Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PD Background Report (PL-REZ-2022-000033)
BKonaThreeeLLCAmendREZ.crk.11.22.22 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT KONA THREE LLC (FORMERLY GAMREX, INC.) AMENDMENT TO CHANGE OF ZONE ORDINANCE NO. 02 131 (REZ 470) KONA THREE LLC has submitted an application for a ten (10) -year time extension to Condition I (Complete Construction of the First Increment on RM Zoned lands) and an amendment to Condition N (Roadway Standards) to clarify which roadways within the subdivision are subject to the County Dedicable Standards, of Ordinance No. 02 131. Ordinance No. 02 131 was a successor ordinance to Ordinance No. 84-23, which reclassified two (2) parcels of land totaling 68.837 acres of land from an Unplanned to a Multiple Family Residential -5,000 square feet (RM -5) zoned district. The subject properties are located along the east (mauka) side of the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway at its junction with Kuakini Highway and between Pualani Estates subdivision to the north and Kona Vistas to the south, por. Holualoa Hui Lands, Holualoa 1, 2, & 3, North Kona, Hawai`i, TMKs: (3) 7-6-021:016 & 017. APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND REASONS 1. Applicant's Request: The applicant is requesting to amend Condition I and Condition N of Ordnance No. 02 131. Condition I: The applicant initially requested an extension of time of ten (10) years from the effective date of the amended ordinance by which to complete construction of the first increment/phase (258 multiple -family residential units) of the proposed development. As further discussed in section 3 below, the applicant has since clarified the request to a ten (10) -year time extension to complete the entire development. Condition I currently states: "L plans for the development within the first increment of the RM zoned area shall be submitted to the Planning Department and final plan approval secured within five years from the effective date of this sixth amendment. Construction shall -1- commence within one year from the date of receipt of final plan approval and be completed within three years thereafter; " Upon securing land use entitlements in 1983 (see chronology below), then owner Gamrex Corporation and its development entity, Kona Vistas, LLC spent the next 23 years developing the initial phase of the development consisting of approximately 103.293 acres of RS -15 zoned lands into 215 single-family residential lots/units now known as the Kona Vistas subdivision. The developer secured a series of time extensions on the initial ordinance, which covered both the Kona Vistas subdivision lands and the subject properties totaling 68.837 acres (please note, due to Subdivision No. 18-00185, which consolidated and resubdivided a 1.675 -acre portion of Parcel 17 with an adjoining property, the total land area that is subject to this amendment request is 67.162 acres). The last amendment occurred in 2002, which granted a time extension until November 27, 2007, to secure Final Plan Approval for the first phase of the multiple -family residential component within the RM -5 zoned area with its planned completion no later than November 27, 2011. After substantial completion of the Kona Vistas subdivision, the owner lost interest/ability to complete the multiple -family component of the development and sold their remaining land holdings to two Hawai`i-based development entities, KV3, LLC and Kona Three LLC (applicant) in 2015. Upon this purchase, both entities have made a significant financial and time commitment to complete requirements of the ordinance as well as perform additional 'soft work' necessary to update and align various studies and previous obligations of the original landowner to be in a position to request additional time to complete the last remaining major residential development component that was originally envisioned by the State Land Use Commission and County Council when the entitlements were granted. Furthermore, as the ordinance was stale prior to their acquisition of the properties, the applicant found it necessary to address many project - related, supporting elements needed to be complete to ensure that this time extension request is consistent with the original reasons for granting the original land use entitlements, conforms to current land use policies, and addresses project related impacts in a responsible manner. These `soft -work' elements include: -2- • Completing drainage improvements within the Holualoa Drainageway in accordance with requirements of the Department of Public Works; • Dedication of three (3) remaining roadway lots within the Kona Vistas Subdivision to the County; • Secured an SMA Use Permit (SMA 430) and hired a hydrologic engineer to prepare and submit a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) to complete drainage improvements for a 12 -acre County affordable housing site fnakai of Kuakini Highway that was originally meant to satisfy the project's affordable housing requirements. Despite the preceding, the County no longer wishes to proceed with the development of this parcel at this time. • The applicant purchased Hawai`i Preparatory Academy's (HPA) 5 -acre interest in the RM -zoned lands on parcel 17 as HPA decided it did not want to build a new school in Kona. As the 5 -acre area was not previously included in the original Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS), a new AIS was conducted for the area which found a previously unknown burial site in a lava tube. The applicant subsequently prepared a Burial Treatment Plan (BTP) that was approved by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) and the Hawai`i Island Burial Council. • The applicant was instructed to prepare a new AIS for the remaining 65 acres of RM -zoned lands within the subject properties due to the age of the original AIS report. This new AIS has been completed and approved by SHPD. • The applicant prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) pursuant to HRS Chapter 343 what was accepted by the Planning Department, who issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) by letter dated September 13, 2021 The EA included an updated traffic impact analysis report, biological survey, cultural impact assessment, updated AIS and site preservation plan. Also included within this process were consultations with area residents, specifically from the adjoining Kona Vistas subdivision. -3- • The applicant entered into a new affordable housing agreement with the County of Hawai`i on January 10, 2022 to satisfy the affordable housing requirement for the entire project. Condition N: The applicant also requests to amend Condition N as follows (material to be deleted is bracketed and struck -through; new material is underlined): N. the roadways and stubout within the RM zoned area, as shown on "Figure 3 -Conceptual Building Layout" in the Final Environmental Assessment - Royal Vistas Housing Project dated September 2021, shall be constructed to dedicable standards with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works and shall be dedicated to the County of Hawaii upon completion. [ Where a roadway crosses a zone line or if a zone line should divide a roadway, the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks shall be provided for the entire right of the way and shall ntersection in order to avoid telescoping and to provide consistent improvement, J Condition N currently requires that the roadways and stubouts within the RM -zoned lands need to be built to county dedicable standards. The proposed amendment to Condition N would clarify that the main roadways identified in Figure 3 of the Final EA would be constructed to dedicable standards and ultimately dedicated to the County since the proposed alignments provide the opportunity for future connection to the larger area road network. The remainder of the roadways/driveways servicing the multiple family residential complexes will remain in private ownership and be built to non-dedicable standards. Finally, deletion of the language at the end of the condition regarding roadway telescoping will allow the applicant to avoid tearing up Kekuanao`a Place and re- constructing it to dedicable standards between its crossing at the Holualoa Ditch within the project site and its intersection within Kamehamalu Street within the Kona Vistas subdivision to the south. 2. Proposed Development: Although the current RM -5 zoning would allow the development of up to 585 residential units on the 67.162 -acre project site, the applicant -4- proposes to construct the "Royal Vistas" project as a 450 -unit, multiple family residential housing project with: • 174, two- and three-bedroom 'for rent' units and a manager's unit within two- story buildings on the makai portion of the project area. • 274, two- and three-bedroom 'for sale' units, and a manager's unit, to be developed in clusters of two- and three-story buildings partially on the makai portion and the remainder on the mauka portion of the project area. • Two (2) community centers, one for the 'for rent' units and one for the 'for sale' units. Each community center will include a neighborhood park, pool, and facilities for use by residents. • Parking will be made available via on-site, paved parking lots and covered structures. • Roadways as further discussed below in the access section. • Drainage improvements are further discussed below in the flood zone/drainage section. 3. Project Phasing, Timetable, and Cost: According to the applicant, the project will be developed in two or more phases, with Phase I having a maximum of 258 units (include all the 'for rent' units and some 'for sale' units) to be constructed on no more than 42 acres within the makai portion of the subject parcels ("project site") and Phase II of the having the balance of 192 'for sale' units within the mauka portion. According to the application, should the requests be approved, the applicant intends to submit plans for plan approval review within one (1) year. There is a discrepancy within the application on the anticipated timing of development where one section indicates that Phase I is anticipated to be complete by 2024 and Phase II by 2030, however, another section indicates that only completion of Phase I (maximum 258 units) of the 450 -unit project is expected to be within ten (10) years from the date of approval of the requested amendments. The applicant addressed this discrepancy by indicating in writing that the entire project can be reasonably completed within ten (10) years of the effective date of the amendment, thus the request has changed to a ten (10) -year time extension within which to complete the entire development. Assuming there are no additional cost -related -5- conditions beyond those improvements required by Ordinance 02 131, the current estimated development cost of this project is $170 million in 2022 dollars, including County exactions and fees. 4. Supportive Information: The applicant has submitted the attached in support of the request (Planning Department Exhibit 1— Change of Zone amendment request accepted June 21, 2022.) 5. Landowners: Kona Three LLC. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 6. State Land Use Commission Docket A83-549: On January 26, 1984, the State Land Use Commission (LUC) approved Docket No. A83-549 to reclassify 124.66 acres of land from the State Land Use Agricultural District to the Urban District for then petitioner GAMLON Corporation (see Exhibit A of the Application). This Decision and Order (D&O) was amended on May 10, 1993 to reclassify an additional 49 acres from the State Land Use Agricultural District to the Urban District as a second phase. 7. Change of Zone Ordinance No. 84 23: On May 15, 1984, the County Council approved Change of Zone Ordinance No. 84 23 which rezoned approximately 103.293 acres of land from Unplanned to Single -Family Residential -15,000 square feet (RS -15) and 68.837 acres of land from Unplanned (U) to a Multiple Family Residential -5,000 square feet (RM -5) for then applicant GAMREX, Inc. The RS -15 zoned lands are the site of the Kona Vistas subdivision and the RM -5 Zoned lands are the current project site (see Exhibit B of the Application). 8. Multiple Amendments to Change of Zone Ordinance No. 84 23: Between January 18, 1988 and November 27, 2002, there were seven (7) amendments to the original change of zone ordinance, which were primarily time extensions to facilitate the development of the single- and multiple -family development. 9. Change of Zone Ordinance No. 02 131: On November 27, 2002, the County Council approved the latest amendment to the original change of zone ordinance. This amendment allowed for the plan approval for the first RM increment to be secured within five years, construction to commence within one year thereafter and be completed within three years thereafter (see Exhibit C of the Application). -6- 10. Multiple Single -Family Residential Subdivision Actions: Between May 17, 1990 and March 30, 2021 there were 12 separate subdivision actions to facilitate the development of the Kona Vistas subdivision on the RS -zoned portion of the project. 11. Final Plan Approval: On November 23, 2007, Final Plan Approval (PLA -07-000325) was issued by the Planning Department for the proposed construction of 150 multiple - family residential units on approximately 17 acres of land within a portion of Parcel 016 in satisfaction of Condition I of Ordinance 02 131. Per Condition I, construction should have commenced no later than November 23, 2008 with completion no later than November 23, 2011. By letter dated September 1, 2017, the Planning Department notified the current applicant that this Final Plan Approval was no longer valid since the previous owner was not able to commence construction of the initial phase of the 150 multiple family residential units within the RM -5 zoned area within the required timeframe. 12. Property Acquisition: On December 3, 2015, the current applicant acquired the subject properties. 13. Subdivision No. 18-001855: On May 15, 2019, Subdivision No. 18-001855 was approved to consolidate TMK (3) 7-6-021:017 and TMK (3) 7-6-012:124 resubdivide the property to reduce the size of parcel 017 by 1.675 acres an increase the size of parcel 124 by the same land area. The owners of parcel 124 are not involved in the current amendment request, thus the total land area covered by this amendment covering the two subject parcels is 67.162 acres. 14. Entitlement Work Since Property Acquisition: Since 2017, the applicant has submitted three amendment requests, the first two of which were returned because the Planning Department required additional information and ultimately the applicant was required to conduct an Environmental Assessment for the project (further discussed below). STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 15. State Land Use District: Urban. 16. General Plan LUPAG Map Designation: Urban Expansion & Low Density Urban. 17. County Zoning: Multiple Family Residential -5,000 square feet (RM -5). 18. Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP): The KCDP, was adopted by Ordinance No. 08-131 on September 25, 2008 by the Hawai`i County Council and -7- amended by Ordinance No 19-91 on September 18, 2019. The subject properties are situated within the Kona Urban Area (KUA). By letter dated September 1, 2017, the former Planning Director confirmed that the proposed Royal Vistas multiple family housing project is consistent with the subject property's RM -5 zoning and also noted that according to the Official Kona Land Use Map (Figure 4-7) in the KCDP, the western portion of the project site is situated in the Pua`a-Wai`aha Village Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Floating Zone. The former Director confirmed that location of this TOD has not yet become fixed by a master plan and Project District zoning; however, it is likely that the future TOD will be located makai of Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and mauka of Kuakini Highway. Therefore, the former Planning Director determined that the subject properties are not located in the TOD. Furthermore, the project site is not situated within a Concurrency Zone. The Official Transportation Network Map for the Nani Kailua Area (see Figure 7 of the application) designates three minor -collector roadways within the project area to: 1) connect County -owned Leilani Street within the Kona Vistas Subdivision with the County -owned Ho`omama Street within the Pualani Estates Subdivision; 2) connect County -owned Kekuanao`a Place within the Kona Vistas Subdivision with County -owned Paulehia Street within the Pualani Estates Subdivision; and 3) connect the two new roadways with a mauka-makai roadway segment. Finally, given the existing RM Zoning, the proposed project can be developed pursuant to KCDP Policy LU -2.8: Development Outside Transit Oriented Developments (TODs), but within the Kona Urban Area, as a non -Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) project through compliance with KCDP policy requirements for parks, street standards, wastewater, and sensitive resources. 19. Special Management Area (SMA): The subject properties are not situated within the SMA and is located approximately 4,500 feet mauka of the nearest shoreline. 20. HRS Chapter 343: The applicant was required to conduct an environmental assessment (EA) for the project due to the proposed construction of roadway segments across county lands (the Horseshoe and Holualoa Drainageways). By letter dated September 13, 2021, the Hawaii County Planning Department issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the proposed 450 -unit Royal Vistas housing project. The final EA is -8- included as Exhibit D of the change of zone amendment application. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 21. Subject Properties: The subject properties consisting of combined 68.837 acres are located along the east (mauka) side of the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway at its junction with Kuakini Highway north of Lako Street. The parcels slope east (mauka) from approximately 360 feet above sea level to approximately 685 feet above sea level. The properties are currently not improved with any structures and are overgrown with vegetation. Two County -owned and managed drainageways are situated within or directly adjacent to the subject properties. The Horseshoe Bend drainageway (identified as TMK: 7-6-021:018) partially bisects the project site in a northeast to southwest direction, while the Holualoa drainageway (identified as TMK: 7-6-021:019) runs along the entire southern boundary of the project site. 22. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: Adjacent properties directly to the north are zoned Agricultural 5 -acre (A -5a) and are intermittently used for cattle grazing, further north is the Pualani Estates Subdivision, zoned Single -Family Residential -7,500 square feet (RS -7.5). Directly to the east (mauka) is the Holualoa 1 & 2 Partition Lots subdivision, zoned Residential and Agricultural -0.5 acre (RA -.5a) and consist of residences and small farms. Properties to the south are zoned Single -Family Residential - 15,000 square feet (RS -15) for the Kona Vistas subdivision and Agricultural 5 -acre (A -5a), which is the site of the Calvary Community Church of Kona, permitted by Special Permit No. 642 approved in 1987. Properties to the west (across Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway) are zoned Single -Family Residential -10,000 square feet (RS -10) for the Komohana Kai Subdivision. 23. Flood Zone/Drainage: The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) shows the project site and proposed development as largely in Flood Zone "X", with a small portion of the project site in the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. The Horseshoe Bend and Holualoa Drainageways which cross and are adjacent to the project site, are sited in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) Zone AE. Zone AE is defined as areas inundated by flood having a 1% probability of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (base flood) and the floodways are in Zone AEF. These -9- drainageways flow through culverts built under Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and merge at the makai end of the 12 -acre property previously slated for an affordable housing development and feed into a County -owned drainage channel from there. The applicant is processing a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) with the FEMA to further channelize the portion of Holualoa Drainageway that crosses the 12 -acre site to allow more safe and efficient transfer of these flood waters. The applicant anticipates that a new CLOMR will be needed during the development of Phase I of the project for the Horseshoe Bend drainageway. In response to the amendment application, the Department of Public Works (DPW) outlined a varied history of efforts to provide drainage facilities for the project, with many changes to the approach and final design of the facilities that have yet to be constructed. In response, the applicant references Condition Q of the existing ordinance, which requires the applicant to develop a drainage master plan, including final design of the facilities, meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works (DPW). Moreover, construction of the drainage improvements must be consistent with the requirements of the approved master plan and Chapter 27 of the Hawai`i County Code as part of the grading permit process and completion of the improvements will be required prior to certificate of occupancy for the project. Thus, ultimately DPW will have final approval authority over the final design and implementation of drainage for the project. 24. Archaeological/Historical Resources: According to SHPD, the project area has been subject to several previous archaeological studies, including a reconnaissance survey (Hammatt and Folk 1983) and two AISs (Hammatt et al. 1984; Hammatt et al. 1992) conducted in TMK: (3) 7-6-021:016 and 017, and a field inspection of the current project area (Escott 2016). The 1984 AIS was conducted for the original 171 -acre project area (which included both the RS and RM zoned lands), except for a five -acre portion in the southeast corner of project area intended to be developed by HPA. The AIS identified 21 archaeological sites and two bulldozed modern planting terraces in the project area, including 11 excavated sites and two burials that were subsequently reinterred outside of the project area. The AIS report recommended no further work at all 21 sites. SHPD did not accept the Hammatt et al. (1984) AIS as it did not meet SHPD standards at the time. -10- No correspondence associated with the Hammatt et al. (1992) project was located by SHPD and as such, it is unknown whether the AIS assessed the archaeological sites for significance, and whether recommendations were made regarding which sites were adequately documented, requiring no further work, and which retained potential for further documentation through mitigation including archaeological monitoring or preservation. Hammatt and Shideler (2007) submitted additional site documentation in the form of a letter to SHPD for five sites, however, site maps and photographs were not provided for all sites. In 2016, SCS conducted an archaeological field inspection of the current project area to relocate the sites identified during the 1992 Hammatt et al. AIS and to assess their current condition and the adequacy of the study documentation. However, the field inspection did not include the completion of new documentation needed to meet minimum AIS standards. By letter dated July 30, 2018, to the Planning Department, SHPD requested a second AIS study of the Hammatt et al. (1992) project area to identify all archaeological historic properties present, and to update previous archaeological documentation to include site plans with site boundaries and areas impacted by bulldozing, photographs of all sites and features, an assessment of their integrity, and site significance. The applicant hired SCS to complete the study, consisting of a pedestrian survey of 76.121 acres of the project area (with the exception of the five acres slated for HPA). Seventeen of the 21 previously identified archaeological sites were located. Two of the previously documented sites relocated by SCS were determined to be natural bedrock outcrops and the two burials that were reinterred off-site in 1993. The four remaining previously documented sites were bulldozed prior to the SCS fieldwork, and the remains of the sites are no longer present on the ground surface. Three previously undocumented sites were also documented, including a portion of the railroad berm, a small coffee shed enclosure, and several ranch walls. A third AIS (Escott and Escott 2018) was conducted in the five -acre southeast corner of Parcel 17. The entire study area was subjected to a pedestrian survey and 22 archaeological sites were recorded, primarily agricultural complexes and terraces -11- associated with pre -Contact era through early post -Contact era to Historic era agriculture. Several Historic era walls and enclosures, a lava tube burial, and a portion of the old railroad berm were also documented in the report. Preservation was recommended for the burial and the railroad berm. SCS submitted a DRAFT Burial Treatment Plan for Burial Site #50-10-57-30593 Located in Holualoa 1st Ahupua 'a, North Kona District, Island of Hawai `i, TMK: (3) 7-6-021:017, which was accepted by the Hawai`i Island Burial Council on August 15, 2019 with a determination to preserve the burial in place. By letter dated August 19, 2019, SHPD accepted the document and SCS finalized the document as a Burial Site Component of a Preservation Plan, which includes interim preservation buffers and archaeological monitoring, and long term preservation measures including a permanent, 20 -foot preservation buffer from the outside perimeter of the burial portion of the lava tube, an additional 10 -foot, no -build easement outside of the permanent preservation buffer, and the construction of a permanent, low rock wall with a gate for pedestrian access to be built under the direction of and inspected by a qualified archaeologist. (Planning Department Exhibit 2 — August 19, 2019 Letter from SHPD Accepting the August 2019 Burial Treatment Plan and August 2019 Burial Site Component of a Presrvation Plan for Burial Site #50-10-57-30593 Located in the Holualoa 1st Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii, Hawaii TMK: (3) 7-6-021:017). A final AIS completed by SCS (Escott and Escott, August 2021) included a 100% surface survey of the entire 76.121 -acre project site with site recordation, GPS, photography, and subsurface excavation with documentation. A total of 18 sites and one isolated find were identified, including two newly identified sites and a petroglyph, with the remaining sites being previously documented, including pre -Contact to post -Contact enclosures, platforms, mounds, lava tubes, walls, a railroad berm, and complexes. Five previously identified sites were determined no longer present and as stated earlier, two burials were disinterred and reinterred off-site in 1993. All the sites were assessed as significant under HAR §13-284-6 Criterion d. The railroad bean (Site 50-10-37-30592) was also assessed as significant under Criteria a and c and was recommended for preservation. The petroglyph (Site 50-10-37-31254) was also assessed as significant under Criterion e and -12- was recommended for preservation. The former burial site (Site 50-10-37-10012) where the disposition (burial and associated burial crypt and features) was relocated, nevertheless, SHPD recommends that the burial site be flagged for preservation in the form of avoidance and the previous site location will be monitored if construction activities occur near that location. The AIS recommends no further historic preservation work for the remaining sites. By letter dated October 15, 2021, SHPD accepted the AIS, agreeing with the site integrity and significance of all the sites and making a determination of, "Effect, with agreed upon mitigation commitments." SHPD agrees with the preservation of sites 50-10-37-30592 and 50-10-37-31254 and mitigation in the form of archaeological monitoring during initial ground disturbance. Finally, SHPD agrees that the sites recommended for no further work have been adequately documented. Prior to permit issuance, SHPD requests that the following be submitted for review and approval: 1) An archaeological monitoring plan (AMP) for all initial ground disturbing activities; 2) An archaeological preservation plan (PP) for the two sites referenced above; and 3) Written and photographic documentation verifying implementation of interim protection measures for the two sites to be preserved. During the EA process, public comments indicated the possibility of the Holualoa Slide being present within the project area, based on a possible alignment starting mauka of the project area at the Holualoa Inn and traveling makai through the project area. According to the comments, the possible remnant of the slide at the Holualoa Inn, "has rock walls on both sides," which may coincide with parallel walls found within the project area AIS. In response, SCS conducted a thorough investigation of the possibility of an ancient holua slide in the project area. SCS provided a report dated November 29, 2019 to the applicant, addressing the public comments (Planning Department Exhibit 3 — November 10, 2019 Report from SCS, Inc. entitled RE: Parallel Walls Site #50-10- 37-30595, -30601, and -31182 (Features 2 and 3) Wall Type, Function and Age, Located on 76.122 Acres of Land in Holualoa 1St Auhupua`a, Kailua-Kona, North Kona District, Hawai'i Island [Portions of TMK: (3)7-6-021:016 and 017 (por.)]). SCS reviewed archaeological studies of the Holualoa Inn property as well as studies of -13- other intervening properties and found no evidence of remnants of a slide in the area. Rather, the alignment found was recorded as a historic era road (Site 24211), whose orientation, slope, ground surface materials, width, and rock wall height lining the trail were not indicative of the remains of a holua. Furthermore, this roadway alignment does not extend into the project area, with its western terminus at Hualalai Road. While the alignment intersects with trails found on a 1928 map, none of the trail alignments enter the project area, but rather the northern trail terminates at a railroad berm along the eastern boundary of the project area and the southern trail passes south of the project area. None of the archaeological studies conducted by SCS of the project area found evidence of holua features, nor is there any documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a holua course existed within the project area. 25. Cultural Resources: A report entitled, "A Cultural Impact Assessment for a 78.122 -Acre property in Holualoa 1st Ahupua `a, North Kona District, Hawai `i Island, Hawai `i [TMK: (3) 7-6-021:016-019J " dated June 2020 was prepared for the applicant by SCS, Inc. and included as Appendix 4 of the FEA. The CIA notes that the region of Holualoa was developed into a royal center in the late 1600s to early 1700s under the reigns of Keakamahana (reigned 1680-1700) and Keakealaniwahine (reigned 1700-1720), with many `ali`i and konohiki residences and numerous religious sites known to have existed here. The majority of the heiau and royal residences were constructed along or near the coast, most notably at Kamoa Point south of the project area. The study further notes that this royal center at Holualoa was eclipsed in the second half of the 1700s by the royal center in the Kahalu`u and Keauhou region. The project area was also a part of the Kona Field System that extends north at least to Kau ahupua'a and south to Honaunau, west from the coastline and east to the forested slopes of Hualalai. In the post -contact era, the Kona Field System hosted the planting of coffee, sugar, sisal, citrus, and cotton until eventually the land was used for cattle pasture. As part of the CIA, personal interviews were sought to provide ethnographic and oral history of the project area. SCS, Inc. sought consultation with Jordan Kea Calpito, SHPD Burial Sites Specialist; Kamakana Ferreira, OHA Compliance Officer; Nicole Lui, -14- cultural descendant, Sean Naleimaile, SHPD Hawai`i Island Archaeologist; Kekoa Nezara, Kona Hawaiian Civic Club President; Shane Nelson, OHA West Hawai`i Representative; J. Curtis Tyler III, cultural descendant, and Gregg Kashiwa who served as project property manager for parcels 016 and 017 in the early 1980s. J. Curtis Tyler III, Nicole Lui and Greg Kashiwa did provide information concerning lands of Holualoa 1st Ahupua`a. There were no past or ongoing cultural practices identified with lands of the current project area. Additionally, public notices were placed in the December 2019 issue of the OHA Ka Wai Ola Newspaper. Public notices were also published in the Honolulu Star -Advertiser, and the West Hawai`i Today on November 17th, 20th and 21st 2019. There were no responses to the published public notices. The CIA concludes that, "An analysis of the potential effect of the proposed construction of residences on cultural resources, practices or beliefs, its potential to isolate cultural resources, practices or beliefs from their setting, and the potential of the project to introduce elements which may alter the setting in which cultural practices take place is a requirement of the OEQC (Nov. 10, 1997). Based on historical research and responses from the above listed contacts, it is reasonable to conclude that, there would be no traditional cultural practices affected and there would be no direct adverse effect upon cultural practices or beliefs in the broader project area region." 26. Floral/Faunal Resources: The Final Environmental Assessment (FEA) included a September 2017 report by Geometrician Associates, LLC entitled, "Botanical Survey and Vertebrate Fauna Assessment, TMK 3-7-6-21: parcels 16, 17, 18 & 19 (78.324 acres) North Kona District, Island of Hawai `i. " The report, which included a review of earlier studies and an on-site field survey of the subject parcels and the County's drainage facilities, included the following findings: 1) Flora consists of primarily introduced plants, including guinea grass, koa haole, opiuma, monkeypod, kiawe, klu, and several other non-native trees. The understory consists of several non-native grasses, herbs, shrubs, and vines along with a few native plants including `uhaloa and `ilima. In total, 65 plant species were found, five (5) of which were indigenous, and none were endemic. All native plants found are very common throughout the island of Hawai`i and the State, and no rare, threatened, or endangered plant species were present. No tree tobacco, significant -15- for its role as a potential host for the endangered Blackburn's Sphinx moth, was found in the survey area; 2) Fauna included 15, non-native species of birds, the most common of which included the spotted dove, northern cardinal, cattle egret, parakeet, Japanese white - eye, and house finch. While not observed during the field survey, the short -eared owl and Hawaiian hawk may forage in the area. Additionally, some endangered and threatened Hawaiian seabirds (Hawaiian petrels, band-rumped storm petrels, and newels shearwaters may fly over the area between the months of June and October, though there is no suitable nesting habitat for any of these species within the area. The endangered Hawaiian hoary bat is also likely to be present in the area, though not observed during the diurnal survey. The only live mammals seen during the survey were cattle, feral pigs, and small Indian mongooses. It is likely that feral cats, mice, rats, and domestic dogs are occasionally present. The only reptile observed during the survey was the day gecko, with other reptiles including other species of geckos, anole and skinks likely present in the area. None of the preceding have any conservation value. On-line maps found on the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) depicted no critical plant or animal habitat on or near the survey area. Despite the preceding, the report referenced some mitigation measures to address endangered or threatened species that may traverse the area, including outdoor lighting mitigation for endangered and threatened seabirds, guidance on woody vegetation removal during Hoary bat pupping season, and guidance on vegetation removal related to the Blackburn's Sphinx moth. By memo dated August 1, 2022, the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) concurred with the proposed mitigation measures. 27. Public Access: There is no record of a designated public access to the shoreline or mountain areas that traverses the project area. 28. Civil Defense Sirens: Section 25-2-46 (Concurrency Requirements) of the Zoning Code requires the provision of adequate civil defense siren warning coverage as determined by State Civil Defense (HIEMA) across the entire project site for a change of zone or a time extension thereto for projects over 25 or more residential units. There is an existing civil defense siren located at TMK: (3) 7-5-019:028, approximately 2.18 miles northwest (makai) of the subject properties. According to County mapping, the coverage area of this -16- siren covers approximately 2/3rds of the project area. The applicant has represented that they will coordinate with HIEMA or County Civil Defense and install any additional sirens as may be required for the project to provide adequate coverage. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 29. Access: In the vicinity of the project site, Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway (Route 11) is an undivided, two-lane, State-owned arterial roadway, oriented in the north -south direction with approximately 70 feet of pavement within a 180 -foot right-of-way. The posted speed limit varies from 45 to 55 miles per hour (mph). Approximately 2.4 miles north of the p roject site, Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway opens to four to five lanes with dedicated left turning and right turning lanes at major intersections. According to the applicant, access to Phase I of the proposed project will be via a new roadway ("Royal Vistas Roadway") which would intersect with Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway, approximately 600 feet north of the intersection with Kuakini Highway and directly to the south of the culvert/headwall that runs under the highway. As represented in Figure 10 of the EA, Royal Vistas Roadway will be designed as a full -movement, channelized, two-way, stop -controlled, intersection. A crosswalk would be provided on the east side of the intersection for pedestrian connectivity to cross Royal Vistas Roadway. There would be a refuge lane for westbound left turns onto Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway to make this turn easier for drivers (see Figure 10 of the FEA for a close-up of the proposed intersection improvements). In addition to the preceding, the applicant proposes constructing the following roadway segments in accordance with Kona CDP requirements: • In Phase I, construct that segment of the Leilani Street extension situated within the project site. This segment will stub -out the Leilani Street extension on the southern project site boundary and will not connect it across the private adjoining parcel (TMK 7-6-021:014) owned by the Calvary Community Church of Kona. • The applicant initially proposed to extend Kekuanao`a Place northward through the project site from its existing terminus in Kona Vistas subdivision, including the installation of a culvert system across the Holualoa drainageway as part of Phase II of the development, however, as further discussed in Section 30. Traffic -17- below, in response to DPW -Traffic comments on the TIAR and timing of roadway segment construction, the applicant now is proposing to construct and dedicate this roadway segment as part of Phase I and prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy for any dwelling units in the development. ■ In Phase I, construct a mauka-makai roadway connecting both the Leilani Street and Kekuanao`a Place extensions. Despite the connection shown on the KCDP "Official Transportation Network Map for the Nani Kailua Area," none of the roads proposed for the project will connect to Ho`omama Street and Paulehia Street in Pualani Estates due to an intervening privately - owned parcel (TMK 7-6 013:004). Finally, these roadways will be constructed as minor collector roadways meeting County-dedicable standards with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, all of which will be dedicated to the County of Hawai`i upon completion. The remainder of the internal roads servicing the multi -family dwelling structures will be designed and built to private driveway standards and will stay in private ownership (see Figure 6 — Conceptual Master Plan for Royal Vistas). According to the Department of Public Works, they have no objection to the proposed amendment to Condition N as it relates to the proposed north/south roadway alignments and clarification of which roadway segments are to be built to dedicable standards (as minor collector roadways) and dedicated to the County. However, DPW has concerns over the proposed, segmented layout of the mauka/makai roadway connecting the highway and the Paulehia /Kekuanao`a Place alignment. Instead to allow for best traffic flow, DPW recommends the mauka/makai alignment to be a continuous, linear thoroughfare like Puapua`anui Road and Lako Street in the vicinity of the project site. In response, the applicant indicated that while they see no significant benefit to a continuous thoroughfare over the proposed segmented layout, they will explore a continuous thoroughfare alignment where practicable given the topographical and drainage constraints of the project site. 30. Traffic: The applicant commissioned SSFM International to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) dated May 2020 as part of the EA process (see Appendix 2 of the FEA). Based on agency and public comments and in accordance with the concurrency section of the Zoning Code, the applicant submitted an updated TIAR dated November -18- 2021 (see Exhibit G of the application). Both reports used the same assumptions, traffic counts, and analyzed the same study intersections near the project area, thus we will focus on the latest TIAR for purposes of this report. The TIAR assumes that Phase I of the Royal Vistas multiple family housing project will be completed by 2024, with all trips generated by the 258 units within this phase entering and exiting at the proposed Royal Vistas roadway and distributed onto the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway (Route 11) via an unsignalized and channelized intersection. The study further assumes that the development of Phase II, consisting of the remaining 192 units, will be completed by 2029 along with the connection of Phase II through Kekuanao`a Place within the Kona Vistas Subdivision to Lako Street. The TIAR includes analysis of 47 turning movements at eight existing intersections on Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. Five intersections were analyzed north of the project site: 1) Palani Road, 2) Henry Street, 3) Hualalai Road (North), 4) Hualalai Road (South), and 5) Puapua'anui Street, and three intersections were analyzed to the south, 6) Kuakini Highway, 7) Lako Street, 8) Kamehameha III Road. Turning movement counts were recorded at each of the intersections at peak morning (7:OOam to 8:OOam) and afternoon (3:45pm to 4:45pm) traffic hours to determine the existing Level of Service (LOS), and all eight intersections currently operate at acceptable levels (between LOS A and LOS D) in the AM and PM peak hours. Upon the 2024 completion of buildout of Phase I, the TIAR finds that overall, all intersections will operate at an acceptable LOS, but some turn movements at six intersections will deteriorate to an unacceptable LOS (E or F), with or without the project. According to the concurrency section of the Zoning Code (HCC Section 25-2-46 (e)(1)), if the LOS for any transportation facility in the project area is (A) currently worse than the acceptable LOS, or (B) projected to become worse than the acceptable level of service during the five-year period of the TIAR, any rezoning of the property, if approved, shall contain conditions that require mitigation of adverse traffic effects before occupancy of the project is permitted, or that occupancy be delayed until the LOS has reached the acceptable level and is no longer projected to be worse than the acceptable level. As no transportation facility in the project area is currently worse than the -19- acceptable LOS, nor is projected to become worse than the acceptable level of service during the five-year period of the TIAR, no immediate mitigation is required. Upon the 2029 completion of Phase II, the TIAR found that overall, all intersections will continue to operate at an acceptable LOS, however, with the increase in background traffic and traffic generated by the proposed project, the LOS for some movements at seven intersections will further degrade. The TIAR recommends several mid-term mitigation measures, most of which are dependent on the State Department of Transportation (DOT) to implement. However, while the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway/Royal Vistas Roadway is expected to function acceptably through Phase I buildout, the TIAR recommends that before any Phase II residences are occupied, the connection to Kekuanao`a Place is completed so that Royal Vistas Phase II 'left out' traffic can access the Lako Street traffic signal. Finally, based on the existing traffic volumes and future projections of Royal Vistas on the surrounding roadways, the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway/Lako Street intersection and some individual movements at other intersections are expected to deteriorate to LOS E or worse in 2039, with or without the project. According to the TIAR, the widening of Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway to 4 -lanes, and the completion of Ali`i Highway (aka Ali`i Parkway) is needed to increase the north -south regional capacity. The TIAR notes that the widening of the highway to 4 -lanes between Henry Street and Kamehameha III Road is included in the HDOT Federal -Aid Highways 2035 Transportation Plan for the District of Hawai`i, however, the widening has not yet been programmed on the DOT's Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) through Fiscal Year 2027. In the meantime, the TIAR assesses alternatives and recommends several mid- and long-term mitigation measures to be considered by the County and DOT. DOT commented on the TIAR and is largely supportive of the requested time extension and roadway standard amendments with the recommendation that conditions of approval require the applicant to coordinate with DOT on any mitigation measures, including any pro -rata contribution's that may be required, that a 10 -year development schedule showing the phases, number of units, and associated transportation improvements be completed before occupancy of each phase, and that any state highway improvements -20- required for the development shall be made at no cost to the State and conform to current federal and state design standards. DPW Traffic Division reviewed and provided comments on the TIAR with information on how traffic on the highway impacts county roadway facilities and requested additional information from the applicant on the findings of the study. One of the more germane comments was the recommendation that the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway/Royal Vistas Roadway intersection be limited to right-in/right out movements and the recommendation that the Kekuanao`a Place connection through the Kona Vistas Subdivision to Lako Street needs to occur from the outset of the proposed project and not as a part of the Phase II development. Finally, with the connection to Lako Street, highway widening and significant Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway/Lako Street intersection improvements are necessary. In response to DPW -Traffic's comments, the applicant has represented that they have no objection to connecting its project roadways to Kekuanao`a Place prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy for any residential unit within the 450 -unit project, thereby distributing vehicular movements between the channelized Royal Vistas roadway and the signalized Lako Street. 31. Water: According to the applicant, they have secured 450 water units to service the entire project and have kept those water commitments paid and current. In addition, an off-site water meter box was installed in 2018 that will provide the necessary potable water and fire flow to service the project. The Department of Water Supply (DWS) has no objection to the time extension request with the understanding that DWS can only support the current allocation of water. The applicant will be required to submit water system construction plans prepared by a professional engineer for DWS review and approval. Furthermore, the applicant will be required to construct applicable water system improvements designed to deliver water at adequate pressure and volume under peak -flow and fire -flow conditions in accordance with the Water System Standards and the Rules and Regulations of the DWS. DWS further requests that the applicant addresses the non -potable demand of water by minimizing the demand or propose to supply the demand by alternate methods (i.e., reclaimed, or reused water). Finally, DWS indicated that the overall water demand should be reviewed as the water use other than the -21- residential dwelling units will need to be included, which would reduce the number of dwelling units that can be developed as additional water beyond the total number of water units allocated to the subject parcels is not available. 32. Wastewater: The subject properties are not currently served by the County sewer system, however, according to the applicant, and as required by the County Department of Environmental Management -Wastewater Division and the State Department of Health, sewer lines and other necessary wastewater infrastructure shall be extended to accommodate wastewater needs of the entire project. 33. Solid Waste: There are no municipal waste collection services in the County. According to the Final EA, solid waste generated by the development will be hauled by a private contractor on a regular basis and disposed of at a permitted solid waste management facility. 34. Schools: According to the Final EA, the closest public elementary schools are Kahakai and Holualoa Elementary schools, located 1.2 miles west and 1 mile east of the subject parcels respectively. Kealakehe Intermediate, located approximately 3.2 miles north of the subject properties is the nearest intermediate school. Konawaena High and Kealakehe High School are the nearest public high schools, located approximately 7.9 miles south and 2.8 miles north, respectively, of the subject parcels. According to a comment letter received on the Draft EA from the Department of Education (DOE), the proposed project is expected to house approximately 99 DOE students and although the proposed project is located within the West Hawai`i School Impact Fee District, the DOE has currently suspended fee collections. The applicant would coordinate with DOE and comply with all applicable DOE requirements at the time of project implementation. 35. Affordable Housing: Conditions of the LUC decision and order and change of zone ordinances require the applicant to offer 10% of the lots or houses and lots to be developed on the subject properties for sale at affordable rates to low -to -moderate income residents of the State of Hawai`i as required by State or County housing agencies. According to the application, the applicant initially attempted to satisfy this affordable housing requirement by entering into an agreement with the County Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD) to convey approximately 12 acres of land located -22- between Kuakini Highway and Royal Poinciana Drive (identified by TMKs: (3) 7-6-024:025, 112, and 113) to the County or their designated affordable housing developer. Despite these parcels not being a part of the land area covered under the LUC decision and order, the LUC opined in 1989 and again in 1993 that the conveyance of the 12 -acre parcel satisfied the decision and order affordable housing requirement. The 12 acres was purchased at auction by GAMLON Corporation (predecessor to the applicant), and as the land area contains the confluence of the Holualoa and Horseshoe Bend drainageways, the applicant was required to address drainage issues on the property which included the preparation of an EA and issuance of a FONSI, an SMA Use Permit to do flood improvements within the SMA, and an application for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to allow the flood -zone designated portion of the 12 acres to be channelized and developed. The CLOMR (Case No. 21-09-1757R) was subsequently issued on January 10, 2022. Despite the applicant's efforts, the OHCD recently decided that this proposed 12 -acre affordable housing site was not suitable to meet their goals for affordable housing, prompting the applicant to offer an alternative to satisfy the affordable housing obligations for both the existing 215 -unit Kona Vistas subdivision and the proposed 450 - unit multi -family residential project through the acquisition of 67 affordable housing credits via land exchange for land associated with the creation of a new 100 -unit affordable rental project above Lowe's Horne Improvement on land that the applicant will donate to a qualified affordable housing developer. This was memorialized via a new affordable housing agreement between the Applicant and OHCD, executed on January 10, 2022 (see Exhibit D of the application). Despite this agreement, the applicant has yet to acquire the 67 housing credits at the date of this writing. The Planning Department is also concerned that the securing of housing credits in lieu of offering built units on site at affordable rates does not meet the requirements of the LUC decision and order and advised the applicant to either seek further clarification from the LUC on whether this approach would comply with the requirements of the decision and order or to amend the decision and order. Finally, OHCD submitted a letter requesting that a condition be added to require compliance with Hawai`i County Code Chapter 11 — Housing. -23- 36. All Other Essential Utilities and Services: Electricity and telephone services are available to the site. Fire, police, and emergency management services are available in this part of North Kona. Police services are located in Kona, about five miles north of the subject parcels and the Kailua-Kona Fire Station is located approximately 3.5 miles northeast of the subject properties. Emergency medical services are provided by the Hawai`i County Fire Department and hospital services are available at Kona Community Hospital, approximately 7.5 miles to the south. AGENCIES' COMMENTS 37. Department of Water Supply: (Planning Department Exhibit 4 — August 15, 2022 memo) 38. Department of Public Works -Engineering Division: (Planning Department Exhibit 5 — October 5, 2022 memo) 39. Department of Public Works -Traffic Division: (Planning Department Exhibit 6 — September 28, 2022 memo) 40. Department of Environmental Management (Planning Department Exhibit 7 — July 20, 2022 memo) 41. Fire Department: (Planning Department Exhibit 8 — July 14, 2022 memo) 42. Office of Housing and Community Development: (Planning Department Exhibit 9 — November 30, 2022 letter) 43. State Department of Health: (Planning Department Exhibit 10 — July 13, 2022 memo) 44. State Department of Transportation: (Planning Department Exhibit 11— September 3, 2020 letter and August 17, 2022 letter) 45. Department of Land and Natural Resources — Division of Forestry and Wildlife Division: (Planning Department Exhibit 12 — August 1, 2022 memo) 46. Department of Land and Natural Resources — State Historic Preservation Division: (Planning Department Exhibit 13 — October 15, 2021 letter) AGENCIES - NO COMMENTS OR CONCERNS 47. Police Department and DLNR — Engineering & Land Divisions. -24- AGENCIES & ORGANIZATIONS- NO RESPONSE 48. Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Housing and Community Development, Kona Traffic Safety Committee, and Kona Vistas Community Association. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO AGENCIES' COMMENTS 49. The applicant submitted the following in response to agency comments (Planning Department Exhibit 14 — November 15, 2022 letter) PUBLIC COMMENTS 50. Email dated July 18, 2022 from Roberta Durham to Planning Department (Planning Department Exhibit 15). 51. Email dated July 19, 2022 from Douglas Fredebaugh (Planning Department Exhibit 16). 52. Email dated July 31, 2022 from Joel Gimpel (Planning Department Exhibit 17). 53. Email dated August 3, 2022 from Jack Nunberg (Planning Department Exhibit 18). 54. Email dated August 4, 2022 from Marta Finley (Planning Department Exhibit 19). 55. Email dated August 4, 2022 from Mike Jorgensen (Planning Department Exhibit 20). 56. Email dated August 4, 2022 from Janice Kerr (Planning Department Exhibit 21). 57. Email dated August 4, 2022 from Doug Perrine (Planning Department Exhibit 22). 58. Email dated August 4, 2022 from Kathy Winter (Planning Department Exhibit 23). 59. Email dated August 5, 2022 from Sheila Braithwaite (Planning Department Exhibit 24). 60. Email dated August 7, 2022 from John Randerson (Planning Department Exhibit 25). 61. Email dated August 7, 2022 from Claude Thornton (Planning Department Exhibit 26). 62. Email dated August 8, 2022 from John Bennett (Planning Department Exhibit 27). 63. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Diane Blancett-Maddock requesting a deferral of the Planning Commission Hearing on behalf of members of the Kona Vistas HOA (Planning Department Exhibit 28) and Planning Department's Response via email dated August 24, 2022 (Planning Department Exhibit 29). -25- 64. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Sherry Bracken (Planning Department Exhibit 30). 65. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Clyde Hemby (Planning Department Exhibit 31). 66. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Renee Inaba (Planning Department Exhibit 32). 67. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Jim Johnson (Planning Department Exhibit 33). 68. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Diane Logan (Planning Department Exhibit 34). 69. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Mary Hemby (Planning Department Exhibit 35). 70. Email dated August 8, 2022 from John Miki and Bonnie Hildebrandt-Miki (Planning Department Exhibit 36). 71. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Mark Powell (Planning Department Exhibit 37). 72. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Peri Steffenhagen (Planning Department Exhibit 38). 73. Email dated August 8, 2022 from Cheryl Tanguay (Planning Department Exhibit 39). 74. Email dated August 9, 2022 from Art and Lisa Javar (Planning Department Exhibit 40). 75. Letter dated August 9, 2022 from Elizabeth Dunn (Planning Department Exhibit 41). 76. Email dated August 9, 2022 from Diane and Christopher Kim (Planning Department Exhibit 42). 77. Email dated August 9, 2022 from Sandra Leek (Planning Department Exhibit 43). 78. Email dated August 9, 2022 from Mike Park (Planning Department Exhibit 44). APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 79. The applicant submitted the following in response to agency comments (Planning Department Exhibit 45 — November 15, 2022 letter). -26- Amendment to Change of Zone Ordinance 02 131 Applicant: Kona Three, LLC Requests: Condition I — Time extension to secure Final Plan Approval and Complete Construction of First Increment of RM -zoned area Condition N—Clarify improvements to subdivision roads Tax Map Keys: (3) 7-6-021:016 and 017 i-Rcilualca, North Kona District Hawaii' Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant May 2022 REQUESTS FOR TIME EXTENSIONS TO SECURE FINAL PLAN APPROVAL ANIS COMPLETION OF MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF PROJECT AND TO CLARIFY REQUIRED DEDICABLE ROADWAYS FOR DEVELOPMENT FORMERLY KNOWN AS KONA VISTAS AS SUPPORTED BY CHANGE OF ZONE ORDINANCE NO. 02 131 (REZ 470) APPLICANT: KONA THREE, LLC (formerly GAMREX, Inc.) PROPOSED PROJECT: ROYAL VISTAS HOLUALOA 1° and 21"dJ NORTH KONA, HAWAI% TMK: 7-6-021: 016 and 017 I. INTRODUCTION Kona Three, LLC ;"Applicann, is the o ••rner of Iwo (2) properties identified by TMKs: 7-6-021 0-6 and 017 ("sL:s ect properties";, Corsi==:ng of a total of 68.837 acres situated vithvi -) ucr .17 .6ff ,C:r[•s project Al cH tins[ v,f . :,ibjf'i:' to a St I+? Larir: LJ t3 District Boundary a.mendrnem to the Urban District it 198 IFyhibit A—AES 549;' which was then subsequently rezoned later in the s,irne yc.-lr in:r khr Sin, l F,1 ily Re4,ido ntial (RS -15) and Multiple Farnily Residential (RM -5) zonii7„ c:istFftts ;Exhibit B Cart::r _ir7.e 84.- 23) in support of a proposed 500 -unit sirgle- and rnr. tiple =t: ni y res'dle-ttial development, with the single family reviccrtial cor'npor'rc•1r lacing corp ctcci Kona Vistas subdivsion. Over the course of the next 23 ,fears or so, the original Applicant, GAMREX, Inc., proceeded with the initial increment of development of the 103.3 acres of R5-15 zoned lands into 215 single-family residential units that is now known as Kona Vistas subdivision, which also included the construction of the mauka section of Lako Street that now serves this subdivision, GAMREX. Inc., and its subsequent development entity Kona Vistas LLC, was successful in securing from the Hawaii County Council a series of amendments to tie original zoning (Ordinance 84-23) to provide additional time to complete the vrc aoscd development, the last extension was approved in 2002 (Exhil t C_Urdi•7nnce 02-131), that granted a time extension until November 27, 2007 to !;[.f.=1 -re Find. I'I in Approval for the first increment of the multiple -family residential coirponont within thr• RM .5 7orrr. area with its planned completion rio later than November 27, 2011. Upon completion of the last phase of the single Ir,rYi y rrsir9oriI i-)1 rc-,pc;norit r [ Kona Vista subdivision on or around 2007, the next incremert proaosec ws the RM -5 zoned lands to the north of the existing Kona Vista subdiviion. Wok nntli .5 phase never progressed. In December of 2015, the current Applicant, Kona Three, LLC, acquired the 68.837 acres comprising the RM -5 zoned lands (Parcels 016 and 017) with the intention of developing a 450 -unit multiple family rental and for sale housing project to be known as "Royal Vistas'. In the years since its acquisition of the subject properties, the Applicant has made efforts to satisfy the various procedural and regulatory requirements that would support these requested time extensions to Ordinance 02 131, which includes the preparation of an environmental assessment as well complying with the affordable housing obligations for both the existing Kona Vistas subdivision developed by the original developer, GAMMON Corp., as well as the proposed multiple family project proposed by the current Applicant, Kona Three LLC. II., APPLICANT'S REQUEST A. Time extensions to Condition I of Ordinance 02 131 — effective November 27, 2003 CondLiar I of Ordinance 02 131 requires that plans for the first increment of the rru`tiple. family residential component of the project be submitted and Final Plan Approve,) scc.:rrcd later tl'an five (5) years from the effective date of the ordinance, or Novembe' 27, 2008, with construction commencing within one (1) year thereafter and complet or of this multiple family residential component no later than three (3) years thereafter, or no later than November 27, 2012. Doth resocct ve conditions within Ordinance 02 131 are -ecitecl for veer convenience below I) plans for the development +.vithin the firm. i ic-elnent of the RM zoned area shall be submitted to the Planning Di pn,.tient and `info' :ihn secured within five years from the effective date of this sixth arnendrnert. Construction shall commence with n one year from the Gate of receipt of final plan approval and be completed within three years thereafter; L!) an initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the ordinance may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstances: 1) the non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicants, successors or assigns, and that are not the result of their fault or negligence; 2) granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the general plan or zoning code; 3) granting of file f irne r~kteirci,rr1 tip„?l.ir: nl51 cora siry tea 1 he o- ig, nal reasons :"Ci r the g -ranting of she chr:nkie of zone; 4) the time extension granted shall he for a period not to exceed the period originally granted for performance (i.e.: a condition to be performed within one year may be extended for up to ane additional year); and 5) if the applicant should require tin additional extension of time, the Planning Director shall submit til:. applicant's request to the County Council for appropriate action. Further, should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with i•1 a timely fashion, the Director [sic] initiate rezoning of the area to its original or more appropriate designation. The Applicant purchased the subject properties in late 2015, 3 years after construction of the first increment of the Frit. tulle family residential project was intended to be completed as origina iFfDrccd by Condition I of the change of zone ordinance. RegardIr s, significant o pl:,rlrlirig, design, regulatory approvals, permitting and constriction have al -eadv been ccne as witnessed by the completion of the 215 -unit Kona Vista sub•cl visic,n allrl ti' coils-rLiction of Lako Street as well as in anticipation of the final residential component, Lhe 450 -unit multiple family project to be known as "Royal V stns'. Regrettably, as r.:xpinincc; furthe- below, the conce7t0c' and diligent efforts of both the original and current Applicant.; to meal .i r:5'r:dIinc's i+ �rr-_lr d by Ordinance 02 131, were unsuccessful. As such, and pursuant to Currcrit`un I and Condition U of Ordinance 02 131 and on behalf of Kona Three, LLC, ("Applicant"), We respc•:tfully request ari extension of time of ten {10) years From the elIccLivc date of this amendment request by .vvhicl' to compete construction of the first increrrent :of the 450 -unit multiple family r :sid: r'tial project upcn the HIV" - zoned subject properties as originally set forth in Cond tion I. B. Amendment to Condition N of Ordinance 02 131 Conrli-ion N, ris r.itcrl f.11l below, obligates the Applicant to provide for dedicable roadways with c,irb, gutter and sidewalk improvements within the proposed development, which the Applicant has every intention of providing. For the sake of anticipating the extent of these dedicable-standard roadways as it affects the overall design of the proposed project, the Applicant is requesting that Condition N be clarified to provide such dedicable-standard roadways only as it pertains to its extension of Paulehia and Ho'omana Streets within Pualani Estates to the north and Kekuana`oa Place and Leilani Streets within Kona Vistas subdivision to the south, along with an interconnecting road between these two extensions and to the Queen Ka `ahumanu Highway, all of which will be constructed as minor collector roadways as identified within the Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP) and further defined on the Conceptual Master Plan for Royal Vistas identified as Figure 3 — Conceptual Building Layout in the Final Environmental Assessment dated September 2021_ Regarding that porticn of Condition N referencing roadway improvements that c Foss or is dividers Ny roi'e lint' r"irld its extension to the raertrost intforsectiDtn, the Appplrcunt recoinrlerlds thj1L Lll s sec -ion be deleted in its entire?y since Figure 3- 3 Conceptual Building Layout within the FEA defines the roadway segments that will be constructed with curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements. The requested amendment as shown below will also clarify that the existing section of Kekuana'oa Place with Kona Vistas subdivision can be maintained with its current paved shoulders and swale, which has been expressed as the preference of residents within the Kona Vistas Subdivision. N) the roadways and Stubcmt within the RM zoned area, As shown on "Figure 3 Conceptual 94. ilding_Layr;i_it" in the Find Environmental Asse; rren Rn'• oil Vistas IfousiriProject dated .September 2021, so-,aII be consti Ldedl dedicable standards with curbs, gutters, and si:iew lks r ertin, with the. approval of thr• i ep.afirnen1 of Public Works rid sh ll be dedir1hr, County of Hawaii upon completion.' Vi.P-ire roe dway crosses a ?ore line Ci•r if a one line shoolri }i riri rr,; ,iiniay, i'1 r' arch g.itters a=7r_r be provided for tnc cr;t:r right': i ,1..3Ii continue w the nearest intersection in order to avoid :cicscopir ; and to provide consistent in ;3rc•rcriicnt;] 6-icdr d I is rinCic,•-Scor1Tc1, c.k-•I1:,t ci rr.ltcriE) it br,-7r.ki 1(d g .SCr,rc:.k s -,,i:) �1 t rr.tiscn for these requests and oily: assDc ate€1 inforn-otioh are outlk-c in the pages Lha: ltil, PROGRESS OF DEVELOPMENT Since the approval of both the State Land USC District Boundary amendment and change of Lone in 1984, the former and cL.•ient Applicants have ma::e significant progress towards completion of the overall single- and multiple .family residential project, as demonstrated by its accomplishment of the following milc 1. Lake Strer:t cx:ter,sion f51B_.5738 L rr a:titaii ut right•ut way between Kuakini Highway aril: the Kailua-KeaL•hcL! Middle Rcuc to accommodate initial segment of the proposed extension Of Lako Street, approver on May 17, 1990. 2. Kona Vistas Subdivision— Unit 1 A (SJB 61100) Phase 1 of initial increment of 39 single family residei•1.ial :Lits of at least 15,000 square feet in size, approved on May 27, 1992. Includes the construction ot the initial segment of the extension of Lako Street from its intersection wii;y I nakini Highway and extending mauka to Leilani Street. 3. Kona Vistas Subdivision— Unit 1-B {SUB 6140a) Phase 2 of initial increment of 51 single family residential Bots arca i bul: Tats. approved on January 21, 1991 includes the second 51 -Trent of the e.xtnnsinn of Lako Street between Leilani Street and Kinau Street. 4. Kona Vistas Subdivision - Unit 1-C (SUB 514D o', Phase 3 of initial increment of 20 single family resirlertial crts and 1 bulk lot (subsequently condomirtiur-rized), approvers <J•1 Ju y 8, 1357. 5. Kona Vistas Subdivision — Unit 1-0 (SUB'14Ub) Phase 4 of initial increment of 10 single family residential lots, approved on December 22,11997, Note that this Subdivision covers porton of same area as Unit 1-C. 6. Kona Visa, Sri: ixrision — Unit 1-E (SUB 6140b) Phase 5 of initial increment of 6 single `amity residential lots, approved on December 22, 1997_ Note thnt this s.ibc'visit�:n c,c ers portion of same area as Unit 1-C_ 7. Kona Vis=as SLIJcivis'on — IJni: a -.A ;SJC 7578 Phase 1 of s(:(:0-ir: Ir'i:l cr.-lei-1i of 8 ,inti family rc!,:irlc ir.i,ll 1c1!,., ;vproved on September 9, 2002. 8. Kona Vistas Subdivision -- LJnil 2-3 (SU3 03-000022) Phase 2 of second increment of 39 single fariily residential lots, approved on July 23, 2003, Includes the third and final segment of the extension of Lako Street, extending it mauka from Kinau Street to the adjoining lolani Subdivision. 12 -ace County Affcarci❑ e s.te o .ate':rl nlc .ng the maka. Sir.., of <iiak:rii Highway across of the Suhjimct prop:'r-t r's., lh s 12-a,_re property v.SS selected as the potential site of an afforctiifl e hc1L�° irl project it s:3tisfaction of the affordable hous:rig obligations required by the State I rind 1J;c' District Bouni,iry amendment and change of zone oriiirance. An envirrnniental assessnent +vas [yepared and a FONSI was isued in 1996. However, before the site could be developed for t]f=r:rdabfe housing, improvements to the Horseshoe Bend anLi Holualoa drainageways were required that would connect with the existing County dra.nageway between Alii Kai and Kaman] Tree subdivisions. Gamrex prepared and successfully secured the issuance of 5MIA Use Permit No. 430 on April 4, 2003 to allow for these drainageway improvements to occur within the Special IVlanagement Area_ Note that this effort also involved the acquisition of properties by Gamrex in the vicinity of Royal Poinciana Drive and KupurTa Street to accommodate both the 12 -acre affordable housing site and the mentioned drainagewAys. 10. Kona Via Srin ?ivis ir7 — I_JniV 4 (SIJR C5 ;3(01227) T ii'cl irlcrerne-nt of 26 lots. eac-r cons slily, Of a mirIrT1L rTt of 15,000 square feet, o. provec on rv1 y 8, 2005. 11. Kona Vistas Subdivision — Unit 3 SUB 05-000226) Fourth increment of 20 single family residential Tots, approved on May 4, 2006_ 12. Plan Approval Application On November 23, 2007, Fin=al Pla i Approvt: v,Las issued by the Planning Department for the proposed construction of 1Si niultip,e-family residential units on approximately 17 acres e;' Lind v thin a po:-tine of Parcel 016 in satisfaction of Condition 1 of Ordinance 07 '1.R1. Pr Conrliti,an I, construction should have commenced no later than iNove--nber 23, 2009 with completion no Tater than November 23, 2012_ By Ic•t-r.r cin -cd September 1, 2017, the Planning Department notified the Applicant 11,„i1 Hp-, Final Plan Approval is no longer valid since the original applican`, OAMREX Inc was not able to commence construction of the initial phase of the 15;3 family residential units within the RM -5 zoned area within the two-year peg iuc: endinP: Noven oef 23, 2009, thereby necessitating this request fora 10 -year tirne extension to complete the proposed multiple -family residential project. :1R Kona Vi :a Su:ar'.ivi z-orti — llni': 4 (SOP 70 :)0' 973 Subdivided large remniirat lot n JraiL 4 nLo 3 single family residential Tots, approved on January 25, 2021. 14, Kona Vistas Subdivision — Unit 4 +;SUB 20-001988) Subdivided large remnant lot in Unit 4 into 2 single family residential Tots, approved on March 30, 2021. Upon purchase of the subject properties at the end of 2015, Kona Three LLC has placed a significant financial commitment and many years of consultation, negotiation, environmental review, preliminary design work and regulatory compliance in order to be able to support this request for an extension of time by which to complete the project. These efforts included the following: 1. Drainage Improvements within Holualoa DrainDgeway in coordination with the Department of PuLl c 'Norks, - Ian.iing Department the Office of the Cor crdtior3 cc,rrpletea improvements Zvi his :ind;_ d. scent to the Holualoa Or.-inaprwa,y in acr_ornance. with tF=e recommendations of the Department of Public Warks. 2. Dedication of roadways within Kona Vista subdivision In coordination with the Department of Public Works and the Office of the Corporation Counsel, performed all necessary road work and completed dedication of three (3)1 remaining roadway lots within the adjacent Kona Vistas subdivision, namely Kekuana'oa Place, Liholiho Place and Karnamalu Place. 3. 12 -acre Ccrsar ty ,Ifc'rd bte Housing site makai of Kuakini Highway With the issuance of SMA Use Permit No. 430 on April 4, 2003 to allow far improvements to the Horseshoe Bend and Holualoa drainageways within this proposed afforLiable housing site, the Applicant retained the services of a hydrological engineer to prepare and submit a Conditional Letter of Map Revision ("CLOW') application to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEM.!\) in 2018. The CLOMR was issued 1-10-22 as Case No. 21 Oc3-17578, so the necessary drainage improvements can now be hsuilt ani the pr:Jpr i y I hen r'ouelopeci for affordable housing. However, des:::ite the Applicant's effort,_,, i_I e County no longer wishes to proceed with the devc lopment lot the 12 -acre oroperty for affordable housing in favor of the afforoablrLL' mousing agreement ri: ,^i,s;r rl ir,r7her MOW. Final Environmental Assessment air: Fincin; of Nri Sit ri fi int Imp= (FCNSI) By letter dated September 13, 2021, the Hawaii Count .7'L7rirg Departrnent issued a PONS' for the proposed 450 -unit Royal Vistas :lousing project that accor'panies and supports these iirnerdrnent •`equests to Ordinance 02 131 as Exlllbi_ D. —he Final Environmental Assessment include: an updated traffic impact analysis 'report, biological survey, cultural impact ;r� ;r'nont, arch 3 ,r Io cal inven:c ry and preservation plan. Also included w thin tris process were consult liens will area residents, specifically from the adjoining Kona Vistas subdivision. Work on the environmental assessments and its related studies began in 2018 unti its acceptance by the Planning Department in Seo. mber 2021, covering more than 3 years of studies and project design revisions based on agencies and public review and comments upon the draft environmental assessment. 5. Environmental flora study commissioned by Applicant and performed on all of Parcel 16; 17; the County -owned 18 & 19, plus the 12 -acre site. 6. Environmental faunal study commissioned by Applicant and performed on all of Parc& 16; 17; the County -owned 18 & 19, plus the 12 -acre site. Affordable Housing Agreement Applicant Kona hree, LLC and the County of Hawaii entered into an agreement on January 10, 2022 to satisfy the �i`furdafble housing obligations {Condition J of Ordinance 02 1.:1) loi inn df vr:e,opm.-ni e; tr entire 173.66 acres of land encumbered by both the State Land Use District Boundary amendment :grid change of .one ordinance approved in 1984_ As allow d l Sect on 1 5(0;(7) of Chapter 11 r,1 :I ri 1lav,rii• Co,,rly Code regarcingAffrfreablri I the Applicant acquiree 67 excess housing c-er is via an exchange for land for a neW ?roject to satisfy the affo-dablc hc..is 'ig ns for both the 21:5 s ng e family residential units within the existi' g Kona Vistas suhsdivisio-i as''fell as _ne 450 multiple family housing units w thin the proposed Royr 1' stas project. As such, the Applicant is requesting an extension of time of ten OM years to secure Final Plan Approval for the first increment of the proposed 450 -unit multiple family housing project as well as to complete its construction as originally intended by Condition I of Ordinance 02 131. And with approval of the requested amendment to Condition U of Ordinance 02 131 to provide clarity and certainty regarding thy:. extent of required County- dedicable roadways to be constructed within the proposrri .ic,velopment, the overall design can be facilitated so that plans for engineering an El cc r•struction can commence promptly after the requested amendments are apprrove7' by the Hawai `i County Council_ IV_ NATURE OF REQUEST GAMREX, Inc./Kuno Vistas, LLC (.re original landowners and Petitioners) were owred by a Japan-based dev,e c•ornent group, whose majority owner and President spetrrhetided.he Ko -la V :is project development unci I- is p :stingsomeyearsago. The development group eventually lost interest as well as its abil -y to continue to develop the project after 37 years of progress as demonstrated above. In December of 2015, Kona Vistas LLC sold their remaining land holdings to two Hawaii -based development entities: KV3, LLC and Iona Three LLC. These remaining landholdings that were transferred included about thirteen lots in Unit 3 anc Unit 4 of the Kona Vistas subdivision together with three roadway Ions and some remnant lots in Unit 4 and Unit 1 transferred to 14V3 LLC; and the rnulti-family {RM -5) zoned subject properties totaling about 68.837 acres identified as Milks; 7-6-21:01.6 017 were transferred to Kona Three LLC. Also included in the transfer were about 12 acres located makai of Kuakini Hig•w4av and naukd of Royal Poinciana Drive (T1VMK's 3/7-6-24:25; 112 & 113). These 12 3crc.s contain the confluence of the Holualoa and Horseshoe Bend drainageways, and were u-igirially Oar - led by the County to fulfill the affordable housing requirements of botn the , xisting Kona Vista subdivision and the proposed Royal Vistas multiple family resident?al projects. KV3, aftcir building some drainage improvements adjacent to County -owned Holualoa dranaa„ew.:y, worked with the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the PLinnirg Depnrtrrinn {CPD) along with County of Hawaii Corporation Counsel ("Corp Cnlrn.sol") to ric•diralc' thr' > rr•m ining roadway', that had not been dedicated, co•nplet ng the roadway derlicatinns in 2019. e crent Applicant, Kona Three LLC, has retained a hydrological engineer and other advisors and is working on a new drainage study and flood zone analysis r irlll'..II i1 or or -loving foiward with the planning and r.lr,vduprro.r'I ci[thc IAV zur7:!t: Lids, 4. rich is mpacted by two floodways: the Horses•iue Bend and l lulualoa drainageways, The Applicant anticipates that a new CLOMR will be needed during the development of Phase I of the Project for the Horseshoe Bend drairtageway. The Applicant also came to agreement with Hawaii Preparatory/Academy's 5 -acre interest in the multi -family zoned lands sitr.ated within the extreme southeastern corner of Parcel 017. Hawaii Preparatory Academy decided they no longer wished to build a new school in Kona, and Kona Thrr: _? I C as able to purchase their undivided interest in the 5 -acro ;_ A new AIS was her- p -op fired on the 5 -acres as this Land was not previoasly included in I.he original AIS. This r trent AIS found a previously unknown histor c. hurial site uncerground in a lava tubn this included Sucre area_ The +=.ppIir rr�l lhhn Cn-,rrr•~'lir;r ir}nrrd a Burial Tri' 1rrlc,-i1 PIrin which has been approved by the 511P and the 1Iowan Island Burial Council. �n add Lion, the Applicant was instructed to prepare a new AIS for the remaining Gr aces of RM -5 zoned lands with in the subject properties due to the age of the original AIS reauat. TF.,s new AIS has been completed and tippruved by SHPD and made a part of the 2021 environmental assessment report. 1.e Applicant has a` ai cur•_u acted :vith a Ioca€ construction firm, under approvals issued by the Department of Water Supply, and subsequently installed in 2018 an off- site waU r mete' box that tvill provide fire flow and potable water to the proposed 450 - unit molt ple family residential project- Final€y, 8t the request of the County, the Applicant sularr tted apl. 1icat on Co- a7 CLOMR for till:' 12 acres located rnakai of Kuakini Highway that was tor-nit-Hyrrtr �r:: cl ,a an affordable housing site, with the CLOMR being issued on January 10, 2022 ddS Cts}e No. 21-09-1757R. As demonstrated above, much "soft work" has been undertaken by the Applicant after its purchase of the remaining land assets from the original landowner in 2015, in order to update and align the various studies and previous obligations of the original landowner in order to be in a position to make this request for additional time in which to complete the last remaining major residential deve.loaa-nent component that was envisioned by both the State Land Use Commission an: the HL1w:ai`i Coirty Council when it originally approved the State Land Use Boundary a r,nndrr.er.t Chrilig0cif zine in 19€4. The Applicant found itself in a difficult position where it could rot responsibly approach the Hawaii County Council for additional time in which to complete the final residential component within the RV -5 zoned lands without first addressing the many project -related supporting elements that will inform decision -makers in making the proper decision to support the approval of the time extension as it will be consistent with the original reason for approving the land use entitlements back in 1984 while 911', conforming to current land use policies and adequately addressing project -related impacts in a responsible manner. V. PROJECT LOCATION The subject properties, consisting of combined 68.837 acres and identified by TMK: T5-021:016 and 017, is located along the east (rnauka) side of the Queen Ka `ahurnanu Highway at its junction with Kuakini Highway in the vicinity of Lako Street. The subject properties are situated between some vacant ranch land and Pualani Estates subdivision to the north and Kona Vistas subdivision and a church to the south, in the ahupua`a of Holualoa 15=and 2"d, North Kona, Hawai'i (Figure 1 -Location Map and Figure 2 — Vicinity Map). The current General Plan, State Land Use District and zoning district boundaries relative to the subject properties are reflected on Figure 3 — LUPAG Map, Figure 4 — StLrle LI; rid Use and Figure 5—Zoning. VI. PROPOSED DEVELDPMENT Proposed Multiple Family Residential Housing Component The Applicant proposes to construct "Royal Vistas" as a 450 -unit mufti -family residential housing project with both rentals and For Sale product to be developed in clusters of two- and three-story buildings throughout the 68.837 -acres that comprises both Parcels 016 and 017. A conceptual drawing of the layout of the buildings is shown below as Figure 6 — Conceptual Master Plan for Royal Vistas, Royal Vistas will be Comprised o mtiltfple family residential units "For Rent" and "Fur Vv ii re ".k•e 'inal ;ii;;r`butiurl of these units may be adjusted during final design and perm tting, the Applicant anticipates that the project will consist of: • 174 "For Rent" units consisting of: 0 n 172 Rwo-bedroom/two-bath units 52 three-bedroom/two-bath units plus a resident manager's unit All units within h.vo s7nry+buildingssituated within the mokai portion of the 68. 37-aue project s'te. • 27L "For S i Brits c:nnsiskinti of: o 14/ :. c aedi u nrIt ^. u bar r .rril O 137 thmr k-)erirocni/twn hath units p try resident i -i n is r' t Lartit. o All tJiiikt,wnuIn hr° Ioc.;71cri in 101i.'o story 1iree.story buildings, with :he two-story buildings dhcing four L., nits c�:ch and the three-story buildings being six units each. Parking wo.,a d consist of a Lmix of covered and open spaces for residents and goes:s, 101J) g To address housing si•urtd.er, iii [(find, unity Development Plan (CDP) identifies Objective HSG -4: Build Mor, -2 nits and Policy HSG -4.2: Workforce Housing. The workforce gap group {up to l`?C' 1 of median income) includes the part of the population that earns too much to quaiify fur -affordable lousing programs, yet too little to buy ar rent decent housing close to their obs. The Project would build units that offer a variety of housing types for both the rental and buyer segments of the mid- market which includes the workforce group. Although the Project is not specifically a workforce project, it would provide a housing option for the workforce gap group, The Project would be developed in two ar more phases, with Phase 1 having a maximum of 258 units to be constructed on no more shin 42 acres within the makai portion of the project site, and Phase II having the balance of 192 units within the mauka portion. Phase r would include all the "For Rent" rinit; and some "For Sale" units. Both "For Rent" and "For Sale" units would target local rente• s and buyers in the "mid- market" price points. These are residents who earn too mucl•. to qualify for "affordable housing" but not enough 10 buy the expensive single-I:Jell y for ~les located nearby. Phaw. 1 is :-.xpc,c;r•dl Ir: by ri mpI 1 c.1 by ?O?f, ar d Ph:ls.r II k expected to b completed by 2029, altho4t pry+ceirn-; 01 these t meld merit rer;4aeatp oc bly push its co'rplction to the Fall of 2030_ There would be two Community. Centers.. each of which includes a neighborhood pr,rk: one for the "For Rent" units and one for the "For Sale" urwi s. Each community center will have a pool and facilities for jse ay the resi0ents. P r1 )oseri FRnariway s The proposed roadway system within Royal Vistas will assist in implementing the roadway netwn—k this project area as defined by the "Official Transportation Network Map -Nadi Kailua Area" within the Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP), as part of the County's plan to expand the road grsd to help alleviate traffic and provide safer driving conditions (see Figure 7-ICCDP Official Transportation Network Map -Mani Kailua Area). These KCDP-defined roadway segments as it affects the proposed project include: • to provide the opportunity in the Tong -term to connect County -owned Leilani Street (in the Kona Vistas project) to County -owned Ho-omama Street (in the Pualani Estates project); • to provide the opportunity in the long-term to connect County -owned Kekuana'oa Place (in the Kona Vistas project) to County -owned Paulehia Street (in the Pualani Estates project); and • to connect these new roads to each other within the Project area. Kona Three, LLC is required to build and dedicate these roads by Ordinance. 1111}:rg� �y. the proposed Royal Vistas project would construct the following rriror collector rus riw^tip}r segments as shovwn in Figure 6—Conceptual Master Plan for ..R,ova ii.sta:. • In Phase , cons.ruct Royal Vistas roadway as a direct, fully channelized entrance- from :he Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. • In Ph;a;c construct that segment of the Leilani Street extension situated 5.v:thin the project site. This segment will stub -out the Leilani Street extnr:ion on the soL there project site boundary and will not connect it across the private adjoining parcel (TMK 7-6-021:014) owned by the Calvary Community Church of Kona. • In Phase II, extend Kekuana`Da Place northward through the project site from its existing terminus in Kona Vistas subdivision. • Construct a mauka-rnakai roadway connecting both the Leilani Street and KeLraria'oa Place extensions. • None of the roads proposed for the project will connect to Ho'omama Street and Paulehia Street in Pualani Estates due to an intervening privately -owned parcel (TPM{ 7-6-013:004). These roadways will be constructed to as rriinor collector roadways meeting County-dedicable standards with curl -n;, guit-: crs, and s'ciewalks, aII of which will be dedicated to the County of Wawa `i upon col n:aletion. Proposed Drainage Improvements TF Ei, align rnonts of most of the Hcrsesho e Bond (TMC: 7-6 021:018) and Holualna (TMK: 7-6-021:019), drainageways are L:uLh ov. nee and managed by the County of Hawaii Department of Qr.:.` c Works RW) as dranar;^ways_ A portion of the Horseshoe [4e.10r' t Ir' i e v 1y 51 eel Ic]tivti frrrnn l:h;= Col., rty-owrrerf {.1;tc.:h at Parcel 1 clown to the ex :atir••- culvert sy:tr.rrY- L. -icier QuCun l::i`Lalr.riiian:a Hi ;hwdy at th e northwest carr}cr of Parcel 16. As vhovin on rigurw 2 Vicinityy. Map, Horsc sr'oo lend drainageway partially bisects the project. site in a r7ortneast to southwest diue::ti;n, while the Holualoa drairiageway runs along the entire southern boundary of the project site. Phase II of trice picipcfsc•d will ii .It.d 11.I0 ir`s I1ation of a culvert system across the I-lolualoa dr .i na{ e),•v+ y to extenc: Ke uuria-oL: S:reet, which will be gated off and used for emergency access only until bass, II is cornplcteo. Phase II will add utilities and roadway irr I hem he c,edicated to the County in compliance with both Ordinance 02 131 and =he <C DP 'Official Transportation Map." 121 The rnauka .Sect°nn of the Horseshoe Bend t.lra na_ew ry, consisting of approximately 3 acres ths.it runs between the subject oroperties that collectively make up the 58.837 - acre project site, will be imorc•ved nartia ly realigned to maintain its separation from the Hoivalua drainageway, aionE with infrastructure for channelizing a portion of the drainageway to accommodate road and utility crossings associates with the construction of the two north -south minor collector roadway alignments through the project site as defined by the KCDP "Official Transportation Map, The rnakai portion of the Horseshoe Bend drainageway will be channelized where it is primarily sheet flow and moved closer to the '0.-thern boundary of th. project site to make room for thr- retic.,... •y int crSPr7ion Kwant.rrifirri Highway at the location to be approved by the State Department of TrT-ispo-ta`ion Highways Division_ Aside from tnr! Department cr Du1.3lir 'Wcrlrs rl -r:inagr. improvements, utilities, aid rDadv ays, the Apolica it is not p opusing to cor'struct any, additional drainage struett es or improvements within these County-ov nes drainageways. Utilities and Services Electrical and sewer service would be extended from nearby public grid terminus and water commitments have already been purchased and secured for the Project. The project site is situated within the Kona Urban Area between Kona Vast: and Pualani Estates subdivisions and is in close proximity to major roadways, recreational opportunities, and essential services, including grocery and wholesale stores, employment, hospital/clinics, public transit, schools, financial institutions, government agencies/services, and the airport. VII. PROJECT TIMETABLE AND COST Should the requests be approved, the Applicant intends to submit pians for plan approval review within one (1) year. Anticipated completion of the first increment of the 450 -unit Royal Vistas project is expected within ten (10) years from the date of approval of the requested amendments to Ordinance 02 131. Assuming there are no additional cost-rc• sited conditions beyond those improvements required by Ordinance 02 131, the current estimated development cost of this project is $170 million in 2022 dollars. This includes County exactions and fees. 1313':reg 1..11 A. kaloka Monika NORTH KONA DISTRICT P1?O ECT SITE Figure 1—Location Map 14 Parcel 15 3794 acres Figure 2 - Vicinity Map IS I num Figure 3 LUPAG rvtap Figure 4 — State Land Use 16 1 Figure 5—Zoning 17 1 Figure 6 — Conceptual Master Plan for Royal Vistas 1811Page ptc•wastd /to o• !a. !. . ;P r.relg,ry' RrOpOE4}tl TrarioFE Limo' . CDP IPI tali ,,"5' r-rnJC•r n-AIC'rr,nr. r^...r.?r • 14Fr, 1110 101" • -Ake rn1h%(L"13F')" TYPE I Me ® Pair -Paihc glared $1tiu411J4a i • m o. • ' Th // Ft ?..,..0?rj s'.` • ?. e�,'.:�;r /;r /3?f7in CIly th+ 1 ifl :'. • d . 7 ' art PROJECT SITE I =iEure 7 <CDP TransDorTatior Network Niap-Nani Kailua Area (v tl-I p ojec:t ijhted) VIII. ORDINANCE 02 131 CONDITIONS AND STATUS OF ITS COMPLIANCE Rezoning time extensions require compliance with applicable prevailing codes, particularly the concurrency provision of the Zoning Code. Further, project's compliance with the conditions of the rezoning ordinance also needs to be discussed. As such, this section addresses those requirements. Change of Zone Ordinance 02 131. (A) the zoning for the property shall be effective only after: (1) there are assurances satisfactory to the Departments of Water Supply and Planning, upon consultation with the State Department of Health, and the Division of Water and Land Development of the State Department of Land and Natural Resourr.c,,s, that a water source ct sufficient quality and quaneity has been establisl•ec within two years from the effective date of this ordinance; provided that a maximum ane - year ex1cr ion it:i .lr, tv' o -year tir�ic: lirrril rimy i](' r�i°�'r ci b:v 11-1:,!Planning Director with rea.5orable and sufficient justi-ication; and (2) an agreement, accompanied E.a••i .i r7 sorely he,r7c1 tr .oIher accei.er,l le executed with the Department of Water Su:iply for the actual develeomeril of i proven water source and its wntr•• r nsmission and distribution sys-cn vi-hin one year from the official date of corre once with condition A (1); provided that a ore -year extension to the one-year time limit may be granted by the Plarni-i Direc-o ° with 'easonable and sufficient justification; or (3) the Department of "t'ate7 Supply issues a water commitment for the proposed developrn n_; (B) 201:' •Tf7r rlii rt r ri h!ls secured and fully paid the require() facilities chrrrgrjoo ; for 450 water volts [Fret ,ngll support the proposed 450 multiple family residenwiuf unit within the Royal Vistas project. In 2018, an off-site water meter box was installed that will provide the necessary potable water and fire flow to service this project. no subdivision or development of any portion of the land shall occur unless and until condition A has been complied with; As mentioned above, the Applicant has fully paid far the necessary water units to support the proposed project in satisfaction of the requirements of Condition A. (C) Director shall be mandated to initiate action for tf.r, re)eal of tf i r rear rn� � i� conditions A or B have not been complied uvitfl, • As bo!h Conditions A c,r;r B were deemed satisfied by t±re PI rrrtrr7! the 0irot- or anis nevor rO.ri' p'`lerl rr7 ii itirnY an acrThn ti roporil rr"r7 RS "'..5 rind siring (Ordinance N4 23). "Nu!, rsf".ri0.1ersupported by thernr[.i'ry sz;bs;eauent amendment s to tars ordinanc • that was approved by the 1-1(1-7wa. Co fnty Council to nile,» for od' mor rel tir` o in which to complete the proposed project, the most rec€.r t be ticj Or&nance 02 131. (0) the petitioner, its assigns or successors, shall be responsible for complying with all conditions of approval; Tiltfll,.ir!"r:"Ir Of' /C7 OW!! dr !'t.!!; rr..'ri F!'Irn(j fF''.` 1f)flSr"lllr�' "i1 cr.iro;piy'L•vril! conditions of i:7f.:.p( VC?i, .r!n i' 4 `1tf its assig r.y or.sricces.iars. (E) the zoning for the 49+ acres des gnated by the State Land Use Commission as its second zoning increment shall not become effect ve until that land is certified by that commission to be within the I.Jrban Distr'ct: + By its Dec:ci. i6n clod () dr r d ir'd May y 10, ;993, f i V r' Land Use Commission cerrifle.l that the second zoning increment of 49+ acres is within the State Land Use Urban District. (F) the RS zoned area shall be developed in two increments, The first ircmi'nc it shall consist of a maximum of 59.5± contiguous acres, and the second. the remaining area. The effective date of zoning for the secrond increment !Mall be after development has occurred in the first increment, r, rThtr''rrnrrir r: by tlw Planning Director. "Development" means the applicant ha,, curr,jleted or - site and off-site improvements within the first increment of tic RS zoned nrcm and has dedicated the roadway to the County; ▪ This condition has been satisfied with the completion of all phases associated with the R5-15 zoned portions of the project area now known as Kona Vistas .subdivision, with the fast phase being completed in 2006, • As Condition f hos been s eaiisfied, the Applicant has no objection to the deletion of this condition should it be recommended by the Planning Director. 21 1 (G; 5.,k)ci vi ic.in plans for the first increment of the R5 zoned area shall be submitted within one year from the effective date of the zoning, Final subdivision approval 5.[-)<• .1 be secured within two years from the effective date of this amendment; • Th )3 condition he i been satisfied with the submittal to the Planning Oepar'tment of ltOna Vistas Subdivision -Unit 1-A (SUB 6140), consisting of the initial increment of 39 single family residential lots, which secured final subdivision approval on May 27, 1992. This increment also includes the construction L?f the initial sec;mer't of the extension of Lciko Street from its intersection with Kuakini HigiT wayf and extending 1770Lik0 to ± eilani Street, • As Condition G has !be Applicant has no objection to the deletion of this condrt;on should it be recommended by tl;e i'lanning Director. (H) the RM zoned area shall be developed in two increments. w hie :first rcr it shall consist of a maximum of 42 acres of the Multiple Family Residential zoned land and the second increment, the remaining area. The effective date of zoning for the second increment shall be after the applicant has completed the on-site and off-site improvements of the first increment of the RM zoned area and has dedicated the improvements to the County; (i) (J) 2213':rg • The .4pplirorii will r:orriply with thi ; rondif ie -m, dovo;opinq tho 4.SC.' r.rr7i� Royal Vistas project in two increments, cis dcussect rr; e'cr.+tin Vl u/ !.h/s report. plans for the development within the first increment of the RM zoned area shall be submitted to the Planning Department and final plan approval secured within five years from the effective date of this sixth amendment, Construction shall commence within one year from the date of receipt of final plan approval and he completed within three years thereafter; • The Applicant is requesting on ornendrnerat to Condition 1 that will allow for the submittal of plans and `=lysyl Pion Approval for the first increment of the RM -zoned urea secured within fi ✓e (5) years from the effected date of the amended ordinance with compleivro of the first increment of the 450 -unit project within five (5) years thereofter. should the Council adopt a Unified Impact Fees Ordinance setting forth criteria for the imposition of r2xactions or the assessment of impact fees, conditions included herein shall be credited towards the requirements of the Unified impact f=ees Ordinance; ▪ The Applrcw I ur:kr;o ,,+edges this condition and will comply upon the adoption cif a Unified impact Fees ordinance. (K) housing opportunities for Hawaii residents shall be provided in accordance with the condition imposed by the State Land Use Commission. The number of units and manner in which they are to be provided shall meet with the approval of the Hawaii County Housing Agency; * Attempts by the Applicont, in coordination with the Office of Housing and Community Development OHCD,), to satisfy this affordable housing requirement ifiitimfly' hhegan with an Agreement, along with seven (7) subsequent trrriendments, regarding the cora',->yarace of approximately 22 acres of lama located between Kuakini Highway and Royal Pofraciona Drive and zoned QRS -10 to the County or their designated affordable housing developer. These 12 acres were purchased cit the direction of the County, along with tik? ne,?ri fry the Applicant to address some drainage issues in the area.(It the r r°iiuest of OHCD, the Applicant prepared and then submitted aro application for Conditional Letter of Mop Revision ("CLOMR") to the Federal Emergency l ?una.p...ment Ager!. y ("FE^kt./ 7, to rfllow the l fr.;ou-zone designated portion of the 12 acres to be channelized err rl cie' eloped. The CLOIVIR (Case No. 21-09-1757R) was subsequen ly iW dirt' Qr7 ? r?uc7iy 10, 2022. • Despite the Applicant's efforts, the OHCD recently decided that this proposed 12 -acre affordable housing site was not suitable to meet their goals for affordable housing, prompting the Applicant to offer an alternative to satisfy the affordable housing obligations for both the exictiriq 215 -unit Kona Vistas subdivision and the proposed 450 -unit multi family re!,:dentital project through the acquisition of 67 affordable housing credits via land exchange for land associated with the creation of n new 100 -unit affordable rental pro.itcr above Lowes on land that the Anpiicant will donate to a qualified off ordobie housing developer. This most rocor'rt affordable housing Agreement, attached as Exhibit D -Affordable Housing Agreement, between the Applicant and OHCD 'ryas executed nn Ianuaryr 10, 2022 in satisfaction of Condition K of CJrdin4.rr;ce 02 171. (i.) imprnvrrr pm s to th4 irltorsrcticns with Kuakini Highway and the Kuakini Hii `Ivwr:y Extensicri shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the State Depnrtmcrt n` T• rinspertaticn I-li; hk^Mays Division. The intersection irnvoverr'err s shall be constructed cone.-re•7JIv with the development of the first increment of the RS or RM zoned areaas, whichever occurs first; • 77);.. condition was satisfied with the completion of intersection improvements along the Kuakini Highway at its intersection with the matrix; extension of Lako Street that serves all of rrc existing Kona Vistas subdivision. • As Condition L hos been satisfied with the completion of the intersection along Kuokinr Hirihway. ("this s('r;mi,hti.s iar:tn . ,Erred t.) ri.c r iwen KO. : H ghhwav) u/ !LS :rlt!°rsectron 'void) Luk 3 Street, the e Applicant has 23 1 no objection to the deletion r.n.l :l!,"5 c. r.incfilfrnulit r? b= re'c,c rrnrrreyrrcied try the l-fawai' County Council. (M) no direct access shall be provided for the Lots within the R5 zoned gree from the mauka-makai collector road; • The development of the existing single family residential Jots within the existing Kona Vistas subdivision adheres to this condition by restricting any direct access onto Lako Street, the me ika-makai connector rocci • As Condition Ad has been satisfied with the completion of Kano Vistas subdivision, the Applicant has no objection to the deletion of this condition should it be recommended by the Planning Director. (N) the roadways and stubout within the RM zoned area shall be constructed to dedicable standards with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works and shall be dedicated to the County of Hawaii upon completion. Where a roadway crosses a zone line or if a zone line should divide a roadway, the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks shall be provided for the entire right -Df -way -and -shall continue to the nearest intersection in order to avoid telescoping and to provide consistent imp. ovwrr en t; (0) 2413':Mg ✓ As pees"rated it .Section II -3 cf this-rrpor-t. r ' Appiicr:nt is requesting that Condition N L;e o'cir.;fied to provide crct; dedicoble-staridord roadways only as it pertains to its ext,?nsipn of Paulehra and H 'omamc Streets within Puaiani Estrtes to ri )e north ond K ekuaia 'nc: P'ioce and Leilani Streets within Kona Vistas subdivision to the south, dicing ',v'rth an interconnecting road between these two extensions' Dred tri Rr iIto .i1, all of whine will J7i' constructed Cis minor collector roadways as identified within the Kona c r rr unit i Development Pion (RCDP) and further defined on the Concepnr oi rvlostir- Plan for Royal Vistas identified as Figure 3 -Conceptual Building Layout rn the• Finer/ Environmental Assessment dated September 2021 at a minimum, roadways and stubouts within the RS zoned area shall be provided with paved shoulders and paved swales meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works and shall be ded;cd:ed two *e County of Hawaii upon completion; ■ The development of the existing sir i ' fcmUy fe'si entrnl Jilts wither the existing Korea Vistas SUbd"iV 51On acarhetes to t"r..S Condit/On by Fir: v!ctrr?r paved shoulders and swoles along all interior stnbc:riv rsi ons rD odway's i n o mainer meeting with the approval of the Department of Pi 1i3lic 'Works,. as well as the dedication of all such roads to the County of kowini • As Condition 0 hr been satisfied with the completion of Keno Vista subdivision and dedicoticn ale interior subdivision roads, the App rant has no iif, e.r:t on to the : r:li?tion of this condition should it be recommended fey. the P+ ir'nh?g Din2ctor-, (P) the method of sewage disposal shall meet with the approval of the appropriate governmental agencies; • The proposed Royal Vistas project will comply with this condition through the extension of and connection with the existing County sewer system that currently services oft of Pualani Estates ,sribdivi is n located to the north of the project site. (al a r,ainage r*r4,vkFr lel w call be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review .grid a.2provai pr c -•r to issuance of any subdivision or plan approvals_ The plan shall include', as a minimum, hydrological and hydraulic calculations for all components of the drainage system, a construction timetable for all elements of the system, and an analysis of downstream impacts. Further, mitigating measures as approved by the Department of Public Works shall be taken to eliminate any downstream impacts; • This condition hos been sa 'shed as it pertains to the R5-15 zoned lands that has been fully developed as Kona Vistas subdivision, which included the preparation and approval cif a dmindue master pion by the Department of Public Works and the cor11pl,?tion of rill r-ea,JJjed drainage improvements,. • A new drainage master play that will provide for appropriate mitigating measures to eliminate any downstream impact that may be directly caused by the proposed 58.827 -acre Royal Vistas project site, will be prepared and sr F�r;�inlr°r� to the Departrnrnt of Public Works for review and approval should this requested time extension request be approved. (R) an intensive archaeological Survey shall be conducted for the entire property and a r eport shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of any subdivision or plan approvals; • An archaeolagkal inventory survey (A S) tif4{0s conducted in 1984 for the original 1 71±-ocre project except for a 5 -acre portion nr? the southeastern corneroriginoi+y H ter?Oird N. be (Joie toprot by t?7(" -a'wo i Preparatory Academy, As recioes[ed by L'?6' 51016' 1lis i0e;c- 'rEservntI'r? Divnstcn?, a new archaeological SI.+ v y to identify all archaeological historic properties present in the PrC,ji'c'1 .int{' ('r d un oprioio {}J fht, prryicn.t r7rr'hfr('rilog.,:''i11 documentation to include site plans for eoci? s?te 4vrth sift' tourrd_mes and areas rrrrpactr,r, ni7nt{,granii.s 011 cites and t otubi'. , yin assessment of tlJt ?' nr?Le`Ciril , rki Sit ' si:qui_[iccioce were perjoirrrc'd, These 25 I I' (5) additional survey repr.,r t4 dor loth the previrju(y 5 -acre site and the remainder of the project site including th cxrsti.'i County -owned drainogeways were completed in 2018 rind 2020, respectively, and included within the 2021 firlui environmental assesstnent for the Royal Vistas project, should any unanticipated archaeological sites be found during land preparation activities, work shall immediately stop and the Planning Department notified. Work shall not resume in the affected area until clearance is given by the Planning Department; • The Applicant acknowledges arra MI! ::c:+np/y'tri; this condition. ditir n. T ne Applicant also notes that it is not c. Ware of on./ 'inadvertent t fin, s that were encounte1vd during f.;f'4.el pment of tfi existing Kona Vi.sto,5 5ubdiViSiriii. Cr) prior to the Final Approval of the second incmmont, thc applicant, its successors of assigns shall pay for any additional real pr upErty taxet:. owed for the new residential assessed value of the subject property which w.LE, previously taxed at the agricultural rate; and (1J) 261 P. g • The Applicant understands that Garnrex Corporation, devvi:yrr f=r,t predecessor- in interest, complied with this condition many year w cgo. Thr Applicant believes this condition is rm longer relevant as the rernainir,n lands are assessed and taxed at RS and RM zoning valuations. Thrrefa:m, t r. Applicant has no objection to the deletion of this condition .,h.. ;r(' r'r be recommended by the Planning Director, an initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the ordinance may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstances: 1) the non-performance is the result of conditions that could have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicants, successors or assigns, and that are riot the result of their fault or negligence; 2) granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the general plan or zoning code; 3) granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons far the granting of the change of zone; 4) the time extension granted shall be fora period not to exceed the period originally granted for performance (i.e., e condition to bd pc;rfc,rrnod within one year may be extended for up to one adc it urial year); and 5) if the applicant should require an :9ddi,ion,.]l c.xt, nsicn of time, the Planning Director shall submit the ipplic;m:'s request to the Ci;r,)ty Council for appropriate action. FL.rther, should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Director initiate rezoning of the area to its original or rr.u-e appropriate designation. • The Applirr.1 rr'or,flstirlq on additional ten (1O) years to complete the first increment of the proposed ,, tiltiple family residential project within the RAMI -5 .7ened propertr^.s c:5 required' ed' by Cpndition l of Ordinance 02 131. VII. JUSTIFICATION OF REQUEST Condition U of the Ordinance 02 131 (Exhibit C -Ordinance 02-131) outlined three (3) circurnstarr c -, under which the Planning -) rector could cnnsi' c r an initial Fine extension request. These circumstances presr: alai) y also apply to an extend _1rl tc be considered by the Hawa_i' i County Council arc] _€-ward Plar_n't7 tommissior7, tic recommendations or the Planning Director, As suci. these circumstarc.es ale. thein justification follow. A. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not hove been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant, its successors or assigns, and that are not the result of their fault or negligence. As noted in Sections fl, II and IV of is report, t.por` ocgr ir'ng th=_ subject properLies at the end of 2013, the Applicant took urnmedine steps to adc-ess the vzvious conditions and associated requirements imposed upon the c:c vrdnpment that included: 1. working with the OHCD to satisfy the affordable housing obligations for both the existing 215 -unit Kona Vistas subdivision as well as for the proposed 450 -unit Royal Vistas multiple family residential project, that included the abandonment of many years of effort by the Applicant to provide a 12 -acre affordable housing site just makai of the project site, 2. wor`cinE m,,ith the County and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) regx-dirg the management, design and improvements to both the Horseshoe Bend and Holualoa drainageways that borders and bisects the 68.837 -acre project site, 3. updating the archaeological, cultural impact, biological, drainage and traffic impact studies that would inform the development of an environmental assessment for the Royal Vistas project, 4. prepared a final environmental assessrricnt ar41 sccu'DI a FONSI for the Royal Vistas project (Exhibit D-Roya"v'ist s Housing Project F=A -701,15) due to anticipated improvement; to these cirEan2ge...vay5 tHT e rr ti;;wnr.e by the County, which alone took over 3 yea i3 ;.o complete.. and 5. worked with the State, County ant: surrounding winniur ity :L address tyle proposed roadway system that will address trAfic vol.incs nrd movements generated by the propos.pd Rciy.: project whir, con tnnr rig to the roadway connectivity requirements of the ICorta CDP. 27 I As presented within this report, both the original and current Applicants have made Significant progress towards the completion of the single and multiple family residential project over the course of past 37 years, with the co -npleticn of the 215- unit Kona Vistas subdivision in 2006 and the const-uctiorl of the exte'biurl of Lci40 Street that serves both this subdivision as well as t ie adjoining Iolani su adv vision. The current Applicant, Kona Three. LLC, has spent much of its time and re.soL.'ces since its purchase of the subject properties at the erid of 2015 to perform •ext _ri5iv ° studies, planning, permitting and design work that still neees ary to pror.r•cri with the construction of the 450-unit multiple-family resoential component to be called Royal Vistas_ Part of this effort has been towards satisfying its affordable housing obligations, including those affordable housing obligations of tha kern : I rritiowne and applicant. Please nate that this time period also included the economic struggles associated with the Great Recession that began at the end of 2007 and extended through mid - 2009, and the accompanying burst of the "housing bubble" and the subprime mortgage crisis that has taken years for both industries to recover. Therefore, the Applicant's inability to complete the mulUple-farody residential project within the RIM -5 zoned portion of the overall 171: acre project area encumbered by Ordinance 02 131 are the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the Applicant and are not the result of their fault or negligence. B. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the Genera! Plan or Zoning Code. 1: shc;i1Id hi noted th.it rezoned in 1984, there have been no c-iali es to the County Gefie,ri I' ori. wl, r.il designates most of the project site as U-han Expansion with a section c•f Low Density Urban along the makai portion frontiria- the Queen I<a'ahuniar:.1 F,i;;hway, as shown on Figure 3-LUPAG Map. Where the land use regulatory environment has changed is with the adoption of the Kana Community Development Plan (KCDP), which became effective on September 10, 2008 (Ordinance No. 08 11S) and was not considered during the course of review of this rezoning action by the Planning Department, Planning Commission and Hawai 1 County Council due to the filing of the change of zone request in early 1984. Subsequent to these �.ipprovals, however, the County Co..incil approved a slate of interim amendments to the CDP on September 18, 2019 t•iat errphasized the CDP as providing a f-amework oT guidance policies tovwwards future development within the Wirth {,ori; -1 iiis.tr i t I li,lrt a series ,3' iii,ri c'i ,tis rkrii `11"r t•r.!if development in 3pec•fic locations rather than proriiut r1 : rejisortible appieriches :c 2813':rg such development that in the end, accomplishes the very intent of what the CDP was attempting to achieve in the first place. Regardless, the Applicant offers the following discussion that demonstrates consistency of its time extension and roadway condition amendment requests with the KCDP: • Consistency with the General Plan LUPAG reap of Urban Expansion and Low Density Urban. The LUPAG map identifies the subject properties and its immediately adjacent area as "Lirban Expansion Area" and "Low Density Urban'. "Urban Expansion Area" allows for a mix of high density, medium density, low density, industrial, industrial -commercial and/or open designations in areas where new settlements may be desirable, but where tite specific settlement pattern and mix of uses have not yet been determined. "Low Density Urban" allows for residential: with ancillary community and public uses, and neighborhood and convenience -type commercial uses with an overall residential density of up to six units per acre. The existing RM -5 zor ng of the subject properties and the proposed 450 -unit loyal Vistas mull ale family residential project, if allowed to proceed, will establish a land Ilse pattern consistent with the both the urban expansion and low density :ISI: t rn n r I: roi 7rr•.ortded by the General Plan as well as with the residential neighborhoods that characterize this part of North Kona along the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway. Speaking practically, the RM -5 zoning of the subject properties is appropriate given the design constraints of both the Horseshoe Bend and Holualaa rrainage ways that borders and bisects the 68.337 -acre project site. Placing re, dential units within multiple family residential structures allows for better sating opportunities while reducing the overall extent of land altering activities typically associated with single family residential lots, • Consistency with the General Plan goa s, policies: aril standards relative to the land use and housing;elements_ The approved RI'V-5 zoning, and the proposer; cevelcprnent of :l -e .150 -writ Royal Vistas mu hok.i frig project, would also bo. r.c':nsisient with klu: goals, policies, and staincldrds of the Housing and Lane L.,e Llemer::ts of the General Plan, at, it was :hater -mined in 1984 with the app-ovn df the zoning by the Hawaii Co.irty Council', The proposed project will Inc c,l<>4 illy raver.:IIV housingstock ;adj,7c_;nt to established residential commun ties along with appropriate infrastructure that both support and facilitate the housing and transportation needs for this particular area. 2913':rg� More specifically to the Housing element, the more pertinent goals and policies follow; Housing Goals • Attain a diversity of socio-economic hocking mix throughout the different parts of the County. Maintain a housing supply which allows a variety of choice. • Develop het ler places to live in Hawaii County by creating viable rornrr;urritiF.s with decent housing and suitable hiving environments for our peo:Ae. improve and rr?aintain the quality and affordability of the existing j lt.N tilfi `(;(.1(. • Seek sufficient production t f crew affordable rental and fee -simple hoL sing in the County in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals. Policies • increase rental opportunities and choices in terms of quality, east, amenity, style and size of housing, especially for low and moderate income households. • Appropriate infrastructure such as water, wastewater, and access are available or will be constructed by the Applicant to support the proposed 450 -unit multiple family housing project. As noted earlier, County water has already been pair for and is available for the project; the project will connect to the County's sewer six stern; and access to the site and adjoining residential communities will eventually D enhanced as two north -south minor collector alignments within the prujiect site, as identified within the KCDP, will be constructed, leaving relativhly r7zall undeveloped segments between the project site and PualHni Estates to the north and Kona Vistas subdivision to the south. Within the project site, a new fully -channelized access point at Queen Kaahurnanu Highway will ae constructed to provide primary access to Phase I, with an eventual connection of Phase 11 with Kekuana`oa Street within Kona Vistas subdivision to provide access to Lako Street. Kona Community Develi pment Plan The Kona Community Development Plan ("KCDP") became effective on September 10, 2008 (Ordinance No. 4S 115) and was not considered during the course of review of this rezoning action by the Planning Department, the Plann ng Commission and Hawaii County Council due to the filing of the request in 1984 Subsequent to thP5,17. approvals, however, the County Council approved a slate of interim .amendrriells to the KCDP crrr Septem aer 18, 2019 that emphasized the KCDP o-c•vicl rg; a framework of guidance policies towards future development within 1 tic. N Irl h Kona district rather than a 4c=r r =. of mandates that : r1 wally hindered deuelcn inert in spec:fie locations rather than promot.nf reasonable approaches to such development tnat will satisfy some of the guioirr f;. inc nlr-:ti of thy, kC_DP to: • Provide connectivity and transportation choceti; • Provide horsing choices; • Provide infrastructure and essential facilities concLr.rert with growth; and to • Promote effective governance_ Regardless, the Applicant offers the following discussion that demonstrates consistency of its time extension and roadway condition amendment requests with the KCDP. The subject properties are situated ,.vithrt the Kona Urban Area ("KUA") but is not. r,i`r:.ntrd within any Transit Oriented Development (TOD) area as shown an Figure 7 — KCDP C)lfi; ';11 T- iisportion Network Map_Nani Kailua Area, Furthermore, the subject 13ropert.e, tyre nc: situated within a Concurrency Zone. These findings were confirmed and ac.c.npt^rd ley thc: Planning Department as the accepting authority for the Final Envirc:nrn m A yr'ti ,rn nt - Royal Vistas Housing Project dated September 2021. The subject properties with their current RM -5 zoning, as well as this request for a time exterrsiuo to complete the proposed multiple family housing project that has been a part of a much larger residential project covering more than 171 acres and underway f=or more than 37 years, should hr functionally 4lassified as "Infill" pursuant to Policy LU -2.8 that provides guitleliries fur rezoning actions and time extensions for properties outside of a TOD area but within the KUA. The guidelines and their relationship to the subject site/request are: a. Consistency with the LUPAG map. The project site's existing RM -5 zoning, and its request for an extension of time to complete the proposed 450 -unit multiple family housing project, wi I co-itinue to fall within the area designated for Urban Expansion, id Ic i, Oensity Urban uses. 311 P. g b. Infll. The project site Is designated Urban on the State Land Use map. The subject property is situated adjacent to the north of the established 215 -unit Kona vistas subdivision, which is part of the original land use entitlements issued iri 1381 that supported the residential development of this part of North Kona. lust one lot away to the north is Pualani Estates, a subdivision of more than 3b0 homes. lolani subdivision and other smaller subdivisions lie immediately to the east (mauka) of the proposed Royal Vistas project site, As such, this area satisfies the concept of "infiil" by linking together the established residential communities adjacent to the north, south and east of the subject properties. This can be no better demonstrated than the proposed extension of Kekuana-oa Place within Kona Vistas through the project site as well as the construction of the Leilani Street alignment, both of which will help to facilitate the interconnection of roadways within Pualani Estates to the north and Kona Vistas subdivision to the south, which clearly justifies the existing RM -5 zoning of the subject property, and is continued development through the approval of the requested time extensions as "infill". c. Greenfields Rezoning. This is not applicable, as by virtue of the previous RM -5 zoning action prior to the adoption of the Kona CDP as well as the comments noted in "b" above, the subject site should not trigger a need to amend the KCDP. By its letter dated September 1, 2017, the Planning Director confirmed that the proposed Royal Vistas e family housing project is consistent with the subject property's RM i Toning. The Planning Director also noted that according to the ()1lirial {ort : rr: it Use Map (Figs.re4-7) in the KCDP, tie wester 71 ipri,tion cif the project site s..tuated m the Pua'a-Wai`aha Village ronsit Oriented Development (TOD) FlonT:'ig Zone. The Director confirmed that location of tlis TOD h, -s not yet becorno liri4•rl b•,: a roaster p; -,n 7rr;-.c1 district zoning; hn rver, ik is :iIu y that the future —CD will be located rrakai of Queen Ka`ahumanu I Ii,Oway and mauka of Kuakini Highway. Therefore, the PI .nning.Director determined t17zt :f e si_.ib,.ect properties are not vacated in the TOD. The requested amendments to Ordinance 02 131, in continued sc.ppo.-t of the proposed 450 -unit Royal Vistas multiple family housing project, will be developer: in accordance with Policy LU -2.8(1)(17) of the KCDP, which indicates the ;project riiuy civ developed iri accordance with the existing zoning, subject to the following requirements: 3211':rgg Policy Ll: -2,8: Development Outside Transit -Oriented Developments (TODs), but within the Kona Urban Area. Development outside the TODs, but within the Kona UA, may occur as follows: 1. Existing Zoning a. TND Overlay. Any project greater than 20 acres on land zoned Single-family residential (R5), Multiple residential (RM), Residential -Commercial Mixed Use (RCX), Gigli r,rl Commercial (CG), Village Commercial (CV), or Neighborhood CommerDm (CN), shall be permitted to develop as a neighborhood TND fallctiir� thr_, procedures for a PUD and the Village Design Guidelines. Non -TND Protects. Any project may be developed in accordance with the existing zoning, subject to the following requirements: i. Parks (see Policy PUB -6.2.) ii. Affordable I lousing. Resale restrictions on affordable units built in campliarrtie with HCC Chapter 11 (see Policy HSG -5.2). iii. Street Standards. Connectivity standards (see Policy TRAN-2.1), street standards (see Policy TRAM -3.1), and traffic calming standards (see Policy TRAN-3.7). iv. Wat;tewater. P•iority sewer area (see Policy PUB -4.4). v. Sensitive Resou»ces• Survey of potential sensitive resources {see Policy ENV -15). Applicants res»• r,s : .A cc,nf Frmed by the Planning Director by its letter doted September 1, 2017, thc, pr-r;pr sr -d Royal Vistas rnuitipde family housing project may be developed as o non- TNL) ,p elect its accordance with its existing coming, subject to the requirements of Policy LU -2.5, which the Applicant discusses in further detail below. Policy PUB --6 2: Active Recre .tion Opportnnit es. A range of recreational opparturii-ies should be prov did to erc:curage physical activity and interaction among toddle s, yodth: teens, adults,, and seniors, including, without limitation the following: (a) Regional park (Tr in alum 50 n__gional park at Kealakehe as shown 011 till PU.,blIc. Facilities I✓E.n tc; Include playfields, multi-purpose building tiE°.g., !;yFT'irTdsiu n) (b) Kona Civic Au:litoriJm or Perform ng Arts Cnnter_ Facility to provide a venue for major c..,ltural, and performing arts opportunities. (c) District park (10-30 acres)—Upgrade the Old Airport Park to enhance the playfields, swimming pool, multi-purpose building, courts (basketball, tennis, volleyball), tot ots, fitness area, pet area, and skateboard area; locate a district park to service South Kona to include playfields, multi-purpose use building (e.g., (:ornrnunity%senior ::t'.rltor, gym), and a tot lot. 3311':rgr (d) Community parks (4-8 acres)—Ashould be located 2 miles apart within the Urban Area to include, at a rnirirrum, playfields and a restroom, as designated in the Public Facilities Plan to provide adequate playfields for youth leagues; multi-purpose use of school playgrounds should be candidates for these types of parks, (e) Neighborhood parks (up to 4 acres) – A neighborhood park (including community gardens, community centers, packet parks, and pet parks) should be located 1/a mile apart [for] subdivisions within the Urban Area. Subdividers shall provide for private maintenance ar pay a fee pursuant to HCC Chapter 8 when required to provide neighborhood parks_ Applicant's response: The project site is situated within the Kona ilrbcn Areca, which contains a number of regional, district and carnnurnity recreational facilities thot ore able to provide for the recreational needs of residents within the proposed project_ Such existing recreational facilities within the Kailuo-Kona area include: r.,ive Rec..reap. nrrnl uci i(75: • C11d Karya Airport Park complex, • Kekiwokalorri Gym -Park complex • Comrnrrnity pork nt Puadani Estates Beech Park facilities • Woi 'oho (Honls) f%ecch Park • Kcrhalu 'u Beach Park • Magic Sands (La'aloa) Beach Park • Perhoehoe Beach Park Carrr(ainq Sites • }Coharwiki Beach Park Two neighborhood parks, each containing a swimming pool, will be included as part of the two community renters that will be provided for the residents of this proposed community. Policy FISC7-S.2: Privately.Construc.t.ed Affordable ljniis. For private projects subject Lo affordable housing requirements, the Kora I -lousing Non -Profit or other non- profit shall have a first right of refusal to 10% of the required affordable units. All affordable units shall remain affordable For 40 years, No restrictions may apply after 40 years based ar the rationale that newer homes wall replace these older homes in the affordable housing stock. During the resale -restricted period, the level of restriction shall meet the following minimum requirements: 341 • lst 20 years: The affordable units shall have a minimum 20 -year controlled appreciation restriction (cast of improvements plus appreciation based an the Honolulu Consumer Price Index; • After 20 years: The owner may sell the property at market value with a shared appreciation with the County or Kona Housing Non Profit at 50%; • Right of First Refusal: After 20 -years, the Kona Housing Non -Profit shall have the right of first refusal to purchase the unit; • Owner -occupancy: During the resale -restricted period, affordable units shall remain owner occupied or rented out by the owner at an affordable rate as certified by the County real property tax division pursuant to the affordable rent provisions in HCC Chapter 19. Applicant's response: The Applicant has acquired 67 a `nrdof>?r. i7t,ocisii"j T. rtc vier an exchange for land associated with the creeLor of G. ,,a .,, ICS? -Ll( t affordable rental project above Lowes on land that the Ap,'iircor'r t•. i 1l donate to a qualified affordable housing developer. This most recent ca'fforda e hou51rct Agreement, at tacked as Exhibit 0 -Affordable Housing Agreement, hetviefTn the Applicant and OHCL was executed on Jgnuc r i,, 10, 2027 in safisforlion n,€ Condition k of Ordinance 02 131 and Policy ±15G-5.2. Policy TRAN-2,1: Connect vitt' Standards. Co'7reutivity refers to the directress of links and the density of connections:hat mike u;) .,-he trms :ortrrtior network. Within the Kona Urban Area (UA} rew development shall contr .ante to th'his interconnected transportation network of streets, pedestrian, and bicycle access that work to disperse traffic and connect and integrate neA•v i ovrlopmont W^lith ti e existing fabric of the community. Proposals for new develop—lent or rede;re €jrrrent within Kona`s UA should meet the following connectivity sto•icdi;i: : 2. Connection to Adjoining Development. The road system for riev' development shall contribute to the local transportation network_ To supplement HCC Section 23-40, at a minimum, riew subdivisions shall incorporate and continue all collector streets, and selected local streets to adjoining property. If a portion of the stub -out is not improvec, the current developer shall improve the stub -out portion, where practicable. Connection to adjoining properties may not be required if seriously constrained by topography or other physical hindrances, or in cases where through travel cannot occur because the property is bounded by development with private stir'et.S previously allowed. Aral)?icemr.s r espcansr�: The Applicant wilt satisfy the requ(rements Of Policy TRAN ?.3 Oa li ccrrstructian of alignments within the project that will provide for the rte tcr-e coonectivrty between the proposed Royal Vistas multiple family frrar�:,rrr �), r;�,r r r r�rrel tlir° flog Kona Vistas and Pualani Fs/ r re,. sre'.)d visiorly ns 351P g shown on Figure 6 — Conceptual Master Pion for Rovoi Vistas, The proposed interconnecting rood alignments include: lr� Phase 1, construct ?:of -.1 ,4(9f;72'.f7r of Me Lei!. -127i ,Street extension situated within the project site. fhas sergfne!H L;b-out the Leiianr Street extension on the southern project site h:—Q]ridary and will not connect it across the private adjoining parcel (TMK 7-6.021;014) owned by the Calvary Community Church of Kana. • In Phase i, construct that segroer r of Kekuana "oo Place extension situated within the project site. * /n Phrase 1, constrict a mauka-makai roadway connecting both the Leilani Street and Kekurarra 'ria 'lace extensions. • In Pi"Ieasr 11, r?,,rr nd Kr}krara,7r 'r o More re from its existing terminus irr Kona Vistas sulk rvisirin aorti7warcJ tri cot iect with the Kekuarno'ea Place alignment wrvithin tl;c projer_ ° e.rt ' constructed in Phase 1. * None of the roods proposc•d fcr the project will connect to Ho 'amama Street or Pr~:.rlehrr Street et ir7 Pwrclarai Estates due to an intervening privately -owned parcel (? P4 ' /-5-013:004). Policy TRAM -3.1: Street'Stricin' d4.. County street standards should be pedestrian - friendly, safely accommodate Lacy es, accessible to the disabled, and appropriate for its surrounding land use context. Applicant's response: The Applicant will satisfy the requirements of Pu`rr_y TRAW-3.1 by constructing ail connector roadways within the project to Crarinty dedicable standards that will include the construction of sidewalks along ri:ese roadways, as shown on Figure 6 — Conceptual Master Pian for Royal Vistas, in compliance? Lvwt1, Condition N of Ordinance 02 131, as reglies`rd tr lar m-nenr.+cit _ Policy TR AN—.7: ic C:rrlrtirc,S7.inii:lrci;. In order to slaw `raific for pedestrian s; -fent Dr- comfort, stt:r Jurds for trDf`ic cti1nrir;, should be included, as part af the County Strnnt Stanch -3. -cls. Appiico+rt's response.. Per Contlitlon IV: the Applicant must construct _til ri .ncr collector roadways within the proposed project to County-dedicable standards. The only perrni5sible traffic-calrr-11ng device that could be considered :vftr,lrr the dedicable roadways could he speert hump.., which hove been utilized ,&'it.nrr7 County roads in selected locations throughout the island. 1-fe ,'.'r v,,r, tart, arses of internol dravew iys providing direct access from. thi'cr rrir!rr'r coge tot roadways tr.) the irrciiviciriil f1tuft+axle family residential hoal,'r•c1 LirjrtiS cJ but its inherent narrow design, already provides for traffic calming throughout most of the project site. Dblective TRAN-2 Street ,'Network Connectivity. With the proposed construction of roadway extensions through the project site that will help to facilitate the interconnection of roadway networks within Kana Vistas and Pualoni Estates subdivision that lie on either side of the project site, the proposed subdivision adheres to an objective of the C/JP to develop a system of interconnected roads within Kano that will provide alternative transportation routes that will disperse automobile trips and reduce their length, while not compromising the through functions of arterials and major collectors with excessive intersections. Such interconnections will also serve to; (0) (b) (c) (f) (g) (h) (i) provide safe choices for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians; promote walking and bicycling; connect neighborhoods to each other and to popular destinations, such as parks, among others; rarr.•'Jicle opportunities fn ; ro ira!'rrro.e their level of ph/sit 0i rr{f y�iyvity each }day 1pby c/ry.2r;unc �vc�?iso+ e neighborhoods wit.h 7dequote connections to l stirrntio s, rcci ccs vehicle utiles traveled and travel uric, thus irnprov nr air aua;ir& and r et, atirrgg the effects of auto emissions on the health of residents and the environment; reduce emergency response trines. increase effectiveness of mi;t?iC:,aa:il .ser'4•ii-i'. delivery; restores arterial street ccperrJty to better serve regional long-distance travel needs; and provide increased err7erpf. nc:y evacuation opportunities. Policy PUB -4.4: Sewer Priorities. In order to protect the nearshore water quality, the requirement to hookup to the County sewer systema (HCC Section 21-5) shall be strictly enforced. The highest priority in expanding the sewer system within the Kona Urban Area shall be to service any shoreline properties that do not have access to a public sewer system and then to sery ce lots within approximately 1 mile of the shoreline. Any new subdivision within 1 mile of shoreline within the Kona Urban Area shall either hookup to the public sewer system, or provide a private treatment system, and/or install dry sewers {see Figure 4-10c Official Public Facilities and Service Mala k11a43t' MAnagernent). privAtt'c.o lection systems within the 1 mile zone snail be designed and constructer. to County standards to enable potential connection to County sewer system. Thi^ Cou vtyf shall ensure that TODs can be served by the public sewer system in a timely manner. Alp,i rnrit .`; rc.sp i.J sz..: The entire 5() !i' t lL:?trt; 'JiSUIc l rcfeic_L v..01 be «alar?erten ±'o the County's sewer syslem, 371 Policy ENV -1,5: Sensitive Resources. In the context of Kona's ecology and history, the following natural and cultural resources shall be considered sensitive and therefore shall be inventoried, as part of any permit application to the County Planning Department (see Figures 4-8a to 4-8d): • Critical habitat areas ,is do ntified by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife or County General Plan; • Predominantly r7�.�'ifr r.cr�y_te n5, which niay not he considered endangered but are valued _ ecau!,e r he r ric.-rly pristine condition; • Anchialine ,.?rinds subject to ti ,management Program addressed in Policy" ENV - 1.1Q_ `tion Degradation crAnehualine Ponds; ▪ High-level groundwater recharge area which shall initially be defined as all lands mauka of the 1,500 foot elevation and which may be refined by the Kona Mauka Watershed Management Program; ▪ Historic trails; • Archaeological and historic sites subject to protection under HRS Chapter 6E; and, • Enhanced Shoreline Setback (see Policy LU -1.5). Any permit Lipp i:Eitior th i- r_,7r_ompasses any of the above resources shall incorporate these resour'.es :; assets, If a proposed project will have significant, unavoidable, adverse ir.pa::tr to any of the above resources, the presumption s•rall be denial of the noplication a'c the applicant will have the burden of L-xalaining nny overriding considerat ons. r h p esence of any of these resources shall qua li-./ fo , density trar74fers thmuElh 4i DIanned unit development based on potential gross r1L nsirtwf allr,'.Jr ri her th prnvcnilirg 7cariing. The protection or restca -rition rat ary cif these resources should qualify 1or Iii inE from the Kona Treasures Fund {see Poky ENV -33). Apprfcont's response: The subject properties are not situated within an area identified as the Kona A4auka Watershed Planning Area (Figure 4-8a) due to its location within the Kona Urban Area. Regardless, the proposed project will be connected to the County's sewer system to avoid direct impacts upon the County's groundwater resources. Also due to its location within the Kano Urban Area coed below the 1,500 -foot elevation, as well as supported by the biological survey, the ,libject properties are not situated within a critical habitat area nor does it const of predc:rnr.nantly native ar endangered ecosystem. The subject r,rf7k)or.r r 5 (7fr' ,rc cot r°r; rai,; mt 4,?Oo feet from the shoreline, and will not have any direct effect upon the s `core±ine ar coastal processes. T -;e Final Environmental Assessrnt-r;t foi Vestas Housing Project (E,k'l?ibit D -r ojrar Vistas t lousy nu Proect FCA-FONSi) found that, 'no threatened or r-ndon ,ryrd plant ;ea:io!; u pear to be present in the Pro ect Site, nor Ore ±:?t're un:queiy vcrlriUb;E' hob+tols. No existing or proposed 381,'. IE'cf�:'rcrll; ;le. ryr riff°ci c.r+t;ccrl p/ont (or ordinal) habitat is present in the Project Sita. Tiu rc' appears to be no potential to adversely affect rare, threatened, or :'r riongered plant species, Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Ass•s_4rnEy t 33 Although existing vegetation would be cleared during Project consvaction octi'rities including grading, the plants that would be removed are oh' fon-ri true. Landscaping is an important aspect for housing developments bath for residents' experience and property value. The Proposed Project would plant new vegetation os port of landscapirla following Project construction_ As requested in on early consultotion letter frc,rn DLNR.. on Three would plant native or noninvasive trees as part of landscaping for the Proposed Project_" Cumulatively, its findings also rro±,'d ? r t "Pc ca. present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the ;Imre imported biological resources through alteration of the landscape throngh introduction of weeds, removal of native vegetation, and loss of habitat for n;w!ive wildlife species. Jmpercts to biological resources from the Proposed Project would be minor, due to the limited number of native species present at the Project Site and the protection measures outlined to avoid impacts to Federally -listed species and prevent spread of non- nove weeds. Therefore, the cumulative imparts of the Proposed Project in ,.unrhlnotion with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions ore xpcted to be minor.' Concurrency The subject properties are not situated within a concurrency zone as depicted in Figure 4-3—Official Concurrency Map of thy, KCDP. Ho v.rr t :ar, the Applicant commissioned SSFM International to prepare ,pciated Traffic Impact Analysis Report TIAR) dated November 2021 far the ;]rc:Jo:,ec? 450 -unit multiple family housing project tura. ;s include -.d as Append:. 2 of tir FFA, and updated on November 30, 2021 in curl fr rrm•arrce with Section 25 -2 -ab of the Zoning Code regarding Concurrency rrnrl inc _iced with thin: report a:; Exh bit G -- Royal Vistas Updated TAR. In response to cornnients from residents of the existing single-family residential communities of Kurz] Pualani Estates, the Applicant moved the access for Phase I from Kc!kuana-oa Puce to the Queen Ka`ahumarau Highway via a new un- signalized intersection in an effort to reduce and delay traffic impacts on the Lako Street/Queen Ka`anurnanu Highway intersection as well as traffic on Kelcuana`oa Place. This direct access for Phase 1 onto the (ween Ka'ahumanu Highway was analyzed by the TZAR. In summary, the study assumes that Phase 1 of the Royal Vistas multiple family housing project will be completed by 2024, with all trips generated by the 258 units within this phase entering and exiting at the proposed Royal Vistas roadway and 39 I iii tr uute : oete the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway (Route 11) via an unsignalized and channelized intersection. The study further assumes that the development of Phase II, consisting of the rernaining 192 units, will be completed by 2029 along with the connection of Phase II through Kekuana`oa Place to Lako Street. At anticipated build -out of Phase 11 in 2029, along with its connection to Kekuana'oa Place, the segment of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway between Lako Street and Hualalai Road is anticipated to operate at Level of Service (LOS) C in the northbound direction and LOS C in the southbound direction during both AM and PM peak hours, and found to be providing an "acceptable level of service" according to the concurrency requirements of the Zoning Code. The study then analyzed each project phase build -out during peak AM and PM hours sand its effects on forty-seven i47} turning movements at eight (8) intersections aiongthe Qurr`n Kaai . ��t�r ,i Highway-Kuakini Highvway (Route 11) alignment exterelliig fru:n :'aiani Rued to the earth to Karnehameha III Road to the south cif the project site plus the effect on the main road segment "Route 11". Five of these existing intersections are signazed. ,71t)(1" -C{?. of them are Two Way Stop Controlled ("TWSC") intersections. Overall, the proposed project is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact to the existing level of service at these various intersections above the background rate. Each transportation facility {State and County highways, rods. Arc] ui... b1ic transportation facilities) uses defined performance •redst1re 'c.r i sessi r ; Cdp.icity and levels of service, and for each facility type, one or more of the s;n,ed porfc}rn,nce measures serves as the primary deterrnir•,xn( of level le sero-c,.,1„I Os' }. This LOS -determining parameter is called the Measure of Effectiveness ("MOE') fol caeh facility type. LOS is defined in HCC Section 25-2-46(c) as "Level of Service, or "LOS", means a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic strearn, and shall be determined using the procedures in the latest edition of the "Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board." For signalized intersections, the IME procedure used is the Overall LOS, which measures "delay". The Overall LOS is determined by calculating the average central delay per vehicle, Once delays have been estimated for each lane group and aggregated for each approach and the intersection as a whole, then the appropriate LOS is determined using the Signalized Intersections Delay Chart, which specifies the time delay as letters A -F, with increasing time delays associated with each letter, 411':rg' For TWSC intersections, the MOE procedure used includes both LOS and vie measures. LOS for a TWSC intersection is determined by the measured control delay (see "LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections" in Manual) and is defined for each movement, expressed as A through F. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole for TWSC intersections, Vehicles travelling along the major, free flow road {Route 11 in this tt se} of a TWSC intersection proceed with minimal or no delay at all. Those veftrlrar, :,proaching the intersection along the minor movement are controlled by a stop sign and thus experience delay attributable to the volume of vehicles passing along the free-flow road and the traffic gaps available. A traffic movement can have a poor LOS but low vjc, which suggests the traffic volumes along that movement are low but must wait a long time to make the movement. These movements affect fewer vehicles and are on the minor movements. As stated in the manual "In evaluating the overall performance of TWSC infer c..tions it is important to consider measures of effectiveness in addition to Cil3 k�,+ _,uc:l and "By ftiy:..,sirig on a single measure of effectiveness for the v^.fc''rst rrovernent only, r,uLh as delay for the minor -street left turn, users may makc k.'ss c_.fficctive traffic cont-ol c:ccisiors." Tnt vic fv1OE mcns.iress th4 vral,•rne fvl to c pncitvr (c}• ars ` expresses the ratio of the vDlunne of tra=tic uti izing the 1 \' "5L: intersection to tie max:um \•olur"e of vehic:es that car. 1.:e accom -Iodated by the interecticc'rt during a specific je iod. A v/L. ratio Linder 0.85 rne,r-1.4 tie Intr.r l''r:"Ion I ciper sting .in•der capacity and ox.r.essivE'. rI • I:ays are not expel ier•,:ed. An inLerse Lion is cpertiti 1E near its co aacity w,r-7en v/c reit c5 range from C.85 0.95. Lin:,table ta?iiii,os arc nx:7dttM the v/r: r,1-ir is biatw!acin 0.95 and 1.0. The study concluded that two of the TWSC traffic movements are problematic. Hualalai Road {N)'s East Bodnd Left turn movement currently operates at LOS "F" for both the LOS and the vic MOE's during the AM study period, and will continue to do so during the five-year study period. Route 11 at Kuakini Highway's North Bound left turn PM movement currently is LOS "E" and wili stay LOS "E" for both the LOS and the vfc MOE's during the five- year study period. Nrve:rthel._ t, with or without the proposed project, certain turning movements at the fol owing intersections are or will be experiencing unacceptable levels of service {LOS L a ae F) upon completion of Phase 1 anticipated in 2024: 1. Ka°ahumanu Highway and Henry Street signalized intersection a Weiiitbc'urid left tui r7 •rruvement onto highway at LOS E due to signal ti rli'lf;, wlich r__, n :ice ur.•jt..stcd to reduce approach delay. 4111':rg' 2. Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) unsignalized intersection a. Eastbound left tum movement onto highway at LOS F during both AM and PM peak hours to due high traffic volume on Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. 3. Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) unsignalized intersection a. Westbound left turning movement at LOS F during both AM and PM peak hours to due high traffic volume on Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. 4, Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway at Royal Vistas roadway unsignalized intersection a. Westbound Ieft turn onto highway at LOS F during AM peak hour due to high volumes along the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. `+. QueLr, ICa`aIi ars m.a H{ - nwLiy ur d IKuakini Highway unsignalized intersection r onThhnr.nri Ic_ft or= Kuakini -i ;F-wvay at LOS E during peak PM hour. C1ueon .im n.iHig '..iv and IAoStreet signalized intersection ELI tbuLir•4i left ',Lin { n.0 [it,rhway at LOS F during AM peak hour and LOS F at PM ne.E:k 7o.ir. b. Westbound left turn onto highway at LOS E during both AM and PM peak hours due. to traffic volumes and split phasing for the Lako Street approaches. The study concludes that none of the unsignalized intersections satisfy tle Perak Hour Warrant fora traffic signal. The Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway ar r: Kt. akin i Highway intersection will satisfy the Peak Hour Warrant in 2024. The nl a traffic warrant does not require the installation of a traffic control s ruI Z;nd role is recommended by the study. Widening of Queen ICa`ahumanu Highway in the vicinity of Lako Street is needed in 2024 to provide for lanes and a permissive left -turn phasing onto Lako Street. Upon completion of Phase II anticipated in 2029, the increase in background traffic and traffic generated by the proposed project will further reduce the LOS at several of the intersections described above, with the addition of the Queen Ka`ahurnanu Highway and Puapua `anui Street intersection that will experience LOS E for Ieft turns during both the AM and PM peak hours due to cycle length. Left turn volumes at this intersection are low, however, and should clear every cycle. The TZAR recommended that based on the existing traffic volumes and future projections of Royal Vistas on the surrounding roadways, the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Lako Street intersection and some individual movements at other intersections are expected to deteriorate to LOS E or worse, The widening of Queen 4213':,g Ka'ahurnanu Highway to 4-Ianes, and the completion of M.1 Highway is needed to increase the north -south regional capacity. In the interim, the following system- wide intersection improvements are recommended for consideration by Hawaii County and H DOT: 1. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Palani Road Existing and future analysis indicate this intersection will operate at an acceptable LOS. Improvements to this intersection are not recommended at this time. 2. Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Henry Street Existing; and future analysis indicate this intersection will operate at an acceptable LOS. Improvements to this intersection are not recommended at this time. 3. Queen KKa'ahumanu Highway and Hualalai Load (North) This intersection does not pass the Four -Hour warrant or peak hour warrant for any conditrr, -r. The high delay 15 due to the high volume on the Queen ICa'allt.iInanu-1'8hway. There are 44 vehicles and 10 vehicles making the wes:bourrd left L.rr, in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. When the !xpericcnccd by drivers reaches this level, the eastbound drivers are likely to find alternative routes. A single lane roundabout will improve traffic operations at this intersection for the existing condition but worser t:) LOS F after 2024. A roundabout is not recommended at this intersection, d. Queen Ka`ahun1anu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) As the westbound left turn delay gets worse, driv;yrs may (led* to t..s- I'uapua'anui Street to access the Queen Ka'al€uinanu Highway in the sou -J- bound direction. This intersection did not pass the Four -Hoar w.irrnnt or the Peak -Hour warrant for the existing or future conditions. Based (7r existing traffic operations, it is recommended an acceleration lane ve installed for the westl-.pund right turn onto the Queen Ka`ahumanu A single -lane roundlabor.t wi imp-ove traffic operations at this intersection for the existing condit inn lir, I 'Ne sen to LOS F after 2024. A roundabout is not recommended at this irrtet5action. 5. Queen Ka-ahumarru Highway and Pr..iipw.: rui Street Signal tinning should be mou torod 7:1 C,: 7d F11�to:f: is needed -n in:.r :r#.`i r' the prababilitythat queues an Queers Ka`aFi'.irrr "iu Hi li �uay cavi ole. i the intersection in 1 cycle, 6. Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Roca 'vistas Roadway This intersection will ti-Ictian acceptably throu F -i the full Phase 1 builclout. Before any Phase 2 rr:s'cli°nco s Are occupied, .t s -nco rc r ded that the connection to I<ekuyneo'a place is completed so that 4uyal V Stas Pi se 2 `left out' traffic c .rn rccc '> the Lako Street traffic signal. 4313':rg 7. Queen Ka'aFr i"iaw.i Highway and Kuakini H-ghway This intersection psi :scs tlir.2 Pc.i k Hour wt: r- oit dur`[m all ocD k f ours for all conditions. The sat sfartion o= a traffic signal doe5 not mean a traffic signal needs to be installer. There are factors that should be analyzed when installing a traffic signal, such as roadway geometry. added delay to a. traffic network, and the impact of rear -end accidents that occur at new traffic signals_ Analysis of this intersection with Various phasing showed that the overall delay at the inlerseciior would iierease, while the northbound left tura will still operate 3t LOS L or worse. A traffic signal should not be installed at this intrr. c ctiew. Rc'}+al Visas traffic has very little c`fect on this intersection. A sir•gFc••lane rminct`I caiwill ,lir' ;]le, :rr ICS r II t existing AM peak hour condition, and LOS F for all fut,ire _o-rcitions. A roundabout is not recommended at this intrrs2cticn. 8. Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Lako Street The Lako Street intersection operates at LOS L/D (AM/PM) with or without the Royal Vistas project in the 2039 condition. Lako Street currently has split phasing (sequential rather than conciirrert) an the Lako Street approaches. Changing the l hrising I•orn ',pill would hc. p Inwerthc, richly ..:although several movements will still operate a: LCS E 01 wui se. Tnis iritersec=iur' would also improve significantly with more north snr.iti regional capacity provided by the completion of t• -ie widenirg of c&ueerr Ka'aIu$manu Highway from Henry Street to Kamehanneha ill Road and tl-^ construction of Ali -i Highway_ 9, Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Karr'c7l1nr1+'!F1 i III Rorad Existing and future analysis indicate this intersection will operate at an acceptable LOS. Improvements to this inTel,section are not recommended at this time. Section 25-2-46 of the Zoning Code regarding Concurrency Requirements states the following: (e Mitigation required. (1) If the LOS for any transportation facility in the project area is (A) currently worse than the acceptable level of service, or (B) projected to become worse than the acceptable level of service during the five year period of the TiAR, any rezoning of the property, if approved, shall contain conditions that require mitigation of adverse traffic effects before occupancy of the project is permitted, or that occupancy be delayed until the level of service has reached the acceptable level and is no longer projected to be worse than the acceptable level. (2) Where the LOS deficiency is due to roadway or intersection deficiencies in the immediate vicinity of the project, the conditions of zoning shall require local mitigation. Where the deficiency in LOS is due to 4411':rg� Insufficient capacity in the transportation Facilities serving tfie project area, the conditions of zoning shall require area mitigation. As no transportation facility in the Project area is currently worse than the acceptable level of service, nor is projected to become worse than the acceptable level of service during the five-year period of The 11AR, no mitigation is required. The Final Environmental Assessment (FEA) for the Royal Vistas Housing Project dated September 2021 and the Planning Department's issuance of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) supports the conclusion that the "Potential impacts to the Kona Vistas 5r,ubdivi5ion world be olleviatr°rd hy constructing the Royal Vistas Roadway intersection with Queer Kci ch uryacnur Hiighmvoy. Aka, the traffic impact analysis shows no impacts to LOS from rhr Project above the background rate to the intersection of Queen Ka'ahumanu Mg,wuv and Linke Street which is the main entrance to the neighboring. Kona Vistas subdivision." Both the FEA and FONSI also recognizes "....the e?wtensi:Jn ref Kekuana'on Street, Gr'd the construction of that portion of the teifani Strt'c; oxionsir)r.' ,riri flat' flr c'ijr'(t'Jiro to be stubbed -out on the south boundary at the Colvary Church property her'veerr the Project and Kona Vistas, and erre new road would he constructed (Royal Vistas Roadway). All would be dedicated to the Count y :is print of the Proposed Project. Based an comments received on the Draft EA on potential impacts to traffic from the connector roads (Appendix 1b), Figure 3 shows the location and phasing of these connector roads, Whiife Fiaur'e 11 from the Kona CDP shows connector roads connecting County cw,7o:i r'r ifonr Street (in t! -u' l(ona Vistas pro c.t) tc7 Cormty•owned Ho'amarria Street On ttfE` Puaiaoi Estate! project) and Kek!runt' 'aca r'?c. C' (ire the Nona Vistas project) to Count;' owaeri Paulehia Street, (,n the Poofrini &Ston.s project), these connections would not be hilt is port of rho Prr?,+ aci'i Pffi ffft_ Add tionolly, rrr rrrcruka-makaf connector roads from Hualuinr Roud to Urr' era Ka cdhcarrTc;r,c: Hiohwav are proposed as part of the Proposed Project. Therefore, the Proposee Prosect wwoLnd have no effect to neighbors in adjacent subdivisions from Phrase 1, [and oni r f?1lryir7l.ri impacts after Phase Il," (emphasis added) County water for the project is still avaiLlrle, and the Applicant has maintained its current commitment deposit. Thi proposed project will also connect to the County's wastewater system th ,er v ces the Kailua-Kona area. Attempts to contact the Hawai'i Emergency: Mtanngr.ment Agency (HIEMA) to confirm the location of existing opdr or s itiil (1(1ance c.rens within the immediate area of the project site were unsLccessful. Should I IIEMA or Hawai'i County Civil Defense Agency require any E rieJitional siren to he situated within the proposed project to provide for adequate coverage, the Applicant will comply. 451i) g r C. Granting of the time extension world not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of the change of zone. Approval of the requested time extensions to secure Final Plan Approval for the proposed 450 -unit multiple family hoL.5int; project and to commence and complete its construction within a period often (10) years will remain consistent with the original reasons for its approval in 1981, as well as demonstrated in discussions throughout this report as it :-rr.rtains to coon ;is rrr:r ,.with the KCDID. In summary, the Applicant finds that approval of IP, urr.encdrner't reques.s will be: • Consistent with the Gereral Plan LUPA'G crap of Lr+ ar. Expansion Area and Low Density Urban, • Consistency with the General Pian , policies, and srt ndards relative to the housing and land use elements. • Appropriate infrastructure such as water, wastewater, and access are or will be made available. • No irresolvable issues relating to drainage, botanical, or avifaunal. • Havrnt appropriate archaeological/cultural safeguards or completing appropriate mitigation es. It is thus malnlair:ed that the reasons used to support the existing zoning back in 1984 still apply to the rr.--ques.ed time extensions and amendment. It should be noted, however, they ;ince the RM -5 zoning was approved in 1984, there have been two (2) substantive changes to the Zoning Code that relate to project of this nature. One was the adoption of the Kona Community Development Plan in 2008, for which compliance has been extensively discussed earlier in this report. The other was the adoption c4 the concurrercy provision, Section 25-2-45. That provision requi, "—s 1 T.:31 ,III roforirg, including time c.xtnrsinn potrihle water, and civil clefe,,se siren concerns. And as discussed earlier, the project rwir_cts these tests. The other provision reates to allowance and management of Short Term Vacation Rental ("STVR") in certain areas as oatlinec in Sect.on 25-4-:.6 of the Zcn,lrg Code. The subject properties are not situated with .-tar area clesiEnated fo- Resort use: o - as a Resort Node, Therefore, STVRs may he peri-itted with n Il r: -7or Salo' 11 pits within the proposed 450 -unit multiple family I,Guvir, , proj r,.:t pi ovidef.1 1:liat t`iese "For Sale" units are part of a condorniniLJrn pr;D:ierty gOveriiec by Chapters 514A or 514B, Hawaii Revised St -Alt. -..s. s. 613':re' Coastal Zane Mana,ernent Due to the location of the subject properties outside of the Special Management Area (SMA) and about 4,400 feet from the nearest shoreline, and the improvements and mitigation measures to be undertaken during the development of the project, the Applicant finds that granting of the requested time extensions and requested clarification regarding roadway improvements will not have any substantial adverse impacts on coastal processes or conditions, re will its approval be contrary to the objectives and polices of Chapter 205A, HRS relating to Coastal Zone Management. The proposed action will not create significant adverse impacts upon nearby and immediately adjacent properties nor the important coasta- resources within this part of North Kona, The proposed 450 -unit Royal Vistas multip rami y hor. ;ieg project is. the final component of a 171± -acre single- and mit tiple-'ami y resideniie. community that was approved by both the Stage La -d Use Comrrission and Hawaii County Council in 1984. The project site is s touted within be Kona Urban Area that is specifically designated to direct future grows:- and to promote infill of areas adjacent to existing developments. As mentioned, tl c project site is situated immediately adjacent to or just one lot away from the existing single family residential communities of Kona Vistas, Pualani Estates and Iolani subdivisions. As traffic is frequently the prevailing concern of any proposed development, the project will assist in facilitating the interconnection of these existing communities th*ough the construction of north -south and rnauka-rnakai roadway segments within the project site that will alar} w til exsting roadways within both Kona Vistas and Pualani Estate subdivision. The development of Kona Vistas subdivision and Lako Street now provides an important mauka-rnakai Zink between loleni Subdivision and Kuakini Highway. This same form of roadway networking, as promoted by the KCDP, will be facilitated by the approval of the requested time extensions. While the subject properties are currently vacant, it was part of the Kona Field System and was likely used for commercial and subsistence agriculture as well as for cattle pasture until the mid -1800. There appears to be evidence that the subject properties were bulldozed sometime around the 1950s through the 1970s in preparation for commercial agriculture. Based on the historical use and biological environment of the subject properties, for which studies were prepared and included as part of the FEA, no threatened or endangered plant species as listed by the USFWS appear to be present in the Project Site, nor are there uniquely valuable habitats. No existing or proposed federally designated critical plant (or animal) habitat is present, Therefore, there appears to be no potential to adversely affect rare, threatened, or endangered plant species The project will connect to the County wastewater system, Any impacts from soil erosion and runoff during site preparation and construction phases can be 47 1 ,' adequately mitigated through compliance with existing regulations and prnpe= construction} practices. Air emissions generated during the construction phase for the proposed proiect will be mitigated by existing construction regulations. W th these precautionary measures in place, the proposed devekaprr'erit is not anticipated to have any substantial adverse effects upon nearby coastal resources or the surrounding environment. The Applicant continues to adhere to and implement conditions of approval for the project that k^r II ensure that impacts on coastal resources, if any, are minimized, An archaeological inventory surrey {AIS was conducted in 1084 for the original 171± -acre project. `^xrc pt Ior a 5 -acre portion in the southeastern corner originally intended to be developed 1 .j the Hawaii Preparatory Academy. As requested by the State Historic Preservation =',: vision, a new archaeological inventory survey to identify all arcFaeclugical historic prupe;.._ies present in the Project Site and an update of the previous archaeological cacame ataaicn to include site plans for each site with site boundu' ier< ufac: tr eJS impacted by `ju l ozing, photographs of all sites and featu.ires, nn r:s=essrnent of their integrity, .nnd site significance were completed on behf7111 of the Applicant. These add.rional sure.r-.y r.r ports for both the previously excluded 5 -acre site and the remainder of the pro ecr Lite including the existing County -owned drainageways were completed in 2018 and 2020, respectively, and included within the 2021 final environmental assessrnent for the Royal Vistas project. These studies found 18 archaeological sites within the original survey area of the project site, of which 6 sites were determined to be pre -Contact era, 3 sites associated w-th habitation, 1 with agriculture, a single petroglyph site, and one single frraturra sit ' (Sits} 10012) conta=nor# tv,ra bunals. The remaining 12 sites were determined to :ae historic era, with rrreny of the sites associated with coffee aghculture and cattle ranching, as well as two historic era habitation sites. The ot.ier AIS tor tilt? 5 -acre site found 22 ne.'wiy identified sites, Whieh were dr,terriin d to or prinlar ly agricultural terraces associated with pre -Contact area to lHist: ric era at�r cult..im_ A pre -Contact era to later post -Contact era lava tube burn_ And := portion of the old railroad berm were recorded as part of this separate survey. The two burials (Site 10012) described in the 1984 AIS were removed and reinterred off -project prior to 1984. The site was further excavated to ensure that all iwi had been removed, then back-filled and leveled by bulldozer, The preservation plan for the railroad berm and petroglyph sites has been prepared and submitted to the DLNR far review 2nd approval„ A burial treatment plan for the lava tube burial within the 5 -acre site has already been prepared by the Applicant and approved, E.nIIowing in-Iple: wrItr:tion of an archaeological preservation plan, there are not e4-ected to be any impacts to historic or archaeological resources from the proposed aro ect. There °,-e, no cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in. combination with I -<,r l}rc,,crtir, or reasonably foreseeable future actions are anticipated to h}sto. is 01 .archaeological resources. .481 P. g A cultural irrrpact assessment (CIA) was prepared in 2020 as made a part of the FEA. The study noted that the region of I-folualoa was developed into a royal er.hte- in the late 15005 to early 1700s under the reigns of Keakamahana (reigned 1680-1700) and Keakeaianiwahine (reigned 1700-1720), with many 'ali`i and konahiki residences and numerous religious sites known to have existed here. The majority of the heiau and royal residences were constructed along or near the coast, most notably at Kamoa Point scr lth of the project area. The study further noted that this royal center at Hblualoa was eclipsed in the second half of the 1700s by the royal center in the Kahalu'u and. Keauhou region. The project area was also a par'. TielL1 System that extends north at least to Kau ahupua`a and south to I-nnaunar.• we: from the coastline and east to the forested slopes of Hualaiai. In the post cnnrrart a�rti the Kora Field System hosted the planting of coffee, sugar, sisal, citrus, and cotton until eventually the land was used for cattle pasture. As part of the CIA, persona irtE:rvic»s were sought in an effort to provide (-tlnnnal hisio•y of II)c. project area. Based on the interviews cor.cluw:ter:. the report Lonclucdes that "An analysis of the potential effect of the proposed s-orrstructrorr of res airs en cultural resources, practicer or beliefs, its po[catic7! to Isolate cultural resources, practices orbeliefs from their setting,. and the porentil of the project to introduce elerr eats which may alter the setting Th which cultural practices take place Is a requirement of the a QC (No. W. 1997)• lased on historical research r;nnrl responses frarrr the above fdste,a contacts, it is easoi irioie to t-r?nc rHrii' tiior, them woufri wouldbf, r7[> Fri.+(i td?7nc.a ci.ilir:raj ciffft'te'rl and then' V4f(JidI be no C. +eco (ii 4 e( '' effect Upon co/fon:if ;fr tie broader projl'ct •ir't_'a region." In v e 01 the Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa`akai 0 Ko 'atria" cir�r ; ons, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights r77t,st b acdressed. These rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. St.ir;ies prepared in support of the proposed project and the amendment requests found r valuable cultural, historical and r,rgr,rril resources within the subject propor-ties that would support troclit ramal or crrstoinnr•,r Native Hawaiian rights being practiced on the subject prope, ties. •f liu M. it believed that the proposed project would have no adverse imp�:ct rr ativ,r to the cultural and historical resources of the area. Based on the above findings, the Applicant maintains that allowing for the development of the 450 -unit Royal Vistas multiple family housing project and related improvements will not have any substantial adverse impacts on the surrounding area, nor will its approval be contrary to the objt'c1i '. r irrl F]c : 1 4 c7f Chapter 205A, HRS, relating to Costal Zone Management. 491 VIII. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS IN JUSTIFICATION OF REQUESTS As extensively outlined within this report, the Applicant finds that it has made a substantial commitment of time and resources to comply with all of the conditions of approval of both Ordinance 02 131 immediately upon its purchase of the subject properties at the erd of 2015. The scope of the Applicant's requests is limited to an extension of time of ten (10) years t❑ secure Final Plan Approval and to commence and complete construction of the first increment of the proposed project and to amend Condition N to provide clarity on the extent of tledicable roads required to be constructed. Since its acquisition of the subject pros liio., in 17,e 2015, the Applicant has diligently pursued the development of the 450 -unit Royal 'Vistas mid -market, multiple family housing project as approved by the Hawaii County COU rnr:il `n the -xtcnt that the original reasons for granting of Ordinance 02 131 is still relevant and appropt' ale. 501 I,:e :; BEFORE THE LAND USE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF HAWAII In the Matter of the Petition of GAMLO T CORP. For Amendment of District Boundary and Reclassification of Certain Lands Situated at North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii. DOCKET NO. A•3-549 This is to certify stat th s Is a true and correct capky of the Decision aid Order on Rein the office of the State Lind UN Com. ion, Ha if r f Il I Date FINDINGS. OF FACT, coNctusTnNs OF LAW AND DECISION AND ODER BEFORE THE LAND USE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF HAWAII In the Matter of the Petition of GAMLON CORP. For Amendment of District Boundary and Reclassification of Certain Lands Situated at North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii. DOCKET NO. A83-549 FINDINGS OF FACT, CCNc7 LS1cNs OF SAW ANL) DECISION AND CRDTR Petitioner, GAMLON CORP., a Hraw, ii corporation, filed the Petition in the above -captioned rr.;-i L t.c r pursuant to Chapter 205, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Land Use Commission, State of Hawaii, to amend the land use district boundary of certain lands consisting of approximately 173 .66 acres, identified as Tax Map Key Nos. 7-6-21:4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 (hereinafter referred to as "subject property") situated in the ahupua'a of Holualoa First and Second, North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii, from the Agricultural to the Urban District. The Land Use Commission, having heard and examined the testimony and evidence during the public hearing held on September 8, 1953, in Kailua-Kori: , Hawaii, and having considered the entire record filed in this docket, hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law. FINDINGS OF FACT PROCEDURAL MATTERS 1. On May 9, 19B3, Gamlen Corp. (hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner") filed this Petition to amend the Agricultural District boundary at Halualoa First and Second, North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii, property into the Urban District. 2_ The Land Use Commission (hereinafter referred to as "Commission") held a public hearing on this Petition, on SepLer^beL 8, 2983, in the Resolution Room, Kona Hilton Hotel, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, pursuant to notice of hearing published in the Honolulu Advertiser and the Hawaii Tribune Herald on August 3, 1983. 3. T'ne Cc;im ni scion. received one timely request for intervention o11 .,-.]Ly 21), 1.91.3 from Elizabeth ADD Stone on behalf of the Honest Environ n nt.a 1 Citizen's Against Progress, and denied. the request in the ab ounce of Ms. Stone at the hearing, The Commission received two untimely requests to appear as public witnesses from James Sogi representing Mr. and Mrs. Roy Nagle, property owners in the area, Maile Akiineseu, representing the Friends of Karnoa Point, Inc.. , and permitted then to testify as public witnesses. DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 4- The subject property is located mauka of Kuakini Highway approximately 2.6 miles south of the Palani Road - Kuakini to reclassify the subject. Highway intersection in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. The subject property is bordered by vacant, undeveloped lands to the north and generally to the east, by the Kalani Sunset, Leilanj Sunset, and Kainana Subdivisions to the south, and by the old Kailua-Keauhou Middle Road to the west. 5. With the exception of an undivided interest in five acres of Tax Map Key No. 7-6-21: 17, which is owned in fee simple by Hawaii Preparatory Academy, Kalott Properties N.7., a Netherland- Antilles etherland Anti.lles owns all purchase corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Petitioner, of the subject property. Petitioner holds an option to the subject property from Kalott Properties N.V. Hawaii Preparatory Academy and. Kalott Properties N.V. have authorized Petitioner to file this Petition. 6. 'Hawaii Tax Map Keys Nos. 7-5.21: 14, 18 and 19 are within the general boundary of the subject property but are not being considered for reclassification as a part of this Petition. Parcel 18, owned by the Investment Corporation, Hawaii, are an existing County of Hawaii and the Dillingham and Parcel 19, owned by the County of and proposed drainage way for the Holualoa School and Horseshoe Bend streams. Parcel 14 is owned by John P. Elibogen. 7. On August 23, 1982, the Mate of Hawaii instituted an cluinent domain action against Kalott Properties, N.V. to condemn n a portion of Tax Map Key Nos. 7-6-21, parcels 13 (.578 iCL-e:,.) and 16 (2_202 acres) for the Kuakini Highway realignment -3- project. As of the date of the pulblic hearing, final judgment had not been entered in this action. 8. The subject property is currently leased to and utilized by the Palani. Ranch for cattle grazing under a month-to- month lease. 9. The United States Department of Agriculture's 1973 Sail Conservation Service Soil Survey Map of Island of Hawaii, classifies the soil of the subject property as being in the Punaluu series and an extremely rocky peat. Peiiueability is moderately rapid, runoff is slow, and erosion hazard is slight_ 10. The elevation of the subject property ranges from 350 feet to 700 feet at its :nauka boundary,. The slope generally ranges from 6% to 20%. 11. Vegetation on the subject property is composed of almost entirely exotic specimens, with Koa-haole the dominant species. The subject .property does not support any plant life considered rare, threatened or endangered. Several native species and exotic species common to Kona and found throughout the State also grow on the subject property. 12. Approximately 75% of the subject property is located within the defined boundaries of the Holualoa drainage basin. The Federal Insurance Administration has designated two portions of the subject property adjacent to the both sides of the Horseshoe Bend and Holualoa School intermittent streams in Flood Zone "Ar" which is defined as arras susceptible to a 100 -year flood, in the Flood Insurance Rate laps for the Island of Hawaii. PROPOSAL FOR DEVELOPMENT 13. With the. exception of the five acres owned by the Hawaii Preparatory Academy, Petitioner proposes to develop a single-family and multi, -family residential subdivision on the subject property. Petitioner intends to develop approximately' 500 residential units of which 215 would be single-family residential units and 285 would be multi -family residential units. 14. Petitioner proposes to build the single-family residential units on approximately 103 acres, with each unit having a minimum lot size of approximately 15,000 sq. ft. The Petitioner estimates that single-family density will be at approxi- mately 2.1 units per acre. 15. Petitioner proposes to build multi- farn ..Iyr townhouse residential units on approximately 65 acres at an estimated density of RM -8.O (1 unit per 8,000 feet sof land area) or 4.4 units per acre. 16. Petitioner proposes to use the Holualoa School Stream as a boundary between the single-family units (to the south) and the multi -family units (to the north). 17. Petitioner intends to market 25% to 50% of the single -family units as housa/1ot packages and 50% to 75% as lot- only sales_ Petitioner intends to market the multi-family units as residential, as opposed to resort, townhouse, condominiums. Pursuant to the County of Hawaii's incremental zoning requirements, Petitioner is required to construct dwellings on at least 25% of the lots in its first phase proposed residential subdivision sion i n order to obtain rezoning of second phase. 18. Petitioner estimates that it Will sell the vacant house lots for approximately $70,000 (1983 dollar) and three- and four-bedroom house/lot packages for $150,000 (1983 dollar). The multi-family units will range in price from $90,000 to $180,000 (1983 dollar)_ 19. Petitioner has agreed in principle to work jointly to provide housing opportunties for low- and medium-income residents Petitioner proposes to cooperate with State and County hoJ .ing agencies in order to offer ten percent of the lots and house and lot packages at prices that will enable residents to quality for Federal- or state-assisted housing. loan programs. 20.. Hawaii Housing Authority (HHA) feels that KapproY.i_mately 10% of the housing units should be affordable by low ar d moderate income families. 21. HHA recommends that a condition be included to a to r_ e that 10% of the units will be affordable to low and moderate income families, as determined by the County of Hawaii and BHA. 22. The Draft Kona Regional Plan estimates that approximately 40% of the households in Kona are currently facing some kind of housing problem which ranges from the household paying too large a percentage of its income for housing, living in. substandard or unsafe housing, living in a crowded household or combinations thereof. 23. Petitioner estimates construction costs for on-site and off-site improvements to be approximately $35 million (1983 dollar). This estimate includes major drainage improvements, road construction, site preparation, and labor and materials. 24. Petitioner estimates that Phase 1 and 2 can be completed within 8 1/2 years from the date of the Commission's approval of this Petition. 25. Petitioner is a. wholly-owned subsidiary of Blue Chip Corporation, a japan corporation. Petitioner holds approxi- mately S14 million of investment property free of any mortgages and can use said ptcorty to finance the proposed project. If necessary, Blue Chip Corporation will provide any additional funds needed to complete the project. STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 26. The subject property is situated within the State Land Use Agricultural District. It is contiguous to urban classi- fied lands to the south which have been developed for low density residential uses (Kalani Sunset, Leiiani sunset, and Kainana Subdivisions) . To the west, the Kailua-Keauhou Middle Road ( 40 foot right-of-way), which is in the Agricultural District, sepa- rates the subject propoit.y from adjoining Ac ric u l...ural and U- -Dz n Districts. Lands to the north are designated AgIiGl natal . Landis to the east are de z igna Led 27. the County of Hawaii General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map designates most of the subject property as "Alternate Urban Expansion" and a small area as "Low Density Urban." The two stream beds and adjacent areas are designated as "Flood Plains." 28. The draft Kona Regional Plan prepared by the County of Hawaii's Planning Department recommends that the subject property be developed for low density residential (RES -4, 4 units per acre), and moderate density residential (RES -].0, 10 units per acre) uses. Petitioner's proposed project is consistent with the draft. Kona Regional Plan. 29, The Kailua--Honal.a Urban Zone Map (Ordinance No. 74, 1967) zones the entire subject property as "Unplanned" with a minimum lot size of five acres. Petitioner must obtain a rezoning of the subject property. 30. The subject property is not situated within. either the Special Manay tent Area or the boundaries of the Kailua Village Special District. NEED FOR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT 31. The draft Kona Regional Plan poses three growth alternatives for Kona with corresponding population forecasts for the period 1980-2000. The population projectoris to the year 2000 are as follows: Alternative I: 33,200; Alter i- ive I f : 39,40D; and Alternative III: 46,300. 32. Using these population projections and the antici- pated decline in household size, the draft Kona Regional Plan indicates future new housing requirements at between 5,240 to 9,915 units or a production rate of 262 to 496 units per annum for Kona, 33. In addition. 1,580 units will reach obsolescence by the year 2000 and will need to be replaced. Petitioners consul- tant assumes 40 of the above enumerated housing units reaching obsolescence will not be repaired. 34. Using the draft Kona Regional. Plan's estimates of new housing units required and the obsolescence factor developed by Petitioner's consultant, the total number of new housing units needed for Kona ranges from 5,872 to 10,547 units. 35. Petitioner's market study of 32 existing residential subdivisions of ten or more units in the North Kona area (as defined geographically by the market study) identified a tota]. of 4,580 existing residential lots. Of that total, 2,352 or 51% of the lots have houses built on them and contribute to the existing housing stock. The balance of 2,228 lots or 49% are vacant. In addition, only 345 vacant lots are for sale. 36. If all the existing vaunt lots counted in the market study become available for housing by the year 2000, the current available inventory of finished lots represents between 21% and 38% of the projected need. 37. Petitioner's market study estimates that 80% of the housing units needed for Kona will be built in the area studied by Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as "study area"), which encompasses the Kailua-Kona.Keauhou segernent of the draft Kona Regional Plan prepared by the County of Hawaii's Planning Department. This amounts to between 4,698 to 8,437 units. IMPACTS ON THE RESOURCES OF THE AREA Lgricu1tural Resources 38. The State Department of Agriculture does not place the subject property in any of its important agricultural land categories in its ALISH Maps for North Kona. 39. The Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification Map for the Island of Hawaii indicates that two land types, 17293 and E295, are distributed across the subject property. The D and E ratings indicate that the land is poorly or very poorly suited. for agricultural activities. 40. Although the subject property is currently used for cattle grazing, it does not have a high capacity for intensive. agricultural use. Approximately 24 to 30 head of cattle are located on the subject property, 4].. The draft Kona Regional Plan, which was developed in consultation with faLIIers and governmental agencies concerned with agricultural activities, recommends that the subject property he used for .residential purposes. Archaeological Resources 42. Cultural Surveys Hawaii conducted an archaeological reconnaissance in January of 1983. It discovered 47 archaeological sites on the subject property, some of which are merely remnants. 43. Based on preliminary observations, none of the sites discovered are historically significant except for research purposes. Petitioner will conduct further archaeological work as recommended by Cultural Surveys Hawaii, the State of Hawaii and the County of Hawaii. Recreational Resources 44. Petitioner intends to develop a private recreation area for residents of the proposed development. PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES Fire Fi htir and Police Services. 45. The County of Hawaii will provide police service from the Kona District Headquarters located in Captain Cook. Fire protection service will be provided by the County from its Kailua Fire Station located on Palani Road. Schools 46. Students from the proposed project will attend the Kealakehe Elementary and Intermediate School (Grades K-8) and the Konawaena High School (Grades 9-12) . The opening of the Kahaka1 Elementary School in September, 1982, which has a capacity of 670 student, alleviates the overcrowding. at Kealakehe Elementary and Intermediate School. The Kealakehe and Kahakai school facilities are expected to meet the needs of the growing North Kona population for the next seven (7) years. The DOE plans to construct additional school facilities at the Kealakehe Intermediate School and the Konawaena High School during the late 1980's in order to meet the needs of the residents of Petitioner's and other developments during the next 10 -year period_ Electrical Utilities Services 47. Hawaii Electric & Light Company, Inc. and Hawaiian Telephone Company lines serve the area. Petitioner will provide all necessary service connection and transmission lanes necessary to transmit electricity and other utilities to the development as may be required by applicable state and county regulations. Water 48. Petitioner does not have a water commitment from the Board of Water Supply for this project, but Petitioner is a participant in the Kona Source Agreement 1 with the County develop- ment of Water Supply and other developers for development of new domestic water sources in Kona_ Petitioner has paid $125,000 as a contribution for its prorata share for 500 water units. 49. Should the exploratory activities conducted pursuant to the water agreement prove successful, Petitioner will execute a subsequent water source development agreement II and the Board of Water Supply will issue water commitments issued to participating developers, including Petitioner. Drainage 50. Although approximately 75% of the subject property lies in the defined boundaries of the Holualoa Drainage Basin, intermittent flooding is limited to the Horseshoe Bend and the Holualoa School Streams. Petitioner will build and dedicate to the County cf Hawaiiai.i drainage facilities recommended in the Drainage Master Plan for the North Kona Flood Control project within the boundaries of the subject property. 51. Properties located makai of the subject property (below Kuakini Highway) to the coastline i w tj ,-e,:e; ved various development approvals conditioned on the 27cquirement that develop- ment of these projects may not commence unless the developers implement their portion of the drainage facilities recommended in. the Drainage master Plan for the North Kona Flood Control Project. 52. The development of the subject property and proper- ties located makai of the subject property will result in a continuous drainage system from the mauka boundary of the subject property to the ocean. Sewage Treatment and Disposal Services 53. Petitioner proposes to dispose of sewage waste generated by the single-family residential area by individual cesspools. Petitioner proposes that the multi -family residential area will be served by private treatment. plants. 54. Petitioner shall design. and construct all sewage treatment facilities to satisfy the requirements specified in Chapter 38, Public c Health regulations, State of Hawaii. Solid waste Disposal Services 55, The County of Hawaii does not provide refuse collection service. Petitioner will require purchasers to haul refuse to the Kona Sanitary Land Fill or make arrangements with commercial disposal services. The landfill, which serves the North and Sau°_'_y Ko 7_ dis-=-i ctF,, is located about four miles north of Kailua Village off of Queen Kaahumanu Highway.. 56. Tape existing land fill has a life expectancy of approximately 10 years. The County of Hawaii is planning to install a reruse snredding facility to alleviate problems. Roadway and Highwav Services 5?. The Slate Department of Transportation has approved two accesses from the proposed project to }uakini Highway. Petitioner proposes to connect present north/south Lateral road system, specifically Kilohana, Leilani, and Pualani Streets to the proposed internal roadway system for the development. The lateral connections and intersection improvements would provide safer and more convenient ingress and egress to Kuakini. Highway for residents of these adjacent subdivisions. 58. Petitioner anticipates that s_raf-ic get+er-aLed by the proposed project should be mitigated. by the completion of the Kuakini Highway realignment project wh ch is t.L-eady under construc- tion by the State of Hawaii and which State expect`, to complete before the proposed project is completed. CONTIGUITY CF DEVELOPMENT 59. The subject property is contiguous to an urban District to the south which has been developed for low density residential. uses (Kalani Sunset, Leilani Sunset, and Kainana Subdivisions). The Kailua-Keauhou Middle Road (40 foot right- of-way) separates the subject property from an existing Urban District along part of the subject property's makal (west) boundary. COMPLIANCE WITH ST \ND R S F.DR DI TF;i,;`Y1t.N W; DISTaicn bOLfl1[}APJ E: GO. The c1iar,a_7L.e. of LIR.: _Eluu 1:, 'tci LTJ lint)' due to they adjacent residential, subdivlsians located to the souLh o;: the subject property. In addition, proposed commercial development by Dillingham Investment Corporation on lands between Kuakini Highway and the subject property further amplify the "city like" character of the area. 61. The r:u.bjf.ct property is cents -ally located to established employment centers. It is only 2 1/2 miles south of Kailua Village and 4 miles north of the Keauhou resort community.. Dillingham Investment Corporation has proposed to construct a shop- ping center and medical center ❑za nearby land already designated for commercial use. 62. Although the development of the subject property for residential use will not create permanent employment opportu- nities, the development of this project at a cost of $35 million will provide short -terra employment opportunities for persons associated with the construction and real estate industries. 63. Reclassification of the subject property is reaso- nably necessary to accommodate urban growth projected for the North Kona area. 64. The subject property does not have any adverse geographic or topographic constraints which will hinder or endanger the proposed development. The proposed project will be designed and constructed to be reasonably free from the danger of floods, tsunami, unstable sail conditions, and other adverse environmental effects. 65. The proposed development will not result in spot urban development because an existing Urban District which has been developed for low-density residential uses is located adjacent to the subject property on the south and a Rural District, which permits the development of residential housing on half acre lots, is contiguous to the subject property on its east (mauka) boundary. 66. Petitioner will install all on-site utility lines, roads, sewage disposal, and water systems at no cost to the state or county governments. Petitioner will also construct and dedicate to the County of Hawaii a major drainage facility within the boundaries of its property. COMPLIANCE WITH THE KAWAII STATE PLAN 67. Petitioner's proposed project is consistent with the_ E,7maii State Plan's objectives and policies relating to population, the economy (general) , and housing. INCRin".E'wTafL DISTRICTING 68. Petitioner cannot complete full urban development of the subject property within five years from the date of the Commission's approval of the redistricting,. Petitioner proposes to develop the property in two increments, encompassing 5 years and 3 1/2 years. Petitioner will substantially complete development of the first 124.660 acre increment, consisting of the nakai portion of the single-family residential area, all of the multi -family area, and all infrastructure systems within five years. The second increment consisting of the mauka portion of the single- family residential area, totalling 49 acres, is scheduled for completion within. 3 1/2 years thereafter. The descriptions of Increment I and Increment II of Petitioner's proposed development -17- are illustrated on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. Petitioner cannot start development on the second increment until development an all on-site and off-site improvements within Increment 1 have been substantially completed. RULING ON PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT The Land Use Commission hereby rejects any of the proposed findings of fact submitted by the Petitioner or the other parties not already ruled upon by adoption herein, or rejected by clearly contrary findings of fact herein. CONCLUSIONS DF LAW Pursuant to Chapter 205, Hawaii Revised Statutes, as amended, and the Rules of Practice .and Procedure and District Regulations of the Land Use Comrnisison, State of Hawaii, the Commission concludes that the reclassification of all of the lands within Increment I, consisting of approximately 124.660 acres (as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto), from the Agricultural to the Urban District and amendment of the land use district boundary to permit the development of Increment, I is reasonable, in conformity with section 205-2, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and is consistent with the Hawaii State Plan as set forth in Chapter 226, Hawaii Revised Statutes, as amended, and the District Regulations of the Land Use Commission. The Commission further concludes that although full development of the lands within Increment II (as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto) cannot be reasonably completed within five years from the date of the Commission's decision on this ratter, reclassification of the lands within Increment I I , consisting of approximately 49 acres, from the Agricultural to the Urban District and the amendment of the land use district boundary to permit the development of Increment II is reasonable, in conformity with Section 205-2, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and is consistent with the Hawaii State Flan, as set forth in Chapter 226, Hawaii Revised Statutes, as amended, and the District Regulations of the Land Case Commission. Therefore, incremental redistricting of the lands within Increment II of Petitioner's development is reasonable and warranted. DECISION AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the lands within Increment 1 of Petitioner's development plan of the subject property, consisting of 124.660 acres, as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, situated in the ahupua' a of Ilolualoa First and Second, North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii, shall be and the same is hereby reclassified from the Agricultural to the Urban District, and the district boundaries are amended accordingly. IT IS ALSO HEREBY ORDERED that the lands within Increment II of Petitioner's development plan of the subject property/consisting of approximately 49 acres, as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, situateei in the ahupua' a of Holualoa First and Second, North Rona, CourifLv, I1 and and State of Hawaii, shall be and the same are hereby approved for incremental development pursuant to State Land Use Commission's District Regulation 6-2, and that redistricting from the agricultural to the Urban District will be granted upon receipt of an application by Petitioner for redistricting of Increment II, and upon a prima facie showing by Petitioner- that it has substantially completed the on-site and off-site imurovements within Inclement I, in accordance wit r Pe k:c:r«r_' s development plan as ind.ic;ated above, within five ye..1_s of the date of this Order, including but not limited to partial satisfaction of the condition A below, to the extent of the number of lots to be. developed in Increment 1 and full satisfaction of condition S below. IT IS FURTHER HEREBY ORDERED that the reclassification and incremental districting of the subject property shall be subject to the following conditions: A. Petitioner shall provide housing opportunities for low and moderate income Hawaii residents prior to assigning or transferring (except by way of mortgage or assignment as security) its interest in the subject property, by offering for sale, on a. preferential basis, on its own or in cooperation with either or both the Hawaii. Housing Authority or the County of Hawaii, ten percent (10) of the lots or house and oats to be developed on the subject property, to residents of the State of Hawaii of low and moderate family income as determined by the Hawaii Housing Authority or County of Hawaii from time to time. The preferential lots or houses and lots shall be offered for sale at prices not exceeding prices that enable such purchasers to qualify for and obtain state -assisted financing (i.e., Act 105 or Hula. Mae) or federally -insured or assisted financing (i.e., FHA Section 245 program) intended to encourage home ownership by low and moderate income families; and B. In making the ultimate decision as to whether a historical or archaeological site is significant enough to warrant preservation, the Petitioner shall consult with and accept the decision of the Historic Preservation Officer of the Department of Land and Natural Resources; and C. Petitioner shall submit annual progress reports to the Commission, Department of Planning and Economic Development, and Hawaii County Planning Department as to its progress in satisfying these conditions; and D. These conditions may be fully or partially released by the Commission as to all or any portion of the subs ect proper- ties upon timely motion and provision of adeauate asisurance of satisfaction of these conditions by the Petitioner. -21- DOCKET NO. AB3-549 - GAMLO CORP. Done at Honolulu, Hawaii, this 13th day of December, 1983, per motions on December 1, 1983 and December 13, 1983. LAND USE COMMISSION STATE OF HAWAII By W ILLI // W. L. YUE1 ,7n awl Com7A- ssioner RTCHARD 13, F. CH•Y I/ Vice Chairman and Cothbissioner By 17,AWrECE F. CflUN Cc.mmisf;!toncr • T F I _MI rr_re. i s on e..r T--'0FTLO PEIL TACBIAN CCTTH 8siorer ERT S. TAMAYF ssioner '7212.11 FREPEPrCK p, C(=misioner 1,ETTTEMORE BEFORE THE LAND USE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF HAWAII In the Matter of the Petition of GOON CORP . . For Amendment of District Boundary and Reclassification of Certain Lands Situated at North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii DOCKET NO. A83-549 CAMLCN CORP. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the Land Use Commission's DecasiOn and Order was served upon the following by either hand delivery or depositing the same in the U. S. Postal Service by certified mail: KENT M. KEITH, Director Department cf Planning and Economic Development State of Hawaii 250 South King Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 SIDNEY FUKE, Planing Director Planning Department County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 RICHARD G. MACMILLAN KARL K. KOBAYAS H I The Queen Street Building 345 Queen Street, Suite 890 Honolulu, Hawaii 96 813 DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, this 26th day of Januar-y, .1984. / Gu1 0A ; _'L'RUTANI L bxft ,,fe OT_ticc r BEFORE THE LAND USE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF HAWAII In the Matter of the Petition o GAMREx, INC. To Amend the Agricultural Land Use District Boundary into the Urban Land Use District for Incremental Redistricting of Increment II For Approximately 49 Acres of Land at North Kora, County, Island and State of Hawaii,) Tax Map Key No.: (Third Division) ) 7-6-21:15 and portions of 4, 9, ) 10, 11 and 17. ) ) DOCKET NO. A63-54 CA REX, INC. T!Ic I 1 LLV mrtHy T AZ i ith la a lira §e -Rd cSrl rc [A. (4=` Y 011119 i "3 aniN3 4Y i o 1593by - , +y FINDINGS OF FACT, CONcl,1.. J c)NS OF 1' AWJ ANL) : F;crS ?N AND CJ DFR BEFORE THE LAND USE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF HAWAII In thea ?°jrihter- of the Petition of CAMREX, INC. To Amend the Aqr r,": ] t:l: r,a 1 rand Use Di: tr; rft_ fluurrdiry into the Urban Land ilt,ri D str. ict for Incremental Re4 l4tricti.r-_u o1 I; c.r.•erent II For A spr uximdtely. 49 Acres of Land at North Kona, County, Is1anci and Stat.{ 01 I:awaii, ) Tax Map c y No.: (Third Division) ) 7-6-21:15 and portions" c•f 4, S, 10, 11 and 1.. ) ) DOCKET NO. A83-549 GAMIREX, INC. FTNDTN S OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS CF ]_Aw1 ANT) DCAtflD CORDER CI}1I EX, INC., a Hawaii vuiip atiof, as successor in interest to Kalott Properties, Inc. and Gamion corp., (hereinafter "Petitioner") flied on June 4, 1992, a Motion to Approve Redistricting of Increment I1, pursuant to Chapter 205, Hawaii Revised Statutes, (hereinafter "HRS") and Section 15-15-78, Hawaii Administrative Rules, (hereinafter "Commission Rules"), to amend approximately 49 acres of land in the Agricultural District to the Urban District at North Kona, County, Island and Stat of Hawaii, 'Tax Map Key No. (Third Division) 7-6-21:15 and portions of parcels 4, 9, 10, 11 and 17 (hereinafter "Increment II") , and comprising the second increment of lands described in the Land Use Commission's (hereinafter "Commision") Decision and Order dated December 13, 1983, (hereinafter "Order") in the Petition by Gamlon Corp. in this docket. The Commission, having heard and examined the testimony, evidence and argument of the parties, the Petitioner's Proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order, and the parties' stipulation filed thereto, does hereby make the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order, FINDINGS OF FACT PROCEDURAL MATTERS 1. The Motion to Approve Redistricting of Increment II and Memorandum in Support of Motion was filed on June 4, 1992, by Petitioner to reclassify Increment II, consisting of approximately 49 acres of land in the Agricultural District to the Urban District for certain land situated at North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii. 2, On June 12, 1992, Petitioner filed a Motion t. Approve Change of Name of Petition from Gamlon Corp. to Gamrex, Inc. 3. On August 3, 1992, Petitioner filed i List of Witnesses and List of Exhibits, together with Exhibit Nos. 1 through 5. These exhibits were subsequently withdrawn by Petitioner. 4. A prehearing conference was held on August 11, 1992, at the conference room of the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, llth Floor, central Pacific Plaza, 220 South King Street, in Honolulu with the Petitioner -2 and the Office of State Planning present. The County of Hawaii Planning Department was not present. At the prehearing conference, witness and exhibit lists, and exhibits were exchanged among the parties present. 5. On August 19, 1992, Petitioner filed its Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Motion to Approve Redistricting of increment 11. 6. On August 19, 1992, Petitioner filed its Revised Last of Witnesses, Revised List of Exhibits, and Exhibit Nos. 1 t❑ 15. 7. On August 27, 1992, Petitioner filed a Motion to continue Motion to Approve Redistricting of Increment II. E. The Commission held a hearing on August 27, 1992, at the Kamakahonu Ballrooms, King Kameharneha Kona. Beach Hotel, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii pursuant to notice published in the Honolulu Advertiser, Hawaii Tribune -Herald and West Hawaii Today on July 17, 1992. At the hearing, the Commission approved Petitioner's Motion to Approve Change of Name of Petition and Petitioner's Motion to Continue Motion to Approve Redistricting of Increment II. 9. On January 21, 1993, Petitioner filed its Second Revised List of Witnesses, Second Revised List of Exhibits, and Exhibit Nos. 17 to 20. 10. On January 21, 1993, Petitioner filed its second Supplemental, Memorandum in Support of Motion to Approve Redistricting of Increment 11. -2 11. On January 28, 1993, Petitioner filed its Third Revised. List of Witnesses, Third Revised List of Exhibits, and Exhibit Nos. 21 and 22. 12. The Commission held a continued hearing on the Motion to Approve Redistricting of Increment II on January 28, 1993, at the TCamakahonu Ballrooms, King Kamehameha Kona Beach Hotel, Kailua- Ona, Hawaii. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 13. The subject property was approved for incremental districting by the Commission's Order dated December 130 1983, and consists of approximately 173.66 acres, at North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii, Tax Map Key Nog, (Third Division) 7-6-21;4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 (hereinafter the "Property") . 14. Increment I, approved by the Commission's Order dated December 13, 1983, consists of approximately 124.66 acres (hereinafter "Increment I"), and Increment 11 consists of approximately 49 acres. 15. The Property is bound to the north by undeveloped lands, the south by the Kal.ani Sunset, Leilani Sunset and. Kainana Subdivisions, the west by the old Xailua-Keauhou Middle Road, and the east by the Tolani Subdivision. Increment 11 is generally located in the eastern portion of the Property. 16. The Property is owned in fee by Petitioner. 17. By Order dated December 13, 1983, the Commission reclassified from, the Agricultural District to the Urban -4 - District on an incremental basis approximately 124.66 acres of land comprising Increment I. Pursuant, to Section 15-15-78 of the Commission Rules, and the above-mentioned order dated December 13, 1981, Petitioner may apply to reclassify Increment 11 from the Agricultural District to the urban District upon a prima facie showing by Petitioner that it has substantially completed the on and off site improvements within Increment I, in accordance with the approved development plan for Increment 1. 18. On November 15, 1988, Petitioner filed a Motion to Extend Time to Complete Substantial Development of Increment 1 and to Apply for Incremental Districting of Increment II with the Commission. 19. The Commission approved the Motion to Extend Time t.::) S•.lbstantial Development of Increment I and to Apply for T-?=c:men=a.1 Districting of Increment II per motion on �ar;u z 10, 1989 and subsequently by Decision and Order dated 1-etri.i.ry 1:.), 1919. The time limit was extended until December 13, 1993. IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED WITHIN INCREMENT 1 20. After Increment I was reclassified to the Urban District by the Commission by its Order dated December 13, 1983, the following approvals affecting Increment 1 have been processed by the County of Hawaii: a. County of Hawaii incremental zoning approval pursuant to County of Hawaii Ordinance Nos. 84-23, 84-42, 88-4, 90-62 and 91-96 ("Zoning Ordinance") . b. County of Hawaii's final subdivision approval for County of Hawaii Subdivision Units I -A and I -B which consists of single-family residential areas in Increment ..Petitioner has also received County of Hawaii preliminary subdivision approval for County of Hawaii Subdivision Unit I -C.. 21. The on-site improvements which have been substantially completed or in progress to date within Increment I are as follows: a. Il;pr-ovements for Units I -A and 2-8. All infrastructure improvements, including roads, water system, electrical system, and telephone transmission system, within the portion of Increment 1 which comprises County of Hawaii subdivision Units I --A and I -B have been completed. b. Ilnprovernents for Unit I -C. Roads and utilities are partially completed within County of Hawaii Subdivision Unit I -C. c. Drainage system for multi -family residential area. The construction of the drainage systen for the multi- family residential areas has been delayed because: (a) Petitioner did not control the lands below Queen Haahuznanu Highway which the County of Hawaii deter, ~red were needed to complete the portion of the Fialualoa drainage system running through Petitioner's property; and (b) the County of Hawaii has -6 - r : r .red Petitioner to participate in certain flood studies and imorovcr]I:nts for the area below Queen Kaahumanu Highway. In J'ano of 190D, Potitioner completed the purchase of a 12-acre parcel (Tax Map Hey No. (Third Division) 7-6-24:25) _Located west (makai) of Queen Kaahumanu Highway, at a cost of $1,000,000 to resolve a problem concerning the construction of its portion of the Holualoa drainage system which portion runs mainly through the multi-family residential areas within Increment 1. All flood studies have been completed and have been submitted to the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works, which will submit thea to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (hereinafter "FEMA"). Upon approval by FEMA, Petitioner will be permitted to construct its portion of the Holualca drainage system. After completion of the drainage system, the County of Hawaii will permit construction of the infrastructure improvements within the multi-family residential areas within increment 1. d. Drainage System Cor Unit I-C. Petitioner, in connection with a_k a•cf nL 1,111dowrrers and the County of Hawaii, have completed a study for the drainage system, which affects only a small portion of County of Hawaii subdivision unit l-c. After approval by the FEMA, the drainage system which affects Unit l-C will be completed and Petitioner will complete the infrastructure inpro-reillents within Unit 1-C. After completion of such improvements, all of the infrastructure improvements within the single -family areas within Increment I will have been completed. e. Infrastructure Improvements for Multi-Family Residential Area Within Increment I. The water system master plan for the area requires Petitioner to develop the water system and other infrastructure improvements within Increment I1 prior to development of infrastructure improvements in the multi-family residential areas within Increment 1. f. Model Homes and Recreation Center. Petitioner has completed eight model homes and a recreation center within Increment I. 22. The off-site improvements which have been substantially completed or in progress to date within Increment 1 are as follows: a. Petitioner has completed construction of the main access road from Kuakini Highway to the project which is the Laky Street extension. Petitioner has also completed construction of the Lako Street/Kuakini Highway intersection. b. Off -Site Drainage. Petitioner has submitted drainage plans for the 12-acre parcel of land located west (makai.) of Queen Kaahumanu Highway (Tax Map Key No. (Third Division) 7-6-24!25) and these plans are currently being reviewed by the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works and FEMA. Petitioner is also participating in flood (HEC2) studies for the area west (makai) of the 12-acre parcel and these studies have been submitted to the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works and FEMA. 23. Total costs, including on and off-site improvement costs, expended by Petitioner is approximately $20,000,000. 24. Due to the existing water system for the area, Petitioner cannot construct any additional water system and other infrastructure improvements in Increment I without urban districting of Increment I.I and cannot proceed with further development of the multi-gamily residential areas within Increment I without such urban redistricting of Increment Ir. 25. The County of Hawaii will allow Petitioner to construct the water systen and ether infrastructure improvements within Increment T:1 subject to subsequent adjustments, rel.ignments, or other revisions to such infrastructure improvements as may be required by the County of Hawaii zoning and sJr..divisian process. 25. Petitioner has already commenced, preparation of plans for the c onstLuct _; ori of .i.ti J i - L_ructure .improvements within Increment II in order that it can pro eed with such construction without delay if the Commission approves Petitioner's request for redistricting of Increment II. 27. Bayed an the aforesaid findings, and the findings in the Commission's Order filed December 13, 1983 in this docket, the proposed reclassification of Increment 11 conforms with the following objectives, policies and priorities of the -9 F'a •aii State Plan provided under HRS §§226-19(a)(1), 226-19(b)(1), and 226-19(b)(3). 28. The Commission, by Order dated December 13, 1983, impoJed the following conditions on the reclassification and increent;al districting of the Property: A. Petitioner shall provide housing opportunities for low and moderate income Hawaii residents prior to assigning or transferring (except by way of mortgage or assignment. as security) its interest in the subject property, by offering for sale, on a preferential basis, on its own or in cooperation with either or both the Hawaii Housing Authority or the County of Hawaii, ten percent (1O%) of the lots or house and lots to be developed on the subject property, to residents of the state of Hawaii of low and moderate family income as determined by the Hawaii Housing Authority or County of Hawaii from time to time. The prefer.errtin7. lots or houses and lots shall be offered. for sale at prices not exceeding prices that.enable such purchasers to qualify for and obtain state -assisted financing (i.e., Act 205 or Hula Mae) or federally -insured or assisted finanniic (i.e., FHA Section 245 program) intended to encourage ho...re ownership by low and moderate income families (hereinafter "Condition A"); and B. In ma}:inq the ultimito decision as to whether a historical or archaeological sit.. i i'4nifioant enough to warrant prem :1 v .Liun, the Petitioner shall consult with and accept the decision of the Historic Preservation Officer of the Department of Land and Natural Resources (hereinafter "Condition B") ; and C. Petitioner shall submit annual progress reports to the Commission, Department of PLInning and Economic Development, and the Hawaii County planning Department as to its progress in satisfying these cvn3itions (hereinafter "Condition C") . 29. Petitioner has addressed. Condition A by entering into an agreement with the County of Hawaii Housing Department providing for conveyance of the 12 -acre parcel, Tax Map Ivey No. (Third Division) 7-6-24.25, to the County of Hawaii, in satisfaction of the affordable housing requirement. 30 . Fed t:t oner has addressed Condition B by receiving approval of its archiEc)logi ;al report from the. State Historic Preservation division of the Department of Land Natural 31. Petitioner has addressed Condition C by subrArzsion of Exhibit A to its Second Supplemental Memorandum filed January 21, 1993, which the Commission accepted as Petitioner's Annual .Report for 1992, and having filed previous annual reports with appropriate parties. RULING ON PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT Any of the proposed findings of fact submitted by the Petitioner or other parties not already ruled upon by the Commission by adoption herein, or rejected by clearly contrary findings of fact herein, are hereby denied and rejected. Any conclusion of law herein improperly designated as finding of fact should be deemed or construed as a conclusion of law; any finding of fact herein improperly designated as a conclusion of law should be deemed and construed as a finding of fact. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Pursuant to Chapter 205, HRS, and the Commission Rules including Section 1.5-15-78 thereof, the Commission finds upon a preponderance of evidence that the incremental redistricting of lands within Increment 11 of tha Property, and approximately shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, consisting of approximately 49 acres of land situate at North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii, identified as Tax Map Key No. ('third Division) 7-6-21:1.5 and portions of parcels 4, 9, 10, 21 and 17 from the Agricultural District to the Urban District, subject to the additional conditions provided in this Order, conforms to the standards established in the Commission Rules including Section 15-15-78 relating to incremental districting, is reasonable, non --violative of section 205-2, HRS, and is consistent with the Hawaii State Plan as set forth ir, Chapter 226, HRS. D , C' Sl ON AND ORDER IT 15 HEREBY ORDERED that the lands within Increment 11 of the Property, consisting of approximately 49 acres situate at North Kona, County, Island and State of Hawaii, more particularly identified by Tax Map Key No. (Third Division) 7-6-21:15 and portions of parcels 4, 9, 10, 11 and 17 and approximately shown in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein, for incremental redistricting from the Agricultural District to the Urban District shall be and the same is hereby approved, and the district boundaries are amended accordingly, subject to the following additional conditions: 1. Petitioner shall develop the Property in substantial compliance with the representations made to the Commission. Failure to so develop the Prcp(-_rty may re4ult in reversion of the Property to its former clae� 3. i i _it i Ll, or change to a more appropriate ciassi.fi.c-ation. -12- 2. Petitioner shall give notice to the Commission of any intent to sell, lease, assign, place in trust, or otherwise voluntarily alter the ownership interests in the Property, prior to development of the Property. 3. Petitioner shah, provide annual reports to the Land Use Commission, the Office of State. Planning, County of Hawaii Planning Department in connection status of the subject project and the Petitioner's complying with the conditions imposed, 4. release these Property upon The Land Use Commission may fully or conditions as to all or any portions timely motion and upon the provision and the with the progress ira partially of the of adequate assurance of satisfaction of these conditions by Petitioner, 5. Petitioner shall record the conditions imposed by the Commission with the Bureau of Conveyances pursuant to Section 15-15-92, Hawaii Administrative Rules.. 6. Within 7 days of the issuance of the Co77i_0-i0r (5 Decision and Order for the subject reclassification, Peti lione.r shall (a) record with the Bureau of Conveyances a Statement to the effect that the Property is subject to conditions imposed by the Land Use Commission in the reclassification of the Property, and (b) shall file a copy of such recorded statement with the Commission. DOCKET NO. A33-549 - GANREX, INC., a Hawaii corporation Dore at Honolulu, Hawaii, this 10th day of May 1993, per motion on April 29, 1993. Filed and effective on May IC , 1993 Certified by: Executive Officer LAND USE COMMISSION STATE OF HAWAII By ALLEN ` v_ . AL Chairman W nd C+mrnissioner By (absent) KART : S. AHN Vice Chairperson and Commissioner By JOA N. MATTSON Vice Chairperson and Commissioner By /414e -- AL , h K. HOE �y Cin1L:5n+���J' inner By (absent) By EUSEBTO LAPENIA, J Commissioner. (absent) RENTON L. K. Nil Commissioner By j \ !4b- TRUDY K. SENDA Commissioner ELTON WAD C cTiIm i El c-. T_ r ri o r By j. 1 b,,`` DE OI ON D J. H. W.: -)N. w):1.11 i.F,s i on r -14- 1 ; I '�1r6i` 2 ti I ' • I • f',rp tel'1I+a''f,'Ir,fit".L\. I'r, % ,. I .F + ! ¢s -v o ' , • -� bi u, u .inn. kic} l . . t . •'•, , '. C14-' I ,.I � I" 44f •tri \\ \ 1 \\;C4,11%. C•' rtf !.','F'' aAtcti + 1 ��tr.'Y t I I I 2-1,-»; . 5', fir aica� ICarnoa Pt 1 ' i 1 - cc 0z ptF'U£iS�Y Qi aT �fS F'i1 �iC \, ' "1 t DOCKET NO . A83 -- 549 / GAIVIREX . LNC 0 , a Hawaii Corporation LOCATION MAP TAX MAP KEY 7 — 6 — 7. : par . 4 , por . 9. por . 10 . pot . U . por . 17 & 15 HOLUUALOA LST & 2ND . NORTH KONA , HAWAII SCALE: 1" 2,000 ft. ± .a.,.APPROVED AREA i INCREMENT 11 I !C4_3I1- A HAMAKUA KONA PUN KAI BEFORE THE LAND USE COMMISSION OF SHE STATE OF HAWAII In thLe Matter of the Petition of GAMREX, E.X, INC. To Amend the Agri c ii tltrai Land Use i;istr_i.ct Boundary into tie Urban Land Use District for Incremental Redistricting of Increment SI For Approximately 49 Acres of Land at North Kona, County, Island and State cf Hawaii,) Tax Map Key No.: (Third Division) ) 7-6--21:15 and portions of 4, 9, ) 10, 11 and 17. ) ) DOCKET NO. AS3-549 GAMREX, INC. CER"T'1: 'ICATE pF .SERVICE I hel-eby certify that a copy of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Latta, and Decision and order was serve. 'anon the following by either hand de.l. i_ve.ry or depos i t rag the sane in the U. S. Postal Service by ce iified mail: -HAROLD S. MASUMCTO, Director Office of State Planning P. D. Box 3540 Honolulu, Haw.ii. 96811.3540 VISCI" -IA GOLDSTEIN, P7.anr.inc Director CERT. Planning Dep rtr�� nt, rc•irrt:v ref Fawrii.Y Aupun:i. SU_reet. Hilo, .Hawaii 96720 KARL K. KOBAYASHI, ESQ.., Attorney icr Pet:itic;:er CERT. Carlsmith Ban Wichm•an Nurray Case MIll<n & Ic ii3-i 2200 Pacific Tower 1001 Bishop Street Honolu1 2, Hawaii 96613 DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, this 10th day of May 1993. ESTHHER USDA Executive Of. --icer BILL NO. 1075 COUNTY OF HAWAII - STATE OF HAWAII ORDINANCE NO. 8 AN Cao=n i MANCE AMEND1N..; SKCTION 25-87 (NORTH KONA ZONE MAP) ARTICLE 3, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING COIF.) OF THE (HAWAII COUNTY CODE, BY CHANGING THE Di4TRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM UNPLANNED (U) TO MULTIPLE FAMILY (RM -5) AND ;IQ(T, FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -15) AT 13OLUALOA 1 AND 2, NORTH f+;(:NP., HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 7-6-21:4, 9-13, AND 15-17. BE IT Oi DATNED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 25-87, Article 3, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) et the County Code, is , :ondec1 to change the district ot -,roprrty described hereinafter as follows: 'ihE district cls:.,,. i.ficiti:n of the following area situated at. riul Laloa 1 and 2, North P c:gar Hawaii, shall be Multiple Family Residential (RM -5): (PARCEL 1) Beginning at the northwest corner of this parcel of ].arid and on the northeasterly side of Kuakini Higliway Rea1 iqn Tw7nt, Project No. 11A-03-69, the coordinates of said point of 0.:"'_:a i nn i riq referrer] to Government Survey Triangulation Station "KMLITA," briny 9,193.71 feet South and 8,705.53 feet tht,t +_ e by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: 1. 2400 28' 30" 2,903.35 feet along the l eIr,.] r ot R.P. 4475, L.C. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamanialu; 2. 2550 18' 17.97 feet along Same; 3. 311° 55' 219.92 fejt along same; 4. 331° 14' 15" 143.36 feet along same; Thence along Stream Lot 14 for the next thirteen (13) courses the direct azimuths and distances being; 5. 960 54' 67.99 feet; 6. 1120 56' 86.79 feet; 7. 900 55' 56.48 feet; 8. 690 49' 76.70 feet; 9. 46° 39' 114.37 feet; 10. 510 06' 83.31 feet; 11. 760 01' 139.84 feet; 12. 510 29' 175.76 feet; 13. 66° 32' 91.49 feet; 14. 440 49' 170.06 feet; 15. 25° 59' 247.57 feet; 16. 37° 21' 124.60 feet; 17. 310 20' 30" 825,56 feet; Thence along Stream Lot 15 for the next ten (10) courses, the azimuths and distances being: 18. 370 01' 19. 660 24' 20. 440 01' 23. 670 01' 22. 1.020 13' 23. 669° 30' 24. 310 40' 25. 830 52' 26. 1144 04' 27. 770 23' -2- 57.76 feet; 138.13 feet; 114.46 feet; 134.84 feet; 107.13 feet; 139.97 feet; 114.38 feet; 64.54 feet; 60.04 feet; 132.01 feet; 28. 1520 18' 10" 95.72 feet along Kuakii.ni. Highway Realignment Project No. 11A-03-69; 29. 139° 59' 30" 20.75 feet along sane; 30. 990 481 30" 35.58 feet along same 31. 154° 11' 597.05 feat alon same to the point of beginning and containing an area of 37.936 Acres. (Refer to Parcel 1 as shown on Exhibit A) The district classification of the following area situated at Holualoa 1 and 2, North Kona, Hawaii, shall be Multiple Family Residential (RM -5): (PARCEL 2) Beginning at the southeast corner of this parcel of land, being the northeast corner of Stream i.,ot 15, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station ' AYI.IIA," being 9,565.90 feet South and 11,749.51 feet East, thence running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: Along Stream Lot 15 for the next thirteen (13) courses, the direct azimuths and distances being: 1. 65° 05' 2.53 feet; 2. 98° 56' 1.51 . X37 feet; 3. 1210 57' 191.39 feet; 4. 95Q 15' 205.20 feet; 5. 96° 50' 273.37 feet; 6. 740 55` 112.84 feet; 7. 1070 39' 54.73 feet; 8. 900 53' 191.87 feet; 9. 129° 17' 56.53 Eeet; 10. 80° 07' 71.22 feet; -3- 11. 53` 36' 104.76 feet; 12. 830 27' 205,32 feet; 13. i4° 08' 104.72 feet; Thence along Stream Lot !4 for the next thirteen (13) courses, the direct azimuths and 3istri '- 14. 2110 20' 30" 763.45 feet; 15. 217° 21' 127.42 feet; 16. 205° 59' 243.59 feet; 17. 224° 49' 148.60 feet; 18. 246° 32' B7.91 feet; 19. 231° 29' .170.64 feet; 20. 2560 01' 1 4]. 06} feet; 21. 231° 06' 55.89 feet; 22. 226° 39' 104.41 feet; 23. 249° 49' 53.22 feet; 24, 2704 55' 33.64 feet; 25. 292° 56' 83.57 feet; 26. 276° 54' 90.29 feet; 27. 354° 02' 55.41 feet along the remainder of R.P. 4475, L.C. Aw. 7713, App. 43 to Victoria j{amana1u; 28. 210 41' 50" 8.60 feet along same; 29. 3590 37' 20" 20.09 feet along same; 3€7. 50 07' 20" 44.89 feet along the remainder of R.F. 4475, L.C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamamalu and along the remainder of R.P. 8217, L.C. Aw. 3660 to John P. Munn; 31. 3550 00' 65.72 feet along the remainder of R.P. 8217, L.C. Aw. 3660 to John P. Munn and along the remainder of R.P. 4475, L.C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamamalu; 32. 30 05' 265.06 feet along the remainder of R.P. 4475, L.C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamamalu; 33. 770 08' 34. 40 39' 35. 3470 02' 36. 3370 00' 20.55 feet along same; 203.73 feet along same; 187.60 feet along same; 679.20 feet along same to the paint of beginning and containing an area of 30.901 Acres. (Refer to Parcel 2 as shown an Exhibit A) The district classification of the following area situated at Holualoa 1 and 2, North Kona, Hawaii, shall be Single Family Residential (RS -15) (PARCEL 3) Beginning at the southwest corner of this parcel of land and on the easterly side of Kailua-Keauhou Middle Road, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "1AILUA, " being 12, 047.12 feet South and 11,089.83 feet East, thnce running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: Along Kailua-Keauhou Middle Road for the next thirty-six (36) courses, the direct azimuths and distances being: 1. 1720 54' 30" 186.38 feet; 2. 1770 19' 91.93 feet; 3. 167° 17' 30" 51.67 feet; 4. 1850 12' 69.99 feet; 5. 1920 52' 74.50 feet; _S- 6. 1730 31' 30" 20.57 feet; 7. 161° 40' 30" 49.48 feet; 8. 1410 33' 41.74 feet; 9. 1280 06' 63.19 feet; 10. 1350 52' 140.78 feet; 11. 1240 23' 30" 65.66 feet; 12. 113° 18' 37.19 feet; 13. 1190 09' 30" 50.14 feet; 14. 1110 13' 30" 24.45 feet; 15. 1070 15' 108.48 feet; 16. 1020 13' 70.44 feet; 17. 1120 58' 84.72 feet; 18. 1150 15' 30" 178.23 feet; 19. 1210 06' 87.41 feet; 20. 11.10 55' 32.57 feet; 21. 11100 49' 30" 55.63 feet; 22. 104° 37' 24.92 feet; 23. 1040 38' 30" 35.05 feet; 24. 102° 57' 30" 40.04 feet; 25. 1120 43' 30" 58.53 feet; 26. 102° 40' 32.94 feet; 27. 95° 37' 30" 32.48 feet; 28. 104° 23' 85.44 feet; 29. 910 43' 44.66 feet; 30. 990 18' 30" 25.27 feet; 31. 1120 14' 66.03 feet; 32. 1170 51' 30" 31.69 feet; 33. 125° 07' 43.90 feet; 34. 134° 37' 30" 40.62 feet; 35. 134° 37' 30" 4L.48 feet; 36. 134° 00' 30" 47.64 feet; 37. 154° 11' 400.86 feet along Ku:,ti;)i Highway Real i T wment, Project No. 1.1A-03-69; 38. 2400 2B' 30" 1,332.99 feet along the remainder of R.P. 447;, L.C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Knmamalu (Lot 4); 39. 150° 28' 30" 337.56 feet along same; Thence alone Stream Lot 15 for the next ten (10) courses, the direct azimuths and distances being: 40. 233° 36' 91.73 feet; 41. 260° 07' 29.64 feet; 42. 309° 17' 89.97 feet; 43. 2700 53' 203.93 feet; 44. 2860 30' 113.50 feet; 45. 267° 11' 352.71 feet; 46. 275° 15' 185,94 feet; 47. 3010 57' 189.37 feet; 48. 278° 56' 182.35 feet; 49. 2450 05' 10.28 feet; 50. 3450 30' 902.50 feet along the remainder of R.P. 4475, L.C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamamalu and along the remainder of Grant 3630 to W. H. Cornwell; 51. 3340 30' 969.30 feet along the remainder of R.P. 4475, L.C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria K,amamalu; 52. 2e' 00' 537.04 feet along game; 53. 860 51' 30" 120.73 feet along Grant 988 to Kamalo; 54. 930 48' 45.22 feet along sante; 55. 840 14' 106.16 feet along same; 56. 1040 06' 30" 41.60 feet along same; 57. 770 41' 30" 76.19 feet along Grant 988 to Kamalo and along Grant 1591 to Hoolawaihonala; Thence along Grant 1591 to Hoolawaihonua for the next nine (9) courses, the direct azimuths and distances being; 58. 820 34' 126.79 feet 59. 142° 51' 32.82 feet; 60. 810 37' 106.15 feet; 61. 67° 57' 30" 30.29 feet; 62. 83° 03' 30" 258.61 feet; 63. 72° 49' 30" 90.07 feet; 64. 840 37' 30" 76.23 feet; 65. 780 08' 62.37 feet; 66. 82° 02' 30" 157.05 feet to the point of beginning and containing an area of 103.293 Acres. {Refer to Parcel 3 as shown on Exhibit A) All as shown on the map attached her'2to, mQEKe3 Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SECTION 2. These changes in district classification are conditioned upon the following: -8- (A) The ening for the property shall be effective on'iy after: (1) there are assurances satisfactory to the Departments of Water Supply and Planning, upon consultation with the State Department of Health, and the Division of Water and Land Development of the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, that a water source of sufficient quality and quantity has been established within two years from the effective date of this ordinance; provided that a maximum one-year extension to the two-year time limit may be granted by the Planning Director with reasonable and sufficient justification; and (2) an agreement, accompanied by an appropriate surety bond or other accer"able security, is c.}>4cuted with. the Department of Water upply for the actual development of a proven water source and it water transmission and distribution system within one ''ca= Lro:n the official date of compliance with condition A (1) ; pruv ided that a one-year exten.ion to the one-year timc:2 1 _Lit :ray L'e granted by the Planning Director with reasn.-rable and sufficient justification; or (3) the Department of Wa7e.r Supply issues a water commitment for the proposed. development; (B) No subdivision or development of any portion of the land shall occur unless and until. condition A }ss been complied with; (C) The Planning Director shall be mandated `.o i n: `rate acton for: the repeal of this ordinance if conditions A or B have not been complied with; (D) The petitioner, its assigns or successors, shall be responsible for complying with all conditions of approval; (E) The zoning for the 49+ acres designated by the State Land Use Commission as its second zoning increment shall not become effective until that land is certified by that commission to be within the Urban District; (F) The RS zoned area shall be developed in two nc:ruc__its. The first increment shall consist of a maximum f [°. + c:nntlguou acres, and the second, the remaining area. :he etfec;_ive date of zoning for the second increment :shall be after: d ve-opment has occurred in the first ini:emn7L, retry w ineci by the Planning Director. "Devetf rr:nent" means chat building permits have been issued for dwe; ling units ; -;c1 c3nstruction has partially completed to the extent tha!- roofs have been constructed on a minimum of twenty-five percent of the nu ,ber of units proposed for the entire area of 103.4+ acres. r1 {)f actual construction, the petitioner may enter into 6n ;at r°r._:nt with the Hawaii County Housing Agency to assure tf County that the dwellings will be constructed within a given pea-iod.. Such agreement shall be su:!cur€ed by a surety bond, certified check, or other security accepta to Corporation Counsel and the ]'trwai i County Housing Act t,L:y . final execution of suCh agree•inent and filing of the °,, c,.Jr ity with the Hawaii County Housing -9- Agency, the zoning of the second increment may be deemed by the Planning Director to be effective prior to the actual construction of the dwellings in the first increment provided that condition E is complied with; (G) Subdivision plans for the first increment of the RS zoned area shall be submitted within one year from the effective date of the zoning. Final subdivision approval shall be secured within one year from the date of receipt of tentative subdivision approval; (H) The R' zrnod area shall be developed in two increments. The first ,n;.,rr•ir:ent shall consist of a maximum of 42 acres of the Mu It i E..1 L. Family Residential zoned land and the second increment r the reiiLlining area. The effective date of zoning for the second incrr j ent shall be after "development," as defined in condition F, has occurred in the first increment, as determined by elip planning Director; (1) plans for the development within the first increment of the RM zoned area shall be summitLed to the Planning Department and final plan approval secured with n one year from the effective date of the zoning. Constraction comm. rice within one year from the date of receipt of fina3 fsl gin rir;::.rovnl and be completed within three years thereafter; (J) Housing opportunities for Aa'waii rc:>>idents shall be provided in accordance with the condition imposed by th!.2 =Rate Land Else Commission. The number of units and T.anner in wci i_ch they are to be provided shall meet with the approval of Lhr Hawaii County Housing Agency; (K) Improvements to the intersections with Kuakini Highway and the Kuak i ni Highway Extension shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the State Department of Transportation, Highways Division. The intersection improvements shall be constructed concurrently with the development of the first increment of the RS or RM zoned areas, whichever occurs first; (L) No direct access shall be provided for the lots within the RS zoned area from the mauka-makai collector road; C:):,) The roadways within the RM zoned area which are propose i for c'.eication shall he constructed to dedicab! e standarjs eiirbS, gutters, and sidewalks meeting with t :F.c cf too r•epartment of Public Works. Where a roadway cro e: as zone line or if a zone line should divide a roadway, the,arta, and sidewalks shall be provided for the ent. i : •A:id shall continue to the nearest interse i cin ,:irdPr to avoid telescoping and to provide consistent i.r i:1_,; +eri_• t.: At a minimum, roadways within the RS zi:r'i .1 fTha11 he provided with paved shoulCsei s ...rid is ve:l 4'tul. :.`_i CIt i riy with Lh L1'? L:E.pIaval of the Depar:tiLierlt ct Public. Work:: (N) -l(- The method of sewage disposal shall meet with the approval of the appropriate governmental agencies; A drainage master plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval prior to issuance of any subdivision or plan approvals. The plan shall include, as a minimum, hydrological and hydraulic calculations for all components of the drainage system, a construction timetable for all elements of the system, and an analysis of downstream impacts. Further, mitigating measures as approved by the Department of Public Works shall be taken to eliminate any downstream impacts; (Q) An intensive archaeological survey shall be conducted for the entire property and a report shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of any subdivision or plan approvals; (R) Should any unanticipated archaeological sites be found during land preparation activities, work shall immediately stop and the Planning Department notified. Work shall not resume in the affected area until clearance is given by the Planning Department; and, (S) All otter applicable rules, regulations and requirements shall be complied with. Should any of the foregoing conditions not be met, rezoning of the area to its original or more appropriate designation may be initiated. SECTION 3. In the event that any portion of the ordinance is declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other parts of this ordinance. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. Hilo, Hawaii nate of introduction: Date of 1st Reading: Date of Znd Reading: Effective Date: Introduced by: COUNCIL N 1.3!•: ,1DL]NT1 OF HAWAII April 18, 1984 April 18, 1984 May 9, 1984 May 15, 1984 -11- i , 7 -{ 0 ffl 7 t.) i 1 -411 Cr, j• --" t'F.1 •):11 Nrto • • cl ▪ 4 - 111 • ro!. • , .r • '' 421 - ' ' — ,- , . ......., i'l _ • 1 71' 31 ' i-'. 4 in ,-• „..-........- rt) ...- ' ,...-• , '' ''. - r np .-, ,...--..- 0 . w 11 , i /----- CI 7 ••-• ''' ' •‘ A !.., ,•:: • • • Cr. 15 • 'V' ' ' ' ' - - ' \\ ' -,i1 ' i . . ,••••••••••, ••••••• 1.1..5. ,,,,,, • ,,, '') ..•:••••-... Jr . ,_.....,,,..1.,fl 31 z • • — • 1, 7.6 trl • I ; r e ; •.."/ • • wukikkorrev,.., ..krob em.ftwookbc•...01.11•.1104.111,•ff. 1,1^1101•1Yri=11,421.=LLY•11 •4,11 ; 1 E. .40 r,, COUNTY OF HAWAII All STATE OF HAWAII BILL NO, 268 ORDINANCE NO /1-31 N t 31 DI ..\ f."] :1'11 :: \J )ING ORDINANCE NO. 97-99, WHICH AMENDED }RD1 N. ANC]: ] : { i4 '1 84-4:).. 88-4, 90-62, 91-96, 93-26, and 94-34, WHICH 11:1) t_'] i' 111 \ 1 . \ V I )ti 1 I f . M UNPLANNED (Ll) TO MUL 1IPLE FAMILY (RM -5) ANI]} ti]\C-iL.J_-1-,1,1.1I1 l' I4. 11)ENTIAL (RS -15) ZONED DISTRICT AT 11OLL1ALOA 1 and 2. NORTH K()N.\.1-EAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 7-6-21:4, 9-13, AND 15-17. IRF IT ORDAINED BY IHE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 97-99, which amended Ordinance Nos. 84-23, 84-42, 88-4, 90-62, 91-96, 93-26, and 94-34, is amended as follows: "SECTION 1. Section 25-8-3, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, is mended to change the district classification of property described hereinafter as lig] LSF{ -s: The district classi?ication of the following area situated at 1 Lcltlalca 1 and 2, North Kona, Hawaii, shail be Multiple Family Residential (RM -5) and Single Family Residential (RS -15). (PARCEL 1) Beginning al the northwest corner of this parcel of land and on the northeasterly side of Kuakini Highway Realigrunent, Project No. 11A-03-69, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "KAILUA," being 9,193.71 feet South and 8,705.53 feet East, thence running by azimuths measured clockwise from true South: 1. 240e 28' 30' 2,903.35 feet iliorpz the remainder of R.P. 4475, L.C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamamalu; 2. 255" 18' 17.97 feet along same; 3. 3 1 1 ° 55' 219.92 feet along same; 4. 331' 14' 15" 143.36 feet along same; 'Thence along Stream Lot 14 for the next thirteen (13) courses. the direct azimuths and distances being: 5. 96' 54' 67,99 feet; 6. 112° 56' 86.79 feet; 7. 90° 55' 56,48 feet 8, 690 49' 76.70 feet; 9. 46° 39' 114.37 feet; 10. 51' 06' 83.31 feet; 11. 760 01' 139,84 feet; 12. 51' 29' 175.76 feet; 11 66° 32' 91.49 feet; 1.4. 44° 49' 17006 feet; 15. 25° 59' 247,57 feet; 16. 37° 21' 124,60 feet; 17. 31° 20' 30" 825.56 feet; Thence along Stream Lot 15 for the next ten (10) courses, the azimuths and distances being: 18. 37° 01' 19. 66° 24' 57.76 feet; 138.13 feet; -2- 20. 440 01' 114.46 feet; 21, 67° 01' 134,84 feet; 22. 102° 13' 107.13 feet; 23. 69° 30' 139.97 feet; 24. 31' 40' 114.38 feet; 25. 8° 52' 64.54 feet; 26. 114° 04' 60.04 feet; 27. 77° 28' 132.01 feet; 28. 152° 18' 10" 9532 feet along Kuakini Highway Realignment Project No. 11A-03-69; 29. 139" 59' 30" 20.75 feet along same; 30, 990 4S' 30" 35.58 feet .[tine santc; 31, 154° I1' 597.05 feet ntonsz sarno to the point of beginning .tnd containing art area of 37.936 Acre . (.1 el;1r to E'arc,d as shown on FA' classification of the following area situ2 .c.1 at E ioli.its[,m 1 Non Kora, kC r a. , shay: he Nlulti;'le I -3n ily Residential (RM5): {PARCEL 2) 13L'L,ionin .at the southeast corner of this parcel of land, beim; i17:1• no: ,]:east corner of Stream Lot 15, coordinates of said point of beginning ret r:cc' L o• 'nirrtent Survey Triangulation St;1ti i:i ": .•1[1.11A," being 9,565.90 feet South and 11. 4 9,51 feet East, thence mom in by azi_Z:uths measured clockwise from true South: Along Stream Lot 15 for the next thirteen (13) courses, the direct azimuths and distances being: -3- 1. 65° 05' 2.53 feet; 2. 98° 56' 151.87 feet; 3. 121° 57' 191.39 feet; 4. 95° 15' 205.20 feet; 5_ 96° 50' 27337 fest; 74' 55' 132,84 feet; 7. 107° 39' 54.73 feet 8. 90° 53' 191,87 feet; 9. 129° 17' 96.53 feet; 10. 80° 07' 71,22 feet; 11. 53° 36' 104,76 feet; 12. 33" 27' 205,32 feet; 13. 84° 08' 1.04, 72 feet; Thence along Stream Lot 14 for the next thirteen (13) courses, the direct azimuths and distances being: 14. 211' 20' 30" 763,45 feet; 15. 217* 21' 127.42 feet; 16. 245° 59' 243.59 feet; 17. 224° 49' 148.60 feet; 18. 246° 32' 87.91 feet; 19, 2 31 ° 29' 170,64 feet; -4 20. 256° 01" 21. 231° 06' 22. 226° 39' 23, 249° 49' 24. 2700 55' 25. 292° 56' 26. 276° 54' 27. 354° 02' 14I1_00 feet; 98.84) 'ect; 104.4 1 feet; x � ? i. } tee: S'.7 feet; 90.'79 feet; 55.41 feet along the remainder of R.P. 4475, L.C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamamalu; 28. 21' 41' 50" 8.60 feet along same; 29. 359° 37 20" 20.09 feet along same; 30. 5° 07 20" 44.89 feet pilon ; the remainder of R.P. 4475, L_C . Aw. 7711, Ap. 43 to Vit. -lona K.arnar ;alu and alc}ii the wnii:ind..rcf. C.P. 8217, L.C. , 15'..xii();F to .foli7i Niniin; 31. 355° 00' 65.72 fed along the remainder 4)1 R.P. 821 1 :4::00 to John I'.Minim the remainder of R.P. 4475, 1....C. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamamalu; 32.. 3° 05' 2 .)5.0{. fewt a1..►rt•�� 1.1re remainder of R.P. 4475, 77 13, 15. 4.-4, tc V'ictt-r a k.2 n-.Fi,r'.mi ]; 33. 77' 08' 20.55 feet alongstin1c,: 34. 4° 39" 203.73 feet along, !-;a111 (2, -5- 35. 347° 02' 187.60 feet along same; 36. 337' 00' 670.2(} feet along same to the point. of beginning and containing an area of 30.901 Acres. (Refer to Parcel 2 as shown an Exhibit A). The district classification of the following area situated at Holualna 1 and 2, North Kona, Hawaii, shall be Single Family Residential (RS -15): (PARCEL 3) FR -ginning ,ki r'!L psi of this parcel of lank! and on the .1. to:1y sid. o Kai 1.i-KedaLlIk7u'Middle Road, [.ice coordinates of said point o1 i1I Government Burk `y Triangulation Station " .ILUA," being H.'. i 17_' Inc S:1L.t.'I ::i,tl 11,089.83 f Lt E.:e;;i, thence ruiiamg by azimuths measured ;.-.lock,,' itis from true SouJ : A[ont. KaiLL...-1 • atilhDu Middle Road for the next thirty d 6) ccuisc.s, th dirC- 1. azimuths arta. distances being: 1. 172= 30" 186.38 feet; 2. 17P l' 91.93 feet; 3. 167° 17' 30" 51.67 feet; 4. 185° 12' 69.99 feet; 5. 192° 52' 74.50 feet; (>. 173` 31' 30" 20.57 feet; r . 61' 40' 30" 49.48 feet; . 141 D 33° 41,74 feet; 9. 128° 06' 63.19 feet; -6- 10. 1.35° 52' 140.78 feet; 11. 124'°' 23' 30" 65.66 feet; 12. 113° 18' 37.19 feet; 13. 119° 09' 30" 50.14 feet; 14. 111° 13' 30" 24.45 feet; 15. 107° 15' 108.48 feet; 16. 102° 13' 70.44 feet; 17. 112D 58' 84.72 feet; 18. 115° 15' 30" 178.23 feet; 19. 121° 06' 87.41 fee; 20, 111° 55' 32.57 feet; 21 _ 110' 49' 30" 55.63 feet; 22. 104' 37' 24.92 feet; 23. 104° 38' 30" 35.05 feet; 24. 102° 57' 30" 40.04 feet; 25. 112° 43' 30" 58.53 feet; 26. 1O2° 40' 32.94 feet; 27. 95° 37' 30" 32.48 feet; 28.. 104' 23' 85.44 feet; 29. 91' 43' 44.66 feet; - 7 - 30. 99° 18' 30" 25.27 feet; 31. 112° 14' 66.03 feet; 32. 117° 51' 30" 31.69 feet; 33, 125° 07' 43.90 feet., 34. 134° 3?' 30" 40.62 feet; 35. 134° 37' 30" 41.48 feet; 36. 134° 00' 30" 47.64 feet; 37. 154° 11' 400.86 feet along: Kuakini Highway Realignment, Project N . 11A-03-6'+; 38. 240° 28' 30" 1,332.99 fejt alor..F., 1Hv ildi'i(ler of R,P. 4475, L. Aw. .' ' 1 .;.. '\p_ 13 is, Victoria Kamanialu (Lot 4); 39. 1500 28' 30" 337.56 feet along same; Thence along Stream Lot 15 for the next ten (10) courses, the direct azimuths and. distances being: 40. 233° 36' 91.73 feet; 41. 260° 07' 29.64 feet; 42. 309° 171 89.97 feet; 43. 270° 53' 203.93 feet; 44, 286° 30' 113.50 feet; 45. 267° 11' 352.71 feet; 46. 275° 15' 185.94 fest; 47. 301° 57' 189.37 feet, 48. 278° 56' 49. 245° 05' 50. 345° 30' 51. 334' 30 182.35 feet; 10.28 feet; 902.50 feet along the remainder of R.P. 4475, L.G. Aw. 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Karnamalu. and along the remainder of Grant 3630 to W.H. Conwell; 969.30 feet along the remainder of R.P. 4475, LC_'. Aw, 7713, Ap. 43 to Victoria Kamamalu; 52. 2° 00" 537.04 feet along same; 53. 86° 51' 30" 120.73 feet along Grant 988 to Katmai(); 54. 93° 48' 45.22 feet along same; 55. 84° 14' 106.16 feet along same; 56. 1 U4". 06' 30" 41.60 feet along same; 57. 770 41' 30' 76.19 feet along Grant 988 to Kamalo and along Grant 1591 to Hoolawaihonua; Thence along Grant 1591 to Hoalawaihonua for the next nine (9) courses, the direct azimuths and distances beim; 58. 820 34' 126,79 feet; 59. 142° 51' 32.82 feet; 60. 81° 37' 106.15 feet; 61. 67° 57' 30" 30.29 feet; 62. 83° 03' 30" 258.61 feet; 63. 72° 49' 30" 90.07 feet; _9_ 64. 8413 3T 30" 76.23 feet; 65, 78° 08' (12.37 feet; 66. 82° 02" 30" 157.05 feet to the point of beginning and containing an arca of 103.293 Acres. (Refer to Parcel 3 asshown on Exhibit A) All as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SECTION 2. These changes in district classification are conditioned upon the following: (A) the Toning for the property shall be effective only after: (1) therm are assurances satisfactory to the Departments of Water Supply and Planning, upon consultation with the State Department of Health, and the Division of Water and Land Development of the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, that a water source of sufficient quality and quantity has been established within two years from the effective date of this ordinance; provided that a maximum one-year extension to the two-year time limit may be X14] a ted by the Planning Director with reasonable and sufficient ju :r ie;;tion.; :tLr (2) „r, <3w.rLLtnent, accompanied by an appropriate surety bond or other acceptable security, is executed with the Department of Water Supply for the actual development of a proven water source and its water transmission and distribution system within one year from the official date of compliance with condition A (1); provided that a one-year extension to the one-year time limit may be granted by the Planning Director witfi - 10 - reasonable and sufficient Justification; or (3) the Department of Water Supply issues a water commitment for the proposed development; (B) no subdivision or development of any portion of the land shall occur unless and until condition A has been complied with; (C) the Planning Director shall he mandated to initiate action for the repeal of this ordinance if conditions A or B have not been complied with; (L)) the petitioner, its assigns of successors, shall be responsible for complying with all conditions of approval; (E) the zoning for the 49-l- acres designated by the State Land Use Commission as its second zoning increment shall not become effective until that land is certif od by that commission to be within the Urban District; (F) the RS zoned area shall be developed in two increments_ The first increment shall consist of a maximum of 59.5+ contiguous acres, and the second, the remaining area. The effective date of zoning for the second increment shall be after development has occurred in the first increment, as determined by the Planning Director, "Development" means the applicant has completed the on-site and off-site improvements within the first increment of the RS zoned area and has dedicated the roadway to the County; (G) subdivision plans for the first increment of the RS zoned area shall be submitted vea:• iTom the effective date cf the zoning. Final subdivision approval ;h;.?i 1 leu srwcl1[c 1 it fin two years from the effective date of this amendment: -11- (11) the RM zoned area shall be developed in two increments. The first increment shall consist of a maximum of 42 acres of'the Multiple Family Residential zoned land and the second increment, the remaining area. The effective date of zoning for the second increment shall he after the applicant has completed the on-site and orf -site improvements of the first increment of the RN1 .rood area and has dedicated the improvements to the County; (1) plans for the deve!t,pment fiat increment of arc,, : lid:i De submitted to the Planning Department and final plan approve,l secured within five }Fears from the effective date of this sixth amendment. Construction shall commence within one year from the date of receipt of final plan approval and be completed within three years thereafter; (J) should the Council adopt a Unified Impact Fees Ordinance setting forth criteria for the imposition of exactions or the assessment of impact fees, conditions included herein shall be credited towards the requirements of the Unified Impact Fees Ordinance; (K) housing opportunities for Hawaii residents shall be provided in accordance with the condition imposed by the State Land Use Commission, The number of units and manner in which they arc to be provided shall meet with the approval of the Hawaii County Housing Agency; (L) improvements to the intersections with Kuakini Highway and the :Kualcini Highway FA shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the State Department of Transportatiorj, Highways Division_ The intersection - 1 2 - improvements shall be constructed concurrently with the development of the first increment ati the RS or RM zoned areas, whichever acours first, (M) no direct access shall be provided for the lots within the RS zoned area from the mauka-rnakai collector road; (N) the roadways and stubout within the Rf\4 zoned arca shall be constructed to dedicable standards with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works and shall he dedicated to the County of I-lawaii upon completion. Where a roadway crosses a zone line or if a zone lin should divide a roadway, the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks shall be provided for the entire right -of -the -way and shall continue to the nearest intersection in order to avoid telescoping and to provide consistent improvement; (0) at a minimum, roadways and stubouts within the RS zoned area shall be provided with paved shoulders and paved swabs meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works and shall be dedicated to the Cotanty of Hav,a ii upon completion; (P) the method of sewage disposal shall Tneet with the approval of the appropriate governmental agencies; (Q) a drainage master plan shall be submitted to the Derailment of Public Works for review and approval prior to issuance of any subdivision or plan approvals. The pian shall include, as a ntinimuni, hydrological and hydraulic calculations for aTli components of the drainage system, a construction timetable fur all elements or the system, and an analysis or downstreana impacts. Further, m tigating measures as approved by the Department of Public Works shall he taken to eliminate any downstream impacts; (R) an intensive archaeological survey shall be conducted for the entire property and a report shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of any subdivision or plan approvals; (S) should any unanticipated archaeological sites be found during land preparation activities, work shall immediately stop and the Planning Department notified. Work shall not resume in the affected area until clearance is given by the Planning Department; (T) prior to the Final Approval of the second increment, the applicant, its successors of assigns shall pay for any additional real property taxes owed for the new residential assessed value of the subject property which was previously taxed at the agricultural rate; and ([J) an initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the ordinance Indy he granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstanc : 1) the non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicants, successors or assigns, and that are not the result of their fault or negligence; 2) granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the general plan or zoning code; 3) granting of tlic time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of the change of Lone; -14- 4) the tir :c csion granted shall be fora period not to exceed the period onj'1 r:i]]v .r-an4cd for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed within one year may he extended for up to one additional year); and 5) if the applicant should require an additional extension of time, the Planning Director shall submit the applicant's request to the County Council for appropriate action_ Further, should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Director initiate rezoning of the area to its original or more appropriate designation." SECTION 2. Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored. SECTION 3. In the event that any portion of the ordinance is declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other parts of this ordinance. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY: IiIcr, kk:.t' ,r:i ]:><<tc of introiln: tion: Date of1st Reachng 1 Bate of 2nd Reading: E11L`L"ivo Celt l': Nov€ ber 8, 2002 Novc'. bcr 8, 2002 Nov. -.:71t 20. 2002 \c -miter 27. 2002 -15- MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII r • • ••••• u_ r4 ••••••...4, • ••••••,..• ' -'•'•'• • • 2ct A4 • • / " • • ' .L11 ." .'. • • • , . . . .• , • .•' VI d •-•-•._.......___ _ . .-'• i ,. t -.-- v .i--•'• , _ : if. w: ii. :• ....70.i.i •-••_ .ez ,Li r -, Ea '?..'; ri '-', •07! Ill .X .;•1 0: , . 1.1.1'.1; c • _ 4 - C` .1 T r- rn 1 ; • ri • ,e5 lf ,1—.• 0 M or- _.,. LI i, • t•-)1 1.,./.• -7-1! u • , , 4 ---1:•••• -Z• az - i,:.... D C,73"il h..T.11 3;. i5 1 '1 4: A L f_ 4 it; • 2-:v 9 E7. Y ...A_r i- : L) 1- I— F01.12, V(7,1' 1 17. Li ri ___[,,, fF i•.'. ''' A •':1 '''. - 7, 1..........,. gi •1, /...',...7 ..,,;•••••••• O: •ii}15',.• le- .....,•to .:i-:: ''''' :I ..1 -- g•f• -r- Z 0 -0, 0•....!. ''.•.;."L"1. ' .e:'';1. 1 ;::.:.-,-..- c41 il -f- ti L.;-;••••=, ....3-_r Introduced By: Date Introduced: First Reading: Published: REMARKS; OFFICE OF THE, COUNTY CLERK County of Hawaii io , Hawaii Bobby ,7ean November 8, 2302 November 8, 2002 NIA Second Reading: To rvIayor: Rturned: Elective.: Published: RE,44,4RKS, NovE:mber 20, 2002 Nov flibir--r 25 , 2002 November 29 , 2002 Nolzentb_ex.. 2002 December 10, 2002 RO".. I.. C.: : .1, V OT rakuki E- Irior,!rf I i 1 Pkicchi,.) Satarik X ABS X X Iler Yac.ong X X x 9 0 0 ROLL CALL VOTE EX AYES NOES ABS Arakaki X . _Chung ELarEonat" Jac abwn X I .e ft head -Todd Ptdoehio •Q, rd. ik. X X 'f ;y2orig X I DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing BILL wca adopted by the County Council published as- indic‘ded above. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: 1". r DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL— COUNTY OF HAWAII Date A t ) elf, c c9:1 +4- Approv = Ofsapproved this day Olt 20 "e 1,L,711;27-0Lf WTY OP' HAWAII COUNTY CLERK Bill No.: Reference: Ord No.: 268 C-768 /PC -105 Roth 1.k.wiegeos Darr 0.e. Wgsg. ()Rise "4-5(b41 Aare Keuhok luk llu.0 l+ad Kora, Irswaqp 7f1741) 1 Mr ai . ;N+3tir, 73-s77D SSG] 5►ptinlrer 13. 2021 FILE COPY SEP 2 3 1011 County of Hawaii PL. N.INC, t?EI'ARr%1FNT i,°, 1:.antnental Review Program °trice or Planning and Sustainable Development 235 S. Beretaniu St, R(1i. 702 Holiult11u, Hll 96813 Dear Director, Zcndo Kern Doeviof Jct e 4V t]ass>•ow 11.:.., I i:_n.'r. • 1:11€C I,.1 1'1�.-,111 ru _c, *iii'!r 1-4) *00/61 S"42 Subject: Final Environmental Assessment (TEA) and finding of No Significant Impact (1~ONSI) for the Proposed Rova1 Vistas 1 -lousing Project Lobation: North Kona District, Island of Hawaii y; 1K isrt: t31 7-6-0ZI:t}l6-- 019 With this letter, the Ctlunty 11r' H,rwa1`i Planning Department tAcceptinU Authority) hereby transmits electronically the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of Into Significant Impact (FEA-FON51) for the proposed Royal Vistas Rousing Project for puhihcalinn in the next available edition of the Environmental Notice, The Royal Vistas Housing Project is being proposed to construct up to 450 multi -family residential units in clusters of two- and three-story building~ on approximately 70 acres of land. Additional impRivcmcrits are also planneit such ;is landscaping, roadways, and utilities. The Draft l nvittinrttcrtta l Assessment and Anticipated Finding or No significant Impact (DFA- AFONSI) was published in the OEQC's September 8, 2020. issue of the Environmental Notice. The FEA includes copies of comment, received and the crirrepondirtg responses from the applicant that were received during the 30 -day public comment period on the DEA-A.FONSI. I3riycd on the findings from. Part 5 of clic FLA. rhe I'I:rrtrring Department has determined that thic. project will not have a " sig nificant effect- or "significant impact- cin the qu.iIi } of the environrracnl and have therefore, , issued a I {ANSI -I his FONS1 drtcs nal constitute approval of the project or of any project corrtpnnents or proposed uses. 1111 1,3 ItP, 22-036 rfcn rn r r. ur1n15 PI onLowy! 01 Imran Pomr4*ra taala Fanlalr h r , 1 i' : Ink. , ,, rr... ERP/EN September 13, 2021 Page 2 If there are any questions regarding this letter or the project, please contact Alex Roy of ow Planning l eptr.ninent slat' at l'808} 961-5140 or via email at A1ex_kuy` hawaticour uk..gpv, Ssncera . . ,P044/ -10(rt.Y.w D iliep 0.1021 II-35HSTJ JFFFR.EY W. D.A.RROW Deputy P1Ennrng Director MR:jaa cahoI bl lworinfGtiCZAPic ;crsVT'U?IiRoyeI visnas PD le 0EQC FEA.dot. 22-036 From ww_brn@sterahewaii.aar To; bLE T CF -Sp. Enylronmental -' view i'rogprri Subject: lry online submission for The Erbvironnnental Notice Date: Thursday, September 16, 2021. 3;10:47 PM Action Name Royal vistas Housing Project Type of Document/Determination Final environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact (FEA-FONSI) H R S §343-5(a) Trigger(s ) • (1) Propose the use of state or county lands or the use of state or county funds Judicial district North Kota, Hawaii Tax Map Keys) (TMK(s)) (3) 7-6-021:016; (3) 7-6-021:0117; (3) 7-6-021:018: (3) 7-6-021:019 Action type Applicant Carer required permits and approvals Grading Permit, Drainage Plan (County DPW); Building Permits and Plan Approval (County DPW and Planning); National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permil (State DOH): Chapter 6E, HRS, determination from State Historic Preservation Division on historic property effects (obtained) Discretionary consent required Approval of Amendments to Zoning Ordinance (County Council) Approving agency County of Hawaii Planning Department Agency contact name Alex Roy Agency contact email (for info about the action) Ernail address or URL for receiving comments pia nri incorptiewaiicounlyjay Agency contact phone :B) 961-8140 Agency address COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 PAUAHI STREET, SUITE 3 Hilo, HI 95720 United States Mao It Applicant Kona Three LL Applicant contact name Richard 'd;l7e lock Applicant contact email plcharrj .eastwestrealtv.orq Applicant contact phone (808) 753-3167 Applicant address 101 Hualelai Street Hilo, HI 96720 United States Maw Was this submittal prepared by a consultant? Yes Consultant Stantec Consulting and Geometrician Associates LLC Consultant contact name Michele Lefebvre Consultant contact email n-Ichele. Ietebvie.4:tertec.:c.-.7 Consultant contact phone { 4088) 494-2039 Consultant address P0iox191 Hilo, HI 96721 United States Man It Action summary The proposed project is located approximately 2.7 miles south of downtown Kaiiva-Kona and would consist of necessary improvements to construct up to 450 multi -family residential units in clusters of two -- and three-story buildings on approximately 70 acres. Units would target local renters and buyers in the `market" puce points. The project rs the final phase of the anginal zoning ordinance (No 84-23) signed on May 15, 1984, and includes the multi -family zoned land which was planned for wort -force housing_ Electrical and sewer would be extended from nearby utility grid terminus and water commitments have already been purchased for the project The proposed projiect has been designed to minimize impacts from surface water run-off. Traffic impacts would be minimized with a new un -signalized intersection off Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. No irrgaacts to birsbgical resources, historic or archaeological resources, or cultural sites or practices are expected from the protect. Reasons support ng determination (1) Irrevocably commit a natural, cultural, or historic resource. No valuable natural or cultural resources would be committed or lost as a result of the proposed Project. No impacts to archaeological resources would occur with the planned preservation of the railroad berrn ane petragryph (2) Curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment; The proposed mid -market housing development does not curtail beneficial uses of the environment and is consistent with the medium density zoning in the LUPAG and conforms to the guiding principles regarding urban growth patterns as defined by the Kona CDP. (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 impact from the Proposed Project is minor and, therefore, is consistent with all elements of the State's long-term environmental policies and environmental goals (4) Have a substantial adverse effect on the economic welfare, social welfare, or cultural practices of the community and State; The Proposed Project would not adversely affect the social welfare of the community and would contribute to services. The Proposed Project would generate worts for the local construction industry, which would stimulate local economic spending. The Proposed Project would balance the social welfare of the community by providing infill mid -market housing and allow resident households better access and the ability to safely manage commutes between home, work_ and recreation. Stable households lead to stable communities and associated workforce, and promotes a functional economy. (5) Have a substantial adverse effect on public health: The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design. (6) Involve adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities; No adverse secondary effects are expected since the development would utilize existing infrastructure, provide rntill housing, and is not expected to result in substantial demands to County services. (7) Involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality; The impact from the Proposed Project is minor. and would thus not contribute to environmental degradation MPs and appropriate erosion control measures would be utilized during construction. Short-term impacts on air and noise quality will be mitigated by employing BMPs No long-tsrm adverse impacts are expected from the Proposed Project. (S) Be individually limited but cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions, The Proposed Project is not related to other activities in the region in such a way as to produce adverse cumulative effects or involve a commitment for larger actions. (9) Have a substantial adverse effect on a rare, threatened, or endangered species, or its habitat: There are no rare, threatened. or endangered species or suitable habitat for these species present at the Project Site, and no effects to these species are anticipated_ Endangered Hawaiian hoary bats and formerly listed Hawaiian hawks, which are island wide-ranging species, would experience no adverse impacts due to mitigation in the form of timing of vegetation removal and/or hawk nest survey. Additionally, no ran=, threatened, or endangered species of fauna are known to exist on or near the Project Site, and none would be directly affected by any project activities (10) Have a substantial adverse effect on air or water quality or ambient noise levels; Na adverse effects on air quality or noise would occur. The increase in noise levels on the site are acceptable and would be only a moderate increase in the existing levels. To minimize impacts to air quality during construction, the Proposed Project would implement a watering program for dust abatement_ Other control measures during construction such as limiting the area that can be disturbed at any given time, applying chemical soil stabilizers, mulching ar>rdfor using wind screens would also be utilized as necessary to minimize impacts to air quality. (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 property is located in an area with volcanic and seismic risk. the entire Island of Hawai'I shares this risk, and the Proposed Project is not imprudent to construct. The property is approximately 0.85 miles from the shoreline and the development is outside any flood plain. Based on potential impacts from climate change, the Proposed Project has been designed to accommodate increased stormwater run eff from larger storms in the adjacent drainages and an site. (12) Have a substantial adverse effect an scenic vistas and viewplanes, during day or night. identified in county or state plans or studies: or No scenic vistas or viewplanes identifies/ in the Hawaii County General Plan will be adversely affected by the Proposed Project_ (13) Require substantial energy consumption or emit substantial greenhouse gases. The development would have solar water heating and incorporate efficient appliances. as practical and possible. Negligible emissions of greenhouse gases would occur during construction and occupation of the proposed development Since the Project addresses an existing demand for housing. it is expected that a portion of the residents that would occupy the development already live in Kona or on Hawaii Island, and there would not be a substantial increase in emissions when residents occupy the Project, Therefore. Project impacts would be considered a negligible increase to the global annual greenhouse gas emissions. Attached documents (signed agency letter & EAJEfS) • .FinaLE&.Rayal Vistas September 2D21.Pd! • ,Royal Vistas PDJo OEQC_FEA. ad( Shapefile • The location map for this Final EA is the same as the location map for the associated Draft EA. Action location map • Royal Vistas TMKs ziq Authorized individual Alex J. Roy Authorization • The above named authorized individual hereby certifies that helshe has the authority to nuke this submission. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Royal Vistas Housing Project TMKs (3) 7-6-021:016, 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021:018, and 7-6-021:019 North Kona District, Hawaii Island State of Hawai`i September 2021 Applicant Kona Three LLC 101 Huaialr i Street Hilo, I-1196720 Approving Agency County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauchi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Royal Vistas Housing Project TWiKs 3) 7-6-021:016, 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021:013, and 7-6-021:019 North Kona District, Hawcii"i Island, State of Hawai"i APPLICANT: Kona Three LLC 101 Hualalai Street Hilo, HI 96720 APPROVING AGENCY: County of Hawaii Manning Department 101 Pcuahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, H 96720 CONSULTANT: Stantec Consulting Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, I-1196721 CLASS OF ACTION: Use of County Lands Geometrician Associates P.O. Box 396 Hilo, Hi 96721 This document is prepared pursuant to: The Hawaii Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 343, Howai`i Revised Statutes, and Title 11, Chapter 200.1, Hawaii Department of Health Administrative Rules [this page intentionally let blank] TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS 1 1.1 Project Location and Property Ownership 1 1.2 Project Description 1 1.3 Purpose and Need 5 1.4 Environmental Assessment Process 13 1.5 Public involvement and Agency Coordination . 13 PART 2: ALTERNATIVES 15 2.1 Proposed Project 15 2.2 No Action 15 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis 15 PART 3; ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES, CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES 18 3.1 General Setting 18 3.2 Environmental Consequences 18 3.3 Physical Environment 19 3.3.1 Climate, Geology. Soils, and Geologic Hazards 19 3.,3.2 Flood Zones and Drainage 22 3.3.3 Water Quality and Water Quantity 26 3.3.4 Flora, Fauna, and Ecosystems 28 3.3.5 Noise 35 3.3.6 Air Quality and Scenic Resources 37 3.3.7 Hazardous Materials and Wastes 38 3.4 Socioeconomics 39 3.5 Cultural Practices and Sites 41 3.6 Historic and Archaeological Resources 46 3.7 Infrastructure 49 3.7,1 Utilities and Public Services including Wastewater Treatment and Solid Waste Management ..... 49 3.7.2 Traffic 51 3.8 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources 60 3.9 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. 60 3.10 Unresolved Issues 60 3.1 1 Required Permits and Approvals 60 3.12 Consistency with Government Plans and Policies 61 3.12,1 Hawai `I State Land Use Law, Hawai'1 State Plan, and State Housing Functional Plan 61 3.12,2 Coastal Zone Management Program (Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes) 68 3.12.3 Hawai`i County Zoning, Special Management Area, and General Plan 69 'oycrJ Vistas HousJng Project Envrronm ntcl Assessment 1 3.12,4 Kona Community Development Plan 72 PART 4: DETERMINATION 74 PART 5: FINDINGS AND REASONS 75 PART 6: REFERENCES 78 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Plant Species Observed in the Project Site 29 Table 2 Bird Species Observed in the Project Site 31 Table 3 Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics 39 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Project Location Map 7 Figure 2 Proposed Roads and Existing Ditches in the Project Site 8 Figure 3 Conceptual Building Layout 10 Figure 4 Two -Story and Three -Story Building Schematic 11 Figure 5 Concepts for Building Layout 12 Figure 6 Sea Level Rise Exposure Map 22 Figure 7 National Hood Hazard Layer FIRM Map 24 Figure 8 Local Intersections Studied for the Project 54 Figure 9 Proposed Improvements to project Intersection with Queen Ka'ahumanu 55 Figure 10 Close-up of Proposed Improvements to Project Intersection with Queen Ka'ahurnanu 56 Figure 11 CDP Transportation Network Map in the Vicinity of the Project58 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 a APPENDIX 1 b APPENDIX 2 APPENDIX 3 APPENDIX 4 APPENDIX 5 APPENDIX 6 Early Consultation Letters Comments on Draft FA and Responses Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) Biological Survey Results Cultural Impact Assessment Archaeological Inventory Survey Reports Archaeological Preservation Plan Royal Vistas HousJng Project EnvrronmentaAssessment 11 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES The proposed project is located approximately 2.7 miles south of downtown Kailua-Kana and would consist of necessary improvements to construct up to 450 multi -family residential units in clusters of two- and three-story buildings on approximately 70 acres. The following are estimates for the number of units, floor plans, bedroom/bathroom counts, and buildings heights. The numbers may be adjusted during final design and permitting. The development would conceptually include approximately 174 "For Rent" units consisting of 122 two- bedroom/two-bath units and 52 three-bedroom/two-bath units plus a resident manager's unit, ail in two-story buildings on the makaf portion of the project site. The development would also include approximately 274 "For Sale" units consisting of 147 two bedroomltwo-bath units and 137 three-bedroom/two-both units plus a resident manager's unit. The "For Sale" units would be located in approximately ten two-story buildings and approximately 39 three-story buildings, with the twa- story buildings being four units each and the three-story buildings being six units each. Parking would consist of a mix of covered and open spaces for residents and guests. The project would be developed in two or more phases, with Phase I having a maximum of 258 units and Phase II having the balance of 192 units. Phase i would include all the Rental units and some Sale units. Both Rental and Sale units would target local renters and buyers in the "market" price points. There would be two Community Centers, one for the Rental units and one for the Sale units. Each center would have a pool and facilities for use by the residents. The e r t would be cnr liant \iyitbetlemejea,newith Disabilities Act Standar for accessible design. The project is the final phase of the original zoning ordinance (No. 84-23) signed on May 15, 1984, and includes the multi -family zoned land which was plannedfor work -force housing. Electrical and sewer would be extended from nearby utility grid terminus and water commitments have already been purchased for the project. The proposed project has been designed to minimize impacts from surface water run-off. Traffic impacts would be minimized with a new un -signalized intersection serving the project off Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. No impacts to biological resources, historic or archaeological resources, or cultural sites or practices, are expected from the project. Royal Vistas Housing Project Envir nmentud Assessment iii [this page intentionally left blank] Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Envrr nmentud Assessment iv PART 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS 1.1 Project Location and Property Ownership Kona Three LLC (Kona Three) proposes to develop the Royal Vista Housing Project ("Proposed Project'') which would occur within Tax Map Keys (TMKs) (3} 7-6- 021:016, 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021:018, and 7-6-021:019 in North Kona ("Project Site") as shown on Figures 1 and 2. Kona Three owns TMKs 7-6-021:016 and 7-6-021:017 which together cover approximately 69 acres, while the County of Hawaii Deportment of Public Works DPW) manages TMKs 7-6-021:018 and 7-6-021:019 which together cover approximately 7.3 acres. The Project Site is located 2.7 miles south of downtown Kaiiva-Kona along Queen Kc"ahumanu Highway {Highway 19) . Photos 1 and 2 were taken at the Project Site. 1,2 Project Description Housing Project Kona Three proposes to construct up to 450 multi -family residential units in clusters of two- and k `ree-story buildings on approximately 70 acres. A conceptual drawing of the layout of the buildings is shown an Figure 3. The following are estimates for the number of For Rent" and "For Sale" units, floor plans, bedroom/bathroom counts, and buildings heights. Although the numbers may be adjusted during final design and permitting, the EA analyzes the maxirnurn building height of three stories and the maximum number of units (450 units) . The medium density development would include approximately 174 "For Rent" units consisting of 122 two-bedroom/two-bath units and 52 three-bedroom/two-bath units plus a resident manager's unit, all in two-story buildings on the makai portion of the Project Site. A property management firm would manage the rental units. A schematic showing the site sections for two- and three-story buildings is shown on Figure 4, and the concepts for layout shown an Figure 5. The development would also include approximately 274 "For Sale" units consisting of 147 two bedroom/two-bath units and 137 three-bedroom/two-bath units plus a resident manager's unit. The "For Sale" units would be located in ten two-story buildings and 39 three-story buildings, with the two-story buildings being four units each and the three-story buildings being six units each. Parking would consist of a mix 01 covered and open spaces far residents and guests. A comment from Gary East on the Draft EA asked about walkability within ;he development {Appendix 1b). Private driveways within the development would be paved and provide safe ces_s.for.resi.d nts jir dudinc l stretliants,LAaditiona ly, the location of walkp_atias. within the development would be determined upon final desictn.. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Envir nmentd Assessment 1 The Project would be developed in two or more phases, with Phase I having a maximum of 258 units and Phase II having the balance of 192 units. Phase 1 would include all the Rental units and some Sale units. Both Rental and Sale units would target local renters and buyers in the "market" price points. Phase I is expected to be completed by 2024. and Phase II is expected to be completed by 2029. There would be two Community Centers, one for the Rental units and one for the Sole units. Each center would have a pool and facilities for use by the residents. A comment from Clyde Hemby on the Draft FA asked whether the proposed development would comply with accessibility standards (Appendix. 1 b).. The development would be compliant with American with Disabilities Act Standards for accessible desian. Construction could start as early as third quarter of 2021, following Phan Approval and construction perrnits, and would be expected to last 12 to 18 months. Construction would be conducted in accordance with any applicable COVID-19 emergency proclamations in place at that time, The Project is the final residential development identified in the zoning ordinance (No. 84-23) signed in 1984. The original zoning ordinance and subsequent amendments included the following:. • 103 acres for 215 single-family units, • 71 acres for multi -family, mid -market' units (the Proposed Project); and • An additional 12 acres acquired at the behest of the County of Hawal'i, Office of Housing and Community Development (QHCD) at TMK (3): 7-6- 24:025. The development of the single-family units on 103 acres was mostly completed by the previous developer. The previous developers built and installed roadways, intersection, and drainage improvements, as well as driveways, light poles, utility infrastructure. landscaping, and other assets for the new community. The 12 -acre area for the affordable housing project is located on what are now TMKs (3) 7-6- 24:25, 112. and 113 and the area could be developed in the near future. As a condition in the zoning ordinance, Kona Three had an agreement to convey the 12 acres of land for the affordable housing when construction of the Project's drainage system is completed. A comment f om Martin Dian on the Draft EA asked about the affordable housing proiecl Appendix l I; If OHCD decides not to pirs ean • fords e housing project at his location, Kona Three would negotiate a new agreement with QHCD to satisfy the requirement of the zoning ordinance using options such as dedicating some of the Pralect's units for afford 02 ho sjJ _t vldinq afforkiauslr q elsewhere aff,.45 to in Kori a, aec uirinq.. affordable housing credits from another location in Kona, or a combination of these options. Mid -market refers to the price point that the Project targets, which is in between the subsidized housing market and the wealthy or upper middle market groups. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Envir nr ental Assessment 2 Electrical and sewer service would be extended from nearby public grid terminus and water commitments have already been purchased for the Project. The Project is in an urban area located between Kona 'vistas and Pualani Estates subdivisions and is in close proximity to major roadways, recreational opportunities, and essential services, including grocery and wholesale stores, employment, hospital/clinics, public transit, gas stations, schools, financial institutions, government agencies/ services, and the airport, To address housing shortages in Kona, the Kona Community Development Plan (CDPD identifies Objective HSG -4: Build More Units and Policy HSG -4.2: Workforce Housing. The workforce gap group (up to 180% of median income) includes the part of the population that earns too much to qualify tor affordable housing programs, yet too little to buy or rent decent housing close to their jobs. The Project would build units that offer a variety of housing types for bath the rental and buyer segments of the mid -market which includes the workforce group. Although the Project is not specifically a workforce project, it would provide a housing option for the workforce gap group. The Project is an infill project located within the Kona Urban Area as designated by the Official Kona Land Use Map (Figure 4-7 in the Kona CDP, although it is not in the Trc.-7;'-Oriented Development (TOD} area nor within a CDP Concurrency Zone. As stated in the CDP, "Within this Kona Urban Growth Area, growth would be directed to compact villages located along proposed transit routes or to infill areas within, or adjacent to, existing development." The Proposed Project is consistent with this designation, Roads The existing Zoning Ordinance for the Project requires Kona Three to build three main road segments to County dedicable standards and to dedicate these segments to the County. Specifically, these segments are laid out in the "Official Transportation Network Map - Nani Kailua Area" as part of the County's plan to expand the road grid to help alleviate traffic and provide safer driving conditions. These segments that are designed include: • to connect County -owned Leilani Street (in the Kona Vistas project) to County -owned Ho'omama Street (in the Pualani Estates project); • to connect County -owned Kekuana'oa Place (in the Kona Vistas project) to County -owned Paulehia Street (in the Pualani Estates project): and • to connect these new roods to each other within the Project area. Kona Three is required to build and dedicate these roads by Ordinance. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Envir nr ental Assessment 3 The Proposed Project would extend Kekuana'oa Place, it would construct Royal Vistas Roadway, and it would construct the Leilani Street extension in the Project Site as shown on Figure 2. The Proposed Project would stub -out the Leilani Street extension on the southern Project Site boundary and would not connect it across the private parcel (TMK (3) 7-6-021:014 owned by the Calvary Community Church of Kona) to the existing Leilani Street. Qmmen-s frQm_liS ' Fast andjohn Fit U on the Draft EA were provided regarding sidewalks and gutters within the development (Appendix 1 by. These road segments that would be built to ded[cable standards would include sidewalks and curved gutters. None of the roads proposed for the Project would be connected to Ho'omoma Street and Paulehia Street. Those connections occur across another privately -owned parcel TMK (3) 7-6-013:004 north of the Project Site not controlled by Kona Three. ki response to publiccomments on the Draft EA. Figure 3 shows the phasing of when the connector roads would be built. Drainage improvements TMKs 7-6-021:018 and 7-6-021:019 are owned and managed by the County of Hawaii Department of Public Works (DPW) as drainages located adjacent to the proposed housing development (Figure 1). TMK (3) 7-6-21:19 encompasses approximately 4.25 acres, includes part of the Holuoloa Ditch, and runs along the southern boundary of the Project Site. Infrastructure during. Phase 11 of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuana`oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the KCDP "Official Transportation Map." riaure 2 illustrates where the Hclualoa Ditch is located. This improvement is the HEPA trigger for the EA since it crosses County - owned land, TMK (3) 7-6-21:18 encompasses approximately 3.0 acres, includes the mauka portion of the Horseshoe Bend Ditch proximate to the Project, and runs between the two subject parcels of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project includes infrastructure for chcinnelizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the KDCP's "Official Transportation Map." Figure 2 also illustrates the location of the Horseshoe Bend Ditch. This is also a NEPA trigger for the EA. The rnakai portion of the Horseshoe Bend Ditch is located within the Project Site (TMK (3) 7-6-21:016), and as part of the Project this portion would be channelized where it is primarily sheet flow and moved closer to the northern Project boundary to make room for the planned roadway intersection at Queen Ka`ahurnanu Highway at the location approved by the State Department of Transportation Highways Division. blde tonith. .circa_lnage._irrl,l ro.v.e.me.nts_u.t1t'itie ..and roactwaY5,, Royal' Vrrstas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 4 the applicant k not proposing to construct any additional structures in the Qu t'-mac me is In response to comments received on the Draft EA (Appendix, 1b1., additional detail regarding the need for the drainage improvements as well as possible impravermiat ars ids are discussec with more context t jrk pcfic o.3,3,2r 1.3 Purpose and Need The purpose of the Proposed Project is to complete the final phase of the project and provide multi -family mid -market horsing in North Kona. According to the Kona Community Development Pion (CDP), although home construction has outpaced population growth, Kona continues to experience a housing crisis as the production of new homes has been skewed to upper income levels. The project would "provide housing choices" to residents of North Kona, consistent with several of the guiding principles in the CDP. The Project is the final phase of the larger development project that includes Kona Vistas, which was approved as part of the same zoning ordinance passed in 1984 and is needed to provide mid -market housing (for rent and for sale) in North Kona in a centrally located area' near existing infrastructure, including shopping, schools, and job centers, and easily accessible from existing main roads and utility grids. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Envir nmentc'I Assessment 5 [this page Intentionally left blank' Royal Vfst rs Housing Project Environrnental Assessment 6 Figure Project Locution Map Stantec re,r. i ,11!CS Cowelsprman I P1,11,,-7 figuir I nor CP Locuilop Royof Ve.tas Housing Protect Environment:J., Assessment 7 Figure 2 Proposed Roods and Existing] Ditches In the Prolect Site LALL7tllh2 trtrjtlC$ itte +.rte rk] C tn., fkadr, a iora CG Wily' 4:, Irl n9 R490 ClirhesEs. 40. Ranter .:15,21rssorriernsi P'gece Figure 2 Prz,wwt.191oalit arorl Essikils1.10 [NI hew w lir. rrr,oc6 $i+r 1' RoyrJf Vetas Housing Protect Envronmentc7., Assessment 8 Photo 1 Project Site: Mid-maker section (looking west) Photo 2 Project Site: Mavkc section (looking northeast) d — r Royor Vitas Housing Protect En vironmenta, Assessment Figure 3 Conceptual Building Layout kC.l,ll I 1"I- `I.I I�li,y��,�'fl Royof Vitas Housing Protect Envronmentc7, Assessment 10 Figure 4 Two -Story and Three -Story Building Schematic • 4Ig 1„1. __faint 4.16 PII.11.11 11T Royof Vitas Housing Profect nvrnmntc Assessme.“ 11 Figure 5 Concepts for Building Layout ,;:•L •- - .14K1111.0. 1 WV` Art, \ 111411FII 11 14.1 1i1.111111 k...il•Am Royof Ve.tas Housing Profect Environment:J., Assessment 12 1.4 Environmental Assessment Process This Environmental Assessment {EA) process is being conducted in accordance with Chapter 343 of the Haawaiii Revised Statutes (HRS). This law, along with its implementing regulations, Title 11, Chapter 200.1, of the Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), is the basis for the environmental impact process in the State of Hawaii. Section 343-5, HRS established nine types of actions that "trigger" compliance, The use of State or County lands is one of these "triggers." Since portions of the Proposed Project cross parcels (-FMK (3) 7-6-21:18 and 19) that are controlled by the County of Hawci`i DPW, compliance with HRS and HAR is required. According to 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 anticipated Finding of No Significant impact; Part 5 provides a review and analysis of the "Significance Criteria" defined in Section 12 of the Chapter 11-200.1, HAR. In the EA process, if the approving agency determines after considering comments to the Draft EA that no significant impacts would likely occur, then the agency issues a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), and the action is permitted to proceed to obtaining any other discretionary permits and approvals. If the agency concludes that significant impacts are expected to occur as a result of the proposed action, then an Environmental Impact Statement is prepared to analyze the impacts and identify rnitigafion. 1.S Public Involvement and Agency Coordination The following agencies and organizations were consulted in development of the EA: Federal: National Park Service, Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service State: Department of Education Department of Land and Natural Resources Department of Transportation Governor's Office State Historic Preservation Division Office of Hawaiian Affairs Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 13 County: Civil Defense Agency County Council Department of Environmental Management Department of Parks and Recreation Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply Fire Department Mass Transit Agency Planning Department Police Department Private: Inter Pacific Motors inc. Sierra Club Calvary Community Church of Kona Kona Vistas Community Association Copies of communications received during early consultation are contained in Appendix 1 a and relevant aspects of reply letters are discussed in the text of the EA. Notice of the availability of th t EA was published in the August 8, 2020. and September 8. 2020, editions of the Environmental Notice. Appendix 1 b c n respQr 1Q th r7rr Brats. Various sections of the EA have been modified to reflect input received in the c0i w .t ! Cr ...6.c_rt?adifiec nen, rocedur®L.ext den.z di!? double underlines, as in this paragraph. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 14 PART 2: ALTERNATIVES 2.1 Proposed Project The taction under consideration is described in Sections 1.1 to 1.3, above. 2.2 No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Project would not be developed on the site and no ground disturbance associated with the Proposed Project would occur. tinder this alternative, there would not be 450 multi -family units available in North Kona at this site. The site is owned by Kona Three; however, under this alternative the parcel could either be held or sold. The parcel could be developed as some other type of project or not be developed for some time. These options would not help the existing and growing mid-market/workforce population in Kona and if it is developed, it is unknown whether it would be developed with both Rental and Sale units. Focusing development within the Kona Urban Area is a guiding principle of the Kora CDP. The no action alternative would fail to focus such uses and provide such improvements within the Kona Urban Area as prescribed by the Kona CDP. Also, under the no action alternative Policy IRAN 11: Connectivity Standards would not occur and there would be no roadway interconnectivity. 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis Kona Three considered alternative building configurations, alternative building locations and numbers, alternative access, and different numbers of Renlal and Sale units. Kona Three looked at building larger structures more like conventional high- density buildings with a heavier density (zoning of the land allows in excess of 600 units to be built) . However, it was decided that the larger structures did not match nearby communities, were less aesthetically pleasing, and would have more environmental impacts than the 450 units of "flats" and "courtyard" styles that are the style for the Proposed Project. Kona Three considered that the larger structures did not offer a lifestyle to the target market (both Rental and Sale units) that is conducive to family living on Hawaii Island as compared to the "flats" and "courtyard style structures. Alternative design features were considered including wider access roads and stand-alone rather than clustered structures, but these features limited the amount of green space available for the Project. Kona Three's initial land plan (known then as "Kana Village") presented to the community and government officials in late 2018 included 260 of the 450E units contained in three-story buildings to help minimize ground disturbance. Access Royal Vistas lousing Project Environmental Assessment 1 5 for the first phase of that plan was designed to be from Lake Street via Kekuana'oa Place, in Kona Vistas Phase IV, which would have eventually connected to Paulehio Street in Pualoni states. Based on responses from members of the communities of Kona Vistas and Pualani Estates, Kona Three changed the name of the Project from Kona village, reduced the estimated number of units in three-story buildings from 260 to 156 units (a 40 percent reduction), and moved the access for Phase I from Kekuana'oa Place to Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway via a new un -signalized intersection (proposed to be built) . These changes were mode in response to corrtrnunity concerns about 1 confusing the Project with the similar named "Kona Village Resort," 2) eliminating all three-story buildings on the makar portion of the Project site to reduce visual impacts to existing Kona Vistas residents, and 3) providing separate access to the Project from Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway to reduce and delay traffic impacts on the Lako Street/Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway intersection cis well as traffic on Kekuana'oa Place. In response to community concerns, Kona Three also considered changing the zoning from Multiple -Family Residential, with a minimum building site of 5.00O square feet per dwelling unit (Rtv1-5) to either Single -Family Residential District (minimum building site area of 10,000 square feet) (RS -10) or Single -Family Residential District (minimum building site area of 15,000 square feet) (RS -15) for the development. However, rezoning to RS -10 or R5-15 would result in a development with homes similar to those already present In the vicinity, which would not meet the purpose and need for the Project to provide housing choices for various community sub -markets compared to the RM -5 zoning, Additionally, if there were a change of zoning that resulted in a reduction of density of less than 450 units, then any left over water credits (whish have already been committed and paid for) would be effectively "lost" since they cannot be transferred except to "adjacent" properties. Currently, there is no known plan by the owner to develop the adjacent property. These credits are difficult to obtain and cannot be transferred by County policy, except to adjoining properties. Not building on this site at the proposed density would effectively eliminate a housing project that serves the mid-market/workforce community in the Kona area for the foreseeable future, since any other similar projects would depend on further water improvements in Kona which is a process that would take years. Similarly, the extension of the County sewer system to this Project would allow leveraging Kona's limited amount of sewer capacity required formulti-family housing, in addition to providing the future opportunity to have surrounding, existing properties hook up to the extended sewer system to eliminate environmental contamination. Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 16 In the end, none of the other alternatives were found to be optimal for the property or the perceived demand in the market, or resulted in more environmental impacts than the Proposed Project and were eliminated from detailed analysis. Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 17 PART 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES, CUMULATIVE IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES 3.1 General Setting The two pccels and location of the Project is referred to throughout this EA as the Project Site. The term Project Area is used to describe the general area of North Kona. The Project Site is located approximately 2.7 miles south of downtown Kailua-Kona on Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway adjacent to its intersection with Kuakini Highway. Archaeological studies indicate that the Project Site was used prior to Western contact for a variety of activities, leaving features associated with agriculture, habitation, burial, and transportation (SCS 2016). More recently, the Project Site was farmed for coffee and ranched since the early 1900s. The lower portion of the Project Site was still used to pasture cattle until August 2019; evidence of ranching including fencing, cattle walls, several corrals and cattle chutes are present. The Project Site and surrounding lands were bulldozed sometime between the 1940s and 1970s in preparation for a commercial agricultural project, most likely coffee growing. The Project is bounded to the north by undeveloped cattle pasture, to the east and south by residential subdivisions and by Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway to the west. !-of as yC cat fine rgj c, tt is consistent with the vicinity and is relatively steep, with elevations ranging from approximately 330 feet above mean sea leve] tamsll to 900 feet amsl. 3.2 Environmental Consequences This section of the EA includes a description of the environmental setting of the Project Site 05 well as the potential impacts from the Proposed Project and alternatives to the resources. Environmental consequences, both primary and secondary, and the cumulative as well as the short-term and long-term impacts are considered. Cumulative impacts are impacts on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency or person undertakes such actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions taking place over a period of time. Cumulative impacts include the direct and indirect impacts of a project together with the reasonably foreseeable future actions of others. Past projects in the vicinity of the Project Site have included the following: flood control projects for the Horseshoe Bend and Holuoloa Drainageways; urban residential development including Kona Vistas Phases 1 through 4; commercial development west of the Project Site (Scarlet Thread alteration shop, Power Self Storage-Kuakini) and south of the Project Site (Orchid Isle Auto Center); Royal Vistas housing Project Environmental Assessment 18 construction and use of the Calvary Community Church; as well as a number of infrastructure projects including construction of the Lako Street-Kuakini Highway intersection, construction of the Leilani Street extension, Pualani Street extension, and Kilohanc Street extension, and ongoing road maintenance and improvements. The nearest reasonably foreseeable future project k dedication of the three remaining roadway lots (Kona Three is currently working with the County of Hawaii DPW to accept dedication of these). The development of the affordable housing project located approximately 0.1 mile from the Proposed Project to be built by others, makai of Kuakini Highway is also reasonably foreseeable. The affordable housing requirement was part of the original zoning ordinance (1984) and is located on approximately 12 acres. Subject to approval by the OHCD, Kona Three's affiliate which owns the 12 acres would deed the parcel to the County or their nominee to satisfy a portion of the affordable housing development requirement, and the homes would be built by qualified affordable housing developers. If OH. D decides not to pursue an affordable housing project cat this location, Kona Three would negotiate o new agreement with OHCD to satisfy the requirement of the zoning ordinance using options such as dedicg a tin some of the Project's units for affordable housing, providing affordable housing elsewhere offsite in Kona, acquiring affardabie housing credits from another location in Kona or a combination of these options. In the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) prepared for the Project (Appendix 2), future road improvements include the widening of Kuakini Highway from Henry Street to Kamehameha III Road by two travel lanes as well as bicycle facilities and sidewalks. The Bike Plan Hawaii also identifies a signed shared road on Kuakini Highway from Lako Street to Llualalai Rood, and a signed shared road on Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway from Henry Street to Kuakini Highway, 3.3 Physical Environment 3.3.1 Climate, Geology, Soils, and Geologic Hazards Environmentof Setting The Project Site has an elevation that varies from 330 feet arnsl to 900 feet amsi and receives an average annual rainfall of between 35 and 38 inches, increasing in the mauka direction (iambelluca et al. 2013). The geologic substrate on most of the Project Site is soil -covered pahoehoe lava flows from Hualilai dated between 5,000 and 11,000 years in age (Wolfe and Morris 1996). Soil in the Project Si le is classified as Waiaha medial silt loam (Map Unit Symbol 243). on 2 to 10 or 10 to 20 percent slopes, depending on location Royal Vistas lousing Project Environmental Assessment 17 (NRCS 2019). This soil forms on ash -covered pchoehoe flows and has a 10- to 25 - inch depth to bedrock. It is well drained but also has a high runoff potential (Soto et al. 1973). Hawaii Island is subject to geologic hazards, such as lava flows and earthquakes. However, the Project Site appears to be stable with no evidence of subsidence or landslides_ Volcanic hazard as assessed by the U.S. Geological Survey in this area of North Kona is Zone 4, on a scale of ascending risk from 9 to 1 (Heliker 1990). The hazard risk is based on the fact that Hualdlai has steep slopes and is the third most historically active volcano on the island. Volcanic hazard Zone 4 areas have about 5 percent of their land area covered by lava or ash flows since the year 1800 and less than 15 percent of their land area covered by lava in the past 750 years. They are at lower risk than Zone 3 areas because the frequency of Huolalai eruptions is lower than those of Kilauea and Mauna Loa. The Island of Howell experiences high seismic activity caused by eruptive process within active volcanoes or by deep structural adjustments due to the weight of the islands on Earth's underlying crust (USGS 2019a0. Although the earthquakes are seldom large enough to cause widespread damage, they can produce locally extensive ground fractures and subsidence (USGS 2019b). For example, the 6.6 magnitude earthquake that occurred in 2006 centered just off the northwest shore of Hawaii island resulted in widespread damage to buildings and roads in Kona. impacts crud Mitigation Measures Geologic Hazards In general, geologic conditions do not impose undue constraints on the Project Site. Building design will meet all appropriate seismic standards ensuring safety for the future residents. Climate Change According to the EPA, global climate change could mean a rise in sec level that could worsen Hawaii I's existing coastal hazards, including waves, hurricanes, and tsunamis, and extreme tides (EPA. 2016). Of the man-made greenhouse gases, the greatest contribution currently comes from CO2 emissions. Through complex interactions on a regional and global scale, these greenhouse gas emissions and net losses of biological carbon sinks (i.e„ vegetation) cause a net warming effect of the atmosphere, primarily by decreasing the amount of heat energy radiated by the earth back into space. Although greenhouse gas levels have varied for millennia, recent industrialization and burning of fossil carbon sources have Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 20 caused greenhouse gas concentrations to increase dramatically and are a possible contributor to overall global climatic changes (IPCC 2007). Potential changes to Hawaii resulting from the effects of climate change include higher than normal temperatures. contraction or expansion of existing vegetation species distribution, the expansion of the range of existing invasive species populations, and the introduction of new pathogens and invasive species, decrease in prevailing northeasterly trade winds, decline in rainfall and increased variability in rainfall patterns, increased ocean acidity, sea level rise, and threats to human health (University of Hawaii at ianoa Sea Grant College Program 2014). The State of Howari in Hawaii Revised Statutes §226-109 identifies priorities to prepare the State to address the impacts of climate change. Also, Title 11-200.1-13 includes significance criteria to consider in environmental impact analysis that includes the hazardousness of sea level rise including: 1) the potential effects of a proposed action on climate change as indicated by assessing greenhouse gas emissions in a qualitative, or if reasonable, quantitative way; and 2) the effects of climate change on a proposed action and its environmental impacts, It recommends that agencies consider the short- and long-term effects and benefits in the alternatives and mitigation analysis in terms of climate charge effects and resiliency to the effects of a changing climate, Figure 6 illustrates that the Project's elevation of more than 300 feet above amsl and 0.85 -mile distance from the coast protects the site from sea level rises of 3.2 feet, which could occur as early as the 2060s (Pac1OOS 2017). The Project's design including surface runoff drainage plans address the potential impact from flooding that could occur if increased variability in rainfall patterns occur. A more detailed description of flood and drainage plans are described in Section 3.3.2. Potential impacts to climate change from the Project include direct impacts from emissions of greenhouse gases during construction and occupation at the proposed development related to the consumption of fuels (combustion) and indirect impacts from greenhouse gas emissions associated with electrical power consumption. Since the Project addresses an existing demand for housing, it is expected that a portion of the residents that would occupy the development already live in Kona or on Hcwai'i Island, and there would not be a substantial increase In emissions when residents occupy the Project. Therefore, Project impacts would be considered a negligible increase to the global annual greenhouse gas emissions. Under the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Project would not be constructed, and the site would remain unchanged from current conditions, There would be Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 21 no change in impacts to climate, or from geologic conditions or seismic activity, under this alternative. Figure 6 Sea Level Rise Exposure Map $ MUNK .14N*' 4:YWI, FX LI9 ParXXXS Cumulative Imp°cts Since there are no impacts from the Proposed Project, there are no anticipated cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions to these resources. 3.3.2 Flood Zones and Drainage Existing Environment The Project Site is located approximately 0.85 miles from the ocean at elevations ranging from 330 to 900 feet amsl, outside the area affected by coastal flooding. The area of North Kona includes a series of narrow drriinageways that flow to the ocean. Two intermittent drainageways are located adjacent to the proposed development on the parcels managed by the County of Hawai `i DPW, Horseshoe Bend and Holualoa Drainageways. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) Mood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 1551660952F (9/29/2017) shows the Project Site and proposed development is in Flood Zone X, and part of the Project Site is in the 0.2% annual chance floodplain (Figure 7). Horseshoe Bend and Holualoa Drainageways, cross Royal Vistas Housing Project Envrror mentar Assessment 22 and are adjacent to the Project Site, are located in Special Hood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) Zone AE. lone AE is defined as areas inundated by flood having a 1% probability of being equaled or exceed in any given year (base flood) and the fioodways are in Zone AEF. These drainages merge makal of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. Channelizatlon of much of both Horseshoe Bend and Holualoa Drainages was planned starting in 1976 (Master Plan for Kona Flood Control Project for the County of Hawaii DPW by Stanley S. Shimcibrikuro & Associates), but not completed. The County installed a lined drainageway just south of the Alii Kai subdivision and a basin to contain the flow from this channel, but the mauka end of the channel ended below Kupuna Street. During the extension of Queen Ka'aahumanu Highway (downstream of the Project) in the early 1980s, the State of Hawaii constructed culverts for the Holualoa Drainageway and the Horseshoe Bend Drainageway under Queen Kca'ahumanu Highway to direct flow under this major arterial. Culverts were also constructed under Kuakini Highway by the State for the Holualoa Drainageway; however, the culverts that were proposed under County -owned Kuakini Highway for the Horseshoe Bend Drainageway waters were never constructed. As a result, during heavy rain events flooding occurs across Kuakini Highway which flows down and impacts Kuakini Highway and the residents rnakai of Kuakini Highway, a l c c�wnstrt►fn:Lth Pfl j. Holualoa Drainageway and Horseshoe Bend Drainageway waters have a confluence at the makai end of the 12 acres, downstream of the Project. Working with the County, the previous developer of the Project assisted in obtaining private property owners' co-operation to achieve land use rights that allow the confluence to feed into the County channel. The current developer is now processing a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) with the FEMA to further channelize the portion of Holualoa Drainageway that crosses the 12 acres to allow more safe and efficient transfer of these flood waters. This channelization protects the lands adjacent to and makai of this work from flood exposure as well as further implementing Phase II of the County of Hawai`i's Master Hood Control Plan. It also allows more efficient development of the 12 acres into residential use in a safe manner. These drainagewoys continue to act as runoff distribution and flood control and mot recently, the Effective FIRM )effective September 2017) increased the Q (estimated flow) within the Holualoa Drainageay, including the section within the County -owned ditch adjacent to the Project Site. To help mitigate the existing downstream flooding concerns, several options for critigation are being considered in the vicinity of the Project Site inconjunction with the County of Royal Vrrstas Housing Project Envirorrmeritcd Assessment 23 Hawaii DPW. multiple comments on the Draft EA were regarding what the dtai ira p rrer is pal k ,LALppe 1h) . The oQ l option5_ for addressing the flooding that have been previously discussed include: (1 j the CoVnty's disposal of TMK 7-b-021.:01 . to Kona Three for use in the drainage improvements: (2) diveitinq sorne car all of the Horseshoe Bend flow into the Halualoa Duan, f3} installation of a retention basinfsj, and or dawns#yearn culvert.• . and (4} leave the drainages in their current configuration with on-site im•rovements within the existi • draina•e boundaries. The final desi.n could include one or a combination of theseoptionsor an option to be identified in future coordination with DPW. The State of Hawaii{ Department of Land and Natural Resources Flood Assessment Tool shows the Project Site outside the area that should be evacuated during o tsunami warning(http://gis.haawaiinfip.org/fhat/, accessed December 2019). No known areas of local (non -stream or ocean related} flooding are present at the Project Site. Figure 7 National Flood Hazard Layer FIRM Map �I uln_I 110r, Fleas rla>v rtaufra 1% Animal DUMMY Root HNir1 aim F'7.IfgNlAh7f4 '1i7c¢N4} MN^sF.at"rlerl'.uL Alai L,Ief.1AI riolc4 -Imo !Oar 11 e'har[x :43m I,ukL1 11111 r'114.e CD1114 lnfn 1% A...01 I...uIMQ f.'kncl Harard Alnr nXh Reduced gill_ Cum Lu 4e: ac NOW* 7 FEMLt 1Pn Royal Vrrst rs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 24 frnpacts and Mitigation Measures pmm, nt.$..On..f e_L raft. EA..in oired :r: c.i t-I;.-:o,dinq and draingsW. imprQ ! mQnts (Appendix 1b). The Project would be r quir-d to follow County regulations and policies related to flood control and cirainoge, among them Chapter 27 of the Hawai`i County Code. Chapter 27 requires the difference between pre - development and post -development runoff to be contained onsite, limiting. impacts. A drainage study will be prepared and reviewed and approved by the County of Hawaii DPW, which would be subnitte ctrt,of the wading permit process, As part of this requirement, the amount of expected runoff would be • o .i • Q DPW s-pndards anc the calcplci-ions would in ILJde the effects of the proposed project. As required by Chapter 27, storm water hgulcl bbee des, osed intorw ells infh®rQf n basins, or ether ❑ rued iniltra n methods (Section 27-2O(en, Implementation of the approved Drainage Plan would ensure that runoff from the Project Site would not be directed toward adjacent properties and the development would not alter the general drainage pattern above or below the develop [Section 27-20 -e . The Project does not propose to impact the existing flows within the Horseshoe or Holualoa Droinageways, other than to charinelize portions of the Horseshoe Bend Drainageway where it sheet flows and as needed to address downstream flooding issues once the options are analyzed and a solution is approved. Kona Three would coordinate with County of Hawaii DPW and FEMA on the CLONIR discussed above, which proposes to re -locate the Flood Zone (Zone AEF) within the new flood control channels; therefore, no Project -related surface disturbance associated with grading, parking, and landscaping would occur within the Flood Zone. c • c 1 t -d a Kona Three will continue working with the County to alleviate the downstream flooding issue caused by the lack of culverts under Kuakini Highway; however, these issues would not be exacerbated by the Project. The final design of the improvement projects for the Horseshoe Bent and Holualoa Drainages would be developed by Kona Three in coordination with the County of Hawaii DPW. Completion of the drainage system improvements is required prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project. 6 comment.f[prrk H) T on the D r t EA identified potential impacts to existing culverts (Appendix lb). There would be r -LQ Ilange to exstincLculvertor the heciiwq)[_p_.<4,W intersaclia Queen Ka`ahumanu. The proposed intersection (discussed in Section 3,7,2) has been desiQned to avoid al impacts .existing other -s and headwall within the highway right of-wa. Under the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Project would not be constructed and the site would remain unchanged from current conditions, There would be Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 25 no impacts to flood zones under this alternative and improvements to the drainages to reduce flooding of downstream properties would not occur. Cumulative Impacts Since there are no impacts associated with flood zone exposure from the Proposed Project, there are no anticipated cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions to flood zones. 3.3.3 Water Quality and Water Quantity Existing Envrronmenf Groundwater The State Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM) classification of aquifers locates this part of Kona within the Keauhou Aquifer System of the Hualdlai Aquifer Sector. The Project Site is not located above any of the nine Principal or Sole -Source aquifers identified in the U.S. EPA's Region 9 (https://archive.epa.gov/region9/water/archive/web/htmd/ssa.html, accessed on-line December 2019). Water commitments for the Proposed Project have been secured from the DWS and fully paid for all the multi -family residential units through Keauhou Source Agreement commitments and Kealakekua Source Agreement commitments. According to a letter received during early consultation, the Project Site is served by an existing service that con accommodate a 4 -inch meter on lo Place, and is limited to 180.400 gallons per day, or 451 units of water. The demand for the Project is expected to be 180,400 gallons per day, which is included in the Department of Water Supply's calculation of Authorized Plan Use. Landscaping is planned for the Project Site as well, and water use for landscaping is accounted for in the water credits. Surface Waters The Project Site is approximately 0.85 miles from the Pacific Ocean and has no nearby surface water bodies or waters of the U.S. According to maps from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, confirmed by field inspection, no wetlands are present on the Project Site (http://wwwiws.govlwetlands/Data/Mapper.htrnlj. The Wal aha Stream is the nearest riverine habitat and is located approximately one rale north of the Project. Royal Vistas lousing Project Environmental Assessment 26 Impacts ❑nd Mitigation Measures Potential impacts from the Project could occur to water quality during land clearing and construction activities from erosion and sedimentation.. These impacts would be minimized since grading of the Project Site during construction would be conducted in accordance with the grading permit which would be issued by Howai"i County. Prior to the initiation of construction for the Proposed Project, Kona Three would ensure that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permit is in place. The permit would require best management practices (BM Ps) to minimize erosion and for stormwater pollution prevention. Oversight of the BkilPs would be conducted weekly for the duration of construction, with updates and corrective actions documented and transmitted to the State Department of Health, Clean Water Branch. Additionally, all earthwork and grading would conform with Chapter 10 - Erosion and Sedimentation Control - of the Hawaii County Code, The intent is for the Proposed Project to collect and convey stormwater runoff into multiple onsite seepoge pits with sizing based ari o 10 -year, 1 -hour rainfall event. Based on the initial concept plan shown on Figure 3, a portion of the Project Site would be landscaped, including two parks in Phase 1, and the rest of the site ouid consist of buildings, parking areas, and roads. Water runoff from parking lots, driveways, and other surfaces would be treated to minimize potential impacts to inland and coastal waters using standard stormwater pollution prevention technology. The specific technology, or combination of technologies, that would be implemented for the Project would be identified during the final design. Where feasible, the Proposed Project would include water efficient fixtures and provide water -saving recommended measures for residents. To minimize water demand, the Project would minimize landscaping and use xeriscape landscaping where landscaping is installed_ In addition, the Proposed Project aims to implement and balance xeriscape with the provision of safe and adequate recreational space for residents. The Project would utilize reclaimed or reuse water for landscaping, if possible. No impacts to groundwater are expected from generation of wastewater since the Project would tie in with the County's sewer system. Linder the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Project would not be constructed and the site would remain unchanged from current conditions. There would be no impacts to water quality under this alternative. Cumulative Impacts Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 27 The relevant past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects for cumulative impacts are described in Section 3.2. Each project has or could result in depletion of water quantity and impacts to wetter quality, including depletion of available groundwater, sedimentation or nutrient loading to surface water and groundwater. The issue comes not from the impacts of ar individual project, but cumulative impacts in the region. As described above, impacts to water quality and water quantity from the Proposed Project wou Id be negligible. Therefore, the cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project in combination with post, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions ore expected to be miror_ 3.3.4 Flora, Fauna, and Ecosystems Existing Envtronrnent Vegetation A survey for biological resources was conducted by Geometrician Associates for the Project Site (Appendix 3). The pre -human vegetation in the Project Site WC1S likely Lowland Dry/Mesic Forest, which likely consisted of an open canopy forest dominated by a wide variety of trees, shrubs. herbs, vines, and ferns. However, current vegetation at the Project Site includes introduced species that are common throughout Kona and include the non-native hoole koa (Leucaena leucocephala), opiuma (Pithecellobf`um duce), and guinea grass (Megafhyrsus maximus). The Project Site includes two vegetation types that are distinguished primarily by previous management activities. The higher elevation portion of the Project Site contains few cattle, is intensely overgrown with guinea grass, and could be described as a scattered forest or thick savanna dominated by koa haole, opiuma, and rronkeypod (Samanea soman) . The lower elevation portion of the Project Site is moderately grazed and has a very similar but slightly more diverse canopy, including kiowe (Prosopis palffda}, [du (Acacia tornesicnaj, and several other non-native trees. The understory in both vegetation types include a diversity of non-native grasses, herbs, shrubs and vines, with a very few natives, including `uhaloa (Waiter -fa indica) and `ilima (Silo fcrllaxj. Although two drainageways traverse the property, no aquatic or true riparian vegetation i5 present in the Project Site. All plant species found on the property during the survey are listed in Table 1. Of the 46 species detected, six were indigenous (native to the Hawaiian Islands and elsewhere] and only three were endemic (found only in the Hawaiian Islands]. No rare, threatened, ar endangered plant species were present in the Project Site. Royal Vistas housing Project Environmental Assessment 28 Table I Plant Species Observed in the Project Site Scientific Name Family Common Name Life Forrr Status* Ferns Nephrolepis multiflora Nephrolepidaceae Sword fern 1 -ero A Phymatasorus grosses Flowering Plants Polypodioceae Maile scented fern I Ler-. Abutlion grandifotium Malvaceae Abutilcr Shrub A Acacia frurr,esianca Fabaceae!" Shrub A Aleurites rnatuccana Eupharbiaceae l,ukui Amaranttlus viridis Amaranthaceae Slender amaranth Tree Herb A Bidens alba Asteraceae Beggar's tick Herb A Bidens cynaplifotia Asteraceae Blue bidens Herb A Edens pilasa E!."odleia `�7Siarir=f Asteraceae Beggar's tick Scrophulariacece Buddleio Herb Shrub A A. uesc!pinc ; ecapetaia Fabaceae alai` -a - bit Viae A C. harnaecri.5ia r?iCJi1C7r15 Fabaceae Partridge pea A { .i iarnaasyce hirtc Ctlamaesyce hypericif©lia Euphorbiaceaae Garden spurge Euphorbiaceae Graceful Spurge „arc era A A Clrlorrs barbta Pcocecae Swollen fingergrass firD A Caccia grandis Cucurbitcceae ivy gourd Vine A Crotataria sp. Fabaceae Crotalaria Cynodon daatylan Poaceae ' Bermuda grass Herb Herb A A DeSmCrr thUS virgatrjs Fobaceoe Slender rr.imoso Dig;, oria citicxris Poaceae Crabgrass Shrub Herb A A r„�t;�rica insulcrrrs Poaceae Sourgrass �� C tarfa Setigera Poaceae Crabgrass Herb Herb A A. Dysphcania carinota ChenopocJiaceae Dysphania Herb A Eieusine indica Poaceae Goose grass Herb A J;ragrosfis tenelta Poaceae Lovegrass Herb A• Hyptis pectinate Lamiaceae Comb hyptis Shrub A !r!dig'niera suffruticasca F tbacece rndia° Shrub A obscurc Convolvuiaceae Obscure morning glory Vine A pinnata Crassulaceae Air plant Herb A Verbenaceae lantana Shrub A „C•?, r F?pettfoJIa Leucaena leucocephala Larnicceae Lion's ear Fabaceae Hoole koa Herb Shrub A A corornandeiianum Maaivc cede False mallow Herb A. Megcthyfrsus rr oximus Paace•ae Guinea grass Herb A Nletirars re pens Poaceae Natal redtap Heat A Nlerrernia tuberosa Convolvulaceae Woadrose Mimosa pudica Fabaceae Sleeping grass Vine Herb A A Pv'•c:rvrdica charoritic l"moi tl'tler o 'oetidc Cucurbitaceae Bitter gourd Vine A Rubiaceae Maile pilau �juin tiysteraphOrus edufis Asteraceae Santa Maria Vine �erc A A Passifloracece i_ili9ccai Vine A. Pn'zv,:i"or- thus debrl,s Euphorbiaceae rNiruri Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment =era Scientific Name P'thec.e iobiurn dulce Family Fabaceae Common Name Duce Life Farm Tree Status* A PJurnb- ga auricufrata Plumbaginaceae Leadwart Shrub A r i..Jr?1bc1go reylonica Plumbaginaceae 'llie'e Herb I PortuJaca pifosa Pcrtulccaceae Portulaca Herb A RProsopis pallida Fabaceae Kiawe Tree A Psidiurr+ guajava Myrtaceae Common guava Tree A h:icinus communis Euphorbiaceae Castor bean Shrub A Riving hirmllis Phytolacccceae Corel berry Herb A Sornanea samara Fabaceae Monkeypad Tree A Schincis lerebinthifolius Anacardiaceae Christmas berry Tree Shrub A A 5e, nno oc of den*c s Fabaceae Coffee senna :S,dc ia�'L:i',. Ma vaceae •'lima Shrub I Si.d.: r'roi^ n../iroffr Ma 'vaceoe Sada "-erb A Srcc s,ainasci Ma vaceae Sida -erb A Solanum crrericara urn So€ar ioceae Popoio •-erb 1 Sdanum seafar"thianum Soanaceae .Asteraceae Vining sso anunl Sow thist'e rierb Herb A A Sor;cill US ofercceus Spothadea oornpanuJato Bignartiaceae African 'dip Tree A Thevet'a peruviar?a Apocynaceae Be-soil tree Tree A Thur+bc•' _,,r_: `rograns Acanthaceae White thunbergia Vine A p_-... -,oma 'r� •�' ; .,orriboidea Ti iaceoe Bur brush Shrub A. ,'c.irric.:-:a indica Sterculiaceae 'Llhaloa Herb 1 - al;4,3 r 1. E = endemic, I = indigenous, PI = Polynesian END = Federal and Stag Listed _: c:cirigered (none) An online mapping tool provided by the USFWS indicates that no designated or proposed critical habitat for endangered plant (or animal) species is located on or near the property (USFWS 2019). The nearest designated critical plant habitat is for endangered haha (Cyanea harnatitlora ssp. carlsonii) approximately seven miles northeast of the Project Site. Blackburn's Sphinx Moth The one endangered insect found in many parts of Kona is the Blackburn's sphinx. moth (Manduoa blackburnii). It is generally associated with drier environments and `a 'a substrates. The native host plant aiea (Nothocestrum spp,) is extremely rare, but a substitute host, the prolific weed tree tobacco ( fcotiana glauca), quickly colonizes dry, disturbed lova flows. Neither host was found within the survey area. Birds The 15 species of birds detected during the survey were all non-native and typical of those found in similar areas of lowland disturbed habitat in Kona (Table Z. The most common species encountered were spotted dove (Streptopelia chinensis), Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 30 northern cardinal (Cardinciiis cardinafis), cattle egret (Bubufcus ibis}, parakeet (,Aratin ° sp.}, Japanese white -eye (Zosterops japonicus), and house finch (Carpodccus mexicanus). No native birds were detected, and it is generally poor habitat for most native birds. The short -eared owl may utilize habitat at the Project Site and vicinity for foraging. The trees in the survey area are generally too short to serve as typical Hawaiian hawk (Bufeo solitarius) nests, but individuals could forage at least occasionally in the area. Table 2 Bird Species Observed in the Project Site Scientific Name Common Name States Acridofheres tristis Common myna Alien resident Araffnga sp. Parakeet Alien resident Bubulcus ibis Cc-tle egret Alien resident Cardr'.na,'s Northern cardinal Alien resident Carpodacus rnexicarrus House finch Alien resident rancpiinus pc nd e cerian us Black froncolin Alien resident Cxeopeffa stricter Zebra dove Alien resident Leiothrix lutea Red -billed leiathrix Alien resident Lonchura punctulata Nutmegs mannikin Alien resident Paddo oryzivora Java sparrow Alien resident Passer domestic us House sparrow Alien resident Seriraus rpozumbicus Yellow -fronted canary Alien resident Sicclis ffaveoaa Saffron finch Alien resident ) r ; -topefio chinersis Spotted dove Alien resident Zose-ops Japonicus Japanese white -eye Alien resident A number of other rare, threatened, and endangered birds are fairly unlikely to be found at the Project Site and vicinity. The Hawaiian goose or nene (Branta sondvicensis) is an endemic, federally listed endangered species that is only occasionally observed in urban Kona, although it is more abundant at Big Island Country Club in the Kekaha region of Kona. Some endangered Hawaiian petrels (Pterodroma sandwichensis or `ua`u) and band -romped storm -petrels (Ccecrnodroma casfro), as well as threatened Newell's sheorwaters (Puffinus auricularis neweffi), may overfly the area between the months of June and October. All three of these pelagic seabird species nest high in the mountains in burrows. Most recently (November 20191 a Hawaiian petrel burrow and chick were observed in a newly documented "ucCu colony inside the Pu`u 0 Umi Natural Reserve Area on Kohalo Mountain. There is no suitable nesting habitat for any of these seabird species within or near the Project Site. The primary cause of mortality in all these seabird species in Hawoi`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 sea in the summer Royal Vrrstrvrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 31 and fall, can become disoriented by exterior lighting. Whc_:,r.. .,:oriented, seabirds may collide with manmade structures. If they are not killed n•s right, the dazed or injured birds are easy targets of opportunity for feral mammals. Although not a listed species, the Hawaiian endemic sub -species of the short -eared owl or pueo (Asio flarnmeus sandwichierasis), a protected migratory bird, nests and hunts in tall grasslands and shrublands and could conceivably be occasionally present at the Project Site. Hawaiian Hoary Bat The endangered Hawaiian hoary bat (Losiurus cinereus semotus), the only native Hawaiian land mammal, may utilize the property, as it is found in most areas on the island of Hawaii and has been observed in surrounding areas with similar vegetation. It was not observed in aur survey, which took place in daylight and did not use any detection equipment, but it should be presumed present. Bats may forage for flying insects over portions of the property on a seasonal basis, and they may find some of the larger shrubs and trees (both exotic and native) suitable roosting habitat. Hawaiian hoary bats are vulnerable to disturbance during the summer pupping season. Introduced Mammals, Reptiles, and Amphibians The only live mammals seen during the survey were cattle (Bos taurus), feral pigs (Sus.scrofa) which were abundant in the survey area, and small Indian mongooses (Herpestes a. aurapunctatus). Given the Project's location in an urban area, it is likely that feral cats {Feiis catus}, mice (Mus spp.), rats {Rattus spp.), and domestic dogs, {Canis f. familraris} are occasionally present. There are no native terrestrial reptiles or amphibians in Hawaii_ The only reptile observed during the survey was the day gecko (Ptieisuma sp.). It is likely that other species of gecko, anoles, and skinks are also present. No amphibians were seen or heard. None of these alien mammals or reptiles have conservation value and all are deleterious to native flora and fauna_ Impacts and Mitigation Measures Vegetation As discussed above, no threatened or endangered plant species as listed by the USFWS appear to be present in the Project Site, nor are there uniquely valuable habitctf5. No existing or proposed federally designated critical plant (or animal) habitat is present in the Project Site. There appears to be no potential to adversely affect rare, threatened, or endangered plant species. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 32 Although existing vegetation would be cleared during Project construction activities including grading, the plants that would be removed are ail non-native_ Landscaping is an important aspect for housing developments both for residents' experience and property value. The Proposed Project would plant new vegetation as part of landscaping following Project construction. As requested in an early consultation letter from DLNR, Kona Three would plant native or non- invasive trees as part of landscaping for the Proposed Project. Blackburn's Sphinx Moth In order to prevent potential impacts to the Blackburn's sphinx moth, the Proposed Project would include the following protection measures. A biologist familiar with the species would survey for Blackburn's sphinx moth and its larval host plants (tree tobacco and native `oleo) between November and April or several weeks after a significant rain and within four to six weeks prior to construction. Surveys should include searches for eggs, larvae, and signs of larval feeding (chewed stems, frass, or leaf damage). If moths or native `area or tree tobacco over three feet are found during the survey, Kona Three would coordinate with the USFWS for guidance to avoid impacts. If no Blackburn's sphinx moth, 'aiea, or tree tobacco are found during pre- disturbance surveys, Kona Three would ensure that measures are taken to avoid attraction of Blackburn's sphinx moth and prohibit tree tobacco from entering the site. Tree tobacco can grow more than three feet in approximately six weeks, and above three feet in height the tree tobacco can become c host plant for Blackburn's sphinx wroth. The Proposed Project would remove tree tobacco less than three feet tall and monitor the Project Site for new tree tobacco grown before, during, and after Project construction. Monitoring for tree tobacco after construction, con be completed by any staff, such as regular maintenance crew, provided with pictures of tree tobacco at different life stages. Birds If construction for the Project is scheduled to occur in the Hawaiian hawks breeding season (between March 1 and September 30), a qualified biologist would conduct a pre -disturbance survey for hawk nests within and immediately adiacent to the property. If a Hawaiian hawk nest is located during the pre - disturbance nest survey, no land clearing or construction should occur within 1,600 feet of any active Hawaiian hawk nest during the breeding season until the young have fledged (usually October). Regardless of time of year, Kona Three would coordinate with the prior to trimming or cutting trees with Hawaiian hawk nests, as nests may be re -used during consecutive breeding seasons. Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 33 The Proposed Project would not involve any unshielded lighting for either construction or operation, in conformance with Hawai'i County Code § 14-- 50 et seq, which would avoid impacts to nocturnally flying Hawaiian petrels and Newell's shearwaters. Additionally, during operation the site would use lighting only where and when it is needed for safety purposes. The use of outdoor lamps with warmer colors (less blue light) and energy efficient fixtures would be considered when the building is being constructed. Subject to local rules and re•ulations, the Proposed Project would utilize li•htin._ on the 2700 degrees Kelvin scale in response to a public comment received on the Draft EA reoardin potential impacts to ❑stronomy If the Proposed Project incorporates additional outdoor lighting, it rusty attract threatened and endangered Hawaiian seabirds, which may become disoriented by the lighting, resulting in birds being downed. To avoid the potential downing of these threatened and endangered seabirds due to interaction with outdoor lighting, no construction using unshielded equipment maintenance lighting should be permitted after dark between the months of April and October. All additional permanent lighting should conform to the Hawaii County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawai'i County Code Chapter 9, Article 14), which requires shielding of exterior lights so as to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. The Proposed Project would also avoid nighttime construction during the seabird fledging period, September 15 through December 15. Hawaiian Hoary Fiat The endangered Hawaiian hoary bat is vulnerable to disturbance while roosting with its juveniles in the pupping season. To minimize impacts during construction, woody plants taller than 15 feet wou Id not be removed or trimmed during the bat birthing and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15) . Additionally, Hawaiian hoary bats forage for insects from as low as 3 feet to higher than 500 feet above the ground and can became entangled in barbed wire, if used for fencing. The Proposed Project would not use barbed wire for fencing. Marine Species Factors that might impair urban Kona's coastal water quality and potentially affect threatened or endangered marine species are wastewater, chemical contaminants from industrial and commercial uses, and polluted runoff from streets and parking lots. Runoff from the drainageways in the Project Site could reach the ocean; however, the runoff from the Project would not be directed into the drainageways or increase flow during flood events. Potential impacts to water quality would be minimized through wastewater and stormwater treatments described in Section 3.3.2 and 3.3.3. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 34 Additional Impacts A nix of native species, Polynesian introduced species, and non-invasive introduced ornamentals would be used in landscaping for the Project Site and on invasive weed control plan for the Project Site would be developed to minimize impacts from fire -prone, non-native vegetation species. Additionally, where no grading or grubbing is required, existing vegetation would be left in place. Biosecurity protocols during construction would include cleaning and inspection ofconstruction equipment for invasive species (including insects, frogs, rats, and mice), and would be applied as applicable. A comment from DOFAW teeommended cvnsJItirlq with . . v. 'v , - - - MC} (Appendix lb). The developer would also request current recommendations from i$ at the tai e� relQp Melt, Under the No Action Alternative, the Project would not be constructed and the site would remain unchanged from current conditions. There would be no vegetation removed, and, therefore, no impacts to the native plant species present in the Project Site or removal of potential habitat for protected wildlife species. However, there would be no invasive weed control plan in place under this alternative, and existing weeds at the Project Site would continue to spread at the Project Site, Cumulcrttve Impacts Past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the vicinity have impacted biological resources through alteration of the landscape through introduction of weeds, removal of native vegetation, and Toss of habitat for native wildlife species. Impacts to biological resources from the Proposed Project would be minor, due to the limited number of native Species present at the Project Site and the protection measures outlined to avoid impacts to Federally -listed species and prevent spread of non-native weeds. Therefore, the cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, end reasonably foreseeable future actions are expected to be minor. 3.3.5 Noise Environmental Setting Noise an the Project Site is low to moderate; the main source of noise at the site is traffic traveling on Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway, Royal Vistas housing Project Environmental Assessment 35 The noise descriptor used to assess environmental noise by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is the day -night average A -weighted (dBA) sound level (DNL). DNL is a representation of the average noise during a typical day of the year. DNL levels of 55 or less are typical of quiet, rural or suburban areas. DNL exposure levels of 55 to 65 are typical of urbanized areas with medium to high levels of activity and street traffic. DNL exposure levels above 65 are representative of dense urban sates and areas near large highways or airports. Administrative Rules for the Department of Health, Chapter 1 1-46, Community Noise Control set permissible noise levels to provide for the prevention, control, and abatement of noise pollution in the state. The Project Site is zoned Multiple - Family Residential 5000 square feet (RM -5). Multi -family dwellings are in a Class 13 zoning district defined by HAR §11-46-3. The maximum permissible sound level in a Class 8 zoning district is 60 dBA from 7:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m. and 50 dBA from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.rn. (HAR §11-46-4). Various agencies have different standards of noise compatibility. Per 24 CFR 51.103. HUD exterior standards are as follows: • Acceptable (DNL not exceeding 65 dBA): The noise exposure may be of some concern but common building constructions will make the indoor environment acceptable and the outdoor environment will be reasonably pleasant for recreation and play, • Normally Unacceptable (DNL above 65 but not exceeding 75 dBA): The noise exposure is significantly more severe, barriers may be necessary between the Project Site and prominent noise sources to make the outdoor environment acceptable: special building constructions may be necessary to ensure that people indoors are sufficiently protected from outdoor noise. • Unacceptable (DNL above 75 dBA): The noise exposure at the site is so severe that the construction cost to make the indoor noise environment acceptable may be prohibitive and the outdoor environment would still be unacceptable. Impacts and Mitigation Measures During construction of the Proposed Project, there would be moderate levels of noise from the operation of heavy equipment during goading and construction. In cases where construction noise is expected to exceed the State DOH "maximum permissible" property -line noise levels, builders must obtain a permit per Title 11, Chapter 46, HAR {Community Noise Contrail prior to construction. The DOH reviews the proposed activity, location, equipment, project purpose, and timetable in order to decide upon conditions end mitigation measures, such os restriction of equipment type, maintenance requirements, restricted hours, and Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 36 portable noise barriers. Kona Three and/or its construction contractor will consult with DOH to determine if a perrnit will be required and what, if any, noise reduction measures are necessary. During operation, moderate levels of noise which would be consistent with the level of noise from neighboring residential subdivisions is anticipated. Therefore, the Proposed Action is not expected to significantly impact any existing residential subdivisions within the vicinity of the Project Site. Under the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Project would not be constructed and the site would remain unchanged from current conditions, There would be no additional impacts to noise from this alternative. Cumulative Impacts Since there are no impacts from the Proposed Project, there are no anticipated cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions from noise. 3.34 Alr Quality and Scenic Resources Environmental Setting. Air quality in Hawaii is generally good, below criteria levels for most pollutants in most locations at almost all times. There are no State Department of Health (DOHA air monitoring stations in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site. The nearest site is the Kailua-Kona monitoring site which is located on Walua Road approximately one mile north of the Project Site. Air pollution in West Hawai `k, when present, is mainly derived from volcanic emissions of sulfur dioxide, which convert into particulate sulfate and produce a volcanic haze (vog} that can affect North and South Kona. Vog concentrations are dependent on the amount of sulfur dioxide emitted from Kilauea Volcano, the distance downwind, and the wind direction and speed on a given day. Minor levels of air pollution also come from urban uses including traffic and other nearby industrial activities. Neither the Project Site nor any surrounding areas are mentioned in the County of Hawaii General Plan as being notable for their natural beauty (County of HowaPi 2005). The nearest site is the White Sands Beach which is located on the coast approximately 2.6 mikes northwest of the Project and is not visible from the Project Site. Impacts and Mitigation Measures Short term direct and indirect impacts on air quality could potentially occur due to Project construction, principally through fugitive Gust from vehicle movement and soil excavation, and exhaust emissions from onsite construction equipment. Royal Vistas housing Project Envrrorimentrai Assessment 37 Adequate fugitive dust control can typically be accomplished by the establishment of a frequent watering program to keep bare dirt surfaces in construction areas from becoming significant sources of dust. In dust prone or dust sensitive areas, other control measures such as limiting the area that can be disturbed at any given time, applying chemical soil stabilizers, mulching and/or using wind screens may be necessary. Onsite mobile and stationary construction equipment also would emit air pollutants from engine exhausts, but no sensitive receptors are present. The contractor will be required to prepare a dust control plan during construction compliant with provisions of HAR, Chapter 11-60.1, "Air Pollution Control," and Section 11-60,1-33, "Fugitive Dust.,, Also, the Proposed Project includes proposed landscaping on the Proposed Project's parcel; therefore, impacts to scenic resources are not expected to °CCur. Under the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Project would not be constructed and the site would remain unchanged from current conditions. There would be no additional impacts to air quality or scenic resources from this alternative.. Cumulative Impacts Since there are only minimal impacts from the Proposed Project, any potential cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions to air quality or scenic resources would be minor. 3.3,7 Hazardous Materials and Wastes Existing Environment Based on the known land uses of the Project Site for agricultural and livestock grazing and since the Project Site has not been previously developed or used for industrial purposes, no hazardous materials or waste are expected to be present. Additionally, no hazardous or solid wastes were noted by the field inspections completed for the Project. State databases did not indicate any Underground Storage Tanks (LISTs), Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs), or records of incidents or releases on the ProjectSite or in surrounding properties (https://eha- cloud.doh.howaii.cov/iheer/##i/viewer, accessed December 2019). impacts and Mitigation Measures Previous land use and informal review has shown that is unlikely that any potentially hazardous, toxic, or radioactive waste would be found on the Project Royal Vistas Mousing Project Environmental Assessment 38 Site. Reasonable precautions would be undertaken in the context of the Project construction Best Management Practices to include provisions for the appropricte reporting to the State and readiness for response and remediation should any such hazardous, toxic, or radioactive material be encountered during the construction phase of the Project. Construction equipment would use fossil fuels, and hydraulic power would be used in grading and construction. There is a possibility of leaks, spills, or accidents during construction and during occupation of the development by residents (from an accidental vehicle leak) . The construction contractors will be required to develop and maintain an emergency action plan for management and recovery of any release of petroleum or hazardous materials to the environment. Onsite stormwater treatment would minimize impacts from spills during when the Project Site is occupied by residents. No impacts to hazardous materials or waste are expected from the No Action Alternative. Cumulative impacfs Since there are minimal potential impacts from the Proposed Project, there are no anticipated cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions to hazardous materials or ca51s. 3.4 Socioeconomics Population as measured in the 2010 U.S. Census (the most recent U.S. census) for North Kona, a Census County Division (CCD), was 18,642 (U.S. Census Bureau 2O10a). Table 3 provides information on the socioeconomic characteristics of the State of Hawaii, the County of Howai`i, and North Kona CCD, from the U.S.. Census Bureau. Table 3 Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics Description State at Hawaii County of Hawa1'i North Konc CCD Total Papula#ion .36:',301 .:,:i, :,1'Y 3/41',. Median age (years) 37.2 4.9 41.4 Total housing units 519,508 82.224 18,642 Median Household lncorne1 $71,977 $53,936 $65,682* Individuals below poverty lever 10.8% 18.77 13.7%* Race and Hispanic Origin White alone 24,7% 33.7% 45.6% Black or African American 1.6% 0.6% 0,5% American Indian or Alaska Native 0.3% O5% 0.5% Asian alone 38.6% 22.2% 15.3% Royal' Vist rs Housing Project Environmental Assessment Description State of Hawaii Count/ of Hawaii 8.5% North Kana CCD 1 1.2% No- °: e nawalian 5.9% - ,A* ,_, or More Races 23.6% 29;5% 23.8% Hispanic or Latino (of any race} 8.9% 11.6% 1 1.3% Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010a, 2010b, and 2010c 2Source: U.S. Cercus Bureau 2016 *Estimates for CCDs have a high margin of error due to small population and sample size. The County of Hcawai'i's population in the 2010 census was 185,079, an increase of 24 percent from 2000. The population of the North Kona District increased from 28,543 in 2000 to 37,875 in 2010, representing a 33 percent increase. In South Kohala the population increased from 13,131 in 2000 to 17,627 in 2010 which is a 34 percent increase. This rate of population growth is significantly higher than the rate of growth for the state which was only 12 percent over the same period and the County of Hawaii which was 25 percent. The combined population of the two districts was 55.502 in 2010 which amounted to 30 percent of the island -wide population (U.S. Census Bureau 2010a, 2010b, 2010c). According to the latest Housing Planning Study, in recent years building has focused on units that are not available for Hawaii families (SMS 2019). "In spite of continuing moderate growth of subdivision activity and housing construction in the North Kona district, housing problems for the low and moderate income groups have been particularly acute." Residents, including families, compete with the visitor market for the rental of apartment and condominium units. The General Plan anticipated In 200.5 that the in -migration to the district would continue as would the need for housing for residents. The Draft General Plan 2040 predicts that over the next 25 years the population in Hawaii County will grow roughly 50 percent, and identifies that housing is a burden for more than 50 percent of households (County of Hawaii 2019). Lastly, the high cast of housing is reflected In the number of households that are crowded (two or more persons/bedroom), doubled up, or both. In the North Howcai'i District, 17.3 percent of the 10,203 households are crowded, doubled up or both while 14.6 percent of the 14,184 North Kona households were in the sarne category. As such, there are 3,836 households in North Hawai'i and North Kona living in crowded conditions or are doubled up (OHCD 2019). This is a trend that has been increasing since 2003 (SMS 2019). As discussed in Section 3.10.2, the Proposed Project conforms with all land use designations. Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 40 lrnpacts and Mitigation Measures The Proposed Project would provide 450 mid -market Rental units and For Sale units. These units are much needed in the area of North Kona as identified in the 2005 General Pian and Draft 2040General Plan (County of Hawai"i 200 2019). Occupants for the development would either come from on-isiarid residents (Le., existing overcrowded or doubled -up households) or new residents to the island. The Proposed Project would address a portion of this demand. The Proposed Project would generate work for the local construction industry, which would stimulate local economic spending. The Proposed Project would provide infill mFd-market housing in the urban area and allow resident households better access and the ability to safely manage commutes between home, work, and recreation. Stable households lead to stable communities, and promotes a functional economy. The Project would also increase demand for services from residents both during construction (transportation and trade services) and during occupancy (infrastructure, school, utilities, government) (see Section 3.7). Revenues of local government overnment can increase as a result of a housing development project, at first from building fees, taxes on construction workers' wages, and taxes on sale and transport of building materials and then in the long term from property taxes and mortgage and deed transfer taxes (Housing Assistance Council 2019). Under the No Action Alternative, the site would rernain unchanged from current conditions and the mid -market housing development Project would not be constructed. Cumulative Impacts Since there are no impacts from the Proposed Project, there are no anticipated cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions to socioeconomics. The Proposed Project does not require any changes to land use designations and would not cumulatively affect land use because it is consistent with community plans. 3.5 Cultural Practices and Sites The following text are excerpts quoted from the Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) prepared for the Project Site (Appendix 4). The Project Site is in Hi5lualoa l st Ahupua'o within the area of Kona ka,15pua in Kona 'dkcu, F-folualoa literally means "long sled course," and Hdlualoa 1st is a traditional ahupua,a stretching from the ocean to the Foot of Hualaid in the uplands. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 41 Very little is recorded of HOlualoa Ahupua`a in traditional oral accounts, The Heart Stirring Legend of Ka -Mika, published in the Hawaiian language newspaper Ko Hoku o HOWCIll contains the anlyt description of Hblualoa. The legend is set in the 13th century but also reflects more recent influences. According to the narrative, The lands of Holudoa were named for the chief of that name; both He lualoa and Puapua'a were high chiefs, who controlled the lands from mountain to sea, which bear their names... Kaluaokalani served as a priest of HoIualoa at the temple of Prtikiha. This heiau was near the contest field of Halualocr... The lands of this region are named for various ali `i, all of whom were related. When the chief l olualoa took up the challenge against Kepakaili'ula on behalf of the Kona chiefs, HOIualoa called upon his god Kdlaipahoa to assist him in his battle,.. H6Iualoa was the First chief to call upon the god KoIaipahaa. and this was the beginning of this god's use by the chiefs of Hawaii. Pre -Contact Era Halualoa, Kona, and much of the leeward side of Howai'i Island, while well populated at the time of European Contact, were settled later than the windward side. This in part may be due to the fertile land, numerous streams, and abundant rainfall on the windward side, Many archaeologists believe that Hawaii Island was first settled around A.D. 1,000 by people sailing from the Marquesas. During early settlement of the leeward side permanent habitations were established in Kona concentrated along the shoreline and lowland slopes. Informal fields were cleared at higher elevations where rainfall was higher. Between AIS 1200 and 1400, habitation and agriculture expanded across the slopes and coastal area of Hua!alai. The initiat construction of the Kona f=ield System (KFS) began approximately between AD 1400 to 1600. The development of these extensive formal walled fields coincides with a dramatic population increase and with the development of the stratified chiefdom structure which is reflected through large residential complexes and heiau, Thus, there was a need to expand the previously limited agricultural base, The royal centers and larger heiau were in place by AD 1 600 to 1 800 which reflect the growth in power of the rulers and chiefs in the region. Royal centers are located at Kctilua, Halualoa, Kahalu`u, Ke•a akekua, and H5naunau. The region of Holualoa developed into a royal center in the late 1600s to early 1700s under the reigns of Keakarnahana (reigned 1680-1700) and Keakealaniwahine (reigned 1700-1720). Many `ali'i and konohiki residences and numerous religious sites are known to have existed in this region. The majority of the heiau and royal residences were constructed along or near the coast, most Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 42 notably at Kamoa Point south of the project area. The royal center at Hblualoa was eclipsed in the second half of the 1700s by the royal center in the Kahalu'u and Keauhou region. The Kona Field System The Kona Field System extends north at least to Kau Ahupua"a and south to Honaunau, west from the coastline and east to the forested slopes of Huaidal. During has travels in 1823, William Ellis noted the extensive field system divided with "low stone wales, made of fragments of lava", producing "bananas, sweet potatoes, mountain taro, tapa trees, melons and sugar cane" and "flourishing luxuriantly in every direction." Many of the archaeological projects conducted within Kona deal with components of the Kona Field System. The kula zone of the Kona Field System is from sea level to 150 meters amsl. This zone is associated with habitations along the shoreline and cultivation of sweet potatoes (uala), paper mulberry (wauke), and gourds (ipu). Clearing mounds, planting depressions, planting mounds, planting terraces, and modified outcrops are common agricultural features in the kula zone. Permanent habitation including royal and high chiefly centers as well as non-agricultural activities such as fishing, ceremonies and burial practices were usually concentrated along the shoreline zone portion of the kula zone. The higher elevation zones are the kalu`ulu zone. `apa'a zone and the 'ama'u zone,. The current project area is in the kalu'ulu zone. This wetter region is above 150 meters amsl where bread fruit, sweet potatoes (lpornoea batotas), ki (Cordytine fruticosa) wauke (8roussonetic pcpyrifera), koro {Cotocasia escutenta), sugar cane (Saccharum sp.), and other arboreal crops were grown. The `apa'o zone is above the kallulu zone. Hawaiians cultivated melons, sweet potatoes, ti, bananas, taro, wouke and sugar cane in fields with low stone walls. The highest zone, the'ama`u zone, was used to grow bananas and plantains in walled fields. The `apa`a zone and the 'arna'u zone were also used to collect timber and catch birds therefore temporary habitations were constructed. Post -Contact Era During the post -contact era, the Kona Field System was exploited and the planting of coffee, sugar, sisal, citrus, and cotton took over original Hawaiian crops until eventually the land was used for cattle pasture. The first cattle and sheep were brought to the island by Vancouver in 1793 and 1794. Horses, mules, oxen, goats, and donkeys were brought shortly after. Feral cattle, sheep, and goats overran agricultural fields by 1813 to 1815. By 1848, in the Kona District, a Great Wall (the Kuckini Wall) was constructed from lanihau to #Onouli to keep them away from homes and agricultural areas. Formal cattle ranching began in the Kona region in the mid -1800s. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment The Kona landscape evolved rapidly with the turn of the century. The rapid growth of the sugar industry produced the Kona Sugar Company in 1899. A railroad was built in 1901 to help sustain this influx in produce, It was later used to haul lumber and freight along with the sugarcane. The rail line was seven miles long and extended from He luc o° to Ka'awaloa. Cotton, tobacco, and sisal were grown in the drier lands below the railroad. The changing subsistence and trade regimes developed by incoming European and American settlers, as well as other historical factors, caused a depopulation of the coastal areas of Kona. Ranches were established at middle and upper elevations, and farms were established in the uplands where rainfall was higher and the temperatures were cooler. Cattle ranching and clearing for sugar cane and coffee removed many of the endemic species of plants. The suite of vegetation that existed prior to the pre -Contact ere were replaced by koa haole (Leuccrena ieucocephaiaj, kiawe (Prosapts paUida). and other newly introduced invasive plant species. Schools, churches, stores, and other businesses were also established in the uplands. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, coastal Kona was no longer the densely populated sociopolitical center it once was, it became a small cluster of houses along the trail from Kailua Bay to Keauhou. Homesteads, ranches, and plantations developed in the uplands during this period as reflected in the pattern of Land Commission Awards (LCA) and Land Grants (LG) recorded during the Mahele. The project area is just makai west) of most of the land commission awards and is at the same elevation as portions of the land grants in the region. Based on historic documents, the project area and surrounding lands were likely being used for subsistence and commercial agriculture, as well as for cattle pasture from the mid to late 1800s, The project area might have been used later than surrounding lands because of its steep slopes and very rocky soil, but based on aerial photographs, the project area was bulldozed sometime around the 1950s through the 1970s in preparation for commercial agriculture. The Mahele The Land Commission awarded the majority of Holualoa lst and 2nd Ahupuca`a to Victoria Kamdmalu Ka`ahumanu IV, Kuhina Nui of Hawci`i Island and Crown Princess of Hawaii as Land Commission Award (LCA) Number 7713, `Apana 43. Several smaller LCA and LG properties were also recorded in the upland region of Holualoa 1st and 2nd Ahupua'a. Twenty four Land Commission awards were recorded in Halualoa lst Ahupua'a, the crhupua"a where the project area is located. A portion of LCA #3660 to John G. Munn makes up a thin strip of land located i through the center of the current project area. With the notable Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 44 exception of LCA #3660 and a few other large LCAs, the average award was 2.8 acres, most (n=16) were for less than 3,0 acres. Three Land Grants (LG #1592, 1602, and 3630) were also recorded in H5lualoa lst and 2nd Ahupua'a. LG #1592 was a 25.0 -acre parcel sold to Kea!alio and LG #3630 was a 38.2 -acre parcel sold to W.H. Cromwell. Almost all of the awards and grants were used as subsistence and commercial farm land, and some were used to pasture cattle. Cultural Resources and Practices Related to the Proposed Development Consultation for the Proposed Project Gathering input from community members with genealogical ties and longstanding residency relationships to the Project Area is vital to the process of assessing potential cultural impacts to resources, practices, and beliefs. These individuals ascribe meaning and value to traditional resources and practices. The following text has been quoted from SCS's CIA for the Project (Appendix 4). In the case of the present parcel, consultation was sought from Jordan Kea Calpita, SHPD Burial Sites Specialist; Komakana Ferreira, OHA Compliance Officer; Nicole Lui, cultural descendant, Sean Naleimaile, State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) Hawaii Island Archaeologist; Kekoa Nazara, Kona Hawaiian Civic Club President; Shane Nelson, OHA West Hawaii Representative; and J. Curtis Tyler III, cultural descendant. Consultation was also conducted via telephone with Gregg Koshiwa who served as project property manager for parcels 016 and 017 in the early 1980s. Public notices were placed in the December 2019 issue of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs PHA) Ka Wai Ola Newspaper. Public notices were also published in the Honolulu Star -Advertiser, and the West Hawaii Today on November 17th 20th and 21st. There were no responses to the public notices published in the OHA Ko Wai Ola, West Hawa'i'i Today or the Honolulu Star -Advertiser newspapers. J. Curtis Tyler III, Nliccale Lui and Greg Kashiwa did provide information concerning lands of HClualoa lst Ahupuca'a. There were no past or ongoing cultural practices identified with lands at the current project area. Impacts and Mitigation Measures The following text has been quoted from SCS's CIA for the Project (Appendix 4). Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 45 An analysis of the potential effect of the proposed construction of residences on cultural resources, practices or beliefs, its potential to isolate cultural resources, practices or beliefs frorn their setting, and the potential of the project to introduce elements which may alter the setting in which cultural practices take place is a requirement of the CDEQC No. 10, 1997. used on historical research and responses from the above listed contacts, it is reasonable to conclude that, there would be no traditional cultural practices affected and there would be no direct adverse effect upon cultural practices or beliefs in the brooder project area region. Linder the No Action Alternative, no impacts to cultural practices or sites would occur. Cumulative Imp°cts Through ori -going consultation, no cultural practices have been identified in the Project Site, Any potential impacts to cultural sites from the Proposed Project would be mitigated, therefore, no cumulative impacts frorn the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions are anticipated to cultural practices or sites. 3.6 Historic and Archaeological Resources An archaeological inventory survey CAIS) was conducted in 1984 for the entire project except for a 5 -acre portion in TMK (3j 7-6-021:017 of the project site (CSH 1984). In a letter to the County of la ai`i Planning Department dated July 30, 2018, (Log. No. 2018.00878 Doc. No. 1807SN01), the SHPD requested a new pedestrian survey to identify all archaeological historic properties present in the Project Site and an update of the previous archaeological documentation to include site plans for each site with site boundaries and areas impacted by bulldozing, photographs of all sites and features, an assessment of their integrity, and site significance. Kona Three contracted with SCS to conduct an inventory on 76.1 acres to update the original 1984 area and a second archaeological inventory was conducted on the 5 -acre portion that had been previously excluded. Based on an interview with a local resident, the five -acre section of the project area was excluded from the original AIS because the property owners were planning to dive the five acres to a group to use as a school. The two most current AISs are included in Appendix 5, and the results are summarized below, Existing Resources In the AIS for the 76.121 -acre portion of the project site, 18 archaeological sites were identified and recorded. Fifteen of the sites were previously documented in Royal Vrrstas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 46 the 1984 AIS and three sites were previously unrecorded and included a srnall coffee shed enclosure (Site TS -1), several ranch walls (Site TS -2), and a possible petroglyph (Isolated Find -1). The Draft AIS was submitted in March 2020. Six of the 18 sites recorded were determined to be pre -Contact era, three associated with habitation, one with agriculture, a single petroglyph site, and one single feature site (Site 1001 2) contained two burials. The remaining 12 sites were determined to be historic era, with many of the sites associated with coffee agriculture and cattle ranching, as well as two historic era habitation site The following text is from the AIS submitted in 2020 for the 76. 121 -acre portion of the Project Site (Appendix 5). AM of the archaeological sites were assessed significant under criterion "d" as they are likely to yield information important to prehistory and/or history_ The railroad berm Site 30592 is also significant under criteria "a" and "c- it is c'°itis associated with events that have made a significant contrfbutlon to the broad patterns of our history and it embodies dislinctive characteristics of the type, period, and method of railroad bed construction, A petroglyph (Isolated Find -1) is also significant criterion "e" as it has important value to Hawaiian people and people of other ethnic backgrounds in the state. The railroad berm Site 30592 and the petroglyph were recommended for preservation with preservation measures to be outlined in an archaeological Preservation Plan. The petroglyph (Site TS -1) is recommended for preservation in a safe location on the project area. No further work was recommended at the remaining 16 sites. Site 10012, a pre -Contact site described in the 1984 AIS, included two burials. The burials were removed and reinterred off -project prior to 1984. The site was further excavated to ensure that all i,il had been removed. The site was then back -tilled and leveled by bulldozer. In the AIS for the 5.0 -acre portion of the project site, 22 newly identified archaeological sites were recorded. The AIS was accepted by SHPD (Log No. 2018,01 123, Doc. No. 1805Sh105) {Appendix 5). The following text is from the AIS prepared for the 5.0 -acre portion (Appendix .5). The sites are primarily agricultural terraces associated with pre -Contact era to Historic era agriculture. Several rock walls and enclosures are associated with Historic era agriculture and ranching. A pre -Contact era to later post- Contact era lava tube burial and a portion of the old railroad berm were also recorded. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 47 MI 22 sites identified during the current AIS study were assessed significant under criterion "d" as they are likely to yield information important to history, The railroad berm is also significant under criteria "a" and "c" as it is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of aur history and it embodies distinctive characteristics of the type. period, and method of railroad bed construction, The burial is also significant criterion ''e" as it hos important value to Hawaiian people and people of other ethnic backgrounds in the state, The burial is recommended for preservation in place with preservation treatments to be outlined in a Burial Site Component of a Preservation Plan (BSCPP), which has been completed and approved. The railroad berm is recommended for preservation with preservation measures to be outlined in an archaeological preservation plan now under review by SHPD. Impacts and Mitigation The preservation of the railroad berm (Site 30592) and petroglyph (IF -1) with a Preservation Plan would prevent impacts to archaeological resources from the Project (Appendix 61. The Preservation Plan was drafted in February 2019 for the railroad berm, and revised in March 2020 to include preservation of the petroglyph which was located in the subsequent AIS. The Preservation Plan outlines short-term and icing -term preservation measures for the railroad berm, cis well as archaeological monitoring during construction. During construction, a 20 -foot buffer from the western perimeter of the berm would be established with orange fencing. An archaeological monitor would be required for any construction work using earthmoving equipment in close proximity to the buffer. No construction activities would take place between the railroad berm and the eastern property boundary except for the breaches allowed for access as outlined in the Preservation Plan. Any construction within 30 feet of the railroad bed and berm would be monitored by an archaeological monitor. A permanent preservation buffer would be established twenty feet from the western perimeter of Site 30592, excluding the approved breaches. Native ornamental plants may be used to mark the 20 -foot preservation buffer, excluding the breaches. No use of heavy earthmoving equipment would be allowed within the twenty foot buffer. Hand tools only would be permitted within the twenty -foot permanent preservation buffer, excluding the breaches. Kona Three is responsible for keeping the easement clear and open, and ensuring pedestrian access to the site. Parking is available on "Io Place. Access would be permitted seven days o week, one-half hour before sunrise to one-half hour after sunset. Signage would also be placed at the railroad bed at the end of 'lo Place, Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 48 Under the No Action Alternative, no impacts to historic or archaeological resources would occur, Cumulative Impacts Fallowing implementation of an archaeological preservation plan, there are not expected to be any impacts to historic or archaeological resources from the Project,' therefore, no cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions are anticipated to historic or archaeological resources, 3.7 Infrastructure 3.7.1 Utilities and Public Services including Wastewater Treatment and Solid Waste Management Existing Facilities and Services The Project would also increase demand for services from residents during construction and occupancy including utilities, services, infrastructure, school, and governrnent. Electrical power to the Project Site would be supplied by Hawaii Electric Light Company. A comment from Clyde Hembypointed out that the name of the utilityprovider was incorrect [Appendix lb). Telephone and data service are „ vir,ed ... cal f jtje. Wastewater would be disposed of through a tie-in with the County sewer system. During Project operation, solid waste would be hauled off site by c private contractor on a regular basis to a solid waste management facility in compliance with the applicable provisions (HAI?, Chapter 1 1-58A, "Solid Waste Management Control"). No burning of wastes would occur on site during construction or during operation of the Proposed Project. Fire, police, and emergency management services are available in this part of North Kona. A police station is located in Kona, about five miles north of the Project Site. The Kcilua Are Station k located approximately 3.5 miles northeast of the Project Site. Emergency medical services are provided by the Hawai `i County Fire Department. Emergency medical services are available at Kona Community Hospital, approximately 7.5 miles to the south. Kahakcai and Holuoloa Elementary Schools are the nearest public elementary schools to the Proposed Project, approximately 1.2 miles west and 1 mile east, respectively, of the Project Site. In a Final EA prepared for a new classroom building for Kealakehe Elementary School in 2018, the Department of Education ( DOE) projected the school could see a growth of approxirfi-ately 33 students from 2015 to 2021 at the nearby Kealakehe Elementary School (DOE 2018). it is Royal Vistas Housing Project Envtronmentral Assessment 4s reasonable that the same level of growth could be assumed for Kahakai and Holucloa Elementary Schools. With a current student population of 749 students at Kahakai (DOE 2019a) and 519 students at Holualoa Elementary (DOE 2019b), this would be a three percent increase over a six-year period. Kealakehe Intermediate School is the nearest intermediate school, located approximately 3.2 miles north of the Project Site. Konawaena High and Kealckehe High School are the nearest public high schools, located approximately 7.9 miles south and 2.8 miles north, respectively, of the Project Site. Current student populations at the Intermediate school is 689 (DQE 2019c). There are currently 1,374 students at Keelokehe High School and 831 students at Koncwaena High School (DQE 2019d and 2019e). According to a letter received during early consultation, Konawaena Intermediate has capacity for additional students for the next five years, and the remaining schools are currently over capacity and expected to remain over capacity for the next five years (Appendix 1), Additionally, Hcwai i Community College - Pa lamanui campus sand the University of Hawaii Center, West Hawaii, are located approximately 10 miles north of the Project Site. The nearest private schools are Makua Lani Christian Academy approximately 9 miles north of the Project Site, and West Hawaii Explorations Academy Public Charter School is approximately 8 miles northwest of the Project Site, The Proposed Project is designed to serve the demand of the existing mid -market population of North Kona, which as described in the socioeconomics section consists of households that are currently overcrowded or doubled -up in market rate rentals. impacts and Mitigation Measures Electricity and telephone/data service would be extended from existing Fines. There could be minimal impacts from solid waste generated from construction. However, these would be hauled off-site. Since the development is approximately 450 units, the Project would result in moderate impacts to the county solid waste disposal system if occupancy is at 100 percent. Trash from all parts of Hawaii Island are trucked north of Kona to the Pu'uanahulu landfill, which has anywhere from 20 to 100 years capacity (HPR 2020) . The Project is expected to serve the existing demand for m[d-market housing for on -island residents.. According to a comment letter received on the Draft EA from the Department of Education, the Project is expected to house approximately 99 HIDOE students. Royal Vrrst rs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 50 Although the Proposed Project is located within the West Hawaii School Impact Fee District, the DCBE has currently suspended fee collections, Kona Three would coordinate with DOE and comply with all applicable DOE requirements at the time of Project implementation. Although this may result in a shift or addition of approximately 99 students potentially from other on -island or North Kona DOE schools, the Proposed Project would provide much-needed housing for residents including families. The net of impact of the Project to the midmarket community in general is expected to be positive compared to the impacts to facilities. Mult le comments identified potential issues to local schools from the development (Appendix 1b). Since the prpioci wpod..b c nstroct d in phases, occupancy would occur over an extendeci.. period of time and not all new students would be added 1I once but rather over a longer period of time. Under the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Project would. not be constructed and the site would remain unchanged from current conditions and no utilities would be needed and no solid waste from the Proposed Project would be generated. Cumulative Impacts Existing utilities and public services have and plan for the capacity to accommodate developments such as the Proposed Project, therefore, cumulative impacts from the Proposed Project in combination with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions are expected to be minor. 3,7.2 Traffic Existing and Proposed Facilities The concept of level -of -service (LCIS) is often used to describe the quality of traffic flow. There are six levels -of -service, A through F, which relate to the driving conditions from best to worst, respectively. In general, LOS A represents free-flow conditions with no congestion. LOS F, on the other hand, represents severe congestion with stop -and -go conditions. LCIS b is typically considered acceptable for peak hour conditions in urban areas. LOS is usually applied to peak hour traffic, which is the "worst-case" scenario_ A traffic study for the Proposed Project conducted by SSFM International included analysis at eight existing intersections on Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway (Appendix 2). Five intersections were analyzed north of the Project Site: 1) Palani Road, 2j Henry Street, 3) Hualalai Road (North), 4) Hualalai Road (South), and 5) Puapuaanui Street. Three additional intersections south of the Project Site were Royal Vistas housing Project Environmental Assessment 51 also analyzed: 6) Kuakini Highway, 7) Lako Street, 8) Kamehameha IH Road (Figure 8). In the vicinity of the Project Site, Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway (Route 19) is undivided, two-lane, State-owned arterial, oriented in the north -south direction. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway extends from Kawaihae Road (Route 19) in the north to the intersection with PPalcani Road (Route 130) where it turns into State Route 11. The posted speed limit varies from 45 to 55 miles per hour (mph). Approximately 2.4 miles north of the Project Site, Queen Ka'ahumonu Highway opens to four to five lanes with dedicated left turning and right turning lanes at maj oa intersections. Turning movement counts were recorded at each of the intersections at peak morning and afternoon traffic hours. The peak hours for the local roadway network were found to be between 7:40cm to 8:OOam and 3:45 to 4:45pm. Existing LOS were determined for the morning and evening (AM/PM] peak hours at each of the eight intersections. The results are included in the TIAR (Appendix 2). Impacts and Mitigation The TIAR calculated the projected increase in background traffic volumes within the local roadway network (without the Proposed Project) in 2024 and 2029 (Appendix 2: Tables 12, 13, 19, and 20). Background traffic volumes are volumes not directly associated with the development proposed. These volumes are comprised of regional volumes using Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and the rest of the local roadway network to travel past the Proposed Project. A background growth rate of one percent per year was assumed, to account for additional traffic et the intersections. Ihis onepercent takes into account the followint c posad c rc .. 2e . za5c,ht I;h vrnngsliC gttlitn _Egan ; and Pualani Mviakai development. The TIAR also assessed impacts from the Proposed Project following completion of 258 units in Phase I (2024) and then following completion of 192 units in Phase II (2029) )Appendix 2: Tables 14, 15, 21, and 22). Only one roadway is planned to provide access for Phase l of the Proposed Project. This roadway would intersect with Queen Kr 'ahumcnu Highway, approximately 600 feet north of the intersection with Kuakini Highway. In the TZAR this Proposed Project access road is referred to as "Royal Vistas Roadway." The TIAR analyzed impacts of the Proposed Project under the presumption that the Royal Vistas Roadway approach would have a left turn and a right turn lane. Turn lanes for this road would be provided for the southbound left turn and northbound right turn into the Proposed Project, Right turns would be channelized and this intersection was analyzed as a two-way stop -controlled intersection. A Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 52 crosswalk would be provided on the east side of the intersection for pedestrian connectivity to cross Royal Vistas Roadway. There would be a refuge lane for westbound Ieft turns onto Queen Ka`ahurnanu Highway to make this turn easier for drivers. The expected future Zane configuration is shown in Figure 9 and close-up of the intersection is shown on Figure 10. The traffic analysis for Phase 1 of the Proposed Project indicates the only detectable changes to LOS under the With Project condition would occur at one turn movement. The Hualaid Westbound Right turn ot the Queen Ka`ahurnanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) intersection is predicted to decrease from LOS E to F in morning traffic. Under the Without Project condition, the analysis for 2024 projects a decrease in LOS at bath (1 ) Queen Ka `ahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street intersection (from LOS A to B in the morning and evening) and (2) Queen Ka `ahumanu Highway and Lako Street intersection (from LOS C to Din the morning) . No other turning movement at any other intersection or turn movement within the roadway network is projected (in 2024) to demonstrate a detectable delay increase (Appendix 2). The traffic analysis for Phase ll of the Project indicates the detectable changes to LOS under the With Project condition include: i 1) afternoon decrease from LOS C to D in the Hualalai westbound right turn movement at Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) intersection; (2) morning decrease from LOS C to Din the Queen Ko`ahumanu northbound Ieft turn movement at the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Kuakiniii Highway intersection: and morning decrease from LOS B to C at the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway!Kamehameha 111 Road intersection. Linder the Without Project condition, the analysis for 2029 projects a decrease in LOS at the following: (1) afternoon decrease from. LOS C to D at the Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Henry Street intersection; (2) morning decrease from LOS E to F Hualalai westbound right turn at the Queen Kc'ahumanu Highway and Huafalai Road (South) intersection; and (3) morning decrease from LOS C to D at Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Loko Street intersection (Appendix 2j. The traffic analysis indicates that only one intersection and two turn movements would experience decreased LOS under the With Project condition, and many vehicle trip delay issues are unrelated to the Proposed Project (i.e., they would occur even if the Project did not proceed} (Appendix 2). Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 53 Figure 8 Local Intersections Studied for the Project prp1*,h $ileo CO Stan C Mona trove F':rrA.il':l'fu. fk,1rk:F, . nt [ o aif Figure A to.' 111 Intrl!, r,. UU,1 a Slurried For their Proiecl Royal Vrrst rs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 54 5yvre 9 Proposed Improvements to Project Intersection with Queen Ka°ahumanu .60 T" --- i ti 1 V ?i mm 111 ice r.i �... �.-�_-.... _.. -,GI-1 1L'+1 I:OV Royof Ve.tas Housing Protect Envi^onmenta, Assessment 55 410L0.4t2a SfiLl F e -up of Proposed Improveme 4EN,0' w-. i Q,ll7 'EW`R WOE �4CCEiMFT7V1 JVr IQ 7 to Pr-"= tin new ij ren-or.,s JFQ \ `,. 17 iu rY� ' M.M .NJ 440444Y NEW I7 wIFe LEFT 1j/R4 L+he 'SW I2» 71-WL64 amE new ti .' w ROYAL VISTA; ROADWAY kIIGF-MAY INE CTIOh4 GRAPHICAL SCALE ac a xr SCALE .ar Royof Vetas F cus+ng Protect Envi^onmentp, Assessment 55 uc The Kona CDP includes the official Transportation Network Map - Nani Kailua Area and shows future connections of 'minor collectors' running parallel to Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway in the location of the Proposed Project, extending Hoomama Street to Leilani Street and Paulehia Street to Kekuana`oa Place (Figure 11). While the exact tiring of these improvements is unknown, it is not expected they would be completed prior to Phase] (Le., in 2024). The most likely scenario is that the developers of Royal Vistas would construct a collector road to the south before the completion of Phase 11. The connection of these roads north to the Pualani Estates subdivision is not proposed for this Project, since these roads cross INK (3) 7-6-013:004 which is owned by the Frank and Betty Gornes Trust (Figure 11. In addition, the traffic impact analysis shows no impacts to LOS from the Project above the background rate at the intersection of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street which is the main entrance to Pualani Estates subdivision. Potential impacts to the Kona Vistas subdivision would be alleviated by constructing the Royal Vistas Roadway intersection with Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. Also, the traffic impact analysis shows no impacts to LOS from the Project above the background rate to the intersection of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Lako Street which is the main entrance to he neighboring Kona Vistas subdivision. As shown on Figure 2 and explained under Roads in the Project description (Section 1.3), one existing County -owned road would be extended (Kekuana'oa Street), the Leilani Street extension would be constructed and stubbed -out on the south end of the Project Site at the Calvary Church property between the Project and Kona Vistas, and one new road would be constructed (Royal Vistas Roadway). All would be dedicated to the County as kart of the Proposed Project. Based on pmm .nts received on the Draft EA an potential im.pacts.ta,traffic.frc.,m the connector roads (Appendix lb), Figure 3 shows the location and phasing of those c9npecto,r roads While Figure 11 from the Kona CDP shows connector roads connecting County -owned Leilani Street (in the Kona vistas project) to County -owned Hcy"omama Street (in the Pualani Estates project) and Kekuana'oa Street (in the Kona Vistas project) to County -owned Paulehia Street (in the Pualani Estates project), these connections would not be built as part of the Proposed Project. Additionally, no mauka-makai connector roads from Hualalai Road to Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway are proposed as part of the Proposed Project. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have no effect to neighbors in adjacent subdivisions from Phase I, and only minimal impacts after Phase 11. Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 57 Figure 11 CDP Transportation Network Map In the Vicinity of the Project ' 03ii.a _.. �.: irilrl rrr git�Lr li k:..l n.,, dpi I I•r-mlrn'n' Prnpntonti rransot Unit' Cr:,: II .I,.I , .ul1.i11ry Policy Layer a Twill yl.r TOO Typo NogrtDremtl PrOw.w i"rrnu' Ottani urryPn Ai" —rrl.l . •.I.e ... rl _F€A:1 1 in h eqi rsll% 2.0001 'ri~!. Sof pre. County of f"tr74Vriit Tire Ccw ty ofHow iu Plurirrfrlg Deparlmenf.,s the repository of the official reap Kana Community Uavalopii^ r: 'I • ' I' ura 4-2o Official Craraporiai➢an Natwork Map - Nen, Kullua hrua Figure 10: CRP Transportation Network Map in the Vicinity of the Project Area Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 58 Additionally, any work that is conducted within the County Right -of -Way would conform to Chapter 22 - County Streets - of the Hawaii County Code, Under the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Project would not be constructed, and the site would remain unchanged from current conditions and LOS are predicted to decline in 2024 and 2029 as shown in the Without Project fables in Appendix 2. Cumulative Irnpocts The predicted impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects are estimated for 2024 and 2029 in Appendix 2. The predicted cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project in addition to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions are estimated in the With Project projections in Appendix 2. As stated above, the traffic analysis indicates the only detectable changes to LOS in the With Project condition in 2024 and 2029 would occur at one intersection and two turn movements, and other predicted delays are not predicted as a result of the Project. The cumulative traffic analysis completed for this Project was conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic reduced traffic. The traffic analysis included a backgroundgrowth rate that tock into account nearby projects that are proposed in the vicinity of the Proposed Project includjnq: Penalozc School; Youth Gymnastic and Sports Fitness Facility; and Pualr ni M akai development. Based on existing traffic volumes and future projections of traffic from Royal Vistas on the surrounding roadways and input the following system -wide intersection improvements are recommended in the TIAR (Appendix 2) for ongoing consideration by Hawaii County and the Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT): 1. Queen Ka'ahurronu Highway and Palani Road: monitor and update signal timing to ensure left turn queues clear every cycle. 2. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Henry Street: monitor and update signal timing to ensure left turn queues clear every cycle. 3. Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North): depending on monitoring, a traffic signal may need to be installed but priority should be given to keep Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway traffic moving. 4. Queen Ka"ahumanu Highway and Hualolai Road (South): monitor future traffic. 5. Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Pucpuaanui Street: monitor and update signal timing to increase traffic clearing the Queen Ka`ahumanu intersection in one cycle. Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 59 6. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway: monitor future traffic .a .5n ..rt a traffic_ .5i nal.st! v. 7. Queen Ka'ahumonu Highway and Loko Street: consider changing the phasing from split to protected left turns to help lower the predicted delay, suggest further traffic study to analyze signal ,I • •'fi a 'off. This intersection would also improve significantly if Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway is widened to four lanes as in the 2035 Transportation Plan. 8. Queen Ka `ahumcnu Highway and Kcimehameha III Road: monitor and update signal tinting as needed. 3.8 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources A commitment of resources is irreversible when primary or secondary impacts limit the future options for a resource; an irretrievable commitment refers to the use or consumption of resources that are neither renewable nor recoverable for future Use. All the land to be used by the Proposed Project is in a State Land Use Urban District and, therefore, has been characterized by "city -like" concentrations of people, structures and services. This District also includes vacant areas for future development. No new land would be irreversibly and irretrievably committed as a result of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would require the commitment of natural, physical, and human resources to plan, design, construct, and operate. Diesel fuel to power equipment would be used during Proposed Project construction and building materials, such as concrete and asphalt, would be consumed. Some of those materials could ultimately be recycled for reuse, those that are not would be expended. 3.9 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts No unavoidable adverse impacts from the Proposed Project are anticipated. 3.10 Unresolved Issues No unresolved issues for the LA have been identified. 3.11 Required Permits and Approvals The Proposed Project requires granting the following permits and approvals, which are listed by responsible agency: Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 6D • County of Hawaii. Department of Public Works, Building Division Approval and Building Permit • County of I awai'L, Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, Grading Permit • County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, Drainage Plan • County of Hawaii, Planning Department Plan Approval • State Department of Health, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit • State Historic Preservation Division, Chapter 6e Historic Sites Clearance • State Department of Tronsportation - Highways Division, Permit to Perform Work in State ROW • County Council - Approval of Amendments to Zoning Ordinance 3.1.E Consistency with Government Plans and Policies 3.12.1 Hawaii State Land Use Law, Hawaii State Plan, and State Housing Functional Plan The subject parcels are designated as Urban by the State Land Use Commission, and State Land Use Commission Docket No, A83-549 dehermined the status of condition compliance for these land use entitlements. The Hawaii State Plan (Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 226, as amended} 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 Hawaii State Plan are individual and family self- sufficiency, social and economic mobility, and community or social well-being. The Proposed Project would provide much needed raid -market housing to residents of North Kona. The Proposed Project is consistent with the State Plan objectives and policies related to housing and facility systems as cited below: Ch. 226-4 State goals. In order to ensure, for present and future generations, those elements of choice and mobility that ensure that individuals and groups may approach their desired levels of self-reliance and self-determination, it shall be the goal of the State to achieve: (1) A strong, viable economy, characterized by stability, ci!`versiiy, and growth, that enables the fulfillment of Me needs and expectations of Hawaii's present and future generations. Royal Vista's Housing Project Environmental Assessment 61 (2) A desired physical environment, characterized by beauty, cleanliness, quiet, stable natural systems, and uniqueness, that enhances the mental and physical welt -being of the people. (3) Physical, social, and economic well-being, for individuals and families in Hawaii, that nourishes a sense of community responsibility, of caring, and of participation in community life. The Proposed Project would meet this goal by providing choices for mid- market/workforce families in North Kona to rent or buy homes in communities near their work. Ch. 226-5 Objective and policies for population. (a) It shat+ be the objective in planning for the State's population to guide population growth to be consistent with the achievement of physical, economic, and social objectives contained in this chapter. (b) To achieve the population objective, it shall be the policy of this State to: (I) Manage population growth statewide in a manner that provides increased opportunities for Hawaii's people to pursue their physical, social, and economic aspirations while recognizing the unique needs of each county. (2) Encourage an increase in economic activities and employment opportunities on the neighbor islands consistent with community needs and desires. (3) Promote increased opportunities for Hawaii's people to pursue their socio- economic aspirations throughout the islands. (4) Encourage research activities and public awareness programs to foster an understanding of Hawaii`s limited capacity to accommodate population needs and to address concerns resulting from an increase in Hawaii's population. (5) Encourage federal actions and coordination among major governmental agencies to promote a more balanced distribution of immigrants among the states, provided that such actions do not prevent the reunion of immediate family members, (6) Pursue or increase in federal assistance for states with a greater proportion of foreign immigrants relative to their state's population. (7) Plan the development and avoilobility of land and water resources in a coordinated manner so as to provide for the desired levels of growth in each geographic area. Royal Vrrstas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 62 By providing mid -market housing to those that need it, the Proposed Project would promote increased opportunities for local residents to pursue their socio- economic aspirations, Ch. 226-13 Objectives and policies for the physical environment --land, air, and water quality. (a) Planning for the State's physical environment with regard to land, air, and water quality shall be directed towards achievement of the following objectives: (1) maintenance and pursuit of improved quality in Hawaii's land, oir, and water resources. (2) Greater public awareness and appreciation of Hawaii's environmental resources. (b) To achieve the land, air, and water quality objectives, it shad be the policy of this State to: (i) Foster educational activities that promote a better understanding of Hawaii's limited environmental resources. (2) Promote the proper management of Hawaii's land and wafer resources. (3) Promote effective measures to achieve desired quality in Hawaii's surface, ground, and coastal waters. (4) Encourage actions to maintain or improve aural and air quality levels to enhance the health and well-being of Hawaii's people. (5) Reduce the threat to fife and property from erosion, flooding, tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and other natural or man - induced hazards and disasters. (6) Encourage design and construction prcac tices that enhance the physical qualities of Hawaii's communities. (7) Encourage urban developments in close proximity to existing services and facilities. (8) Foster recognition of the importance and value of the land. air, and water resources to Hawaii's people, their cultures and visitors. Inc Proposed Project has been designed to minimize impacts to natural and cultural resources during construction and operation as described in the resource sections above. Royal Vrrstas Housing Project environmental Assessment 6-3 Ch. 226-15 Objectives and policies for facility systems --solid and liquid wastes. (a) Planning for the State's facility systems with regard to solid and liquid wastes shall be directed towards the achievement of the following objectives: (1) Maintenance of basic public health and sanitation standards relating to treatment and disposal of solid and liquid wastes. (2) Provision of adequate sewerage facilities for physical and economic activities that alleviate problems in housing, employment, mobility, and other areas, (b) To achieve solid and liquid waste objectives, it shall be the policy of this State to. (1) Encourage the adequate development of sewerage facilities that complement planned growth, (2) Promote reuse and recycling to reduce solid and liquid wastes and employ c conservation ethic, (3) Promote research to develop more efficient and economical treatment and disposal of solid and liquid wastes. As described in the water quality and water quantity section above, the Proposed Project has been designed to maintain basic public health and sanitation standards by tying with the County sewer service. As the final phase of the larger development, the Proposed Project complements planned growth as port of the authorized 1984 zoning ordinance. Ch. 226-16 Objective and policies for facility systems water. (a) Planning for the State's facility systems with regard to water shall be directed towards achievement of the objective of the provision of water to adequately accomrncd-J,e domestic, agricultural, commercial, industrial, recreational, and other need s w; t - n resource capacities. (b) To achieve the facility systems water objective, it shall be the policy of this State to: (1) Coordinate development of land use activities with existing rind potential water supply. (2) Support research and development of alternative methods to meet future water requirements well in advance of anticipated needs. (3) fecfaim and encourage the productive use of runoff water and wastewater discharges. Royal Vrrstas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 64 (4) Assist in improving the quality, efficiency, service, and storage capabilities of water systems for domestic and agricultural use. (5) Support water supply services to areas experiencing critical water problems. (6) Promote water conservation programs and practices in government, private industry, and the general public to help ensure adequate water to meet long-term needs. As described in the water quality and quantity section above, the Proposed Project would utilize the existing water supply through coordination with DWS and meet that objective. Through water efficient fixtures and xeriscape landscaping, it would meet the water conservation objective. Ch. 226-19 Objectives and policies for socio -cultural advancement - housing. (a) Planning for the State's socio -cultural advancement with regard to housing shall be directed toward the achievement of the faliowing objectives: (l) Greater opportunities for Hawaii's people to secure reasonably priced, safe, sanitary, and livable homes, located in suitable environments that satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individual, through collaboration and cooperation between government and nonprofit and for-profit developers to ensure that more affordable housing is made available to extremely low-, very lbw-, lower-, moderate-, and above moderate -income segments of Hawaii's population. (2) The orderly develapmenl of residential areas sensitive to community needs and other and uses (3) The development and provision of affordable rental housing by the State to meet the housing needs of Hawaii's people. (b) To achieve the housing objectives, itshafl be the policy of this State to: (1) Effectively accommodate the housing needs of Hawaii's people. (2) Stimulate and promote feasible approaches that increase housing choices for low income, moderate -income, and gap -group households. (3) increase homeownership and rental opportunities and choices in terms of quality, location, cost, densities, style, cnd size of housing. (4) Promote appropriate improvement, rehabilitation, and maintenance of existing housing units and residential areas. (5) Promote design and location of housing developments faking into account the physical setting, accessibility to public facilities and services, and other concerns of existing communities and surrounding areas. Royal Vrrstas Housing Project Environmeritcr Assessment 65 (6) Facilitate the use of available vacant, developable, crnd underutilized urban lands for housing. (7) Foster a variety of lifestyles traditional to Hawaii through the design and maintenance of neighborhoods that reflect the culture and values of the community. (8) Promote research orad development of methods to reduce the cost of housing construction in Hawaii. The Proposed Project would meet this objective by providing the mid- market/workforce population {a gap -group) housing options to buy or rent in North Kona. The Project Site is zoned for multi -family residential and is ars in -fill project an vacant land that is surrounded by residential development and has utilities available. Ch. 226-104 Population growth and land resources priority guidelines. (a) Priority guidelines to effect desired statewide growth and distribution: (1) Encourage planning and resource management to ensure that population growth rates throughout the State are consistent with available and planned resource capacities and reflect the needs and desires of Hawaii's people. (2) Manage a growth rote for Hawaii's economy that will parallel future employment needs for Hawaii's people. (3) Ensure thcrt adequate support services and facilities are provided to accommodate the desired distribution of future growth throughout the State. (4) Encourage major state and federal investments and services to promote economic development and private investment to the neighbor islands, as appropriate. (5) Explore the possibility of making available urban land, low-interest loans, and housing subsides to encourage the provision of housing to support selective economic and population growth on the neighbor islands. (6) Seek federal funds crnd other funding sources outside the State for research, program development, and training to provide future employment opportunities on the neighbor islands. (7) Support the development of high technology parks on the neighbor islands. (b) Priority guidelines for regional growth distribution and land resource u tllizcrfton: (1) Encourage urban growth primarily to existing urban areas where adequate public facilities are already available or can be provided with reasonable public expenditures, and away from areas where other important benefits are Royal' Vrrstas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 66 present, such as protection of important agricultural /and or preservation of lifestyles. (2) Make available marginal or nonessential agricultural lends for appropriate urban uses while maintaining agricultural lands of importance in the agricultural cfisfrict. (3) Restrict development when clrofting of water would result in exceeding the sustainable yield or in significantly diminishing the recharge capacity of any groundwater area. (4) Encourage restriction of new urban development in areas where water is insufficient from any source for both agricultural and domestic use. (5) in order to preserve green belts, give priority to state capital -improvement funds which encourage location of urban development within existing urban areas except where compelling public interest dictates development of a noncontiguous new urban core. (6) Seek participation from the private sector for the cost of building infrastructure and utilities, and maintaining open spaces. (7) Pursue rehabilitation of appropriate urban areas. (8) Support the redevelopment of Kakaako into a viable residential, industrial, and commercial community. (9) Direct future urban development away from critical environmental areas or impose mitigating measures so that negative impacts on the environment would be minimized. (lO) Identify critical environmental areas in Hawaii to include but not be limited to the following: watershed and recharge areas; wildlife habitats (on land and in the ocean); areas with endangered species of plants and wildlife; natural streams and water bodies; scenic and recreational shoreline resources: open space and natural areas, historic and cultural sites; areas particularly sensitive to reduction in water and air quality; and scenic resources. (1 l) identify coli areas where priority should be given to preserving rural character and lifestyle. (12) Utilize Hawaii's limited land resources wisely, providing adequate land to accommodate projected population and economic growth needs while ensuring the protection of the environment and the availability of the shoreline, conservation lands, and other limited resources for future generations. (13) Protect and enhance Hawaii's shoreline, open spaces, and scenic resources. Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 67 The Proposed Project helps meet the demand for mid -market housing in North Kona, which is needed to support existing needs as well as predicted population growth in the area. It is located on vacant land in an urban area surrounded by residential development with utilities available. Ch. 226-108 (2) -- Sustainability. (1) Encouraging balanced economic, social, community, and environmental priorities; (2) Encouraging planning that respects and promotes living within the natural resources and limits of the State; (3) Promoting a diversified and dynamic economy; (4) Encouraging respect for The host culture; (5) Promoting decisions based on meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations; (6) Considering the principles of the ohupuaa system; and (7) Emphasizing that everyone, including individuals, families, communities, businesses, and government, has the responsibility for achieving a sustainable Hawaii. The Project Site is within the Urban Expansion and Low Density Urban zoning district in the LUPAG, and is consistent with this designation. The Proposed Project would provide much needed housing options for the mid-market/workforce population in North Kona, and meets the sustainability objective by meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations and promotes living within the natural resources and limits of the State. Chapter 205 Hawaii Revised Statutes classifies all land in the State of Hawaii into one of four land use categories - Urban, Rural, Agricultural, or Conservation - and determines permissible uses in each district. The Project Site is in the State Land Use Urban District. The proposed use is consistent with intended uses for this land use district. 3.12.2 Coastal Zone Management Program (Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes) HRS 205A defines the coastal zone as "all the lands of the State and the area extending seaward from the shoreline to the limit of the State's police power and management authority, including the United States territorial sea", the Project Site is located in the coastal zone management area. Royal Vistas housing Project Environmental Assessment 68 The Project Site is located approximately 0.85 mixes mauk-a of the shoreline at an elevations from 330 to 900 feet amsl and would not influence coastal process or conditions. The Proposed Project would also have no impact to coastal recreation opportunities, historic resources, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems. economic uses, coastal hazards, managing development, public participation, beach protection, and marine resources (HAR § 20.5A-2). Detailed explanations of potential impacts are described above in the environmental consequences secfions. As the site and actions on ft are not likely to influence coastal processes or conditions within coastal areas, no potential impacts are anticipated. 3.12.3 Hawai'€ County Zoning, Special Management Area, and General Plan The subject parcels are zoned Multiple -Family Residential, with a minimum building site of 5,030 square feet per dwelling u nit (RM -5), by the County of Hawaii. County of Hawaii Ordinance No. 02-131, which amended previous ordinances to establish zoning on the parcels. As described in Section 1.2, the Project is the final residential development identified in the zoning ordinance (No. B4-23 signed in 1984, and subject to subsequent amendments. An amendment is required in order to provide additional time to commence construction of the Project, This amendment request would be reviewed by the Planning Commission, with a decision by the County Council. Aside from the need for more time, this Project and the zoning that supports it continues to conform with the original findings and reasons for its approval by the County Council in 1984, and as amended as recently as in 2002. County of Hawaii Ordinance 02-131 amended previous ordinances to establish the zoning on the properties and required the applicant comply with conditions A through 5, and the State Land Use Commission Docket No. A83-549, to determine the status of condition compliance for these land use entitlements. The General Plan for the County of Hawai`f is a policy document expressing the broad goals and policies for the long-range development of the Island of Hawoi°f (County of Hawaii' 2005). The plan was adopted by ordinance in 1989 and revised in 2005 (Hawai "i County Planning Deportment) . The Genera! Plan itself is organized into thirteen functional elements. In general, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the goals, policies and objectives, standards, and principles for several functional areas. This section addresses the consistency of the proposed action with relevant policies of the County. Housing Goals: • Attain safe, sanitary, and livable housing for the residents of the County of • Hawaii. Royal Vista's housing Project Environmental Assessment 69 • Attain a diversity of socio-economic housing mix throughout the different parts of the County. • Maintain a horsing supply that allows a variety of choices, • Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing inventory • Seek sufficient production of new affordable rental and fee -simple housing in the County in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals. • Encourage and expand home ownership opportunities for residents. Housing Policies: • Encourage a volume of construction and rehabilitation of housing sufficient to meet growth needs and correct existing deficiencies. • Increase rental opportunities and choices in terms of quality, cost, amenity, style and size of housing, especially for law and moderate income households. • Aid and encourage the development of a wide variety of housing to achieve o diversity of socio-economic housing mix. Discussion: The Proposed Project would incorporate measures to provide additional mid --market housing in a quickly growing part of the County. The location of the Proposed Project is adjacent to other housing developments and services for future residents, and would provide choices for the mid -market population in North Kona, Historic Sites Goals: • Protect and enhance the sites, buildings and objects of significant historical and cultural importance to Hawal'i. • Appropriate access to significant historic sites, buildings and objects of public interest should be made available. Discussion: No impacts to archaeological sites would occur from the Proposed Project. Natural Beauty Goals: • Protect scenic vistas and view planes from becoming obstructed. Maximize opportunities for present and future generations to appreciate and enjoy natural and scenic beauty. Discussion: The Proposed Project would not degrade the scenic environment of the area. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 70 Transportation Goals: • Provide a transportation system whereby people and goods can move efficiently, safely, comfortably and economically. Discussion: The Proposed Project would include constructing an intersection from ueen Ka`ahumanu Highway that would allow for safe ingress and egress during Project construction and occupancy. In addition, the Proposed Project would build and dedicate a substantial portion of the expanding County planned roadway grid system. Land Use Goals: • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural, and physical environments of the Cou nty. • Protect and preserve forest, water, natural and scientific reserves and open areas. Land Use Standards • The designated land uses will be delineated on the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map, The broad -brush boundaries indicated are graphic expressions of the General Plan policies, particularly those relating to land uses. They are long-range guides to general location and will be subject to: a) existing zoning; and b) State Land Use District. Similarly, the acreages allocated represent alternatives for the various levels of economic activity and supporting functions, such as resort, residential, commercial and industrial activities. Land required for community and governmental services and programs as well as new towns and resort centers may be accommodated within the allocated acreages. Discussion: The Hawai'f County General Pfan Land Use Pattern Affocafian Guide (LUPAG) and Facilities Map components of the General Plan are graphic representations of the Plan's goals, policies, and standards as well as of the physical relationship between land uses. They also establish the basic urban and non -urban four for areas and the planned public and cultural facilities, public utilities and safety features, and transportation corridors. The Project Site is within the Urban Expansion and Low Density Urban zoning district in the LUPAG. As discussed above in this section, the Project Site has been found to be consistent with this designation, The Proposed Project would provide much needed mid- market housing for residents in North Kona. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 71 3.12.4 Kona Community Development Plan The Kona CDP encompasses the judicial districts of North and South Kona was developed under the framework of the February 2005 County of Hawoi"i General Plan. The CDP is intended to translate broad General Plan Goals, Policies, and Standards into implementation actions as they apply to specific geographical regions around the County. The General Plan now requires that a CDP shall be adopted by the County Council as an "ordinance," giving the CCP 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. The Kona CDP was adopted in September 2008 and amended by Ordinance 19-91 in 2019 by the County Council. The version referenced in this Environmental Assessrrent is at: http://www.hawoiicountycdp.infa/north-and-south-trona-cdp/cdp-final-drafts. The Plan has many elements and wide-ranging implications, but there are several major strategies that embody the guiding principles related to the economy, energy, environmental quality, flooding and ether natural hazards, historic sites, natural beauty, natural resources and shoreline, housing, public facilities, public utilities, recreation, transportation, and land use. The Proposed Project's proposed development is consistent with all aspects of the Kona CDP, including three of the eight guiding principles: (1) provide connectivity and transportation choices; (2) provide housing choices; and (3), Provide infrastructure and essential facilities concurrent with growth. It is in keeping with the Plan's the Gocals, Objectives, Policies, and Actions to develop a system of interconnected roads in Kona (Section 4.1). In particular, Section 4.1.3: Objective TRAN-2 Street Network Connectivity, To develop a system of interconnected roads in Kona that will provide alternative transportation routes that will disperse automobile trips and reduce their length, while not compromising the through functions of arterials and major collectors with excessive intersections. Under this Objective, the Project complies with guiding principles established by the Kona Urban Area by promoting Policy TRAN-2.1: Connectivity Standards (5j Future Extensions and (6) Connectivity. It is in keeping with the Plan's the Goal, Objectives, Policies, and Actions to guide the development of housing in Kona (Section 4.5) . In particular, Section 4.5.3: Royal Vistas housing Project Environmental Assessment 72 Housing Goal: Diversity of housing choices for all segments of the population close to places of employment and/or daily needs, The Proposed Project specifically aligns with Objective HSG -4: Build More Units, Policy HSG -4.2: Workforce Housing and HSG -4.4: Housing Variety. The final guiding principle emphasizes that future growth should occur where infrastructure (roads and utilities) and essential facilities (i.e., police, fire, and schools) are already in place. These facilities should be maintained at a level that will enhance the quality of life for Kona residents, This project is the final phase of a larger residential development that sow the completion of Kona Vistas, a 215-un4, single-family residential project on approximately 103 acres. The zoning that supports both the existing Kona Vistas and proposed Royal Vistas projects spans over 35 years, As last amended in 2002 to provide for additional time by which to complete both projects, the completion of Royal Vistas is encouraged by the Kona CDP as an infill rezoning. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project environmental Assessment 73 PART 4: DETERMINATION B.sed on th- indi .s below a du o co •-,a ion oft e.ub •uati-i received during pre= -consultation and an the Draft EA, the County of Flowai'i Planninc [ _epartme.nt aas..de_t rmine:d that the used action will not significantly alter the environment and has accordingly issued o Finding of No Significant Impact (FONG). Royal Vistas lousing Project Environmental Assessment 74 PART 5: FINDINGS AND REASONS Chapter 11-200.1-13, HAR, outlines those factors agencies must consider when determining whether an Action has significant effects: 1. lrrevocobly commit a natural, cultural, or historic resource. No valuable natural or cultural resources would be committed or lost as a result of the Proposed Project. No impacts to archaeological resources would occur with the planned preservation of the railroad berm and petroglyph. 2. Curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment. The proposed mid- market housing development does not curtail beneficial uses of the environment and is consistent with the medium density zoning in the LUPAG and conforms to the guiding principles regarding urban growth patterns as defined by the Kona CDP. Conflict with the State's environmental policies or long-term environmental goals established by law. The State's Tong -term environrnental policies are set forth in Chapter 344, HRS. The broad goals of this policy are to conserve natural resources arid enhance the quality of life. The impact from the Proposed Project is minor and, therefore, is consistent with all elements of the, State's long-term environmental policies and environmental goals. 4. Have a substantial adverse effect on the economic, social welfare, or cultural practices of the community or State. The Proposed Project would not adversely affect the social welfare of the community and would contribute to services. The Proposed Project would generate work for the local construction industry, which would stimulate local economic spending. The Proposed Project would balance the social welfare of the community by providing infill mid -market housing and allow resident households better access and the ability to safely manage commutes between home, work, and recreation. Stable households lead to stable communities and associated workforce, and promotes a functional economy. 5. Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design. 6. involve adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. No adverse secondary effects are expected since the development would utilize existing infrastructure, provide infill housing, and is not expected to result in substantial demands to County services. 7. involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality. The impact from the Proposed Project k minor, and would thus not contribute to environmental degradation. BMs and appropriate erosion control measures would be utilized during construction. Short-term impacts on air Royal Vistas housing Project Environmental Assessment 75 and noise quality will be mitigated by employing BMPs. No Tong -term adverse impacts are expected from the Proposed Project, 8. Is individually Ilrnited but cumulatively has substantival adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions. The Proposed Project is not related to other activities in the region in such a way as to produce adverse cumulative effects or involve a commitment for larger actions. 9. Have a substantial adverse effect on a rare, Threatened, or endangered species, or its habitat. There are no rare, threatened, or endangered species or suitable habitat tar these species present at the Project Site, and no effects to these species are anticipated. Endangered Hawaiian hoary bats and formerly listed Hawaiian hawks, which are island' wide-ranging species, would experience no adverse impacts due to mitigation in the form of timing of vegetation removal and/or hawk nest survey. Additionally, no rare, threatened, or endangered species of fauna are known to exist on or near the Project .Site, and none would be directly affected by any project activities. 10. Have a substantial adverse effect on air or water quality{ or ambient noise levels. No adverse effects on air quality or noise would occur. The increase in noise revels on the site are acceptable and would be only a moderate increase in the existing levels. To minimize impacts to air quality during construction, the Proposed Project would implement a watering program for dust abatement. Other control measures during construction such as limiting the area that can be disturbed at any given time, applying chemical soil stabilizers, mulching and/or using wind screens would also be utilized as necessary to minimize impacts to air quality, 11. Have a substantial adverse effect on or is li efficient appliances, as practical and possible. Negligible emissions of greenhouse gases would occur during construction and occupation of the proposed development. Since the Project addresses ars existing demand for housing, it is expected that a portion of the residents that would occupy the development already live in Kona or ori °i Island. and there would not be a substantial increase in emissions when residents occupy the Project, Therefore, Project impacts would be considered a negligible increase to the global annual greenhouse gas emissions. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 77 PART 6: REFERENCES County of Hawaii. 2005. County of Hawaii General Plan, as amended, February 2005. County of Hawaii. 2019. Draft General Plan 2040. August 2019. hftp:// vvw.hiplanningdept.com/wp-content/uplocrdsj2019/081201 -8-09- eneral-Plan-204O.Final .Draft .0 timized.•dt. Accessed December 2019. Department of Education. 2018, Final Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact for Kealakehe Elementary School New Classroom Building, http://oegc2.doh.hawaii.gov/EA_EIS.Library/20}18.06-23-HA-FEA- Kealakehe-Elernentary-School-New-Classroom-Building.pdf Department of Education. 2O19a. Kahcakai Elementary School: Strive HI School Performance Report. htfp://vrww.ha aiipublicschopls.org/Reports/StriveHIKahakaiE1,19.pdf. Accessed December 2019, Department of Education. 2019b. Holualloa Elementary School: Strive HI School Performance Report. htto:llwww.ha c iioublioschoc ls.orc Ret c rtsl5triveHlHalualoaEl19.pdf. Accessed December 2019. Department of Education. 2O19c. Kealckehe Intermediate School: Strive HI School Performance Report. htt# ://w/v .ha aiipuk l csah ools.orc /Reports/StriveHlKealakehelnte11.2 of Accessed December 2019. Deportment of Education, 2019d. Kealakehe High School: Strive HI School Performance Report. http://vv w.hawaiipubfcschools.argWReports/StriveHlKealakeheHigh19.pdf Accessed December 2019. Department of Education. 2O19e. Konawaena High School: Strive Hi School Performance Report. htt :!1ww\tv.hovvadt uk licsc ooCs, ira1Repc rtslStd eHII ono aencrHic h19. df.. Accessed December 2019. Environmental Protection Agency {EPA). 2016. What Climate Change Means for Hawaii. August 2016. EPA 430-F-16-013. Royal Vista's housing Project Environmental Assessment 78 https://19januaryo17sncpshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016- 09/documents/climate-change-hi.t df. Giambelluca, T.W., 0. 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. httplirdinfallaeodrapny.hawaiLe_du/Interactivernart.html. Accessed September 2019. Hawaii Public Radio (HPR). 2020. Hawaii Island Has Decades of Landfill Space But Still Faces Challenges In Dealing With Its Waste. January 9, 2020. https: //www. hawcaiipu blicradio.orainest/hawaii-island-hos-d ec ad es- landf)Il-space-stilj-facts-challenges-delal'na-its-w tg#streoam/Q. Accessed February 2020_ Heliker, C. 1990. Volcanic and Seismic Hazards on the Island of Hawai `i. Washington: U.S. GPO. Housing Assistance Council. 2019. The Effects of Housing Development on a Rural Community's Economy. http://www.ruralhome.ort/sct-infarrrafionfmn- hac-researchlmn-rrg/94-the-effects-of-housing-develooment-on-a-rural- communitys-economy. Accessed December 2019. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007: Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, 11 and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp. httos://www.ipcc.chlsitu/assetsluploads/2018/02/ar4 syr full report.pdf. Accessed November 2019. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.covjcapp/. Accessed November 2019, Office of Housing and Community Development (OHCD). 2019. Kaloko Affordable Housing Project Final Environmental Assessment. http://oeac2,doh,hawoii.aov/EA EIS LibrarvJ2019-07-23-HA-FEA-Kaloko- Affordable-Housing.pdf. Accessed November 2019. Pacific Islands Ocean Observing System (PaclOOS). 2017. Sea Level Rise: Hawai`ii Sea Level Rise Viewer. hftps: Jwww.pacioas.hawaiLedu/shoreline/slr- hawaakj. Accessed December 2019. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 79 Sato, H. H., W. Ikeda, R. Paeth, R. Smythe, and M. Takehiro, Jr. 1973. Soil Survey of Island of Hawaii, State of Hawai'i. U.S, Department of Agriculture -Soil Conservation Service and University of Hawaii Agriculture Experiment Station. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Scientific Consultant Services (SCS). 2016. Archaeological Sites Inspection Letter. 2016. Report for 20 Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites Located en 66.039 Acres of Land in Holualoa lst Ahupuo'a, Kailuo-Korea North Kona District, Hawaii Island [Portions of TMK: (3) 7-6-021:016 and 017]. Prep. for Richard Wheelock, East-West Realty. SMS Research & Marketing Services, Inc. (SMS). 2019. Hawaii Housing Planning Study. 2019. Prepare for the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation. December 2019. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019. Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS): USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report. https://ecus.flus,govlecp/reportJtoblelcritical- habitat.htmI. Accessed November 2019. University of HaaPi at Manoa Sea Grant College Program. 2014. Climate Change Impacts in Hawaii - A summary of climate change and its impacts to HawaPi's ecosystems and communities. UNIHI-SEAGRANT-TT-12-04. http: / seogra nt.soes t. hawa li , ed u/wp-content/upic ad s/2018 /05/sm F INA L- HawaiiClimateChanc e.pdf. Accessed December 2019. U.S. Census Bureau. 2010a. Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 Census Summary File 1 (DP -1) for the State of Hawaii. https:/lvv.census..govlquickfactsl. Accessed November 2019. U.S. Census Bureau. 2010b. Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 Census Summary File 1 (DP -1) for Hawaii County. httrs:/lwww.census. iovlcuickfactsf. Accessed November 2019. U.S. Census Bureau. 2010c. Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics- 2010 Census Summary File 1 (DP -1) for the North Kona CCD. httts:llwww.census.coviauickfactsd. Accessed November 2019. U.S, Census Bureau. 2016. Selected Economic Characteristics: 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5 -Year Estimates (DP03) for State of Hawaii, Hawaii County, and the North Kona CCD. https://factfinder.census.gov. Accessed November 2019. Royal Vrrstrrrs Housing Project Environmental Assessment 80 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2019. USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report. https://ecos.fws.govJecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html. Accessed November 2019. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2019a. About Earthquakes in Hawaii. https://volcanoes.usgs.gnv,/observatoriesihva/about earth, akes.html. Accessed November 2019. U.S, Geological Surrey (USGS). 2019b. Damaging. Earthquakes - A Common Hazard in Hawaii. USGS Volcano Hazards Program. HawoH Volcano Observatory.. hftps:i/volcanoes.usgs.gav,jobservatpries/hvojhazar Pc1rtnctqakes.htrn1 Accessed November 2019, Wolfe, F.W. and J. Morris. 1996. Geologic Map of the ;stand of Hawaa'i. LJSGS Misc. Investigations Series Map i -2524-A. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey, Royal Vistas Housing Project Environmental Assessment 81 APPENDIX 1 a: Early Consultation Letters Harr:, Klin ,k i'aycr IE O1. be 4?r1nr.. rr* b'?+ri'ctor November 27, 2019 ural of Paivrai`i DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Aupuni Center ]U1 Pavahk Succi, Smile' 7 • Hilo, Hawaii 967114:24 1808) 9514321 Fax (SUS) 9614534 pntriic unrk5:2rlh,lwaii4[ Rty gay David ViImarnoto, P.E, Djrecr.or Allan G. Simeon, P.E. Denbo fJrrict u Michele Lefebvre, PhD PO Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 (via email to: michee.lefebvre@u stantec_com) Subject: Environmental Assessment Early Consultation for Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project. Island of Hawaii, North Kona District Tax Map Key: (3) 7-6-021:016 and 7-6-021:017 We have reviewed the request for early consultation for an Environmental Assessment and our comments are as follows: 1. Flood zones AE and AEF affect the subject parcels as designated by the Flood insurance Rale Map (FIRM) New construction and substantial improvements shall comply with Chapter 27 — Floodplain Management -- of the Hawaii County Code. 2. Drainage improvements, including the combination of the Hnlualoa Drainageway and the Horseshoe Bend Drainageway, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval 3. AH development generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and shall not be directed toward adjacent properties. 4. AH earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10 — Erosion and Sedimentation Control — of the Hawaii County Code. 5. AH work within the County Right -of -Way shall conform to Chapter 22 — County Streets — of the Hawaii County Code. Please provide us with a copy of the EA when it is completed for our review. Should there be any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Natalie Whitworth of our Kona Engineering Division office at 323-4853. Ben Ishii, Division Chief Engineering Division NW Copy: Engineering Division - HILO/KONA. Planning Department - Hilo L"t.4sr� af ilaua< i i4 an Flea flyri,ortunih Plovidcr and Employer Harry Kim .vr December 6, 2019 County of awail POLICE DI:1,-kla i'V FN T 349 Ka +i'riani Succi • 7:"13.3998 (Stag)9:45..;:711 • Ms. Michele Lefebvre, PhD Ervironrrierta Scientist Stantec Conswltin© Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, Hawaii 96721 Dear Ms. Lefebnrre: Paul K. Ferreira �vlrcr ChAff K nneth Buggdo, Jr. SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT EARLY CONSULTATION FOR PROPOSED ROYAL VISTAS HOUSING PROJECT, ISLAND OF HAWAII, NORTH KONA DISTRICT, TM1KS: 7-6-021:016 AND 7-6.021:017 This is in response to your letter cated November I8, 2019, requesting comments related to your project, Thank you for allowing the Hawaii Police Department the opportunity to participate, At this time, the Hawaii Police Department has no comments. Should you have any questions, please contact. Captain Gilbert Gaspar Jr., Commander of the Kona District, at 326-4646, extension 299. Sincerely, PAUL K. FERREIRA POLICE CHIEF ,67 ROBERT WAG ASSISTANT °oLICE CHIEF AREA II OPE ATIONS GG/jaj 19HQ1210 ,.Fi#v.aG , Coartv is snE411UI Cfiuu L Psov:dct tail Employer, 0414 Y. IGE f_PhrA OFFICE QF FtC4LITIE$AND OPE AT1ONS December 10. 2014 StaEu . [ , :1. I'.(i, t•tl 1') Ilii , lIawaii STATE OF HAWAI' i DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION P 0 BOX 2364 HONOLULt1, 4AW 95804 Re:: rtwirtinmi tal Asses.ment Lirl► C'tirt iiltatit+n Request for Proposed Royal Vistas Rousing Project: Hawaii' -FMK' 7-[-021.0 Ifi & 017, \ottli KLIlu, Hawwuli Dear ros. Lefebvre. ! f G IFDST1, , hl MISFIIND1 D rite Hawaii State Department nI Education ti 1111 1,1 has. dtaixa Inc comments for elle proposed Royal Vi±;t:rs !lousing Project (Project' Accon ine in the hilorl i, a + , i,Ic,I Kum Thi .20 I 1 {' priipmes to develop 00 multi-fami1y units. a comhinalion DI -rental and for in ' r;rlli ls,ina. bland of Hawaii. Iiltwaii. TM : 741-07 1:016 & f}17. When the Project is mature and unit turns s..: L. 0.1, Ild °spec' rtrii;-lrl} 'al} 1111 )I sliud:rits it reside there, 'trite HIDOE sclicitd currently servicing the proposed Project arca are 1-#trluitltra Elementary. Kaltakai Fle ent:ir}, Kealakelle liddl[:. Ktinayaaena i 1itldlr. ICealal,elie 11i0 and Ktirtcrywaneria i iiLh, Knrtaywaerra Middle has Lapilli:it: and is expected to have carioca:, over the neat five years... TIua remaining schools nre currently over capacity and ate expected 10 reirmirt over capacity over the 'next cars. i`hc' propos-ed Project is located 'within the IN est }iawadi School impact To. District. however ytc are currently not collecting impact fees. The 1I1DOL would like to neeit'c a cop}' of the Draft Enr•frortmental Assessment for review, Thank you fir the opporttmit' to comment. Shouid you hay.e questions. please contact Robyn Loudermilk. School I-aiids and Facilities Specialist. Facilities Development Branch_ PIannine Section al {1;(184 7114-5093 or via entail at rnbv°n, loWenn iik `r+ k E2.1;i.us. Resp tfulb e. Kenneth G. '43asdert 11 Public Worsts aManae.er Planning. Section K(iM;rlI c: Ari Souza Complex A1rre i Siiperinte tdrnl. Hanoka Kralakelii KoltalalKonativatr'ia Complex Area AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY t COUNTY OF HAWAII! 345 KEKUANA,0 A STREET, SUITE 20 HiLO HAWAI 1915720 TELEPHONE (BM €;j g51-8050 - FAX (Bc18) qF,' -4F;' December 16 2019 Ms, Michele Lefebvre Starnee Consulting Services Inc. 1 259 Mokts Place Hilo. HI 96720 Dear Ms. Lefebvre; Subject: Pre -Environmental Assessment Consultation for Proposed Royal vistas Housing Project Isirtntl ❑f I-tawai`i, Nur•ttt K oMSai District Tax Map Key 7-6-021:0161 and 1)17 We have reviewed your Pre -Environmental As.sessntent Consultation letter. dated November 18. 20I9.. Please be ialfcrrrr1e1:1 that the subject parcels ate served by an existing ser* ict" that taut accctmmodare a 4 -inch meter or Irt Plac:L', which is limited to 180,400 gallons per d;t3., Lir 471 units i)f tearer. Please note that the Uepaarmtcnt of Water Supply ael:nowlecigs that potable water is Ha;r'ai'l Island's most preciotts re$curCe and L Ii(L.:urages our communities10 protnotc x titer conservation and reserve the highest quality or -water kir end-use, which is the st: :',nance of life, We request 1;t -1t the der el; ;,rr :'.tlr: =, r )i:: r. °7 'I ,.t ware- hv mi-in-;iirnivirnizing the demand or propose to s ij_•]A.,tIL.' , I r] ind'.�. 1° :.r .. L il' '.i. tl •. t i ti' :4'c l,ii i�.:l , i rii ;: tikat�s l l itlw uw tall water demand Should be rtti'14'144il ,S �' _ ...iter i a:it_1 'li.ii li;_ 1 1,1111.. LI I_ ;ov;tt.,. x5,11 oivtJ 10 bc in.Iucicd which ,,,vuuld rrdut:e l4. ritun.I:iCr t .:5. !I': titer 1. vt nd the total number of water units 3110c.:.3tcd no the subject Should there be any questions_ please contact TY1r. Ryan Quiteri:lrio ()lour Warcr Resources and Planning Branch at %I-8070, extension 256, RQ:dmj SincerC14 Keith K. Okamoto. P.E, MarlwLeer-Chief Engineer rti,'ate6 Our o i Trecioris Resource . . Kia i' aiA `Mae — Me ae- Tne Devartrrprnt of v'vster Supply tic an EAuo Opportunity wtrvfrdur ;rrti ipIL cr Metlanall Perk Service Kieoka-Honokaluru Lr $.Dtpluttowig ei th+? Interior Ne•tional 1-1, clerical! Pafk 7S-4MS k'.cr,ai?ni Street# 14 Kske.4( . Hait ire74O 320-25337 Fax Kaloko-IHonokohau IN REPLY REFS 10: L762 I (2019-10) December 18, 2019 Dr Michele Lefebvre Smritcc Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box t91 Hili, Ela 'ai`i 95721 at;t jc�:l: National Park Service Comments for an early Consultation for an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project, Island of Hawai'4 North Lona District, TMKs: 7-6-021...016 and 7-6-621;017 Dear Dr. Lefebvre: Thank you for providing the National Park Service (NPS) with the opportunity to comment for an early Gonsuitation kr an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project. The proposed project is located approximately 5 miles south of le,:zioko-l-fortokOhau National Historical Park (Park' and 2.7 miles south of downtown Kailna-Kona along Queen Ka"ahurianu Highway and would consist ornecessary improvements to construct up to 450 residential units in multi -f tinily configurations with clusters of two- and thy -store buildings_ Congress established ECitlako-Hartcik6hau National Historical Park iri 1978 to preserve., interpret. atitL perpetuale !radii ion al native: !—I aiLan activities and culture by protecting Lhe cultural _and natural resources within the Park ( 1 to U.S.C. 39&c#(a)). The Park contains more thin 450 i•`no}' rt archeological and cultur.L1 sties, among which are several heiau, nerrwork of ancient :grid historic trails, traditional dry -laid masonry tcatures, more than 180 known anchialinc pools, rwc ancient Haiwaiiart fishponds with associated wetlands, and a fishtrap. The park lauds and waters pr'avide habitat for 17 federally listed species, and candidate species for listing, under the Endangered Species Acc. 'Aimaikapli Fishpond and wand is "core habitat' for the recovery of two endangered water+ird species, the Hawaiian st(LL (Hi rantopua mcxicarws knudteni) and the Hawaiian coot (Fliiica americana tr[ar), and is ;in important habitat for migritiory walerEewl.' In addition to die fishponds and pools, the Park boundary encompasses 596 aces of marl rte waters and coral rc7f habitnt_ s Svc $total above, there arc many groundwater dep ildc:nt tx.. systerris (ORES) iri tic Park_ All of the Park's GDEs arc dcperidclit upon groundwater inputs to maintain these ecosystems, especially as habitat for culturally important and rare native aquatic species. i IsFri?-: tvite. 2011- Rocovery Plan far Hawaiian i 'axetbirds, Sceond Revision. Ea?ERIENCE YOUR' A&AIERJCA rho 14.11,c r)21 Pik SWAM carras :a HCl piteces saved Dy than American people sa that ar may experiences aur herlbge 2 Approximately 22O,0000 visitors per year visit the Park.' Local residents, cultural practitioners, and visitors from around the world come to experience Ka1ok--Honokihau's unique sense of place, hio-cult ral and natural history, and to understand and perpetuate Hawaiian tradition. According to the Water Resource Protection Plan 2019 Update, the current methodology used by the State of Hawaii' i Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM) for determining sustainable yields does not explicitly aceounr for freshwater flows needed to presenia GDEs such as anchiatline pools, fishponds, and wetlands_3 CWRM has recognized the need to refine its management approach to groundwater and requested that its staff study ways to refine the estimation of sustainable yields to account for the needs of GDEs,‘ Therefore, CWRM is developing a "pilot adaptive management plan" for protecting GDEs in partnership with the NPS and cultural practitioners.' The pilot adaptive management plan will focus on GDEs within Kalcko-1•lonokohau National Historical Park. The Hawai`i County Department of Water Supply has also proposed measures to minimize the effects of new groundwater withdrawals on groundwater dependent ecosystems and the Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices that rely upon them. The 2017 Water Use and Development Flan Update for the Ke'auhou Aquifer System Area describes these efforts and includes refined demand projections and a calculation of Authorized Plan Use (or Anticipated Water Demand) for the aquifer syslern (28,07 million gallons per day). Therefore, the NPS requests that the Environmental Assessment include the water demand for the proposed project artd address whether this demand was included in the Depaitinent of Water Supply's calculation of Authorized Planned Use. Thank you for allowing us to comnment on the early Consultation for an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project, If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Jeff Zimpfer of my stall -(308-32881 x 1500 or ,jefzimpfe s*itvps.gov). Sincerely, Leonel Arguello Arg Superintericlent Kaioko-H000kvhau National Historical Park Pu`tthonua io- H&naunNaEional Historical Park 1 :!!irmn.nps.gov.'Stetsf emission on Water Resource Management, 2018 Water Resource Protection Plan 2419 Update, Appendix F, Page 9, Public Review Dcatt, October 2414- Available at: hawaii.g1 vrcwriniplannirrglhiwatcrplanJwrpp: Ibirl.. I1. Mitt, 63. IlUIPOPOINGE YOUR AMERICA The Hallam' Park Smoke taros fa spaded p hcies moved by they American peltrpla se that al may experience our heritage. QA1QY.Mt SAM HLFJIS, HAINAN STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LMW AND NATURAL RESOURCES Lair+lI)DIVI ION Stantec ConsUting Services Inc. Attenrion. Ms. Michele Lefebvre Fnvirnmmrintal Srlantisi P_o Er:](i I�ilc1, F -lawn; 96721 Dear Ms. Lefebvre: N -r ovt;rF BOX 52] fIalloLUm, I [A.WAII 96$09 December 19. 2019 ,r vi8 email; li'3iF ' I* ;1V + of "c1 r1�E3C.d i(Ti SUBJECT: II mental Assessment Early Consultation kir Proposed Royal Vi-ta5, Housing Project Ia-c:ated at North Kona District, Island of Hawaii; TPw1Ks- 1:3I 7-6-002 I :01C, & 7-6-021,0/7 on behalf of Kona Three LLC Thank you 'or the _ppc,r:unity to review and comment on the subject matter The Lanni Division of the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) distributed or made: available a copy of your request aerlaining to the subject matter to DLNR's Divisions far [heir review and comments. At this time, enclosed are can nier v (Fal-'11 the a) Engineering Division, (WI Division of Foresvy & 'Wildlife, and (o) Land Division - HalArai District on the subject matter.. Should you have any questions, ple8se feel free to 7:c ntati.t Darlene Nakamura at (808) 587-0417 or em lil• clarion .F, riakp.gmlwa(a7,1 � ..F l goy Thr you Siriccraly, Firre' Land Admirtistr,ator usseIl Y. Tsuji Enclosures cc: Central Files �7 CAM T. IGE Lay1u 4111 c7 - IL111N411 STATE OI HAWAII DEPARTMENT -10F T,ANr7 AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND UTNlssIOrw it 1I E. MEMORANIJUM DLNR Agancic of Aquatic I:. 'rem -Div, of Boating 6A (.,)ti.tYan Recreation X Engineering Division Div of For btry & Wildlife :div. of Slate Parks X Commissiol on 'Neter Resource Management Unice of conservation + Coastal Lands X Land ❑ivi ian — Hawaii District Historic Preservation I hf. MrE G4, r. M1,.'iR. cr rU100.5u111 9ikNCLL OF L. OD htrD ti -411.14,4 L. PlAsHl Ult1.1.S C014411$S ,M4 ON 11.4171% RMOU ECCE %JANA GrAWAT �L Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator -. SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment Early Consultation far Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project LOCATION: North Kona District, island of Hawaii, TMKs; (3) 7-6-021:016 & 7-6-021:017 APPLICANT: Stentec Consulting Services, Inc on behalf of Kona Three LLC Tri-ismittod for your review and comment is inforr: tiior. on the above -referenced su :ct matter. Please submit comments by December 18, 2019. :f ria response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by email at : ariene.k.nakerr:..Jr.a hawaii.aay. Thank you. \We 1 rci E r o objections. Wet -Lava rio conmments, corr,r-nents are attached , Signed; Print Name: Date: Attachments cc. Con trod Pile Carty S. Chang, Chief Engineer 11 DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING DIVISION LD/Russell Y. Tsuji Ref: (Environmental Assessment Early Consultation for Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project Location: North Kona District, Island of Hawaii TMK(s): (3) 7-6.021:016 & 7-f>`021:0i 7 Applicant: Stonier Consulting Services, Inc. on behalf of Kona Three LLC COMMENTS The rules and rcgulaainns of the National Floor! InsLII 1ncc Program (NFIP). Title 44 of the of Federal Regulations (44CFR), are in effect V4•hcri development fells within u Special Flt=c++i Hillard Arca thigh risk areas). Stag protects are required to comply with 44CFR rti r=til:,uion.s as saipulated in Sectihn 4'0.1 2, He advised that 41CFR reflcets the tr►irlir7,+rrti standards ,ts sc=. forth by the NFIP. Local community flood ordinances may stipul,i1c higher standards that can be more restrictive and would take precedence over the minimum NFIP standards. The owner if the prr eci properly and/or their representative is r°espon\if'I '.F i c:rrcli the Flood Hard Zone dcsiimatluli for the project. Floud l-da.-rarL: L rlc4 ,rrc ii�'�rgn r�csi on FEiMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps 111RM). which can he vicwe_i r+!I r rir F1)od Hazard Aasessmem Tool (IIIA"I'I ('hii-rj/pig haw:timtip org/FIIATI If there are queslic tis rcgasrcl,rr Ole local Hood trrtlinaruxs. please contact the applicahle County NFIP coordinating agency below: o Oahu: City and County of Honolulu. Department of Planning Lind P r-m.irting (II0#) 768-8091,1. c Hawaii_ 1slart4: County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works (808) 961-8327, Maui/Molokai/Lanai County of Maui, Department of Planning (808) 270-7253. a Kauai: County of Kauai, Department of Public.. Works (808) 241-4896. S igrteri' CART. S. t;<UANG, CHIEF ENGINEER [ane: 1 pbvlp V. I13=- 6'tPrt_aNf. t LW 1 0,1Vnh TOEPrrr] s'rATF OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAID AND NATURAL Ri SouRCrS LAND DIVISION POST pFFMr-: rcx 62 ] HDN{}I.111.UI,HAMA It 9fiR0 November 26, 2019 MEMORANDUM f]l•NR Ag ncies' Div. of Aquatic Resources Div. of Boating & Ooean Recreation 4 Engineering DivHun ?4 Div. of Forestry Wildlife _Div. of State F',11 3( Gcr mission UI I ',-1 ]ter Resource Management C}fflue of Cut Ib€ r vathJrl & Coastal LailrJs X Lard Division — Hawaii District 4 Historic Preserva!Io1 ; 1-,16 bU HMar; n_ c,*NE Dal lac CIF LAMA AND NATURAL 11FxRFU1iICK*� Cl3FZIOS&[]NON W.• fl1S R{LIOLIRC J AlMUGU, !ENT ..OM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT; Pnvironmentr11 Assessment Early Consultation for Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project LOCATION: North Kona District, Island of Hawaii; TMKs: (3) 7-6-021:016 . 7-6-C_'21:017 APPLICANT: Stantec Consulting Services. Inc. on behalf of Kona Three LLC Transmitted for ynl]r ravi1-w and comment is information on the above -referenced subject :Matter. Please s 'km it comments by' December 18, 2019. If r10 response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, plaaso contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by c sail Rat dart+ n s.k.r1akainura hawaii.ggv. Thank you. ( )1 We 1 ] sv,e 110 . bjectiun ( We have 110 Comments Signed: Print Name: Date: Attachments cc: Central Files DAVID G. SMITH9 Administrator D411Ft1 v. 13E aovEfiNeo C 114.4131 STATE F E OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL. RESOURCES POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU. HAWAII 951419 DEE 1 1 2019 6 UZANNF. D. CASE mop #>+tA.I4 AMI Nh'r. ,, . RI RT QIli4TICRE R •• k4F AAF} J«NIW int ROA nom, 1lg nc �a lF At MEMORA.NIDL:M: TO: Russell Tsuji, Administrator Lad [Division FROM: David G. Smith, Adinitiistl:r .., SLIB ECT: l ivislt it 1 °,- -,r, :II . L'ornmcrltsonRoyal Vistas Housing Project T Mk No.: (3) 7-6-02:O16. & 7-6-021:0l/ E,,_ I-1r,2s••_rrt:nent «fitLand acid Natural Re ota1:.I_Ni ,° t.riw. .is,r° i 1'r restryF and Wildlife r /r ',as reed ved your inquiry regarding, I°,, L. •Iµ 111., ,•I.. I We appreciate the to provide consultation arid lir i.h :..: •,Wi rc,ir,ved for this sil c, c?ri project, underscore but a few of the rriult:I:J b .,.tits of trees atm i grs•sn i tirastruelvre: Clean Air: [n addition to creating oxygen, essential for all life on Earth, tree clean the air by removing carbon dioxide and other air pollutants. One hundred large trees can reir;tivi i9 trins of carbon dioxide and 372 pounds of other air pollutants annually. Health & eU-Dein : Tre-(i11L°°_l neighborhoods are safer. reduce mental iThysi+.a.1 stress, and encourage people to sl-cn:I more time outdoors. including transportation (Lc., t,.11':ing 6;Itiil biking vs. driving)..Trot- •lila ;.k streets enclourzi.:2,e s[ovt•1_I driving lid prrFn1ut"v pedestrianSii1Li Energy Cost Savings; •l`re:es provide shade and cooling, greatly reducing energy costs. -1 rixs save more than $622;OOO per year (based on 2013 rates of .321l wh for 43,4001 inventoried strict tri:tx in 14111011.11u.) Watershed Protection: Trees cost-effectively filter and improve waver quality by reducing, sto anwater r noff and flooding. Trees in Honolulu intercept more than 35 million gallons of stu: Lova-ttt. r per year. This contribution is valued at more than 5350,000 annually, Reef Protection: A healthy urban forest reduce -s erosion and filters pollutants significantly reducing runoff and the destruction cif our valuable reefs. Our comments as they pertain to trees. fore*, and green infrastructuare are below: Il Proposed free removal: * Scope of work should includc a tree pr'ote, t:on plan and 11`". ;L1pervisti•.I h a certified arborist • Consider pruning as an alternative to removal ▪ Replace removed trees with native or non-invasive canopy trees • Designate ';hich specks of trees are proposed for removal Cl Proposed disturbance of area: • Scope of work should include a tree protection plan and be supervised by a certified arborist • Install g ccn infrastructure for rehabilitated areas post -disturbance [] Proposed tree root & crown pruning: • Scope of work should include a tree protection plan and be supervised by a certified arborist Q Proposed paving: • Consider permeable pavement or other permeable surface to allow for absorption of groundwater Should you have any questions, please contact l-Jeather AicMillen C heather,l.mcrnillen ihawaii..gov 'DAVID Y. Hit atutiiiJGilpf I4.ijVMI Tf: STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND N!AT[H A r RE$OURCE.5 LAND DIVISION POST OFFICL BOX fit} HONOLULU HLWA11 96E09 November 26, 2019 MEMORANDUM 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 an Water Resource Management Office of Conservation & Costal Lands Land Division -- Hawaii Cistrict { Historic Preservation eCAIN! .-7.i .. .i FROM: Russe!! Y. Tsuji. Land Administrator ' T SUBJECT' Environmental Assessment Early Consultation for Proposed Royal Vistas H rasing Project LOCATION: North Bona Distryct, island of Hawaii; 71ViKs: (3) 7-6_021 0116 & 7-6-021V 7 APPLICANT: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. on behalf of Kana three LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced sL.bject matter. Please submit comments by December 18, 201 L if no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. _f you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by email at da:rlerje k.nakamyra havvati,gov. Thank you, have no objections. Wo have no carmen-ts. j Comments are attached - Sig ned: .Prnt Name- Date: Attachments cc: Central riles D*VIp Y", GZA-Fitp% dm/4, STATE 0F HAWAII L117,PAW[ AA1 EN 1 IJF LAND AND ATI l II1AL kESUL1 RCP'S I.ANJD} DINTSN]; 4 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Attention: Ms Michele Lefebvre Environmental Scientist P 0 Box 1g1 Hilo, Hawaii g6721 Dear Ms Lefebvre: SUBJECT: POST OFFICE IPA 621 1;HON0L ULU. HAWAII Q6309 December 23, 2019 SI4.1Isne r, CAI CDA,KPEr1S0-^r [WARD r}} LAND trtiY N.iY L'ILAL IIEYAiL�lsi'.L'S LCIIMLitiTr10%anr WA -Mt 1.43(.141r4CE hIU.; EAIFNr via email: micheie.JefebvreAsLerltec.corn Envlrorrrnantol Assessment Early Consultation for Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project located at North Kona district, Island of Hawaii: TMKs: (3) 7-6-02'1:01G a, 743-021.V:7 oil behalf of Kona Three LLC Thank you for the OpportL,!}i!'r ieview to aur previous comments dated December 19, Commission on Water F escur::t- Management on questions, please feel free to contact Darlene darlene,k_nakarru.Frafit t1awa1I.gcov. Thank you. Enclosures cc Central Files cc;ir rri' nt 011 the subject mailer, In addition 2019, enclosed are comments from the the subject matter. Should you have any Nakamura at MA 587-0417 or email: Sincerely, Russell Y„ Tsuji Land Administrator bNLV-JI Y. ICA uhtiiM _M. Lu- !ANA 14 • STATE [}t1' l l .'VrV DEPARTMENT ()Fl.AND AZri er1 u,tir.IZE,(rr.r.E:r 1 .1y111'iI\ -R I it7X 621 41-1N 7i i'I ir,Y hll 9G {i NaverlL r 26, 2019 MEMORANDUM TO: DLNR Agencies: Rrv. of Aquatic Resources Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division X Liv. of Forestry & Wildlife Div_ of State Parks XCornmIssion on Water Resource Management Office of Cunservatiun & Coastal Lands X Lend Division — Hawaii District X Hstoric Preservation 1 -ROM: Russell Y, Tsuji, Land Administni r rte` SUb.JiaL. I: Environmental AsseFsne-it Lirly LL>I1-L,ItalOn for" Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project LOCATION: North Kara District, Island of l -t 1v.r,i!; FlKs ;:3} ?-3-L121:Cr1 b .. 7-6-021:017 APPLICANT- Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. L}s r belcar of Kona Three LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information en the above -referenced II; ,nattar PIRnsR comments by December 18, 2019. I' mu response is received by this date, we rlrl asSL.rrnl your agency has no comments. iidve any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by etrnail al darlene.k.nakamura hawaii,clov. Thank you. } Wf, have ro objections, We have ro comments. ( x j Comments are attached. Signe—d; Print Name: Date: Attachments cc; Central Flies / M. Kalea Manuel Deputy Director 3acember 16, 2019 I CAWS Y 1 -,QE er STATE OF HAWAII w DEF, r _t GEPARTNMENTO LANCss.NDruTUR$_,RESrnL*rlCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT F O. r3�Y& '71 410413LJLU 1, ik•Wi Sitikrit Decemtrr 16. 2016 REF: RFD.52.88.6 TO. Mr. Russell Tsuji, ,administrator Lend Division FROM: M. KaIeo Manuel. Deputy Director Commission on Water Resource tbdanagen +n: SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment Early Ccrtsultatior far Proposed Rot's! Vistas Housing Prat FILE NO.: RFD. 5288.8 TNIK NO.. (3i 7-6^021=Ctf68 7-5-021.a17 Thank you for the opportunity to review the subiiect Gartlrrr Sion cry cr—e- guy Managerrren t (CWRM) is the agency responsible far adrniriiistei State Water Cole r."C• rJ }_ l_1 xae :" :: 4 all waters of the State are held intrust for the bei-ert of the citizens c1 State. therefore ail Yater u4� i= _ •herr'; leg: IIw protected water rights" C fiRM strongly promotes the effijent. useofI-IEwar'a water resrur F- 191.7... - corier,ration measures and appropriate resource management" For more fir -oration, p ease __ `_' rc lro . 613:E da. Orin' ter n i4G Hawaii Revised Sla-utes, rid hawail Administrative Rim. - ac -tors 13.167 to 13• " _"- Thr ;e ric,_umer:t<; are available via the Interne- at ntlp lidInr.haveaii..gav rim" Our rcr-r,erci dieted to -esourres arra cneciced of nelaur. X X X VVe recommend coordination vrith the sourly to incorporate t`,, v rF.tr r :r. -;'5 ''pater Use and Development Phan Please contact the respective Rennin g Ce at—= I �;.; It eD s , T. rrt of Water Supply for further information. 2. VVe recommend ceordinstion with tt~e Engineering Divi*icrn o' the Stake rrepalroent of taint and Natural Resources to in orporale Mrs picia ct Into the State Water Proleeis Plan. 3. We recommend cCu.Irdir;dtlan with the FIawal! Department of Agriculture (HOCA) tc incorperets tle reclassilicaticri of agricultural zoned land and the recltst;ibutrin of agrcutluial resources into the Slates Agricufturaf Water Use and Deveropmerrl Ran (AWUDP)._ Please cerise' the ll -1130A for more inforritatyon 4. 1'V recommend that ett;ir er..., =Lines tie instatted and water effict nt prantkpes implemented throughout the deve:oprnen: tc.1 "i:a.:: the increased demand on the aria's rrestmeatei res _rox3s Reducing the water Js.a.ge cit = i i ., i - or bu+Iding may earn credit lower is Leadership in Energy ant Environmental Design (LE=f cold cal 1017_ More tniknnrta ion or LEED certification is available al nIttpl/www.usgbcorgiteed /www.USgbC,orgiteed A list ng at fixtures rertdfea by the EAP as having riga water efficiency can be found at http3iviww.epa.go",rfv eiersen>sr#. 5 We recommend the use of best rrranagernerrt pmol OAP' for stormwatermanagement to minimize the impact of the prated to ttte existing area's hydrology maintaining' "tie YrMMdlr t dry arid preventing polluted runoff from storm events. St:orrnwate' rMs tag -anent TUFF rho earn credo: Ionia LEER c&rtification More information air stormwater BMPs i oe found at http uplarnning"hrawaii govJwzmiini-ialivrWaw-irnp t•de+deloprneriL 6. We recommend the use of afternati.e water swaic s: Whyrev pr 11 D1e, 7. We recommend partrc patina in the Hawes Green Business Program, that assists ar i recognizes busressea that ire to operate in an erivrronrnerntttly and sccially rssponarble mainrrer T55 uvgram description can be foLrid on In M http;tierrergy hawatt"gaWgreen-business-f,rograrn. t3" We recommend adoot'ng ,ancsrape irrigation conservation best maragemer'tprac,tces erxtorsed by the Landscape irndust►v Gocincil of Hawaii. These practice's can be found online at htf.p:lfwvvw.hauraliscope.eornntip-oerttetJuplo olsi C130TAiLtCN_lirigati.,n_Ccrseivalion_EWPS,pdf. Mr. Russell Tsuji Page 2 December 17, 2019 9, There may be the potential for ground or surface water degradation/contamination and recommend that approvals for this project be cortditianed upon a revie,v by the State Department of .—k Ith and the developer's acceptance of any resulting requirements related to water qualt!y. 10 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 us.s of water The Water Use Permit may be .:jrd Lc:led an the requirement to use dual fine water supply systams for new industrial and commercia &-:v:.lopments, 11 A Well Construction Permit(s) is (are) are required before the commencement of any well construction work. 12 A Pump Installation Perrnit(s) is (are) required before ground water is developed as a scurce c supply for the ;proect. 13 Tnere is (are) well(s) located on al- adjacent to this project. if wells are not planned to be used and will be riffec). d by any new construction. they must be properly abandoned and sealed. A permit for well L:.-11: must be obtained. Ground -water wilhdrawals from this project may affect streamflows, which may require an instream flow standard amendment, 1 5 A Stream Channel Alteration Permits} is (are) required before any alteration can be made to the bed andfor banks of a steam channel, 16 A Stream Diversion Warks Permits) is (are) required before any stream diversion works is constructed or altered. 11. 14 17 A Petition to Amend the Interim tnstream Flow Standard is required for any new or expanded diversion(s) of surface water. 18 The planned source of water for this project has not been identified in this report. Therefore, we cannot determine what permits or petitions ars required from our office, or whether there are potenttai impacts to water resources. EOTHER: Planning - The proposed water sources and projected water demands for the project. bo'h r,ctaLEe and non -potable, should be identified and the calculations used to estimate demands snood be provided. A discussion of the potential impacts on water resources and other public trust uses of water should Pe included. and any proposed mitigation measures described, Water conservation and efficiency measures to be Implemented should also be discussed. if you nave any questions, please contact Lenore Ohye of the Commission staff at 587-0216, Harm Kirn tta ijr Wil Okatte Afanvigfg Direcror West Hawaii Office 74-+1144 Arte Keohokalcie Hwy Kailua-Kon. HawaV 9fo74 J Phone' (80g) 323.4770 Fax (808'1,327.3.563 December 23, 2019 County f PLANNING DEPATaN IT Michele Lefebvre, PhD Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 I-Iilo, H1 96721 Dear Ms_ Lefebvre: Michael Yep: threat -Jr Duane KanuFta Uep>r). Urrecrur Fal4 I•1kwa i C ff'lcv 101 Pauahi Street, Suite tiilra, Haawai'i 96720 Piwric (S08) 9614288 Fax (Sti1R) 961-8742 SUBJECT: Comments for Earle Consultation for Environmental Assessment for Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project Tax Map Ke►s: (3) 7 -(i -I)21:016 & 017. He lualoa 1" &: 2". N. Kona., Havral`ii This is in response to your letter dated November 18. 2019 requesting early consultation comments for an environmental assessment being prepared fur -: 45) multi -family residential unit development and related improvements on the above referenced property, including dr inaue and roadway improvements within County -owned parcels 18 and 19- I. The subject properties are zoned Multiple -Family Residential. with a minimum building site of 5,000 square feet per dwelling unit (RM -5), by the County of Hawaii. and designated as Urban by the State Land Use Commission. Refer to County of H-iavcai'i Ordinance No. 02-131, which amended previous ordinances to establish the zoning an the properties, and State Land Use Commission Docket No. A83-549, to determine the status of condition compliance for these land use entitlements. 2. The General Platt Land Use Pattern Allocations Guide (LUPAG) map designation for the properties are urban Expansion and Low Density Urban, Be aware that the County Gesterol Plan is undergoing a comprehensive review and these lands use designations may change soon upon adoption ofan amended General Plan. 3. The property is not located within the Special Management Area (SMA) and is situated about 4.500 feet rtiauka of the shoreline. TI r r» 7 �°tit Y ,wpr, liam.vd'a County as wi Fquu1 f2ppora ma by Provider and Employe Michele Lefebvre, PhD Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Paget Ikcernber 23, 2019 4. The property is in an area affected by the Kona t: ommatmty Development Plan, tiv°hich was adopted by the IIa ai i County Council by Ordinance No. 08-13l and amended in 2019 by ordinance No. 19-91. Please indicate how the proposed project meets the goals, objectives,, policies, and actions of the CDP. S. The EA should describe he specific drainage and rc7ad..ay improvements proposed within the County property and analysis of impacts and alternatives considered. 6. We strongly recommend you review the Planning Department files related to these propcmcs because they contain information related to land use permitting history. eultui-L1 and historic resources. flooding, traffic, and public sentiment regarding the pre}fit •td projct.. The files can be viewed in the Hilo or Koiio office, Plwa scl Lclulc :i. 4111)LIritii'ern so than we can ensure all the files are available for vicii-in 7, Please include in the EA consultation process. strrrou€idin property owners and. ctprnmunity asso :iat ons. including hut not [United to,'Kona \ _z i. Subdivision. Pualani Estates Subdivision. K.uakini Makai Subdivision, and prnlnerty owners directly east of the subject_ properties. We 1cck for; ; rd to reviewinq the draft EA when it is available_ [f you have any questions, please reel free to contact Maija Jackson at 961.-8159. MICHAEL AEL YEE Planning Director MIJJ:rn ails P„.61% FIi4 7711` Ra7;:iI 'ixris Lt t.1 ere -Pry- �€�raFl�Cnn u]�-F xtl'es4sx. � cc tticopy of letter: Ronald Kim, Deputy Corporation Counsel APPENDIX 'lb: Comments on Draft EA and Responses Mori, Ashley OIL Ltg 01,9 From: Jae! +;i ,p& <aiohafidir@ aol,com> ,, CifiiiING DEPT Seat: Thursday August 13, 2020 8:0 ► AM{ j , 13 , x" r rrti I i To: Planning Il terntet Mail Subject: Kara Three. LLC Rzya Vistas HaiN,rkg Project Draft Environmental Asses5merit Dear Director Lee Asa ten-year resident of Pualani Estates ard Pre:dent: of the Homeowners Association, rve reviewed the subject DEA for the Royal Vistas Housing Project and have a number- pf concerns regarding the Traffic Impact Analysis. My concerns include the Failure to take into account the potential effect on traffic ori Highway 11 that Could result from the Suffolk investment and Puaa Development applications for amendment to ordinances now pending before the Leeward Planning Commission. I presume you recall my comments on those applications, which propose a 60,000 sq. ft. commercial development and 386 multi-far-ni y residential units on the west side of Highway 11, that I submitted to you on April 2 and June 3, 202C. Those comments rioted the already horrendous traffic jams experienced dally bc'r.wu »r Hf nry° Street and kamehart eha III Rd. during peak hours that would be unalterably worsened by the additional traffic resulting from those applications. It is inexcusable for the Kona 'Chive environmental assessment to fail to take the Suffolk arc! Pty ,aapplications into account. In addition, the Royal Vistas Traffic Impact Analysis, while appropriately appearing to forgo use or Ho'omarna and Paulehia Streets In Puaiari Estates to gain access for Royal Vistas residents and visitors to Highway 1 Pikipuaanui Street, welts to create a new, direct but non - signalized access ttr .ht !highway via Royal Vistas Rucidway. Even assuming that access lanes can be provided on the highway, the absence of traffic signals will inevitably lead to accidents and injuries. Furthermore, the existing access to the highway at the Lako Street intersection is already woefully inadequate because of the necessarily .0m11t north and southbound access lanes. But 1 also note th.:t. a.he applicant could also seek to have the County exercise eminent domain to allow the development to access Hp'omarT,dr and Pualehia Streets in Puelani Estates through the Gornes property, and thereby access Highway 11 al: the Puapuaanui intersection. Cur previous comments on these applications included our strenuous objection to such Highway 11 access through Pualani Estates roadways. In sum, I firmly believe that adding 450 two and three-bedroom residential units with at least 900 vehicle trips per day will aggravate the already unacceptable traffic delays on Highway 11 between Henry Street and Kamehameha 111 Rd,. even with the proposed added access via Royal Vistas Roadway I note also that the DEA fails to adequately deal with the existing problem of overcrowding in most of the public schools serving the area. Even acknowledging that the development would generate 99 students, there appears no provision for funding needed classroom space in the area. Finally, neither I, other owners of properties in Pualani Estates, nor Ha riaiian Management, our managing agent, received your original notice of this 700 -page DEA. After learning of its 1: 50 existence from a third party, I reviewed it, notified our managing agent, and prepared these comments. Because many interested parties were not officially notified of the DEA, 1 believe that the 30 -day deadline for comments should be extended. Aloha and mahalo in advance for your careful consideration of these concerns. Joel Gimpel 75-628 N. Mea Lartakila Pi. I{aiiva-Kona, HI 96740 808/325-4991 2 Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.9039 Mr. Joel Gimped 75-628 N. Mea Lanakila PI. Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 Via emcil: almatidlr ±ool.cc�n . RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr_ Gimpel: Thank you for the comment letter dated August 13, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The impact analysis fails to take into account the potential traffic on Highway 11 from the Suffolk Investment and Puaa Development applications for amendments to ordinances being considered by the Leeward Planning Commission, given the existing traffic issues between Henry Street and Kameharneha 111 Road. Response 1: Existing traffic conditions were established as part of the analysis in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIA.R) (Appendix 2 of the EA). As described in Section 3,7.2 and Appendix 2 of the EA, turning movement traffic counts were taken at eight study intersections, including Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Henry Street as well as Queen Ka`ahumanu and Kamehameha III Road. Although these intersections may experience delays, Appendix 2 demonstrates thatQueen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Henry Street functions at Level -of -service (LOS) C in the morning and evening while Queen Ka'ahumanu and Kamehameha 111 Road functions at LOS B in the morning and level C in the evening. These are both considered acceptable Levels of service by the County of Hawoi'i. Based on the methodology described in Appendix 2, the TZAR assumes a growth rate of one percent to account for additional traffic at the study intersections. Projects such as the ones you mentioned, Suffolk Investment and Puaa Development, have been accounted far in this erre percent growth rate. With these assumptions, the traffic impact analysis shows no impacts to level of service from the project above the background rate to these intersections. September 13, 2421 Mr. Joel Gimp& Page 2 of 3 Comment 2: The DEA does not consider accessing the proposed project from Queen Ka`chumanu along Puapuaanui Street and then along Ho'omama and Paulehia Streets in Pualani Estates. Kona Three could seek to have the County exercise eminent domain through the Gomes property. Accessing the project directly from Queen Ka'ahumanu will lead to more accidents and injuries,. Response 2: As described in Section 3.7.2, Kona Three LLC does not have rights to extend these streets across private land owned by the Frank and Betty Gomes Trust, acd Kona Three LLC as a good neighbor is not seeking to exercise eminent domain when another access option is available and supported by the Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDT1. Regarding the safety of accessing the site from the proposed intersection of Royal Vistas Blvd and Queen Ka'ahumanu, Kana Tree LIC has coordinated with HDOT and continues to coordinate with HDOT on ensuring the safest design and construction of this intersection, Comment 3: The existing access at the Lako Street intersection is currently inadequate due to the short north and southbound access. Response. 3: Figure 2 has been revised to show fhat access to the project site would not be connected to Kekuana"oa Place from Lako Street until Phase 2. Although this intersection may experience delays, Appendix 2 demonstrates that Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Lako Street functions at level of service C in the morning and evening which is considered acceptable level of service by the County of Hawaii. The traffic impact analysis shows no impacts to level of service from the project above the background rate to this intersection. Comment 4: The project would increase overcrowding in public schools with the adc::iiion c•f 99 students and does not include provision to fund needed classroom 5pcce. Response 4: As described in Section 3.7.1, the West Hawaii School impact Fee district has suspended fee collections, Therefore, there is no funding requirement ir. poc.ce for new developments. The project would be constructed in phases, ano occupancy would occur over time. Additionally, it is expected that the project would provide workforce housing for the local community. The project's first phase would construct rental units. and it is expected that occupants of these units would be local and many of the students already attend local public schools. Section 3.7.1 has been revised to clarify that since the project would be constructed in phases, all 99 students would not all arrive at once and occupancy would occur over a longer period of time. This is consistent with predicted rates of growth for the area which are considered by the Department of Education in their forecast planning for public schools. September 13, 2421 Mr. toes Gimp& Page 3of:? Comment 5: Request to extend the 30 -day deadline for comments. Response 5: This request was granted by the Hawaii County Planning Department and the DEA was released for a second 30 -day comment period. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 4942039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. ;'11 LL 1 Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.Iefebvre4stantec.con cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC MaiJa Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department .Ii-. 1:: - 01,9 Mori. Ashley From Lester Shirley 4Ivis avwgsbcglobal.net> Serie Friday. August 14, 2020 11:06 AM Ta: Michelelefeebvre c@stantec corn; Flartnmg Internet Mad Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Prc j t S s'sl,L \1s. 1.cfcI v c onk..l the Nanning I)ep i.rrenent 1 III c. ( Pix [iti ail Sheer lfL the Komi 1"�4t:15 wul�cli� Itilc�n. re-# lPLf NINC ;fir,T \lr cr>»crrn altour this'Prn# ir-iu l putter" is 1rallk Knn 'r 1 tx i, a quite subdivision with thc L,sireption cwt' 1.ikn [tect. The itnemetion of the highway end I.ako is a#readv ven' bus4'. without acIdinp, the additional tritFhr tnrn3 47.4i(1 iittio#ii Fn�ult' units "1116-1{ )vai Pr•i ic•ct nc:cds lo inLvc ;+u' xtt dirc;cth ti the highw iv, rat 1, ditit,nt ro ettrry and exir flu -cough Kfin,i "iritis. .ester V Shirley, 1 sq. Etctir.d i 135249 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, I-1196721 Tel: (8081 494.2039 Mr. Lester Shirley, Esq. Retired Via email: Mrslaw sbcglobaLnet RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Shirley: Thank you for the comment letter dated August 14, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The project would add traffic to the Lako Street intersections which is already a busy intersection. Response 1: Although this intersection may experience delays, Appendix 2 in the EA demonstrates that Queen Ka`ahumcanu Highway and Lako Street functions at level - of -service (LOS) Cin the morning and evening which is considered acceptable LOS by the County of Hawaii. The traffic impact analysis shows no impacts to LOS from the project above the background rate to this intersection. Comment 2; The project should have an exit directly to the highway, in addition to entry and exit through Kona Vistas_ Response 2: As described in Section 3.7.2 of the EA, Kono Three LLC proposes to construct a new intersection Royal Vistas Blvd. at the project's intersection with Queen Ka'ahumanu. Additionally, Figure 2 has been revised to show that access to the project site would be connected to Kekuana'oa Place from, Lako Street during Phase 2 of the project. At project completion, there would be two ways to access the project. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre' stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Moijo Jackson. County of Hawaii Planning Department August 16, 2020 County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3, h -filo,„ Hawaii 96720 RE: Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District TMKs (3) 7-6-021:016,017,018, and 019 Dear Sirs: C0I- PUINTQ+lj-- CEP IG 1'202`..)"?: ' ` RECD NS: I arm a long-time homeowner in Paulehia Street, having purchased my house in 2007. As a horneowner, 1 am adamantly opposed to the proposed Royal Vistas ~lousing Project, It would add about 45.O multi -family residential units just south of Pualani Estates. The reasons I am against such a project are as follows; 1. Much -Increased traffic on the main highway betv+een henry and lako Streets, especially whon tuuriSCS and mainland people return to live, work, and play on our island. 2. Possible traffic from Royal Vistas through Puy lani Estates, on Pauiehsa Street (my streety, and Ho'ornama Street. The streets here are narrow and many families with smalI children live here. Such traffic would then have to turn left on FLxapuaanui Street, to get to the highw, y, creating traffic backups on Puapuaanui Street. 3. Loss of property values in Pualani Estates due to the above possible scenarios, Please do not allow the loyal Vistas proposed project to go forward!' Ronald F Ra r idon 75-6133 Paulehia Street, Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 135408 � q k1 Stantec September 13. 2021 Mr. Ronald Raridon 75-6133 Pcu1ehica Street Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FQNSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawai'l Island Dear Mr. Raridon: Thank you for the comment letter dated August 16, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The project would add to existing traffic problems between Henry Street and Lako Street on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. Response 1: Existing traffic conditions were established as part of the analysis in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the EA). As described in Section 3.7.2 and in Appendix 2 of the EA, turtling movement traffic counts were taking at eight study intersections, including Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Henry Street as well as Queen Ka'ahumanu and Lako Street, Although these intersections may experience delays, Appendix 2 demonstrates that both of these intersections (Queen Ka`crhumanu Highway and Henry Street, and Queen Ka`ahurnanu and Lake Street) function at level -of -service C in the morning and evening. These are considered acceptable levels -of -service by the County of Hawai'i. Based on the methodology described in Appendix 2, the TZAR accounted for traffic measured during peak periods of use in April and August 2019, prior to the Covid-19 pandemic reduction of local and visitor traffic. The TIAR also assumed a growth rate of one percent from use in 2019 to account for additional traffic at the study intersections. With these conservative assumptions, the traffic impact analysis shows no impacts to level -of -service from the project above the background rate to these intersections. Comment 2: Traffic from the project would impact Hc`omama and Paulehia Streets in Pualani Estates, and create backups on Puapucanui Street. Response 2: As described in Section 3.7.2 of the EA, Kona Three LLC does not have rights to extend these streets across private land owned by the Frank and Betty Gomes Trust and Kona Three LLC is not proposing to access the project from these streets. September 13, 2021 Mr. Ronald Parisian Page 2 of 2 Comment 3: Loss of property values in Pualani Estates. Response 3: The project is consistent with medium density zoning and conform to the guiding principles regarding urban growth pattems as defined by the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP). It is beyond the scope of the EA to speculate on property values in the analysis. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre. Ph.D. michele.lefebvre'. stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Marjo Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mari. Ashley From: Kathy Winter 410-ikealani(ggrnad.corn Sent: Wednesc€av, August 26, 2020 9.06 AM Te: Planning Internet Maif Subject Royal Vistas Housing Project EA comments Attachments: Hui Response Ietter.dacx COP. PLANN_ RUG 26 2Q 2 C 125591 I eau Kukui }Ula Heiau Hui To: Michael Yee, Planning- Director From!. Heiau Pres€ r.:rtitr.1a 11111, Kean Kukui 'L1la 1Ieirtu Re: Royal Vistas f)e;vr•ItTut; rrl t'In2t AtrgU5t 22, 2020 As the hui that is respitasihlc f, a' the preservation and protection of the helm' in the "ualani Estates subdivision, we wish to express our concerns with the proposed development "Royal Vistas Wincing Project" [fMK (3) 7-6-O2E0ib-019]. • The study of the arca shows Llltit there is evidence of pre-eontac'l agricultural, habitation. bit]al zu d transportation fetttures, lava tubes and caves that were not obscured already b4• the bulldoling done in past. The sine of the development proposed will erase some of that history that cannot he r•cstc rc'd or recreated. • That land is a significantp:trt 111 Ilii• Kona 4st.•trt (i<i•sl that fill and supported a larT,e population in' f.tir'10 'f'lle laud prt.1)(Jsed for acquisition rt t rita wt)nir• sal ilii± historical eviLIvlit•l• which was 1c};t 1 1i� it Il. i lllir�.Ill developments built. • Though they area roads and streets flood. there are no perennial strertrns iii Kona. The area under consideration contains one of tht. Lew statural war ,'t sheds ilial could provide insight iaattl tlit cif the Lind ill rel.ition to ipvarter 4sciiirt"e . ▪ Most_ presc'[ :iI iron effurts in Kon.t are at the stiortlini, so this parcel is especially ,.'aluaable lin- p picKiervation that such a large tlevulscpiiivttt threatens. cu--74-4EAA- Dr. Katt' Kealani L -l. Winter Co-chair Ric l ,ii kt:• l urnan lag Co-chair Jeff MON - Res. ik flare. Manager Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Dr. Kate Kealani H. Winter, Co -Chair Mr, Ric Likeke Bumanglcag, Co -Chair Mr. Jeff Nohea Alexander, Resident and Doc. Manager Heiau Preservation Hui, Keau Kukui 'Ula Heiau Email: khk.ealaniC gmail.com RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated PONS! for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Dr. Winter, Mr. Likeke, and Mr. Nohea: Thank you for the comment letter dated August 22, 2020, on fhe Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The project area shows there is evidence of pre -contact cultural resources that not obscured already by previous bulldozing. The size of the project will erase some of that history that cannot be restored or recreated, The project is located on land that is a significant part of the Kona Field System and retains historical evidence that was lost when neighboring developments were built. Response 1: As described in Section 3.6 of the EA and included in Appendix 5. two Archaeological Inventory Surveys (AISs) were prepared. The AISs and EA cescrbe the project's location within the Kona Field System and how sites ;car: n-ified during the inventories are relevant to the Kona Field System. As part of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for theft significance. The AISs were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rules §13- 276 13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study, Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites, Two of the sites were identified for preservation (the railroad berm and petrogiyphj. As described in Section 3.6 of the EA.. Kona Three LLC k coordinating with State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) to ensure protection and preservation of these sites. Comment 2: Although there are no perennial streams in Kona. the project area contains one of the few seasonal watersheds that could provide insight into the historical uses of the land in relation to water sources. Response 2: As described in Section 1.2 of he EA, the project includes c small portion of the Horseshoe Bend Ditch that would be re-routed but not destroyed. September 13, 2021 Helau Preservatior Hui. Keau Kukui'lJ!la Heiau Page 2 of 2 Historic land use is described in Sections 3.5 and 3.6 of the EA. None of the existing Holualoa Ditch will be re-routed or destroyed; therefore, it anyone wanted to study the drainage ditches in the future, that opportunity would still exist. Mauka areas where rainfall occurs could be considered watershed areas and would not be impacted by the project. Comment 3: Mvicst preservation efforts in Iona are at the shoreline, so this parcel is especially valuable for preservation that such a large development threatens. ResPon€se 3: Regulations for evaluating site significance and eligibility for preservation were applied to all sites in the project area. These criteria apply regardless of proximity to the shoreline. The project is following required regulations for development to protect cultural resources in coordination with the SHPD. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. • Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. mic.hele.le`ebvre stcn ec.cor. cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three I_ LC Maija Jackson, County of Hawci'i Planning Deportment Mori, Ashley From: \atH Winter < m kelani g m »om> Sent= Wednesday August 2 20 g#] AM To: gain Internet Mail Subject: Royal Vistas Hoeing Project EA comments Attachments Lelter to Y .do , I tag »\J\Q 2\7, ' ' 2070 % %) 1355§3 To: Michael Yee. Planning Director From: Dr. }date H. Winter Re: Royal Vistas Housing Project [MIK (3) 7-5-021: 016-01911 Date August 23, 2020 Asa teaching professional, 1 have deep concerns about the housing development referenced above. 1 have taught some of Kona's teachers as undergraduates and know the talents and challenges they work with. As a professor at University of Hawaii Hilo and West Hawaii Community College. I have wltniessed the deficits that the district schools leave our students with. Socioeconomic stresses associated with such a Targe housing development in this district will have adverse impacts on our schools, our teachers and our students. The report states that 5 of our 6 public schools are over capacity at this time. Where does the County plan to have the additional children from this 450 unit development go to school? Thank you for your consideration of this problem. Dr. Kate H. Winter, Professor Emeritus University at Albany Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Dr, Kate H. Winter, Professor Emeritus Via email: khkealani4grrmarl.corn RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kano District, Hawaii Island Dear Dr. Winter: Thank you for the comment letter dated August 23, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: As a professor, l have witnessed the deficits that the district schools leave aur students with. The project will have adverse impacts to schools which are already over capacity. Response 1: As described in Section 1.2 of the EA, the project would be constructed in phases and occupancy would occur over time. It is expected that the project would provide workforce housing for the local community. The project's first phase would construct rental units, and it is expected that occupants of these units would be local residents and many of the students already attend local public schools, Even if the project added 99 new students to the district, all 99 students would not all arrive at once since the units would be built in phases and occupancy would occur over a longer period of time. This is consistent with predicted rates of growth for the area which are considered by the Hawaii State Deportment of Education in their forecast planning for public schools. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email, Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre. Ph.D. rnichele.lefebvre�a stantec.com co: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department liexaiS Mari, Ashley From: nra aw .i�Ui ►hawaii,rr.(Qr17 SentSent7 Tuesday. August 25, 202C 10 11 AM To: Planning Internet Mail Cc: 'di nnkoria uaol.com Subject: Royal Vitas Attachments: Royal Vis s:pdf Flkdsc scc attached. Thank you, M iakie 1 1 35 47 8 LTC DANIEL C, MALAKtE (R) 76-117 KAMEHAIVIALU STREET KAILUA-KONA, HI 96740 25 AUG 20 Caurty of Hawaii Planning ComrniSsion. 1 am writing in opposition to the proposed new development , Royal Vistas. 1 have lived here fcr over 25 years and have been very active in our community_ I have seen the lack of infrastructure causing numerous problems for our community. As you know it you live in F crra, the biggest problem is beeitie. Wryer? tliiegs return to normal and the tourists rand I:sitrars return and when we are able tei open al our businesses and return Io work, lne extenes teener to bumper from north at the airport to Gapturn Cock. The traffic light at Laky end ween K. intersection takes 3.5 minutes to change. Only a few cars are able to go through This light at one lime. There is the potential tei over 2000 new vehicles irorn the new proposed development traveling thro'..gh ti -ti: light every day, This intersection is already one of the deadliest intersections n lee , cumulous fatal ucc,denits, iris alone could acid on an additional 30+ rniniees to nr,r co -memo,. "ore neon a 4 -dare higrneray /ream Henn Street to Karr 3 Highway, There is terrible flooding in this area. Numerous times when there was a heavy rain. I have personally witnessed a waterfall that was 20 meters wide go over Queen K. Highway between Rualeni Estates and Lake Steee II blocked the entire highway It also caused much destruction. There is sir ee° ro in thus area and not much you car do to slop it. A new development will compcuna this problem_ Another major concern is for our water. If there era 75f1 new apartments and condos built, what will happen to Our water supply and additional sewage? There is alreacy a strain on the existing veils and watershed. Additional schools will also de needed. This area is rich in cultural peaces and acts. :ties,'There is a lack of parks and recreational areas In our community. Just look at the amount of people tl,at walk the Weilua trail and the Old Airport trail every day. You can check with PATH for additional inforrnat,on, If the County bought this piece of property they could have a beautiful park_ hiking trails and show significant cultural landmarks. There are numer❑us burial grounds in this area and Ons of our former councilmen has relatives who are buried in caves by tI is area. I have spoken to many of my neighbors and residents al our town. I am very active in many mmunity organizations. Our veterans groups, which account for about 900 active members are opposed to this, ROTARY, Knights of Columbus and Elks Lounge personnel are also concermec win the traffic. I propose you consider building a new park for our growing community in this area. This would service cur community greatly. deci.ironicisik &ionnii DAMN_ C_ fv1ALAl<IE Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Daniel Malakie 76-117 Kamehamclu Street Kailua-Kano, HI 96740 Via email: rnala3 i ct •ha �::i.r_ �� RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr_ Malakie: Thank you for the comment letter dated August 25, 2020,, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The biggest problem in Kona is traffic and impacts could occur at the traffic light at the Loko and Queen Kaahumanu intersection with the addition of the proposed project. We need a 4 -lane highway from Henry Street to Kamehameha III Road. Response 1: The Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the EA) acknowledges the bottleneck that occurs at Lako Street. The traffic signal timing and phasing can be changed in the interim from split phasing to protected or protected/permitted or permitted phasing on Lako Street. The long-term solution k the widening of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. The widening of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway from Henry to Kamehameha ill Road has been in the long-range transportation plan: however, this Falls outside the scope of this project. Comment : There is terrible flooding in this area, especially over Queen K. Highway between Pualani Estates and Lako Street, There is sheet flooding in this area and not much you can do to stop it. A new development will cornpound this problem. Response 2: Queen Kaahumanu Highway is owned and maintained by the Stote of Howai'i, together with the two culvert systems traversing Queen Kca'ahumanu Highway which transport the floodwaters of Holualoa Ditch and Horseshoe Bend Ditch below Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. The State has not indicated any problems with being able to maintain the highway or the culverts. and the proposed project would not increase the amount of water in the ditches (per Sechion 27-20 of the Hawaii County Code). September 13, 2021 Mr. D iniel Mnlakie Page 2 of 3 Comment 3: Another major concern is for our water. If there are 750 new apartments and canoes built, what will happen to our water supply and additional sewage? There is already a strain on the existing wells anci watershed. Additional schools will also be needed. Response 3: The Project is planned for 450 units, not 750 units. As described in Section 3.3.3 of the EA, the water credits for this project have already been committed and paid for. The Department of Water Supply assigns credits based can capacity, so the infrastructure can provide the water for this project. Potential impacts to schools through the addition of students from the project is described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA, and is not expected to have a major impact to local schools. Comment 4: There is a lack of parks and recreational areas in our community. If the County bought this piece of property, they could have ca beautiful park, hiking trails, and show significant cultural landmarks. There are numerous burial grounds in this area and one of our farmer councilmen has relatives who are buried in caves by this area. Response 4: The project is consistent with medium density zoning and conforms to the guiding principles regarding urban growth patterns as defined by the Kona Community Development Pion. The applicant action being considered and analyzed on private land in the EA does not include a proposal for change in zoning or creation of a public park. Although the project si`e has been narninated tor County of Hawaii Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PC NC) acquisition twice, both times the Committee declined. Potential impacts to cultural resources are described in Section 3.6 of the EA. The entire property has been inventoried and this section describes two burials that were located in the project site, which were removed and reinterred prior to 1984. There is one single burial on the project's 70 acres, and this burial has been approved for preservation by the State and Burial council. Boned on these results, impacts to burials in the project site have been mitigated. Comment 5: I am very active in many community organizations. Our veterans groups, which account for about 900 active members are opposed to this. ROTARY. Knights of Columbus and Elks Lounge personnel are also concerned with the traffic. I propose you consider building a new park for our growing community in this area. Response 5: Impacts to traffic are described in Section 3.7.2 of the EA. Additionally, the applicant action being considered and analyzed on private land in the EA does not include a proposal for change in zoning or creation of a public park. September 13, 2021 Mr. D iniel Mulukie Page 3 of 3 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 4 l Y Michele Lefebvre, Ph.❑. michele.letebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department From; Zirnrfer. ]eff F Tot LeranKre-.M chete Cr Broward. )ohn Subject; NPS Comments, Draft Environment I Assessment for Royal Vistas Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 3'52:45 PM Attachments: 2020 08 25 NPS let, -W- rc. F7CA.odf Attached plcr.4s:c find our col- impnt Ie. tter. —Jell Jeff Zimpfer. National Park Service Environmental Protection Specialist Kaloka-HonokOhau National Historical Park 73-4786 Kanalani St., 414 Kai lua Kona, HI 96740 ph:808-329-6881 x1500 fax_ 8C8-329-2597 jetfzi rno fer() n D5. goy bItIZILLY r' ..0 :1 3. 1orndex.htl n The National Park Service cares for special places saved by the American people so that all may experience our heritage National Park Serviee U,S, Department of the Interior 14alrikri-Honok6hau 73-47St, Hanal Street # 14 National Historical Park Kailua-Keana. Huwal.'e 96740 Kis 329•tiSRi PhDne aoc $ 9.2597 Fa ss Kaloko-Honokohau l F l:VLY REFER TO: 1 762 (2020-3) August 2.2020 Dr. Michele Lefebvre Statltcc Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo. Hawai`i 96721 Subject: National Park Service Comments for a Draft Ern/iron men tar Assessment for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project, Island of Hawaii. N4.11111 Kona District, TIMMKs: 7-6.021:016 and 7-6-021:017 Dear Dr. Lefebvre! The National Park Service commented for an early Consultation for the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project. Thank you for addressing our comments in the Draft EA. As a physically small park in a developing region, we depend on the careful and thoughtful actions of tour neighbors to protect the fishponds, coast, and anchialine pools that are valuable cultural and natural resources for our community and our nation. Mahal() For working with us to help protect this precious place, We have no further comments for the EA. 11 you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. JeffZimpfer of my staff (805-329-1881 x 1 50 or Jeff zimpfer(ci?nps.gov). Sincerely, John Hroward Acting Superintendent Ka1oko-Honokohau N ational Historical Park EXPERIENCE Trio 11,ii I P:.irk l'A;,•��i� ��,�c�alplaces sar tttythe American people o. that all may experience heritage, Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, H 96721 Tel: (808) 494.9039 Mr. John Bro yard, Acting Superintendent Kaloko-Honokohau Notional Historic Park 73-4786 Ka na la ni Street #14 Koilua-Kona, HI 96740 Via e-mail: Jeff Zimpfer, jeff_simpfer nps.gov RE: Comments on Dratt Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii island Dear Mr. Broward: Thank you for the letter dated August 25, 2020, iri which you stated that the National Park Service hod no further comments on the Environmental Assessment, We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me of (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.le febvre©'stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From John Randerson caw - Sent Thursday. Angt:st 27, 2020 x.2 PIA To: Plannrng Internet MaiJ Subject: Royal Vistas HoiJ irlg Project EZ Comments Aloha live, near this proposed devclorment and wish k make thc following submission: 1�Ii'r3 PLAIN i SPT Nit* e 2070 p1 -42:3O Tile Traffic Information Report J { Appenc1i .1 WO of the EA rtleasured peak traffic Ilfro's iin two day's. Tuesday, April 30.2019 and Thursday, August ?4. 2019. Wane 125 of the 1HA and numbered page 9 of Appendix "[ Those cl rtes hctilkr e: eludsr the 1614.,besi density traffic penor1q which hL :IIi :I, November. arid end in the following March I'hi ti\'e-iiit'i11th periid is the period during, which Ii1L porti1 ili, iv.1\Lt1 by 'snow -birder,'' from Alaska, ('.:triada, and other US states that •11E +.1 !HILT, i; Iti c"•.Ir 111:! II;� -t." periosls Ilr:rt northbound traffic hacks up to Akoni Street in 11—t niornil:!r :is late .1. I dill ai1LI "1 KJ 1191.1+.1luiKl '...I II Ic ba6:k, up as Far aw Huulalui Road ii tht I tc ttftO miion, The prrlprl,esl Rt ynt i Iw'i is in ;rocide tit' t"h:11 backol up traffic and the proposed two way stop intersection 14'II1 ;+1111131 ' nii' work, t f1,:se nr#' h;rscti on my Ohservation5 as a rrrstdont Mt Kona Vistas' `.+II1ee 241112; hut are not itif 4i:t11y vt relied. 1 hL tfierthorn be verified is for l..rna 1] i'cc I l.[' to re -submit i i I-1AR twtth irafticdata seleCTed Irt 111 Iww't, 41:Its•:'• 11111.1111_ that peak perirwd i[ ctv - Mureli}. As it stinidx, Ihr 1.IAk i 1ait;.illy clawed because its arc h sed or dares Thai fill otif,itlt peak traffic periods. Ct thus pro% tiles :rn unrealistie assessment or tIlaL :ry): eLL s.,t the L iromr.en1at Impact 111 this subdivision. Jahn. Soo Rao Al t?Ii 76--1_15 ^ Lt1141::i Street 1 1:1559C Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box. 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. and Mrs. Randerson 76-4353 Lei.lani Street Kailua-Kona, Hi 96740 Via emvil: fjr123Cgmail.com RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI tor Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mrs, Sonja Randerson and Mr, John Randerson: Thank you for the comment letter dated August 27, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix Two of the EA) measured peak traffic flows on hovo days: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 and Thursday, August 24, 2019, Those dates exclude the highest density traffic periods which begin in November and end in the following March. The proposed Royal Vistas Roadway k in the middle of that backed up traffic and the proposed two way stop intersection will simply not work. Kona Three LLC should resubmit the TIAR with traffic data selected from two dates during that peak period (Nov -March). Response ": Historic Hawaii Department of Transportation (HOOT) counts show that the overall average weekday volume is fairly consistent throughout the year. While tourism traffic is Higher during the winter months, summer break. and spring break, the overall traffic due to work and school being on break is also lower. A typical school/work day will usually have higher AM and PM peaks. it is this school peak hour in the AM and PM peak hours that the TIAR is aimed at analyzing. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email, Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvresfantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC JVICIliCI Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department CAVID Y. ase 3.w-444•i.'A Or'FICE DF FACILITIES AND O FrESIATIONS Septenj er 1, 2020 Michele Lefebvre Stantec Consulting Services P.O. Box 191 Hilo, Hawaii 96721 try STATE OF HAWAI 1 DEPARTMENT DF EDUCATION P,D BOX 236C I -I NDU1JL J, i-WW4WAI I 9E4334 naz �er�snwt. _ Re. Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project Draft Environmental AAssessnent North Kana_ Hawaii. TMK 7-5-321:016. 017. 018. & 0.19 Dear Ms Lefebvre. The Hawaii State Department of Education HIDOE) has the following comments for the proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project (Project). Kora Three Li..0 proposes to develop 450 multi -family units. a combination of rental and for sale units, and associated Improvements in North Kona. Island of Hawaii. TMK: 7-6-0211:016. 017. 018 & 019. The HIDOE previously provided comments or the proposed Project by the enclosed letter dated December 10, 2019_ As there are no changes to the previously reviewed Project we have no further comments. Thank you for the opportunity to comments Should you have questions, please contact Robyn Loudermilk. Acting Land Use Planner. Facilities Development Branch, Planning Section, at (808) 7E4-5093 or via email at robyn.loudermilk[o3k12.hi.us. Respectfully, Kenneth G. Masden 11 Public Works Manager Planning Section KGM:rfl Enclosure c: Janette Snelling Complex Area Supennterdent. > ;orokaa'Kealak he. oilala'Kona raena Complex Hawaii County Planning Department AN AFFIRMATIVE ACT1CN AND EQUAL DPPOR T t1N TY FN'FI nY=R . ' OAVIn v 01Ge tir FAL IL.1T'ES .AN OPERATIONS r344emller 10.2014 Michele Letbk•re Stant (=misfiling scrk icc P.O. Box 141 1Iilo.Iila4aii 06721 STATE OF I-tAWAI' I DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION P 0 BOX Z3E0 HDIKO•LUtu I WA 1 9& 1 96E034 Re. Lnti iron111sntal Assessment I= lrrlw 1,704151u1lariorl ReLllLIL L for Proprr,eii Ri+- a] 'k`asra3 Hou;i g Prptecr,. Hattan 1'ktl. - 1 11IF:. 017. Nortli Kona_ Hawaii Fkar Ms. 1u}re:lkre Thi 1laaaair Slaw Del:urtn-1.m of Education i11UDOE) h.a5 tlw 3bllo+.in= i or ttTtt:rlts for the pmpc d Ra-17,aI %Islas 1-I i!`..1112 Pro'e[ C 1 Prua.ar l 4ccordrrt to 'clic inl ,arrniniani prole itled K&,,/11a "I }1re6 LLC p-rcpesti.4 w deu T11p 45.0 mutli-r'am.'I Mils. o con1birldti4.in of ren.lar and Er'r s,:le units_ IocaE4d ir1 %cortlr Knnls. Lslaild of1Eati ii_ H�asaii. T\11,,.: 74146: '41 & 01- 1 11E!1 "Iti' Csro.lect mantra: :lnLl mitt turni,Ra+r' 1117:11 tk I_ kaC L0111-411)01- regLle 1114!•_. T1)1: I1. 's. _ • - .:Ltrr013L'••• 1a7I ; I:'_ t I",...';1 I'r `-& '.--v...if 1:FCtrffJCrii LII:rri rY116�. k Ji . i k,eElj5r:1��'tif 1tii 1V1w i'I L. 1. ila' Ih is �i111ti .1,1 . L': . 13,: s 1 . : `r _ 1-.1 i,li r•'..I en;i CI13.11 Korb -7w illrt8 \I;t1tIle.}l: i.w �Il�l:la lEl 3nd 14 "p ` L 1':r4 . C'11ti..t r, .1•, "Ii•. 1'i4°` Ii• h1 'illl. st. kol . lrl ti irrer111} ait'CI' and. J14 L.111:1115 ON .1 rI.,. ';G''+.I :I•b` tA'..I• - The [Imposed 1'rc.e:l ;'wL /Loa aii SchLoollir;pt.:tFav Doitrict_ 11aikteaer kke ire+:trrreiii1a not �c1'Jr Lt n�. impact 1cr5 T air,. Ir T Mental 3y0a4L•rne t', I hank \cu !i3rthe orporton i1 CCS comment. Should t1Li Jluk- 4LEe tion4. 111:stic i:oni 141 r Arh4ri lichi 1 Lands and Fu}1IIttos ti ^c11111;-1_ I-ainliriL Develnpinenr 13ranf•h Pianranu SeL:Iit al r14Ci1;1'44-51193, or krn crnaii t1 rnhtn.Intid i iii[k•r)I Tr2.hi•u, Rei -p etfuJI} , •r z 1.. nrat0;; Ce. t I'a,bII4 V. arks Manager 1'lalTnin Section K it~1.r11 I:- Al Scioza rnr+lL' air+, -1 tlpa.-rintsndient. HI.IllrrknL•Kral:;lash:l.'k1,I1rt,t.Knnrtio.;i na Complex Aran AN AFFIRMATVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Kenneth G. Madsen ll, Public Works Manager State of Ftawai`i Deportment of Education P.O. Box 2360 Honolulu, H 1 9 68 04 RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Madsen: Thank you for the letter dated September 1, 2020, in which you stated that the Sate of Hawaii Department of Education had no further comments on the Environmental Assessment. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email, Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. /ll Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele, lefebvreestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department From: Melissa Matsuura To: Dlarlr" 9 + j>SGil 1t9ov Cc: richardr eastwestreatti+.orn; jrefebwre. Michele rmclareni2ha. au.ed&; pawui Lonborg, Richard ! aIns:caa4 Subject: Comments ars the Proposed Royal Vistas Project Draft EA Date: Wednesday, September 02, 2020 2:27:12 P4 Attachments: 49.02.2020 Hawaii County Pfannirso Dect Comments on Royal Vistas Housmo Draft EA.odf Aloha, /Wad -Led care comments from Robert McLaren, [nterim Director of the University of Hawaii Institut } for .Astronomy regarding the proposed Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project DEA, Tax Map Key No. (3) 7-6-021:016-019, North Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. 1Melissaa)4, 9Wtitsaru.ra Operations Coordinator University of Hawaii Institute for Astronomy 2680 Woodlawn Drive, C-205 Honolulu. Hawaii 96822 (808) 956-682.9 — direct a�matsur�c luau aii_cd>l. W NOV E R 5 1 T V OF /# A W A 1 1 1 AT M A N GI A IAm,.wirny Ofl . iter Oir room September 2, 2020 Via email: Planning Department, County of Hawail 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Attention: Mr, Michael Yee (planning@hawaiicounty.gov) Re: Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) Royal Vistas Housing Project TMK: (3) 7-6-021:016-019, North Kona District, [stand of Hawaii Dear Mr. Yee: Thank you for the opportunity to comment an the Draft Environmental Assessment for the proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project referenced above (published August 8, 2.020)„ specifically with respect to issues and concerns regarding light pollution. The University of Hawaii Institute for Astronomy (11A) condu,cts research in astronomy using telescopes located on Haleakala and Maunakca and operated by IfA and our partner institutions. Both Haleakala and Maunakea are among the best sites in the world for astronomical facilities because of their elevation, clear skies, Favorable atmospheric conditions, and low levels of Iight pollution. Hawaii -based observatories have played major roles in the advancement of astronomy and astrophysics for over 50 years and are well positioned to remain at the forefront of astronomical research for decades to come. Because of the outstanding quality and productivity of these facilities, IfA is acutely concerned about negative impacts on astronomy from increased light pollution. Our work to combat light pollution has also brought us into contact with others concerned about light pollution for other reasons, including impacts on wildlife (particularly seabirds) and an hurnari health. While 1LA's comments focus on the impacts of light pollution on astronomy, appropriate mitigation measures also help to reduce non -astronomy impacts. With that background, we offer the following cornrnents: Any new or additional artificial light at night has an adverse effect on astronomical observations by increasing the night sky brightness. Nearly all observations performed by the telescopes on Maunakea are sky -background limited. This means that there is a natural sky brightness corning from airflow and zodiacal light. Artificial light increases the sky brightness, thereby decreasing the sensitivity of the telescopes. Lights can have an adverse effect on astronomical observations by incrementally increasing the night sky brightness, effectively making the telescope smaller and less sensitive. Paved iMatt mon Lirw Wrsca,ak,, rti.r .4� IF,jsri t `:014. A.PM4—a4,r.Ar.a. r 6,141„Baer Planning Department, County or -Hawaii Mr. Michael Yee Page 2 Appropriate steps to reduce the impact on tlic observatories would include. 1. Any lighting at the facility must follow the Hawaii County lighting ordinance. All lighting must be fully shielded. This means that all lighting fixtures must emit zero light above the horizontal plane. 2. The minimum possible amount of outdoor lighting should be used. Motion sensor activated lighting is strongly preferred. Blue light is most harmful to the observatories, so blue -deficient lighting should be exclusively selected. The best choices are filtered LED lights, or amber LED lights. Under no circumstances should high-intensity discharge lamps such as metal halide be used; fluorescent lights also must be avoided. Both of these types of lamps use mercury and emit light at wavelengths that is very damaging to astronomy. 3. White light should be avoided because the blue component of white light is very damaging to astronomy. White light should always have a Correlated Color Temperature of 2700 K or below. Thank you foryour consideration of these comments and attention to lfA's concerns. if you have questions or need further detail regarding these comments, please do riot hesitate to contact the undersigned or Richard Wainscoat (rjw@hawaii.edti). Very _]'illy yours, ''11' (if Robert McLaren Interim Director cc: Mr. Richard Wheelock, Konda Three LLC (richard()eastwestrealty.org) Ms. Michele Lefebvre, Stantac Consulting(michele.lefebvrefd)stantec.com) Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Robert McLaren University of Hawa'i at Mcsnoa Institute for Astronomy 2680 Woodlawn Drive, C-205 Honolulu, HI 96822 Via email: mmatsuur@hawaii.edu RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. McLaren: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 2r 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: Lights can have an adverse effect on astronomical observations by incrementally increasing the night sky brightness, effectively making the telescope smaller and less sensitive. Appropriate steps to reduce the impact an the observatories would include: 1. Any lighting at the facility must follow the Hawaii County lighting ordinance. All lighting must be fully shielded. This means that all lighting fixtures must emit zero light above the horizontal plane. Response 1: The project has considered potential impacts to night sky brightness and incorporated protection measures to minimize these potential impacts. As described in Section 3.3.4 of the EA in impacts to biological resources, the project would not involve any unshielded lighting for either construction or operation, in conformance with Hawaii County Cade § 14 - 50 et seq. Additionally. during operation the site would use lighting only where and when it is needed for safety purposes, No project construction using unshielded equipment maintenance lighting would occur after dark between the months of April and October, All additional permanent lighting would conform to the Hawaii County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawaii'i County Code Chapter 9, Article 14), which requires shielding of exterior lights so as to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting_ The proposed project would also avoid nighttime construction from September 15 through December 15 (to avoid during the seabird fledging period). These measures would also reduce potential impacts to the observatories. Comment 2: The minimum possible amount of outdoor lighting should be used. Motion sensor activated lighting is strongly' preferred. Blue light is most harmful to the observatories, so blue -deficient lighting should be exclusively selected. The best choices September 13, 2021 Mr. Robert McLaren Page 2at2 are filtered LED lights, or amber LED lights. Under no circumstances should high-intensity discharge lamps such as metal halide be used; fluorescent lights also must be avoided. Both of these types of lamps use mercury and emit light at wavelengths that is very damaging to astronomy. White light should be avoided because he blue component of white light is very damaging to astronomy. White light should always have a Correlated Color Temperature of 2700 K or below. Response 2: As described in Section 3.3.4 of the EA, the use of outdoor lamps with warmer colors (less blue light) and energy efficient fixtures would be considered when the building is being constructed. Additionally, the project does not anticipate using metal halide and fluorescent lights. To minimize Project impacts from lighting, the following text has been added ray Section 3.3.4 of the EA to address your comment, "Subject to local rules and regulations, the Proposed Project would utilize lighting on the 2700 degrees Kelvin scale in response to a public comment received on the Draft EA regarding potential impacts to astronomy." We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. It you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Staritec Consulting Services Inc. i Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D_ mic h e le, lef ebvre©stontec.co m cc; Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department DAVID v IOL :f' •EHWiaFC Ibis. Michele Lefebvre Staantec• Consulting Inc. liox I I 11110. I Iatik a<tt 1 96721 Dear Ms. I- efebvre STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF IRAN FORTAT(Qt ErEPUNCHBOWL 7REET HONOLULU. HAMNAIL 1;16 813-5097 September 3. 2020 Subject: Draft Environmental Assessment (DEM Royal Vistas housing Project North Kona, Island of1tawa ii, Hawaii Tax Map Key Nos.: (3) 7-6-021: 016. 017. 018, and 019 O,Ltt. F DIJtAV LiiI&C 104 Oepnily DIm i LYUN A S A4 A-REa3Att LCpCK CHOW uc, s M HI I;,A;J I Lr* INH HNIFFEl4 IN REPLY REFER TO D1R 0740 HWY-PS 2.31718 'I'hc applicant. Kona Three I,. 1„.(..' proposes to develop 7t1acres of vacant land into a rnLalti-tarzily residential subdivision. L Fw:,1 I1ui"JO _tt i!s emit -hated a 450 units. with 258 units planned as Phase I, The property is located on the nattl:a . idc of Queen Kaahulnanu Highway between Kona Vista Subdivision rind i'ualani Lactates 'Subdivision. Only one roadway is planned LO pre}ti•icie access lot Phase 1 wI ILI1 intersects with ()LILen E\,ralluini,Irla IIielltvay (State: Route 1 1). approximately 600 feet north of flit i'.h KuakLn Iii llc� ay, The DFS A should include a. liycirolnric nrtd hydraulic study oldie proposed changes to the Ilt�rwcwline Bend Drainatgeviia depicted c,tt ih l'IRM i4aap Panel 15516009S2F where the existing culverts on Queen Kaahumanu 11ighwoy. may he impacted. The LICA should also note the proposed access LLQ Queen Kaahumanu Higly -tt4 will apparently conflict with and impact the CX. itingdrainage culverts. The I)rLtc1 Ironic Ia1)p.Lct Analysis Report (-TZAR) I+ e Lhe I' v.II'Vistas. doted May 2020, was included as an Appcncii.N tli ilio DFA. Hawaii Department (Ft Transportation (HDOT) has reviewed the -l`I? L .and has the following co>aarnents role' ;.Lnt to State highways: 1. The `I'lAR is included as part of a DEA d. I LL law t'ha ter 343. 11,Rcill i Itc-c tweet Statutes 1L)r the subject project for the use; al (mitr land. 2. Phase 1 oldie project is expected to he completed by 2024 with the only proposed access being the 111 opF!.r.:L1 Royal Vistas Roadway Tillers C'iitII1 with t tree r Kaihunicintl 11ighwi.ay. This proposed Access as a lull -intersection on the State l.•iglw.ay, which is a. major arterial. is no ;id' isable and alternative options should be explored. Alternative Ms. Michele Lefebvre September 3. 2020 Page 2 HWY-PS 2,3918 options should include connections of `mirror collectL}r4' running parallel to Queen Kaahumanu Highway from the official Transportation V:iwork Mala Nlani Kailttn Area from llie Kona Community Development Plan. l lige include extending Montana Street to I-eilani Street,. and Paulehia Stre t i Kckuanaua Place which may he done in Phase 1 to pray idc access to the project. the alternative analysis should include impacts to 1.1i study area intersections of Queen Kaahumanu l lighway k ialum the proposed Royal Vistas Roadway intersection. Hie I I AR should include ;z phasing plan and the transportation imprnvements of each his 411orild include the road payout and circulation within the project lbreach. 4. Fite I TAR should provide a mitigation analysis for the intersections that Operate at 4`k CI +)I' Service 1: or lower. 5. The I'I!\R should include an estimate of regional traffic imprmernenta Dosed on a pro -alta Basis. {r. Hie I li.K. fl' requests u din setback or3o feel from the existing Quueen Kw. uarnurtu Highway right-of-way for future roadway improvements. ements. 7. The summary and recommendations of the TL.'LR do not include the proposed left turn lane .and right turn hale for the Royal Vistas Roadway. There is also no nienlion ref' ihanneliaation, a refuge lane. or a crosswalk. li ,:i 11:0 ilny 4.1 If'..11 1011S. a,l :1",C contact. 3eyan Thinlwnaimm. Systems Planning Engineer. 1 lig=hv..ivs l)tttwk4�,,. 1'i:l]trtttlg Branch ql (ROK) 587-63,741 hy email at .joy.in.tltirttgstanttawti .hitwvaii.go _ Please reference file review number PS 2020-120. Sine rely, -F(t .JADE T. 13L1 I AY Director oI transportation Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Jade Butoy. Director of Transportation State of Hawaii Department of Transportation 869 Punchbowl Street Honolulu, HI 96813 RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr, Butay: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 3, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The DEA should include a hydrologic study of the proposed changes to the Horseshoe Bend Drainagewoy depicted an the FIRM Map Panel 1551660952F where the existing culverts ori Queen Kaahumanu Highway may be impacted. The DEA should also ride the proposed access to Queen Kaahumanu Highway will apparently conflict with and impact the existing drainage culverts. Response 1: Please see the response prepared by Mr. Ty Dempsey of Dempsey Pacific Inc, enclosed. Mr. Dempsey is the Civil Engineering consultant for Kona Three LLC, the applicant for this project. Comment 2: Phase I of the project is expected to be completed by 2024 with the only proposed access being the proposed Royal Vistas Roadway intersection with Queen Kaahumanu Highway. This proposed access is a full -intersection on the State highway, which is a major arterial, is not advisable and alternative options should be explored. Alternative options should include connections of 'minor collectors' running parallel tca Queen Kaahurncnu Highway from the official Transportation Network Map - Nani Kailua Area from the Kona Community Development Plan. These include extending Hoornana Street to Leilani Street, and 'Paulehia Street to Kekuonaoa Place which may be done in Phase 1 to provide access to the project. The alternative anclysis should include impacts to the study area intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway without the proposed Royal Vistas Roadway intersection. Response 2: The minor collector roads located within the project site v auld be built and dedicated by the project to the County of Hawaii, but these collectors cannot connect Ho'ornamca Street to Leilani Street due to two intervening properties (one on the north of project and one on the south) that are not owned or controlled by the Kona Three LLC. Kekuanci oa Place would be connected to the project's connector roads in Phase II tas outlined in the TPAR and EA), but cannot be connected to Faulehia Street- due to the intervening property an the north sloe of the Project which is not owned or controlled by Kona Three. September 13, 2021 Mr. Jade Butay Page 2 of 7 Comment 3: The TZAR should include ca phasing plan and the transportation improvements of each phase. This should include the road layout and circulation within the project for each phase. Response 3: Figure 2 hos been revised to show that access to the project site would not be connected to Kekuano'oa Place from Lako Street until Phrase II. Comment 4: The -FAR should provide a mitigation analysis for the intersections that operate at Level of Service (LOS) E or lower. Response 4: The only intersection that operates at LOS E or lower is the intersection of Queen Ka'ahurnanu Highway and Lako Street in year 2039 AM Peak period (see Tables 27 and 28 on pages 53 and 54 of the TIAR), which is due primarily to Queen Ka'ahumanu northbounci through traffic coupled with Queen Kaahumanu Southbound Left movement and Lako Street Eastbound left movement. Section VI., Item 8 on page 57 of Inc TIAR provides the following mitigation analysis for that intersection: "Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street: The Lake Street intersection operates at LOS E/D (A PPM) with or without the Royal Vistas araject in the 2039 scenario. Lako Street currently has split phasing (sequential rather than concurrent) on the Lako Street approaches. Changing the phasing from, split to protected left turns would help lower the delay. This intersection would also improve significantly if Qucon Kaahumanu Highway is widened to 4 lanes as in the 2035 Transportation Pisan," Comment 5: The TIAR should include an estimate of regional traffic improvements based on a pro -rata basis, Response 5: Based on our understanding of the HDOT Proportional Share Impact Fee Methodology, a transportation fee is charged to new development projects to pay for regional transportation improvements needed as a result of the new development. The fee is proportional to the project's impact. The method for determining the pro -rata share of regional transportations improvements is as follows: 11) list project -related regional transportation improvements determined by TIAR, (2) determine the cost of each regional transportation improvement, (3) identify project's percent of trips towards each regional transportation improvement based on critical peak hour, (4} total project's cost towards regional transportation improvements, and (5) apply the project's total pro -rata share cost towards one or more HDOT initiated regional transportation improvements or require the developer to implement one or more regional transportation improvements. The TIAR analyzes traffic conditions for existing conditions, 2024, 2029 and 2039 with and without the proposed project. The conditions for future years with and without the project mirror existing conditions: delays for stop controlled traffic at Hualalai (N) and (5) and Kuakini Highway. The delays worsen with time and added traffic. However, the signal controlled intersecfions operate at overall LOS D or better (acceptably] for 2024 and 2029 with and without the proposed project. In 2039, again ail of the signal controlled intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or September 13, 2021 qtr. Jade Butay Page of7 better (acceptably) with or without the project, except for the Lako Street intersectio, in the AM peak hour, when the analysis showed it is expected to operate at LOS E with or without the project. As the highway is widened to 4 lanes, the LOS is expected to improve significantly. Further, the LOS can be improved by changing frorrr split phasing (sequential) to concurrent phasing for the side street traffic. There are na regional transportation improvements needed as ❑ result of the proposed project, other than building the Royal Vistas Roadway access intersection, which the applicant would fund at 100 percent. Comment 6: The HDOT requests a design setback of 30 feet from the existing Queen Kaahumanu Highway right-of-way for future roadway improvements. Response 8: Where possible. Kona Three LLC would accommodate a design setback of 30 feet from existing Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway for future right-of-way improvements. Comment 7: The summary and recommendations of the TEAR do not include the proposed left turn lane and right turn lane for the Royal Vistas Roadway, There is also no mention of channelizatian, a refuge lane, or a crosswalk. Response 7: The TIAR does propose a left turn and right turn lane for Phase 1 and Phase Il, As stated in the TZAR lAppendix 2, on page 21), "A crosswalk would be provided an the east side of the intersection for pedestrian connectivity. A refuge lane for westbound left turns onto Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway is recommended as this is an unsignalized intersection and will make this turn easier for the driver." We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D michele_iefebvre stantec_corn Eng. fosure cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson. County of Hawoi'i Planning Department penny Pacific Inc. civil Engineering Design & consuiilnq services October l9. 242.0 Mr. ;lc hard Wheelock mina Three LLC ICI I,lua!alai Street 10 0,111 9672c ,Subject:-+„stiAK Lurvert terarrr•'IAtrar, her Queen Kaahumdnu h'Mighw r tmersectrttrr imprOverrierrts ',nyalVistas Uiee+' cirir'uni ru olethwlayr Preliminary Engineering Assistance icon. -ort, T\t4 ; :1 7 i. 0' 1 (11 t. Dear Kona Three ILC ti4'r h.tue re".t+ ,!d the review lel •r 'r; rb, the -t.ste or Hawaii Department n' Transportation, regarding rlr.rt-rIwironnnemai Assessment IDOT i„ r,,vays rererenc,e UIR 0740. HWY PS 2.3918). The r'rot:11'111 11 1,1{ '1'rr!r, of Iv. intenrre:lcn for the R;rvai tiiat:r. r,::', rl . .y Entine( ton with Qrir+rrt Kaahtrmir u IIphv.7w .01.,11,"-'et:n he within the existing 12€1' wrldle per',di rr rsa iot tion Wrywee ,hot the r;4 rte, h.i hw 7. r•,ivert crossing for Horseshoe Bend does re. 1. .. ,.9ihy within :he ler: side or the exisairnR i ' L1' wide permuted access location. Based an the ROW V. ...Ind togiographic surrey or the enrsting culvert and headwall locations as-0wil = {,L7°11 the original hi. - ,y cssnstructian, the northern mo'1 prrrlltan of Ih,d 1 ?C° 4W,OOP. Il rilryiti±i) lr:f.p ": .r'w! ip ,l I,; ,r:,' tl :; •!,rr! .' .a l the t:t,r,lirnJi [...ANTE t ter ;;ln leer 04.2 •,otilllskry at,ly! ,1 r,, '1', S ,'s. •rr encroach inkrl tP exrstiang 120' wtrde perntictrd rt t:il,s by •` n:1a1111, Mr* proposed intersection is pllarinecl rrrore within the sch rtn pnrtiar cr` ra'- .., .,:: l ', srMrfle rr.1i-:.ed :1i cess in order to allow the existing highway culvert crossing . rent. t , _• �r, {l��i.l, l"r• -/1 log Heart+,i r+°x ;,ry grid culvert crossing. The i,`.trrseLt:.,ri , • theRtly.ii ': ii P ii pY p 0. 11 .'1': ,M+tlulders offset 49.00' Priori titer reurti.eerr pair• , .• ... b. permitted...loess and ulh., • 1=• rt) Priam the southern {trout ui Elie 120' vinic permit- • ,v. the nreg rakiary location 3'11nt :. i W edges of pavements fertile radius's of the inters:, t ..i remain within the existing 1 ', ;rl ' r „ : i ,.o r ,: , „- , „rn .rmd remain dear of the eidstrng t^ighwray culvert headwall tei f l . . ,r :III A.11 I 'vottt IS clear of the soruttrern must point of the 120r wide per. rein f 1 1rc1'Si by , 1 .: e, ' 1,i 11 • , ' b'r pawed shoulder on the intrtr!#,Ction radius ra Elie edge col the permitted access tit N•r7rticl hr pxrtisihi.. tr sHMI tht• Rr7yr4I Viii l riaratiw ine rip f., q frog further south 11 vttefrr'ea Jurui ^i„aI uin.lruLLiu„ plait cle4gp, And still frill within [Ii t k1,i bg :21:` i•viralv permitted access Iso ticiii e . .. , I.. A, !+1 +3f„E °.ri I rAt11 177.2.143 I'• ...'. �.+ �•. i.i`, , i,.'r I °I"r.J'J%w MaM,. 14,11:4Ty Ili i1 - ki5A k`La;rs yJur:rn t;AsrhurrrrsrlLrl{i+llrti:1} Larlrrvedtan Oct.,hrr l•9. race 2 u: 2 Attacked i5 az ccrpy of the 90W Map confirming the location or the existing UO wodepwrnixted access. This [modify malth•r: conceptual inle sechor+ plar• t5k the 121:1' w+de permitted access location starts 90.534' from ttre northern properly trrr corner_ The remnant construction parcel matches the corvreptual intersection plan, and vie arc able to keep the proposed Royal Vista roadway Improvements outside or the extstins remnant construct Ion parcel, Attached is a copy rr' 7 tn4mgYaphk survey of the existing highway tuhr€rt crossing This topographic survey shows C3'e ci, Gu l! I; ••.,:'etaOn of the three (3I ertrsting structural plate lupe arch culverts budl as pari Orr the drii09.0 liiehw ,col0.:,'.Ir[ini rrrl FederalAid Project No. F 011 1014} Rased On the surveyed incatJ4rrs or Ih— • .1 1. °rc headwall and winpwalls, 12O wide permitted access io atlon, and the peelimistary ;loyal Vtst;:as roadway Iocatl;'r r c . , r,,,, .e 1 ;"iway intersection r4jn tar' CarStrlir'r• ; tr.;}yr}Sf Klwrg tc r1';. I f_ Ili . .... crossing. Sire. The misting I Inn +.' r rte ',! I.I —r1' tireAIn'gand dr& . i.',•-• r • re -or "II tfl7nges tea tete. 100rv+tur r,"f isr,r,i,a' I.,o{lplzeor wtat.tld occur 436 part ce the prur1[ Jed ;r'.,f rSCtS n improvements ;nu I.1', 11111FOPS. 10 the hydrt'l;, • J.or hydraulic condiiDn. of 1i• --lorseshue would occur, the • Ka,hntg r I ,)d In`.1I1.ii r' Study ir•S: and FEMA Flood map r;onditionv.for thishighws*y culveri crossing locatiar s all rem, rr° salad, and a new study would not be applicable .f thr•rr • r• •1I1 rill iii 1. regarding this ir9nrmation, please Peel free tocontact me at " ''�l err by otIbbi. AT 171L] J 777-2D4 Sincerely, Tv De. F•sev, P•E . C Civil Engineer Atta,•hrnte;s; ;CW Map TropaarJphio: Survey of exittirpy ittg location (] frryi tr)1.4.Fnsa51',,..i.^ 1 1 NV*, IT' 0111 r1+rir?,Slr+tt r,...fVNr{fa{. CO,T1 sP',a1&I}'gig reel API-#ICAL SCALEI • From: siond!!. Kula ] To; terebvre, Michele Subject: DEA for Royal Vistas Houswng (TMK: 7.6.021:016, 017, 418 and 019) Date: Thursday, SeptenbeI 03, 2020 2:36:30 PM Attachments: VE2Lcomrrients_DEARoALVistoliousIna.ne Hello Michele, Attached are my comments for the "Royal Vistas housing Project Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact" (TMK: 7-6-021:0I6, 017, 018 and 019). Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions or concerns regarding my comments. Thank youI Kyle Honda County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works, Engineering Division 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy, Bldg. D Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 Tel_ (808) 323-4854 Email: Jkvlej ";crciara)hawaircountv.gov Herz swim 1 ri i v. - Ran Takunratn 111E.V.rJPe 1l"rY,-4 f r� frlt September 3. 2020 111.1 11 tiju f a tlini 1 `t »FP. I TMF:N r OF P1111I_l( 1 11:5 013urri Center 10I I`.a�.::ai i[Yccl 'i .. ' Pru• i 'cynic 1. 96717YJ-•I2_'d 1.8,1%pOh1•x3:1 1-11, Catil1rairr-84311 44r+4l,wv*h3w'41.14.4111r0 elft II Ri;I i a►nratu�iu. Y.L. Yrr.: Parr 1ILi.i f. riuia°rrn. P.E-. Michele L.elebtiTe Stantec ConsuPting Inc. P.0. Box 191 Hilo. f 1I 95721 (transmitted via emGtil to: ink lir lc t I I- 1. r r wz:inlrc.c lnl Subject: Royal Vistas Dousing Projec Draft Env,ronmenta.l Assessment and Antic pates Finding o` No Significant impact Tax Map Key (3) ?-6-021:016. C17 018 and 019 We hove reviewed the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact and our comments are as follows_ 1 Flood zones AE and AEF affect the subject parcels as designated by the Flood Insurance Rate Map {FIRM) New construction and substantial Improvements shall calmly with Chapter 27 — FIoptc/a,n Manau-rrrertit — of the Hawaii Code. 2. Drainage nage imprc ments to Holua! , I ;-1 way and the Horseshoe Bend Urainageway shall be submitted ;41+r 4 Y i invent of Public Works for review and approval. Should there be any questions concerning this QIease feel fi ee to ;,mast Kyte Honda of our Kona Engrrfeerrng Division office at 323-48544 BEN . tSFiIl, Division Chief Engineering Division KH Copy- i NG-HILCf ONA, Plann iiy Dap nhin•ent [`Ault% of 11nwaio r i; • l:qurl t'ipp r1 ui PINK ,1rxl 1.rpti1i.. r Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Strikes Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Ben Ishii, Division Chief Department of Public Works, Engineering Division 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 7 Hilo, HI 96720 Via email: Kyle Honda, kylej.hondahawaiicounty.gov RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated PONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Ishii: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 3, 2020, an the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: Flood zones AE and AEF affect the subject parcels cis designated by the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). New construction and substantial improvements shall comply with Chapter 27 - Floodplain Management - of the Hawaii Code. Response 1: As described in Section 3.3.2 of the EA, the project would follow Caunly regulations and policies including Chapter 27 of the HcwaPi County Code, Comment 2: Drainage improvements to Holualoa Drainage way and the Horseshoe Bend Drainageway shall be submitted to the Department of Pubic Works for review and approval, Response 2: Kona Three LLC would coordinate with the Department of Public Work , egcarding the final design of the improvement projects for the Horseshoe Bence and Holualoa Drainages as described in Section 3.3.2 of the EA. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questicns about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantee Cansulifing Services Inc, Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele,lefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Haai"i Planning Department From: Robert Harris Tot Leretece,plichele Crl plannkrociettawailm ao Subject: RE; Royal Vist2; 1 :,; no Project Date: Monday, Septan:bar 07, 2020 8:49:31 AM Attachments,: 11ovak VItaL Harusifio Proiect Ietter.gdf Aloha, 1 live in Kona Vistas' subdivision and am attaching a letter in reference to my objection to Royal Vistas having access to their project through Kona Vistas' Subdivision. 1ahalo for the opportunity to present my colrl nlents regarding this project. Robert D. Harris 76-4323 Kekuanaoa Place Kailua Kona, HI 96740-6958 September 7, 2020 RE: Royal Vistas Housing Project Aloha, My wife, Bonnie, and I have lived in Kona Vistas Subdivision for over two years. We very much enjoy our home and look forward too many more years of enjoyment_ Our home is located on Kekuanaoa Place which currently is the only access to Royal Vistas Housing Project specified on the Royal Vistas' plans. When we purchased our lot almost four years ago we were not informed of this project or Kekuanaoa Place as being the only access to the Royal Vistas Housing Project, The Royal Vistas Housing Project Owner presented to Kona Vistas' owners their plans for the Royal Vistas Housing Project and what it would look like. They had proposed two entrance/exits to their project from Kona Vistas and two entrance/exits from a subdivision on the north side of their project, Pualani Estates, One of the accesses from Kona Vistas, not Kekuanaoa Place, requires permission from the owner of the property for access the Royal Vistas which has been denied by the owner from my understanding. Also, the two accesses from P ualanl Estates requires Royal Vistas to be granted access across a strip of land awned by another owner who has also denied Royal Vistas access to their project from my understanding. This only leaves Kekuanaoa Place in Kona Vistas as the only access to Royal Vistas Housing Project. Since Queen 1 Highway is adjacent to Royal Vistas Housing Project there should be access from this highway and notfrom Kona Vistas Subdivision, Kona Vistas only access is from Queen K Highway by Lake 5t. for our subdivision with 200 homesites. Royal Vistas Housing Project is slated for 490 homes {Condos, some rental units and some purchased units), If Kona Vistas has only one access to it's subdivision why shouldn't Royal Vistas only access be Queen K Highway as well. Why should Royal Vistas have an access through Kona Vistas and allow all their traffic, including the construction equipment traffic over the next 20 years of their development, to drive through Kona Vistas Subdivision? Royal Vistas Housing Project with 494 units has almost 2.5 times larger density and this traffic should not be funneled through Kona Vistas Subdivision. Mahal° for your time, Robert D. Harris 76-4323 Kekuanaoa Place Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Robert Harris 76-4323 Kekucnc'oa Place Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 via email: bcbh.home cimaaiscom RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr, Harris: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 7, 2020, an the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: Cur home is located on Kekuanaca Place which currently is the only access to Royal Vistas Housing Project specified on the Royal Vistas' plans. When we purchased our lot almost four years ago we were not informed of this project or Kekuanaoa Place as being the only access to the Royal Vistas Housing Project. Response 1: The project would be accessed in two different ways, As described in Section 3.7,2 of the EA, Kona Three LLC proposes to construct a new intersection Royal Vistas Roadway at the project's intersection with Queen Ka `ahumanu. The second access point would be from Kekuana'cc Place, which would not occur until Phase H of the project. Figure 2 has been revised to show that access to the project site would be connected to Kekuanaoa Place from Lako Street during Phase 11 of the project. At project completion, there would be two ways to access the project. Comment 2: The Royal Vistas Housing Project owner presented to Kona Vistas' owners their pians tor the Royal Vistas Housing Project and what it would look like. They had proposed two entrance/exits to their project trom Kona Vistas and two entrance/exits from a subdivision on the north side of their project, Pualani Estates. One of the accesses from Kana Vistas, not Kekuanaoa Place, requires permissior from the owner of the property for access the Royal Vistas which has been denied by the owner from my understanding. Also, the two accesses from Pualani Estates requires Royal Vistas to be granted access across a strip of land owned by another owner who has also denied Royal Vistas access to their project from my understanding. This only leaves Kekuanaoa Place in Kona Vistas as the only access to Royal Vistas Housing Project. Response 2: The plans tor access into the development have evolved over time based on discussions with various stakeholders, Section 2.3 of the EA describes how access from Pualani Estates from Paulehia Street was on alternative September 13, 2021 Mr. Robert Harris Page 2ot2 considered but eliminated from detailed analysis. The project as described in Section 1.2 and analyzed in this EA tor approval presents two access paints for the project, from a new intersection (Royal Vistas Roadway at the project's intersection with Queen Ka'ahurnanu) in. Phase I and from Kekuana'oa Place in Phase II. Comment 3: Since Queen K Highway is adjacent to Royal Vistas Housing Project there should be access from this highway and not from Kona Vistas Subdivision. Kona Vistas only access is from Queen K Highway by Lako Street for our subdivision with 200 homesites. Response 3: A small number of 'left turn our {southbound} vehicles will be pushed through Kekauna"aa Place and Lako Street. For emergency reasons, it would be beneficial if more than one access is provided to any development. The master plan for this area shows connector streets parallel to Queen Kceahumanu Highway through these developments to purposely provide connectivity redundant to Queen Ka`c humanu Highway. This is not a new or recent concept in the area. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email.. Sincerely, Stonier Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. rri. `1 e le.le tebvregistantec.con cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Standard Comments for Land Use Reviews Clean Air Branch Hawaii State Department of Health It your proposed project Requires an Air Pollution Control Permit You must obtain an air pollution control permit from the Clean Air Branch and comply with all applicable conditions and requirements_ If you do not know if you need an air pollution control permit, please contact the Permitting Section cf the Clean Air Branch. s Includes construction or € e icl tion ac-ivities that involve asbestos You must contact the Asbestos Abatement Office in the indoor and Radiological Health Branch_ Has the potential to generate fugitive dust You must control the generation of all airborne, visible fugitive dust. Note that construction activities that occur near to existing residences. business, public areas and major thoroughfares exacerbate potential dust concerns. It is recommended that a dust control management plan be developed which identifies and mitigates all activities that may generate airborne. visible fugitive dust. The plan, which does not require Department of Health approval, should help you recognize and minimize potential airborne, visible fugitive dust problems. Construction activities must comply with the provisions of Hawaii Administrative Rules. §11- 60 1-33 on Fugitive Dust. In addition, for cases involving mixed land use, we strongly recommend that buffer ones be established, wherever possible, in order to alleviate potential nuisance complaints. You should provide reasonable measures to control airborne, visible fugitive dust from the road areas and during the various phases of construction. These measures include, but are not limited to, the following: a} Planning the different phases of construction, focusing an minimizing the amount of airborne, visible fugitive dust -generating materials and activities, centralizing on-site vehicular traffic routes, and locating potential dust -generating equipment in areas of the least impact; b) Providing an adequate water source at the site prior to start-up of construction activities; c) Landscaping and providing rapid covering of bare areas. including slopes, starting from the initial grading phase: d) Minimizing airborne, visible fugitive dust from shoulders and access roads; e) Providing reasonable dust control measures during weekends, after hours, and prior to daily start-up of construction activities; and fj Controlling airborne, visible fugitive dust from debris being hauled away from the project site. If you have questions about fugitive dust, please contact the Enforcement Section of the Clean Air Branch Clean Air Branch (808) 586-4200 cab*doh_hawaii_eov Indoor Radiological Health Branch (808) 586-4700 April I, 2019 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Clear Air Branch Hawaii State Department of Health Via email; cab:4 doh.hawaii.gov RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island To Whom it May Concern: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses to your substantive comments below. omment 1: You must obtain an air pollution control perrnit from the Clean Air Branch and comply with all applicable conditions and requirements, You must control the generation of all airborne, visible fugitive dust. It is recommended that a dust control management plan be developed which identifies and mitigates all activities that may generate airborne, visible fugitive dust. Construction activities must comply with the provisions of Hawaii Administrative Rules, §11-60,1-33 on Fugitive Dust. Response 1: As described in Sectiori 3.3.6 in the EA, the contractor for the cdeveNpment would be required to prepare a dust control plan during construction compliant with provisions of Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Chapter 11-60.1, "Air Fcllu ion Control," and Section 1 1-60.1-33, "Fugitive Dust." Comment 2: Includes construction or demolition activities That involve asbestos. You must contact the Asbestos Abatement Office in the Indoor and Radiological Health Branch, Response 2: The project does not expect to encounter asbestos during construction, and no demolition is proposed. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email, Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. l'<tl _ 1 f Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. niichele, lefelwetq stgntec.conn cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maijc Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY w COUNTY OF HAWAII • _ I - STREET SUITE 20 HILO. HAWAII 9E720 LEF"L)' E - 'FAX (B^£)9b1-B657 September 8- 20:0 "vis_ Michele l.elehrre Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1, r) N.lo LL Place Hilts- HI 967.20 Dear Ms. Lefebvre: Subject: At >-ki ivi,lrrncntal skssuss.ment for lln a.1 Vitas Housing Project North. k4:Il:l 11istriet. Island of 1120$ i.l f. k !laic itiee 1-021:01&, 017, 018 and 019 We have reg ie wed the subject Drat Environmental .'Assessment (DE) and have the ti3llor,kini, col -an -tents, ts. i'leae be intnmied that the subject p rwc€s arc served by art CNISt1112 scn-i a brat has an allocation 01 451 units of \valor. or an a%erusi 1./s{15. -Ii: ail 180.4E-1[) r wlst3 . The deieicspnnent will need to Fro ide water al adequate pressure and tof. unre under pate-t1Litit aria I re-f1cw rc1€1 itier�s. The s tict4til k+.tlt`r LIc•mar1L1 calculations s'ouid 14 submitted for rc,.ieo.: zs the atcr use other than the reAi4'. rit:.L .t- ti l i;� u11it; t+i1l need to l reduce the number of dwelling unit Additional N.atcr bcvo:rtii. the: total nuniber of 'allocated water units to the stabicct I: Ili -� llc' t' ' :Cllr i. -k' I. ,'i. I' _'..L t•,.11:41e1 \Ir k ,BEY, SincereL' \ ours. nil °lour Water Resources and Keith K. Okamoto. Pl . N1i71tager-('hie Engineer RQ -c114 4op — Planning 1.)c pal rn nt db t r air Yost - cious - 7.sot4rc . `�j;,ca ilaapi 1' L rte.. The, I•ec_lrirnenr ^,P ,A4:4!,r ow dr:4 rt P1,..n}+.- Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Keith Okamoto, Manager -Chief Engineer Deportment of Water Supply 345 KekCanaa'o Street, Suite 20 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii island Dear Mr. Okamoto: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 8r 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: Please be informed that the subject parcels are served by an existing service that has an allocation of 451 units of water, or an average usage of 180,400 gallons per day. Response 1: The project would not exceed the amount of water allocated by Department of Water Supply. Comment 2: The development will need to provide water at adequate pressure and volume under peak -flow and fire -flow conditions. Response 2: Kona Three LLC would ensure that the development provides water at adequate pressure and volume to occupants under both peak -flow and fire - flow conditions. Comment 3: The overall water demand calculations should be submitted for review, as the water use other than the residential dwelling units will need to be included, which could reduce the number of dwelling units that can be developed. Additional water beyond the total number of allocated water units to the subject parcels is not available. Response 3; Kona Three LLC would sebrnit water demand calculations as part of Pian Approval. Additionally, as described in Section 3.3.3 of the EA, the project would rrinirnize water demand by limiting landscaping and using xeriscape landscaping where landscaping k instolled. The project aims to implement and balance xeriscape and providing safe and adequate recreational space for residents. The project would also utilize reclaimed or reuse water for landscaping if possible. September 13. 2021 Mr. Keith Okamoto Page 2at2 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at X808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.❑. michele.Jefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department D U1C Y. PGE Gre..'1+1Ii QF 1 .4wkI STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF 1 .AND !SAT -URA[. RESOURCES L,%'iD DIVISION Stantec Consulting Services Inc Atter tori: Ms. Michele Lefebvre Environmental Scientist P.O. Box 191 Hilo, Hawaii 96721 Dear Ms, Lefebvre. 6HyS1 I►li ll t ii4)Xb:I IluN(1I.4'1.1', 1lAkk 111 9040 September 8. 2020 KI "f 9. ''I Il f %1!. I NI..I HPF.NM11 Nli%1lj11111L'I14%11 III CI, 2I1 .`19112{ 14 117411114'II 1411, 1Y ti1H Id. 4141 lig 1 SI55I d 1II '1! via email: micheI•eiefebvre(c start .com SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment iDEA) and Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project located at North Kona, Island of Hawaii. 11,^.K. (3) 7-6-021:018, 017. 018, and 019 on behalf of Kona Three LLC Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter The Land Division of the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNRi 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, (b) Division of Forestry & Wildlife. and (c) Land Division -Hawaii District on the subject matter Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Darlene Nakamura at (808) 587-0417 or email: darlerle,k r.akarr.ura@hawaii goy. Thank you Sincerely. Russelil Tst i Russell Y. Tsuji Land Adrrainistrator Enclosures cc. Central Files County of Hawaii (wicopies) Attn: Planning Department (via email: Iannin. ha a_iicounty.gc r) DAVID Y. ioe a:t;vFRNP`l7rg of 1I4 'AII nr r r R r I r\T nI r .1/4‘0 k it ti vii It lir 14 i tir rt R4 1 1 \ hI}rkL41(I' N1151 1 11 'L r i' +N. GI". 110N01 1 i August 14, 2020 CPI MIIKIL.SrlS ®a6. ptil L\Atraatn kmVVI1M. RESOVJ{CEs. (13: .1ISSLQV 4`L w ATER RE5UL710E MANAGE MIr:S r FROM: MEMORANDUM TO DLNR Agencies: Div of Aquatic resources Div. of Boating 81 Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division (DLNR,ENGRAhawaii goy) X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife (rubvrosa.t.terracto-c hawaii.ciov) Div of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management (DLNR CWRM(ah waii.00v) Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Laid Division Hawaii District (ctoicion c heft t(.liawaii oov) X Historic Preservation (DLNR_lntake.SHPD(?hawaiigov) TO. Russ3I/ fsu, r rttlii. Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) and Anticipated Finding of No Significant impact (FONSr) tar the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project LOCATION' North Kona, Island of Hawaii "MIK (3) 7-6-021JO16. 017, 018.. and 019 APPLICANT; Stantec Consulting on behalf of Kona Three LLC Transmitted for your review nncI comment is Li forr►'ation L rI 1'1(r rove -referenced subject matter. Please submit any comments by September 7, 2020 The DEA can be found on -hoe &. ?Me I b al;h Airy The Envlr°cnrnelitaf Noiaaice la the middle of the page.) if no response is received by the above date. we will assume your agency has no comments. Shauld you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at darlerle.k.rtakarnura ha ail.gov. Thank you. tdditiL_+iiai We have no btections, We have nocomments.. Comments are attached Signed: Print Name' Division: Dale Attachments cc: Central Files Carty S Chang. Cnier Engirieef Engineering Division f �,Ip, 2E 202O d4Vld r iff .' :ivEnla.JR 1]- �Lt 1rVa:4 STATE OF HAWAII I)I':rAl.t'I MEN! 01, L IN[D.' 'I)NAIMALRES01RCt ti LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 I rCtw;e.1 L LLa. HA4�',#tI !►SSL August 14, 2020 pdEMORAN ©UM 115:1511:r:tO% 841AAtl J11. 1S0.ksUs1 I H15}:'lRUM ES ,11 R I: F'!r1' RC: F, TO. DLNR Agencies; _Div. of Aquatic Fgesources Div. of Boating & Ocean Rr°c'ce-aiion X Engineering Division (DLN'f2 ENG.R@hawai goy) XDiv. of Forestry & Wiildlif r (rubvrosa.t.terrat o hawaii cloy) _Div. of State Parks XCommission on Water Resource Management (DLNR,CWRMihawaii,gov) Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Ladd Division — Hawaii District (g,orm❑n c heiti'ailawaii govj X Historic Preservation (DLNR Intake SHPDahawan cloy) FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator Rust+ Tsup SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) and Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project LOCATION; North Kana, Island of Hawaii_ TMK; (3) 7-6-021:016, 017, 018, and 019 APPLICANT- Stantec Consulting on behalf of Kona Three LLC Transrinitted for your review and comment is information on the aborve-retirenc{tri subject matter. Please submit any comments by September 7, 2020. The DEA can be found an-liraa at htfp'/fheatth halvah' govioegcl (Click on The Eraviro imontad Notic ,in the middle of the page,) If no response is received by the above date. we will assume your agency has no comments. Should you have any questions about this re.quest, please contact. Darlene Nakamura at derlene.k.nakaniura ayhawaii.nay. Thank you. ( ) We have no objectons. ( ) We have no comments. Comments are attached Signed, Print Name; Division: Date: Attachments cc Central Files DAVID G. SMITH Administrator Forestry and Wildlife Scott, 2020 L1401191. ME ,11 MEMORANDUM 'ATE or 11AW w 11 DITAIt Fir1I ".. 1 11 ! •55. ! � s',.I 1 i i i I: l: Pi 01 I y,r 1 I. I1. 1 PI ',1 I ; r.l' Iai.ltrS:I S I 1 11,111.1 d41. Se,pternher -i 'ri:!li TO: RI 1SSI"I f. Y. TSUJI. Administrator t.ririd 1)iVINLLln FROM: I)AVII) G. SMITH. Administrator Division of I-'1lrestly and Wildlife iL fJ,1�k 11 i, Ah! �1.11.i1.•11,1d'f:"•.:PLin 1.L01 m !AIL, 1' Wilt.WT 9W yl�i%YIYA 111,1r5,1 11 H F. w• I. t, 11+4 r'1 1"1 r 1 1,1 Irri. r 1 1r 111�.IIfA,.4.1.11.14 1 ON LI! 1P ,i 1114 111'1.1 .41'1.1 , e.44'41 c 4, 1 1 . 4..1y..•IIF'..y y 111 111,.11,11 1.! }r; C'.. 41Jro W11,55111 I .rJl. y,N41II f.. 141:11, 11.1b I p.11..,111111 e :111 •.'�1. 5 54111141111•!. I. 11. ;..., I IF': Sil•. N Log no. 2763 SUBJECT: Division of Forestr'i :irncl [',lmments ror the Draft Envirottmental Assessment (DILA and .lutit•ill,ttl•tl 1'111dingofNoSign lit Impact(FONSI) For the Proposed Royal Vista. I1ject. 1Itr~ DDc1,1rrcralento11Land and Naturlal Rc . iirct,, 11,41 i1i,,,11 [ ,I.t.ti MO 51 II.11iiL i[)(iI r\W) has r4cciwet.l ..1,ur inquiry regarding the 1)1 \ .i11 .011, Ix,rs:111:t1 E()NSI or the ;,r,L[,,1,:ci 1 s1 Al Vistas I [kluwil: 1 Project in North Kona on 1Iatwai a I,I.� �t_ 1i 4 ai i, Ti MKs: (3) 7-6-U2 1 10., 017, 018. 1YI 11, -111.7 petal c.sed project consists of cons[rL,Lt.nc.. ;Ip to 450 multi -family resiJt:uticil units in .clus1L•rq 1)1 [\1. and three-story buildings on yi,pproNimately 70 acres of previouslw LIIK t,%cIvI.Ld I.Ir151. he `Melte Listed Hawaiian 1lawwk or ° Io ( /two", r11 /Ihrr'rJI, is known 1t4 iICC11t ill ELIC project 1 it illll w . It lI A11 recce—amend*: MIrveying the arca 111 ensure nIl 1law►aiian Hawk nests are present ir trees are to be cut. 'to nests might be present during lit- I3r`ccrlint; sOttstirt from March to September. The State listed 1-lawaiian Hoary Bat or 'fpc apc'a (Lct.+<it.trus cvnsc'r[rrr.s wtrrorrrs) has the potential Ic' o .iir in t11e w'iCirlit' el t114: project arca and Ind) roost in t1Cu.rhw trees. If anw site clearing is required this should be tinted to avoid disttlrl,;tlitc during the hat birthing and pup r earaig season (Jure I through September 15). lrthis c,iiin.l1 he %,1111' d., woody plank greater than 15 feel (4.(i meters) tall should not be disturbed. ren10wc51. ortrimmed without consulting UOYAW. The St to listed DIswkburn.t, Sphinx Moth f3 'wf; Si rmJlfLu 1burnr i has a historic range that encc.)anlarl.ssti, IIiL I?ro,iv.•I Irti:cl. Larvae 01 ISS\I :eeit on many normalwe hostplants that include tree tobacco hid), gr, ., iri disturbed soil. We recommend eutitactinv Lair I°lawai`i Island 13101. A\i'' ;,1 IL :11 1 R11,%w' I 07-1-47J:76 1s,r tLrther inUormution about where BSM tray be present and wvhethcr a vegct<1ti in ,ur1'e\ *h{,u]d be conducted to itL:ti•:-lrline the presence of plants preferred b.. ISM. To al.. lid harm I r 1 11. 1)(11 .t' ' rer:4)rrImentls removing plants Tess than one meter in height or during.. the dry tilde. ,1I lltL' 15,ir f1"you remove tre4:, tobacco ‘'ver one meter itt height or disturb the grounc1 ctwtlnd car '.t ithir several meters of these plants llae> must 1_"xt: Jwcked thoroughly for the presence of eg.Is and I:IrL :rc. DoI AW recomtitends minimizing the movement of plant or soil material between i •orl sites. such as in 1111. Soil and plant material may contain invasive fungal pathogens Ire I(,1Pw,d 'inti` r, Death). vertebrate and invertebrate pests tc.g,. l ittie: (vire Anti. Coconut Rhinoceros Boole -0, +,r` invasive plant party that could harm our native species E nd eeo Ca.Crtas. We recommend consulting the Big Island Invasive Species Committee as t8(' 933.3341 Al planning. design. rind� )1 L!IILtion of the project to learn of any high-risk itt'warsiw a species in the area and w a s ruit1 :rte spread, All equipment. materials, and personnel should bs' cleaned ofeNCOSs sail and • hrls tr. minimize the risk of spreading Invasive spt c les. D(C')f•AW rectrnmcnds using native plain species for Iandscapiiii drat ;ire appropriate for the arca (i.e. climate conditions are suitable for the plants to thrive, hisllJI'iUDII occurred there. etc.). Please do not plant invasive species. C)OFAW recommends consulting the Ilaav, i -Pacific Weed Risk Assessment website to determine the potential invasiveness of plants proposed for use in the project (i tips://sites.gT43ogle,riilp sitchace iriwlwrt*;setsment home). We recommend that you refer to tt tt 1', rllnirLor.' fin guidance on selection and evaluation for landscaping plants. Wk.', note that aartiticial Ii feting rain adversely impact seabirds thin ma), pass through the urea at ra1611t by causing tI iuI 11,I. tli oriertat,,ti can result in collision v, ith rilanmade artifacts car i.rotrrtdirrg of l}it'd.• l'or nighttime lighting that might be required, D()F W recommends that call lights be fully shielded t., minimize iritpaacts. Nighttime work iliac requires outdoor lighting should be avoided during the seabird Medi. i.n season from September 15 through December 15. This is the period wwhi,:n. young ccabir•dS taiae their maiden waw see to the open sea. For. illustrations and guidance related to seabird -friendly light styles that also protect the dark. starry skies of Htiv ai'i piense visit: lrtips klirlr.h:Lvk aii. hwildlilt taics12(1I6'911))(.4 t).ndlt'. We appreciate ‘tour efforts to work with our office for the conservation of our native species, Should tali project change significantly, or sliolikl it become apparent that threatened IIi i'iid,ungerecl species may be impacted, please contact our stalTas soon as possible. if you have any questions, please contact Lame l Taylor. Prtltii:.,..: ',:lecies Habitat Conservation Planning (uordinaw'. at (808) 587-0010 or hew. DAVID V. 'ix 14)4Frvrar r. r nwywu STATE OF HAV ,alt DEPARTMENT OF L.NNEI r'tM) NA 1 1 •R w 1 fi [SOIL R(FS IAN ri DIV MON POST OFFICE IJO 621 1101.0 I.I 1i,'IA WAII gE -1 August 14, 2020 MgMO PU Al.:S id:!❑I L_:t -iJ 4S[I ti]'.k 5i 14f`111'49 ff� 11°45 .(11E.V11 TO DLNR Agencies: Div. of Aquatic Resources Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division (DLNR.E ,R(e haw,aii.gov) X Div. of Forestry &WilcIlde (s ubvresa t.terragcr havwaii_eav) Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management DLNR.CVIrIV1( ?hawaii goy) Office of Conservahon & Costal Lands X Land Division -• Hawaii District Irr. or c.hestr, hawaii qcv) X Historic Preservation (DLNR intake SHED 'hati•:aii.aov) FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Adrninistratt,rR 6A' ry.")(i T-54.21/ SUBJECT* Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) ,ora Antidpated Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project LOCATION. North Kona, Island of Hawaii; MIK: (3) 7 -6f -021:O16. 017, 018. and 019 APPLICANT. Stantec Consulting on behalf of Kona Three LLC Transmuted fcr your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter Please submit any comments by September 7, 2020. The CEA can be found on -lute al hlIp,//ihealth hawarr qoo/oecia(CJick on Th Ent++mnmental No(icg in the middle of the page,) If no response is received by the above date, we will assume your agency has no comments. Should you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at darlene•k.nakamura hawaii.Qov. Thank you. ( ) e nave no obhectio7$. ( VVI hae no connrnents ( ) Cornnent$ are attached. Signed• Priv! Name: Division: Dale Attachments cc: Centrai Files Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr, David Smith, Administrator Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife 1 151 Punchbowl Street, Room 32.5 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii island Dear Mr, Smith: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 4, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The State listed Hawaiian Hawk or lo (Bute° soiftarr!Las) is known to occur in the project vicinity. Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) recommends surveying the area to ensure no Hawaiian Hawk nests are present if trees are to be cut. 1I0 nests might be present during the breeding season from March to September. Response 1: The EA includes protection measures to avoid impacts to Hawaiian hawk nests. As stated in Section 3.3.4 of the EA, if construction for the project is scheduled to occur in the Hawaiian hawks breeding season (between March 1 and September 30), a qualified biologist would conduct a pre -disturbance survey for hawk nests within and immediately adjacent to the property. If a Hawaiian hawk nest is located during the pre- disturbance nest survey, no land clearing or construction should occur within 1,600 feet of any active Hawaiian hawk nest during the breeding season until the young have fledged (usually October). Regardless of time of year, Kona Three LLC would coordinate with the DOFAW prior to trimming or cutting trees with Hawaiian hawk nests, as nests may be re -used during consecutive breeding seasons. Comment 2: The State listed Hawaiian Hoary Bat or 'Ope`ape'a (Lasturus cinereas semofus) has the potential to occur iri the vicinity of the project area and may roost in nearby trees. If any site clearing is required this should be timed to avoid disturbance during the bat birthing and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15). if this cannot be avoided, woody plants greater than 15 feet (4.6 meters) tall should not be disturbed , removed , or trimmed without consulting DOFAW. Response 2: As stated in Section 3.3.4 of the EA, to minimize impacts to hoary bats during construction, woody plants taller than 15 feet would not be removed or trimmed during the bat birthing and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15), Additionally, Hawaiian hoary bats forage for insects from as low September 13, 2C21 Mr. Dvid Smith Facie 2 of A as 3 feet to higher than 500 feet above the ground and can become entangled in barbed wire, if used for fencing. The proposed project would not use barbed wire for fencing. Comment 3: The State listed Blackburn's Sphinx Moth (BSM: Manduca bfackburnr) has a historic range that encompasses the project area. Larvae of BSM feed on many nonnative hastplonts that include tree tobacco (Niicokinc glcuca) which grows in disturbed soil. To avoid harm to BSM, DOFAW recommends removing plants less than one meter in height or during the dry time of the year. If you remove tree tobacco over one meter in height or disturb the ground around or within several meters of these plants they must be checked thoroughly for the presence of eggs and larvae. Response 3: A biologist surveyed the project site and did not find the species present, and did not find potential habitat. As stated in Section 3.3.4 of the EA, to prevent potential impacts to the Blackburn's sphinx moth, the project would include the following protection measures. A biologist familiar with the species would survey far Blackburn's sphinx moth and its larval host plants (tree tobacco and native "oleo) between November and April or several weeks after a significant rain and within four to six weeks prior to construction. Surveys should include searches for eggs, larvae, and signs of larval feeding (chewed stems, frass, or leaf damage). If moths or native 'area or tree tobacco over three feet are found during the survey, Kona Three would coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (IJSFWS) for guidance to avoid impacts. If no Blackburn's sphinx moth, 'aiea, or tree tobacco ore found during pre - disturbance surveys, Kona Three LLC would ensure that measures are taken to avoid attraction of Blackburn's sphinx moth and prohibit tree tobacco from entering the site. Tree tobacco c❑n grow more than three feet in approximately six weeks, and above three feet in height the tree tobacco can become a host plant for Blackburn's sphinx moth. The proposed project would remove tree tobacco less than three feet tall and monitor the Project Site for new tree tobacco grown before, during, and after project Construction. Mon'tcring for tree tobacco after construction, can be completed by any staff, such. "❑r maintenance crew, provided with pictures of tree tobacco at different -e stages. Comment 4: DOFAW recommends minimizing the movement of plant or soil material between worksites, such as in fill. Soil and plant material may contain invasive fungal pathogens (e.g. Rapid 'Ohi'a Death), vertebrate and invertebrate pests (e.g. Little Are Ants, Coconut Rhinoceros Beetles), or invasive plant parts that could harm our native species and ecosystems. We recommend consulting the Big Island Invasive Species Committee in planning, design, and construction of the project to learn of any high-risk invasive species in the area and ways to mitigate spread. All equipment, materials, and personnel should be cleaned of excess soil and debris to minimize the risk of spreading invasive species. September 13, 2C21 Mr. DovFd Smith Pow 3 of 4 Response 4: To minimize the introduction and spread of invasive species, Section 3.3.4 of the EA states that "where no grading or grubbing is required, existing vegetation would be left in place. Biosecurity protocols during construction would include cleaning and inspection of construction equipment for invasive species (including insects, frogs, rats, and mice), and would be applied as applicable." Text has been added to the EA to state. 'The developer would also request current recommendations from Big Island Invasive Species Committee (BIISC) at the time of development." Comment 5: DOFAW recommends using native plant species for landscaping that are appropriate for the area (Le, climate conditions are suitable for the plants to thrive, historically occurred there, etc.). Please do not plant invasive species. DOFAW recommends consulting the Hawaii. Pacific Weed Risk Assessment website to determine the potential invasiveness of plants proposed for use in the project. Response 5: Also, to minimize the spread of introduced species, no invasive species would be planted and Section 3.3.4 of the EA states "a mix of native species, Polynesian introduced species. and non-invasive introduced ornamentals would be used in landscaping for the Project Site and an invasive weed control plan for the Project Site would be deveioped to minimize impacts from fire -prone, nor -native vegetation species." Comment 6: We note that artificial lighting can adversely impact seabirds that may pass through the area at night by causing disorientation. This disorientation can result in collision with manmade artifacts or grounding of birds, For nighttime lighting that might be required, DOFAW recommends that all lights be fully shieldec to minimize impacts. Nighttime work that requires outdoor lighting should be avoioed during the seabird fledging season from September 15 through December 15. This is the period when young seabirds take their maiden voyage to the open sea. Response 6: Tc prevent impacts to seabirds from lighting, as stated in Section 3.3.4 of the EA, the project "would not involve any unshielded fighting for either construction or operation, iri conformance with Hawpi`i County Code § 14 - 50 et seq, which would avoid impacts to nocturnally flying Hawaiian petrels and Newell's shearaters. Additionally, during operation the site would use lighting only where and when it is needed for safety purposes, The use of outdoor lamps with wormer calors (less blue light) and energy efficient fixtures would be considered when the building is being constructed. To minimize Project impacts from lighting, the fallowing text has been added to Section 3.3.4, "Subject to local rules and regulations, the Proposed Project would utilize lighting on the 2700 degrees Kelvin scale," If the proposed project incorporates additional outdoor lighting, it may attract threatened and endangered Hawaiian seabirds, which may become disoriented by the lighting, resulting in birds being downed. To avoid the potential downing of these threatened and endangered seabirds due to interaction with outdoor lighting, no construction using unshielded equipment September 13, 2C21 Mr. [avid Smith Page 4 of 4 maintenance fighting should be perrnnitfed after dark between the months of April and October. All additional permanent lighting should conform to the Hawail County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (f-lawai'i County Code Chapter 9, Article 14), which requires shielding of exterior lights so as to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. The proposed project would also avoid nighttime construction during the seabird Hedging period, September 15 through December 15." We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. + IL, I Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvrestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department From Jackson. Maiia To; Lerebvre Mi5rlyele Subject: FW: Kona Three LLC Project (Royal Vlsbs) Date: Thii rsday, September lOr 2020 7:58;00 AM FYI - From: Martin Chan <martyohan@hibr.ne!> Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 2:37 [ M To: Jackson, Maija‹MaijaJackson@hawaik:<.:ulity.gov> Cc: "Martin Ohan` <martyohan[a hibr.net> Subject: FW: Kona Three LLC Project jRoyai Vistas) Hello Maija, Well that was quite a long and detailed EA for the Royal Vistas Project. Some of my objections to this project moving forward as outlined in the EA are as follows, This k primarily a single family neighborhood/area. The current Zoning and Density proposed is not a good fit and creates a suffocating impact on the existing road system. The vehicle access points for this project will dog an already stressed Road system or grid and unduly impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Much has changed since the original 1984 zoning designation. would suggest that a down Zoning be initiated to RS -15 or RS -.50 from the current multifamily zoning. The work force concept at this location is not feasible based on the proposed high rental values. The Vacation Rental concept, with the proposed higher density, will add an unknown higher volume of trip generations to this region. A safety and quality of life concern. The required affordable housing development has not been funded or finalized which is a Requirement for this Royal Vistas or Kona Three, LLC project moving forward in any capacity. This designated land is adjacent to the Kilohana Subdivision, et al with a very extensive drainage problem with no known Developers or Builders under contract at this time that I am aware of. Let me know if I am misstating any of the facts, I may also add other EA concerns in a future email. I am opposed to this Project being granted approval by the Hawaii County Planning Department/Commission or the Hawaii County Council. Mahalo and Aloha, Martin M. Chan/Vice President Kuakini Makal Homeowners Association From: Martin Dian [mairto:marthohhan@a hibr.net] Sent: Monday, August 03, 2020 12:37 PM To: 'Jackson, Maija' Cc: 'Mark Hast` Subject: RE: Kona Three LLC Project (Royal Vistas) Hello Maija, Mahalo plenty for the update with the Kona Vistas Project. Does this EA mention the affordable housing proposal or plans adjacent to the Kuakini Makai subdivision? Name change from Ted Baldau to Mark Hoist, President HOA. Same address. Take care. Aloha, Martin M. Ohan From: Jackson, M riija [tnailto Maija.]arksonehawailc.00ty.0v] Seat: Monday, August 03, 2C20 11:43 AM To: Martin Ohan Subject: Kona Three LLC Project (Royal Vistas) Hi Marty, I just wanted to let you know that the draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Royal Vistas Housing Project will be available for a 30 -day public review and comment period starting August 8th To view the draft EA go to the Following website on or after August 8th:: I'itto://oeQL2,ccob.haWAli .Rav/ Iavriets/1 Sfstart,aSrax#fD x_ I lir,;r v/Torr �s/Allltc �'i ,as x A hard copy of the draft EA is also being sent to the Kona Planning Office. 1 also asked the consultant for the applicant to send a copy to the Kuakini Maui Association, I believe she is sending it to Ted Baldau at PO Box 2924, Kailua Kona since Ted is listed as the registered agent. If that is not the correct contact info for the association please let me know. I look forward to hearing from you. Morjc Jackson, Plcr ier County of Hawaii Planning Department (808) 961-8159 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Mr. Martin (Than, Vice President Kuakini Makci Homeowners Association Via email: martyohan.«Tibr.net RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONS1 for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Flawall Island Dear Mr. Chan: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 9, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: This is primarily a single family neighborhood/area. The current Zoning and Density proposed is not a good fit and creates a suffocating impact on the existing road system. The vehicle access points for this project will clog an already stressed Road system or grid and unduly impact the adjacent neighborhoods. Much has changed since the original 1984 zoning designation. I would suggest that a down Zoning be initiated to RS -15 or RS -.50 from the current multifamily zoning. Response 1: The proposed action being considered in the EA is the proposed development project within the current zoning. The project is consistent with rnedium density zoning and conforms to the guiding principles regarding urban growth patterns as defined by the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP). The applicant is not proposing any change in zoning for the development, so the EA does not analyze any change in zoning. Comment 2: The work force concept at this location is not feasible based on the proposed high rental values. Response 2: The need for the project has been identified by a private developer based on demands for mid -market, including workforce housing in the area. Comment 3: The Vacation Rental concept, with the proposed higher density, will add an unknown higher volume of trip generations to this region. A safety and quality of lite concern. Response 3: The first phase of development has been identified as long-term rental, but the exact nature of the rental units has not yet beer determined. The traffic analysis in Section 3.7.2 of the EA conservatively accounts for occupancy of all the units, and daily trips are not expected to be different whether the rentals are short-term or long-term. September 1a 2021 Mr. Martin Chan Pace 2 of 2 Comment 4: The required affordable housing development has not been funded or finalized which is a Requirement for this Royal Vistas or Kona Three, LLC project moving forward in any capacity. Response 4: As described in Sections 1.2 and 3.2 of the EA, the affordable housing development is required as part of the origins z3r•ing ordinance. The EA states, "Subject to approval by the OHCD, Kona-;_ir==== s cTtiliate which owns the 12 acres would deed the parcel to the County or heir nominee to satisfy a portion of the affordable housing development requirement, and the homes would be built by qualified affordable housing developers." The Final EA identifies options for the affordable housing project if this parcel is not selected. Finally, the approval of this project is not dependent on the completion of the affordable housing project which would be built by a qualified affordable housing ceveloper. Comment 5: This designated land is adjacent to the Kilohana Subdivision, et al with a rery extensive drainage problem with no known Developers or Builders under contract at this time that I am aware of. Response 5: The flooding that occurs across Kuakini Highway is described in Section 3.3.2 of the EA. As described in this section, the sheet Hooding occurs as a result of a lack of infrastructure on the highway. The applicant recognizes this existing condition and as described in the EA, is working with Hawaii County's Department of Public Works to correct these issues. As discussed in the EA, the project world not contribute or exacerbate the flooding issues. Per Section 27-20 of tne Hawaii County Code, the project is not allowed to increase any run-off onto neighboring properties, so there are no effects on any neighbors from project run-off including on the County -owned parcels. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808} 494^ 2039 or by email. Sincerely, Manioc Consulting Services Inc. F r .. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.Iefebvre4stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department DAVID Y. ME QMERNQr (jF HAWAII Y STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LANA DIVISION Stantec Consulting Services Inc, Attention: Ms. Michele Lefebvre Environmental Scientist P.O. Box 191 Hilo, Hawaii 96721 Dear Ms, Lefebvre: POST 0I'FIC FBOX tit1 11t V JOLLILLI, IIAW,A.II 19(1'4O September 17. 2020 SUZANNE IL CANE CIIAIRPERifkw 1H..1 RIA OFF L .!UAL\ 6 SA UL RAL REMAI RCVS 4-m13IIi IW illTF1L ilESUI1'Ri'F MANAGEMENT via email: mich€le.icfebvre(c. stantec.com SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) arld Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project located at North Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 7-6-021:016, 017, 018, and 019 on behalf of Kona Three LLC Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter. In addition to our previous comments dated September 8, 2020, enclosed are comments from the Commission on Water Resource Management on the subject matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Darlene Nakamura at (808) 587-0417 or email: darlene.k.nakamurahawaii.Qov. Thank you, Sincerely, Russell Tsuji Russell Y. Tsuji Land Administrator Enclosures cc: Central Files County of Hawaii (wfcopies) Attn: Planning Department (via email; pIannirlgl hawaiicountv.gov) DAVID Y. ICE GW TQVfl. R nr rtx.w STATE OF HAWAII oeeee MEr TOP LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PO aokui HONOLULU, FIAWAIr 96604 September 14, 2020 TO: Mr. Russell Tsuji_ Administrator Land Division FROM: M. Kaleo Manuel, Deputy Director ":610fiKeLe_.- Commission on Water Resource Management SUZANNEI] CASE CO-ARPERS74 BRUCE S. ANDERSON, PIL.D. KAIVIANA BefiMER, phi U, MICHAEL G. SUCK NE EL J. HANNAH'S WAYNE K MtAYAMA PAUL J MEYER M KALEG4ANUEL DEPOv LYWErU]R REF: RFD.5288.8 SUBJECT: Draft Envircrnental Assessment (DEA) and Anticipated Finding of No Significant impact (FONSI) for the Proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project FILE NCI. T1wtK NO.: RFD.5288.8 (3) 7-6-021:016, (3) 7-6-121:017, (3) 7-6-D21:018, (3) 7-6-021.019 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 conservati:•r measures and appropriate resource management, For more information, phase refer to the State Water Code Ci iapter 174C. Hawaii Revised Statutes, and Hawaii Administrative Rules, Chapters 13-187 to 13-171. These documents are available vL the Internet at http_lidlnr.hawaii.govlcwmi. ci-Aim nts 'elatedto water resources are ctteaed off below. 1. VVe 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 \Alater Projects Plan. 3. 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 HDCA. for more information. Ix I 4. We recommend that water efficient fixtures be installed and water efficient practices implemented throughout the development to reduce the increases/ demand on the area's freshwater resources. Reducing the water usage of a home or building may earn credit towards Leadership in Energy end Environmental Design (LEED) certification. More information on LEE) certification is available at http:Hwwvw,usgbc,ory Ieed, A listing of fixtures certified by the EAP as having high water efficiency can be found et tittp:lrl�vww.epa.govlwetersense. �( 5. We recommend the use of best management practices (BMP) for stormwaler management to minimize the impact of the project to the existing area's hydrology while maintaining on-site infiltration anct preventing polluted runoff from storm events. Storniwater management BMPs may earn credit toward LEED certification. More information on stormwater Blv1Ps can be found at http_11p I a nn i ng . h awa i i_goviczrr'i nitia ti vesll ow-impact-develo pmentl 6. VVe recommend the use of alternative water sources. wherever practicable. 7 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_llenergy.hawaii_govlgreen-business-program. 8. We recommend adopting landscape irrigation conservation hest management practices endorsed by the Landscape Industry Councrl of Nawar. These practices can be found online at Mr. Rr.'seeII Tsuji Page 2 September 14, 2020 http: Iwww. hawaiiscape_cornlwp-content/uploadsl20', 3?O41LICH_Inigetion_Conservetion_BMPs,pdf. ❑ 9. There may be the potential for ground or surface e.,=ilor iii:gradation/contamination and recommend that approvals for this project be conditioned upon a revle.v by -he State Department of Health and the developer's acceptance of any resulting requirements related to water quality. ❑ 10 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 Perrnit may be conditioned on the requirement to use dual line water supply systems for new industrial and commercial developments_ El11 A Well Construction Permits) is (are) are required before the commencement of any well construction work. ❑ 12 A Pump Installation Permit(s) is (are) required before ground water is deve[oped 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 corstrection, they must be properly abandoned and sealed. A permit for well abandonment must be obtained, ❑ 14 Ground -water withdrawals from this project may affect streannflows, which may require an instream flow standard amendment_ U 15 A Stream Channel Alteration Permits) is (are) required before any alteraticn can be made to the bed and/or banks of a steam channel, TI 16 A Stream Diversion Works Permit{s) is (are) requ re;:: i;etrrre orgy stream diversion works is constructed or altered. ❑ 17 A Petition to Amend the Interim Instreem Flow Standard is required for any new or expanded diversion(s) of surface water. ❑ 18 The planned source of water for this project has not been identi ied 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. 17 OTHER: If you have any queaiions_ please contract Lenore Chye of the Commission staff at 587-0216. Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Kaleo Manuel, Deputy Director Commission on Water RescLrce Management P.O. Box 621 Honolulu, Hi 96809 RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawal`i Island Dear Mr_ Manuel: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 14, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment DEA) tor the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: e recommend coordination with the county to incorporate this project into the county's Water Use and Development Pian, Please contact the respective Planning Department andlor Department of Water Supply for further information. Response 1: The water units have already been acquired for the project. Additionally, Kona Three LLC would coordinate with the county regarding the c e.r Use and Development Plan, as it applies to the project. Comment 2: 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. Response 2: As described in Sections 3.3.3 and 3.3.4 of the EA, the project would include water efficient fixtures and provide water -saving recommended measures far residents. Comment 3: 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. Response 3: Prior to the initiation of construction for the proposed project, Kona Three LLV would ensure that a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permit is in place cis described in Section 3.3.3 of the EA. The permit would recuire best management practices (BMPs) to minimize erosion and for stormw❑ter pollution prevention. Oversight of the BMPs would be conducted weekly for the duration of construction. with updates and corrective actions documented and transmitted to the State Department of Health. Clean Water Branch, September 13, 2021 Mr. Kaleo Manuel Pace 2 of 2 Comment ....4: v e rer_ on.lm€rrd the use of alternative wale, sources, wherever practicable. Response 4: No alternative sources of water have been identified for the project since 451 water units have already been allocated for the project. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (8O8) 49442339 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre. Ph.D. michele.lefebvre,gstantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Mafia Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Harr- Ki iri August 1B, 2020 M5. Michele Lefebvre, PhD Environmental Scientist Startec Consulting Inc. PO Box 191 Hilo, Hawaii 96721 Dear Ms. Lefebvre: County of Hawai'i POLICE DEPART‘1FNT 3.9 Kari oiling Street 4d'=7,9% 1808) 935.3311 • F .x o Ei+J$1961.2 ' Patti K. Ferreira 1 oixr C'hirf Kenneth Bii *Uj, Jr. t)!'pT+N FrO ra `lar: SUBJECT: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (DEA) AND ANTICIPAT-- G OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TONS]) FOR ROYAL VISTAS HOUSING Fr.; i ._.: , ISLAND OF HAWAII, NORTH KONA DISTRICT, TMKS. (3') 7-6-021:016, 7.6 k;zi.017, 7-6-021:018, AND ?-15-021:019 This is in response tc your letter receiver on August 10, 2020, requesting comments relates to yauur project. Thank you for allowing the Hawaii Police Department the opportunity to participate. At this eime, the Hawaii Police Department has no comments.. Should you have cuestions, please contact Captain Gilbert Gaspar Jr., Commander of the Kona District, at 326-4546, extersian 299_ Sincerely, PAUL K. FERREIRA POLICE CHIEF n � ' ROBERT WAGER ASSISTANT POLICE CHIEF AREA 11 OPERATIONS GCi jaj cc: Planning Department F€3u9i i Com* is 8n Eq Oppor—m Prns;der eats Er ployea Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 95721 Tel: {808) 494.2039 Mr. Robert Wagner, Assistant Police Chief - Area ll Operations County of HawaE'i Police Department 349 Kc_api'oloni Street Hilo, 11196720 RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawat"i island Dear Mr. Wagner: Thank you for the letter dated August 18, 2020, in which you stated that the Hawaii Police Department had no comments on the Environmental Assessment. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. l.� 1. I Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Harry Sim Roy Takemoto liea+.r'_ertf dlalxrrarr� September 22, 2020 County of mei HAWAII FIRE DEPARTMENT 'i tirrlrt:r.• `+ti el . 'quiff. 25111 r Flilir, Ifaviai`i'Nr7211 {Kllh}411-. P.II i. i a<(A11lir"IJ2-2"1"21i M i c he l e I. e f e h v re Miche1c`_lefebvre r staittec_com Stantec Consulting Inc. P.U_ Box 191 Hila, Hawaii 9021 Dear Ms, Michele Lefebvre: SURJFCT., Draft Environmental Assessment 1 o al Visins Housing Project North Eona, Hawaii TMK: 7-6-021:016, 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021:018, 7-6-021:019 Darren d. Rosario f Robert R.K. Pcrreira riemer Fit • [r, regards to the above-mentioned Environmental Assessment application, the following shall be in accordance: N EPA 1, I,'NIF€ FORA". FIRE (BODE, 2006 EDITION Note: : f fo wa:fi :} State to Ore ,fllir llai Fire 'Tr rectio+If ,- .S.soc-nwit 2006 rersiotr, (—many Qf licrweri 7 f:rnrc•rr bne..I}l,a. Culrrr ti amcsrrcaltrrre t5- are wirlh a preceding "t' rJ the r(• /< r'enc € Chapter 18 Fire Department Access and Water Supply 18.1 General. Firc dcpartm nt access and water supplie shall comply with this chapter. For occupancies of an especially ho7ardous nature. o-rr,vhere special hazards exist in addition to the normal hazard rd of"the occupancy, , or where access x+ r fire apparatus is unduly difficult, or areas where there is an inadequate fire 110u, or inadegttare Lire hydrant spacing, and the .1H.1 inay require additional safeguards inc.It Jiiig, but not limited lo, additional fire appliance Lr1Iits, more than one type of appliance, or special systems suitable for the protection of the hazard involved_ 18.1.1 Plans. 1 l.:etxaa'C : i orr, tqr ii ::tt r laav! i F�r� 4n jlp tri r f'r v' !'r ! ii.,r f.i r, lit i'. Stantec ConsuItin2 inc, September 22, 2020 Parc 2 I8. I.I.I Fire Apparatus Access. Plans for tire apparatus access roads shall be submitted to rbe fire department t er review and approval prior to ccnstructic rt. 18,1.1.2 Fire Hydrant Systems. Plans and specifications for fire hydrant systems shall be submitted to the fire devilment for re -view and approval prior to construction_ " 18,1.1.2.1 Fire Hydrant use and Restrictions. No unauthorized person shat€I use or operate arty Fire hydrant unless such person first secures permission or a permit from the owner or representative of the department, or company that owns car (2c-wern' that ;nater :supply cpr system. Exception: Fire Department personnel conducting firefighting ghting operatiols, hydrant testify, and/or maintenance, and the flushing and ace,cptance of hydrants witnesscd by Firc Prevention Bureau personnc 1. 18.2 Fire Department Access. I8 -2.I Fire department access and fire deparlrnerrtaccess roads shall he 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 FIJshall bare the authority to require an access ituxI t s) to he 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. rhe .\F -U Skill have the authority 1:o require fire department access be provided to gated subdivisions or developments throe ;h 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 tire 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 he referred as. FDAR) 18.2.3.1 Required Access. 18.2.3.1.1 Approved tare department access roads shall he provided for every facility, building, or portion of a building hereafter constructed or relocated, 18,2.3.1.2 Fire Departrrtent access roads shall consist of roadways, tire lanes, parking 1ot.s lanes, or a combination thereof. Stanrec Consulting inc. September 22, 202 Page 3 18.2.3.1.3* When not more than two one- and tea -family 4lurellin ;s or private earages,, carports, sheds, agricultural buildings, and detached buildings or ?ructures 4Ouft' L 37 nrr'rl or less are present. the requirements of 18.2.3.1 throueh 18.2.3,2.I shall be permitted to be modified by the AHJ. 18.2.3.1.4 When fire department access roads cannot be installed due to location on property, topo rapby, waterways_ nonnegotiable grades, or other similar conditions, the NFU 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 cutcnd t<) within in 50 ft (15 m) of at least one exterior door that can be opened trona the outside ;iia!, ;7rcwides access to the interior c4 the building. Exception; 1 alld 2 single-fairrily dwelling=s. 18.2.3.2.1.1 When huildinis are protected thrortghour with an approved automatic sprinkler system that is installed in accordance with i\EPA 13., NFPA 13D_ or NI -PA 13H, the distance in 18.2.3..2.1 shall be permitted to be increased to 300 Leet, 18.2.3.2.2 Fire department access roads s}ni11 be ptuwkied such that any portion of the facility o -r any portion of an exterior wall ut the first story of [be building is located not more than 150 ft (46 n.1) from fire department access roads as measured by an approved route around the exterior ot'the building or facility - 18.2.3.2.2.1 When buildines are protected throttgllour with an approved automatic sprinkler system that i$ installed in accordance with NTP_A 13, NI PA 13D, or NFPA 13R, the distance in 18,2,3,2.2 shall be permitted to be increased to :1,50 ft (13-7 m), 18.2.3.3 Multiple Access Roads. More than one lire deparinient access road snail be provided when it is determined by the Al -LT 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 Speeillearions. 1$,2,304J Dimensions. (- 1N.3.3.4.1.1 FDAR shall have an unobstructed v idth of not less th:ui 2OI1 with an approved tarn around area if the FDAR exceeds 15C feet. Exception: FDAR For one and two family d -ellin.ts shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 15 feet, with a' in area ofaor less than 20 feet wide witllirr 15{r feet ot'the structure hemp, protected, lin approved turn around area shall be provided if the FDAR exceeds 250 feet. C.'— 1f3.2.3.4.1.2 FDAR shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not Tess then l: -ft 6 in. Starter Consulting Inc. September 22, 202C Page 4 C-- 18.2.3.4.1.2.1 Vertical clearances may be increased or reduced by the ,AHJ. provided such increase or reduction does nor impair access by the fire apparatus.and approved signs are installed and maintained indicating 511C approved chanes. 18.2.3.4.1.2.2 Vertical clearances shall be increased wlien vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to accommodate fire apparatus. 18.2.3.4.2 Surface.. Fire department au;e<;s M ads Mand 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 a .11-wcathcr driving sirifarQ, 10.2.3.4.3 "I urning Radius. C— 18.2.3.43.1 Fire department access roads shall have a minimum inside turttir.g radius of 30 feet, and a minimum outside turnips radius of ()0 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 lire deparuiient access roads in excess of 150 11 nt 111 len��th shall be provided with approved provisions, for the fire apparatus to turn around 18,13.4.5 Bridges. 18.2.3.4.5.1 When a bridge is required to he used as part of a tare departntent access road, it shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with counts requirements. I8,2 3.4.5.2 The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of Fire appaitratus- 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, ("-- 1'8.2.:3.4.6.1 The maximum !=radicait of a Fin!, dLpartmc.nt acce s road shall not rxcccd 12 percent unpaved surfaces and i percent for pawed an faces. In areas of the FDA where a Fire apparatus would connect to a Fire hydrant or Fire Department Connection, the maximum tzr<adiertt of such areas) shall not exceed 10 percent, 18.2.3.4.6.2* The angle of alpproa h a -lid departure for any means of fire dep trtinertt access toad stall not ext ecd 1 ft drop in 20 ft (O.3 m drop iii 6 Ln) or the design limitations of the fro apparatus ofthe lire department, and shall be subject to approval by the Stantec Consulting Inc_ September 22, 202C 2C Pate 5 18.2.3,4,6.3 Fire department access roads connecting to roadways shall be provided with curb cuts exteilditig at least 2 it ((} erl in beyond each edge of the fire lane_ 18.2.3.4.7 Traffic Calming Devices. The design and use of traffic calming devices shall be approv d the AI -11_ 18.2.3.5 Marking of Fire Apparatus Access Road, 18.2.3.5.1 Where- required by the AH& approved signs or other approved notices shall he 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 apltarauis access road ;hail also he known as a Fire lane. 181.4* Obstructic,n :Ind Control of Fire Department Access Road. 118,2.4.1 General. 18.2.4.1.1 The ruired width of a fire department access road shall not be obstructed hi any manner, including by the parkin,of vehicles, 18.2.4.1.2 Minimum required widths and clearances established under 18.2_..3.4 shall he 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 lire department operations. 182,4.1.4 Entrances to fire departments access roads that have been closed with gates and barriers in atceardance with 18.2.4.2_ I shall lint be obstructed by parked vehicles. 18.2.4.2 Closure of Accessways. 1824.2.1 The AEU shall he authorized to require the installation and rrlainrerraner of gates or other approved barricades atcrass roads, trails, or other accessw{ays not including public streets, alleys, or highways. 18,2.4.2.2 Where required, gates and barricades shall he secured in an approved manner, l8.2.4.2.3 Roads. trails, aid other access ways that have been closed and obstructed in the manlier prescribed by 13. .4. ,1 shall trot be trespassed upon or used unless authorized by the owner and the AH -HJ. Stantec Consulting Inc_ September 22, 2I2C Paze 6 18.2,41.2,4 Public officers acting within their scope of duty shall be permitted to access restricted property identified in 18 _2_4 2.1 18.2.4.,2,E Logs, 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 wdth, or otherwise vandalized in any manner. 18.3 Mr tater 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 car buildings, or portions thereof, are hereafter constructed, or moved into or within the county. When any portion of the facility or building is in excess of 130 feet (45 72()mill) froru a water supply on a lire apparatus access road, as measured by ait approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on- site fire hydrants and ,mains capable of upplying 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 sprinkles avStern the provisions of section 13.3.1 may be modified by the tHJ. ?, VV}len water supply requirements cannot be installed due to topography or other conditions, the .FIT may require additional tyre protection as specified in section 18.3.2 as arnended 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 A HJ. 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 ha11 he -permitted 18,3.3* The loeariciL, ra inil"cr and type of fire hydrants connected to a water apply capable of delivering the required tire flog w shall he provided on a fire apparatus access road on the site of the premises or both, its accordance with the appropriate county water requirements 18.311 Fire Hydrants and connections to other approved water supplies shall be accessible to the fire department, 18.3.5 Private water supply systems shall be tested aid maintained in accordance with NEPA Z or county requirements as determined by the :AHJ. 18.3.6 Where required by the AHJ, tare hydrants subject to vehicular daraiage shall be protected unless located within a public ri.lit c f way_ Stautec Consulting Inc. September 2.2, 2020 Paye 7 18.3.7 The AHJ shalt be notified whenever any fire tiydr'ant is placed out cif service or returned to service. Owners of private property required to have hydrants shall maintain hydrant records of approval. tesrirSz_ and maintenance, in accordance with the respective county water Lt quire1nents_ Records shall be nracle available for review by the AHJ upon request C--18,3,8 Minimum wetter supply for buildings that do not meet the minimum County water s ar_dards: f u�lc'an .;a up to 2000 square Feet., shall have a minimum ofi1,0U11 gallons ofwateravailable for Inirefi htirrt. 13t iftlin s 2001-1000 square reet, shall have a minimum ef6,000 allons or ware! available for Firefighting. Builc.inYTs, 3001- 6000 square feet. shall have a minirntirn 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 Trrultiply the square ret by the amount of stories when deterrniriirtu the rnininitiin water supply. Commercial buildings requiring a minimum fire flow of 2000g,ftnt 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) of cock. (VOTE: In that water catchment systems are being used as a weans of water supply for firefighting, such »sterns shall meet the foliov€illg requirements; 1 1 lii that a single %pater t{tnl< is used fpr both domestic and tirefit hiirtg water, the water lOr domestic use shall ncrt be capable of being drawn from the water reserved for firefighting; 2l Minimum pipe diameter- sins from the water supply to the Fire Department Connection (.1 -LIC) shall be as follows a) 4" for C900 PVC pipe., b) 4" for 0906 PE, pi c) 3" for ductile Iron; d1 3' fDr gal\anized steel. Stantec Consultin4 Inc. S ptembet 2.2, 202( Pae 8 3) The Fire Department Connection (I -DC) shall al be nude of galvanized steel; b) have a gated valve with 2-1/2 inch, National Standard Thread male iittinv, and cap; c) be located between 8 ft and 1i It from the hire department ac, .ess_ 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 of the FDC rificc; c) be securc an' capable of withstanding drafting operations. Engineered stamped plans may be required, f) not be located more than 150 feet of the most remote part, hut not less than 20 feet, of .he structure being protected: E.) also comply vi.ith sec (ion I:i. I ; and 18,2,3,4.6.1 of lkrjc curie. 4) Commercial buildings requiring a fire tiow of 2000gptn shall be provided With a sec nd FDC, Each FDC shall be independent of each other. with each FDC bi. in4, capable of flowing 501.1 ru by engineered design standards_ 1'he second FL)C shall be located) ni an area aPprovetl by tete ,AH.1 nrith the idea of multiple Fire a pparatus'conducting drifting operations at once, in mind. 5) inspection and maintenance -shall he in accordance to NEPA 25. e The owner ar lessee of the property shall be responsible for maintaining the water level, quality, and appurtenances oldie system. EXCEPTIONS TO SEC -HON 118.3.8: 1) Agricultural bruildings_ storage sheds, and shade houses with no combustible or equipment storage_ 2) Buildings les that 800 square feet in size that meets the minituun. Fire Department Access 11 -)ad requirements. 3) For one and two family dwellings, agricultural buildings. storage sheds, and detached garages 800 to 200C square feet in ;ize. and meets the minimum Fire Department :ecus Road requiremears. the distance ec the Fire Department Connection niati• be increased to 1000 feet, 4) For (-Ale and two lam Lb dwellings, agricultural buitdin s, and storage sheds greater titan 2000square feet, but less than 3000 square feet and nteets the minimum Fire Department Access R aJ requirements_ the distance to the Fire Department Connection may be increased to 500 feel Stantcc Consultinu Inc_ September 2.2, 202e Pae 9 5) For buildings with an approved automatic sprinkler system, the minimum water supply required rnav be modified. If there :ire ani• questions regarding these requirements, please contact Deputy Fire Chief kt bert Perreira at MS) 932-2902_ DARREN J. ROSARIO Fire C'hicf RP: nac Email; plannin i'ihawaiicountv.;ov Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P•O• Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Darren Rosario, Fire Chief County of Hawaii Hawai'i Fire Department 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 RE: Comments on Drat Environmental Assessment and Anticipated IONS' for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Rosario: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 22, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comment. Comment 1: The project should be in accordance with National Fire Protection Association [NFPA) 1, Uniform Fire Code, 2006 Edition. Response 1: The project would be compliant with all a�,plicable coces and standards of the NFPA 1, Uniform Fire Code, 2006 Edition. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any aciditionol comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 4942039 o by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. it Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre@stontec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department M ori, Ashley From ARTHUR FELIX <artfelix@nverizon fete Sena: 'Wednesday. September 30 2010 3:1O AM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: Royat Vistas Housing Project EA Comments Attachments: K V;Arc h. Ar p d f Please see my attached email which describes my opposition. to the Rt yar Vistas Housing Project or the lasts of archeological concerns Arthur M. Feb 136529 11E t LAX\ ! IUti Lit r fill}-iUR NI FELIX i}RJR !A FLUX. a.eiare I C t}fr13 rssidrfl1 L I'Kere, 4ris4iw �itl liwi�: rn. C'4lttnv, ras 1l:iwal"1. slai5 01 -Bawl, I. I lie taulxSsed land ilctiekinllenr pruiro. the titabjet.3 ,aFihe pcndilj; Ura,t !-rivirtlnmcnl:il Ai -semi -tens Aut+minc-w h Rntial ti ros Etr a irI I'rrrjetrt Notirp itis} Kos. i 7.1 7,6-0217011i, l -f►- Ii'1 n17. 7,5 .021 11)Ptt. argil'-Cw_lla1 1)P1i Nn!1I K01'1:5i)ia1tiJ liltiwin'irat, .1(:L 1 IIx■ 1i•i ra`.ire9s nlr perru}na41. as tv,eil as uliccty n y iniereit in real property I Ie rric v,,iihsn 'tile It,wi [cli,ierirt�,i1 the rrrarsomett I.arkl tietehoril!•2a 1 prnjNt. ill yuchCdptl.iiirs, I Nor firislati kl k lie kg' the ft,Ikj -in tPtsl :Aar „ai alai urrl,ul iexti[+ .11Ie(1 upon 14 tiro s,> 41 PM iewvzi.I , I ., lllj I � t.1P Y. 1 r11 dttnclur.antx, 1 ans sitcti:iiiws3h w1lyterai...: 1"'• r rua.nlsl r: I. r 3 thti necp toporaphy. ttionoz,11 lin a, prescrl1 ha.F.,114.14. thel arc rta,r aLidar]34t1111 the 1)rj11 1 17w ir.hl1n 'lr.t! 1 1 el :MAT Thr 1h1i Cvnirlee• ".4ill II:a•- i. igr to ra lin 1110 1+Wrutrfidin j In sum stir ihsl!t I•nv°itrnme tal : ruwnl is1 d cs Mit slur!_..!. r ±Q 1Ci-i Imetro aauld uralysis s h goat !hr ole es...lrt Jr11151 2e improvements and diver incl, Cop h lutderslurd A %tr.-m !.CrrnI asae9s11i oar a wttl.l Iea%c itertlllti 1,. he token Pita or -in tall' Future. As I uttl)rrstai>s1 „t KIwh circa rmilinclr3 xoiti1 lead tri unlay.ful ptc>•j r:l gig iegiati'n, amdrig othh r erre e3, ti y hair: ,.41,traIE' gr,tfi!►r11y 1.}lat Jleed1e1! 1 :S.‘71/1/1,":hh1.".ivem n len! rt -1.9.1.1..1... 1. imuffivivq! °la a °Triroirnurn.. F:11 .1;11 irvirrrxmlui 9rD1it rutsi specifiLa117°. °,11;:raAruniunt impfilvtTrivniLi. a ronrydto sh: IN:.4 armnagt WJ m.o., 'host- ]FIprU'.i11I1U funaiiiri I Jeann,—.1.v...1cr reirtr.v,L14.1°: k...0 I ua..kitrta, Fluivart. Sp:ph:Triter ..;(31. 202(i. I ° Siiproarun. Lq: S' Y Anhui' 2 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stcntec Consulting services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Mr. Arthur Felix Via email: artfelix4verizon.net RE: Comments on Drainage Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawai`I Island Dear Mr. Felix: Thank you tor the comment letter dated September 30, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The steep topography, historical rapid storrnwater run-off and associated drimoge present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the (raft Environmental Assessment. E am aware that this project will have serious impact on the immediate and surrounding area. Response 1: Kona Three LLC is not aware of any damage to adjoining properties, including Queen Kcrahumanu Highway, from water flowing from the subject property. Comment 2: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood, A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future, As l understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among other errors. Response 2: Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two County -owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revised to clarify that on TrilK (3) 7-6-21:19, „Infrastructure during Phase 11 of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuan a`oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kona Community Development Plan CDP) "Official Transportation Map." For TMK (3) 7-6-21:18, the protect includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Qrdinonce and the CDP's "Official Transportation Map," Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be September 1a 2021 Mr. Arthur Felix. Pope 2 of 2 contained onsite. The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works (DPW. Text has been added in Section 3.3.2 of the Final EA to identify possible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this E. Comment 3: A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. Al a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements are required to tie into the County's drainage system rind how those improvements will function, Response 3: The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA. Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Pion would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed, We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808} 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 4 Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre4sfa ntec.com cc; Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori. Ashle From: Sent: To: Subject Attachments: ARTHUR FEU): <artfelixq3verizon net Wmdnesday, September 30, 202C 314 AM Planning Internet NI Royal Vistas Housing Project EA Comments KV;1 rain;AF.pdf Please see rry attached email which describes my opposition to the Royal Vistas Housing Project on the basis of drainage concerns which concerns the enure area around this protea. Arthur M. Felix 1 136 148 uL.t_L 4[A TION F. AR 1 -Ili I E.l:i . I.:tli.1III lf `w1 ur l.l? . i#ecla r 1 iirn d rt idenc est Kuril r_ - „--di, _s, e . L'rriuttr ul Hap, LU t, SUM" ti+_ HI1A 1l I Tile prop'i`ed Laid dr6 elitatria preyed r., :•' L1 t ( Ikea }krliii,nk 1Jrifs Lmuri,rlttenfjl ',s cssr„rtr a11hmittc.t h} Royal Vi.ua_ I{.wu,tiig Prafect TAX N1.17 ".Cy 7-t-021 1)16, 7-b-. fit :01 7-6 1' 1'n11i, airlil .6.0' 1 0.1 rs Non h Kinn IT15; ri..i I `.+cure ,,r 1 affects rne per.,..,nafla isr ,t+rll a; affects no; interest[ in real prt!pert} 1 rrsi,te a athllt 25 feet' . i...la ceI ,1f the piiipaau.l Laud Iex,einprutnl prof I Itti Aue.h t.IaCiriet. 1 Iii t'rr1han.{ k: okielcd ,,1f (flui 1.uuin>r" fn:r,aid ;:ns:lrl q1l wrtRdtl Ilxlrfy 1.hrrcrn it culled upon to rio ;uti. 1h;i4 rIhepti,clinl I1F. I`f r'.VIPElNtef 1-1,1.1'SEs '.i l°Tan.l ltutchmar;lr. 1 *m sprcifer;allti concerned about t1ar: cultural impact 17I Lltl'i prsldxt 11, c ra _lei that the arttamIcgicial;turlres offered iit support e1E lltu." C11cuIi 11411x u c'IYl.lt \ -s,`w .:I L"�`" .rrc' I+I<.kl_.u9:.• sub}eVL lural Fur ti tcol • I Ih,aantiU I i5 td'Ii: Hite : v. xt' Shat the hkral Cncnrn11a . dl In.:, :he ,, 01'11 t.”.131. the I-{iffuiluri Uidr. includrttg nick NNull%that arc Inllile'tpktICl4 :1,1111N 1n Ilte Iircharlftr irali 511{ ont ;'l r)Iwti T7ta'I LI1 L1 terv11e11Ial A2 •oioatsent. I he 1 lalu:rltw Slide .s nil 11r,, l:.clars, I 1 l +uiaar t cultural and 1%-nutco'iirLrii Jl feel ti !L' 1^13rt1 nri. t. ..:L'^,1 V r7hicf Crtnr„ 1 b,. rr•r!l" 1 . i:u1R:1eltn.t,v ,Ieri1u!J 3- 1 lac m4 woravcrn All LAC ion and analis tw:riti,mt:d bti Tom Phi & litutic, u COtr ai'AEC.' ,? irlui::llocri. 1 In :sum. a! f,1 =' Fin iruazuu ii::!' ^. u:wsrn r i ;1pc.7c not rf' ;s•11• :.�.i fici r+ r.ii ' and du a i.3 ps +- it khan, khc I]S purt:]ini and arch:tcx!kr,.: can he tu]aetsitx.d, kr' ,tune t`-+ k•'ct la presort=J.. A! al minimur LI'It Drat; L.nx:run:n,, i11111 AsScSa.12titnL i.uuY b: Phi` ic!,..tism ,.ita rrcrovery ri l rrci1YS$11or1 ihe Hcritthbill:4i:tk co,717cn&nli ;711 thL' 1 .JP:dari under d,.Jgw 1>1 per;la,+ that 'Lk f'rcutnng is true. I7uiciJ: k;1iJu:i-Ku,L1_ Hatt.ei'I. S1CFgetilbrr 31i2i:i211) ;. 2 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (8O8) 494.2039 Mr. Arthur Felix Via email: artfelix@verizon.net RE: Comments on Cultural Resource Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District. Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Felix: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 30, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment IDEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1; I do not consider that the archaeological studies in support of the DEA are adequate. I am aware that substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Holualoa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. The Halualoa Slide is or important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. Response 1: As described in Section 3.6 and included in Appendix 5 of the EA, two Archaeological inventory Surveys (AISs) were prepared for the project. As part of the AIS. sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their significance. The AFSs were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rt.iles §13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 2421 1) documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse ongle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a halua. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3. walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are Located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA) #3660. Additionally. the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the September 13, 2,021 Mr. Arthur relix Page 2 of 2 some gulch. it is unlikely that this is a holua course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a holuo in the project site. Comment 2: I base my concerns upon the evaluation performed by Tom Pohaku Stone,. a copy of which is attached_ The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features can be understood let alone properly preserved. The DEA must be revised to address the location, data recovery and preservation of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject parcels. Response 2: In the email provided, there is reference to "the portion of the holua at the Halu❑ inn [that] hos rock walls on both sides" and refers to parallel wolls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31162 Feature 2 and Feature 3 walls which are LCA #3660 boundary walls. Primarily. Mr. Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coost and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhau to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuno. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he`eh3lua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the cocst and in the near coastal region. However, the complexes care heated more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal. sacred or sociopolitical complexes, or a halua, 'within the project area. The existence of c hdlua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone. As discussed above, there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a hblua course existed within the project area. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sing : r&y, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. mi,_-_Thele.lefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawai'i Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: ARTHUR FELIX .(artfelix verizon.rmet> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 3.1 - AM To: PJarning Internet Mil Subject_ Royal Vistas Housing Project EA can rT-e-its Attachments•. KV;Traffic;AF,pdf Ptease see my attached email which describes my opposition tc the Royal Visnas p Iousrig Praled +7n th€ basis of traffif. concerns which well have a negative rrn pact on the entire ccrnmunity Arthur M. Felix 36522 • t)t(:i.ARn rle)N or darkI1 Jli i_ EIIL[N. r. A13."C C II.IR M 11:1.11X. vlrelu:c I /xrr, a f4':11(1 nt nr Iw{snvl t'a ua-s suhdts•isi rn I t.'o ane} zt Hamel. Star .r1. Hass Ed • I I hi rna:rno..,;eti land ricsci ipnrcnI I3ru]a:a,'t th i st dsc suhjccs of iIi pending Dean. Eris tt'ortrrteist.ai A esaintiu subinined by Rov'al V im:as I lousing Prl l....el Ism N,lap !ti{ w NiL _ i 1 -fi 11'' 4 :i 1141, i.f1-1.12 1,7 . 743-02 I 'ts I Ei, and 7- h-112 t IJ 1'J North Kona District. Hawaii lst n t, Siaie of lisp da 1 atihetm me [lemma :ala %yeti a afit%'[ to intend in mil prvirrp i rc a within 2s0 fecal ;asttanix car Inc pra)pinwd rand {tciclorlrortU prr.t,rtcr In su4h cartaciticS, I1,144c lil,tF,u.ns! ktlir„IcalF*r ,,t 111r r I ,,v.lt11 ac't 3r1d zoild s,in] °G4rtuId tcs.ritk tIscreia it Called upon u►,,t;' so l hsatxt rak'vioNvvl usa_: prndr. ! URA} I I`?%l•lits.liNNII- VI".41. A ShI u'MENT atclinling rite [mete !swatl I?>Gpv i by SSF$.1 111 rratirat 1, timed 1 i '. `i"'ie and imbed ,a4 ,Appl:.iatitix 2 iv, thc C74i \i" i i 'JL'IRONMENi.k1 1-\ i'+i,Iik°lt,rty c.on crit/ .r S��C16 YI :9d4'ero... it ir?S� impart hulls wat.t i sul ,S iLhi,7.: II t;,,,;. 10 1 P.: -Js h IJbdViS t{til: IIs ;ark' rust IluJl1 t r .r.t:ur_:,I Atdsosio.l I/1(3w SSJ'hd lr;tta.. Iatpai t Anal!0 Repon 1 rulic am! /lc Inn/m..1 :1n.'.1i[epctrt. un' discussed r the hotly or the rJRAF? I r.,+, It! i"tiw1 N 1 SI k i"''.`.11' l ,a: lal, 48-56. f,? and 71 . rl o .,,i LI vision, the propa's"cd projecr relies nn thr wise or a substandard road -ally, F .^"kuttrS:t'is71 Nan:. Kt.+. arta"ii:i Plias' 7ti VIM FTecp. has, I[In ired dtilartizes due to exsrcn,e strew acid I6 nitro« wish Ivo 8i,icwalks_ 1.i a lrnpa;a of increased triJPk Jos Log ru0„, m.Lase 1 and riaase. 2 barildOrtts aline WI v31 4 o:t 1Antiira{ll ProPect i, Irtade-gunr13 :Lilr/rts: t'4.! S'c ! Traffic Impac; Aralys!cRepeal_ ,°,hid! foc.usc.sinsteaL" ;rn77a01.5rllt�n� i�Muccn J&hurnan,s I Ii aua.) I 3411 particularly cot -ATI -11M that skidding iurrnorwIisu Arks rr.9drt IL "sL'pLirili y1.11115 7 -;r(rrr tia:;l ; •Ci:..7It IL.ro frN'YL.la_•.AI'4 ai. r,k Krk"IaatuL',ue onside!' chid 9h irl anutrrr_ [7k xr.rinkeni cbL L Js1 die "*! ii int fila ;Irc•"4 ,: rsC4rr�s. 4 The DLA'. ; I;+:-}" r [1. ti.1 °\L ASSI:SSMEi' L' requires evaluation or. among ouhc°rs.„raverwo,+rr,gxruk, I r>w r.s curiielspoirnifuaWrq ihull},rtr.++rr e ;r,t r,m frl,la.'it lifehrPfir.x. ["Itaprt;, ! 1 1iO 1.1;. ^„dmsnitirrritc RuI Iritne.s:1 witrnrr'ti Addressing rhzle +SItl:uti, la5vrever.'Ji,r. 111A1""1 1-'.VIRttr',141"N 1'rI :1`+k ``Ali- 1 cttrtplt I}rtarreNthem, IutntirriE ib I °hI 4 1ssr.r efireds .ur C,lxes;ted atrlCe ll>e Jctie1i rnicnl wsru[cl uiil rl cXI.S11 f.. LI _ t lu►I4tC Undl L acrisrng. uid ib Ito; e4.),:cta4[ L icsult in fUbi ltul �.il 1:fiIi � r.x(ai r,r' r,i4C"," II isacerinnl nmi,4ion r1h1"1R A, 1”\[ \I YA..11=1'0I., F rrf 1r it lurlerttiat adverse itnl t, sr1' iltet"crssinga the sow of ivtll ,LJ r._ • _ ..I _ -14116 uJ1, likr Ktio.LIilld011 Mace. 1 i \ t k(1 h7F 1 acidres2tes I :Nene teal tC aripa in irk Ih tiA. ilea of i.hrtlter tits iiruNv t rtiiruJd fiuvt a aub3robttiul u{14°erse OW n ApplrcatnL claims, 'I tic I'rs:Iposcrl l'rvlcci wcpt1Jii th11 al'lcs puhli: tltirldt Irt ar14 u°r•, • - .1V4r w"~inti b..ipproiNn atrh divasr t of to dniinr.4 . . r r .L. Tr, rxlll II:' lrurttL'"cl.{ wti, Fmphssr.,:islt l "I'ht h.Ilt! ha'er not atldre•, p r ..r- ` r I enipaits as required by I')h.apttr I 1-21111t !-I h.Elr:uitristrrtiseRutes. rs Pk.. Nanning 1)etiort -rt Ftx tJld n:-11 7eccrI The )R.1 F1 FNV1R N `'4l"1':hi. A SSESSIti.E.'s Fs reliance on the tiSt'1 1'traffic l: pares, AnaiJtiass l ,K•ppa,rl,. whi4:h hes the Eillu',n shirt iu address adverse impacts xvitlarri tJre Kuria. Vii ,uLiJrvl,iuri Ar rims r .t • t. }rcij t. h the w' `. t ! cflit• itnria„ei Anal). sis R ep4on a ; a ercruth one c+f 1%. Fn cr4rr:_r si Bit Ile °e ki + IC7 r_ra di -A; ilre 201 Wiletrer itnigutrcrJng. frar1L Impact Analysis Report. t rlil3M n.717 '111C i.• k•;, +_'IJ riitZ in i31/47,41-I141caI', poricriLtal rCJatlsrrl, 11a� ...--.•41.'`v! I raffia Irrs1oor kr ,r. licrerr Marc ricxr rec gni7e msJlli ncrttl..,n1fi rc,ri:.ili 9 IIJJ1 11I.14titli:11 4 4lrl1nrti71> 111}#I iii JJcLurdirig 1;1711 .01% Jwla and l kelt' uri,leres irlriJ;r da1I4 veJtic:IC trips nrtril ilabtc r1 . ; ' ,!. I`lfidbic i, cl the SSL' S-# 1 rtttlk Jm 1 - ,uo ur 1 47,1114 IJ,1ti 1(-141'1 s- 4.11. if4%chit'Ie% f'".4 NI,' r117 i'y„Jrrtt � 4ILrf� 1t.I,li`1��:, a� Ii f a,1 4• l.1, it :i 4' 1'1 I ?si[0. a weCk4,14wanti AUvUst:4. 201(0 uht• 2:11 1x 1,6 ilch4r kirir illtwrriJJgIri ii 1Jltpiictktep4art 1kl l.h'iP,, r.'.1 Ir'=' u'i, ls'w 1, •I Iir14r,.r., 14 Lirrd. .?!)1b. bc>al7 4+rrurJ.;i4ti 1 Ii utainiailb lu*4 rrrwarlo.° , ..I 1I I rw ... JJr ,:.ek1a wii11 FigI!r 4 rsri it 4Sr i Truffle' Irrract ,inull°s'ru RtC trilci1$ nrr4rovrrrralr,•G.. 1 ;c,1 u¢hic!1! r,r hoar ir, 7;016J rrrr Nlrrrh, IJnw1 ()wren 11JiJih4rrruiri i li1.}avr'11L at 7 u rr. The di!l rt:nee rri L4J'.uniC %IOUAI' the n1.LuIAUuii 1004 4 11411MJlI ilk vlJil°-14-(11{4 mc.> i crn nth wad tai as unrrl iabtc: s' 1 rrerernmendruion hi Iril'1ir 1rnho 1 An,114'sic t#c;nrI tiyr i rrIL rldJI IOUR wi 1,1JLCrw f;;l.t}srlt.taI ii 1 liejw..3x a3rI11 11 Laiajtli ltr1l_l sal r1 i h :1116Ji1,i•;,V<7I ti1111 r}1r` :7:1.111c ItileiNevI''ri tlI@i r-y;c %cr.rr1.1n1 7.754.-1.0 '..jar t'€ 3fkry Ifrihi.I1r' Niru for l:1C tpt itis m nt: I Ng fttiorrimcnd:triiin hti S.SFiruptici Au:ll,.# IRc w,it for monit)r r ! iI tate intersection of Vu tri k. rthu ttelnu 1-1igh+< I} rad Kurihara ia L.I•,,tay 15 itsdc :ate V4'}1crr. I� r�, ,iet tR1'Tw i:l i i 7.ttc:•t!inure [hay one 't i1 i •" $[3 itilli} Ind deign ni a 56ifiiJ kyr I his i ;i.ttC11 :.Jlt ",1e44 htl' pIiipr;' proiect. ii xu1 1_ the I.t'raft !`>ht'iri,rinwnua Assiessrneni unni'SF%1 f rattie Ir11pac l An wi5 Rpport does n'! i resit i A ttETc°tC"1'.2, ,.retdihkr t[Ttt :rill arab; 415 5111'1'' Ihnf fhe ::6jw C"r'yi rnp*._L4 011 C'tiptltl� Ifl rusty+. !ft1J and rt44minct17! fronts imrextedrrii1111 earl ht WIN II1kkf5'toolid arlt'4 fkmit in appr:eprliau gob r'11Ati.-ni piHnritne and resptirtsr Jet.I ane under Ncnain' ,if p.nurw dirNl [he irrrcgc>'Ing 414 I.1'I itI ginrtern'm-r 314. 207141; Kmlti,i Kona.• I far i'1 p tactile Arthur M, Felix 4 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Arthur Felix Via email: artfelix@verizon.net RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawal`i Island Dear Mr. Felix: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 30, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned That adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place, l consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the some specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuanca'Oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana `oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is rouanly one additional vehicle on Kekuanaoa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2021 Mr. Arthur relix Pte 2 of A Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regcrding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oca Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The CEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, Lind accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance an the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion~ is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers L., sec.- 1 T_ from the 2025.LRTP forecast. September 13, 2021 Mr. Arthur relix Page :i :::,1 Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics scorn een in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. ResponseJ: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and raid -rise was considered. Low-rise multi -family housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very law standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAL, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway ❑t 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualaloi Road {north). Our traffic count token in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Wiieher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the TIAR for the project is undo aeroling, but the project's TIAR report does use numbers similar to those f rov-ded in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than ane warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other cansideratiens that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility„ and others, The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2021 Mr. Arthur relix Pc 4e 4 of A an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many ot these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.leFebvrestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County ot Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashie From: Sent: Ta: Subject. Attachments - ['!Last e attached. Daniel Malak e rnalakied'I awaii rrcarn V edn8sday, 5epteniber 30.2020 8:31 AM Planning Internet Mail Proposed Roya! Vistas Housing Fra ect KV OWNERS De laratiun re Tratfrc,pdf PE 'LAR TION 01` TRAFFIC Dan !eI Malakie declare: 1 am a retsi&ett eel' = Kona Vistas suI divisii nj. County tori lavt i`i,'State cI lfa' rai`i_ The proposed 11 rid development project that is the suh?:ct ++f-r1a4 p''!':Lii!%I)ralt Environmental Assessment st.1 tied by. Royal Vistas 1H1,rn; Niaije tTax Map ley Nos, f ! 7 -h -021'01h, 1414111:017, 741-021.01g. and 7-6-021 ,til North Kona District, C lawai'i Island. Slate iliec s me personally as wc11 affects m', interest i11 r4�ul property�. I reside within lllll@ [distance] of OK; plopused land den, ek pnicnt project. in such capacities,1 haw firsthand knowledge tat' the [0lowrnu facts and could and would testify thereto 3l'called upon w du SLI, 1 have rcviewcd the` pwnditig DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL. AI._. ASST SSMENT Including the Tr4Iiirr Impact Analysis Report by SS FM In .-r1tanonal, slated July 2020 anel attached as Appendix 2 to the DRAFT 1E,NVIRt 1N 1.i 14 CAL ASSF SSM ENT. 1 ant specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within acrd withcout that Kona vistas subdivision that are. Mil Fully or 4tccurtttcly addressed in the SSFM Traffic lrriptct Analysis Report. Traffic .and riw SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. are: discussed in the body of tll4 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.. at pp. 48-56. 67 and 7l 3 In the Kona Vistas subdivision. the proposed project relics on the use iota substandard roadway. tiray. Kckuana'aa Place. Keirtiana`ca Place is very steep, has limited tight distance: due to extreme curvOS and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising trnrrw Phase I and Phase 2 htiildouts of the Royal Vistas Hem -sing. Project 9s inadequately addressed in the SSFM TriIli4• Irnpac:t Analysis Report_ which foctatiec. instead on impacts along Queen Xaarhurttanu Highway. Iain particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and front a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuarta'oa Place. 1 consider that the Planning Deparimerit should requite the app i icant to address these concerns. 4, The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT rayuiri.s cdre•rsc .1LreM'tiva•► impacts. such EIS pOpi itrric„r R'ifki!!;}t.,S or cliff's or-epee/VictAchritrf"S Svc Chapter I I-200.1-1 Administrative Rules 1n tE.+id oi'scluttrely ttcittrc,wtng these issues however_ the DRAFT E.NVIRONMENTAL ASSI.-..Y,NLN.T simply" igrnc res than. claiming that "No adverse secondary effects trc expotta-I sittkc cls Lk%dL>1mlent would u<<Iirc e�xi,ting infrastructure, providemf I1 housing., and is wait expected to result iii substantial demands to County servicer;.'" it urrtionoti for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSF.SSM ENT to fail to address the potential adverse iLnpacts of increasing the use of sukt andard existing infrastructure. lila" Kekuaiia`oa Piaeca 5. Tho I:)RAI'l I:NVIR{ )N1f49FNTAI. ASSESSMENT adc#rcises adverse traffic ittwpact.s only in tete context of '.vlicther the project would Have a substantial adverse rse (Oct On t++fic lknulrh, Tltc Alrptit tttttt t [Dints. "TIw Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; sit-Jen:mailer would be appropriatel), dispcased ot'in drainage structures_ Traffic.irrtpacts he ve ee 1 t (c ifJtg..c reful consideration in project design." Emphasis added, This bold conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts cis required by Chapter 11-200.1-13. Hawaii Administrative Rules. +. The 111anriing I)' partrrrent. should not accept the DRAFT h. VIRON ' 11.-'\ l'AL .AssESSh1ENT's reliance an the SSFM Tr rt1ie IraFi-r nasty°ti i, Ik�•;,txr-t_ which IhI trio following deficiencies: a. failure to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kkina Vistas subdivision arising from IIiL pro.leer: b. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report uses a 14rth rate of I°;x, iii contrast to thc 2 ,ii growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Fngincering Traffic impact Analysis Report. Traffic coages(ion is sdnsitiw°e to gruww al raw in a non-linear, exponential relation. c. The SSF\I Trarlic Impact Analysis Report goes not rwccw ni7C t>!ttslti- ener;ittorrtl housing characteristics carr in Hawaii according to census clat:r and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips ,• takin tab ie ter h!lt of the 1iropi+- .1 d. The SSFM Traffic Impact Anal w wr, I epor' s-rsrt,;;wru,rtarlly low vehicle volume ‘if 853 vehicles for Northbound C;1u' ii K;41here anu highway on thc si:Icctw;d dales of April 30, 2D19, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday. compared with the 24113 \Vitchcr Engineering Tr -uric Impact Analysis Report which 'molted 1057 vehicles far JaotiaD• 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported volume of 1453 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the SSFM Trai'ic Impact Analysis Report, which shows approximately 1050 vahieies per h. fir in ?'116 for Northbound Queer Kaithurruinir Highway at 7 am. The difference in uuIUMW i t1101-� thin double the ma.timurn 10% variation geaerally aw :vpterl in day-to-day ine. scrrements and thus unreliable; e. The rcca:rrrtrncttdation by MEM Traffic impact Analysis. Report fora to nadabtnit at Quo en Kaahurtmrtnu Highway arid Iltntlaiai Road (North) rs inconsistent with the traffic cnrridor.. lrttLr:ce9ctions Om pals, warrants but ron in unsignalixcd present traffic satcry liability concerns for the govern tn...-2ut. The rcc• Inerl►I.ttiri1I,v SSF 4Traffic Impact,"4rialys,.; Rcpc~<ri For mcrnrtorinsof the intersection of Queen kaahtini intt Highway and Kualcutt Highway is inadequate. ''here, as Iwrv. au itttertic9L'tion passes more than one warrani Hatter all coli.dltiuns. It rllarulcl he priorilIJ.LC1 fix ~muds and de:sit;n ofa signal for installmi on.. This circtlnrstaue will be cxacerbatcd.l by the proposed Ilrtn d. 7, 111 Stull, the Dram Environmental Assccsrttent 311d SSI'M Traffic Impact Antal~"sia Kirt. {toes rtut pres1rrt suin'tgint. ea'tdible facts and analysis such that the adverse intp.tcts on existing, infrastructure.and resulting iiunt iraffiL. can bas fully understood and result in apprt?priatc:overnntic tt planning, and resin trs.,- I declare under penalty of penury that the foregoing is true. Dated: Kitilua-Kona, Sept 30 , 702U. 4 4ignmtu .c Printed name: electronically signed flaniel C. Malakie.. Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Daniel Malakie Via email: molckied. ihawc.ii.rr_corn RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kano District, Hawal'i Island Dear Mr. Malakie: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 30, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the [EA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. 1 am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: KekuanalociPlace is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase II in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAL estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak perioci, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak r- eriod. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana'oa Place every 4 rri'-iORs for the o cik ,.-sr,i-iods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of. among others, adverse secondary impacts, suck as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is serious omission September 13, 2,021 Mr. Daniel M al akie Pacje 2 of A to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekueanceoa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana `oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to we Kekouna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic (22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively). The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). omment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the proect would Hove a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5; Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the LEA's reliance on the TZAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kora Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TZAR uses a growth rate of 1%%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range ire- asportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and '2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast, Comment 7: The TZAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle Crips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. September 13, 2021 Mr. Daniel M, al akle Page 3 of Response 7: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus_ The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output, This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the besi projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles. for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30. 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repoli, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15. 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study ❑re❑ was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hual❑loi Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting. or if the project's TZAR is undercounting, but the TZAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Cont. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumonu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahurnanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project, Response 9: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others, The scope covered in this TZAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal September 13, 2021 Mr. Daniel INAalakie Pope 4 of A without the proposed project. The proposed project is not the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at 8O8) Sincerely, Mantic Consulting Services Inc. f Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvrestantec.cam cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department necessarily triggering have any additional 494-2039 or by email. Mari. Ashley From: rnalakiwi@hawair,rr.corn Sent: Wednesday September 3C. 2020 E.:37 AM To: Riannirigq Ink9rr7 ' Maul Cc: dbr•ikorta("aal.cer� Subject: Pr::po=_'d .• vol Vistas I -I ,us rg Project Attachments F.'.• [ iWNtf?5 ation re Traffic pdf; KV OWNERS Declaration re drainage pdf Please, sec attached. [Daniel leia.lakic 4- 652? DECLARATION O I. Daniel Malakie TRAFFIC , declare: 1. I am a resident oaf[ ; Kona Vi*tai sulticlitii`icwttl, County of Hawni`i, State u wai'i_ The proposed land development project that is the subject of the pending [haft Environmental As_sesSrraent Sub tntried by Royal Vistas Housing Project °fa.x Map Key tins ( i) 7-6-0211116. 74)--021:0 17. '7-64)21:01)1, and 7.6-(i21 :1119 North Kona District. f lawart Island. State of IIawai'i affects tate personally as well as affects my interest in real property. I reside vvithin mile [distance] of the proposed land development project. In such capacities. I have firsthand krtotalydgI: uF the following !'acts :and could terve u.+Mild testily thereto it"Ciillt;d upon to do so. 2. 1 law(' reviewed the pending DRAFT' FNV1RONlw1iENTAL ASSESSMENT including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report b}' SSFM trucnmtional, dated July 2020 and attached as Appendix 2 to the 1)R.AE1- ENVIRt `JMI N'1AI. ASS FSSh11-N F 1 ani specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts hath within and without the Korea Vistas subdivision that arc nil Indy or accurately addressed in the SSFM Tra ITie impact Analysis Report. Tr i1 ie and the SSFM Traffic Impact .Analysis Repoli. zirc ilisctisse'd in the body of the: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, at pp, 4E1-56. 67 and 71. 3 In clic Kona VH1as subdivision. lrirpi .. tI project relics on the usc`[31' a substandard roadwj4, Kektruia'c.7a Place, Kekaaan i'ca Place is v cry sleep, bus liinitr cl Sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sulevcalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Pha.sc 1 and Phase.? huild+ uts of the Royal Vistas I Iousiltg Project is inadequately actdresged in the SSFM Tragic ]mpact Analysis Report, which loc; ises instead on impacts along. Quem Kaahurnanu I-tighw'ay. I am par'icularly cnnccrncd that adding numerous vehicle trips to antl Lion] a separate subdivision wIII prese!1I dangers ;arid curtgcstion to residents along Ket atna`ca Place. 1 consider that the Plarsning 1)ep,ir4tiit,rr !he applicant to address these concerns. 4. The DRAFT ENVIRON\ LNTAl_ ANtirsSMENT oenturi.r . ,It,.iCitiir a l: anon ethers,. oclt'er t_ PPtIpar 11' ti'.rrr h ; Jr l+.: t'. rad t? it•t ft 1nthIrt ,fin ifrlic See (..'haptcr 1 1- Yd.1-13. I-Iitt4' i At!iiiiiii.titrativc Rules Instead of xc}uarFC rssrintF 1Ets5;1. issues, ilOIN ;ver. IL DRAFT l` ENVIRONMI=NTA1...A SESSMIINT simply ignorethem. claiming that "No adverse secondary effects an: expcelcd since the dicrrt:lopntint would unive 'xistirtg intrastr.icture, provide housing. and is not cxpc4ted lc) result in sul)stalttial deniandti s •ice.,." II is a seriouson:i_; :Its DRAFT 1:N\'CRON\1I NT, 1_ ASST SSr 1F ! T - IC? tail to address the poienii.IC adverse impacts of increast4 the tia e ti�f substandard existing irtlrawtruuclure. like Kckuarra•na Place. The DRAFT ENVTF(ONMENTAL. ASSI,SSNI1 V 1 ;iddr. s*t' adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the. project would Hcn,e s.w.:I. Iu.rniraf cry rcrxe etrifcf nr� puhllc h alrlr. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not aired public health in ttnv way. stormwater would b appropriately disposed gin drainage structures. Traffic impacts h v r7 Ic,ken jritcLLcaLeili_coruicieration in project design,' Emphasis added, This bold conchsion does riot address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11-2011 .1-13, I ta..ail Administrative Rules. 2 f,. The, Planning Department should l neat accept the. DRAFT FNVIRONMENTAL ASS E.SSM EN`Fs reliance on tlhe SSFM Traffic impact Artalyis Report, which has lltc following deficiencies: failure to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona 'i tas subdivision arising from the project; 1 . The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report !uses 1 grrrwili eerie of 1",'6., in contrast Ici the 0 N,rovi, th rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Iinginecrtit Train: c Iltlpact AriLtlysis Rtparl. Traffic cungetitiuii is very sensit'twto growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation'. c. The SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report docs net recognize rrroIH-gelicrIitrn,Ll housing ch:tracten &ticcs common in Hawaii according to census data and likely tindt.,restInr:itcs (Laity vehicle trips attrihulahla to h�,il�1�.rGil cFf the prupuscd, prt_+jc.0; tt The SSFM Traffic Irnalact Analysis Report etipluvs art unu wally low k`cxhicle volume or 853 vehicles lirr Northbound Queen K iuhurnanu hignwnv on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a wc, kday and August 24, 2019, a Santrday. cr mparcd with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which reported l t}57 vehicles far January 14 and 15, OIf►, kith 4veek+ ays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also al aci, itlr Figure 44)f rhe SSFM Tra.the Impact Analysis Report, which shows approximately 145O'chick s ptr hour in 20E6 i irr N Fedi hound Queen Kaahiimanu Highway ighhway at 7 ai.rn. The di llerci t in voluirne is mot,: LI :LLD ciciublc the maximum 10%, variation generally acccpted1 in clay -to -clay measurements and thus unreliable; 3 c. The recommendation by SSFM Traffic Impact. Analysis Report For a roundabout at Queen Kaataurnanti Highw•:i> and iIualalai cl (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor, Inlcrscctinns that pass warn Eras but remain unsigtxalizcd presort traffic saf"et • liability concerns for the government; f. The recorrarnendation by SSFNI Tragic Impact Analysis Report for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahu.rnanu Highway and JKnakmi Highway is inadequate. Where;, ati here. an Iftter ction passes more than one warrant tinder all cnnditions, it should. be prig}riti/cd for study .1141 d4:sriui of a signal fur installation. This circumstance writ be exacerbated by the proposed. f ri ijec r, 7, In tiurn, the Draft I.;ttvirortmeni Ll A sctisrucrrt and SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not present sufficient, credible. tads ;tad analysis Unit the adverse iml c.rs cal existing infruwtructurc and rt uIling from increased traffic can be fuily understood and result in appropriate govannient Manning and response 1 &clarc unde penalty .if perjury that the tbregcring is true. Dated: kailua-Kona, Ilatitiai°i, Sept 30 ?It?ll. electronically signed Signature: faniel C Mala. Printed name' 4 Dr-__CL..ARATtO\ car. DRAINAGE Daniel Malakie ,decf:ar . . 1 am a resident of Kona Vii subcliwisi ri County of FIawai'i. State el 1 iawai The proposed land do,cloprnent project t}tat i5 the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Asscssritent submitted by Royal Vrsiiis I ltrtrsing Project Tax Map Key Nos. f 3y 7.6-{7r1, :O 116, 7-1,-I}211)1 7, 7-64)21 .(11f. olid 7-6-021:01'J North 1... it..t 11istrict, 1Iawai`r Isfatiil, State of 1lawri`t affects me personally as well .rS :r11LrIS rrrt real property 1 resitIL, within 1 mile tillsl tn►<] i?ftlhc' pr,.iect. In such capacities, 1 have tirsth.ind knowledve et'the following tants and could ani ,x Ohr,dl t ktily thcreto il'called upas tea do 'in, [time re%ieWuc! the pending 1)I#AP' 1 NTAL ASSESSMENT um' attachments. 1 an specifically concerned about; sewage and water table 3 1114 sI4'c'it Icpograaphy, historical rapid siormwarcr run-off and associated iated datttiuge l)r; ent hazards that are net adequately addressed irk the Draft Environmental Assessment. See 1}I1. t.hcrer t. 4 I am aware: that [cite spec tic facts]: 4 In sum, die Draft Environmental Asscssrncnt does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and ctwersions can be understood_ A proper environmental assessment cannot leave rnearaingful details to he taken care of in the future.. As I urxdci stand ,uch circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation, among other errors. 1 t+. A hare: conclusion by, the applicant or accepting authority that nc ded infraasirueltire will comply with gc vernin.. t a`cgulations is itiufiiciern, Alea minimum. the Draft Environmental Assessment rc..viaed to sliou• specifically what irdatsirucmr: improvements arc required to tic into the County's 4lriin.a a system anti how those inipr-tir-emarnts will function I declare under penalty of perjury that the Foregoing is LruG. Dared` Kailu-Krma.I{ti'ati�ti`i, Sept 30• 211?tl• Signature 1'nnicd name! 2 electronically signed .l..anicl C l alaki.e Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Daniel Molakie Via email: molckied.i .hawo.ii_rr_corn RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawal'i Island Dear Mr. Malakie: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 30, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the [EA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kciahumanu Highway. 1 am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuana`ca Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications cis all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase 11 in 2029. Atter that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAL estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana'oa Place every 4 minutes for Theo cik ,.-sr,.-iocJs, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2,021 Mr. Daniel M al aloe Facie 2 of w Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them, It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Respons.e 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana `oa Place. the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic {22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in arty way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant.. Comment 6: The TZAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate errpiayed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TZAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation, Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume, The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast, September 13, 2021 Mr. Daniel Mal ak[e Pace 3 of w Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics con een in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response_l: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAL employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen IKaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019. a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TZAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day -today measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumariu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hual❑lai Rood (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if lege Witcher Engineering report is overcountiig, or if the project's TIAR is uncie7 curling, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those crovided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roendabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor, Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the T1AR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumariu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project, Response 9: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other consideraticns that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents. geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2021 Mr. Daniel Mal ak[e Pace 4 of w an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. it should also be rioted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. Comment 10: The steep topography, historical rapid starrnwater run-off and associated damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment. I am aware that this project will have serious impact an the immediate and surrounding area. Response 10: The developer is not aware of any damage to adjoining properties, including Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway, from water flowing from the subject property. Comment 11: The CEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood, A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future. As I understand it. such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among other errors. Response 11; Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two County -owned parcels. It describes that on TMK (3) 7-6-21:19, "Infrastructure during Phase II of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system across the ditch to extend Kekuana'oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the KCDP "Official Transportation Map." For TMK (3) 7-6-21 :18, the project includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the KDCP's "Official Transportation Map." Additionally, as described In Section 3.3.2 of the EA, Kona Three would prepare a Drainage Plant to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite, The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by DPW. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. Comment 12: A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At c minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements are required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function. Response 12; The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA. Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Plan would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed. September 13, 2021 Mr. Daniel Malakfe Page 5of5 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at 808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre4stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawai'i Planning Department Mori, Ashley Frorn: Micky <maureenfelix n@verizor.net Sent!. Wednesday. September 3C. 2020 3:29 AM To: Nal -ring Internet Mail Subject.. Ruyai Vistas Housing Project EA Cowmerds Attachtinent KV.tra fic,MMF.pdf w Please find my attached fetter to the Hawaii County Planning U partment which documents my concerns about the impact of the proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project on the traffic situation which is already overburdened. Maureen Felix 1:36525 Di.CF. Al:.\iIf. l i,'J 111:14I10,1:N 4. t 'IIX 1, MAL REEK A. I 1.:1.1X. decLary 1 am a rCSid c1 0l &orno Vtaus xlalRlrI. mon,. County of 11 -It iosi"t, Stale o. lbw -1i., prnroi Imo dexddprnenl P >)evi that is t e wtrbjea:t of the pen liltyUr fl F:nvirtmmer al As.sessnla ni submI'Mai byKutit] tSUS.I1 Lt,► IJ PrOicci 1' ' P1.tipIce> 1' ;;i 7.6.,0-21 L1f,, 7-6-421 01 7, 741.-112L.UI$, and?• 6-021.01Y Nor•lit puna Iltitrict_ E lewa, • 1 Slate alt 1 iiwai' 1 affects me IrersGtrilly +ts well ms affects 1t 1' intcrent tn rt al prupertt 1 r' itie within 251.1 tc!t 14 i c.n4'i I of div I;;trali navi:lupIl1 or r 1,,Ln 11,_nt firsthand krtucthralge of the !L►Ik1 i 1 '. 1•aiIx and L.11..1 I rani' IitelrW if cslleal upon Eu deb ;+n. have rcvicw.cd rho prrra.lin D \[1 F'ti ll�.? i \11- N I \I :VSSII including Iia 1 rtt1I`i.. Intp.0 1 :l' aaiM1 I?y SS1 f41 Enlerualtrinal,twat; ! aLllx arid ii L �lrcd Appendix 2 1,a the /)RAF T 1_NWJRUNS4E 'f FAI ASSFS.i1,14F,N1 : arrl xpeci Focally <sttccrrti,i �E~.:w1 adverse traffic Impncuo ixtith wii in arui wilhotit the Kama Visas subdi..istiin that tire ru+t ttillr, irr tI curniely L.kirrssx..1 ii, the SSFM TsaffIc Impact Analysis 14.1.7 Qrt. E raltic flat Vtil• E t,woflAti IIl I;a41 d.,} ilti Mita KeIxtrl ,t a ,si we uk Oscsp rrt «hc b,"2) col -1110 L)RAI...I. I•'.4NO LVI,C) ktili N I he .i`~'*1:SSMLN I . rtL per 4S- ^t,, 157 a1J1t 71. In the Kona ViAiti l.ision, Me proposed mimed reheo4 on. the uae of. sa,,andand rxvdway, K kuarta'oa f'1 a keictranf•,lai Praer is V1.1n Sies_ , hos I1maUd r ht 111511Mt:cMvkirr'Li; e coin JJJL.t _. ruirrnw with 1a1i sidaA9.1L_ The impact of 1n3;rto d trull.W ffl15111! faint P1 .isr 1 and Phase huiJu'autr, odf 1fr_ 11.;,))1.1 ilutianag E'Yufcit 1s irta,it-Liar EL l ti adlin:.3svd IF1 thc'FI 1rfI1 Frniii 1.11,11;1, ii r,1.4.11i0k r Nt":.Isci.1 li 11,1rie K4141114.1rPAIILI I 1 orn itiutrcowcirricd. "i 1%; ': ...IjrFS W.Itkli6isionW1 ptsr1L nd corkg.;-,7tIoA Kei....Liartfou Pac 1curiAiLlor that the Planinrari ;mrI r 1iin. thr AppLitdiu 4 I Ftv 1 LN1, iR,()NNLI.N r1/2.1. SSIVIFNI requiru!,r II.Ii1jh !WO' tr CerWidCit untnriels, 3rurn popprivrriv,. 7 t -2X I Priviii Administrative rmicip.t.! if rtI thc.Fc -, 1 .LIk:VIItONME1'47,41 ASRFSSilik.IEN A1vcr,r,.ceondlir1/4 ?..1.1i;vb weN,pocted SIOCC the liCYCIOrenCra •-• r provs,te niU1 J1C i iWt .9pVcIsN1 rc)ull to Nubsttotial de. ' 1 ',.41' ire, "1 k 3 fieriini orrifirkior Alt the flR.r•1 t'N VIP ()N I!. N 1 rik I 1,1`,1 '\L 1 ; 1kt tilddrkrib 11W Evientitil rtereng ihuc 1.1 R'1 1 ".4!, 0\ .iriver9e rrAffl: iIU1 nJ). ;11 ... ;ht.. projimp J1J I. a y1,2-.....,a...r!Jcti adiwrse eeiref perithe 1waim Tho itilpticAnt .:iitints, '11%c Pripdtv&LI Piuji1.44,]A!..1 rik4 .111eft public health in uis .cnrimmemer +fruit*, 1.1 ri iii i tribAureA I rat] 1.411yr bret..a_141111.1.11..rA—. 4 -+ phao.1 :lidded. MSc h3ld does rii 114111-n1AI ariverximpart5 as required by Chaptcr I-2001 l Ilawind Administrative Rides. f The PIanning sit.-ILIci nil accept the f.] ti.t ! f `w','IVI i �!. ,y i 11 :''tSSt.SS4iJ:N1's:c iancc 4m the SS: 1 iMilt: Imprrr r nrt;tyiw Xcpiri, h 11r, I.1,Luti,ll.lg deficiencies Iaulur'e 1,41 oddres' athrnie traffic unpile tft within the Korta! Viscus auL+cJ. viilie�n tri,iii rrtlm rile prr+f�at; The SS1 +~1 Traffic is impAnnlysi5 Repel el uses u growth rale of 1%. in Cnil asl ie the 2% p.mwth raze cnipIu,,rd b} the: 21)1 + Witcher krigineeering 1 rsffir 1tripa l Annly'si, RepoE, 1-rallfic congestion is Ven 4r[a,lti,e tr �r�•,trll raw 1_1 ti{irr-Lui>leatt, expernenu l relariin .1 ri.rt - "'' Ir^ 1; l', •.i. I2-i1a•T" °. ,,s'w not rvcrl4" 1 •"e° multi- rsrr:rrirl,u+aal 1. I I;eaa 11 ,Ir ;:� ! a, 71.1 7,:L° ,,r• .fiti i 11411Sa:rcAtrrnaic+ M1lrldti' vehicle trips iiltrIt•u,il'k- ri.• I'lu::..J,.,•_Il. ,.! L',rtb rrecrine t ht raiI C Irxip t A;iiii y5r5 ttcr+c7[t ernpk % s an rirtttmiall • lsm vehicle n'i r,115e171l b•::::rh,,rr.mli 4i!"11u:?_; am I �.. I..i."roti d,,itl_-w „f a weekday rii uq,uyt 24, 2014, a $,'t1urda . , uirttpaied with the ,2011$ Witcher i.rnfh ImpactAnalysis Repan. ►rhi,h reported LUi7 vehicles for .rnauura 14 LII 15. 2014, txth wS:iiu+ f I;ti „ally ,,2411. ,lcrnar,:llJ5vtia:!a+pr - ,.":rht Figure 4 e 11hr cSf Al kereirl 1'+ ;, : 1 ,15 per hour in 2016 For Northbound quem KlailLITIESIU 111,71:1s LAY 41 7 ra.ni 'Lhe 61 ,st!r;,:e irr tiCA;Link! isnt:ry thinc!4iablc LLu :t::1,\krt11111.r 1'i' ,.:11.1111+4.161 grriet'E1ily ,tecepie,` , .,.•tar -lar flit ;tS-lutrircri turd 1hua unrrfrlhGc; C Ifs=: f`L'.z r-•;=n.�.:1""I�r} h 4\F'4.1 I 1 ,1711 , il" i:.r'r,. 1 'r 1 n,tIr,1-1,11imuit at l trCk`rl Lailhilinai i 1Ltglrvt'uy circa, I I:rzlylrel I.na.:i ,r1hr tw ,rear ro'rri.-nr wiih. l' 1.;!;', 1rfrrWilifir14. p114-; ,A;Irrr!!,.0ttrri traffic tattnt c4.111MinkT 1ieV.iv-r-Ftruent (Lir nutai'..0-triu 111 the anter5ection oi Queen Kaahurnanu IiiRkwa and Kunkini 1 Liiti inaLiequute Whorl.% 4L,, ,tI rrtrvi:;,-, 1?1,111E- dial, 11/1C ''k'.1.1'1111r111 Nutlet nil 11 priciritind for study and design rir a Ail for mmallar Irt 1 tin ctI rJeIinir ill he the prorored. project. . ilrinrartawntal ASSR.,,ISIT10111 and Rerort dtc r' 1111e f ' :nh (=Ku th.' existinl; inintair frotn increased 1;11 1:1c L.,in he n 11 .1 . 3ppilipraisic w 1 LI:1.3F1 11114 WIXOM 1 dIttild inder 1,s laity al Egriury 'hal air farritNimg (rue r.3410 Smenaket ";ni 7020, is.ntittu14,,ona,, 110.114.1C1 SLEtrarnanc• irao: miturr-en A Fcikx. it 11; Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Maureen Felix Via email: rrlaur ' na I;x_ c; ver zon.net RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Graft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawarl`i Island Dear Ms. Felix: Thank you for the cornrnent letter dated September 30, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Ar7clysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEAj. I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am ps rticularly concerned That adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents olonq Kekuanaoa Plcice. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as oil other Kona Vistas roods, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana`oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2C21 Ms. Maureen Felix Page 2 of 4 Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7 1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekcuna'oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Hove a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; sto rmwaher would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.201.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Commet>wt 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TEAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (NDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Flan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers usec. 1 T_ from the 2025 LRTP forecast. September 13, 2C21 M. Maureen Ferbx Page Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics comm -,.,n in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable tc buildout of the proposed project. Responsej: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very law standard deviation and on R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repo l 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAL, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Norihoound Queen Kaahumanu Highwoy ❑t 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum l 0% variation generally accepted in day -today measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Huololoi Rood (north). Our traffic count token in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcountiig, or if the project's TIAR is unde7 °._r'ling, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those crovvided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualaiai Road ( North; is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project Response 9: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents. geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2C21 Ms. Maureen Felix Page 4 of 4 an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be rated that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (8O8) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1' r: Michele Lefebvre. Ph.D. michele.lel`ebvre rstantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kana Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley Frcrn: Micky fraurtigriferixave.rizon.net} Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 326 AM To; Planning Internet Mail Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Project EA Comments Attachments: KV; Drain;Mf _pdf The attached letter expresses my concern about the Impact of the proposed Royal Vistas Hausa rig Pralect on the drainage problems that already exist in the area, Maureen A. Felix 136524 OI-: - i-ARAT7t.I•r c)I N8, i.^Eii,i N.A.ill L 1. MA :1ZL..E.N" A. TT.•.l IX. ;3 clmle; 1 alit a rt-siden.al KLl11c1. Vislaa sUbdi 4J�ILIra L'Utrn r' L t 1 la•.tiut•r. Stmt; it. uI 111.4v.au•I, 1 hr. F.P.2p,oaJ:td land Lldwr[up-SJ.L'n! proiC44 LIia1 IN Chic -5o b.11,4:41 of tit, randit hour cri u] :tow .ttu.•rr1 sutxru[Led I0t u! T'ro ei1 To 161.111 Jac; h[o3- { i 7•h•[i2I:LI tti- 021 ..111 Y. i ii ±1 _iit F. :ru! :71 a t nrl Kt+rr: rie[_ t}1 1-V,-ttL11`I affe:ots ar¢ peisunall, wtli as aftews, rn irk rt'-'. prkTerr . [ reKni twithi.ri 'SIJ Cect t1,,talrrc.eI I rtr ; 1,111.1sedl her, les nI ,mien [ • r ri:. L'rmavt•1Lit eufri.., ..11.4v:ir.+ I,Iir, Jr 1 h II ;...•• L:+= 11I2 0' 1 1 `=,y,'t'atk,`.Is ! 't' ax:•l -s\1' 1 ,inti att1j1,•ksientrt 1 .1I1r, 1/2,:l'rl4;rr11Cri about Otte enviroltutentdl Ir apacl IrroEcct. the atm,. clap .g1z h}-. histarlLal rapid 51amttt;ltcr rr-11riattul (Srr"J4'11I hazards au! . 11]'L` not adoguatri4 +kklxe. d iIt lilt r teJtit^i !Rao 1 1 am atlrc tlL ! th•s prefect t+.•,11 have rrrrnL15 irnitnct tine irltrnvdt,dr Bind sum uniting arcs In ,,tknt, tIu' 1)ruti IsrritllurtrerltLJ ,1s,scr;.tirtlrarl dues Ja,11 rli4.'u 4.rtFlrirut lilts+ 11 741 anal > 14.oachl 114u Illr liccet iary chatungt iiprirtKrl7e!It> alas d:t'Crsiorts earl 1Nr unt1r;ratt *I. A ringer cn+rroar_rrtertal asfirnIneort cannot Ienvc meansngf rl 14 si1z. to be taken car, gat'in th loll n iK 1 un.kistJni1 it. ttoll cirrtirnAktot°e4. would kad m uniaviftri prrrje t segrrarntatik' n. a11uitrE 0th1Kr coir•;. .4 kn.111:• 4u$ . [I. iLtilt I%) tits 01,p114ant ui Jt.tl,t.rir4 that li tielJ 1 G. !21 41{ITI, t"1C 1 kir I-91',,99-01110ttai no! till;i"IJP'. +1a1" i Y+:SLI 1,EILL1. ori‘' .171tt1h tilt' LI 91 k171111 i'sport/Jur, . F Jist dr. LG Y, .A1it971 HULL .33 01100.1.1.4 14.th./.6C.1 440 i►' uIJtl4t�r.J&J-d ict iili r1r pi 11 En71i .:r I i t i 1 r ',+,, -in ent:3i 4CC`ssr,ic `_1 m rs1 kx :ttt r1 1Yry JsJI}rr4w thz. gidto tii.917rr61 r1_ 11`t.terl 5i Ils• su111 7 parRls. 1 urktcr pcibilt4 t}G fJCr79aor+ ih.ii Ilrc 1i'.4 -CEI shit t4 1.7uc D d: i:ailt7s-Kor,tt, I L wii-i. September 417, 2n2fi 1 � n gY signi1Itirt17.,27„.,%/04,,,. Dr �rC.a+'7' hi11r>LILirers A. 2 Stantec September 13, 20121 Stcntec Consulting services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Ms. Maureen Felix Via email: maureeenfeli ver,zon.net RE: Comments on Drainage and Cultural Resource Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Ms. Felix: Thank you for the comment letter dated September 30, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment IDEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The steep topography, historical rapid storrnwater run-off and associated damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the DEA. I am aware that this project will have serious impact an the immediate and surrounding area. Response 1: Kona Three LLC is not aware of any damage to adjoining properties, including Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway, From water flowing from the subject property. Comment 2: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood, A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future. As 1 understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among other errors. Response 2: Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two C•:-, .i ty-owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revised to clarify that on TMK (3) 7-6-21:19, "infrastructure during Phase If of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuana'oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kona Community Development Plan f CDP) "Official Transportation Map.'" For TMK {3) 7-6-21:18, the project includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the CDP's "Official Transportation Map." Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Arco. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage Pion which would be reviewed and approved September 13, 2021 M. Maureen reiix Page 2 of 3 by Department of Public Works (DPW). Text hos been added in Section 3,3.2 of the Final EA to identify possible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding_ There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are no;:-.ribed and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. Comment 3: In sum, the DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features can be understood let alone properly preserved. At a minimum, the DEA must be revised to address the location, data recovery and preservation of the holualoa Slide components present an the subject parcels. Response 3: As described in Section 3.6 and included in Appendix 5 of the EA, two Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) reports were prepared for the project. As part of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their significance. The A/Ss were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rules 13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information !hot was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211) documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is nol smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a hc5[uca. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads. property boundaries, gardens. and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA) #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a hdlua course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a hblua in the project site. September 13, 2021 Ms. Maureen Felix Page 3 of 3 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at X808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely,, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. [1,.u1 N.w Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvrestantec.cor-n cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori. Ashley From: Mickymaureenfelix e@i verimon.net-, Seam: Wednesdays, September 30. 2020 3 22 AM To: PLLrfnirrg Internet Mail Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Project EA Comments Attachments: KV; .Arch,MFpdf.pdf I am concerned about the archaeological impact athe proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project; please see my attached letter. Maureen Felix 136522 DF.CLARAEION OE MAUREEN A. FELIX I. MAI: RE EN A, 1 in it rrtiticil I ill' ki).1).1 ki-Lutis i011 SlNir pT, Atiptrit Fr t Owis th ihii1 tfibperk:lino I)ti:' F rumen till Asseshr All V; kij i1twir4 Projco. La Map Kcii NQs, 7--O2 01(1, 7-i- (11' 7-t -1`1 ....I -A-10 :`1 K.sud Flawrci ri111:1;1 Stale 11.4Awi ,*fle.i in pers‘mally well affects illy interest in r411.11 rtrtiperty.. 1 retie %whin 2D feet CT the pi puJ rand J.;...lorrth nt pjr:. In such rwulct have tirstriasiti ..EF l Fk;',-11:, .111'4 ;NTIJ Y'.1;1". 115,"1.:A0 if culled uptir, .11,111.1. 1 ant spceitii,,,,i11;, abn.n. ..1k7 It . ; rapid 1 prascrir 1164[1114/4 I h..14 arg ni,1 iLlL o‘iLlic.; the I }rat;1 ri rI]II11i.,4 1 elm ,11:,:ttir 1-111: r:ropk;:: Il rrinTLI,, 1.1.n ow minic,ilote 131..1 iirrundiri arca Irt %tint the frith r nvimItririltz.1 A:,..;eistrient 'dews d;s,.....te...t qualeieni tliciA and cti; ir rth: nercssnr:. ;trnagr rvi inJdi‘ersiorm in ho underarm -Id A :1 4-.1. .1 ki.11 , 1111Li1-11:1 grti tO ti;t: i.tken vale Lir tp lite IluNrc A51 undi..~rgtand et. such Ciriun)Stisiises uld projeer seigrnenCatItin. ,ramori.4 ether erf•in 'Nig" •p11'l .1alfrorir3 tMIL ILA I 15:1.11 hi1Itic IVY Ir".11.11 1111114,1tuclure LJF L ' r. 1 into the Lotisity'N.L.1%tinzgle LTi l V. u.hu. urpri .ill JILtII 1 I.iI. rvnp,It) Ili-perjury ti thr frictenirtE i tr be- 1.41vd ".;cpivrtiber 31i. 2O liegruture A. Fe) '1K Stantec September 13, 20121 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Ms. Maureen Felix via email: rnaureenfeli r, Q verizo,_net RE: Comments on Drainage Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hnwai`I Island Dear Ms. Felix: Thank you tor the comment letter dated September 30, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The steep topography, historical rapid storrnwater run-off and associated drimoge present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment. I am aware that this project will have serious impact on the immediate and surrounding area. Response 1: Kona Three LLC is not aware of any damage to adjoining properties, including Queen Kcrahumanu Highway, from water flowing from the subject property. Comment 2: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood, A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future. As l understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among other errors. Response 2: Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two County -owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revised to clarify that on TMK (3) 7-6-21:19, „Infrastructure during Phase 11 of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuaraa`oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) "Official Transportation Map." For TMK (3) 7-6-21:18, the protect includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the CDP's "Official Transportation Map,' Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three LLC would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be September 13, 2021 Ms. Maureen reiix Page 2of2 contained onsite. The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by Department of Public Works (DPW). Text has been added in Section 3.3.2 of the Final EA to identify possible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. Comment 3: A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements are required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function, Response 3: The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA. Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Pion would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed, We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 4 Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre4sfa ntec.com cc; Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From! jcscah Visconti <jat iscortti sbcginbal.net> Sent 1 L rsclay, October 01.2Lk O 1133 AM To: Planning intern pt Mail Cc: ChrRiinagriPlIPIP Visconti Subject: F'p ral Vistas Housing Profeta EA comments Attachments! JV Deciaraticn.pdf Planning. See attached declaration in opposition to the proposed development referred to above. I am very concerned about the additional traffic- through our neighborhood, not just the safety issue but also, the increased road noise, The school bus pick upkdrop ofl on our corner, Paulehia Street & Puapuaani Street is of additional concern as it is somewhat a blind Domer. Thank your for considering us and our neighbors, Joe Visconti 75 6104 Paulehla Street Kaitua Kona, HI DECL AR.A'rION 0. 1. •r01 1:1'11' ISO 1-1, declare: 1. 1 am a resident of Paulani Estates (suhdi%ision1. Cowaty° tel' Ha+ rai i, State oft lawai` The proposed land development project that is the subject +.�I the pending Mar Environmental Assessment submitted.. by Roy .41 Vistas Housing Project Tux Map Key Nns_ 3) 74-021:016, 7.6-021:017. 7 -h- 021:018., -d -021:111R, and 7-6-021!.019 North Kona District, Hawrai'i island, State of ll twai`i affects me personally as w,vel1 as affects my interest in real property. 1 reside within 1 utile ot'ihe prtapusw. J land development project. 1n such capacities. is have firsthand knowledge of the rcIlnwing facts and could and would testi f) thereto itcaflrkd upon Ili ck sen, 2. 1 have reviewed the pending DRAFF EN V t RONMENTAI., ASSESSML=NT including the Traffic Impact Analysis Itepon by SSPA International. dated July 2020 and attached as Appendix ndix 2 to the t)l r I- I ENVIRONMENTAL A,SSESSMEN1. 1 am specifically concern ii about adverse trailic impacts bath within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report traffic and the SSFN.1 'l ;;attic Impact Analysis Report_ are discttsseil in thc hn,1e ref the DRAFT ENVIRONMF.N1 .\I . ANSESSNi1[ T• al pp. 48-Y. 67 and 71 i. In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project rclick on the use of substandard roadway. Kckuana'na ?lace. Kekuana•oa Place is wcry seep. has limited sight distances due to c r me cures and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact 0 -increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts or#Ire Royal Vistas Housing Fruieel is inadequately addressed In the SWM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which incases irtstcad iiiipdeis along Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. 1 am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trip,; tro and from a separate subdivision will present dangers ers and utangestion to residents along Kekuans-oa Pace. 1 consider that the Planting ficpartaxtrn should require the applicant to address these concerns. 4. The 1)KAFT ENVIRONM1ENTAL ASSESSMENT requires eval tuition of. among others, adverae scc-onc%rry im +rac t.e. Nhe h ;�% putnilatiow churtge.+ rrr offeclti ryn i ft'sJr'►ieN Sear Chapter 1I-?U(l.E=l3, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Instead ofsquarely addressing; these issrsc:., titowrver, the 1)RAET1- EN V'IItOLVASST SSMEN'I' simply ignores them. ilk Iliat 'No :ic1%4ati. tiectotid.dn effects ar,.: expected since the development would utilize existing. infrastructure. provide iirfiiII housing. and isnot expected to result in suhstarwal demands to County services." It is a serious omission for the D?RAI+ f ENV1RONJMF'sF[AL ASSESSMENT to rail to address the potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substandard existing iafrastructure. like Kel uana'c Place l'he DR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT addresses adverse traffic impacts oroly in the context of whether the project would ffov a . orh.,lunticrf adverse e_ffi'cr cur paihfic health The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: stormw•ater WOILILI be appropriately disposed of in dsairtage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken lnuta careful consideratkLn in prQiect design." Emphasis added. This bald COL arcs not address potential ddvetse arltpacts as required by Chapter 11-201).1-13, I-kr,vaii Administrative inistrative Rules. t7_ I lye Planning* l)eparirncft should itcn accept the I)RAF 1 FNIVIRONMLN FAL ASSFSSMENT's reliance on the.. S:SF 't ra(Tic impact .Analysis; Report. ‘s hid" has the.: ti)11)Wink deficiencies: Failure address adverse traffic impacts within the Kana Vistas subdivision arising from the project. b. the SSt✓M Traffic Impact Analysis Report ups a growth rate or 1 "la. in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering 'Fran; Impart Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth riacc in a neon -linear., exponential relation: c. The SSFN1 Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not recognize multi-gencr'ationai housing characteristics ova -union in 1lawaii according to ccrisus data and Iikel> Underestimates daily vehicle tripw ultributable to buildoin of the proposed project: d. 1 h SSE 1 Traffic Impact Analysis Report employs an unusually Ow vehicle volume 4 f gra vehicles for Northbound Q;ILcit Kaahurnairu highway n. the selected dales of April +1). 2019, u weekday and August 4, 2014. a Saturday, compared with the 018 Witch ;r FliFinerling Traffic ]neper Analysis Report, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 201o, better weekdays 1'he unusually low rcportcd vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the SSIV Traffic impact Analysis Report. which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen KaahLrrnhtlllr Hiahway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in Liar -tit -I -dare rnt ,5urernents and thus unreliable: e. The retotiumerdation by SSI M Traffic Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout at Queen Kraakiutuan.0 11ighw;ay and 11tualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic 1. rTtljlr'1 11Etrty+..r1011* 111,11 1.‘,L 3111* [AI! rL'111k3If1 s"111s.url.11tt-u<I prt'titrlt Pill tic 'talar 1.�1h1 11\ i.'tiracL.rns Ip,r tiy4 p 1�\�r lrr7�:IE. I, 111 tt rr1„Et41r�1.:tir 111'k Kc1\1111 [1f rnLr11rtx1!"sutr i11 tli irttertit:zliclti i?1 L ut.'ct1 Kutillt:tit.ulu 1 Iig1), 1\ :ttid 1r•uul.ini 11iulikko\ 1 nta1-I L1i1:-1tC. l'1i re �iC1'r. skEl rttlil.'ict'9st S1 pia„e, rsr\1r t314:f1 sI111u1d I [,rrtirTlira�i for 1;1r inwta[kitiiill. 1 his cliclrr1141strsw.: t1611I 11 L1aiccrIl.Il.d h the IIfork .lwe41 1)s r.1Jr1.1 111 -sill 1)r111 1'11ti,rinr:ticrlt.11 ..tip+..sn1i:t11 and SSI \I 1nzps.Ec1 &nal) Repo 1 I. t ! Pr:Sa'n1 '.ut1it:lennt. t.st'tw .r.:.. ::.i°'• ,i • !I : 1.,1 the rtt veirAe inip.lc1Stits 1.4ititing it .1 tare and s *411r1t'1 twos inkrca4 dd tr.•1' •1, Ix. !u11\ tindcr.It>uJ and res3.111 in Iylafl Iii IIL! .11111 rc•~.pvt,,:1tic X, I .rift ti4'n 1w411tr:I fl10(i.111,Fill tlhe dila 1141111 1 r,tdli ahrt 1+111 *rrkl:r .tI1Ll IIir1111t h r1iir r1�•i hh�1r111>�1{I r'rorn .111€I 1 cl r~1:t1°1~ 6111.1tkt I ti.111 1'�I 1ti�wrptrr Out t1i4 Ii•r1,.01112 Iti eruct 1);1tri1 h�tiiu,-.,tlti.s. 'ct-icr. ?Osis"erft" ['rioted Ltanta,� 4 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Joseph Visconti vice email: javiscontasbcglobai.net RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawal`i island Dear Mr. Visconti: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 1, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaaa Place, I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuana'oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact an Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase 1 as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -cut is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana `oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle or Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2,021 Mr. Joseph V] coriti Page 2 of A Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7 1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa iPIoce is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Hove a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Commet>wt 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance an the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TEAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Flan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers usec. 1 T_ from the 2025 LRTP forecast. September 13, 2021 Mr. 1, .:=;h Visconti Page )1 4 Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics cornreen in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Responsej: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumciriu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repoli, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 k also at odds with Figure 4 of the TZAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway of 7 a.m. The difference In volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailuc Road and HuaI❑I ai Road {north}. QUI traffic count token in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if he Witcher Engineering report is overcountiig, or if the project's TIAR is unde7,cour'ling, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those crov-ded in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Huolalai Road ( North; is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TZAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuokini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes mare than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project Response 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices {MUTCD) states, 'The sc_7 i:5icar.'i =>r, of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2021 Mr. Joseph V] coriti Pace 4 of A an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. Comment 10: I am very concerned about the additional traffic on our street and through our neighborhood from a safety and "noise" perspective. ftemorne 10: Impacts to traffic and safety from the project are described in Section 3.7.2 of the EA, and project impacts from noise are described in Section 3.3.5 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at 1808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph,D, michele.lefebvreC + stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: Greg Olsen <gregolsenCiearthlrnk.net� Sent: Thursday, October CH, 2020 1-4A PM To: Planning Internet Mail Cr: Greg Olsen Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Firnjec.t EA c:wrninentt Attachments: Kuria Vistas Owners Declaration re Tra#fir.pdf [� narric is °rep ❑I.'rrn. I cr�vn and live al 76.1.58 Kasnchamalu Saner, Lot 33. I'm aUa ping rnv declaration for use al the naming Departm kits' review of c [loyal \'51115 prcrjccl Mahala, Cireg Olsen 11_36530 r11TA 1 t(EN 1 )i tilil..(itlf'. 1. CiRFAIoRY 01 .' EN1 declare: 1. 1 am a resident al Kona Vistas suhdtvisian. County or Hawk i. Stan: rrt. Ilir proposal hind development project 1'F,Fr t? -ie subject cit the 1, irditr 1)r,it1 Fri%ironinenta1 As, i.,simttt submitted by Rol' _11. Vistas 1tousin Project Tax Map K. NON. [i) 7-<,-trfr.Ill 1[x, 7-+-I}71'1117. 7-t°-tI' t 1 :i l..l 7- 6-112 1:111') North 1tii)111:1 llt trlut. I Fa ii'i Island, Stare of 1 Inw'ai`1 r): eels me p rst.>I Iiy;i 1,Lit AS a cts my interest in real property. 1 reside within 51l0" of the proposed lir id +lntch In ti114:F1et9pactriew• I lti.n'c iirsthntid ktlowIL-tk.:e 01 11 ii. follow ing I".ict; ant' would testi ft th reto il'.ulli d u111)11 to Jhi st1. 1 I,as°e reviewed the Winding DItAIT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT including the 'Frank" Impact Analysis Report b. SSFM Iiiterualioaal, +Jated .itilw 2(12(, artd attached asAppendix _' to the DIRAI1 1(1NME•.°wt1Al. ASSISSMF•.*wi1. 1 ani sjsceiticall concerned aLtiut et so traipse impacts itoth within and twsithraut the Kona Vistas suhcii isiim that are not tiilly or;KCcUtak: IV i•dJre- ed in ih SSI1vl Traffic Inipact Analysis Report.. 'I"rrii'l.IL rind the wki•N.1 I ralf„. I1 1l1;i1'1 1F1.,I ;'i'• erre discttss. d in the body of t}ii_ DRAFT 1-.INVIRCiN 1E:NU iii ASSFSS '1F,N'T al pp. 4N-5(,. ei7 and 71. cOc1Czrn is that ite'.w r sii.teIitsofRu gall Vista!, who work south or1.,aku will cut up Sunset Ave. to Leilani and then prc`IceCd k ttriti e lion to their homes in ki yal Vistas. I. ilttni will become a "short cut" due to the traffic on Kaiakini Hiuhwa} at L iko so people will dritie through Sunset and Kona Vt iaw on theirwaiy home from work,341ii t l Our streets were 1 not meant to handle that atnotint oftraffic vitticit will rewuli in lar more trallie driving norm t a residential roads rill irtieTu1ed to handle the !rat fi r. 111Llren rid their hikes down the sietp driveways, seniors walk along our roads. and peopic r}:ilk Ih.ir Cit !`t tilong all the roads o( Vista . This behavior Fids evetl4cxl ttl er time since our streets are quiet with little ru-shiii u oi'fie. the volume o1'trallit 4tln utiJh result in ad‘fense. conditions through 11K neighbors in KUM IV. ',lit,. and SunsL:l. In the kcnn<i Vistas sohdlti'I59tlr,�, they proposed project relies on the suhstaltdned KekLl:in I`cJ Nice is 5,erv. steep, bas linllilcc sight distances due lo extreme curves and isnarrove with no silt: walkia, The impact eel' increased Irtt(tic :arising Irunl Plh.sr 1 and.. Phase _' 1tuil`louts or rkrc Itr,rwltt V'isias I lousing ['rowel is inadequately arddresseti in the :'SI° .1 frit !mood. Analysis, RkpL,rt. which fl,eusi.:s instead on impacts al{Trip r'�uc cJ Kaal1Lltt.Lirtiu 1 li};.l1+ uy. 1 ant particiilarly cm -Joel -p ii that .tilting nLLmernnI' vehicle Trips to anti trolit a sep:tr'"it+"' subdivision will present dangers and coltgestiori t residents illrrrl I ekiinna.k.Lii I'LL): I consider Lha] t}7L` I,I Itlaim Department should require the applic:trrt to aLldress these c-oncerus. 4 The DRAFT ENVIRONM1 NT 1- ASSESSMENT I-k.:cluires evniuition c,t, among ethers. ar:AVOnit? tif'i"ol'tth/r1 irrP rrlt'a.�, ti�t�'i� �s peplitalicjat rh.ar„ ;,►•rar(e(iec•1.M• on public f7c:ii trrc Scc 'hapter 1 1 -200_I -t 3. I lawnii .'tdn:iinistrativ Rulc4, instead of sgtiatrel} atifincscinp these issue. however. the DRAFT I-NVIli{)N v1 EN-1'AI.:'1S I.s 7,..1 N' sin-ipb ignores. iltctt . claLixninir that "No -i• Lidver esee:orat r>0ft�,et:; arc eispeeted since 111rL Mititild utilize CX itt1Tr trurtuu:, provide ijil11l housing, and is not expected to result UL tilaslantial derti;.riJs to County seri-tees: It is tt seristus omission fir the DRAT -`I' L1`JVll t7'.' EN"TAL riSSl'SS!4li?N1 tee laif L+) sacldro.:, rttc pulconti& ::rcker c impacts of int: reasing the use L4 xtthstLtrtciard exi‹inInlrasaructttrr . like I ekuana tea Place. �. l`lre i)RA1`1 E V1RON hiENTAL ASSESSMENT addresses adverse traffic impacts onl} in L1:e cunte.rt whether the pro eci would I,' 1111,T er 201b.5lu1r1hti cac 11TF5T e.114'L1 o � er alr"e hr"aiIh_ Tltc App[ieant claims_ 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health m any- way: s ormwarer would be appropriately disposed (Witt drainage structures. Truflic impdet ['NAT lr ctt Lit ..[.Axion rt~liu.L. tt wdelatisau.tllr}z, r�ir:ct cic3 taErn p hasis a tided: This bald Cur1ClL1 tLIt dues not xa[I1 ess potential aclvt'rsc impact: as required by(.'hipter 1 1-200.1-13. 1law:Ai.:Wm ini tratitir Rul4 fi. -lhe llLuniira, Depii •tratcht should ire I accept the 1)1(A1; I ENVllkONMl=1V J Al. .^v S: I�• SA 1 N I"s reliarnc.ea,iZ Llic SSlNi I,iili,e: 1n11t.ict AiLliy.tik Report. which 1 -ms the following deficiencies liihire to address adverse lraftic impacts within th' Kona Vistas subdivision wising from tlic project: b The SSI=N1 -Traffic Impact a'w iahsis Report uses a growth rate of I"'t. in. contrast in the '11, ero).tII rate employed by the 201 Witcher [r1Fi:tccriraL -fraitieItupui.i AdsiN Report. Traffic congestion is v'erl qtr; i.i k. 4. tit growth rate iiia nun -linear. exponential relation: c. The S,SFTraffic Impact Analysis Report does nol rc gtni7c multi -generational housing. characteristics cnrnarton in Hawaii according to census data and Likely ttndcrestir atc.s daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout tI'i'[I,c Frn11th1d prowett (l. I Ise SSi M lraftic Irtipac1 Anaaltiwis Report t:tnpls.tys an unusually kw vehicle volume of 853 w ehiclt:s for Northbound Queen Kaaltumttliu highww:t.w on the selected ri:nteg nl' April 3(1. Z110_ a w,eukJaw• and August 24. 2019. a Saturday. eon-Taxed with the 2418 Witcher Engineering '1 radio linpacr Analys:3. Report_ which reported 11)57 vehicles for January 14 awl 15. 2lr]ti. hntl7 wweelalays. J lie unusually tow repftutetI well tele volume 01 853 is itlsrr sit odds with Figure 4 trl'the SSFM Tral"lrc Impact a'rnalysk Report. which shows approximately. IOW vehicles rur hour in 7.1516 for Northbound Queen it 7 A��, l c difference in wc►Itrrnc is more than double the maximum 111011, tatrittrirwn :iert•..r.i.1% accepted it1 -n*olary tt"reastlt-L'rnionl,: and thus trarelitrti'le; s. The recontmendatican by SSFM '1'rcttiic Iniptact Analysis l epoi•t for a roundabout ;at {.due -n I4auhwn.utu Ilivlrwr•ay and Httaialai Road (Ninth) is inconsistent rwith 2hc• •rd is corridor Intersections that pass 'warrants hut ter-mitt t.tnsi rialiet:d present traflit: s;at tw Itahilitk t:oueerm, For the gcrw-crntrtent; 1 The recommendation h) SSFM Tcaf is lir i t Analysis Rvixrrt rot atortiu ring or tate intersection of ttt.i 'rt Ki.ralrunrunu l-liglmay and Ktla oru 1 Iigltwvtrti is i ladalw:tr- 'here. as Isere. Urs irtterseClitinn Fit,seS tact?re ihrirl ctrl k' wk;3rranr tartalrr311 cenditit)rrs i1 should be prioritized for study and th..-ti is Hyl u signal lire its. tall:atiurt. i liis t±ircuinsturact; will tt exueerhat d by the proposed project. 7. In sum. the Draft Etn ironniental Assessrttent and SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report docs net present sufficient.. ercdihlc facts anti iartalysis slush that the adverse impacts rwri existing infrcorut:ttirt and rciiulting from incr. ;r ._•rl Ira Tic can b l`ully une#er:.d csdl arta resrrli in �ippropriate pov°errunent planning. and response, 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the forogoirig is true. Datoi: Oct. 1. 20.10. z ..-1' 1 i ill Al (t_ (eAli 4 ' grut[orL.-: ,-. (/ ..fv) 1'rilitu.J1 namc. Ciregor:, 1.* Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Mr. Gregory Olsen Via email: grego sen.© earthlink.nef RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kano District, Hawcil'li Island Dear Mr. Olsen: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 1, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts ore discussed below. comment Z: My concern is that new residents of Royal Vistas who work south of Lako will cut up Sunset Ave. to Leilani and then proceed to drive north to their homes in Royal Vistas. Leilani will become a "short cut" due to the traffic on Kuckini Highway at Lako so people will drive through Sunset and Kona Vistas. The volume of traffic can only result in adverse conditions through the neighbors in Kona Vistas and Sunset. Response Z: While it is possible that after Kekuana'oa Place is connected in Phase 11 of the project, some residents could travel into the project site from the south by turning onto Sunset Avenue, then north on Leilani Street (or Pualoni Street), then east on Lako Street, and then west on Kekuana'oa Place, this would represent the majority of traffic or where backups could occur, This is why the traffic study focused on impacts at the intersections identified in Section 3.7.2 and in Appendix 2 of the EA. Comment 3: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the 'IAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I om particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents September 13, 2C21 Mr. Gregory Olsen Pcoe 2 of 4 along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 3: Kekuana'oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks, There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana"aa Place from Royal Vistas Phase F as designed as the connection of Kekuana"oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peck period, and 25 additional vehicles during the pm Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana"oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 4: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary irr,pacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing LLLnfresstructure, like Kekuana'oa Place. Response 4: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana'oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic (22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment : The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substanfial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way, storrnwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response .5: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 6: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA"s reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 6: Intersections within the Kana Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local September 13, 2C21 Mr. Gregory Olsen Poco 3 of 4 residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 7: The TEAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 7: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HRCT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume, The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Pian forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rote. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast. Comment 8: The TEAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response 8: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars. or if residents will use The bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and amid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output, This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value 'very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 9: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repo i 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Rese r e..9: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualcalai Road (north). Our traffic count token in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting., or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 10: The recommendation by the T1AR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. September 13, 2C21 Mr. Gregory Olsen Poco 4 of 4 The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway Is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 10: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis, The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. it should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project Is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrent. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. miche Ie.Iefebvreg)stontec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three RC Maija Jackson, County of HowaPi Planning Department Mori, Ash! From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Nanning. ChrOra Visconti <christrna_vrsc@)sbcglvbal.net Thursday. October (}1, 2020 6 t5 Pm Manning Internet Mail Royal Vi:tas Housing Project EA comments CV Declaration .pdf See attached dectaratinn in opposihoo k the proposed developmt:rnt referred to above. l arix "way tt►1�� r�ict� dhoLwI the addiliunat traiftit: tlrruugb 01 11- neig;hhcrrhood. not just the safety issue but also, the inc:rea cki mild The school bus pick up'dtop off on our comer, Paulehia Street & Puapuaani Street is of additional concern 373 it is somewhat a blind corner. Thank ,yo Lir (Or co u idcring us and our neighbors, Christina Vi 7:C41114 l'aulehit3 Street K.aifto a boar.. Hi 96740 ( 5 30)44 S -6g1.17 1 It• it,' ....Hi vim: Inv pcarce 1 1.iti 4' rr>rt. 1 Lk! rioE „ILIi, a ti ,Is t1 a vorkl !Lives Do not Ikr [teals. be ee< ulit«t and.1 do nil b aireutl.' J,,iIEN 1.36534 DECLARATION OF 1, CHRISTINA VISCON 1 1 arra a resident of Paulani Estates (subdivision 1. County of fluvial" Sate of l trtwa i • I. lige proposed land development prkj .-cI lhal i5 the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment %uhmincd by Royal Vistas Housing I'rojeci lax M.ip Key Nos, (3) 7-6.021:0116, 7-6-421:017, 7-6- 021:01 S.. and 7.6-0?1:019 North Kuria C)istrict. Huw li•i Island, State o1' 1lawai'i affects. me personally as well as affects my interest in r al propert}. 1 reside within 1 milli of the proposed land development prtoject. 1LS such capacities, 1 h3vt~ firsthand knowledge of the tollowitig (Acts Lind anild tnc� would testify thereto if calla) upon ca do sn. 2. 1 have reviewed the pt.`ndinf E)JtAF 1 I•*4VIfli)NV11 N FAL .ti.~ :LSSVIENT including the i raftic Impact Analysis Report by SS1'k1 Imernatioti.,l., til.tted lulti 020 and attached as .\ppcndtx. ? to the I)RAFl I:NV IROVVU`.M"JAI. ASSESSMENT. I hitt vrcitically concerned a..1'}latii ad\.erse [rank- impacts moth w'itfain grid without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addrcsscil in tlx: SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic and the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis ftcf+or_ arc discussed in the hod}. ot'the DR.AF1 Fl '1RONMFNTAI_ ASSE.SSMLN"I . at pp , 4S-56, 67 and 71. 3. In the !cunt' Vistas subdiw Aston, Itt pri pcccd project relies on the use of a substandard roadwaw,. Kekuana.`oa Place_ Kekuarts'oa Place is' ery steep, has limited sight distances due to extrenw curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of ir►creased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buitdouts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequately addressed in the SSI' M Traffic Impact - t>alysis Report, Khich focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu 1-lighti ' = I Jill c.t,iicetned that adding nUrnerilliS VC hie trips til and from a separate suhdivision will pi s'_• -"inti dt tt 44 rs and congestion to residents along Kelkuaina'aa Place. !consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant LO address these concerns. 4. The DRAFT L Nl'IR()'~J"�MI.NTAL ASSESSMENT requires evaluation of among otters, adverse secondary irrrprrci . such as p{Pp dotutrr change. or Miyis r}aa public iacitirie ti. See Chapter 11-200..1-13, Hawaii Administrtttirc Rubs. Instead of squarely addressing these issues, however, the DRAFT ENVTRONMTNTA C..•1SSESSMEN'l irnpI, tgnrrres them, claiming that "ND adverse secondary effects are expeetM since the development would utilize existing infrtlstrucrure. provide infill housing. and is riot expcctcd to result in substantial demands to ('runty services." Itis a serious omission for the DR,. FT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMEN"t to tail in address its; Ik t4 n?i;tC adverse impacts of iitcreasin�a. the use of substandard existing infrastructure. like KI-:latt I'I.lCe 5. Thc DRAFT ENVTRONM[NTAI ASSL-.SS lhN'1• addresses adverse rraflic impacts only in the context of whether the prujtt;t Jhii'f' u .set +.►rrrrirrif adverTy c!f ec-i on public health The Applicant claims. 'The Proposed Project svotitld not after public health in any way; stt,rnlwat `r would be disposed of in Jrai t;ige s[[i 1.Jrt;. 1 r.i fl 1L irtmacts have begirt cal rt into careful consideration iib proi0-et itsigt .' Emphasis added. This ba:d conclusion does not address potential acIvo.-54:irr.;aacts as required by Chapter 1 1 - '..:t.1- l 3. Hawaii Administrative Rules. 6. The Nanning Department shcruid Mn accept the DRAFT ENVIRONMF I Al. ASSESSMENT'S reliance on the S f of Traffic impact Analysis Report, which I aN rate IiiIinvw.! €� deficiencies:. ra. rai1airc w, address ad erre traffic impacts within the Kiat-a Vistas subdivision arising from the project h. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report uses a growttlT rate or I".0. in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 201 t4 \k iti her F-ngineering Traffic l nip.t r .thkrwalysis Report,. 1 rafTtic congestion k very sensitive to grouwtit tate in a non-linear. cxpone ttail relation: c. The SSFNI Traffic impact Analysis 1ttptirt does not recogni a gnu Iti- neratiorral housing characteristics coronion in Hawaii according to census Jutta and likely urtdcre iirnates daily vehicle trigs attributable to buildout of the proposed project; d, I be SSFM 'I raffle Impel Analysis Report ernplr.rys an unusually low %ehicli: volume of 853 vehielts Inr NorthhrpI,rEL1 (,lacers Kaahuir,.inu highway on the :selected rates of April 30. 2019, a weekday and AkuQ.ar t 24. 21119,1 wuturd y. compared %vith the 20t8 Culler Engineering Traffic Impact Analyhis Report, which reported 1057 vvehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. 'the tmustaal ly low reporred vehicle. volume of' is also at odds with figure 4 nt'tire SS F?c1 Traffic Irnpaet Analysis Report. which shows appro,xiniatA l)' It7547 vehicics per hour in 21116 for Northbound Queen Kaahrrrrtanu Ili hw `ati al 7a.itt. ] hs• dit ereai.ce in volume i9 more than double the maximum 110% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliahle; e. 'Che recommendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report far a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (Northl is inconsistent with the traffic 3 �INrritl�,r Illti�' cli�`Ir- ilh:it pa— \Arr.lrit' lLti rcriialll tinsign,jlll0.1 Irri.. ITLIrr:iIIR 1:21,) 1l IiLllL. Lc�ilti:wrr�� liar thc. gd'r4...rrllncrn_ rL'l;a+rtlrTlL'n13:1ILon ;It N1 1 r il1it 1lJ pu41 \ri:il ,i I cp ri for illoriitorirlt kit the irners•ectilon ed. (juc..tli I.,l°rliL]1T7.Ir1Ll 114:).ro.ak, rLIJLl :v .LI ikini 1 Ihvliti4i.k ry IliiitIN( Lilie VI !itrc_ an into-,. L:t4oa lY,L 'L*w Iilltir.' Il}•:Lil one 4tiar'r, nl urld all r:S�rItI311tT11w. II should ht prto tizekl Ei,r titttt and Lksi n uI tN sigila,rl lor 'rlr$.iri.Ali r . 1 his s iri:urnmi!iTI:L" vain I t e . LErh:itL'd hs the Fir(+l10:,;ed rrt'GjL'L. In -4Iiii. Liu,' 1 )r,llt I'.iit iruritlrcrit.11 '17s1,e•tiso-lent .aid I° \I 1 Inirgc1 "1f1:L11 R.eporI n,1 r "�trtr tier it irni. L:retiihly i'u t*.. and an.il is 4I I1 tlitit the .idk-vr4 frilpLl.In k 11 L'tis6n1.1: inl°rastruclrlr<~ :inLI resahi1ig Prim incrLd4c°-1 TraItIL L';111 her fun!, uIIJ.'r bold :hnd rc' iih .1IlPrlliirI,nr !N1lrrruilchi iNI.Irinuip :uid rt.:Tonic. 1 r :hr1i r'c°r1, Iota! 1 r;11lii' Kiri iiur .,nec"t acrid through our nei liharhi»+ll irrtnl :N "n4111:ttvcii i 1 Llw,11.1!1 r)LnaltP nt periun th.ii tITc rilreg!i>ing is. nue [Rated. ka.i:tl.1-1,-,t is%. 11Eh�kilf'I. ) 3 Printed r4une lt�,� + t r l ir t11 r rrpN 4 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Christina Visconti 75-6104 Paulehica Street Ka ilua Kona. HI 9G740 Via email: chrlstinca visa(4sbc plobe l.net RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii island Dear Ms. Visconti: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 1, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment IDEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts bath within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2::•-1 he Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a su=,,standard roadway. Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Piave. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuana'oa Place is a County -owned road built to County 5tondards, with the same specifications as all other Kano Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase i cis designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H ih 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuanaoa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This Is roughly one additional vehicle ori Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2C21 Ms. Chris'ira Visconti Page 2 of A Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuanc `oa Place. ResPonse 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7 1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana `oa Place. the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic {22 and 9, for the A.M and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Hove a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Appiicont claims, The Proposed Project would not offect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been token into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance an the TZAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TZAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Flan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1 from the 2025 LRTP forecast. September 13, 2C21 Ms. Christina Visconti Page Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics cornr-as in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Resvonne l: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019. a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repo] 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaohurmanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum I 0% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailuc Road and Hualaloi Road {north}. QUI traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcaunting, or if the project's TIAR is unde7o._1r'lirg, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those crov-ded in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR far a roundabout at Queen KaahL.manu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor, intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumariu Highway and Kuokini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The scrisior.'i n of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal," There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2C21 Ms, Chris'ira Visconti Page 4 of 4 an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. Comment 10: b am very concerned about the additional traffic on our street and through our neighborhood from a safety and "noise" perspective. fesrxrrne 10: Impacts to traffic and safety from the project are described in Section 3.7.2 of the EA, and project impacts from noise are described in Section 3.3.5, We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (SOB) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. (I' 4 Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. rnichele.lefebvreC+ stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: Sent" To: Subject: Attachments: Aloha, Rob -&rt tiaras «obh.horre('gird il.com> Thursday, October 01, 2020 51.19 AIw1 Plar1r1rrig Internet Mail Royal Vistas Housing Project EA comments Declaration Of Traffic Corzcerns.pdf; Declaration Of Drainage Concerns Of; Declaration Of Archaeological Concerns_pdf I IZavattac:hrxl thrcc: tluz:1aratis n concerns kir this project, 1 havc also attacked u letter (p. 5) to the declaration of traffic i. once n. Mahain for your tine to ,nsiai r comxrns. With Aloha, Robert I) Mims 70-4323 kekLId tat i DECLARATION OF 1. ,dir ►S, declare: 1 am za resident of [ e,. ,r y3 / Kona Vistas subdivision], County of Hawaii. State of 11awat i. 1'hc proposed Castel dcvelepni nt that is the, subject of the pending Draft Environmental Asvt:-srn cnt suhmitted by Royal Vistas Housing Project Tax Map Key NoS Of 7-6-121.0116. 7-6- 021: D1 -ra-021:01 7. 7-C>,-(21:018. and 7-6-021:01 Nattlt Keno District. Hawkti°i Is [anti. State of Hawai't affects me personally las well as affects my interest in real Ufa operlw_ 1 ac.rielk within 10 (' t- t. t [distance:] of the proposed land dc-vc;lopment pro ,:cl.. In such capacities, l have: firsthand knowledge tel the fallow tug facts artd could arse] would testify t]tetcto if called etpon to do so ?. l Iitt+e'e i viewwd the pending DRAF1 ENVIRONMENTAL AL ASSESS ENT including die Trrsffie Impact Analysis Report by SSFM Intcrrtttti(anu1, dated July 2070 and attached as Appendix 2 to the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. lam specifically concerned [pout ta{ 'i ne traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully {IF aecorrlt¢'.] yatilcressGd an the. SSFrvi Atr:a:ysis Report. Trunk and the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysts Report. arc discussed in the body of the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL._ ASSESSMENT, at pp 4S-56, 67 and 71. 3 In the Kona Vistas subdivision. the proposed project relies on the use ti fa substattdard roadway. Kekuan t'oa Place. Keku u a`oa Place is very steep. has limited sight distances date to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks, The impact of trtt.-re:as d trallTic arising From Phase 1 asr l Phase 2 handouts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequately addressed in the SSFM Traftic Impaci Analysis Report. which Iocutiew instead iam1 along Qtteeit K rat uim' nra Hit,Ji ay. I am particularly concerned that a icltatg Numerous' vehicle trips to. and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along 111:icc, I consider that the Planning Dern tL1lent should require the applicant to Idrtres.y these concerns. 4. The DRAFT ENVIRON\IENTAl. ASSESSMENT requires evaluation of. among tftl7tt: rw. utfverae .re^crartcluo t+mi etc c; , xvaeft ct.Y prrpamflvioft chctrr, tw or ea on public farc°rlitie . See Chvier 1 1-200.1.13, 1lawaii Administrative !Culex, Instead of squarely radtlt'Lssinp then issues, h itvcvm:r. the DRAFT UbV'II(C)NMENTA1_ ASSESSMENT ';imply igli ares tl7 ,ia_ claiming that "No adverse secondary effects are expecred since. the development. r <«ulti till tree existing infrasttztcturc. provide infill housing, and is not expected to result in substantial demands TO Count} scrviees." 11 to ;a serious tt niw;i1itr eli,: l)FI,AF'] ENV mow .i i;hl'1 ell ASSESSMLN I to tail t address the potential adverse: impacts ofincrcasing thr uxc° cit substandard existing infrastructure, lake Kckuana`ti a !lace. The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMF1' rimddres. adverse traffic only 'to Inc c ordest of whether the project would !!ui•c adver(Jr, pe,'f,12. lied:110 The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed d Project would not affect public health in tiny way; sturmwatcr would be appropriately dispmxil of m drainage structures. Traffic is pii;IN have ben taken into careful consideration, in prolecl resign." Emphasis added_ This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by C lhapter 11-2001 !_. Flawaai Adim tttrrativc Rules, 6. The Planning Department should no! accept the DRAFT ENViRarev1ENTAl, ASSESSMENT'S reliance on the SSFM 'Traffic Impact Analysis kapoti, whtt;h has the t'tttkiwi rig clelicienwiesr failure to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising, from the project b. The SSFM TratTic Impact Analysis Report uses a growth rate of 1 "A), in contrast to the 2% gttnvvtit rate employed by the 2018 WiLcitet Frigiitc:erii g Tralidc Impact .Artttlysis Report. -I ruffle congestion is veru scrsiti\ c to growth rale in a ncrn-linear, exponential iI. 1ltiuei; c. flu SS ENI I "1 raffiic Impact Analysis Report dries nor recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common it Hawaii according to Censo data and :1kcI ttndertirstir atcs duily vehicle trips attributable: to but [clout of the proposed protect, d. The SSFM l'rsffic Impact Analysis Depart employs an unusually low tali ck vnlitmc nig5.1 rw.hicics for Northbound Quern K,nahtnnanta hiphrvay on the 4-1:1 eC Lud dna-% t71 April 10, 2014i, a weekday anti August 24, 20!'tt, a S9aturday, compared with the 201ti Wttelm Prigineeting Traifie [impact A tialy:%.2s,[ll pt ii, whic.li repotted 1057 ti -chicles far Jsrtunryr 14 and 15. 201A, birth v t;r.kti;t} w ILI+N Iepotiotl eltit.-le +c l'.i€;ie ail g5 k is .tltia, at tads !vtth Figure 4 I ache SSFM TtaLTic Tntpsact Analysis Report, which 4hows apprcixtntarely« 11751) vehicles per hour its 2016 For Nttrthhtaund Queen KuPubtmanu Highway at 7 :.ret. The di terence in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements wlci thus. unreliable: e. The r:commendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout at Quccn Kaahu.rnartu I lighw^are and Hualalai Road (North) is uaconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that flaw, wa.rrar,rs but remain rrrtsr mtlrte.l present ira{I lic s 1cty iin riiity co.irtccrns for the government; The recommendation by SSt lr1 Impact. Atiulysis Rep rt 1+1a moikilorir>Gg 1)1 ill:: inter.sectir.r, ,C)necrt Kaahunianu Highway jiid Kuakini H[gha,33. ina(i i ti:rre°. Wlter•, its here, an niter ec ion pasties moll; thin unc undtir ill ct,ndrirurr . it Sh0.1.6.1J lx prioritized for study and de:xign of sk4nal for i:r :.tll ticrrt. Thi; w:rouLrtstance will he exacerbated by the (rroposad project. In t)ro, the 1) aft hi •ir,)nmeftal ;Hai tiSt• \1 1 tunic Impact ,A titly$is Report dukes not present sufficient, credible racts and analysis such ghat rile ativcrsc2 MiliaaI!, on ext ting infrastructure and resulting from increased Irat i can hk i\alty tint crstood ;ind emilr Prt arltl+rtiprirtk government plrrnniitg and rr �<anw4. 1 t !arc urtk .r licnalty ofrierjur•y that the foregoing is tru4. Dated: Kailua.itirina, Flstwti`i, Cie if06<l 1 ,2C)2C1. 4 1L. it oatare; Primal name: Ata4:71(41( • +C.a 1 5 October 1, lltlu RE: Royal V iStaS Housing Project Aloha, My wife, BranrtirP, and !have lived in Kana Vistas Subdivision tor over two year's. We very much enjtry tour home and look torkuard tOia' many more years of enjoyrrier:. Our home is located on Kelkuanaoa Place which currently 15 the ball access to Royal Vistas Housing Project specified on the Royal ViSta5' clams. when 'me purchaser our lot almost tear years age, we were not informed of this Project err 'Kekuarava Mace as being the only access to the Royal Vistas Housing Project The Royal Vistas Housing Project owner presented to Kona Vistas' cwciers their plans fur like Royal Vistas Holism?, Proj t and what it would look like. They had proposed two el trdl'nc It/exits to their project from Kona Vistas and two entrance exits hum a sutidivisl,ia cin the 110111,II,+.?ir project, Pualani Estates. at the accesses From Kona Vistas. not Kekuariaoa Mace, requires permi5 oro from the owner of the property for access the Royal Vistas which has been denied by the owner from my tinders Landing. Also, the two accesses from Pttalani Estates requires Rnyai Vistas to be granted access across a strip oI land owned by another owner who has also denied Royal Vistas act.ess to their pruleLt franc my runth rstanrli�rg. This only leaves Kekua nape ace in Kuria vistas as the oniy access ro Royal Vistas Housing Project. SiiiLe Queen K Highway 15 adjecant to Royal Vistas Housing Project there mould bre access from rhla highway arms nor from Kona Vistas Subdivision.. Korai Vistas only access is train Queen K Highway by lake 5t tor ,3_rr sundivisictn with 200 harnesites and trry r Cher yuhdivi�iura3, E ttiyal Vistas Har.rsirag Prra;ec`1 ig til rod 4J] holies (Condos. some rerrtdl mils and serrate purchased units) if Kana Vistas has only ore .3c e;s to its subdivision. why shouldn't Royal Vistas only access be Queen K hiiphway as well. d Royal Vistas have an access through KonaVistas and allow all their traffic., including the construction equsIpment traffic over the next 20 years of their development, to drive thrpt,gh Kona Vistas Subdivision? Royal Vistas housing Project with 490 units has almost 2.$ times larger oerlsity and this traffic should not be funneled through Kona Vistas Subdivision aria Kekuarraoa Place or any other street. Mahala for your time. Robert D. Harris 76.432.3 Keicuarteoa Place 1JCCLARAT1ON of r � r � declare: "kI c.tI (- .i s►�r- 1 am a resident of Kona Vistas subd vision, County of Haws , State of Flawni`l. proptpscd land development proje.t that is the sulajtut ria die pending Draft En k ut tnacttital ;.fie; tlu-nt httedby Royal nisi t-1 ii irt'Project Tax Map Key Nos. {; .t_r)- ' ; !ti lr57-6- 1321:017, 7-6.021:0 K., and 7-6-021:0 19 North Komi District. Hawaii i lsltlncl, :its Ml t, ni i f'fccts me personally its well as affects my ]ntcrcht in rcatl property. I rid w tli1., 1distaneel elf The proposed land development project. In such Hes, kia •e firsthand knowledge of the following tads and could and would testi& thereto if called upon to do so. y MN II thakereviewed the pentlmngIlk iI-'l EN4'AL ASESS".'41 and attaelun;nts. 1 am specifically concerned about: / 100 i" 414 t It f! 3. I do mil ccrn5idcr that the; archaeological studiei offered in support oldie. I /rain 1:rtvtuonrmcntal AN5esAnvont are adequate. See pp, cher+enf. 4. l am aware that subsrantial evidence heists that the land encompassed by the subject land parcels includes features of the lid ualotr Slide. including rock walls that are inadequately described ass aurtii-uliural walls in tliarchacult4cal siedies oiicscd iu support of the Draft Environmental = ssessmcrrt The flok+raltta Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -V4' terra contact times that cannot be replacodif datutaytd or destroyed_ 5. I l)ase ❑lV concerns upon tl1L c"vala1ation and analysis pert•omxtid by Tout rcrltaku 1 Stone, a copy of which is smelled. In sum, the Draft Environmental Assessment does not discuss su1Ticierai taus and analysissuch that the important rtant Uaw.tu`ian cultural anti archaeological features can be understood. tool. let alum: propel 7. A! a ii—nimunl. Fru 1)r f° .°7Wimnmenial Assessment most be revised to address the location, data recovery and preu r-vatiun or the Ftc lualoa. Slide iLumpunents prmserit an the subject parcels, 1 deelasrc under penalty of perjury Ilia! the foregoing is true. )atr d. l .allua-Kur)a,, Iiaw ri" i, C�7# +la • �a 2 . 20111 Signature: Primed name: 110 t 1-` DECLARATION OFr L [ vedtt 1..r;f=,r, . declare: I 1 err a resident r4 Koiia LIti,wctl7cliw t�i�rn, ( "0 rtty t>kf Hawaii, State +:t1 }Iawai`i. The proposed land development proj c t tl;.t is the subNet cit' thQ Pending I)ratt hnvirortniental Assessment sub;taitte:ei by Royal Vistas Heuusirtg Project Tax Map Key Nos, 13j 7-6-0211,16, 7-6- 1.021'.017. -fJ-tM?1°017. 74-0121 RtE S, and 7-6-021019 North Kona District, Hawai'i Island. State ell-lawtti'i affects rna personally as well as affects Joy interest in rail property. I reside within 'C° t 4-f [distance] of Elis proposed. land development project. in stitch capacities.] have firsthand knowledge or Iftc follaviitg facts.. and amid and would testify thereto it'c:tllerd upon to do so, I h.r', . reviewed the Ltlt.011" E ENVIRONMENTAL ASSLSSr'vl[ N l' eirid +ttachments 1 tLEU sl'..irwally L'o:R:4.IJ ,J crl's);t! ,;.rwr7► .' ,*.7 f L, k". 4L#? fs 3. tip tupt t raephyr, 1tistorica t.tlyid storttiwater nni-t1ftr { ;IS xuC[t,tec] dein ;:i g,e prestttl lt:tttr& that are not adequately a.l'Ir iic i''no Draft Env:]unincIttar r4.sto5ril rel, Sec pp. iltcreuf, ; E am aware that [cite specific facts]- . In Burn, the Draft Environmental As ,cNrtrnerit does not discuss sufficient facts and a>tab, pis `etch that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can he undo rsi iod. A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful detuiLs Er be taken cute of in the future As l understand it, such cireurnscances would lead to unlawful project segmentation, among other errors. 1 A bate conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed IntrastnLcture will comply with sir•.ernnietu re ulutiotis fs insufficieut. At a minimum, the D.ra11 Environmental Assessment must bc revised to shows ei ilinally what inf=nructurc improventeflr are requiredi to tie iniu the County's drainage system and l;,'w ihrase intip •ov racnb will function. i declare, under penalty of perjury that tlw rim -egging is ince. Maud: KatHawaxi`i. ' ®e '�4 1 2020 2 Signature: Piiii e`t, ttan ic: f 11 1 kir le *rs" f Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Mr. Robert Hams 76-4323 Kekuana'oa Place Kailua-Kona, HI 967 40 Via email: bobh,home: gmail.com RE: Comments on Drainage Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawat i Island Dear Mr. Harris: Thank yon' far the comment letter dated October 1, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kana Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildauts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIARr which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along; Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Keluana'oa Place is a County -owned rood built to County standards, with the same specifications as ail other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase las designed as the connection of Kekucnna`o❑ Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -cut is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuanaoa Place during the AM Peak period. and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuanaoa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2021 Mr. Robert Harris Page 2 of 7 Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects an public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA. ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects ore indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project, These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA, Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana `ea Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively), The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3,7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project ,rvould not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health, The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately surnmarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 3: The Planning Deportment should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Rrsyonse 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic, Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TZAR uses a growth rate of 170, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TTIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rote in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume, The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate, Although we are not certain haw Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast. September 13, 2021 Mr. Robert Harris Page 3 of 7 Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. ResPonse_l: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus, The Institute of Transportation Engineers lITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output, This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Innpact Analysis Repot 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TZAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.rn. The difterence in volume is mare than double the maximum 1 0% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailuc Road and Hucllalai Rood (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overccunting, or if the project's TIAL is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TZAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the govern ment. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for instcllotion. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal," There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TZAR does not include that analysis. The TZAR does mention where September 13, 2021 Mr. Robert Harris Page 4 of 7 an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed, it should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. Comment 10: Cour home is located on Kekuanaoa Place which currently is the only access to Royal Vistas Housing Project specified on the Royal Vistas` plans. When we purchased our lot almost four years ago we were not informed of this project or Kekuanooa Place as being the only access to the Royal Vistas Housing Project. Response 10: The project would be accessed in two different ways. As described in Section 3.7.2 of the EA, Kona Three LLC proposes to construct a new intersection Royal Vistas Roadway at the project's intersection with Queen Ka'ahumanu. The second access point would be from Kekuana `oa Place, which would not occur until Phrase 11 of the project. Figure 2 has been revised to show that access to the project site would be connected to Kekuano`oca Place from Lako Street during Phase 11 of the project. At project completion, there would be two ways to access the project. Comment 11: The Royal Vistas Housing Project owner presented to Kona Vistas" owners their plans for the Royal Vistas Housing Project and what it would look like. They had proposed two entrance/exits to their project from Kona Vistas and two entrance/exits from a subdivision on the north side of their project, Pualani Estates. One of the accesses from Kona Vistas. not Kekuanaoaa Place, requires permission from the owner of the property for access the Royal Vistas which has been denied by the owner from my understanding. Also, the two accesses from Puaiani Estates requires Royal Vistas to be granted access across a strip of land owned by another owner who has also denied Royal Vistas access to their project from my understanding. This only leaves Kekuonaoa Place in Kona Vistas as the only access to Royal Vistas Housing Project. Response 11: The plans far access into the development have evolved over time based on discussions with various stakeholders; Section 2.3 of the EA describes how access from Pualani Estates from Paulehia Street was an alternative considered but eliminated tram detailed analysis. The project as described in Section 1.2 and analyzed in this EA for approval presents two access points for the projecl, from 0 new intersection (Royal Vistas Roadway at the project's intersection with Queen Ka"ahumanu) in Phase I and from Kekuana'aa Place in Phase 11. Comment 12: Since Queen K Highway is adjacent to Royal Vistas Housing Project there should be access from this highway and not from Kona Vistas Subdivision. Kona Vistas only access is from Queen K Highway by Lako Street for our subdivision with 200 homesites. Response 12: A small number of 'lett turn out' jsauthboundj vehicles will be pushed through Kekauna'aa Place and Lako Street. For emergency reasons, it would be beneficial if more than one access is provided to any development. September 13, 2021 Mr. Robert Harris Page 5 of 7 The master plan for this area shows connector streets parallel to Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway through these developments to purposely provide connectivity redundant to Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway. This is not a new or recent concept in the area. Comment 13: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment and attachments, I am specifically concerned about the Holualoa Slide rockwall being damaged. I do not consider that the archaeological studies in support of the DEA are adequate. I am aware that subst©ntial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Holucioa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. The Holualoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. Response 13: As described in Section 3,6 and included in Appendix 5 of the EA, two Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) reports were prepared for the project. As part of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their significance. The AISs were conducted fallowing Hawaii Administrative Rules §13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost, The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 242111 documented, This road is not very straight, has obtuse cngle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a holua, Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA) #f3660, Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the some gulch. it is unlikely that this is a hdlua course since the parallel wails empty into a large gulch. No holua slide has been identified in the project site. Comment 14: 1 base my concerns upon the evaluation performed by Tom Pohaku Stone, a copy of which is attached. The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features can be understood let alone properly preserved. The DEA roust be revised to address the location, date recovery and preservaticn of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject parcels. September 13, 2021 Mr. Robert Harris Poc.e6of7 Response 14: In the email provided. there is reference to "the portion of the holua at the Holua inn [that] has rock walls on both sides" and refers to parallel walls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 walls which are LCA #3660 boundary walls. Primarily, Mr. Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhou to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry. Kekahuna. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he'eholua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the near coastal region. However, the complexes are located more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal, sacred or sociopolitical complexes, or a holua, within the project area. The existence of a halua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone. As discussed above, there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a hOlua course existed within the project area. Comment 15: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment and attachments. I am specifically concerned about drainage interruptions. Response 15: Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two Courtly -owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revised to clarify that on TMK (3) 7-6-21:19, "Infrastructure during Phase ll of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuana'oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kora Community Development Plan's (CDP's) "Official Transportation N1ap." For TMK (3) 7-6-21:18, the project includes infrastructure for charinelizirig a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the Kona CDP's "Official Transportation Mop." Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 describes that Kona Three would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by Department of Public Works, and there would be no drainage interruptions. Comment 16: The steep topography, historical rapid stormwater run-off and associated domag. e present hazards that are nat adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment. I cm a tnat this project will have serious impact on the immediate and surrounding crea. September 13, 2021 Mr. Robert Harris Page 7 of 7 Response 16: Kona Three LLC is not aware of any damage to adjoining properties. including Queen Ka'chumanu Highway, from water flowing from the subject property. Comment 17: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis Such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions con be understood. A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be token care of in the future, As I understand it such circumstances would lead to unlawful protect segmentation among other errors. Response 17: There is no project segmenfation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. Comment 18: A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements ore required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function. Response 18: The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA. Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Plan would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email, Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. f ia.ct' Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvrestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department RUUD CCM PLANNER; DEPT (IC) 2"70Pi-1 IF HIND GF+ ill#�'�,.� October 3. 2020 Planning department County of Hawaii 74-5044 Ane Keahoialole Highway Bldg KaHua Iona, HI 96740 RE: ROYAL VISTA Houslog Project ILA comments Cear Planning Qepartfner .Officials: I am submitting to you rrryr comments regarding the Royal Visits Housing Project F.A. lam opriased to the project as It is currently proposed. My husband and i are full time residents of Hawaii anti I navp attached rnyi comments regarding the EA, Further, 'fully concur with the detailed cornrrent5 that hove been submitted by the Kana Vista Homeowners Assotlatian and Board Sincerely Margret Donnellan Todd iii l Z Kamehamaij Kai lug Kona. HI 9674 0 562 874-054(teilJ I "1 if J. 3-5 42 1 hCUD CH Pl_14411'40 DEPT GC,1 `'20H-6:17 4 f1ti1) IA. I. TUE RED DECLARATION OF 1, MARC ARET 1 ONNELLAN TODD. declare: 1. I alta resident of 7h -I51 Ka a eharnalu St Kai luau Kona 1 Iona Vistas subdivision], County of Hawari'i, Stare of lawai`i. The proposed land development project that is the subject of"the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal \' isms Housing; Project t Tux Map Key Nos (',)7-b-021:016, 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021;018, and 7-6_021:019 North Kona District, lttvai` i Island, State of Hawaii affects we personally as well as affects my interest in real properly. I reside within approximately two blocks Df the boundaries of the proposed land development project. In such capacities, l have firsthand knowledge of the following f'ar_is and could and would testify thereto if called upon to do so. 2. I have reviewed the pending Dli`AFF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report by SSFM international. dated July 2020 and attached as Appendix 2 to the DR.APT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. 1 am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within wild witlwui the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the SSFM 'Uralic Impact Analysis Report_ Traffic nnd the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. arc diFzussed in the body of the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. at pp. 4&-56, 67 and 71. I am also concerned that the mitigations for ingress/egress in emergency situations is inadequate. 3. In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on ihe use of a suh iaradard roadway, Kekuaria*oa Place, Kekuaana`ca Place is very steep, has limited sight 1 distances due to extreme curves and k narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase I and Phase 2 buildouts oldie Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequately addressed in the SSFNI Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which focuses instead on impacts akin Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle gips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuana`oa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should i-equire the applicant to address these concerns. 4. The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT requires evaluation of, among ethers, adverse secondary impacts, such as popitiMon changes or ejects o, publicfi7ciirities. Ste Chapter 11 200.1-1 }, I-lawaii Administrative Rides, Instead of squarely addressing these Wever, the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT simply ignores them, cia ming that "No adverse secondary effects are expected since the development would utilize existing infeastrtrchire, provide infill housing, and is not expected to result in substantial demands to County services. It is a serious omission For the DRAFT F,,NV IR()NNIENTAL. ASSESSMENT to rail Lo add the potential adverse irnpaace] ,f increasing the use of substandard existing infrastructure, like Kekuaraa`oa Place. 5. The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT addresses adverse: traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Wave a suh.c•rarrrial adverse effeci Mn puhlic health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project verottld not affect public health in any way.. stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful corisiderarinn in project design,' Emphasis added. This bald conclusion doles not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11-200,1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. 6. The Planning Department should not accept the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT'S reliance on the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which has the following deficiencies: a, rai lure 10 address adverse traffic impacts wiRhin the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from he project; b. I'he SSFM Tra Tie Impact Analysis Report uses a growth rate or 104ti in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic impact Analysis Report. Traffic congxs1:orn Is very sen rive to in a 114111-ltntar, exponential relation; c. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed ed project; d. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Repon employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbownd Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and .August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic impact Analysis Report, wtlich reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15# 2016, both weekday:,;_ The unusually law reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at sxks with Figure 4 of the SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahurn anu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the ma_xirnum [Or'..), variation generally accepted in day -today measurerrments and thus unreliable: e. Tile recommendation by SSFh1 Traffic lr ip.7ct Analysis Report for a roundabout at. Queen Kanhurnar:u Highway. and Hualalai Road f Orth) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government, f, The recommendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kunkini Highway is inadequate. ire, as here, an intersection p.11 bcx.s more Wali one kvarrartt under all rorrditir»ts, 11 tihcruld 6e prioritiv�-d for study and design of siprtll for .rtstallaticn. Thus circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project_ 7. In sum, the Draft Environmental Assessment and SI(!i Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not present sufficient, credible facts and analysis such that the adverse impacts on existing infrastructure and resulting from increased traffic sari be fully understood and result in appropriate government planning and response. 1 declare under penally of perjury that die foregoing 151/11e. Dined Kai lua-t p+uu. Ham.ai'i, October 3, 2020. 4 Sign tur Pri flied name:. ' are t Donnell = cxdd 1?CUU CON PI At'lrllraf DEPT OCT 2 -20 P-`,3:17 1-II1HD DELIVERED DECLARATION OF J. MARGARET DONNELLAN TODD, declare: 1. 1 am a resident of Kona Vistas subdivision, County of Hawaii, State of l:lava "i. The proposed laud Je'elopment project that is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vista Housing Pmjcct Tax Map Key Nes. (3117-6-021:01 6, 7-6- 07:1 '' l ?. "=6-021:018, and 7-6.021:019 North Kona 17[strict .1-lawai'i Isl�ottid. State of Hawaii allr:�:o, vne personally as well as affects my interest in real property. 1 reside within approximately two blacks of the proposed land development project (76-151 Kantehantaalu In such capacities, I have firsthand knowledge of the following facts and could and would testify thereto if called upon to do so_ 2, 1 have reviewed the pending DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and attachments. I am peel tical ly concerned about: the props l's failure to adequately address drainage and runoff issues including the increased potential for adverse weather events resulting from climate change. Prudent planning requires that nevti developments are planned to address the potential increase in adverse weather events. 3. The :steep topography, historical rapid stormwater run-off' and associated damage present hazards that are JLQI adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment 4. In sum, the Draft Environmental Assessment dnes not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage irnprc.emcnts and diversions can be understood, A proper envirorun,entail sessment cannot leave meaningful details to be. taken care of in the future. As 1 understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation. 1 among other errors. 5. A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient Al a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessrnetti. must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements are required to tie into the County's drainage system and how these itnprovewents will functioE. I declare under penalty of perjury that the fore oing is trait. Dated: Kaitua- K,nna, I lawai'i , C tober3, 2020. 2 Si gnnture. Printed name: Maret Donnellan Todd P :''1 MI PLANING ITN T OM 2''20: I :17 1440 0 L1E1 1)JIi= t..itr RON OF I. MARGARET TODD, d ec. Irtr-: 1. I am a residelii of Kona Vistas subdivision, Co inty of1'law ii' i. State of Havel'. The proposed laid development project that is the suhlect of the pending Draft Envircrnrnental. Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas Housing project Tax Map ley Nos. (3) 7-6-021:016, 7-6- :017, 7-6-021:018. and 7-6-021:019 North terra District, I lauai'i Island. State of Hawai`i affects me personally as well as affects my interest in real property_ !reside within approximately two blocks (76-151 Kameltamalu St Kailua Kuria ) of the proposed land deveIoprnent project. in such capacities, 1 have frrsiltrtnJ know Lt'dge oldie foliowing facts and could and would testi F thereto it called upon to do so. 1 have reviewed the pending DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and attachments. I am specifically concerned r►hriut: inndequate assessment of arc healogical features 3, 1 do not consider that the archaeolt,;,iccl tc,dies offered in support cofihe Drab Environrrwertal Assessment are adequate. 4. I am isware that. substantial evidence eiists that the land encompassed by the subject land parcels includes features of the Holualaa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls inthe archaeological studies offered i i support of the Draft Environmental Assessment. The Holualoa Slide is Etil important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if d;unaged sr destroyed. 1 > I base my concerns upon the eN,aluatiu t and analy.,iis performed h • Tarn Poftaku Stone, a copy of which is attached. 6. In stmi. the Draft Environmental Assessment docs not discuss sufficient facts mid analysis such that the important Ha+vai`ian cultural and archaeological features can he understood, let alone properly preserved. 7. At a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised io address the location, data recovery and pr'eservat'ion or the Halualua Slide components present art the subject parcels. I declrtne under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing, i; true Rated. Knilita-forts.. Hawaii, October 3, 2(120 2 I ^r Printed name-, rgarret Donnell an Todd Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Ms, Margaret Donnellan Todd 76-151 Kamehamalu Kaulia-Kona, HI 96740 RE: Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Ms. Donnellan Todd: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 3, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (D) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. I am also concerned that the mitigations for ingress/egress in emergency situations is inadequate. Response 1: As described in Section 3.7.2 of the EA, Kona Three LLC proposes to construct ca new intersection Royal Vistas Roadway at the project's intersection with Queen Ka`ahurnanu. This intersection would be built to County and State standards, and dedicated to the County. Additionally, Figure 2 in the EA has been revised to show that access to the project site would be connected to Kekuaana'oa Place from Lako Street during Phase II of the project, At project completion, there would be two ways to access the project. This is consistent with access of other communities in Kona. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a suosTandofd roadway, Kekuanaoa Place, Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is incadi:,(Thotely addressed in the TZAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumoriu Highway. I am particularly{ concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents clang Kekuanaoa Place. 1 consider that the Planning Department Should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuana`oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana"oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase 1 as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to September 13, 2021 M. Margaret Donnellan Todd Page 2 or 7 Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak period. and 25 additional vehicles during the Pm Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana"oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana'oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a diffc rant place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic (22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively). The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3,7.2 of the EAj. Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 31.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health, The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kano Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected id be significant. Comment 6: The TlAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion k very sensitive to growth rote in a non-linear, exponential relation. September 13, 2021 M. Margaret Donnellan Todd Page 3 of 7 Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation {HDOT) counts did not show can increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Lore Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast. Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing charccteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response 7: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupieo with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TZAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahurnanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAL, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Response a: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section bets een Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north), Our traffic count token in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDCT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TZAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queer Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignallzed present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumariu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. September 13. 2021 Ms, Margaret CDonneIlar: Todd Page 4 of 7 Response 9; The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices {MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal_" there are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAIR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. Cornment 10: I am specifically concerned about: the proposal's failure to adequately address drainage and runoff issues including the increased potential for adverse weather events resulting from climate change. Response 10: Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two County -owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revised to clarify that on TMK {3} 7-6-21:19, "Infrastructure during Phase 11 of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuana'oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called far in the KCDP "Official Transportation Map," For TMK (3) 7-6-21;18, the project includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this ditch and includes c road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the KDCP's 'Official Transportation Map." Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text- in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three LLC would prepare a Drainage Pian to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by Department of Public Works. Comment 11: The steep topography, historical rapid storm water run-off and associated dcrnoce resect hazards that are not adequately addressed in the DEA. Response 11: Queen Kci'ahumanu Highway is awned and maintained by the State of Hawaii, together with the two culvert systems traversing Queers Ka'ahurrnanu Highway which transport the floodwaters of Holualoa Ditch and Horseshoe Bend Ditch below Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. The State has not indicated any problems with being able to maintain the highway or the culverts, and the proposed project would not increase the amount of water in the ditches (per Section 27-20 of the Hawaii County Code). Additionally, Kona Three LLC is not aware of any damage to adjoining properties, including Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway, from water flowing from the subject property. September 13, 2021 Ms, Margaret Donneilar: Todd [Doge 5 of 7 Comment 1: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood, A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future. As I understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among ether errors. Response 12: See response to comment 10. Also, the Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by DPW. Text has been added in Section 3.3.2 of the Find EA to identify passible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. Comment 13: A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations its insufficient. At a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements are required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will -function. Response 13: The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA, Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Plan would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed. Comment 14: I am specifically concerned about the inadequate assessment of archaeological features, and don't consider that the archaeological studies in support of the DEA are adequate. I am aware that substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Holualaa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. The Hokialoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. Response 14: As described in Section 3.61 and included in Appendix 5 of the EA, two Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) reports were prepared for the project. As port of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their significance. The AISs were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rules § 13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211 } documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a h5lua. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to September 13, 2021 Ms, Margaret Donnellan Todd Page 6of7 similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA) #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is [a h5lua course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a holua in the project site. Comment 15: G base my concerns upon the evaluation performed by Tom Pohaku Stone, a copy of which is attached. The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features can be understood let alone properly preserved. The DEA must be revised to address the location, data recovery and preservation of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject parcels. Response 15: In the email provided, there is reference to "the portion of the holua at the Holua inn [that] has roc'K. walls on both sides" and refers to parallel walls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 walls which are ICA #3660 boundary walls, Primarily,, Mr. Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region beivween Kailua to the north and Keauhou to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuna. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he`ehdlua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the near coastal region. However, the complexes are located more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal,. sacred or sociopolitical complexes, or a hobo, within the project area. The existence of o holua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone. As discussed above. there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a holua course existed within the project area. September 13, 2021 Ms, Margaret DonneIlar: Todd Page 7of7 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, F'h.0_ michele.lefebvre{4'sk;_antec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori,, Ashley Freon: Yee, Michael Sent: Friday October 02, 2020 1:57 PM To: Mori, Ashley Subject: FW: Comments ori Royal Vistas proposed project Attachments: Royal Vistas corn rnents_frnaLpdf Please intake to Jeff. From: Gary East <gwweast2@gmaiLcorn> Sent: Friday, October 02, 2020 1:12 PM To Yee, Michael cMiehael.Yee@a hawaiicourtity goy> Subject: Fwd: Comments on Royal Vistas proposed project 1 i"0^."u:•IJ'.... .,_... Frcr. Gary EAST .,....'.2� ,II i, w> f};i' F!I• C�tl . 2L .1J ,a_ lr `,? I'IiVt y1i "li�i`r t (s,":.111010'7; t i It ,7 +, '..1 eras proposed project r luha, wish to submit public comments on theRoyal Vistas proposed Project that are atta ed as a PDF file to this email. Aloha Gary W East F'V1P f5j j? 'rl'1�]iL'-c''1 t 116533 From. To Subject' Date: Aloha, Gary W. East pia nninf, 7iiawaiicoui ty.gpv Corrmentson Royal Vistas Housing Proiect TiviKs: (3) 7-6.021:016-019 October 2, 2020 am writing to submit public comments on the proposed development of t'ie Raul Vistas Housing Project. I am a homeowner in the Rualari Estates subdivision located directly north of the anticipated project. P. y greatest concern about the development is the lack of highway infrastructure currently in place to all of the additional traffic ger crated horn 454 housing units It is important to remember that I «.,41 L .w units will contain 1,105 bedrooms when the project f5 complete.i The demographic For the rr, units will con tr'b4.1CQ to rnorc than one driver per household thus compounding the total r, I•iUt•I 1.1 I _IE„ , far each un.t.. The Queen Ka'ahumanu Ffighway, Routell, that will provide access to than proposed hosed develo m e tit is only a two lane road between Henry Street to the north and the Karrieharrlwhar! III EuLiti to the south. Tr ',fiic is currently highly congested In the rriurninig imd ri'ternoon along th:5 . r :int ,t. ,:tch of roadway. Hawaii county has planned far the decnrrstructior, inti w,dr'nrri.,f the roadway betv4e,Street and Karn 111 in the future and 1 believe this investment infrsi',truLture must becomplc;'•,i additional housing is constructed. -The Traffic Impact Analysis Report prepared for Kona Three LLC by55FM International in NI 2020 hip provided in abundance of data to model the anticipated traffic generated by tie proposed Royal Vistas project. However, the report is biased by selecting the dates for the traffic study of April 30. 230 .i id r ueust 29, 2019 when tourism for Hawaii Island is at historical lows as shown in figure 1 bolo"A' Big island Tourism - tor Arrivals by frbr,1I° 1 4110, ♦. 1 Me 0«p lylrnd ,eswr w., ,.r .. 4.. r Jar, .w p•,s pah k, Mir y.: Hl ti4I pis M..•, l4 n ro]r .1L a+v.w r-FCf U'E' httks://www.nawaii-guicle.comffiles/imag esic hart sib ig-i s la nd-vi sito r- rrIval s.pri; A more realistic assessment would have included the traffic associated with rental vehicles from visitors to this island. ' Phase 1 contains 122 t o bedroom units and 53 three bedroom units tar a total of 400 bPdrao, s. Phase 2 contains 147 two bedroom units and 137 three, Oredroom oohs For a total of 705 bedrooms Total bedrooms for the project are 1,105. The SSFM document references the number al trips generated from The In$tltute of Transportation Engineers Trip Gerrerotion, 10 Edition (ITE, 2O1&). The ITE land use category 2W0 is described as multifamily housing low rise containing one ar two floors and classification 22]. is for multifamily housing containing three to tern floors. The proposed development is a combination of two and three story units so neither category completely describes the intended project, The data listed Table 9; Estirnated Trips Generated – Phase I cin page 19 of the SSFM document is very misleading as the equation shown Is for statistical analysis. of a fitted curve for the ITE data. There is no Standard Deviation calculated, range of values or confidence interval rho indicated. The calculated trip numbers are not based on any of the local traffic data that is included in the SSFM document_ Also, the AM and PM designations from ITE only relate to the number of trips between the hours of I-9 AM and 4-6 PM. The total number of trips generated over a 24 hour period using the ITE data ! L' for 258 units is estimated to be about 1,7002 and In eti, this is just phase I, For this reason, l believe It Is imperative that the existing highway reeds to be upgraded before this project Is developed. Adding an additional 75% more units In phase II will have a o116149+a■.rn',Fired -P9ra •L APA pw�tlan • Land Usr Ir, k v.pcei Wldlti.faftlily HuuslrL t.>,r Racal tzar] o„ rclurti; Milts l'firra Irips Fq'wtnan 1�Pr 1 T,=ir.sa•tn• x}. l?' 7='T-ial Yi -r+=.•Arno^grrre ater ■ L.vW,,n.` I,.fy large impact on the traffic generated by this project. l aIsfa have some concerns about inadequacies and omissions. from the draft Environmental Assessment submitted for the proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project to be developed by Kona Three ILC, The new road tfIilt will provide access to the development off of ,a CIueen Ka'ahumanu Highway appears to be 35 feet wide as shown on the Scale drawing In phase one, the We road; r.o the buildings and surface parking appear to be only 18 lee( wide, The dravving indicates about 3.54 su:rfaCe parking spaces are provided for the 258 units. Is this adtuuatL for Hawaii Cuoniy standards? Is this neighborhood intended to be ,walkable? I do not see any clear unci cation of sidewalks or streetlights. It this is the case, I think this is a big canrern especially because the intended of these units will certainly con Ain a high percentage of rhifdren, How are any residents supposed the park and swimming pool if There is no safe way to get to them? The park area for phase I looks to or r have at most 15 parking spaces wliich appears to be inadequate, The access roadways for phase two also appear restricted to a single lane 18 feet wide. How could two vehicles safely pass each rather it they were traveling in the opposite direction? Again, I see no clear -indication of sidewalks and streetlights for thesis units Vehicle parking in phase two appears to be underserved. Is everyone living in these units expected to park inside of their garage? Marry occupants of these two and three bedroom units will have additional vehicles and where are they expected to park them? I have no way to judge the design of For rainwater mitigation except to say that the square footage of the upper portion is then compressed to what appears to be a relatively small 40 foot wide culvert. How deep is this btructure required to be s7 that it can contain the runoff from the upper portion? And will this be fared, or access restricted frons the occupants raf this development? Aloha Gary East The estimate was obLamed using a spreadsheet from the Florida Department of Trar,sparta=,on with data from the $tr Ecl-i,Dn ITE Top Generation Report rntps:ffw,.w.Ltdot Ravi¢Iortninir}s'stem„ ,(e rltrgp sins Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.9039 Mr. Gary East Via email: gweast2 gmail.ccrrri RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii island Dear Mr. East: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 2, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments, Comment 1: My greatest concern about the development is the lack of highway infrastructure currently in place to accommodate all of the additional traffic generated from 450 housing units. It is important to remember that the 450 housing units will contain 1,105 bedrooms when the project is complete. The demographic for the occupants of these units will contribute to more than one driver per household thus compounding the total number of vehicles for each unit. Response 1: The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Handbook referenced in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 in the EA) used for the traffic analysis uses housing units, and it does not assume one person per unit. This k taken from the ITE trip gen handbook regarding land se 220: 2.72 residents are assumed for each unit. There is no trip generation for number of bedrooms, It is difficult to analyze and make projections based an number of bedrooms, or how many people we expect in bedrooms, The ITE trip generation for land use 220 collected data on low-rise multi -family housing, and based on that data, the traffic model come up with a best fitted curve. which discussed below, has a very low standard deviation, and a very high R squared value, which indicated that the data collected is not scattered. The TZAR assumes a and use that is typical. and with the best possible data, captures the number of project generated trips. Comment 2: The Queen Ka'ohumanu Highway, Route 11, hat will provide access to the proposed development is only a two-lane road between Henry Street to the north and the Kamehameha 111 Road to the south. Traffic is currently highly congested in the morning and afternoon along this entire stretch of roadway. Hawaii county has planned for the reconstruction and widening of the roadway between Henry Street and Kam 111 in the future and I believe this investment in infrastructure must be completed before additional housing is constructed. September 13, 2,021 Mr. Gary East Pc -Joe 2of4 Response 2: The State's plans to widen Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway from Henry Street to Karneharneha I'll Road as a result of existing levels of traffic congestion have beer contemplated for more than ten years. This improvement is listed in the 2035 long range transportation plan for the Big Island. However, the project's analysis was conducted with the 2 -lane highway and levels -of -service at the signalized intersections were acceptable. Comment 3: The TIAR provided an abundance of data to model the anticipated traffic generated by the proposed project. However, the report is biased by selecting the dates for the traffic study of April 30, 2019 and August 29, 2019 when tourism for Hawaii Island is at historical laws. A more realistic assessment would have included the traffic associated with rental vehicles from visitors to this island. Response 3: Based on the numbers for the 2018-2019 monthly tourism numbers, August 2019 had the 4th highest visitor total and April 2019 had the 10th highest visitor total. This is consistent with the information you provided. For all islands, the pattern is similar with high visitor volume in June through August, December, and March which corresponds to summer brew, winter break, and spring break, These are when school is not in session, so visitor traffic is high as people travel more. When school is out, typically the overall traffic volume during the AM and PM peak hour is lower. Generally, traffic counts are taken during "worst case" scenarios, which are historically on Tuesday through Thursday during school days. This is information we know, and we purposely target school days as when we take aur traffic counts. While tourism numbers may be low, the intensity of the peak during the AM and PM school day peaks are generally more intense than the AM and PM peak during non -school days. Here is the HQCT station on Queen Kciohumanu Highway in 2016. It shows that the monthly weekday average is very close 10 the yearly weekday average. The standard that traffic engineers use is the school cloy peak; therefore, the counts token in April and August are defendable. Comment 4: The TZAR references the number of trips generated from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 10th Edition (ITE. 2016). The ITE land use category 220 is described as multifamily housing low rise containing one or two floors and classification 221 is for multifamily housing containing three to ten floors. The proposed development is a combination of two and three story units so neither category completely describes the intended project. Response 4: The project proposes mostly 1- to 3 -story buildings. The traffic engineer reviewed low-rise and mid -rise multi -family housing options. Mid -rise, Land use 221, would actually provide lower numbers than Low -Rise. Therefore, the trip generation utilized in the trottic analysis is more conservative. The project's density does not correspond with high-rise multi -family housing, Land Use 222. Therefore, the trip generation used in the analysis is appropriate. Comment 5: The data listed Table 9: Estimated Trips Generated - Phase 1 an page 19 of the SSFM document is very misleading as the equation shown is for statistical analysis of September 13, 2021 Mr. Gary Etat Pace 3 of 4 o fitted curve for the ITE data. There is no Standard Deviation calculated, range of values or confidence interval rhea indicated. The calculated trip numbers are not based on any of the local traffic data that is included in the SSFM document. Response 5: The fitted curve is available when there are "enough" data points to determine a best fitted curve. If there are not enough data points, the ITE trip generation will have only an average rate, but the best fitted curve is generally a more accurate projection based on actual data points collected. The standard deviation was not provided in the TIAR. As shown in the figure below shows the standard deviation of 0-12, which indicates that the fitted curve will generate outputs really close to t• -e. overall mean, The R squared value is 0.90, which also indicated that the regression prediction is very close to the collected data. Therefore, the best -lac f-1 curve is the correct curve to use when available, and the traffic enginrr ::::s ! aenr in the number selected. Comment 6: Also, the A'/ C..PM designations from ITE only relate to the number of trios between the hours of 7-9 AM and 4-6 PM, The total number of 'trips generated over a 24 hour period using the ITE data for 258 units is estimated to be about 1,7002 and this is just phase I. For this reason, I believe it is imperative that the existing highway needs to be upgraded before this project is developed. Adding an additional 75% more units in phase II will have a large impact an the traffic generated by this project. Response 6: While it is accurate that the 24-hour traffic is higher than the AM and PM peak hour traffic generated by the project, the AM and PM peak hours are when traffic is at its worse, The TIAR looks to provide mitigation during the worst traffic periods. The overall traffic on Queen Kaahumanu Highway is much lower during the non -peak hours. Figure 4 H the TZAR shows the 24-hour volume an Queen Kaahumanu Highway between htani Kailua Drive and Hualalai Road. This chart shows the AM and PM peak periods, with lower midday volumes, and much lower volumes before the AM peak and after the PM peak. Comment 7: The new road that will provide access to the development off of a Queen Ka'ahurranu Highway appears to be 36 feet wide as shown an the scale drawing, In phase one, the access roads to the buildings and surface parking appear to be only 18 feet wide. The drawing indicates about 354 surface parking spaces are provided for the 258 units. Is this adequate for Hawaii County standards? Is this neighborhood intended to be walkable I do not see any clear indication of sidewalks or streetlights. Vehicle parking in phase two appears to be underserved, Is everyone living in these units expected to park inside of their garage? Response 7: As designated on Figure 3 of the EA, the layout and number of uuildirgs and parking spaces are conceptual. The final number of parking spaces will determined upon final identification of unit mix (i.e., number of 2 - bedroom and 3 -bedroom units), and will have the number of parking spaces as required by Hawaii County Code and zoning ordinance based on the numbers of each unit type. Regarding sidewalks, the text in Section 1.2 of the EA has been revised to clarify that the road segments that would be built to dedicable September 13, 2021 Mr. Gary Fust Pace 4 of 4 standards would include sidewalks and curved gutters. Regarding walkabilify, the text in Section 1.2 of the EA has been revised to clarify that private driveways in the development would be paved and provide safe access to residents (including streetlights), and that walk paths within the development would be identified upon final design. Comment 8: I have no way to judge the design of for rainwater mitigation except to say that the square footage of the upper portion is then compressed to what appears to be a relatively small 40 foot wide culvert. How deep is this structure rewired to be so that it can contain the runoff from the upper portion? And will this be fenced, or access restricted from the occupants of this development? Response 8; As discussed in the EA, the project would not contribute or exacerbate the flooding issues from the project. To prevent these issues (described in Section 3.3.2), the project would prepare a Drainage Plan in accordance with Chapter 27 of the Hawaii County Code which would be reviewed and approved by DPW. As required by Chapter 27, runoff from the project site would not be directed toward adjacent properties fbrdt nrivate and County -owned) and the development would not alter the duc pattern above or below the development. This pan would be submitter: part of the grading pian submittal prior to project construction. The text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA has been revised to clarify what is required as part of Chapter 27 of the Hawaii County Code for developments regarding containment of runoff. To ensure public safety, any structures constructed to manage runoff as identified in the Drainage Plan would be compliant with. County requirements, with public access restricted. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at X808) 494-2039 or by email, Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.]efebvre; stcntec.corn cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, A5hie From: Sent: To: Subject Attachments: Candace Ha1l+2t. <t,alletttjr grriail.cnm> Satt:rcay, Octobe 03. 2020 11:33 Am Planning Internes Mail Skayal Vistas Hcu5i1Project EA comments Royal Vistas Declaration - Traffic Car dy.pcIt Please find attached sttlidavit is iti heh:dlfuf Candace 1 Hallett. residing al 74S-1.56 KisImch u'n Iu St., L01426 32 flank von for your cor3sidcratintt. Carida4.c Hai°u 136519 3 lJl.l I_r l r't lt)' OF CANIlACI..11 HAI 1 I.I FF._ Hr1LLET l are: Til a7 rw si-1 ttl 1111 rt1 1 iir Kanieh,arnalu St 1 ]tion. -1 Vistas l_111[I1Vi7•10111. (1.PLIJ1.)14 J 1a ai' i. State of 1 Iawtii-i. I i e proposed land (level;rpsncritrrtil1 Lt 'J::st is the subject oft he trending IiraiG i- in, irdinInenLil suhmitted by Royal Vistas Flousing Project T I.\ Mian key Nos. 01 7-0.1:2] :016_ f-6.11121:UI T 7-6-021.01R. and 7-6-021:0 19 North Kona District. I Jcrr4ai'i Island. State cif 1lav ai i a11t~cts me personally as '1,4. el Ess c1r-10.:ts iiie interest in rail property. 1 r.sidc tiirhirs '(►t! fc'e'i IJistrt3 eel ot'the proposed lams 4leveloputeni projet.1 In such d ufssi+:itsd:s. 1 liave rirstlt tnd kno,,vicitije c5t'thc following titers said could and L\.Cmtilcl testify thereto it c':tIkL1 t1pon to JL) so. I have re'rkwed iliac pertd.litiAl'1 ENV IRN; IENTAL ." SS1_SSNILN 1 i>nrlu�tinir trte Irsi.t•tic Ir'ii;tct Arialysis I t . il. 11 ' SSIA,1 International, ci.tterl Jul} 1) 20 and tilt;iclwn:is Appemlix 2 :ti die 1)RAF 1 ENV IRONMV\'1 Al.ASSESSMENT. 1 tilt(' s}vtilicallw concerned Anal adverse traffic imnaewtw hc,ih within irit1 rsithoui the Kona Vistt:is suldiai,idrn that are i cii CtiII or accurately addres. d iii the SS' I'M Trttt1ie Intact Arralsis Report. I nittiL° anti th ::'S1 N1 1 rai'tic impact AnuIy$is Report. urti J1, -;.Lased in the body o1` the I)RAI 1 rlvVrr.f)N'M Nl A ASS1. "SS Nil .N I . at pp. 67 and 71. TIkk potential fur lttt► rrait4ents rl' Noyatl Vistas to. use' itrtAet .Ave And 1,ciIan' St, as a cut -through k Kykuartet,ua Place poses a real threat tc' the residents L7t Krlita. Vistas. Street; within Kana Vistas were not : teaait tci handle high volumes oftraffic. In addition. r+itr residents regularly walk along our roads,. o.t;llf, tliw it dugs and children. ride. their bikes all errs oar street: since we (10 not h i e I reaseil ;i' tr''.til_ due to Ow influx iilLLte< iwlt'i?rw m Koval \• r,sta5 can L)r:1% Il'[ii+ 17[14irst E':ttc.i i r'. r Ile I : r w I .t'I.. %� I:et ES i.l 4,! r 1 !IEL, Sunset. In the l~`47rir! 1!itin: sulldi isil_iil. the proposed pr-iject relies on thin use o 17 trhst.attd .rd roa(hs, i:,y. Kekuaturua Place. K.e.k.wiTia-cia. ]'Litt. is very steep, has limited sip]it di.tatrc>, due Lia krxt.rer le curves and is namiw v illi no sidewalks. The inipaet o1" iiiere:isc=d Cr .ilio arising iirrirri Phase 1 fiat! Phase 2 I)tuldoub oldie Rrt`41I Vistas 1 lousing, I'ri leo is inadivisitcly a.ddresscd in the 'tiwFr I TrFit"tir: Ilripac( Analysis Report. ,oeIlii:h tiictiscs frisk:Ad on impacts along, [,ltieen KttilllLilitarrll 1 Ii l7 w"uw. 1 am purtiealarly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and li'&+ri.i a separate soh ivision will present cl::ii t'cry andongi sition to residents ialiiri kekii ilia.cia ['face. ] c 3rt:siciti• that the. Planning Cl<pi1rLtuerit should require die tt171illeant tri address tlst�c .'trilttriis, 4, °i'hc DRA1.1 I'AVI3i(t'MI'IN.] AI. I" reLiti res eviduation of. among' othter's, coNiier.ti`e eCilridar") irttp] ser,x.f"rapu!,ir Jrr c'htrrtxc'.+rrr'eti rlii irli?�!t" jerc•iiilri"w. S ti: Clililate:r 1 1-20(11-17.. lla' aii Fldininistrat:vc ifIcs Instead r l welcraF d) iicidressing. iheSC issues. th.fi ever, rii,f tw.. t3' [ 1 NVllt()NmI:"~ 1A1_ r1 tii 1I N 1 wirrypk. i:r.riores titem. i (,riftitlti�� duo crie° °•c'k+lrid ary effects are expected sinc4 tlt 4Ie 5 ii3i7nicTii t+-()uJCI 11ti ' esi in? inlra.strLiL.I irx. prur'idc ii;Iill housrtLg. and is not L'spi:l'Lctl t5' ic:wult in substantial cl�llt: ricl* tc� ("Olint4 wei'v'iCeK,'' Et is at1 :.; r>!otisi oni sciji uii rnr ' is 1)It.A.F 1 1: \ VIR1) 4\'11 NTAI . ASSF,S i i 1.N"I' Lk) Icki1 Lu .iac sas. p' ieiltial ad1'evie illipi3 1, Di die Lt5C suhstandarJ 'usIin intiastruc.turc.lilc,: The 1)k A1 1 1 NV1k(1Ni117\ I. I "'i1SESS IENTaddre;ses atherse [r.9Liic itripac,s olds ill thc t « w Iretlier I h: pro co would Mac zJ4Fi r e r+t1;fri r�u parhlir. health I be Applit:ant claims. "The Proposed Project would not affect publi. health in iuly way: stcirrn Eater uoulcI he appropriately disposed of in drainage aructlires ] r€iti e imp ct, h�pv'e been taken into careful co[rsith ration intrc (tct clS�` P I:nlphasis added_ This bald conclusion does rtirtaddress potential adverse impacts as required by C'hapicr 1 l -No. 1 Iatwitii Adininistrttry t.° Rules, 6. the Nanning i )ep;artri lcrlt should not accept Lhc 1)101'1 1'.NV I Rl ASSFSS\{E 11'w reli:,irce ,,on tlt4 SSI -N,°1 Frank Iic Ina a t Analysis Report. which h4r thti dctll•LLncies: t. l ilure ttr atldt :.s adverse: tra Ile impacts ithin the Kona Vistas tihc,livisrur, rtlisirtg front the hrctictr b. The SSIA1 '1 ratfiic impact flrtal} rig ReporL uscm ;a growth rare or' I m cohtn st lt9 the �'°« growth nut' eui kJyed h) the 201 'Witcher i.n4ttieerrt'i6 1 itIt Impact llttithsia Report. 'Truffle uetrtgw itm is cer)v sensitive to g[revalt rate ill a nun-Itncatr. expctnenrial rel:,ttiun: l 1te SKI .1 f rai'lie" Impact .atrial}saw Repot cltt.s not rccognize mul6-generational housing characteristics common iii Hawaii according to Leis us data and likely undcrestimrt,att:s drril) vchicic trip- attributable tt, huilcic+wt e!t`ttlipii cd project: e1. The SSP%I k r~.ilI i Impact .Ari:ttesi; Report rrr:pictys ur. unusuatlly lnvv ehiet volume lat. 8 3 vicehicles tiff Nttrthhaund Queen Kaahui ianu ltigliway on the selected dares Ott` April 30. 2019, a rckclai+ and Aui;wa 4. 2019. a Saturday, compared with elite ?01S w itchcr f ri.,�,incc:riraj I'raat'iic !miner Arial vs4 Report_ which reported 1057 %chit: ds for January 14 and l . 21111}. h41 Ni.e tticia)s Hie L.Inusiall 10 reporlcci r •hiclk° vc unie of8..5 is also at odds wiiri 1', .urc 4 or 'lie SSI='V1 TrnIiic Impact -'analysis Report. wit ILh abuse approirna el; L# tirl vthiciew per hulir in 2t01 i,, for Narrthi mild Qaeen Kaahuianranu iiiplltr tv at 7a.in. Ilcrcnce ir1 'volume is rnork} than cicatihic the niaxinaum I OP -'n variation ti,encraily acepiG"d in Car.--to-dla.r tr1e£Lyurcut4`Itt and thus tuilydi ihIL: 'Fite rc:clltrtntctltl:.itinr h. SSENI Tra ric impact .#na13sis Report lair a roundabout aal ()awn n k::liltLtt>yrtru 1411%1av and 1 Itrrilrllrii Road tNl,rthl k itleon JSta.l1L tblt l tllc iratiic kurriduir. IrtteFectit ns Tit:u pivis c% arrank latrl r rii iin klnsi Jnnli7ctI prescnt tralilt ssr4;ty Iitabils#4 ooncelts tiff the goternmein. I. Thc r.:4omtrieneatinn by SSEN1 Traffic Impact An.iIvsis Report for tnuniLurirrg t}t' The intersect (in o(k) aLal icualuiniann l li,F=,hway and F wrikitii 1-{ighl.vax4 is inadequate. 1,:hiere,. ,t Iit.rc. till intersect loll p.r s'cs lltorr. [Mitt one I4t1r1;1tjiL under alI cCuidititirrls. it should hr pr'illriti .c'd 1 r 4�LI4I1' J1s4I LI. ii T1 ell' .a signal tor ltrtittilltitkrtrt. 1.111 circlll7tsratiLr ,ti ill he kmztcurflat :tl lati C17+k plopkiNccl pr>,jcct 7 In Sum. li1C Drat t:nvt,°«tlaelelit:t1 .h,.s<+siil i irlt'i SSPvI'I`raailic I�iip i.i rlrk rl sr Fitp,lrt dnk•,c riot presenl I:ic:t such that tha:.advr;rrsc impacts in exisi ii iitfr stniciLire and rest,ll ,_ .i,, 1, iridic can be fully trnds:rsLL►od and r;sttlL irl appropriate goy el...,,... 1 I,i r_ ,• ;, ,r se. 1 declare under I'Ien:1lr G i i., t' :rr [h.,e fortgaintt is true. Dared! Kailua-1 o:Lt_ 1 Irtti4 �i'i r }. ca �_r 2[1 70 SigriitLin: I"rinted name: Caradaci. J 1-1a1 4 l� � Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Candace Hallett Via email: hc�llettcj 7r�i`.c:arrl RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FON$1 for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawcil'li Island Dear Ms. Mallett: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 3. 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. comment 2: The potential for new residents of Royal Vistas to use Sunset Ave and Leilani St. as a cut -through to Kekuana'oa Place poses a reap threat to the residents of Kona Vistas, Streets within Kona Vistas were not meant to handle high volumes of traffic. In addition, our residents regularly walk along our roads, walk their dogs and children ride their bikes all on our streets since we do not have sidewalks. The increased volume of traffic due to the influx of residents in Royal Vistas can only have adverse effects for the residents of Kona Vistas and those living on Sunset. Response 2: While it is possible that after Kekuana`oa Place is connected in Phase II of the project, some residents could travel into the project site from the south by turning onto Sunset Avenue, then north on Leilani Street (or Pualani Street), then east on Lake, and then west on Kekuana`oa Place, this would represent the majority of traffic or where backups could occur. This is why the traffic study focused on impacts at the intersections identified in Section 3.7.2 and in Appendix 2 of the EA. Comment 3: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place, Kekuanaca Place is very steep. has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips September 13, 2021 Ms. Candace Hallett Page 2 of 4 to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns, Response 3: Kekuana`oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase las designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase II in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuano'oa Fsoce during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak eriod. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 4: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. it is a serious omission to foil to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure. like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 4: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana `oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectivelyj. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EAS. Comment 5: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way, storrnater would be appropriately disposed at in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Response 5: The EAdescribes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment G: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA"s reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 6: Intersections within the Kone Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local September 13, 2021 Ms, Candace Hallett Page 3 of 4 residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 7: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR, Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation, Response 7: Hawaii Department of Transportation (FOOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume, The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% friar the 2025 LRTP forecast, Comment 8: The TEAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response 8: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars. or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output, This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the bast projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 9: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaaohumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repoi 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahurnanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Rest rL e..9: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualcalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 10: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North} is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. September 13, 2021 Ms. Candace Ha lett Page 4 of A The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 10: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states. 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall root in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. miche Ie.Iefebvreg)stontec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three RC Maija Jackson, County of RemoPi Planning Department Mori, Ashley Ruin: +- 1,11e4 Hallett ehallettcj@grnail.camy Seat: Saturday, Oct - her 03, 202.0. 112g AM 7o: Planning lrternet Mail Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Project. EA comments Attachments: Royal Vistas Declaration - Traffic - Ron.pdf Please find attached an affidavit on. behalf of Ronald R Hallett residing, at 76-156 Karnchaenalrl St, Lot J4,2632 Thank you for your consider -a! ion.. Ronald Hallett 1)k(1.ARA l ION OF RONALD 12 11A1.I„F: [1 1, RONALD, R I!A1sl..E1"1 . declare: 1. I nen a. resricrt of [76-156 Kamehantalu t t Kona Vistas subdivisionj. Count}' of 1 -law "i, State of 1 Lima? i. Tilt proposed land development pr+,j c:t that is the subject nI"the pending Draft Environmental Asa u nl ,sulrrtiiitGcl by Royal Vistas flouting Project Tax Map Ke' Nus, {'z} 7x6-021:111 is, 7-06-02.1'.017. 7-6-(21:018, and 7-(,-021:0I{) North Kona District. ll:ac4 i'i Island. State of 1 !avail 'i affects ine personally as well is affects env interest in Nal property, 1 re ide. within _5110 feet [distance] of the propus,cd laid dercicFpnicnt project. In such capacities, I have firsthand knk-►t+,ledge of the 10 flowing. facts and could and would testify the to [leaned upt,ir. kelt) .o 1 have reviewed the pending DRA.FT ENVIRON \fENTAL ASSESSMENT including the'1'ratlTie ImpactAnttly.sis Report by SSFM [tttLrnai.n:ul, daawwd July 2020 sand attached as Appendix ? to the (DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. 1 urn specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts cts both within and tvithou: the, Kona Vistas subdivision hal lot full} 4.)7 accurate17.3dclressed in the SSI -;~41 Traffic Impact Analysis Report. 1'raflie anti the SSFM 'Traffic l.rtpact Analysis Report. are discussed in the boly, of the DRA.1"I' E'..NVLI&ONMENTAI, ASSESSMENT, at pp,. 48-56,67 and 71 . 2.a The potential for tww residents of Royal Vistas to use Sunset Ave and Lei St. as a cut-[hrou li LC, Kekraan a' a Place prsc:k a n.:111 L1trc,ri. Iu the msic imis of Kura Vistas. Streets within Kona Vistas we°ere not meant to handle high volumes of traffic. In addition. our residents regularly walk akrttg our roads_ walk their dogs children ride their bikes all on our streets. 1 since we donut have sidewalks. The met -eased Volutxre of tratIic due LC the in tut of residents in Royal Vistas can only have adverse effects for the residents of Kona Vista and those living on Sunset. 2.b. I am a senior with health issues c nd limited mobility so the t.tt itel± posts a serious threat to me pctirsonally. 3. I,tx tltt Kona Vises sulxli} (Sion. ttrc: propuscd project relies on [he use ofa ss.ibstarrdard rid., . inti l;uat1a'c tt Place. Kektuinrs`ot9 Place is very steep. has Itan Lied sign*. dist zees due to exticn.e curl and is, narrow `till' nLi sidewalks. 'thy° impact 'lot. increa.at ] traffic arising from Phase 1 4Lr1d Phase 2 5uildouts of the Royal Vistas 1 lousing Project i inacic,.. i tr.. 1•,.. addressed in the SSl M 'iraffic irrtpact Armlysis It port, which l'ocusv Qu.ccri ICaahurnam Highway. 1 ant pi t:..u1 c pnccrtl. IUULradding flumes•,• 1- ,,.1 . 1,:, and from a ;.cparatc subdivision will present dangers :ti, , • 'o, E1.,r - K kuana'oa. f'Iac . J uirnsitler that the Planning Ikea t.ntent should. require die tppli ::: << .._1 address these ct:rst arts. 4. -l'hc I )R.A1'`T ENV ASSESS MFN-1 n'quires ev'a]untion of, among, others, adverse Ketrarrhtrrt• frrtpa:rs. vrrc.•h as ppuialion changes car Oleo's on public aelines. See, C'htrpter 1 1-200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Instead of stuarely addres .ing these is:s°ues, however, the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT simply it pores them. claiming that "No adverse sc°ut~ndary erfeetS are expected sinee the development would urili7.e existing infrastructure. provide inftill housing.. and is note,;pectsd.. to result in substantial demand; to County services-" it is a serious omission for the DRAFT ENV II [)NllrllN"fAL ASS I'SSI'v1.1 ' '1 to fail to 'address the potential adti Lrwt irTil a tw €=1 incrcasin Alert -5C. of Siihstarnclard C7,4 i, ting infrastructure. lilkc Kckuana`oa Float. S. The 1)RAF 1 E•NVIR \\: f l .NT„” I ASSl_S'NiLNi addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would stdiarc:r:!r.rt adverse t./ ecf rug lruirlic• health, The Applicant claims. '1 -he Proposed Project ti_catnrd not :attest public health in ari}' way; stor1nwater would be appsopriately disposed (3f in drainage stnictutes. Traffic i tpa.et have Imautkail1deration tri_pssAi cazti,lesign," Emphasis added. This bald conclrtsiirn iliws riot address porcritiil adverse impacts as regiiired by Chapter 11-2091 -13. I Iawaii Adnti ni_stratt c Flu I es. ti. The Planning. l)t %ir mens 4.hs1old not accept the DRAFT RNVIRONMENTAI, ASSESSNI K•NT's relit:o e Asn the "Stilet I`raft c Impact /.j alvsis Report, which has the following def c•ienciL.s: a. failure to adtilre$s 'adverse lCaI 'ic impacts within the Kona "isms subdivision arising from the project; h. I Ire SSI Al Traffic Impact Analysis .Report uses a growth rate of 1%. in contrast to the ?%growth rate employed by the 2018 Vitcher f:nginecring 'I raftrc I rrpaei Analysis Report. Traffic congestion i&vet 'Setnsiti e to growth rate in a non-linear_ cr:Eroncntial reIntioti: c. TFtc SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report does stat rc,ccp_rta2:W Ti enw:rrtricrr ak housing characteristics common in liaw'aiT ac000ciing to census data ant' Ii ele utiderestirnates daily vehicle trips attributable to huildc art of the proposed project; il.. l he SSEM Ira! 1112 InlpJCL Arab"Nis RCpot-t Cntploys an Unusual l " low vehie1e volume of 853 v4h.it lcti Ii,c Northbound Queer! lKa.ahurnann lilehway on the selected dates of April 30. 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019. a Saturday, oorttpared with thc 2018 Witcher l:ngilteering Traffic lrrtpact Analysis Report, which rel r`; _ ; L. Licks for Januar], 14 and 15. 2016. both we kdrlys. The utiu uaLly Ion{ reported 853 is also at odds with Figur 4 411 Lhe SSFM Tratlic lwpact Analysis Report. which ; . l-proxirnately 1050 vehicles per ht-rtr in 2016 far Northbound Quem Kaahuntanu I Iitlrway at 7 a.m. "floe diflOrenix in voIunte is rnt*rc than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in div '.to-day measurements and thus unreliable; recommendation by SSFM Traffic lrnpact Analysis Repair! Ir r rt roundabout at Queen Kaahtimanu I lighwny :end kivalalani Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pas warrants Liu!. r-iuuin =signalized present traffic. safety liability conrxrns tor the govt'mrnen% The recommendation by SS I'M Traffic Inip ii.-t A.13,1t1v L Report for monitoring of the intersection tt1'Queen ltim.humanu 1liizhw y and Kutikkitri Highway is inadequate. Where, as here_ an itite.rseetiein more than one wr.i.r.ram u iJcr all conditiurli, 11 should ht prior-it-zed for +o lri'.V and CIesitLin 1)1- a s:gtta: for ir_ .Lallatior, I his circumstance will be exacerbated her the proposed project. 7 in sum, the Draft Env iroririi ntal .Asccs,grnent and SSF1 1 Traflk Impart Analysis Report dogs not present suFf..iera. credible tarts and analysis such that t3 a adverse impacts r+rr e stinr� infrastructure and resulting fieri increased irariic can be fully understood and result in appropriate gcr.-c rntnenr planning and ri pouase, 1 declare under pena.lty tst periary that the foregoing is true. 4 1 )ntok K :I -Kona_ Hay. October 3. 2021),. Si F, nature: t Ir Prictuii Tame 1( 5 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Candace Hallett Via email: hc�llettcj 7r�i`.c:arrl RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FON$1 for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawcil'li Island Dear Ms. Mallett: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 3. 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. comment 2: The potential for new residents of Royal Vistas to use Sunset Ave and Leilani St. as a cut -through to Kekuana'oa Place poses a reap threat to the residents of Kona Vistas, Streets within Kona Vistas were not meant to handle high volumes of traffic. In addition, our residents regularly walk along our roads, walk their dogs and children ride their bikes all on our streets since we do not have sidewalks. The increased volume of traffic due to the influx of residents in Royal Vistas can only have adverse effects for the residents of Kona Vistas and those living on Sunset. Response 2: While it is possible that after Kekuana`oa Place is connected in Phase II of the project, some residents could travel into the project site from the south by turning onto Sunset Avenue, then north on Leilani Street (or Pualani Street), then east on Lake, and then west on Kekuana`oa Place, this would represent the majority of traffic or where backups could occur. This is why the traffic study focused on impacts at the intersections identified in Section 3.7.2 and in Appendix 2 of the EA. Comment 3: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place, Kekuanaca Place is very steep. has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips September 13, 2021 Ms. Candace Hallett Page 2 of 4 to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns, Response 3: Kekuana`oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase las designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase II in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuano'oa Fsoce during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak eriod. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 4: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. it is a serious omission to foil to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure. like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 4: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana `oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectivelyj. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EAS. Comment 5: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way, storrnater would be appropriately disposed at in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Response 5: The EAdescribes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment G: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA"s reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 6: Intersections within the Kone Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local September 13, 2021 Ms, Candace Hallett Page 3 of 4 residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 7: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR, Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation, Response 7: Hawaii Department of Transportation (FOOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume, The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% friar the 2025 LRTP forecast, Comment 8: The TEAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response 8: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars. or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output, This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the bast projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 9: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaaohumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repoi 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahurnanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Rest rL e..9: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualcalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 10: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North} is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. September 13, 2021 Ms. Candace Ha lett Page 4 of A The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 10: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states. 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall root in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. miche Ie.Iefebvreg)stontec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three RC Maija Jackson, County of RemoPi Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: Ed and Janet Tong 4jtang€0091©a gmail carn> Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2G20 8:04 PM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: Royal Vistas Attachments: Royal Vistas.pdf Please 1ln tris declarations regarding ilk proposed Royal Vistas development below. Edward Tong 136520 I}l(I -NI,: 1111,1►I 1 ,1J!I.4 f�" Yt1 'lil 4►I i4 's;t4a1L' 1 }1-: 1 ;Ind IC'. 4' JipI'S'h`:1r rh:tt Is IN: atihl4ct iIf ihk: 11en.Jinr 1 ]ra T 1'r1%Irotlrnertiat r°ic L` srlS<"11I %UI1fUt ed Int R#rnj,:IJ \'Is(:r. F{crwiii N;,:,..1 Tari iu.C' i;�� -� (31 74x0'1. 1'110.. 7.r, 1121 01 I, 16-t1' I + I 1'I. and t, ' rth hoina. litawari t,l.irr,i. tikrtc` Mr( 1 las.% Al „cc, rrw IkrSllr4lrts air: vrk11 a .IlTortti i'4•JI wpm) 1 reside vortlin k bl c Idistance 01 Iihe opa..,I J land dwectopmcnt prriect In such ti:itiac1t,.w.. 1 havc titUtiand lirrcwk Ic(: g irl 1110 tollcw.trig I•:i•,:r.% jy141 .114,1 V% 11,110 ittilll2 tI -r+Lrr! 11 0:4111C,1 u1'ti'11 1 JO NIF ? 1 ■r: rwriewwcd l •:OLn}. 1)RAI 1- l. \•1Rroot4 AI �s`r..z.s\f('\T +twclaktirrt4thy 1ri1lfc: Impact AnaJ}sIg kri'i rl I wSJ h1 1rricrtint1f,n.el"rci, Llid ,r Iti .'rpt,rkfit' i,. Ili,- Iltt fir- T t`\ '`•FtE r4; 1r 'T 1r Ncsc- SSY4.1rNT I .tire :{s a IlirilIv N c. -t : trattic rrii art i ,tl; +r111an .ind 4A t?Jhos.li th+: 41'.471\ :1 -‘at :l dw" riot •a1 k [3r :icturatL . E' d rr. uJuc fir` \1 1:4fl-i. Intl' ct `nzI %ls Rcrk,ri ttri anti Inc %;!,;} 1.11.1 1 ra1i fes 1a.rl t :+e. :.,st,, F6,,,V4111 . dis.vi1:,Ned in the Li iti ,or iib L►RA' C NV1 R{-1NS-I NTA.I. ASSI.. at p€' ,y .5t,. [. ,111„.1 71 in t11c F.c4ti<i I'4}I.:Iw r :M l`. I�ILm. tII l!r1};x .J pr,*lili eche i it Th UNC Kira . t1- .1im,,1.Irei .:144i i.i I°. ha; Ii.rr!IEeri tiro+hr Lt`4t.ance.; Jtk4 1th 1 k': the ;1f trk"t '.i L!l1 irzi is :err ent I•r!%m 111ac• 1 and 1"h.e •, w "r,,IT . wI IIla' Ci+)v:11 V1ti1-.4,, Ifi'+9r i�,E! F'r,rns r iw in:/4I 1Li.rrb-I% 1 5SFF;A•t 11-J13 is F:.•p1,rt w,hxh ftircusc, instead d,n t_d:ltitt; K iuirn:gnt Ii.:eht4.,+. o .1771 r.k7lriiL:r?w 41rrt_+rrrirdi aLsi.IF11.1srsp nl.LnriFlrtJti Ol;tkfdc It -41.N It, II -°.1 t', .11, prt'w'klt (kitt!t.'rti.',Fkl1lll14 .!I1Mt h. 6,u.ksht dti.ihi ix I ,.41rtsidt-r [ha! she I'I.ulrrlrk [ P -f1:tl'[nlL11t Jk1tile# r1cgI1trr the appli..ta 51 ki addre54. Corti rr I!7* I ht I)R_\1. I h \VI1 uN\l1 N.1.'sC \. 'ws0.11=r. 1 rtgt.[rc. ,�•.. `trv• In ll!- 41:11L"t�. .rrrri: rl ,4JJc f: FAr 1• r, ra f•!,^ , -1. I I • 'IX, 1 -1 v 1ia5+1:tii "tdmTni4rati>,c !Cite 9n•cto,..tdi r.:° .Ir4;Ir, All 1-NVIRON:M1:'. .A3. \] ;qR11d i. IJ 't11. ,11limp _ r , •rllµ:tr7.' 4* i'L1'. s k fir^ „iv �+.ati17 1111 rl4' yy r•ti1•.�TRFti• 1 f11^:r•oSta7�'h" •;.I`k 41...L� IP111II l', _a1TF�r91°' a.n..J .1; r,:7111L ttl bUh�Ln iti.i� d!crrtar5F1• II, It 1, v.N..ion, fur lilac• (rpt .,11 1 1 '~ti v1Ro%Ml'N tA1. .SSI-SS!'.t1-..N11 to Lill scv JJJrlrlve'rSce rr11ArLIs rri rr,r..rc.st•,mi' rIw 1e.~c 111 StOIwt,knk.ird etisrifg mfr.' irnulIil.c` 1ti�°I a r45.t .,,z IFI.s1c. 1110 1)R .1 I 1 \VIIC()VAI N. 1 ".1 t * f SY..I1.N.1 lraflik IrapaLi: iFtrlt- Ih i he coni >(t M FI 1.%IA:tlicr iIIV prdrlrat ti'lnal.l hall a wiIrk,Nripziit,ii IJd1tt rI d•?ld'd 1 Pp; r:,htn h:dadrh puI lk. bc.tlth ,rl srti SRF{rlkt►.:[C1 4karu1a11ti sf'-1+k'•r11rk,1lilw .lbtiitF td1 dal ti: thra:rrlcc .'Itillrlr4~` Ir:1iIF� t:ri�.hl� have. been Oaken into careful conside3r, tiQu in pipict cte?sgn. ' Entipt a$ks added This h~fild conclusion dues nul address fx lerttr4l eetllrekse rrrl rads as re-wtJ1reii by ("h:uprld-r 11...'okwl I. 1lay.:ii: Sr INV f:ol♦-% e, l rs,.: Iitiall,:1:g 1.Icilartil, 'II t1,..,,1.i ."YYt ,LLL j+r tt 111 i,1. I . 'I1 c1'.\T 1 tI '441 44.s N, N le;?t.irl4. ti:t th. '."k1 V1 "Er.Rc'11•,Ir ';e h: h 1t,i',Ihcr'!_ tailor to 4:1'hc [rJ11dl :ripj&1.I,11r tr„ h, 1'_Y t', I,t ;iih�1:�.:•,d.•r. anSing. from F+tc�ik` i„ Tlk- SSI" `11.1 Triltit 11111146'. Ank31'sra Ri.-port 1.04:N wAli1 rata !GIs.. Est C intrust l4+ the 2% E"n1{''loN=.:‘i 1+ .hc 7111N' itl1i'i7,L'ttki nng 11':iIlit 1int p.:Mt RcTair7. 1 rail lc clasigi.:+iltiei in i T ,n-Lunt:as rrlatit_1+1. 11'4, `s t ".I 1 r.11iz.cp.d.1" irxA tt - ,e: rvrartrlrl.11 hsnrstrl1 1:h.1rz4-tcns'tiu v-.'Irritn,rr, in 1 kn,%,111 JL ordin tV :i'nsti I 'it:.. Ind day r:'• ftaiii ; hick Sra s nttriStrt:thla* 1`+ 1w11ti itJt t'r tIM Work, 1 +~�;"4# 1Yr+lCCI ��; al 1 r�.` ^1 \1 1'. :1 l:. 1r :r5 y, t %1, S14i1ti 1{,'!x*1l :'11411 , 411 {1'! 11 t"4.-17 ,L• Lritirtr;; ,.d 1 (../•J1/4 n )..a hurflinLL 11101'144 w1.4 l*d', Lill: `kfici.lctl C{,1`t"5. tr'1. 1T+ni ;ti '919, rd w;.4 r ..1, .1r:.l i,,, r ?1]19. a `+4tiurriaF. kt11tll1tl1txl +w irk] the X1.11$ '1�i.tt:Ilcr 1 f:1114 1.14Alc Illr ,,wr .�r,.l...Ia. It; ' ri wh1Ch rcr•ror:..i ii}4 j +rchrcl4;a Icn Jul -m.1 r' Hold 701: . 'h„Ittt tirt'ua.I1r.,1I1 h.'. : j. rri4ti 4'dunk IV: t'ir4t is alsi' 1 i'urc 4 i tk SSF'I1 Traffic I,T1113u 11sal1,iw : ,-T*Yrrt. +..1ii laa114+v> aPV:1..X1d1r.:,1:I 1,1CI .1:1),sA -: Tkr 1:t•uru .'U 1, lila' ►i41Tih Iiiini! l MVC! L1;th inidl,1.11 III41ika r: ° 3-111 1Th;." LiitiL.Tence rd1 I�sr1`w t 111%.•1 L' LIuJJI dQut'1 l3'I ttta"kirltulll Ir.r'+. %:kriiiTiori Y"tiw afik +t4^IL'M.t °.4 ooR.:a ri.1 M s•. dArlrt 11ai1tilti. 11 gj %-ir,-rtil", 171ti f.l.ui Ir11k'l' rinlasi i 1+. sti1 :.t 114,1711+ 1T' 1{4tkrrt tor :7 rE+16d1Y4t:1141j' 3 r,)u1,:inKrinnarn; arid Htzibal.ii tirrthl is i Y*t 1,'{•rii 144 WI rt1+' rr:itlttk rOrn4 r Ir.+ k 1 tan. that .,:�ti .aerranf a but r 114u0 ur L JLli7rki rrc .int traflk IrjhhC11�, I Li> is4 :Ilea.0\ narrilr1t, L� w, 1 1 hi. ro44lriir's1t`titi.fliIr'�L''r11 SSFM 1rilllm' 1 rnp.l. . • r i"ili lt3itSrort 11 �' :�1 EI 1nr4rwc:Iiolt tit i) it f aahanlanu HijhvGis 3n.1 is/Dakin+ tri_ L'L1 tar►. � �1crt .I•: I7vrc. sat 1111.-r` .-. Ii irl rl::inl 0rl Si.: rr'.l'r1 uLnJ -T :lll L`aNlilii1c..114„ 4111.+'u1J li prlklritdI for suMJ. and drnii,911.1 .I �rgrwi tsar HLStkitic.tU. 1'his eirturrFtinc4- vain hc• a'alar-rh:Itrct tri ut proivrted pr.>>4 ct a lrt gum nkIn+r11r1ilkl.tl ,tiS64.-Nti11 11 a1J SS1 \i fir,,i1ic 1lirft.x1 .1n.rl>«�I, Report (kw', rlklr lyrt•,a•t7! rlal'iala'lli. irti1141'1I' tact, an1d;IP.11ti';;I* sl.lkt` tIlur tti :id L. t' Iia .Jr4 i.)1 cusime Iorlwtruktupc and tvsulitrw, [Torn Irk:i...s►a-II trsiII t-,:ur 4 Ctilir unkic ^ tl+;}cl and ra•h+uli I11 srpturinah-s rnrri*nt pl inr}111st a.!' t+*:,,ron 1 Jxia.tk Itrlurr ttl.tr llh' forirgouri fti tnx E}.01:43 K.1111114- a,II.I, 11-15A I IL2;11.7-11- 4 4 t 1'I. I'I:ituIc '`f11,��J r1:1st77L' ar i 111 C1 K 1115!"v I. 1 1 L '. irks 4 iJJ7it :• 1 ,,w4�. I. t.E'4 L11 I i r•rti,x: ,I. l tit• 4.1: j44' °.. ih.. 4ti4 .`1L 71?4. 4 P.4.11 LAI -,...+•••_ ,s,'C'I!r �t; °rtUlt'C►I 11r 1%Lig 1 I6 `rir;C•i_i ,11.. Map 1 t "lik'.. I I 17-r1-�l� I11tr 7 -CI - :0 1 7. -ir-:{117. 7,6-01 .Ur 8, and 7 ft l„I1 i:<r1`� NvrU.1 P,vir:,! IDrii;LSI. 114►Aaj i bl:ilrd- Stitt:i. 1 11;1".ri iinkTh`plc `et rrl l!► a� v►t•!: I. F111-4 IM n1} rntrn"J ur rr.fE I+r'a>Ilrrtx 1 rt -‘41117 v6flhr,rl 1 1,L.t.T I �',: Frrt.6`j srl 11rC j'rlrl trJ 1:1.IrI ti:4tClIL ,ir4 t rrk[y.l Iwo first! Id i.nom.1t'i..11*1.: (It 111i. t:lL't4:rnd k.. •&iIil L.*i111ori 0t()4.14.1 41. 1 hr,.c the 1)14:1I 1 1;: it t- \M1;N I Ai \S'1 N:11 and :Il? Axl I I r 1 ,,i»KI 37%41411 1 I1..1' .II :`r tL ! i :lti, tt::-ttor:I 6I ray.:,Iaj 11arti 1st titt ai J UPLst.itr. nu t 1..,. 1... ;.I:r,'.r, .• 'Ll tri 1 i I?ltatr 1 rrtlrrrFv,rwr,r;rl i1ti~ .'.rFerrl�rrt 4 1 .11111 ;4'AL,11"i; rlt.;r lr"I.., +.714%11 Lk t !n sire., r1'I.:{lr.ttl 1 II0,ir,lrEITIVTll..rl ry •` t I•,::rt r!tic;, rp+t lls.,..!NN NUJ I3•.i11 t.h.t .tire,! r +«7x74 L1141 1 aC 1711,4 _�;lr; +Ir ilfl;u I, rrn ti4 I'r111'Il1=. ,rRu1 o1I L r'rilT1 rri 1.r c!I141.1'41+to, 4I Ir11111'1t:"FILO as:Lartnot 1, ,14: n1can:nt.nul dctall., trr i tikl:n d 1;i 11ri: lulu! . lir 1 JIa1LIi[*t1CYd !t, such urn1:I 1%11_11 pr. 011-'1_1 17li Ul.14i L_ anioi)' 1 ' :Rr,' con, 1LIcon krt [E'c° .L1 )I14".It's! or .ac ct_Ti.np' 111,,' 917L"k'.1 inIr Iru&. [rare- volt citr;tpb, +�s; i[:a ri'nnl(aiwal, t 1)%111 1 n r..r1ra1L°fit.1' nS:Lrc h rCLisc, T.-1 Iww cpeiifi:.a.1Iy v hat Infra.st'r ctur•: Ir lj"15'.�'r7Ftfll:, 'S T1 rt+ uI t j :EI In.: i 1.i ;Ix (. Kin') r aa[1a;,t' S. sicrnY and `Sr ro,. urn pr -Tv enI. ru*, .,A.1.1", funs.: tit.n.. 1 (k-a,:I,ar. Mar#tiLf-Ci'-a]R err t9R`r urt !hitt the IrtrC6'e}1rnr 14 tUuL I }Jt4sa"r_ sIri'n:Intire I'7111 I o.1 fuirnir A C t� t t —4 tit ; 1L 1l14 I•1,R.1 1111`k 411 . Jot Luc 1 1 ,ns .1 r+~ likiit # 11 [• 1+71,a as.IN,11, i .1u1It+ <+1 1 1.lrt.u't. NUJ_ .1' f [,x$..,: a 1111' Pi+o, '1 11„1cLt IIL.i1 til[ Lh12it .'•C lt:lit l ::ti 1±eFt11`.i lai_i. '\ 1 I,} I1'+IrL. Ii royi'tt 1 %Lit+ 1 1 111(3, +). 012! .1 1 1 1 4i th ict. i two, uf 1 El and, State tit I I y't au 1 ".11#1311tH .1'w ;}r 11 .1•. ,211ct. t`• it'kt E'ItC1t:+t in tti,.11 1-pn.,1 . r11 1i4: �tittfrk '1Al llhin 11 u.011.1EI+410 SO. I.11ti.Yeit u 11.1 r I,1,111.,,,".1 [MO 1.1, s 171y i I,1 rr„1.`:1 In viol 1 ,t1 11w aahtfc iuttf t1t� i►tl tv t.11ti '<itcfclo 11( czillcvi • r 1"c • Dkr11 1 1 'w'► 11,1,11\101 \ 1 11 Vs.L1 'S\I1 1 :1141 I' ! 1_°...I I .,. . .1" ,,..1..°, ,a;.°#11ti't :1111+'IttT L'<tL -Wil:°tL� � •1..,1ry11`►..il-'L [ - a` ti.,ik c'i1R4i;1+^r :r#.1I #ft.° alr:. fs,u-e It! Cd 151 -4u1111,111 ,,1'111L• 11.1-,a,!1 f°CSt IT IF«914'r11;I1 J11 1110.1:01 4 1 .ir .111.21-h: 111.1 sui-imanual cvitic t 4 i,'ti17,t- 1h it 1ITC 14.1f til 14'n4.i`r11h.. :1-+1t4'I 1°Id1+1 F44110:1 111'tItUJti'. kat rr'. &ifihk 111. 111.611+,1 ,11-10 11.1e.1iY ualt'1112rik 9I It9Ira 1 1#.:111% !tro 1113'I CAI 'tl1dit% o ictoi ill Nur +e1 137 ih. 1)r4I-t 1 1s. rimirik:1iL I .1_,:i:titst,rr 11' 1 he I Etw11LL11.1ce 'sI1dt 1.. 1n IrniP.,rt;.UIt 111.,'.w _1, 1 _ 1k _:° 1] anti :irutl:lLlV4 i tkii' i u+f11J41 ti#Ttd... th.41 ;;411;74'x it tis411.11rY17f for x.:hlhL'1 t4i 1 ha,t 1114 ,:ontt"Fns u1. n 1hc I' . 1I.11ritirl :In.i anal'r r d 1*, 111•.et 1'1+h.1Lu 1 Saiwri:. a cops tot 1.4,hicli .titett9lc i hi "sLI r 1111' }hal: 1 11%Irolhtlo,. e: y 4:n . r.cint 75+ i:illtfi'otrtr t:bti'9w:ihld! .irt.t}li..vonl 1 l:.tr] t:lzllur.! ...'-_°i1._r limitrook.. let alonc pro} `r1. I 3:T1Lrlt171Ltrr; th.; r.tir,,r n ni. ! 1.9.1 ht Tv, 1 4d I41:04.rtso. thc ltxatioo_ dAta rocro,e7, an.l pre-.c^>r-s. t.krn i,1 theJI 14.4a! +:a ,.1, , • yr ',rc* rtT tin tIir cut n t ixtr`.'I I s 1 tit:clar: UikICf I'•rturti !hat ihe Inregoine 1; Ir [}.iicJ }sial ii-ks>Iu II.IK.,i',. 2 1,4 1t110 f "I 1 tiik..i! r° rnL Below aro communications with Mr Tom Poroku Stone about the iwir[ walls ancl Fi Ids with a Kona Vista Hoard mariners Below are communicaTions wilt, Mr. Tom Po.-0.1-u_i Stone about the twin wails and the slide with a Kona Vista Board memere Ori Mon, Jul 1'12.t:, 8'55 AM Tem Poli SterlA > wrote' To anSiwor tr.: • ; 1 ..-,-)parrIlhil tha wells ; Nat nilk .; hr. • ..-114s but --• ; . • !!. • : 1, ; - ;I; ,• - ; or-..• and in ar, oi I -• • '1,,,V1ICTI you mrat-, rn:tvirigif !cp. •- i• ! ;1•-•'. • ; -: L. 4 ••••• , • HAW 1J1,81 f7V0511 lire En 8 whei • • i 1, • ;:, 1.• c::• .11 ,nair • •I • • ;,•• - • •72.1. an LI._ ; The L I, • • ; • • • 1. • • •• ; : ••• ; • 11 • • ! •! • • ••• areas Irriportan' • • ; and - :•• : 1, ':"••! ., • • '.1.• ••• .• •• :1••_,•••.,•• ;1 • • • • ,7;r[fr'..•-• •-• .• • • •- -:• • • •"- _ , . , •!, • •.•_ , , ':!! niicration ph. • • ; • or Pn'ah • • • - ,..• ; -g; I VT,ilet0 the est, •I . Un Mon, Jul 1 2019 et f3:15 AN' john Torn. Thank yot.4.1,+r '31;1,112 ria tame to educate ma. 111s grally appreciated. Tru e history of Holu4loa remarkable. •• :.•.; ,ave drily scratched Una surface o!--•• .11 "t.. 61E1cl po; I •lcia at the 1; i••• ; rouk, wall •-•'•• Th; ,•• - • :•:"1" P -•I'' •••••.; .• • •••1-6.,.,•, -• -1,. t.•••.; ,•• ; 1; 1, . •;. ; • ,),1i - • .••', Jo any • ; • -1 -rtur ....14L-tfu: and graieful,, Jutui 1'1, 2019, 6:35 AM Tom wrote' •••• ; • • !tut beer in t:act forcount..; InTn-• • • ...Frigoino MP:mg:pi all my reco:•,..;,— •11,htL- :r r •;; 6 are ,••••• •"•., -;•.1 h. - u1 that slide ber;au5e l'Ice the pa: •••; 31 mat ara•e. A lot ..nz c•i•'• -•:-•:•7_,•11 cultural larldscapain Ills area. uver the • yrs,:i and with it m . landscane pL.,izz:!e. 1 -Kai .1,3 -;ah of rhy Iiiri rld ; • ; • focus ,11,•• • ,, : :0 .. • • • • • ••• ;• •••• ding cultural _.•-•'•••.- •-• • 1 -4 our bcfrintunity rags/air.. ••- •••• •• •. , . • • ! : ; •-•1-7orre. The o.,•••••• 1.. •• • n-it;4•2,gra the d1...,11 -Au -n1 !,-_4•••1•7!..••• !••••• 7,1 .4 •• ...4 . • •7 tiVith tnat •.•;•• r.; ,•••••••- -1 . , l• .:" yw3ars ;r05; a•lorid rotc..61,u.EE Lior._ • • •• • ; • ; • • • ,; • ' ThE; tc 1 I '4, h \Tsfr yahoo rviait of A joke the?: had existed. Ths thC. flir. are still " ' F ; • .1 this great oomplex. VVe i. •,.l . • ..:;-ning to hoh_ra stide and sr.i•. • iiId.• -:. • .7:117.7 carnplax and tiovk, this WOLli(i on ifiric at this porn 1 believe the • with Hawaiian cu. l. ,..alFtraditionat architecturallarch,— you need someone to do irt-depth researdi, prepare oreseni can discuss this. Henry PC,ekelluna provded th 'host detailtki .. • ; knowledge, interpretation, and undemtandind nf thia,cci signirioant; http,O,ottiail.yalloo.corn.'11.`7,-'.r.,....!.k?Nword=subjecIV43A%22Fwd%..... • :s no'r- C4t . • .•,,tio11 • •;•-..its on . rffi not ,•••ins•-i•rie — '•-••lovv, I • •.:•.-31 but if 'ray • Alon we • • of •j L.:all trrterta. :s Me Ra haaha'a Torn P4!Inakii stone Kanalu (1(3a) is a .-%Cl1 c 3 non prold organization dedicated to cultural & ocean education based nri traditions of our kipona, Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Mr. Edward Tong Via email jtong60091 >g ail.com RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI far Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, HawoFi Island Dear Mr. Tong: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 4, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaohumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications 05 all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuanci'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuanca`oa Place to Royal Vistas k not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle or Kekuanaoa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2021 Mr. rdwnrd Tcng Page 2 of h Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at c different place or time than the proposed project, These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuanc `oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The 'Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been token into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does riot adcl-ess potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Admir rrcative Rules, Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 3: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance an the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. R rsyonse 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic, Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an ircre se in traffic volume, The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Trunsportation Pian forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up v th the 1% growth rate, Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast. September 13, 2021 Mr. rdward Tcng Page 3 of h Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. ResPonse_l: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers SITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output, This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Innpact Analysis Repot], which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TZAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 w❑s compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TZAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahurncnu Highway and Huaialai Road (Northl is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 9: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others, The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TZAR does mention where September 1a 2021 Mr. rdwnrd Tong Page 4 of h an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. Comment 10: I am specifically concerned about drainage. The steep topography,. historical rapid stormwcater run-off and associated damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment. I am aware that this project will have serious impact on the immediate and surrounding area. Response 10: Kona Three LLC is not aware of any damage to adjoining properties, including Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway, from water flowing from the subject property, Comment 11: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood. A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future. As 1 understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among other errors. Response 11; Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two C..)uniy-owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Anal EA has been revised to clarify that on TMK (3) 7-6-21:19, 'Infrastructure during Phase ff of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuana'oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kona Community Development Plan's CDP's} ''Official Transportation Map." For TMK (3) 7-6-21:18, the project includes infrastructure for channeiizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the CDP's "Official Transportation Map." Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarity the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage plan which would be reviewed and approved by Department of Public Works. Text has been added in Section 3.3.2 of the Final EA to identify possible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. Comment 12: A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At c minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements are required to fie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function. September 1a 2021 Mr. rdwnrd Tong Page 5ofh Response 12: The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA. Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Plan would be identified at a later date. the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed. Comment 13: I am specifically concerned about archaeological significance. I do not consider that the archaeological studies in support of the DEA are adequate. I am aware that substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Holualoa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA, The Holualoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. Response 13: As described in Section 3,6 and included in Appendix 5 of the EA, two Archaeological inventory Survey (AIS) reports were prepared for the project. As pard of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their significance. The AISs were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rules § 13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. All 40 sites were considered 5ignific❑nt under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211 ) documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a holuca. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is sirnilar in constructed to similar historic era rock wok const-ucted along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. The only other parallel 'walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA1 #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wolf at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a holy° course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a holua in the project site. Comment 14: I base my concerns upon the evaluation performed by Tom Pohaku Stone, a copy of which is attached. The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features can be understood let alone properly preserved. The DEA must be revised to address the Location, data recovery and preservation of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject parcels. Response 14: In the email provided, there is reference to "the portion of the hclua at the Holua inn [that] has rock walls on both sides" and refers to parallel September 1a 2021 Mr. rdwnrd Tong Page 6 of 6 walls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31 182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 wails which are LCA #3660 boundary walls. Primarily, Mr. Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhou to i' he south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuna. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he`eholua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the near coastal region. However, the complexes are located more than LO km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal, sacred or sociopolitical complexes, or a hdlua, within the project area. The existence of a holua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone. As discussed above, there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a h5lua course existed within the project area, We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808} 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Starrtec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. rnichele.le febvrelVsta ntec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori. Ashley From: Sent To: Subject Attachments: Mark Powell <markp50@ott_net> Tuesday. October 016, 202C 4 30 PM Planning Internet Nail Royal Vistas Housing Project EA comments Royal Vistas County docs.pdf Attached are 3 different comments about this project. Archaeological, Drainage, Trac_ Mah alo John 116584 DE( I AKA l'ttiN [tl 1\Its ItAr.O1.t?(irCA1, 1. JOH\ FM}V4° l_1.. declare. 1. f ant :r resident nI lona Vistas subdivision. County u1 1 -lav ai"i. State ufl�a► '1 -he prc:c o3ed [arid development project that is the subject of the pending C)rafi; ia_nvirunnierital Assessment submitted by Royal ' 'ist:t 1 It um. Project TIN: Map Key Nos. (?) 7-6-0211 1116_ 74)- 02 7. -€i-021:1317, 7-6-W I:tt18. and 7.6-0 t:sbl •, \ trth INnn) }I riot, IState of 1 affect:i tic personally as well ,as tacos property. 1 reside hair± rtrile oI the proposed ed land de%elopment project. In such capacities. t hal..e firsthand knowled .te f the: I �Ilci win lasts and could and would testily thereto} it'cal led ttlutirt to do so. _'. 1 haa*et reviewed the pending 1)RAI"i' l:' l•'ICU)NMla;NTAI. ASS SSN11a,N 11 and tEttLtclirm encs_ 1 :tett sn cilieull% unite riled whom: the Ind the windi e Bred trrtii !cts that could he lost Ver., lik eh that more hand cxetivatIon is ticcW.i, t , r..._ r , •..nplete site Orrll. five aeers w•a:;i barely .scratched doing light hand excavation 'ttan' lltitt i. do not consider that the archaeological studies o or the Drail 1. nvi.ronrucntaI Assessment nre adequate thereof -t. 1 arts aware that substantial evidence exists that the i s:ncl encompassed by the suhjtct land parcels includes fe turea 4tf the Ik1ualoa Slide_ including rock walls that are inade ivatel} described as agricultural walls in the ur haeolo ical. studies trlfsred in support of the I)ratt F nvirenmcnt:tl Asse strtent. The llolualoa slide is an important llawaiian c.ulttara1 �utd archaeological feature from pre- v`estern contact times that cannot be replaced it` damaged or destroyed. 1 I 1 -rase MY Conr:crtis upon the evaluation and 4nalysis performed hy 1 om Pollakr] Ski In SUM.. the I lraft l:nvironmerrtal ASseSsnwnt ctoenut discuss suficit uc filets and ;maLysis such Thal ehc aiaaaptrrtant l-la►vai'ian cultural and archaeolrq2icaI reatt]re c;ri[r Iv iindorstcx _ 1(.1 alone properly pr'cs ry d. At a niinrrnua7, the Draft 1:7,nvircinniental Assessment must Ire revised to n lclrc:;;q Lhe lucntiun, .lata rek:0Vci- and preservaticgn cti-the1unloa Slide votnpr)nerdLs presc]i[ WI the subjfx1 plArccrsrid,xther historical rart]Cncts. 1 deet ►re order persalt), 0/I rjury rla:;]t LIL Ii►rs juirrg; is true. Dated: Kaillra-Kansa, Iau i`i. % C16, "•C J► 2020. r Signatur(7 Illd(4e1( Printed !num': 2 DIA '1,ARA 1 ll)N OF f)I AINAGF I..li tl I\ [IAA. 1.1.. l I auai ar reiident pit Kona 'Vistas .suhdiviwrcn. tAlum.). ,71 llawai`i. Sure cwt`1-ia~ axi'i. line proposed land d v.lcaprracnt project Lbw. is tlt,: 5utal;. t 11 Late pciiding.. Drtali 1~nvtruaurtrnlal Assc snacnt submitted bky 13.Llyall Vistas Housing Prui .t Tax Map K. y Nos. t'ti 7-15-021:016, 7.&. 1121:1)17: 7-6-021:U18, and 7-6-021 •019 Itiafrlla Kin tlititriwt. llaauai'r I51:tr1d, S1aitC nl'I Innal`i affects nit persona h., as wc11 its affect my interest in real pri perry. I resile within Hal f Ni ilc f :1i,t;7ucl of Lb: propi,i 'ti land dcvelupment traject. lrr sorb capu:ities. 1 have Ifirslhand know: •tIgc. ilk fol liswnag Facts and c4afilJ and iiNoniLl ,estify [hereto it -c ilcd mitran tel CIO sca. 2. 1 have re% ic«.d the ;. itdin ; DRAFT ENVIRON'ENT,°\L ASSESSMENT and 4atta :hryyents 1 :xnl specifically concerned about! clrainagc,'runntt water quality. ,►rotinclwtttcr r.-..harg.c. flooding. 1 llcrc is no drainage plan that 1 could find. Prefects need to have this plan lir ;t IA it al tcr. These monster building;: appcar u> lin c major nuii'1't}fat can add tkl the problem. rhe steep ttapvgrupll). historical iapid slLarrnwater run-caiTan,J .a;y. rlr4i1 .iaraaa e present laalard.s that are not adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment shat 1 could. Fwd. II,t rcol 4 I am aware Haat flooding has occurred ? lakai of the highway. In Burn. the Draft Environmental Assessment does not diseuss Bulli lent facts and aryal} is such that. ilii tiecu.ssary Jrainapc improver -nerds and divcrsiuns Lada wr.erslocrJ. A proper environmental assessment carrutut leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the thture. As 1 understand it. such circumstances air told lead to uri}awtnl project stgt' nt{iiint�, 1 'k17k41l1 tM ei- t•iTltw., i5. A barc conclusion by thc applicant or acceptiJtg authority that n-etle.J infrastructure •ill ccrntpty with overn+tient reguiuti4)ns is insufti ieni. At :t minimum, the Draft Environmental Aasa.sm nt marl he revised to show specifically what intractrucr ur rnnrrovemenrw are required to. tie into rile County's JJraina4e system and how those Illlproti wownts will iursct.ion. 1 declare under penalty perjury that the [hregning is True, DUtc4l.Kuril uaTKci1U.1Eutu4tti•i..Jt/'&s •-+ } ' 2021J S !palmy: tiruttc7 2 r)h:t_`LARADION Cal" 11 A.1=1-1(' )11 IS Pit )4l'EL.declare: 1. 1 'trn ;i resident ul Ktttluaa•Kt'n an1.1 live in the ktma Vistas tabdi inion, Counr:i. of la 'al't. Sta1:e til I.1ac4ai 'a. f he prc+pesed land development project that is thy; subject of the pending Draft L.nvirohntenta] Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas 111'3t1.sirig! Project Tax Map Inc} Nos. 1317-6-02 l .014, 7-6-1121 alt! 7. 6-02I8. and 7,.it.t.)21.f/19 ticttth Kona i)kstrict.. l I:iwi i'i Wand. .it 11a«4i'.1 at1l-0`ts ince pct finally iris well u. ;ar ecis #ia ° into}rc t in rail property. 1 resde. lt,jli'tnile iil'the prtit+ciaeti IanJ devett-tilt-lentproject. In such c;tlr;aciric . 1 have. arst and hltucwledgc cline 1,]1n vir and could and w[>aa1d testi t' thereto it'wallt:d. up at to su. 1 have rc`° is °...1 MI; pending k11 AFT E iVLRONMEN A:iSINSMENml inwludirrj ilii k'r:^I' i'il►;:�a `, �l..;s R.epcira by : I'.11 international. ►l4tit.l Jule 202(k and attached uv Appendix 2 r.o rhe l)RAIT ENV] Ri ]NN111 1 _NL ASSESSNfENT. 11utit spcGi tirrtily concerned about a<lw crse traffic impacts both t ithb and without the Kona 'Vistas subdivision that para` not fully or accurately addressed In the SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report. 1'r:tl'lie and the IS..SP4 T;st1'fic Jrriiaact lrialcsis Report. are discussed in the bud). of trio l])F' AF"1 ASSLSS k=,1*,' -1 . as pp -t -56, 67 and. 71. 3 1n the Kona Vistas subdaxi:ion. the proposed project relies on the u of a u:tsrtarn.lard roadway. Kekuaxra'cra Place Keknontroa place is very steep, h.alimited sight distances due Ri the grades. extreme catNes ;and is narrov` ►sitkh no curbs, gutters, or 5idewaalk.. 1 The impact ofincrcasecl tr.ttfic arising film Phili4,2 1 and 1'1twsc 2 IiutIdout; of the Ruva1 w°iat:t� IIcjusitat Project f, Math:quite ).. a.ddresseL1 in the SSFM 'Trani 1ni t,:t Analysis Report, which focuses instead on Impact, al Ong Queen Kaahun anu Highway. f aria 1 rtit;nhirlr concerned tb.x adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a ttzt,.,, aL will present elanucr+ and eortgestitrtt ter resiclents alortAKel u ann.`trtt Place. I considerr :Irl !:: 1' ;iryrtiattr Depat-mrtent should require the applicant to address these concerns. Fico} a. V]stics road system should tbllow Count) standards c'f Nlauka tea Maki with a cisnaliaed itlterieet},in at the highway 4, '11tie 1)R1\11. I NVIRt)N! 4J NTAL , S I,4 h1} N.1 iet�I�irc�+ CVrth tion ut'. among other; sir/ti'r'e: ' tee nd dry imparts vueh ei.y` fit] treditrifFri ekirtge'frczs rlrt inoblii fiat liltieti So; Chapter 1 I-211011.1. , llw;jii A 1Mini srtttive Rules. trtr-teal.of squarely address inig these i rsues. however, Ow DRAFT ENV IRON ME.. TA1. ASS ESS MEN I' simply ignore thent_ elatrntiitig that "Nta adverse set;t ndary of els ore eXpeet:c-d incse: the development would utilize: existing intra, tructute, provide itiiill housing. tinct is not expected lo result in substarttierl demand tat C'aaunt) ,.er.ices.' it is et c°ritsua utnia5i0r for the 1)1 AIF 1•-.NVIRONMHN jA I. ASSESSMENT to 1ai1 Lu address the potential_ adverse impacts of increasing the use of substtindard cxktirtb, irtrraslructure, like Kekuana'oa lace with y ung children pr .sem..,. The DRAFT F Nv1RoNMFh"i'AL ASSESSMENT' addresses adverse trzfic impacts only in the context of whether the project W011 [CI flaw rr a`46,8rureiicd G t c'rrve eekrcTr r�ra Public 1i trlrh, The Applit:am claims. "Mt. Proposed Project would not affect t public health as any wny! stem'mato'would be apprt}pritttels disposed of in drainage s'truchirtLs. 1 rallie imaaets have begirt .a a A sec enation in prtjc i dittsagti." Emphasis. added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse imparts as rapt Wed by Chapter 1 1-2(10.1-1 _ . l l.a■w ii Ad.rnini;trz 1ve REi.k■s.. 6. The Planning Department should not accept the DRAF1 kNvIRO\Nik l AT ASS!-SiSM Ts reliance on the SSI'M Traffic Impact Analysis Repon. which has the following deficiencies - a. failure t tr;ittic impacts 1nco i shout the erotic Kona Vistaa arising fn Pm the project: 1�. 1 Iae' S1'?vl - rr R is Impact .Analysis Report uses a ga'rtwi.lr rate of 1 %, in .intrnsi to 1114 '.` t!rcitctla rate eniployed by the 201g Witcher I: narii eeriri" Traffic Impact Analysis Report, Traffic c%)ngeitiort i5 very stnisit:vy to �rr►twrll rate in :t mutt -linear. exponential relation c 1 fr SSEN1 Inif is impact Analysis Report docs not recognize multi -generational housing i lraracteristics common in I lia■varii aecordirrm to census data and likely uttclerestir attic daily wchick: trips :artrihua ihle to buildout of tli proposed project; d, "the SSFM Traffic impact Analysts Ropatrl employs an tatrusuafly low vehic Ie mc. of 851 Northbound Queen Kanhurnarni highway on the sekctetl dates of tut April 30.201x1. as weekday and Augur; 24. 2019. a Saturday, crinipatrecl with the 2011i Witcher 1 rtpineeritag Traffic laatpa ct Analysis Report, which reported 1057vehicles- for January 14 tura 15. 2016, latah weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume ot'853 is aIsc at odds with Figure 4 of the SSFM Traffic Int ct Analtsis Report,. which sho).vs tppror•in ely 1050 vehicles per (tour in 2016 liar 'Northbound Queen I ,uahurnanu Highw-ay al 7 a.m. The dill zetacc in voiltttrte is more 'than dualblc the maximtrraa ]tura ►ariaiion generally accepted in day -to -1T, me c ttr•ernents and thus unreliable-. e. I'lte reeonttttc1L:iatittst h> ti' \I -Tr;lflie linp.tcl •\i ilywis Rerttrl rotroundAtkotti ut Qutictt l to }ttirttdttt4 l Iighway and I Inakt Int Road t Nr,rthl is inconsistent with tho traffic c in-id r. Intersectioni that kuts.s wi mLnts but remain unsignalized present.. tra.flic safety l'tahilit' concerns fitr the t.tvemrn it. "th- recammeenclatit n by SSFM Traffic irnpw: Ana y. is l cport fOT mnnitoring of the intcrscititt<hteettt Kctah trt_itantt F3i ltss;x• tact l txattl.ini lli;;ltu » i, irtidv* oatc:. Where. as Iter , at intierscotiori passes more than oho. warrant tillcier all c-onditions. it should prioritized 1i,r stud) and ticsip i of tt signal for installation, This circumstance will he eNaoerl tied h► tltct rirctftira;cd project. 7 In surer. the l.)rafi lanvironn.l nta.] Assessment and SSI-VI "I r tfEie ltit{a; et .hxr:tl *;i . Report does tioL prestrrnt sufficient. credible facts arid analysis stitch that the adverse impacts crit ckicting 3ttftastn,cttrrc and resulting t'rtatn ieltrera +:d traffic c an Ix fully understood and result in appropriate: 0.c1ivern teen planning and response. 1 tieui4rie under penalty of perjury that the l«regoittg is lnFc. Dated. Kailuu-IKonict i lttw"ai►, it ' -c. 24. 0-2t, l'";171J3k_ 1''rit4te.i ttzrtte: Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Mr. John Powell Via email: mar<.p50@att.net RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI far Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, HawoFi Island Dear Mr. Pevy'eII: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 4, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: l am specifically concerned about the history and the undiscovered artitacts that could be lost. Very likely that more hang _xcavatian is needed on the complete site. Only five acres was barely scratched _Hn light hand excavation which uncovered many things. Response �: As described in Section 16 and in Appendix 5 (Archaeological Inventory .Survey [AIS] Reports) of the EA, the entire project site has been recently inventoried for archaeological resources. One inventory covered 76.i acres and the other covered 5 acres. Section 3.6 includes a summary discussion of the findings for both surveys that cover the entire site, as well as a discussion of how potenti❑I impacts would be minimized. The reports hove been submitted to SHPD for review and acceptance. Comment 2: I am aware that substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Holualoa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. The Holualoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. Response 2: As described in Section 3.6 and included in Appendix 5 of the EA, two AISs were prepared for the project. As part of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their significance. The AISs were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rules §13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. Alt 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. September 1a 2021 Mr, John Poweaf Pogo 2 of 7 Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211 } documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a h5lua. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls ore located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA) #3660, Additionally. the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a holua course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch, Therefore, there is no evidence of a holua in the project site. Comment 3: l base my concerns upon the evaluation performed by Tom Pohaku Stone, a copy of which is attached. The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features can be understood let alone properly preserved. The DEA must be revised to address the location. data recovery and preservation of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject parcels. Response 4: In the email provided, there is reference to "the portion of the holua at the Holua inn (that) has rock walls on both sides" and refers to parallel walls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 walk which are LCA #3660 boundary walls. Primarily, Mr. Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhou to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuna. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he`eholua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the near coastal region. However, the complexes are located more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal, sacred or sociopolitical complexes, or a holua, within the project area. The existence of a holua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone. As discussed above, there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a holua course existed within the project area. Comment 4: I am specifically concerned about drainage/runoff, water quality, groundwater recharge, and flooding. There is no drainage plan that I could find. Projects need to have this plan first not after. These monster buildings appear to hove major runoff that can add to the problem. Response 4: Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two Cou"ity-owned parcels_ The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revised to clarify that on TMK {3} 7-621:19, "Infrastructure during Phase 11 of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and September 1a 2021 Mr, John Poweff Page 3 of 7 roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuana'aa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kona Community Development Pan's (CDF's) "Official Transportation Map," For TMK (3) 7-6-21:18, the project includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this HIch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the CDP's "Official Transportation Map." Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage Pian which would be reviewed and approved by Department of Public Works, Comment .`a: The steep topography, historical rapid storrnwater run-off and associated damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment. I oro aware that this project will have serious impact on the immediate and surrounding area. Response 5: Koric ihree LLC is riot aware of any damage to adjoining properties, including Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway, from water flowing from the subject p -o perty. Comment 6: 1 am aware that flooding has occurred makai of the highway. Response 6: Flooding has occurred makai of Queen Ka'ahumcnu Highway from waters in the County -owned Holualoa Ditch and the Horseshoe Bend Ditch; however, as described in Section 3.3.2 of the EA, the proposed project would not be increasing the amount of water carried by these ditches from the entire drainage basin extending miles up -hill {above the proposed project). Comment 7: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood. A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be token core of in the future. As I understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among other errors. Response 7:. See response to comment 4. Also, text has been added in Section 3.3.2 of the Final EA to identify possible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. Comment 8: A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulatior', is insufficient. At a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised ti specifically what infrastructure September 1a 2021 Mr, John Powelf Page 4 of 7 improvements ore required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function. Response 8: The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA. Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Plan would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed. Comment 9: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEAD. i am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TZAR. Response 9: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 10: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no curbs, gutters, or sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildauts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TZAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahur-nanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Royal Vistas road system should follow County standards of Mauka to Makai with a signalized intersection at the highway. Response 10: As described in Section 1.2 of the EA, Kona Three LLC would extend County -owned Kekuana'oa Place and construct a new intersection Royal Vistas Roadway of the project's intersection with Queen Kacahumanu, The TEAR (Appendix 2,, did not identify a signal warrant for the new intersection based on current and projected levels of growth_ To ensure safety, Kekuana'oa Place and the new intersection would be built to County and State standards, and dedicated to the County. The Kekuanaoa Place extension constructed as part of this project would include sidewalks and curved gutters. To clarity when the Kekuana'oca Place connection would occur, Figure 2 has been revised to show that access to the project site would be connected to Kekuanaoa Place from Lako Street during Phase 11 of the project, Therefore, at project completion, there would be two ways to access the project and would alleviate impacts to any one entrance. Comment 11: This DEA recJires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects an public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuanaoa Place with young children present. Response 11: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not September 1a 2021 Mr, John Powelf Page 5of7 expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts lin Section 3.7.2 of the EA), Comment 12: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been token into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 12: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 13: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response la: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections ❑re not expected to be significant. Comment 14: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation, Response 14: Hawaii Department of Transportation IHDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate, Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1` from the 2025 LRTP forecast. Comment 15: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to censc,s data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response 15: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will hove 10 people with two cars, or three people with Four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus.. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. September 1a 2021 Mr, John Poweff Pogo 6 of 7 Comment 16: The TZAR employs an unusually Iow vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repot 1, which reported 1057 vehicles far January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually Iow reported vehicle volume of 653 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 20T6 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume k more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-d❑y measurements and thus unreliable. Response 16: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queer Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani ICc�ilua Road and Hualala Road (north)_ Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HOOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcourating, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count, Comment 20: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and i luol°Iai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a sianol for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 20: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices ( iUTCD) states, 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay. the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others, The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant o signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA. please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc, September 1a 2021 Mr, John Poweff Page 7of7 Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele_lefebvre: }stanfec.corn cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Ffawai'i Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: Joel Gimpel 4aiohafidlreipaiI corn - Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2020 7:54 AM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Project WM Nos. (3) 7.6.021:016, 7-6-021:017, 7.6-021.018, and 7-6-021.019) DEA comments Dear Director Yee: 1 humbly apologize for misspelling your name on the corm -rents regarding the subject DEA that 1 submitted late yesterday. Sincerely, Joel Ginipel Mori, Ashley From: ,Rel min' 1 • Ici .:11, iaci corn Send: ii,..tubp! cb 202c 5 ? PM Ta: Flaming Inter -ft./ maii Subject f o D1 istas .rn.i inc Project (TMK Nos. (3) 7-5-021 016, 7.6-021:017, 7-6.021.018, and ,'•b, -L} 1:0)9 LEA _ommerits Dear Director Lee: You may recall the comments I submitted on August 13 stating my many concerns over the shortcomings of the Traffic Impact Analysis in the subject DEA. and commenting on the problem of already overcrowded public schools serving the area that was not adequately addressed. I hereby express my thanks and appreciation for your decision to extend the deadline for comments because of the delayed notification. Accordingly, I had the opportunity to more carefully review the DEA arid prepare the following comments and concerns regarding the archeological and cultural issues raised. Because I live in and own a home in Pualani Estates, the 362 -single family home subdivision several hundred yards north of the subject property, thepending,DFA ;Affects [11L and my family's personal lnd property interests, lam specifically concerned about the Ln dcquaey oftlie arcbcol 'ieal Stud ii:s support. the IEA because iliac is suhstawitial evidence that tlie subject includes the Elcrlrt,ilcea Slide, rrtcludirlg rock walls, ti-;lt Arc inadequately described ,is agricultural kv .' Its T he I lulu loo 'Aide is an impoa w first l-Iaww:116n cultural and ircilacol(Tical Feature Iron) p; -\ L•stern contact times that cannot be replaced it damaged or destroyed. Iii short, the DI -A doesn't contain Fact~ and aii_llysi s fIi�i�r71 ]u undorstand and preserve the important Ilawati`ian cultural and archae plc glc.iI features. .Mahaalo for your careful. consideration of those additional concerns. Joel Ciimpel 75-628 N, Mea Lnnakiila Pi. Kailua-Kona, 1-11 96740 8081325-4991 1 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.9039 Mr. Joel Gimpel 75.628 hi. Mea Lanakila Pl. Koilua-Kone, HI 90740 Via email: alohafidlr4aal.ccrn RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr impel: Thank y:)<<. for the comment letter dated October 6, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: 1 am specifically concerned about the inadequacy of the archeological studies purporting to support the DEA because there is substantial evidence that the subject includes features of the Holualoa Slide, including rock walls, that are inadequately described as agricultural walls. The Holualoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed, In short, the DEA doesn't contain facts and analysis sufficient to understand and preserve the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features. Response 1: Regarding the rack walls within, the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 2421 1) documented. This road is not very straight. has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth. cis would be expected if the site were the remains of a holua. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens. and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls ore located clang the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA) #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a hclua course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a holua in the project site. September 13, 2,021 Mr. Joel °impel Page 2 of 2 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvrestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona. Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawai"i Planning Department Mori, Ashley From:: Bruce Kirschenbaum <brucelr4555@gnial9.corrn Seat. Tuesday, October 06, 2020 10:28 AM To: Planning Internet Mali Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Project EA comments Attachments: Kirschenbararr Declaration re Traffic 10Q120.clocx; Kirschenbaurn Decterat ars re archeaingical feature 1CO12020,ducx To whim 9t may concern: Attached to this email are two declarations concerning the Royal Vistas Development Draft t..ro.9rtxnrnent Assessment submission. w;}ts]J :apprcci:ate ar email indicating receipt oftht same for my rucrrrds. Thank you liar your t:unsidcrtftion. Bruce Kir: thenh Burn Kona Vistas Resident 1.:36589 DECLARATION OF BRUCE K1RSCIlENB.' L'N1 1. BRUCE KtR.SC'I11-:NHAtJM, declare: 1. 1 .trip a rc:ic.lc:tnt of the .Kana Vistils subLlivision, County of Hawai`i. State of Hawaii. Ilic proposed land develctpint:nl prujt t that is the subject ctf the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas f lousing Project Tax. Map Kcy Nos„ (3) 7-6-02 I:016. 7-6-031:017, 7-6- 021:01g. . and 7-6-021:01 North Kona State of El i►ai'i affects me affects my interest in real property. 1 reside lvithin two blocks ol clic proposed land development project and live on Kulcttatntruu P1ae . iitte Ctl•IWO main in ss,'tlgress pints to Royal Vistas. In such capacities.. I have firsthand knowledge u1'th4 follutivirtg, facts and could and would ie. -a tv thereto if called upon to du so. 2. i kia ve yet t:tc E' ndirtt DR.AI'J' 1_NVIRONMEN`I•.AI.x ASSESSMENT including the:Trstt c: Analysis Iteport by SSI d•ii .I .frit•. 21-111 and attached as Appendix? to the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts hoth within and without the Kona Vistas Subdivision Iltat are. not tally it accurately addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Tra1 'ic and the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. are discussed in the body of the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL_ ASSESSMENT. at pp. 48-56.67 and 7L Today, the number of trips that pa tsdirectly in front of ay house tan Kukuartaoa Plate is less than thirty per day. Kukuanaoa Place is a quiet residcrwtial strut that "T's" into Laker Street. Per the roads and traffic plan for Royal Vistas, 1'~uktratiaoa Place would he used as one rtt'the two 1 Ili/kit/1 ingress/egress points to siwrvicc traffic for the 450 -unit : uhdia, ision. Not being a track expert, hut assuming each s.)t the 450 units owns 1.5 cars and each of those cars makes two trips iktiout of the a ev'elorio Lnt i_v r day and those trips equally use the main highway and Kukuanana Place as their ihorout hfares for the trips_ that would i iic:rease the traffic on Kukuanaoa Place from 30 to til trip per day. 1 hat's a 2.O0()°•fi increase. 1-hiw would you like to have the street you lige on turned into a major roadway when it v. as ncvcr intended or designed for such a purpose. Why should the residents of Kukttanac a Street and Kona Vistas hear the brunt of establishing essentially a solution to Royal Vistas traiTic rNuii nwnt? That sitnply i$ not Lair and wri n in my view., 11'you examine i similar development that is the next gronprif'pareels directly to the North of Royal Vistas. Puulutti Estates, Puspuaant.ri Street is the main and stilts inktressiegress point for tat}% of their Waffle flow, There are no cross rosins that hive'been used to of l ill traffic. to another area Ln e rder service titer development. I hc[wyc the: sarnc concept should be used for Royal Vistas with all traffic routed th ugh the iic"v connection to rhe main (,ween K highway. _ lrr the Kona it e prof et r 'lies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kektaaa`na f lee . Kckuaiita`ua E Lace is very steep, has limited sight distance due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact ofincreased traffle< :wising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 huildouts ol'the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequatcly addressed in the SSF'M Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which focuses i. s instead on impacts along Queen kaahuinanu Highway. I arta particularly concerned that adding numerous vaido trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuana`oa Place_ 1 consider that the Planning Dcpartnieiil Should require the applicartt k address these concerns. 4. The DRAFT LN 'IRON MENTAL ASSESSMENT rctuirch evaluation of, arriong others. adverse secondary Tnipacts, such UN ()I.-Jixr //alio! checrrg.rs or cj cts on public facilities. Soo Chapter 1 1-.200.1-13, Hawaii Adrriinastrativ'e Rules. Instead of squarely addressing theme issues, however, the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSI.SS\1FNT simply ignores them. claiming that "No adverse secondary effects are expet;ted since: the dcwt`Iopulent would utilize existing infrastructure, provide infill housing.. and is net expethd to F -suli iso ,tibSta1ill al d mart is to County service.~." It is a serious omission for the DRAFT E.NV'IRONC' IH\TA1. ASSESSMENT to ir,iI to address the potential adverse impacts of increasing Clic use tai' substandard existing infrastructure. like Kekuana`oa Place. 5. The 1)RAVi ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT addresses adverse it iffie impacts only in the context of whether the project would Hare a suhsrcrnnal crcfl'en'e' cif ec•t on public !wrath. Vac Applicant claims. 'Mize Proposed Project would not atteut public 'wall in any way; siirinwvartc.•r would ,e a ppropriately disposed of in drainage: structure~. Traffic impacts have LteLtaktiqi.m.ip it r :, I io i` I,�: At 11 sir_s,dri " ErilphaSIS added. This bald conclusion does rrrA us rcq.iirA by Chapter 1 t -200_I-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. 6. The Planning Department should riot accept the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSFSSMEN,T's Bance on the SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report, which has the .following. deficiencies: a. failure to ad'dre'ss adverse traffic imp:alts within the Korai Vista: suhd.iviz;ic't1 arising front the project 3 1}. SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report uses a growth rate of 1%, in caantrasl to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact .Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very setts itive to growth rate in a a'trark-linear, exponential relation; c- The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Regi docs not recognize multi-gt•neratii-,mill housing charactensties common in Hawaii according to census data and likely undcrestirr alcs daily trips attri1 utablc tu buifdout or the propo$ecl project: d.. The SSFM Traffic Imp re:i Analysis Report employs an unusually 1uw- w'chiele yr IYs;Yr� sed' 853 vehiclez4 \'.uih..bournd Queen l.aahuinanu highway on the sciccted date-, April 30, 1i [1'. _r ,'\IW,L.I I 24, ':tl'i a S;Itl.rrt[a , edrupaYred with the Et gineeIiII' Trait Rep(It• 1CTorttd 10.:,/ chielc`w Ill; _laI:'I.I!i 14 aril 15, 2it16. bw ih wtekdays- TIie unusually tow reported chi, lc of g53 is also tat Lis with Figure 4 of the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which shows aapproxirn ely 11 50 vehiels.'s per stout• in 2016 for Northbound Queen K tilkkl!naano Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in 1=olurtne is Iaai7rt than d1J11hle thr tt1axinurrl tO Yaradtilm generally accepted in dray-Lar-clay iaica;urciaaents {inti thus unreliable; u. The recommendation endatirlra hw' SSFM Traffic In-pact Analysis Report for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumaxlu I-ligFiway and Huai alai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. trrtersectiorEs that pass warrants but remain =signalized present traffic. safety liability concerns for the government; The recommendation by SSFM Tousle [trip tcl Analysis Report for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahum{anl.l 1 l iw hwav and Kuakini I Iighway is Inadequate_ Where, as here, an intersection passes more thane one +w a,rralIL under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exa erbated 17.iv tare proposed project. r, In sum. the I)i-att Environmental Assessment and SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report does not present sufficient_ credible facts and analysis such that the adverse impacts on existing infrastructure and resulting from increased traffic can he fully undcNtoct`al and result ir1 appropriate government planning and response. 8, 1 wish to add a statement expressing my concerns for safety on the proposed ro idwa} through Kona Vistas as well. As the street does not have sidewalks only lines separating the main rcoxcl from the sidelitpards, die people �vho',Valk, children who play. bike riders. skaiet„rL,rtl i- L4..°r?. have 1111le cont.:cm 14+r shcir titil t}' ([U42' roti the ~ ur' low residential neighborhood traffic that exists today. Once Kekua:iaon Place is opened w Royal Vistas and it: almost a thousand trips per clay. it w-truld be extremely tan, fe to enjoy the activities 1 just described especially with the tact the street k hilly and there a..rc not unuhstrtrcted views of oncoming traffic or pedestrians. This could lead to a ‘x.try dangerous situation in €r residential neighborhood. 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing i.s true.. Dated: Kailua-Keine, Hawai`i, October 1. 2029. Signature: Prrntet1 name: 5 Bruce Kirschenbaurti 76-4314 Kukuanaoa Peace Kai l ua-Kcin a, l l l 96.741) Brucek455' ra..,E mil,corn 36,1-904-9563 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Bruce Kirschenbaum Via email: brucek4555 ,grnail.com RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Rousing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Kirschenbaum: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 6, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments, Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TZAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: Today, the number of trips that passes directly in front of my house on Kukuancoa Place is less than thirty per day. Kukuanaoa Place is a quiet residential street that 'Ts" into Lako Street. Per the roads and traffic plan for Royal Vistas, Kukuanaoa Place would be used as one of the two major ingress/egress points to service traffic for the 450 -unit subdivision. Not being a traffic expert, but assuming each of the 450 units owns 1.5 cars and each of those cars makes two trips in/out of the development per day and those trips equally use the main highway and Kukuanaoa Place as their thoroughfares for the trips, that would increase the traffic an Kukuanaoa Place from 30 to 675 trips per day. That's a 2,000% increase. Response 2: Regarding the methods for calculating trips, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Handbook referenced in the TIAR (Appendix 2 in the EA) used for the traffic analysis uses housing units, and it does not assume one person per unit. This is taken from the ITE trip gen handbook regarding land use 220: 2.72 residents are assumed for each unit. There is no trip generation for number of bedrooms. It is difficult to analyze and make projections based on number of bedrooms, or how many people we expect in bedrooms. The ITE trip generation for land use 220 collected data on lova-rise multi -family housing, and based on that data, the traffic model came up with a best fitted curve, which discussed below, has a very low standard deviation, and a very high R squared value, which indicated that the data collected is not scattered, The TIAR assumes a land use that is typical, and with the best possible data, captures the number of project generated trips. Septernber 13, 2C21 Mr. Rruce Kirschenbaurn Pace 2 of w Comment a: If you examine a simjEar development that is the next group of parcels directly to the North of Royal Vistas, Pualani Estates, Puapuaanui Street is the main and sole ingress/egress point for 10O% of their traffic flow, There are no cross roads that have been used to offlay traffic to another area in order service their development. I believe the same concept should be used for Royal Vistas with all traffic routed through the new connection to the main Queen K highway. Response 3: As described in Section 3/.2 of the EA, Kona Three LLC «reposes to construct a new intersection Royal Vistas Roadway at the project's intersection with Queen Kaahumanu. As required by the County, and in accordance with Kona Community Development Plan (CDP), the major roads in Royal Vistas would be build and dedicated to the County. The County has long-range plans as outlined in the CDP Official Transportation Map tor these dedicated roads to link Kona Vistas roads Leilani Street and Kekuana'aa Place to Pualani Estates' roads Ho`omama Street and Paulehia Street respectively as part of their community connectivity policy. These roads ore also planned to further extend to the north eventually. Additionally, Figure 2 has been revised to show that access to the project site would be connected to K.ekuana`cia Place from Lako Street during Phase II of the project, At project completion, there would be two ways to access the project and according to the traffic analysis would serve the needs of the project without exacerbating regional traffic. Comment 4: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project miles on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead an impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I ori particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from o separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. l consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns, Response 4: Kekuana'oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oc Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase II in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Septernber 13, 2C21 Mr. Rruce Kirschenbaurn Poole 3 of w Comment 5: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 5: Secondary effects are incir w - affects, or effects that would occur ata different place or time than the prr.�posed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7„} of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'€aa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 6: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Proiect would not affect public health in any way storrnwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design ” Emphasis added, This bad conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 6: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 7: The Planning Department should not accept the LEA's reliance on the TIAR, which foils to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 7: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant.. Comment 8: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2015 Witcher Engineering TZAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation, Response 8: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast, September 13, 2C21 Mr. Rruce Kirschenbaurn Pace 4 of w Comment 9: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics corny -..,n in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response 9: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 10: The TZAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaohumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2€ 14, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen ICaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 10: The most recent Historic HDQT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahurnanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north). Cur traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDQT count ard was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 11: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumarnu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor, Intersections that pass warrants but remain ur'signclized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government, The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahurnanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 11: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2C21 Mr. Rruce Kirschenbaurn Page 5of5 an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of o traffic signal warrant. Comment 12: I am concerned about safety an the proposed roadway through Kona Vistas as well. As the street does not have sidewalks only lines separating the main road from the sideboards, the people who walk, children who play, bike riders, skateboard riders have little concern for their safety due to the very low residential neighborhood traffic that exists today. Once Kekuanaoa Place is opened to Royal Vistas and its almost a thousand trips per day, it would be extremely unsafe to enjoy the activities I just described especially with the fact the street is hilly and there ore not unobstructed views of oncoming traffic or pedestrians. This could 'lead to a very dangerous situation in a residential neighborhood. Response 12: As described in Section 1 2 of the EA, Kona Three LLC would extend County -owned Kekuana`oa Place and construct a new intersection Royal Vistas Roadway at the project's intersection with Queen Koahurnanu. These roads would be built to County and State standards, and dedicated to the County, The Kekuana'oa Place extension constructed as part of this project would include sidewalks and curved gutters. To clarify when the Kekuancfoa Place connection would occur, Figure 2 in the EA has been revised to show that access to the project site would be connected to Kekuana'oa Place from Laky Street during Phase II of the project. Therefore, at project completion, there would be two ways to access the project and would alleviate impacts to any ane entrance. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any ad.dittonal comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely,. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. L{. 4 i t i Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.Iefebvregsta ntec.corn cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawai'i Planning Department Mori, Ash! Frown: Sent: T©: Cc: Su bject: Attach ments: Bonnie Miki rkinaust2igrrnail corn Tuesday, October 0.O C 5 35 PM Planning Internet Mail dtxnIcona@)aol.com, loan & Mark Powell Roy& Vista Housing Project EA cumrnents irng0OS.pdi; ATTODOO1,htnt imgtI4Th.pdf ATf00002.htrrr; irrtig007.pdf; ATTO0003.htrn; irrig008.pdf• ATT00004,I1tm; irriga09.pdf; ATTOCI005 htm G f)EC1.ARA'ItON(11- :IOH\(iER. LD 1411!! l I. JOHN GERALD I'd IKI declare 1 Jam a restderit of 76-4341 Kinau Street Kona Vistas subdi vision j. Count} of Hawaii, Mate ofHawai`i The proposed land d elop:neat project that Is the subject r+t die penrliru Draft Environmental .ks-sessment suhmirrescl b Roiyal Vistas Housing I'roi ct -fax Mai Key Arts l ;) 7.6.021.01E% 7-6421(.1.17. 7-6-0 21 U113, and 7-6-r121 019 North Kona District, F{awai"i island. State of 1=lawar' i a:'fecrs me personally as well as aficcis my interest in real propeny. l reside within l0ti Yards of the propo$ed land development project. In such capactties. 1 ],ave firsthand knowledge ul'die rollowine facts and could and would testify} thereto it called upnn, to do so 2. I have reviewcd the pending DR„AF°'I' FNIVIRf)NNIE \ 1` I. ASSESSMENT including the Trntllic Itnpaut Artalvsis Report by SSFM Intern itic_ntal. dated July 2020 and attached as Appendix 2 ra the DRAFT ENVIRONMENT.AL ASSESSMENT.. I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic; impacts bDth and v.tltout the Kona V.stas subdivision that are nut fully or accurately' addressed rn the SSFM Ti af7'rc Impact . rtaIV is Report. Traffic and the SSFM Traffic, Impact Analcsiw R port are discussed in the Ijoth' of the I]RAET .ENVIRONIVIENTAL ASSESSMENT at pit 4R-36, 6 mud 11 At g2 years old. 1 spent summers during Wlar'II l.vttlt other kiJ , le4v: , in front of my ('hineseg,randparen'sgrocer+, stores in Hanaunau on. Matnalahoa Hi hwaw, the only level area between the pahaehoe and a'a lava roadside Only an occasional. sampan taxi carrying tourist, L 1 from Hilo to the Kara Inn or 1)r L iiz. a .iii making htuse call' in s 'l:xcic'l T in: aru ,kti l c) .r ►I.:� Now, 75 years later, our South Kona ohana reIaa(ms cemplain that. ensile.„ rrattic makes it hard to enter the r) -lane road to go To di ctS.)r car thi, 1.;:7.'(,'!(:,:f 'se store. .meter retiring tEl ourKornohana ht.:7142 La.ku Street in 090, my wife and I watched the traffic turn into gridlock where Kriakini H,4ti. i int1 rse3'i Queen t'.a'ahurrtanu I liglrw�ti Auwe` New Korta Three LLU wanes to hurt,: a 45H Gerin 51.1hdivision which will add tx.t :4Itts cars thin the two -lain Vehicle crawl stretching from (:atain (.:r.+ok to Palani k4ad Using aft outdated 1')S3 EIS, Kona Three request acs through narrow. residential sheet~ :n Kona Vistas and Pualtitri Estates Issues not adequately addressed include traffic. safety and density, emeruency vehicle access. t+ids disembarking frorri school busses. the lack of curb and sidewalks required by code. impatient driver curling through Ptialaini !-.states, Kona' i Gats, arid u:tact st,lrcliv I', tarsi grrrihsek, anti merging inaauka and rnnkai traffic from I.akti Sirtvt onto Que+:,r Ka ._ .rrnanu Hi►thwa v In addition, the original easernent for Sunset Subdivision's Leilani „,as°rib, 40 feet At To provide sate accv6. for modern emergency ;trttibt ":�r I ! r F :.r , rk4ess I', underground utilities, cable arty tlec•taic lines, etc., tate easement for [,.eiiard S-reet was widened to 60 feet when Kona Vistas portion was built It is hazardous if emergency vehicles. encountering. traffic, accident gridlock on Queen Ka`alirxmanu lit llaway orLako Street, are rorced ac's enter the proposed Royal Vistas subclsv.:' on rhr<scrth Sunset's narrow porton of Ler lain Street to quell a fire and/or save lives We're not against development But the people of West I lawaii need affordable I•,cru„n with reasonable access to and from work, rather than another developer building niort 2 /5S rsi-‘1 dollar homes for wealthy snowbirds We need a wider highway, not 900 more cars, trucks and vans choking our two-lane Queen Ka'ahumanu iJi h wav while we sit in siridlack. [n theKLrrta Vistas subdivision, the proposed pruje t relies on Che use of a substandard roadway. Keli;uana`ua Place Kelcuana'oa Place its very steep, has limited sight distances due to crctrcrnc et:rve5 and is narrow with, no sidewalks Thy impact of Lnc.renscd trat9c itristriR from Ph 1 and Phase 2 bail Jouts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequately addressed in the SSF 1 1'rallic Impact Analysis Report, which focuses instead on impacts air}rg (buten 'Kaaht,irt,tnu Highway 1 am pnryicLlal'Iy concerned that adding numerous wvehicle trips to and f'roni a wr?arAte subdivision ski i reser}t dangers and congestion to residents mean Kckuanx•cra Pla.cc. 1 tl?rtsider the Plartniit 1kc1°rarinienr Io address these concerns. 4 i"he [)RAFT EN1.f1k2(_)'ti,1tl•N 1,= I. SSFSS! t[.N'T requires evaluation of, among others,. iraly r A ' i] c.•rarttr'jart' ttnput't:ti, sar`h a prim/tat Or changes rir r, tteccr.w .9.n. Sacrline itat Chapter 11-200 1-13, Hawaii Aldntl rtrstrattvte Rides lnslead of squarely addressing these issues, however. the DRAFT E14-1VIRONMENTAL.ASSESSMENT s.mply igrtrtres them, r lairnin , that "No Adverse secondary eftcis are expected since the development would utilise existing infrastructure, provide infill housing. and 15 not expected to result in substantival demands to Count!, ser.lces 11 is a serious OITI1 5s on t or the DRAFT EENVIR,i?NMF_NTAI_ ASSESSMENT to fail to address the potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substandard existing infrastructure, like Kekitatiu-oa Place_ 8/ The DRAFT E\VIR NMENTAL ASSESSMENT addresses adverse traffic irrtpaus only in the context wherher the project would Have i7 :s• ribs rrrrraf adverse we ef►ec t on public: 1tealih. Pie Applicant claims_ 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in anv stc►rmwater would he appropriately disposed of in drainage structures Trak impacts hove 7 n t I it corefrll ,`Cr7 id�3"��+iGrr ]rt E� d s fir i " Emphasis added. Tris Oat c.oriciusi ;r� does got address poterrial acverze impacts cts ~equired 'y Chapter 11,-200,1 13. Hawaii Administrative Rules The Planning Department should nor accept the 1.)RRAF1' EN V IRMIVfrNIAL ASSESSMENT' reliance on the SSI ;41 traffic; Impact Analy5i Report, which ha the following, deficiencies• failure k> Etddress advergc traffic impacts within he Komi Vistas s1 hdivisinrt arisrr t from the proiect, l The SSFM Traffic impact An rlysiy Rcpiort us>~ at growth rate of 1%. in contrast to rhe 2% grriwtIr rate entpl ed by the 2018 Witcher Engirt ring Traffic Impact Analysis Report 1`ra3"iic congesricm ls eery sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, vcpanerttial relation.. The S*l-hI 1 r:4,11ic. Impact Analysis Report does nor recognize rnr►lti-generarionaI housing characteristics coat -non in l l swa it accurclinc4 to censtas data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attrilmitul`%I Lis LIU&IL A"L the proposed proiect, The SSF.%i Tratfic impact Ana!vsis Report employs an unusually lcv. veltic3e volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Ka.ahurnanu highway on the selected dat;Sa of April 30, 619. a weekda), and August 24, 2019. a Saturday, compared with the 2018 WI tchi r Engin terrng Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which reported 1057 vehicles for January~ 14 and lYz I , 2016, both weekdays The unusually low reported vehicle volume c t 853 is also at a.add4 1.4.ith FRRure 4 of the SSFM "Traffic Impact Analvsi s Report, which shows approximately IO5G vehicles per hour in 301. for Northbound Queen Kaahum:anu Fiiphway at 7 a.m The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted In day-to-dav nieasuremerits and thus unreliable, e Tlik: recr wniendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout at Queen Kaahuriaitta. Highway Ind HiNtt1Ali t RCA] (Ncsrihj is inconsistent with the tra.TL corridor Intersections Alai pass warrants but remain rrnsoena.I LI ahiIrt). concerns for the government, The recomtnaulatitan hr+ SSFM Traffi c Impact Analysis Report for monitoring. of the intersection of Queen Kaalrunianu Hs41twa+v and Kuakini li.ighway is inadequate Where, as here, an inteLsect:Urt pas Tirol C than ont. warrant Linder fill conditions, it should he }rioriti Ted for srudv and design eL.i signal for irisu,.Ilation. This cir1;urstaric4 wall be c'tiaccraic I IIw Th proposed lrn1ietit 7 iii aurin, thu I t•afi l rlviio menial Assessment and SF NA 'Traffic Impact Aiiatvsis Report does not present lul'ftciern, credible. its and analysis such that the adverse impacts L'i1 existing infrastructure and resulting from tratli cdn he rally understctcxt and result in approprra+e government planning and response 1 declare tinder penalty of petury That the foresoi rte is true. itz, _ r Dated Kailua-Kona_ Hawaii, t6 Octobeer, 2020 ` W Signature to G o1onel USAF- (rel[re,d Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. John Gerald Miki Via email: kinaust2C'4gmaiLaom RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawal'i Island Dear Mr. Miki: Thank you for the comment Tetter dated October 6, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments.. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Trcffic. Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kana Vistas subd:vis:on that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: At`,..y retiring to our Komohana home off Lako Street in 1990, my wife and I watched the traffic turn into gridlock where Kuakini Highway intersects Queen Ka'ahumarri Highway. Using an outdated 1983 EIS, Kona Three request access through narrow residential streets in Kana Vistas and Pualani Estates. Issues not adequately addressed include traffic safety and density, emergency vehicle access, kids disembarking from school busses, the lack of curbs and sidewalks required by code, impatient drivers cutting through Pualani Estates, Kona Vistas, and Sunset subdivisions to bypass gridlock, and merging mauka and makai traffic from Lako Street onto Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. In addition, the original easement for Sunset Subdivision's Leifani Street was only 40 feet wide. 11 is hazardous if emergency vehicles, encountering traffic accident gridlock on Queen Ka'ohumanu Highway or Lako Street, ore forced to enter the proposed Royal Vistas subdivision through Sunset's narrow portion of Leilani Street to quell a fire and/or nave lives. Response 2: Kona Three is not requesting access through Pualani Estates. As aescribed in. Section 1.2 of the EA, Kona Three LLC would extend County -owned Kekuana'oa Place and construct a new intersection Royal Vistas Roadway at the project's intersection with Queen Kaahumanu. To ensure safety these roads would be built to County and State standards, and dedicated to the County. The Kekuana'oa Place extension constructed as part of this project would include sidewalks and curved gutters. To clarify when the Kekuana'oa Place September 13, 2,021 Mr, John Gerald Mki Page 2 of 4 connection would occur, Figure 2 of the EA has been revised to show that access to the project site would be connected to Kekuana`oo Place from Eaka Street during Phase 11 of the project. There#are, at project completion, there would be two ways to access the project and would alleviate traffic {and safety] impacts to any one entrance. Comment 3: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place, Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TZAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. 1 am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion: to residents along Kekuonaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require f.he applicant to address these concerns. Response 3: Kekuana'oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the some specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact an Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`pa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase 11 in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuanaoa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle ori Kekuaria`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 4: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure. like Kek.uana`oa Place. Response 4: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA.. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana `oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna`oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic {22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively). The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way, stormwaler would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald September 13, 2021 Mr. John Gerald Mkt Page 3 of 4 conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 1 1 ,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 5: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5. Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 6: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance an the TIAR. which Fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 6: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 7: The flAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TZAR, Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rote in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 7: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDCfl counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers i.secs 1% from the 2025 L12TP forecast. Comment 8: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics c.3rrzrrror°i in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response 8: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with n© people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was us:_cl since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 9: The TEAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. The difference in voluble is more than double the maximum 10%o variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Response 9: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared September 13, 2021 Mr. John Gerald Mki Pace 4 of 4 to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable, It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's PAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 10: The recommendation by the TZAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Huolalai Road (North} is inconsistent with the Traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignaiized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection, of Queen Kciahurnanu Highway and Kuokini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 10: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states. 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. it should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (8O8) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, St€rntec Consulting Services Inc. r , t. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.le tebvre stontec.corn cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Mcii a Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley Frorn: Sent To: Cc: Subject Attachments: Ronnie 4viiI i -'kir aJstz � crrall.{(am Tuesday, October 202D 5:11 PM Planning Internet Mail dhnkona(aao1 coni R+:!yal Vista Housing Prr jectEA comments irngDo2 pdr, AT roma imgX 3.01: ATT D2 htrn; imge04,pcdf; ATTO11003.htrn DECLARATION OF YO11N GLRALI) MIKI !. JORN CiFRR 1K1- declare. Inn a resident of Kona Vistas subdivision, County or HIetwat`i Sate of Ila wari i. Trio l,r:,.i •Jen elol int•lt project that rti the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Rk.:.!% a Vitas Housing Project Tax Map Key Nos (3'.17-6-021.D16,, 6-021.017. 7-6-071.(11N, -O21 •ct1N, and "7-6-021 019 Neem Kona District, Elawai'i island, Slated Hawaii, affects nie persona11v as well as atrec,ts env rnteresr in rel property. 1 re;Side Within It}ti Yards ar'the proposed lard develepment project in such capacities. I have firsthand knowledge or the following facts and could and weyt.ald testify thereto if called upon to do so ?. I have reviewed the pending DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSFSSMF.N V and attachments 1 un specifically evncerned about the d des-tri.tction ot'Ar-chec.f1ogical 1-.4:wiltes of [he said Area bet rlconsidered for extensive houskng development .' Oef, born and r sees ,n 1lawai,, who spent suntrxicrs living With rny grandparents :a h:ex:t:_G 'n 1Ior;iyinr:r_ dunrng, W'W11 I)erririg the school ear, 1 att;rrcied weelel Classes at the City Par •in l Rosource Center at the McCoy Pavilion at Ala Moana Park where kids from [ 1onolulu were bussed to learn about .Hawaii We were awed by tales of the holualoa sliders built throughout our island, where warrior chiefs hurtled dawn rock courts at breakneck speeds up to 41s plus MPH on skinny t2 root tor:g by six-inch wide sleds on rnamarse hardwood runners, ot'err w.agerinct their land a, 1,vtves and elven their lives agai .t rival chiefs, The holualoa experience was a hat r -raising but thullsng tale for us yor:rrr stern The Holualoa Slide is an irrrportant l-1 wa'ran archaeological feature froLn) pre -Western contact tunes that cannot be replaced In [994, !took a `"1lawaiian Beliefs & Practices" religion /4; 3 44(4 class taught 11y l'u la,.rr, kanakaole, Hawaiian Studies instructor at I inrwer vitt. nt' Haww illi Irle 1--111 She said that when pre -contact. Hawaiians needed :0 carve a canoe or a tiki god they would take a human sacrifice {siav or captured enern!, chief] up into the rainforest and search for a 51.11rahle tree Upon Findingone, the kahuna would qacnfice the hurnan before felling; the tree vtisill adzes. and bury the body at the base of the tree (trading a life fora life trt thanks to the forest god .0 They. they'd use holualoa, like the one in questtcsr at the Royal Vistas site. to slide the giant now sacred 1rsg, dawn the mountain using ropes t,lF a violent thunderstarra arc Iightentrte occurred before the cutting, the life of the hurttan SAC rit1ce was spared.) Twenty years agcy. illy wire and 1 artended a lecture at the Kink Kaine tasti ;lta Hotel by famed archeologist 1.)r ¥osihi.kw'F Sinoto who told the audience that the largest arcl> ulstg�w aI artrt'act in the. entire Pacific Basin was the Great Holt alio Slide built in Keacrhou, Kona Workrn with his mentor. the. rcnow•ncd lir. Kenneth Emory ttithy Bisltup Museum, they determined that the Kca.uhou Slide wits 6[7 i'c°w : lw an5,5Q) feel long_ E'our W s:rc feet in height and built on a 1200A D lava Bowl i _�r iii ,ncr ,tip. i ped the stifle with ti loafand hartarntt fit lilt. ui :I were still holes on the rough surface 1'1,1 s When winter waw.rs arse 111211 in Kona, a kahuna would stand on the beach anti Sinal with a while taps flag for the race to the beach Lo start. The chief. aught a big wave to race against a competing chef 4p tdinst down the holualoa, tate Brat c.hiet'ty reach the beach and g ab the white raps tilt; was the winner Hawaii was a warriOrsociety where men died in such ctmtests As we %wal ked the upper 2(X)O foot slope, Dr Sinoto Laid us that Bishop Estate had bulldozed the lower 4,500 Fitt of the h.olual tc"build a golf course which one can view today at the cut in the old government road nauka of the sic tFcourses 'Vista Restaurant This marked the destrltctir,ri of an irreplaceable historical artifact Artwe! .1 -low much more sit Hawaii nflLst ire d stray 'd'' We respectfully request the Leeward Maxim ng Board defer approval of the Royal Vista projecI until a complete anzbeological eva;uation of the site is complete. 3 1 do not consider that the archaeological studies offered in support of the ()rah Env-irtrlmental Assessment are adequate 4 I am aware that substantial ei:dence exists that the lard encompassed by the subject land parcekc incllyd features of The 1 Ictilual a IJ,de. 1ncj.1d, ng rack walla Thar are inadequately described as a ricultulx} wYalls in tl%' arwhacologica' studies otTered in support oft11�►Malt Envirorltriental r\sscSSz1iar.t S l 1,;ts�> lit c,03,:crrt, upku t17.4 ai:J analysis pi:Ifunned Ilty 'Turn Pultaku Stone, a copy ot'which is attached 6 Iii $un, the gall Environmental Ai es Jrivni. does ITOL discuss salt:lent faLls and analysis such that he inip riant lIawai'ian cultural and archacological features can be unclerstrotl, let alone prgperlu preserved 7 Ata rninimtarn, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to address the location, data reuoverN and preservation of the Halualaa Slide components present nn the subject parcels C declare under penalty of pes'tsry that the rrres;tririg is Lille Dated: Kailua-Kona.G October . 2020, r ?nature Prin Prin '•`am John °, Pvtiki Colonel USAF (retired) -Sob. tr! Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (8O8) 494.2039 Mr. John Gerald Miki Via email. kinaust2C4gmait.com RE: Comments an Cultural Resource Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated PONS! for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District,. Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Thank you for the comment letter dared (:c:tober 6, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment IDEA) for the proposed prc;ject. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I am specifically concerned about the destruction of archaeological lea=ares of the said area being considered for extensive housing development. We respectfully request the Leeward Planning Board defer approval of the Royal Vistas sroject until a complete archaeological evaluation of the s[le is corrplete. Response 1; As described in Section 3.6 and in Appendix 5 )Archaeological Inventory Survey [AIS] reports) in the EA, the entire project site has been recently inventoried for archaeological resources. One inventory covered 76.1 acres and the other covered 5 acres. Section 3.6 includes a summary discussion of the findings for both surveys that cover the entire site, as well as a discussion of how potential impacts would be minimized. The reports have been submitted to SHPL for review and acceptance. Comment 2: I do not consider that the archaeological studies in support of the DEA are adequate. I am aware that substantia evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Holualoa Slide, including rock walls that are inadec'Jctely described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. The Holualoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. Response 2: As described in Section 3.6 and included in Appendix 5 of the EA, two Archaeological Inventory Surveys (AISs) were prepared for the project. As part of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their significance. The AlSs were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rules 13-276 and were eva[ucafed according to the process required by 10-284-6. All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. September 13, 2,021 Mr. John Gerald Mid Page 2of3 Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211 ) documented. This road is not ver / straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as wr,, Cr ; h:7 ,cted if the site were the remains of a holua. Also, the walls were 1.0 •1-eler in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls cc, -=gid along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA) 403660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a hdlua course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a holua in the project site. Comment 3: I base my concerns upon the evaluation performed by Tom Pohaku Stone. a copy of which is attached. The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features can be understood let alone properly preserved. The DEA must be revised to address the location, data recovery and preservation of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject parcels. Response 3: In the email provided, there is reference to "the portion of he holua at the Holua inn Ithat] has rock walls on both sides" and refers to parallel walls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 wails which are LCA #3664 boundary walls. Primarily, Mr, Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhou to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuna. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he`eh6lua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the near coastal region. However, the complexes are located more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal,. sacred or sociopolitical complexes, or a hrlua, within the project area. The existence of o holua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone, As discussed above, there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a holua course existed within the project earea. September 13, 2,021 Mr. John Gerald Mki Page 3 of 3 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at X808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.iefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: Frankie Hemby <frankie.herobyPgmarl corn> Sent: Tuesday October 06. 2020 4°S2 PM To: Planning Intemet Mail Subject: Loyal Vistas Housing Prefect EA comments Below arc my comments on the Royal Vistas (Kona) Draft EA, l include it below as text whieb e{tn he searched. car evaluated as text instead of scanning to a picture tile it Forcing you to handle an attachment. This however niealis I ;,tin unable to 'include a signature. Please accept sign ]nI! at the end as my digital signature.. If another forrn k required. let nae know quickly by email- Frank lc. 1 iemhy'i. rmail,com -or phone 1575) 74S-9003 or 4573)365-7255, DECLARATION OF 1,1ARY T ILi \4I3 ' 1, MARY Y '1. Hmby declare: lare: I am a resident of Kona Vistas subdivision. County orlkwai`i, State of11awai'i.The iInposc<L land duvuL viten! projoct that is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal 'Vistas Housing Project lax Map Key Nos. (3) 7-6-021:016, :01{ , 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021:2.11 " and 7-6-021:010 North Kaes District, 1Hawai`i. Island, State of I a]]c,• l,e;rs]io illy as well tw al't wl. iity interest in rail property. 1 reside within half mile o#'the proposed land development project_ In such kapacitics, 1 have firsthand knowledge oldie 1:ullowi]tg facts and eoulrl and would tcstit` them() if called upon to dos so. I have reviewed the pending DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT including the Traffic I]tipa ,..:t Acrolysis Report by SSEVI1atrrnu ior]ul, dated May 2020 and attached as Appendix 2 to the DRAFT ENVIRON ILN NIAL AMEN I , 1 am specifically concerned Jhnut adverse trartle; impacts hcth within and w►ill7ac,l flit Kona Vi las tici id]v]si n thEat are mit fully or accuratciv addressed in the SS FM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic arid the SSFM Traffic: Impact Ihinalysis Report. are dis sussed in the bc,d of the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. at pp. 48-56.67 and 71. 3. In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the ail.: of u soh tattdurtl 611.1.11.1 , K.elcu tna`€>ra Place. Kektuana`cott Place k very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme cures and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impaet of increased traffic 3rising Irvin Phase 1 and Phase 2 buil douts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequately addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. v, hich foeuses instead on impacts along Queen Ka`ahurnattu Hi away. 1 wi particularly ccancc•rnccl that aaticiiitp numerous vehicle trips to drd from a separate subdivision will present danger and congestion to residents along. Kekkuana'caa Place. l consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. 4. The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL,.. ASSESSMENT requires evaluation at', among others, rutve rse secondary impacts, saaca as population chang s or etj'e.'cty rrrr public ./tu.ilrfi. . Sem Chapter 1 1-200.1 13. Hawaii Administrative Rules. Instead of squarely addressing these issues, however, the DRAFT l'`.%; V I R ()NMFNTAI. ASSI rSSM[;N'f" simply ignores thein, claiming that "Ni..a fdversc see nduty effects are expected since the tle\elsrprite at tivt)ultl utilize existing ir1l`rastructure, provide infill housing,, and is not expected to result in substantial demands to County st viers." 11 is a serious omission for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT to fail tot address the potential adverse impacts SMI' increasing the use of suhstiindarcl existing infrrastruittarc, Iik Kckuana•oa place, The DRAFT [NV L\ l .A1, .A SSESSMF N`1° addresses adverse Ira tilt impacts only in the context of whether the proje l would Have rr suir'ers e el/ter ori pithily her rls. The Applicant claims. 'The Proposed Project would lot affcci puhlac: healih in any way-; stnnnWatcr tivcia.alcf be appropriately disposed cif in drainage structures. Traffic rlth ►acts have been taken into careful ctnisideralisin in firoje t design.' Emphasis added. This hold conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter L I -200. I -1.3, Hawaii ,Aim in. istroti ve Rules. 17ta: Planning Department should not accept the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT'S reliance on the SSFM Traffic iac Impact Analysis Report, which has the following deficiencies. Ei_ failure to address adverse tr.it!' isnbacr, within the Kana Vistas R111,1 project: b. The SSFM Triaffic Impact Analysis R ort u,.c:s a i*iw with rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate: employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering I raffle Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponent tarl relation: The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report dues not recoanze multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and 1i]€. I ' underestimates daily vehicle trips aitributable to buildout proposed project; d. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Repk rl crtipluys an unusually low vehicle volume 01 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Ka'ahuniartu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 201 ►, a weekday and August. 24, 2019, .i Saturday, ctiniparell with the 2018 Witcher Enginevring Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which reported 1057 vehicles fOr kilerar ° 14 and 15, 2016, berth .wockdayso The: unusii.ill' Ii}tiw reported vehicle volume. cif 853 is also at odds with Figure: 4 of the SSI I `Traffic impact Analysis Report. wIiich shows approximately 10513 vehicles per hour tri 2016 for Northbound Queer 11iiliway al 7 u,m. The difference in 4olurile is more Omni double the iriaixignum ltfi+fia variation generally aca_'cprrcd its day -t + -day measurements and thus tinrclrahle: e. 'file recurmnendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout it Queen Ka'ahuctiauiu Highway and Htialalai Road (i4rth) is inconsistent with the traf is corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignaliZed present traffic safety liability concerns for the government, f. The recommendation by SSFM Irtittic Impact Analysis Report for monitoring of the intersection tit Queen Ka High. ay and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. \1 Dere. ,r here. an intersection pa; cs more titan one warrant under all conditions, it should he prioritized for study arid design of sigal for installation. This ircunistance will be exacerbated by, the proposed project, 7. Our household has per na11y observed .ureic w .ry^ dangerous events ..end situations pertaining ro traffic inside the Kona Vistas Subdivision and on roads and intersections erre the project arca defined iii the 3 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSFSE\lENi SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report. The following is just a partial list nf ltielnnrahle events: a. Events inside Korea Vistas Subdivision: I . ? I/Itty a iOuis Of V4.1iiw17: dunning t}i, step sign at Kamchamalu and Lei lani St at ful] Rpecrl_ " Matt. +cc i i+tire; atf ti cltielei making Grwompletc attepa in ICamcharnalu and Letlartt St. 3. (lordlier and landscaping vuhicles parked in Ihc. traffic lane.s on Knnielianrriltr St 4- School Sus crossing g double ye[Ii3w line and speeding Lm K.lo irliamalu St. 3. Ce,rimrtrcial car hauling semi -trailer Truck crossing double yellow line on Kait> haTurtkt SI Fur cd into Konta't.xttG.ti from lack of ,pace to turn. Westbound from I-ord dealership. Cr Budding contra:tor rsorlitsdm hrnEfia lane a°tn L.eilatti St Jusa. Gaff Lako St. As we Iv -tied ihe pickup utas ntit vt.rhl,r, but was left in Ci[ItlIL Ltiie•w and we hae t•` yc r}ae ernptti truck. ▪ Commercial veltic]er speeding in subtlivtaion. took I..LILiLe. but not lnnptit«1 t_^ Ul' . tiff"tttr deliNery, pest control. Io}t+I L'.1L`arncr`ri, i1.1rnr k.. , ii r, T, ' ll 'I l:.i I.0.11 e.a.it agency chides h L vents outside Kite Vistas Subdivision in sloth art:u or SSFM TTAR, 1. V4'e,c1b0rritd on !alio Si .in l ,i t.tl.lr to get Teta! ttiru114lani. L11 Quetirt K.a'aahumauru hrbhway, Wt...1-yund tirn I.:Gki} wt .ut,! ttu:il 't° ti, r Imo i ru alto lone lir tylueen uhuntltenr hiihwav 3, L Istbcund Our Lako St, and unable 1.1.!.9L-1 inIO tuinui Linn! at Queen Ka aliiuiijaiu ltigflu.tti becuuso thru traffic bir ked aeti ^ to ruining lane a F,i,.tbc,und d rr Lako St, and unable to het into direr Eratlie lane at Queen Ka'abum;artu highway because lett turn lane was t"ettl .uid blocking rr.,•. eti, LL' tutu :ri. 2 eycics of the traffic sagnal u-hiclt was an uttaccepta}xk-waiting time. 5. Sonthbcund on Queers Kta'ahurna u hiLhway and unable htget intti earning hitt: at Lako SE because.thzu traffic was Hoek ng access tr, turning Lane 1'. Southbound on igen l..n'ahuruanu hlsl'1way and unable to get into thrn traffic Issni I•teeaukc left fuming lane vacs full and additiormil vehicle; tunt,u 14ft blocked a cw-is... 7. Experienced atop and pii traffic ti'trrn Herlr'r St io L.ako S; in slid-Set}tet hei IIurSTI L' it p tni.Leimc with ,cry few tours is on the> road_ A. °hien. l rrlkit ...Atli, les after accidents ;an Queen Ku'ahumanu highway and intersections at Lake, SE.. Kuakinr hr ltw ay F'u.spu:e inui St and Nani Kailua Dr Two acciderits had rttultrplc rolled vehicles. OF.•rtied the aftermath of many more accidents w L h crust, hid s.hic ]r`:I wan tsar tow trucks. I {.l'. Flail tt, turn onto a street rtilt ren rtry trip plan to yield to ari emeWruency vehiL6e Sunset DI. s4 a 1'iou Cirvic arrj 11 Lxprriert€ed manenirve or tIs rri‘trt'e ,ittw,cts betund 4'ur vch iie come 111 a st. rrmhirIL slop tlt hav-,cc r+ IfLl II7r rite right whru.riticr while stopping, rtaarru+a'1y avoiding a rear -end 12, Fla.fricri 1s that were in rear end accrdott.% that totaled their venule. anal in on.: c;a.e r.ausrd neck and hack inlu-v that r;2uircd trc:,at,rwnt and Isa wL+r1 days, H. Ohur uJ drivers Dr% [lcllr , str-.-t 'hat h ave tarried OR. grerr lights wit ut Watutzg firr the turn arrow as pc*stad hitt] rc,Alurrol, 14_ A.4oide 1 a:liajueN in the road t.at i,vcrc lost got Nowt front Irutik or trailers with unsecured loads 15, 1Irar errterg.cltc veined,: wrr r , c,rrl Qt leen ka'aahuatl.! 1u 1iig,ht+,ay ink pie rimes •i. eiy day. S. In sunt, t1K Draft EIivirurttitcia,ti and SS.FM Truffle Rtpnri docs not present sufficient. credible facts and analysis such tli.it lite adverse impacts on existing infrastructure and %% suiting from incrcasr tl traffic can be firstly understood and result in appropriate government planning and response. Signature: Please accept the helm as my digital signature Mary 1. Hemhy Dated October is, 2020 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Mary Hemby via email: frankie,hemby`V'gmail.corrl RE: Comments ori Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housirig Project. North Kona District, Hawal'i Island Dear Ms. hlernby: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 6. 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Ancilysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse Traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below, Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of "increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAL, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am p€ ticularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuana'oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase las designed as the connection of Kekuana'oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana'oci Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2021 Ms, Mary Hemby Pacje 2 of A Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues. however, the DEA ignores them, It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Sections 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana `oa Place. the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic {22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comm.nt 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed cn analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since thoee internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant.. Comment 6: The fIAR uses 0 growth rate of 1%. in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2015 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation, Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate, Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1%from 'the 2025 LRTP forecast, September 13, 2021 M. Mary Hemby Page r),t 4 Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics corny -..,n in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response Z: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 13: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 8.53 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HOOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TZAR is undercounting, but the TZAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the govern went. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kca❑hum❑nu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design at a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project.. Response 9: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD( states, 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant of warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2021 M. Mary Hemby Facie 4 of A an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. it should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. Comment 10; Our household has personally observed some very dangerous events and situations pertaining to traffic inside the Kona Vistas Subdivision and an roads and intersections in the project area defined in the DEA"s TIAR. Response 10: Unfortunately, these events are not unique to this neighborhood or this part of the island. The proposed intersection and minor connector roads would be built to County standards to ensure their safety. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulfirig Services Inc. It Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefe avre stcantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mari. Ashley From: Mark Powell marka50(i' tt.ilet} Sent: TuiNday, October 06, 2020 4.33 PM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Project Attachments: Royal Vistas "raffic Pictures.pdf Attached is a bref descriptor' of the West side traffic issues. John 136585 To Whoni it May Concern, All the residents on the West side of Hawaii island have a major concern with traffic and safety. There is a proposed development called Royal Vistas Housing Project that will adversely affect the already backed up traffic situation on the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway and could add 1,000 carr kegs or more a day. Lake Street intersection is already a bottle neck because of the 3 south bound lanes, 2 turning and 1 south on Kuakini. Picture 01 shows north bound traffic on Klajk;ini tri turn across south bound traffie on Queen K to head north or} highway which is very dangerous. Picture 41 also shows 2 merge lanes rrom lower Kuakini onto the highway heading south with a very short distance to move into a left turn, right turn, or straight lane. All of this traffic movements causes backups and accidents, Picture 02 shows the lanes a little further south ori the highway toward the Lako intersection. This area is a real bottle neck with traffic twreert to move into a lanes depending where you are going. Picture 43 shows the Lako Street intersectiori. This int.ersecticn is very congested because of all the movement there. Vehicles are headirip north, south, turning left: right, in all directions. Adding to the problems is the F -i I that Mauka bound Lako there are 4 business commercial driveways located on the corner, the Shell Gas Station and the Ford Dealership, Also there is no merge or acceleration lane from west bound Lako turning right (North Bound) onto the Highway. Because Lako Street is so busy now traffic backs up on Lako to try and enter the highway in either direction. Adding this new development without proper panning will bring traffic to an even great backup and create a high danger of accidents. Part of the issues could be alleviated if the State, County, and Developers would work together. Build a signalized intersection bringing all the Royal Vistas Huusing Project traffic (Mauka to Makaij, Kuakini`s, and the Queen K's into 1 intersection. This would be much safer than it is ncw and with what's being planned. This would also improve the 'Lake) Street intersection because it would eliminate the 2 Kuakini merge lane heading south Also the State and County must think about the full widening of both the Queen and Xuakini highways. If this development is approved before the highways are widened, the developers should be conditioned to widen the highway fronting there property frontage now. I know this has been a requirement on the mainland in some cases,. Summary Build 1 signalized intersection bringing Kuakinii, Queen K highways, and all the Royal Vistas Housing Project traffic together in one place. This will help traffic flow and greatly improve safety for everyone. Require the developers to widen the highway along there project frontage. Require the ,-vPlopers main road through the development go Mauka to Makai so there is the lower way ur an upper way out safety). Mauka to Makai is an ekisting County requirement. Don't approve the development until the Highway is fully widened to all directions arwl a new inter ection iS built, Mahalo John P. Pletos . c: ct 11 • 0 gNYNie.Dfun.'ivett,143atc,v1i:040--&; net r ES '...2535.17 15'.; tifEs7-M.95.70 11,1z7124.1 PL31 rr 17-.93-2..C58.:1•214h :i¢rsr'eee'.(xw1i.tatielh arli L tt ,-Srt°wt*kalluea lx,asnw - `x 1. 1.55 g$79Z+f76%an.1:4-14.41 8te,821 65594T Q41,3'.r.11) 29e.Ft,0 Tf ,7,07 La17 mtpe i rll"Tl gDflgteG:iilIvait'see crtiLako+StT-'.. .k. ! ..i.,,ri � - li '"�� 6{}E'+:R : rte- _ ';c:1••::]7• �'�,4, n=1'r l : 4-1 47'1„ y:°�'+v 4 _ , s � :rcl , Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. John Powell via email: markp5O att.net RE: Comments or the draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Powell: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 6, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments, Comment 1: Lako Street intersection is already a bottle neck because of the 3 south bound lanes, 2 turning and 1 south on Kuakini. This intersection is very congested because of all the movement there. Adding to the problems is the fact that Mouka bound Lako there are 4 business commercial driveways located on the corner, the Shell Gas Station and the Ford Dealership. Because Lako Street is so busy now traffic bads up on Lako to try and enter the highway ineither direction. Adding this new development without proper planning will bring traffic to an even great backup and create a high danger of accidents. Response 1: The Traffic Impact Analysis Report {TZAR) in the EA acknowledges the bottleneck that occurs at Lako Street. The traffic signal timing and phasing can be charged in the interim from split phasing to protected or protected/permitted or permitted phasing on Lako Street. The long term solution is the widening of Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The widening of Queen Kaahumanu Highway from Henry Street to Kam I[I has been in the long-range transportation plan. Comment 2: Part of the issues could be alleviated if the State, County, and Developers would work together. Build a signalized intersection bringing all the Royal Vistas Mousing Project traffic (Mauka to Makai). Kuckini's. and the Queen K's into 1 intersection. This would be much safer than it is now and with what's being planned. Response 2: There are plans to re -align Kuakini Highway at Queen K,a`cihumcnu Highway as shown in Figure 6 of the TIAR. This shows a new intersection just south of Puapuaanui Street. The 2010 Kona Development Plan shows the roadway with bike lanes and pedestrian facilities. This new intersection, with a new intersection at Kona Vistas driveway, and the signal at Lako Street would need to be coordinated. This is outside the scope of this project, September 13, 2021 Mr, John Powell Page 2 of 2 Comment 3: The Slate and County must think about the full widening of both the Queen K and Kuakini highways. If this development is approved before the highways are widened, the developers should be conditioned to widen the highway fronting there property frontage now. Response 3: The development is building a dedicated right turn Zane. From a traffic operation standpoint, widening a short section of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway to 4 (ones (2 through lanes in each direction) is not justified. Vehicles would have to merge bock otter the short widened section~ creating another bottleneck. Therefore, the project does not propose making these mprovements. omment 4: Require the developers to widen the highway along the project frontage. Require the developers main road through the development go Mauka to Makai so there is the lower way or an upper way out {saretyl. Mauka to Makai is an existing County; requiren-7ent. Response 4: There would be a right turn into the development. In the professional opinion 0l the traffic engineer, widening Queen Kaahumcanu for a short section, since vehicles will have to merge back into 1 lane, Therefore, widening the highway is not proposed, Comment 5: Don't approve the development until the Highway is fully widened in all directions and a new intersection is built. Response 5: The widening of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway has been discussed ono planned for many years now. The completion of this project is not in Kona Three LLC's control. The TIAR in the EA includes analysis of future traffic projections anc includes mitigations that show that while the delay would increase, the overall intersection level -of -service (LOS} would be acceptable. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock. Kona Three LLC Maga Jackson, County of Hawai'i Planning Department Mori, Ashley From; kNa!,rie Hernhy <wayrie.hernhy@grnail.cc n-- Sent: Monday, October 05, 2020 445 PM Planning Internet Mail Cc: cclt,nyharh hotmail.corr1 Subject: Hiw5ing Priiect EA Comments Attachments: R. yit Vistas Comments by EarLia,a Repasky signed 2.020 Oct 3,pdf 1: yiM, 1171 :ir1}' c,uo _ IIr1I� +I�ia.c trc�alt. e! ;ate :;a ;SO SF 31%0180 have attached a sigred and scanned copy to this email. I have the same contents in the email heloio,7 in a form that is searchable but \t id -lout signature. I1°'I;;111aitr. t3.arll.U1I l{ti1,asky 75-1521 k. ati ICIliiii al 11 t l.ailua-Kortd.II; ►`aii96740 Ixl t LARA I it)y 1tARLIt1RA I. 11A141 -&A k \ RI- dt:cl°rrc;: I a.in al r s.4lc:at,}t1[a1 + aii ' Kona Vistas subdivision, ',°e.;rl•. 9=kVA' ui i, Sta'4.'47fIla ti`i. The proposed land tilcvolopn.4•nt project that is the. shect 01 the pending I)ratl1 1 17', 11.$F111147111a 1 wsessirner1l submittal by Royal 1r'1sias I hri�n•ing Project l'atx Map Key NON (3) -6-0 1:0 i . r,...,. 1:017, 7-0.-(1,21:01' , 74,621 1119Nutth Kona District, Elawat'i Island. State of F-ia.•,.at"r Ltlli:its iac Iat.iti1 °.LI. I \ .ati «LII ,Is iii"tec1H cavy Illtult+5i all mill property. I reside within hlif n nsi1e ctitprop „,ctl land deli 4°Icyrn-!in1 project. Ili scch c;-ip:s. ilk's. I have firsthand know lcdgt; of. the In1litir ing, facts .tnk't e:i.)ultl and wOu13 !. til thereto 11.,*:4Ile•J upon tc do so. 2. fluty(' re%tciAed the pending DRAFT ENV 1RO 1\1ENTAL ' SSi:SS\1ENT °1 ii1L c I;tipact Analysis Report by SSF M dated \1a tl X11 Laud ui 1:31i lied as Appein_l1 s 2 to the DHAI- 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSI=.`, .•1 h \ 1 1 am t let:it-lalal.yhcattl atcIvE!titr,ttfic impacts hlrlh %3rtthui Mid without the Kona Vi.stas ,,11)111... imt. 1 that aro r1<,1 C'L I I c ir atltlreisseci i.; 11,4: SF! 1 Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic and the. SSFM Truffle Impact Analysis Report. arc clist.135ed in the body cfthe DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL AVNl 1:SSAIFN'I at pp. 48-5h,6 and /1 3. In the Kona Vistas ~ubdivision. akh: FE7o io.“.!t1 project relies on ahw 13:47 of:r'N;ih t:aaalard roadway, l ekuatrtri'oa Plrittle. Kekuana"o:Y Place iw +era steep. has litlailee] sight distcalees due to exit cunt eui. es and is narrow with no sidewalks. 'Tie impact of increas-ed traffic arisantig from Phase 1 and Phase 2 beuldouts of the Royal Vistas Flousing Project is inadequately .addressed in the SSI [v1 iraftic Impact Analysis Report, which tucii nist4.rjd sstr ir11paets along Queen Kaa1iurn inu Highway. I tam particularly con6...erned that adding namertlus vehicle trip4 to and from a separate subdivislcan will present dangers and cor]E 4•stiotl to residents along I ,ekuana`oa 131a4.7o_ I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns_ 4. The DRAFT ENV1RONMF::N'T Al. ASSESSMENT t's.t°;atatc; eValuaticarl of, runoiig slthwr , atl 'crse sce:undary impacts. such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Sec Chapter. 11-204,1-I3. llavaii Administrative Rules. Instead of ;,yiaarcly addretssity, ihes;c: is..tiic . however. the DRJ FF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT simply ignores them, claiming titan "No advase secondary effects arc expected since the development would utilize existing infrastructure, pr&se,idr- 1C1ti L1 housing, and is not expected to result in suF,,44t11ial demands tea (county se:ri•1•:es." Et i is serious cianission for the DRAFT ENV IRON MENTAL rV.SSLS MENT to fail to addre,,s 111; Pcst rrt.!1. ac VCTS : 111npa.i of kik: reasing the use ofsubstandard existing infrastructure, like Kekltana`on Place_ 136500 5, The DRAFT L?wl '11 ONMENT Al Ati 1.' M1 NT addres;cs .1J'. crse tral'Iie impacts L1rtly trx thy' context of tiv'hether the project would Have a suh-;;7.annal adverse cffc, t rt I1L'.11l1L' health_ The Applicant claims,. "The 11topLII Pr+3jeet would not aftocr, public health in any way: �l,tin11 4Liter would be tlppropriatel5, clisposed of in drainage structures. Traffic irr.pc141ti have been taken lir1L caircii,t1 crins1LieratiLln in project ric 1gn.hF l Ittph.tsts added. This bald concIusil 11dloc, nom address poterl'ial adverse .it1p;Icts az, required by 11-200.1 -13. Hawaii Administrative Rules. i i 6. The Nanning Department should not accept the DRA1 1' ENV11tON.M].: N1 1 AL SSESSM NT's reliance en the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which ha; the faallow+'ink; dctic1Lm. iLs: a. failure to address adverse traffic: iI1 paeis within the KLula 'V'itir. is sUl1division arising; fame the prr>jea; b, 'rile SSP°M Traffic Impact Anal>sis Report uses a growth rate of l'?/,), 3n contrast to the 2'- growth rate crnpkw cd by the 2,018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact -Analysis RL.port. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in u non-linear, 3t2I 1tia:In; C. The SSFM Traffic hnprct Analysis Report does not reuog ize multi-generational housing characteristics common in flakvaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to huilrlout 11uc Itroposctt pr,71,°tt� d. The SSF\11 .11.1!L` "4.0 Iw, l L"I}R,il en,ph.”..., iu >rrlLtstr,rlly lsatw wtl>itilL volume LtfI53 vehicles for 4� ; „�I+�"tl'� ,ultrr,i �wrL;�°.-I t•;tr�hu,�Ir;�itdi I. ,. I�. �i 11L,c�L•L�xl dales tI April 'IC a..weekday :ted August 21. ,('• ` . :rtur:l:l',', cirtnparcil \V' rchter-ttL~,Inecran 'I ate c II'•1 1 i i Analysis l epu rr, which reported initial-1'F 14 1 J. 2I1145 l ,,t:r ck.LhI •5. The 1.11i,iscl3;rlly L(rV r L:;ported vtlticic ^L clurae of 853 3s i,.^ s .f' t+s'1:' 41'l1.11 Figure .1 sl ihr,1 ] ;,Ie Lrt►p�lLL »tII lysJs Report, 1•wlnchh s1rt.'�•s.approx11uaately 1050 vcirit l4 pt i our In 2i:I Ire Ci.Ir h.,,rll,3IIi Ii I:ttahlrmarul lligItway at 7 a.m. the LLIherence In v'olurne is t11+ L II�.�� ilf ..II,IL Iltt r:r.l.v�it3,u` .,L.IaccL•ptLxl in day-to-clay tneascyrcrinents,roil thus urrcl�,II.IL' e. 'I`h.• r,..I-,'inllrurlct,3tion by SS!'1vl [rank impact Analysis Report fir a roundabout at [wren I aalittmanu Hi 1% LI .SII,! 1.111311.:r1331 ROILt.:l ince+11,-,Istcrtt with the !raffle 4 cu]Tidor. Intersectiones that pas warrants but remain unsignalizcd present traffic satity liability concerns trrr the ^sw vrntnLnl "1.112 3ecs,rt;r1-:Ls:rtlatitfn Ley 1-'\1 Truffle impact Analysis Report for monitoring ofthd iii r eClidln tot Queen 14„I;IttIIl1'1 311,1 I 1 Itr��I� ilii;( ]ikI31kii i H'Ighway is inadeL.Itritle. Itert.% as here. ir1 H1tQr.,eizlW11 plisses inure than 4,11L' wwttrranr unxicr :r'al CCEIl 11710lts, Ir Should he prioritized for study and deli jii of a sL!n,tl t,'t irt4r;tl Iat.3111 "I his circurrNianuL` Ia Ilk _te Qxatcrhai d by the proposed projeeL. 7. hi. spec:. rllc L)ralt Environmental Assessment and SSFM Traffic; Impact Analysis Report elites not 111-esc3t sufl'icl o'rt. E', Iliiltle frets and an.r]v'sN such that the adverse impacts on existing int?' astrr1.ture and re . Itln ; irom increased tratfit can Ile fully ur:ulerii usiiI and result in appropriate government planning and response. 1 declare under penalty ofFpw;rjtary that the forcgLriny is true. Dated: Kailua-Kona, 1-1awai'i. r. ctober 3.2020. S ignaturc: Printed name: Barbara Repasky 2 I.)l..t.1 Alt 1 i is N OF BARBARA RI.P.\Sk`r 1. I1A1 B RA RI',PASKY. declare: 1 all" a residtmi L)1'1lrav in .' Kona V istns subdii%isioaa. County Of EJlvui' i. Slate Or 1 IaWai' i. 1 he proptssz,ci lairJ de elopI ac -all prcijoci that is thrs° sub -loci of the pen -cling Dian -nvircir rrtenlal ,,Vsessrnerit. snhnillcd by Knyal `isiu Fl, yusiri4. lbrojcc l Tax Map c.!! Nos. l ;1 741-1.: I:111 , 7-6-02 1:017. 7-C1.- 01:018. -fi-01:(1 8. and 7.6-01 I:E}I'I Norah Krma 1)istricl, J1 w 'i [slut id, SLatt Ha a,lt"i rac pirxtmallya3 well as a1i 4is my rralcresl 1rt real prr<alirrty 1 n.wttic within ntik Pic prcalxrscd Itrtrd tic elarpment. pmJci:1. 11a salcla capa►wities, 1 Ia rwt lirsth;rnwl kaluwtilcalEr sLn(l could and v uld toslif} lhcroo if called upon to du so, haw rcvicv►ed liar ,p ncliriE+. [)RALE.'f 1 N.\ I RC V.J.IVIl'.I 1 .\L ASSFSSME\T inc.ludirsg 'he '1 railic Iaip ai Ana1y is Rcpern Lv SSA- til Inlcn1salisma6. dated Ma. 720'1'0 mid atutchcdas .Appendix 2 tc►11tr 1)I AI -T FNVIRONMJI.NIIAI A4 US MI -1. I and specifically currcCrratLJ about 3dwr:r iral`liv imperw:ta. bo Fi within mid w`iih+irrt InV Karla `isi11s subdiviS1c11. ihcu arc no: fully 4'rr acc;rrateI' ad ii s ted in flaw; Fl+vi -I runic Impact Analvss; lie.pnr1. 1 r£aI is un,.I L1k SSFM1 Traffic Impact An.tlwsis Repuri .rrc discussed in the body 1hc l.)RAt°°I [HV1RONMF IAl..4SSkSSMFNT. at pp. 4 - h, 67 add 71.. In (11 c Kona Visas suhda visa m, Slat prupus iJ proj:ect relies cin tIi U. a ora sithslandard IK.ekuana'oa Place. Kekuariu'tta Place 1,rcry stCcp. has linittr`d wtistaat�ues duu tss extreme c1=rvcs and is rlarrov.. with no The impact. Of incrw3 ctl tr l4lic. arlslrh Irorrl ,aril l'liil.ti4' huiildcirras 4-.+1 the R ).a1 \'ista51lousing Prajc:ci i> irtaadeti atcl } addresvai i11 die SSW Flak, l I ,c.- 1. o , , .ieaiel on i,rl .. rt_• I ue4.'rl I1aillhUnitilrinJ iIi hway. I am particularly concerned that add in. l itk 'LAB vehicle trips to and from a separate affil t11 isr[>111 Will present ,`!angors clad congestion to residents alone KekLimiii• 'a Place. 1 consider that the PIMILD ilig [)rlr.irurIi. i11 should the yip heat t to address [!lege conee371: . 4. The DRAFT EN IROI\MENTAL ASSESSMENT retuirL's evaluation or. unione sstlt r:ti. ritirc^t.Nt` Sec. rerrrliry RrrQfitrc'r.r, Sift Ir ¢t_ti f+ra9rt1i+c'Prert+, e•.( ejr t.',+ ect) orr irr6h/ro itc + nre.%_ 'hal,rer i 1.-_1(10.1 1 i 1latit.iii A.Irninrstralit.ve 1tr114:5_ Insiend of squarely :1cltlre.ssint the c issues, how e'v or, the DRAFT P V1Ft i)\r\1LN 1AL. ,\SSESSMEN1 simply i tlorus theist, t l<liilitil that ''Ni ad% vise are wxpectod sirz:r the de eiopnietSt NVbold utfli extsuU1 ! iittt•asla•ltiture, provide i€tlill housing,. and is acs; expected to result in sryitwla.ilti.el dcniant in County i r neck." It k a serious gntissii'n for the (DRAFT L\V IRCr.MENT-\L ASSI SEMEN 1 to tail Lo addlicsw 111 polvi1tial utlt rs 'unpirtts aiI` irttrea ing the 01' yah iaiii1ardExistiiitg infrastructure. like kChlian f."co !tee 3 l'kt�• 1)14AFT I•'s k`IkI( M.`kN11-. `I'l A . S'}-SS1rt[ lV f :i 1 Ire : ti iw'rrti0 1E11l11' impacts Lyell!, in the cosltexi pl. tlk project w.(.6uk11 !lav' a.rublaurrrrzr! trtbzer.vt. e!%t'cretre pubhc-hverilh Tk Applicant claim's. 1 he €'rt,pt>ise.cl Proict~t would not affect public. health hi any e4's14: itL rrnwater apprt}priatc1} rilspl s tI 3►1 in tlriinaLi ' 3tC'ul tore . Tiaftk inlpacts have 11r. it tact r?I alit) Ldie:kul .:ertrSicltrdtiun iii project deign." Lliipllii ib Idiot;. This bald conclusion IRA address pututl!idl .1i_IvLrse iiiiPaCtS ar: rt:goiced by Ci;_tpicy 11 -2(10-1 - Atirllillistrative !Milt's, Ile Planning Depar:in nt should hot cecept [FL ASSESS .1.LN 1's reliance on the SSM I -raffle lanp t : J1 ik-'•1. f �}z.r� I�i�ir k1;is the foilinNiE�� cleficierlwies: ;3 to liddress adverse traffic impacts within rhe Kona Vistas suhillo.ision arising 1riIrTT the Frcuci I 1�. The 4FM Trait c• Iinp et Analysis Report usc: +1 grim.th raw of in ctintrasi to he "`i, growth rate c'mpisrwetl by the 21.118 Witcher Err ,ittirrin Trttrfte Ir:tpact ,Autu1ysis Report, Ironic comilostion is very sensltive to growth roe in a non-li reitr, exponent, n.1 rtilirtion: 11ac SSPYI Ira Itic ii p;aLt Analysis Report does not rccoL:nii. Tt inti- trtcrraric►rnal huusinv characteristics common in 1-Il t:ut-ding It, eenstis dual and 1ik h urau.crestirnittes. daily vehicle trips attributable to huild iut of the prnprrisedi project: d. The SSI `.i I'rat is Impact 'Analysis I4.cp rt employs an unusually low vehicle it : cc•}ticics lilt Northbound t,)ticert KaitihuTl Er1u highway on die selected dates c>If April ►d . 7019. a wee kd. y and August 24, 2019. Cl Saturday, co.tnpnrcd with the 2018 Witcher Enginecrine Traffic Impact Analysis Report_ \VIBE!} rq)r,r•red 1(15 i vehicles torr ianuarti' 1-1 a, d 1 `, 401, 6, both .weekdays_ rhe unusually k w repi rro r IA unie N53 is :thew at odds with igure 4 of the SS1-M Irain,:1mpact Antilti-sis Report. ixaii:11 shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 201r, -for Northbound Queen aahurnanu. l-lig.hway at 7 rt.rn. I he difference in volum:: is more than cicruhle the rruximum 1O1`s.3%iariation generally 1C'::w.eiLl it1 iia -tc-::1',. rneasurc rtictns and thus rtrtreliahlk: � . the recom.mcndation hoi,. SSIN l tai 'te Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout al Qutvii 1 rlti ;Urt9iariW Eirghv i aid 1-luitialui Riid INorih1 is inconsistent the irii),'i`w -': rrIJItir. In[ctpectitirtS Ilran [ass +aarri.int,.1 but remain LLtnSi rtalueed present. truffle salcly I :al lliir' 'µr°cru rot- the gc\-errrnacnt: The rei:onttncndanu he• 4' 1 N1 I rat•aic Intpaci Ana Ivsi Rpt:di for manitcrrinL2 44r. the 1nte>rsection o 'Queen K:tahum-atm I Iigliway and I.uiI ini [-lighvvay is "rade() Jute Where.. ; her:, ari Intersectit'1.1t �eiw�L+ Cil e than Eine warrunn tinde r nil conditions. tt shcsuld he prioiritized I r study and dtsljn ()I .s iL-nni tor c•ircumstnnec wiI[ he ex crhate4.l by the propilscd irtri tt. r. lit sualt. 1lty. I:i[;:I I 1'11% irortnta•-iial Asses mcnt ark -1 'SS!' i 1 raFlic Inipacl Analysis Iteri"Nrt Aire: riul I*r:wept ti II I ti;Cli1, i r, Jjhi 1:...I :L[1+1 ,r,1;1I' 'w 'itch Char th adverse iniipactS C'it • ructure and rtsultirtr IFusii irnt:.ac:iscd Irvin ie can h Ir: 3} u.acle°t tood and result in apprsoi go cr iiiiD.:ro n Llnnr g and rc p+}ns . l klccltireundler pf,:natlt} rerjLtry that the tnrUaritne Is True l arte1 ()1.:t 1xr 2t)2(J. r gnatyrc, a'-..�°�.., fits-.' !_ "1.a '.f -ter �'e +'• Primed name' Barbara Re asLy° r / 4 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Barbara Repasky 76-152 Kamehamolu Street Kailua Kona, HI 96740 via email: wayne.hembygmail,com RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated PONS! for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawal'I Island Dear Ms, Repasky: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 5. 2020. on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1; I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In 'I -he Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa. Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. l consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County ..,1c -v -dards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact an Kekuaana'oa Place from Pc;yal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuanci'oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuanaoa Place during the AM Peak period. and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuanaoa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2,021 Ms. Barbara Repasky Page 2at4 Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them, It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 1 Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project, These effects are not expected. since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents os described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts lo Kekuana`oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekcuna'aa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectivelyl. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Hove a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any 'way, stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed Grid analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are nat expected to be significant.. Comment 6: The TIAR uses Ca growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering. Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Deportment of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume, The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1%from 'the 2025 LRTP forecast, September 13, 2021 MIs, P.111: ii f'.i Repasky P a c e L :' Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics corereen in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response Z: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and law -rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of B53 vehicles for Nofthbaund Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HOOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TZAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kcaohurnonu Highway and IKuakiri Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design at a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project, Response 9: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant ar warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2021 Ms. Barbara Repasky Page 4al an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many ot these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc, Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lel`ebvrestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County ot Hawaii Planning Department Mori Ashley Frani_ Caleb Kekoa.Nazara AiknazaraOprotonmail,corri2. Seat_ Wednesday, October C7, 202C l_00 AM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: Kona Vistas housing project EA Aloha Tlik is lust to int -unit you that my 1i1i111WaS I1 enlion mi as having sought i:onisultation 1 have no rei:nllectic n of receiving any document seek ins consultation, and drely have not 3rnkcn with anyone on any consuitation. \1 Lthalo Caleb Kekoa Nazard-1'c l cltil kena Kona 11a' ati;tn Civic Club tin torn l rntnnMiiI Mnhiile 136662 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 FSI: {808) 494-2039 Mr. Caleb Kekoa Nazara-Pelekikena Via email: knazarargpratonmail.corn RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated PONS! for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii island Dear Mr_ Nazara- Pelekikena: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 7r 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed protect stating that you had not been contacted for consultation. We apologize for any confusion, but attached please find attached an email chain between our cultural consultant (Mr. Glenn Escott) and yourself confirming communication, contact, and request for consultation during the Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) process for this EA. If you hove any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (8O8a 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely,. Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvrei:gslantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Moja Jackson, County of HQwci'i Planning Department Kekoa Na2ara , k>aaararr .gnail.com - "fo.C,ierin 1:.sastl Wed. Feh 19 au 1{1 •I9 -.M \It,lut &elm Will do. lly l'the %Nati 1 did Iind one other contact for that deal and i)I.itiR project. I`ve Keen ss bu.sv 1 hit en't had a chance To call him tut 1 Will this week and get back to you thanks CIU 1r'iiii ITN iPhone on I el, I .WZit, at 12:2' I'M. (derail 1:soti gle,ckciiti yallf Aloha r keLta� 1:47411 i17Ult Nhslaal[a firtOnn.iullilii [7tt the 111.NR 1.ti7t1n orea in I1]4a 5th .'1.hufatia s 11 Win, storxt t6, Talk hliary Wath you and Jake'. 4'4'ta hart" Ll indI!.iing another CIA in 110hutlira if you are interested m cony ,lIii1g on 4n11Ilttrul practico. al the° project time lanai•. lice the 3111611A € L- cor ultatian requiit for lan& of I Iolualt*m Ist, North Kona If you you kn } e hAis informat lit regarding past orongoing cultural prarli' in 1Iolnal, a 1+t. let coli1;1.:I rite 1 4orthuli '\IuhJdI Ntli I..KL irlcnn. C.i, 1 seoLt. wk"nI[1r : lrcltuerik)gtst Scientific Consultant 5ary cer;. Inc,. Mori, Ashi Fronn: Sent: To: Cc: Subject Attachments: inabaverituresPyahoo Com Wednesday, October 07 2020 5 17 PM Planning Internet Mail Yee, Michael Royal Vistas Housing Project EA Comments Planning Dept Submission Roy V!stas 10 7 20.pdt iIi he -lavvai'l Cc ti 1lea,e if 5libor1rtri rov Trie Roya ' moo 7., vers 10' firli7iV •T'y Etd-1.12•':.1 • • ,1.1c r1 regnrCIVIg Ibe Drat( EA A:, ink::E Llra'! 1 wou , ;. 1,)E. 1-,nre ,••1 Thiri%,„,00 I -r lie .:011 ,110,1 Renee Inotai Arrno.-INIENUPDF IDOCLPIIeltor submissInn r i SUBMISSION tl IONS 1(11IA AI'l UOUN1 ." Pl.r NN1NCC DEP f'OPE\ 1'l'111.1CCO11"i1:.I AND C LIES1'If7NI 1018;200. RE; RCYYA1.. VISTAS I10US1Wi PROJECT DRAFT FA, 1, Renee L. Inaba, declare: 1 anz ai resident ofKnilua Kona. County of Ilawai`i, State ol- Hawaii 'i. The rp, Ned Iankl cl el{F[urnolt project that is the subject of the pending Drult Environmental :.sseli;ment submitted by Royal Vistas [lousing Project Tax Map Key Nos. (3) 7-6-1)21 (116. 7-6- 112i• t}17. 7-6-02 1 111and 7-6-02i:019Nlurth. Kona District. I i Island. State eel II 1 utI c1 t39 :itiiriil '. ply ciiiiiiriunity, and me personally as well as frfiects my interest rrt real pronLLrty. ! reside within 0.1 itli - the proposed land develnprnctit project. In such capacities, l have .lra1hJr L1 l4tiokt he following facts and coukl and ' u1d tcstr'a'ct': ifealltxf upon to do sty. _ 1 have rcvieL.d the pending DRAFT liltiVIROttiMEN. I AL. AsSESS:MIE\T and attachments. I am specifically coneerneci about, the completeness. accutuy and adequacy. of -the information provided - 3. A..RCHAE LOG1CA.L HISTORIC"AL'CULTf1RAL AND THOSE CONSULTED. It t . not clear that the archaeolNical �tuclies offered in support of the Draft Environmental Ashes-sinent are fully complete or adequate. A) Sample size and completeness: There are a number of features ofarchaenI, historical and cultural sign.if-icanee that are not documented inasmuch as the document has addressed only a $ciall sample of the land and Teatimes as opposed Oo a full study for purpos of: identification, loggingicatalcrging.. and. Page 1 of 7 mernorialization of l:c'v le -attires ciF cen ern to local 1-lau'aiian. kara'ain .. and stakeholder populations, B) Consultations Sought and Actual Otrrl"ut.'t' ointments. The' ` arc also questions that need to be hater arLsu ied abet 1,.‘hat constitute= --t t,nsoluttiit~rt Ntius Sought". see Page 42. as noted quoted limn the SCS CIA for the Project. 11 is nc.n clear what infortntrttc,n was provided and if the panics dial were Listed, as asked. had additional queries that still stand urtarrswcrca.i and not disclosed in this document. The statement as shown misfit imply stir ,iso. an impression of acceptance, agreement or c-,)ncurrcnc;c by khebe parties when it i~: not cIt r that has ++ccurrcd, ill the absence ni'atlirrtt:tttae statements by these individuals and related con titue'ncies, That said, a marc curnplcte utrderstardiri Lit 1Ite nature of the inquiry, casual tersignificant, would be helpful as well as doctimenLation from the parties listed as riirig their attwtu l poii lions aad`or questions. 4 CULTURAL ANI) OTHER FEATURES APPEAR NOT FULLY DOCUMENTED OR VISI S 1.I) t.it& POSSIBLY hails-[DCNTl11I:I) I.111)M THE. CULTURAL LANDSCAPE. . Al Substantial evidence eri tk 11LIT the land cnconipuswed by the suhject land parcels include a culturally si.gttidicant 1lt,lua Historic Slide, and ro.,I walls that are inadequately described as agricultural irons in the archaeological :studies offered hi support of the: DAR Environmental Assessment. That is a significant difference and dearly imponartt lir understand much 'better. before any equipment is. even con dered to roll. The Bill in Slide is an important 1#ave°aii:tn cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact tinter that cannot he rcplaeed if damaged or destroyed. 13) Concerns expressed are bas l upon the evaluation and analysis performed by Tom Poliaku Stone, who has much personal inic rrnarion about t1ii particular land and the importance of Holua,, and who has shared that irrformatu n with local community mL.TribL.-rs. Was Mr, Stone consulted about his concerns., kntiwledEe and Page 2 of 7 izitorntation! Cl Local historians from the i.cartic. F(} J-ear-ckd. historic: Mokuaikaua Church. including Yolanda ft [son n i the late R 1. krsrle Olsen. have been researching this area timid parcels asclesc-Huai). IIre._. :inkagctothe culturally significant pantsand sacred hui]dine, materialti brought dawn from the rnauka fntcsts presumed through this land, its paths. holua., eie. kfy the early post -contact Ilawaiians irk the buildint oldie iconic Kcn,a landmark 19ttkuaikatia Church.. Was Ms. Olen consulted on this study Di Were the cultural stewards and caretakers c>fthe I calaknwa'a l lc int' ;ss c. i. 11 aw 111L cultural leaders of Kora ClutrlcxrrC'ircle notified or this work and proposed cls.°'~elalpmet7L? Given the connection r l"thc flciau to thL land as outlined in th.e Draft EA. EIS Well a, its position dirt tly low the prstperiy they would. also be key stakeholders int these land issues and arty alterations. Pr,.- and I,o.I-s:tirrtt.sct rrr.ais:rs:slw were transported reverently through these I:;rscl to kcal aktuva" a, thought to be the last remaining canoe building Vidal.' in the State of I Iawai'1 and clirceily conrtcretcr.0 to these trla}hst Facets and the slide. Miatterials, presumed tt? hati;c included timbers. caw,: hulls. and other significant produas and items needed for ntaukaa-rrlikai provision i along the 11;0."..;,i1:!11'qpath through the property and this alrupua`a, would travel. further nakal. The label level Ian ct wcrc vcry critical for lite and foc>'d provihiani11g as these parcels were the life n1" Ihc: people 4nd lktttic to the Kona. field System. Timbers that now support our most iconic. landmark buildings in Kona (Mokuniknua and the Palace) are thought to have traveled this route before in , dropped in the ocean's salty, curing waters and floated ftp to the building. sites. Thcsc lands are presumed linked to not only those post -contact icons but to the pre -contact and now sadly rare carne h+eiau srf E.1ealakowa'a Hs:iau.:ts *ve11 as other relevant sites largely lost due to past development. E} Were lineal descendants with anccitral claims tti the. land and the bones•'iwi Bully afforded information and notification? It was noted in the study that paper media was used, but given the padre 3 of 7 importance of land issues here in I lawai'i and recent issues with MMfatuna Kea. it .would stern out of an abundance of transparency and inclusiveness chctronic ttoti ieation would also be necessary if the idea is to actuall ' pr viile lull awareness and notification. Were other methods used but not noted fully in the report t 5, Endangered Spe its Studies and Assessments Ai pear Incomplutc grid Mis-titric i, Assorted speck's saf Iii',li value to tpai Ilopu'iation and the island are present on these lands. Et was oiled iii the study that there was an aw.:Cl4°i14Isg (Attu,. but it also watt' noted that studies, such as for the Endangered llnar3. Bats, were not conducted at a time wwhcrt thi y are active:. Titus. additional studies that cover' the times of day assorted rare and eiulangered species are active should he required. 1 hi • -.. ,1 :tl -..;11 C„ req.,'irc ii level ofcurieern and care for the local and nartir•e lima .and fauna that - 1 •i::i. ...! . Citi c"ii itEr thL report appears to acknowledge the Bone rri turd issu i with such species uac luding the I I i,iry Fiats, iti there a plan to better evaluate ail the native. rare. and endangertul ~pedes prt..ent on die parcels? is (tele .1 plan tcafai lust t Ail! and coinpletc study of the population of Hoary Bats during a sufl ciLu period of tame anlusave of CIO right time of day to rialiy' assess the impact or any dcvelc►pinu nt 1,11 any endangered species'? 6. Environmental Safety, 'Trallil, \Vaud7Ln , Water Sheds. Al i i><ilic fiat issues have arisen around our island when de‘eloprtiern or g-rouridl disruption is Mone without tall awareness or proper mitigation oft e. future fiILla Lrie effects. These become b ih cosily for die County and dangerous to the public at large. Vw', Ii n e ti,3c d in \rest 1-IL ai'i. inclusive of in and around Kuakini Highway, makai cct'this arca, that significant Hooding has occurred when larger and intur-rnediaatt lex• is orprecipitatiuu are present, The rwn important waterways already noted arc tlw Kolualoa Ditch_ and Horseshoe Bendwhich currently manage water e •ss and flow Page 4 of 7 when precipitation is heavier, are effective old historic 11"LL ti <<ncl ri.ttershetis. Was water !Ivo( impact fully studied should anv alteration of the landscape utaM IriII C!i occur alter all eulLural, archaeological and ctrdaugcrtd species issues have been resolved'? The details looked a hit light in the document and this is a critical concern. B} Has the County of developed a plan to deal wide watr'rtlow disruptions, flooding. etc, andior made provisions for any developer, contractor, or agent to set aside signilieant funds it icirnbursc. the County 5l3ould development adversely inject adjacent, apslopc; and cls wn,slrrpc areas that end up Damaged from alteranrrns nl pre -contact flows" Drainage and water flow tlisruptionli ik*d to 13e handled wGth a fail and complete cnvirortzrtentul assessrricnt. Cl The: Tiaflic Stucly. tk rioted in the Draft IA including th.c rt port lr+ SSF1.1 international dated 7.'2021 dares not seem sutTtcienl Ica rival with IN ri crall and significant levels o 'traffic on any of our mdary and reside rtti tr I beets and road ► tty s The continent addressiits that "frallic intnact4 have been taken into careful consideration..,.- is not sufficient in alleviate valid concerns that will be held by the public. Those cuc.c�1-ns include. significant excess and Iii ardclus traffic c:itnditivas. Having been an active itwmber dour County Tral iic groitip as well as 1131 our community Here in Pualani Estates. we have found nc�t'mal'. non-Cov'id time traffic to be increasingly risky and dangerous on all ErIMour streets within our community and also in the surrounding area. Any increase in population for riensily rar access through neighborhoods already serving relatively large populations pose.~ crc iihle risk that should not be ignored. It was already a stated concern in assorted forums specifically related to trur roadways in and around Puulfani Estates, i,c.. that some grade and curvature issues pose significant and life-threateniav, risks that we have idetttitied over the past many years. Please he very conscious of ihes. e. very significant safety and irtifrastrueture concerts. It v. cold be prudent of the County to require any cic:vtlr,lter, Ets in this casc or any other Iarrgc scale proposal. tc set Page 5 of 7 aside significant escrow or bond funds with the County to rernuni late for losses due to environmental disruption, property devaluation. loss of usc, and in the cam of infrastructure strain additional casts that might otherwise tall on the County or the people of the County of I-iawai-i. Issues left for future remedi<-Ltioli and reined} rarely work out well for the citizen stakeholders or for the Crovernmentai utllority. It is best to have adequate and sul►stantial provisions scL itt plaL:c itas the tiQvclt>pct..tticquziEsl}` i:i[Edi: p:oVa E1,1E4 tj alsty Ill int around. existing communities and rtiathti illi' t{M Li+i42rk ilia . iicacu 1111tt tl'_.E4:1 iiti i`; IAr.'4t'nt iltll4' Gln (Jur streets aid inFri hit 14litre') Has the deveioper ;ct aside sulli,tiit nti funds in County at:uutitLts lLr settle any issues tat Loukl result in .a puorlvr cN.ecilicd {,r iit,s4lequaiely completed plan that warns and I;I 0,s rr.ir ccos gents {7r Intrig;lrliti'tL:re i,:rll rq.ies' It does not appear that those wt_�rc stitlieiently doeuivented in the report but plight we anticipate ipate additional information and thought on funding the County for these significant costs. risks, liabilities in th Find Version? 6. .il srurlrn rr'. the Draft Environmental Assessrneut dos nol ciftictcnt faults and analysis. concerning important i`lawarian Cultural ari i archaeological features, noi n..{l(i.g it fully address watertlow concern -s, infrastructure issues, traffic, cn irorunenta] and rclatQc1.. t'uturo costs and liability to'thc. County We need to be 1jtistlrec] that 'all steps are hilly vetted and understood to avid costly and dangerous future issues_ We alsn need to tr to 1Iu-xys lrx'lc with a vision to preserve and protect our peace, safety and lands and frankly those things once gone that can never he restored 7. At a mini [rani, the 1).raft l-rtvirnntnerrtal Assessment [mist be revised to address. Li% locution, Bata teem ery and prescr s:utn e;:the Holm (SIide! and related artifacts and Iine>,l am;esrry ompc peeps present c?n the parcels. ALI infrastructure concerns .reed to he fully Page 6 of 7 addressed with public, in person meetint4s. i.e,. not Covid lockdown limited participation or ability to speak. Dur kupuna and community population will both warts and need to share their isdo nrrruaufo and relevant concerns before anything is strrted. Spt cies protection along with historical preservation need to be done in earnest and the key issues r 6surety. pease, find mairttainirg the aloha of the land and its e.Urrern tlim need to he held as a priority to avoid issues similar to those we have seen !tin other pans of the island. In all things openness and transparency and working toward a positive futtu r.. hill:, respecting tiur past and those !hitt came hcld►etw t]i he td Li!: all in gi rd stead. These are rnv thought and guesrinn for you, die niciitl'crs ei the Planning Corntntssion tet relay back to tire; del ,2[0;,:,:r you set the entirety or their proprr,Lals and their report and declarations. [ cel'•purtt,itlty t.ct Vtrii:c 4s,nsr eu,, �t�9s,rco�r : :111 t]IIt!!.,I1I,t1; ern tilt;°,i fswues of ;treat importance for tau island and for ltierya. Dated: Kansa-Kona, H.iwai'i, October 7..100 Si;;,taturt:: ELECTRONIC SKCINATeRF.;rJj 1e1-I11LL i i rn.: Renee L_ Inaba Page 7 of 7 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 FSI: {808) 494-2039 Ms. Renee Inaba Via email: inaboventures i .yahoa.cc m RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI fox Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawai'i Island Dear Ms. Inaba: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 7, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment {DE.Al for the proposed project, Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: It is not clear that the archaeological studies offered in support of the Draft Environmental Assessment are fully complete or adequate. There are a number of features of archaeological, historical and cultural significance that are not documented. Response 1: As described in Section 3.6 of the EA and included in Appendix 5, Iwo AISs were prepared. As part of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their sigrificonce. The AISs were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rules § 13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. Comment ^ : There are also questions that need to be better answered about what constitutes "consultation was sought", see Page 42, as noted quoted from the SCS CIA for the Project. It is not clear what information was provided and if the parties that were listed,, as asked, had additional queries that still stand unanswered and not disclosed in this document. Response 2: The information regarding cultural consultations is included in the Cultural Impact Assessment including methodology in Appendix 4 of the EA. Comment 3: Substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject land parcels include a culturally significant Holua/Historic Slide. and rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the Draft Environmental Assessment. C11 September 13, 2021 Ms,, Renee Inobc Page 2 of w Response 3: Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211) documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a hoiva. Also the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA( #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a hoiva :curse since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a hoiva in the project site. Comment 4: Concerns expressed are based upon the evaluation and analysis performed by Tom F ohaku Stone, who has much personal information about this particular land and the importance of Holua, and who has shared that information with local community members. Was Mr. Stone consulted about his concerns, knowledge and information? Was Ms. Olson consulted on this study? Were the cultural stewards and caretakers of the Kealakowa'a Heiau as well as the cultural leaders ofKona Outdoor Circle notified of this work and proposed development? Were other methods used but not noted fully in the report? Response 4: In the email provided from Mr. Stone by other commenters, there is reference to "the portion of the hoiva at the Holua inn [that] has rack walls on both sides" and refers to parallel walls within the proposed development area. possibly Site 31182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 walls which are LCA #3660 boundary walls. Primarily, Mr. Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance at the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -Coastal region between Kailuo to the north and Keauhou to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekcahuraa. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he'eholua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the rear coastal region. However, the complexes are located more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal, sacred or sociopolitical complexes, or a l-rolua, within the project area. The existence of a hoiva within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone, As discussed abovethere is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a hclua course existed within the project area. A list of those consulted for the project are included in Apper!Jx 4 of the EA. The information regarding cultural consultations, including who was consulted, is included Tr7 the Cultural Impact Assessment including methodology in Appendix 4ofthe EA. :r•'Ir, 1 (11 September 13, 2021 Ms., Renee Inaba Page 3 of w Comment 5: Endangered Species Studies and Assessments Appear Incomplete and Ms -timed. It was noted in the study that there was an awareness of this but it also was noted that studies, such as far the Endangered Hoary Bats, were not conducted at a time when they are active. Thus, additional studies that cover the tirmes of day assorted rare and endangered species are active should be required. Response 5: The EA includes a description potential habitat for native species Cnc tiding the hoary bat) in the existing conditions part of Section 3.3.4. The �cgical survey acknowledges that just because a species is not detected curing the survey does not preclude Its presence. In tact, the biological survey stated that the hoary bat should be presumed to be present. The impact discussion includes potential impacts to individuals and to habitat for native species (including those not directly detected during the survey). The impact discussion including protection measures to eliminate potential impacts to native species (including avifauana and bats) and their habitat in Section 3.3.4. Comment 6: Given that the report appears to acknowledge the concern and issues with such species including the Hoary Bats, is there a plan to better evaluate all the native, rare, and endangered species present on the parcels? Response A: Since the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat is vulnerable to disturbance while roasting with its juveniles in the pupping season. the EA (Section. 3.3.4j includes a protection measure for all potential habitat. 'To minimize impacts during construction, woody plants taller than 15 feet would not be removed or trimmed during the bat birt ring and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15). Additionally, Hawaiian hoary bats forage for insects from as low as 3 feet to higher than 500 feet above the ground and can become entangled in barbed wire, if used for fencing. The Proposed Project would not use barbed wire for fencing." So whether the species is detected or not, the applicant will adhere to this protection measure for the project. With these measures in place, the project would not result in impacts to bats. Comment 7: We have noted in West Hawpi'i, inclusive of in and around Kuakini Highway, makai of this area, that significant flooding has occurred when larger and intermediate levels of precipitation are present. The two important waterways already noted are the Holualoa Ditch and Horseshoe Bend, which currently manage water excess and flow when precipitation is heavier, are effective old historic flows and watersheds. Was water flow impact fully studied should any alteration of the landscape and hillside occur after all cultural, archaeological and endangered species issues have been resolved? Response 7: A new drainage study must be approved by the County prior to coris'°uctlon of any improvements for the Project, ensuring review and approval of proposed drainage improvements. As discussed in the EA, the project would not contribute or exacerbate the flooding issues. Per Section 27-20 of the Hawaii County Code, the project is not allowed to increase any run-off onto :r•'Ir, 1 September 13, 2021 Ms. Renee Inaba Pace 4 of 5 neighboring properties, so there are no effects on any neighbors from project run-off including on the County -owned parcels. Comment 8: Has the County of Hawaii developed a plan to deal with waterflow disruptions, flooding, etc. and/or made provisions for any developer, contractor, or agent to set aside significant funds to reimburse the County should development adversely impact adjacent, upslope and downslope areas that end up damaged from alterations of pre -contact flows? Response 8: Section 1,2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the Iwo County -owned parcels. It describes that on TMK (3) 7-6-21:19, "lnfrastructure during Phase 11 of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system across the ditch to extend Kekuanc oa Street. which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kona Community. Development Plan (CDP) "Official Transportation Map." For TMK (3) 7-6-21:18, the project includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the Kona CDP's "Official Transportation Mop." Additionally, as described in Section 3.3.2, Kona Three would preccre a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by Department of Public Works. and there would be no drainage interruptions. Comment 9: The Traffic Study, as noted in the DEA does not seem sufficient to deal with the overall and significant levels of traffic on any of our secondary and residential streets and roadways. Response 9: Existing traffic impacts were accounted for in baseline conditions. Traffic counts that served as baseline conditions were token pre-Covid and, therefore, could be considered a conservative estimate of impacts compared to current conditions. The TIAR ]Appendix 2) thoroughly analyzes traffic impacts from the project to relevant intersections at the project site and nearby intersections. Comment 10: Has the developer adequately made provisions to maintain safety in and around existing communities and roadways to assure safety, peace and quiet as is present now on aur streets and infrastructure? Rest onse 10: The proposed project would be built using best practices currently in place in the State and County of Hawaii, as well as all applicable laws, regulations, and policies. Comment 11: In summary" the DEA does not discuss sufficient facts ard analysis con ro__rning in-L-,c-:rtc:nt Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features, nor does it fully address waterflow concerns, infrastructure issues, traffic, environmental and related future costs and liability to the County. (11 September 13, 2021 Ms., Renee Inaba Page 5 of 5 Response 11: These impacts and protection measures are discussed in the EA in Sections 3.5 (Cultural Practices and Sites), 3.6 (Historic and Archaeological Resources), 3.3.2 (Water Quality and Water Quantity). 1.2 (infrastructure), and 3.7.2 (Traffic). We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments cr questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvresfccntec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: John ber'rleti <jw512,666Pgmai4.corrr: Sent: 1Nednesday, October 07, 24201 14:5g AM To: P1 rnirig Internet Mail Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Project To wham it may concern, In regards to the proposed land development project that is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas Housing Project Tax Map Key Nos. (3) 7-6- 021:016, 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021:018, and 7-6-021:019 North Kona District, Hawaii Island, State of Hawaii. 1 have found the Environmental Assessment of this project inadequate. The Assessment shows great detail on a 5 acre portion of the property that was performed in 7018, and a much lesser detail, as well as dated, assessment of the remaining 65 acres, Within the property are very likely remnants of Kealakeekowa'a road ( path of the canoe). Koa Trees were harvested above Fici[ualoa and logged down to the Kealakekowa"a Heeiau where the Koa logs were carved and made ready. A portion of the actual path exists an the property of the HaluaLoa Inn bed and breakfast https:L/1,0AM rhr lJ,)lcialnn.crL history-ref-the-holua-slide, , Most Holuas were used for sport, however this I-Iolua was built for hauling Koa wood to the sea. One unique aspect of this Holua is Its parallel rock walls to help contain the Koa a5 it was transported down the holua. In the Royal Vistas Assessment it shows these walls and how they were used for cattle in the late 1800s and early 19COs. 1n the assessment core samples of the revealing kukui nut. The ancient Hawaiians used kukui nuts and ti leaves to help lubricate the holua for sliding the logs. Holualoa is translated to english as "Long Slide". This is a serious omission in the assessment. It has been observed by me, Hawaiian Hawks, Hoary Bats, and Owls live in the proposed development. The assessment only suggested that they could possibly reside in the propowewd area. The traffic study miraculously claims that the traffic has gotten better than in their previous traffic study. The entire Kona population would agree without hesitation, that it has become much worse. To suggest that adding 1000 cars to this area won't really have much of an impact is wishful thinking. Lastly, 1 fired it very unnerving that the owners of this land that Is currently zoned as multi family have been using it as a cattle ranch allowing cows to trample historical sights. The majority of the cattle have been removed recently, but at least 2 cows are still within the property. 1 think it snows a lack of respect for an owner to do as they please, Ag land for now, and Multifamily tomorrow. Laws do not allow for this, yet it appears KV3 doesn't want to play by the same rules as the rest of us. Thank you for for your time, Sincerely, John Bennett Stantec September 13. 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 FSI: {808) 494-2039 Mr. John Bennett Via email: jwb 1266: 'gmail.com RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Bennett: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 7, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment IDEA)) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: [have found the DEA of this project inadequate. It shows great detail on a 5 acre portion of the property that was performed in 2018, and a much lesser detail, as well as dated, assessment of the remaining 65 acres. Response 1: As described in Section 3.6 and in Appendix 5 (Archaeological Inventory Survey PAIS) reports) of the EA, the entire project site hos been recently inventoried for archaeological resources. One inventory covered 76.1 acres and the other covered 5 acres, Section 3.6 includes a summary discussion of the findings for both surveys that cover the entire site, as well as a discussion of how potential impacts would be minimized. Comment 2: Within the property are very likely rerfinncants of Kealakekkowa'a road ( path of the canoe). Most Floivas were used for sport, however this Holua was built for hauling Koa wood to the sea. One unique aspect of this Holua is its parallel rock walls to help contain the Koa as !t was transported down the holua. The DEA shows these walls and how they were used for cattle in the late 1800s and early 1900s. This is c serious omission in the assessment. Response 2: Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road Site 24211) documented, This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected it the site were the remains of ca holua. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic ero rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and ceattle postures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of a Land Commission Award (LCA) #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch_ It is unlikely that this is a hblua course since September 13, 2021 Mr. John Bennett Page 2 of 3 the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a holua in the project site. Comment 3: It has been observed by me, Hawaiian Hawks, Hoary Bats, and Owls five in the proposed development. The assessment only suggested that they could possibly reside in the proposed area. Response 3: The EA includes a description potential habitat for native species (including the hoary bat) in the existing conditions part of Section 3.3.4. The biological survey acknowledges that just because a species is not detected during the survey does not preclude its presence. In fact, the biological survey stated that these species may occur in the project area, and the impact discussion includes potential impacts to individuals and to habitat for native species (including those not directly detected during the survey). The impact discussion including protection measures to minimize these impacts to native species (including avifauana and bats) and their habitat in Section 3.3.4. Common' 4: The traffic study claims that the traffic has gotten better than in their previous traffic study. To suggest that adding 1000 cars to this area won't really have much of on impact is wishful thinking. Response 4: Section 3.7.2 and the Traffic Impact Assessment Report (TIAR) in Appendix 2 of the EA include a discussion of current traffic conditions and analysis of predicted changes to traffic. The changes in level -of -service from projected growth with and without the project condition in the analysis is based an the results of modeling by a professional traffic engineer, not wishful thinking. Comment 5: I find it very unnerving that the owners of this land that is currently zoned as multi -family have been using it as a cattle ranch allowing cows to trample historical sights. The majority of the cattle have been removed recently, but at least 2 cows are still within the property. Response 5: In response to neighboring community concerns, Kona Three LLC ceased cattle grazing in the proposed project site in 2019. To their best knowledge, Kona. Three LLC knows of no cattle an the project site. However, it is possible that cattle grazing from the adjacent Comes` property temporarily moved to the project site, September 13, 2021 Mr. John Bennett Page 3 of 3 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. LA Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.Iefebvrestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department :r'• Ir, 1 Mori. Ashley From; Sent: T e: Subject: Attachments: Wayne Hemby <wayrieh72@Itictrnail.carn> Wednesday. October 07.. 2020 3:29 PM Planning Internet Mail Royal Vistas Housing Project EA comments LOS-(101•1od.pdf, Royal Vistas DEA Comments by Clyde Hernby.pdf; SSFM High Irj.ry Networks Map -1424x7 t,apg; SSFM Vision Zero Study 10 30 2D19 polf 1 have attached the fikes khbich contain may comments on the Royal Vistas Draft Env+irorlmental Assessment acid 3 support documents referenced in my comments. Please contact me if the 4NMB size of the 5SFM Vision Zero study Pres?r1ts a problem or if any of the attachments arrive damaged or unreadable. The 55F M Vision Zero Study is Targe but that is their original file which 1 did not wart to modify. All the fifes except the comment tette+ itself are available on the Internet and I can provide (inks. Mahal°, Clyde Hemby 1366 )9 MCA' HE 1. LEVEL OF SERV1( E (LUSO DEFIN ri itris iyeJ af ritivipa A: Ftio3-1w trifit.:wilriradividual L.N01-5 Isla! oJ,ervicv D. HIFI-density WA, Iv. 04101 seed end visits -Illy unafTeciErf by Ihe taresirze of othess is, the trallic Ire€iCr krsgmeuve! ors seveiVy resvicled Zrdi Conlon 51 real') ane canwerience rave declined even ihough row roroaln,i,, Itabeiv Levu O Qf &grilse Stable Irafk flue, mirth a I;iyh uagresR fruedcrn kcssrlect soevd ond itsetating LMM1b UL Virri4 InItuerce horn nines $sivisa L. litleverk With pt)c)f 104016 a CiNffetrt And Level of Service CL, ReehlidedilLr#11. : !-;table but kvilh signifiCani irtieraiztiorIE rrIal 01rth- enal f conifert and wenvun not;.coaty this level kwygl Suryrse F; ',=u-LerJ Irani; Your ir the amount iralgt anc.,r0aL,Iii•:., a p:a-"1 €,Y.,:mgds the arncidi1 t De served LUS :71arac:cm22,1 tyL -and-cc poor travei ::,-res :v. :c.—.1crt and ci:reiente,-:e .15.3& — , ei CAPTAIN 0.3rd 17 rra gr. 'own tlr11 11,• VtAIMEA P.+0.1.111.4 LAURNIVEME - 114 witit)fil pEPEExEC VPAINAA UNIDO sipAimr, LAC.= NW tow tomb. 114. tenAer grails 414 r..r1, 5:14. ,313 mirda: ,72 •ft:Aft, 9.1.0 Iwo ItM.1.1.1 Introduction and Conclusion- Royal Vistas 4ttrusirrgProject EA comments In order to be efficient I have designed this document to convey the basic elements into two pages of reading,, More dela ii with headings is supplied but the reader is not forced to scroll to the end for conclusions Those headings will be arranged in order of importance r.1y name is Clyde Herr by and I live in the Kona Vistas subdivision about a half mile from the proposed Royal Vistas project_ The Dig Island is my home because it is mostly rural, It has some large hotels in appropriate tourist locations in Hilo, Kailua-Kass and Waikoloa. There are net skyscr.Rhers Full of apartments and hopefully never will be, because that would signal the end of the serenity ; ,til naturae beauty that is the treasure of l-Jawai'i Island. Currently there are times when I can hr': - r i.7 ;F ng winter surf mixed with the sound of a cow moving to the North along with the unclerl -+r3 ai • i ever-present sound of traffic that. seems to grow steadily worse, You can imagine my sorrow upon ririctirig that Kona Thi te I.LC, a real estate developer from Honolulu, 15 pr^ posmg to build a high density 450 unit protect just to the North. While Kona needs affordable ai,d s ri ;Ie 'arruly housing, this project is a hunch of duplex, 4-plex and 6- piex clusters of two and three story It will resemble the "monster homes which have plagued Oahu and caused outrage and dissatisfaction within governing agencies to control them, It Is like building a Blockbuster video store when we live in a digital age. it was evidently proposed in 1984 when Kona was a blank canvas with a single traffic. light. in 2020 that is no longer true. That blank canvas has been transformed into a paint -by, numbers pairiting with just a tEW unpainted parts. These parts should be used to fill the needs of the community and not some developer with dreams of dollar signs for motive. The development is designed to Erse the least amount of materials, the least amount of 'abor, and is a Targe urban project being stuffed into a place with insufficient infrastructure to support it. The schools are over capacitor and projected to be for at least five years. The flood control is insufliclent and will be made much worse by thls development. Pages 36 and 69 of the .pdf file jpages.23 and 56 of the DEA) acknowledge that no Certificate of Occupancy can be issued without completion of drainage system irr provernerltsr so why is a building permit every being considered? The current roadway is a rural two lane rind, with wide shoulders to allow vehicles to yield to the frequent emergency vehicles, and is not adequate for current traffic. Under Hawaii County Code Chapter 25-2.-46(0 'Mitigation required" there can be no occupation untilthe unacceptable traffic conditions described in page 63 of the DEA are fixed, o wily would a building permit even be considered? There will be a substantive traffic safety problem with more traffic congestion and more severe accidents if this development is allowed before the roadway is improved. The proposed Royal Vistas Roadway, an tan -signalized intersection near the Lako Street and the K.aakcini highway intersections with a left tum across traffic to enter the development for southbound tra-fic will be disastrous considering most of it will be heavier and slower Commercial ve'.7icle5. 1 'W hiir r is ten -lot -11g to accept a deve'_opment for the economic and property tax bust, the proposed ctev -I. i: it of Royal Vistas as specified will be hurtful to the community in the long run. It will not fit in with He 5Prit cif the community in the way it looks with clusters of multi -story buildings, especially the three story buildings which should be prohibited. It will adversely affect three or more established nearby subdivisions. it will not be substantially cheaper for buyers. MMlarket value will put the units out of reach of local families where the annual median household income is $8,5,682 according to a Sept 8, 2020 article entitled "The Pandemic -Driven Future Cf Affordable Humes in North Kona" on C:ivii Bat Honolulu. Most of the units will be sold to mainland investors or rented out by the Honolulu developer so money will not stay within the IHawai'i island economy. It is even unclear if the project will use local labor or materials_ The developer would have you believe this is a simple "infill" project but itis so poor4y planned that Lhey cannot complete the required roadways specified as requirements because they don't own all the property. They are also notinfilling with tike and comparable properties but insist on loading the area with at least 450 units to utilize water commitments they may have purchased prematurely. By their own ODEA "Alternative design teat tires were considered including wider access roads and stand-alone rather than clustered struc=tures, but these features limited t'ne amount of green space available for the Project". That also drives the requirement for the three story 6 pie( c'usters which is not desirable to anyone but the owner or developer and not on the wish list of rr err: °ias, They have raised disgust and anger from the surrounding 5ut divisions which have endukr ii construction and when `inally there seems to be an end, this developer conies along insisting on using the roads of those subdivisions as if they were unpopulated, Commuters from South of the project revile it as an additional obstacle to a difficult commute. Please consider that the best long term plan for this lariJ might be to leave a undeveloped. It could be set aside or acquired as open space land and used fora purpose that has a light footprint. Trois Development might have been useful in 19 8,4, but like that blockbuster Video store :.t should no longer be considered. I urge you to reject the DEA and the development because of the lack of infrastructure in the proposed location and because of incorrect or inadequate parts within the DEA, which I will highlight in the follcr'wing pages. Clyde Hemby 10/7/2020 2 Traffic Many pages sof the DEA is devoted to a traffic study (see Appendix 2 of the DEA for this l rellic Impact Analysis Fiepsnrt; filed with industry [argon and diagrams which concludes the project will only retake traffic a little .4/01$e, The study also has some serious mistakes, some suspicious data questions anti lacks scope: • Page 125 of the IDEA „pdf file (Page 9 of Ti)ARcites data counted on Thursday, August 24, 2019, which was a Saturday • Page 125 of the DFA .pdf the (Page 9 of TIAFt) tells us data collection was on Tuesday, April 30, 2019 and Thursday, August 24, 2010 which are 116 days apart' Are they 'cherry picking' data because of unfavorable results? Why was this done? • The DEA Is very inconsistent In reference to the vary Important TIAR, referring to it as a Traffic Impact Assessment Report in the table of contents and the cover page far Appendix 2 and a Traffic Impact Analysis Report elsewhere, With all the narrow scope and failure to address many important areas, this report actually is reduced to a Traffic Volume Study. • Page 55 of the DEA .pdffile, numbered DEA Part 1 page 52 (Figure 9 -Proposed Improvements to Project: Intersection with Queen Ka'ahumanul Is provided in very low resolution, making it difficultto see details to evaluate Feoteems with turning lane capacity, refuge lams location and length, or dangers and conflicts with Tilt' i€takini irttersectian This deserves a very serious look in order to plan for a signalized inter,itciice when Rand are added. Planning, approvals, and installation Fara signalized installation can take over three years. Intersecti4ns that pass warrants but remain unsignalized are a traffic safety liability for the agency in charge. • The TIAR nr. ver examined traffic impact on Pualani Estates or Kona Vistas roads even as Phase 11 plans to use their streets, They also omitted La'alca Ave and Sea View Circle which are signalized int ersei tions between Lako Street and Kameharrreha 111 which were st:._dip d Nan i Kailua Drive was also left out. Had they taeen included I believe they wou'sd tie found pralilernatIC. • The TZAR {foes not mention the new Niuma lei Marketplace at Henry Street that will open in 2020. This 22 acre shopping center with spaces for over 750 cars will have an impact on the Henry Street intersection, esrpecally where the southbound two lanes quickly merge into a single Zane at the Malu lana Road 'traffic light which is also not considered in the TIAR. l wouldn't be surprised to see gridlock in this are because I've already experienced it when the car waiting capacity between Henry Street and Ma ..Ilan' has been full and the Henry Street sourhbounc signal turns green and there's nowhere to ,o_ The problem will be worse when the old Safeway is repurposed. • The 11AR does not mention the approved Homelands' Villages of La'i'Opua 200 unit project in Kea Iakehe.. This would alter the results of the 5 year estimate at Makala Rivet., Palanr Road and Henry St. intersections. • Safety and Health concerns were never mentioned and should bean important part crf the evaluation. Mere traffic capatity is too narrow in scope_ SSIFIuT, which produced the TIAR In Appendix 2 should be well aware of safety problems in the area because they ptc duced a study and a set of crash maps of accidents from 2013-2017 for Visior Zero, and classified every intersection in the Royal Vistas TIAR to be part of a "High Injury Network" On Wednesday, Feb 3 20, 2019 the Hawaii County Council Transportation Committee passed Resolution Number 38- 19 to adopt the goals, strategies and policies of the Zero Vision Task Force to prevent traffic - related fatalities and severe injuries in I-1awvai`i Cuu city, by a vote of 8-1. • Queen Kaahumartu highway south of Henry Street is not an urban roadway or freeway. It is a two lane undivided road and One slow vehicle or accident can take it from free flowing to stopped, This means infrastructure must come before the project starts building. It would be a disaster to have this project delay road improvements or try to do both projects at the same time. The draft CEA announce-, :n r.ix ; es Kuakini Highway from Henry Street to Kareharneha 111 Road will be widened by 2 travel lanes (Page30 of the .pdf file page 17 of the CEA), page 68 of the .pdf file (page 55 of the DEA), page 133 of the .pdf file (Page 17 of the TIM), Page 148 of the .pdffile (page 32 of the TIM), page 172 of the .pdf file (Page 56 of theTtAR) and page 173 of the .pdf file (page 57 of the TIAR)l. Most of these references indicate inclusion of bicycle facilities and sidewalks but Wes- Today reports in a September 29, 2020 article that dine to Covid- 19 state revenues are gon dor road mp-overne its, which rely on rental car fees which is down 69% and gas tax which Is also drastic.illy short of projections. No Hawaii road projects will be approved for federal BUILD funds for 2020 which will make prioritization unlikely, The impreawrement will have to be treated as a new protect instead of an improvement because right- of-ways and property must be acquired, according to Freshman Senator Dru Kanuha 1p -Kona} who was trying to get the project back into ronsideraticn, as stated in a West Hawaii Today Newspaper article dated February 13, 2019 and titled "Kona Traffic is a Nightmare". The review committee would be w zt to consider the Improvements will not happen in a timely manner and will be much harder thin the recent widening project to the airport, which was over budget and severely behind schedule. As a resident that has lived with the traffic near the proposed project for years, 1 have tried to convey in layman's terms why the project will cause a substantive safety hazard and convince you further study is needed at best and at worst this project should be delayed or abandoned until mitigation under Hawaii County Code Chapter 25-2-46 (eis completed for the 5 LOS E&F deficiencies listed on pages 25-29 of the TZAR, The traffic study report has many references to Level Of Service or LOS, which is just a rating or a grade for the flow cif traffic. LOS A is free flowing traffic and LOS F is when traffic exceeds the capacity cf the roadway and usually includes waves of stop and go traffic 1 have included Figure 1 -LOS Defined which is a visual depiction of the different traffic levels. Many of the state regulations, including Hawaii, accepts LDS D during peak hours as acceptable but you carp see frown Figure 1 that LOS Cis where general level decline is noticeable, In Hawaii with many tourists on the road, it is important that roadway speed he stable in order to prevent acYcidents from distr i 1 ;ear inattentive drivers that are not familiar with the roads. As a driver, t have personally seen the aftermath of rollover accidents at Lako Street, Puapuaanui Street, and Nan i Kai( ua Drive. 1 also have a neighbor that hada cherished vehicle totaled at one of the intersection in the study after being rear-ended by a driver suspected of being distracted by her phone. Another friend had her SUV totaled and suffered back and neck injury at a different intersection in the TZAR study. 4 The roadway section that is the key to the substantive safety hazard is state road 19 between Henry Street and Kamehameha ID. It is not .an r.irhan roadway, just a tvvo Zane andrvicted road with some turning lanes_ Some of this section of roadway has wide shooder; which are used by scooters, joggers, bikers and allow traffic to yield to the frequent emergency 4hirls, The road from Lako Street to Karnehameha III has only inches of shoulder which is often obscured by vegetation. In many places there are guard rails or rock walls. The only way vehicles can yield to the frequent emergency vehicles Is to turn onto side streets or into private property parking lots, driveways, etc_ it is no wonder that an October 30, 2019 SSFM InternationaI Study classified this entire section of road as part of a "High Injury Network' corridor. I will conclude the traffic comments with the following declarations which were professionally written: l . 1 am a resident of Kona Vistas subdivision, County ot'1lawai`i, State of Harvai'i. The proposed land development project that is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted Itis, Royal Vistas Housing Project. Tax Map Key Nos. (3) 7-6-021 :016.7-6-021,017, 7-6-02 l _O18, and 7- 6-021:019 -6-0?1:019 North Kona District. Hawai`i Island. State of .Hawai`i atTccts me personally as well as {affects my intc'rest in real property, T reside within half a mile of the proposed land development project, Ta such capacities, T have firsthand knolAled2e of the fel lorcmg facts and could and would testit'v thereto if called upon to do so. 2. I have reviewed the pending DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report by SSFMrt International. dated May 2020 and attached as Appendix 2 to the DR.AFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. traffic and the SSFrvt Traffic Impact Analysis Report are discussed in the body of the DRAFT FNVIRcNMENTAL ASSESSPv1ENT at pp. 48-55, 67 and 71. 3. iii the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard road wa}`_ Kekuana`oa Place, Kekuana'oa Place is very steep, has limited sight 5 distances clue to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequate) addres.scd in the SSFl1l Traffic impact Anal si, Report. which focuses instead on impacts alonu Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I ani particularly conccrried that adding numerous velzicic trips to a nc1 Frolrl a separate subdivision will present tLtngerH 41x.4 c:ongestiori to residents along Kekuana oa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns, 4, The DRAFT E's'c' f IAC) N lVI f NT,A L. ASSESSMENT requires evaluation of; among others, advc sc2 ,vecon tory impacts, ts, m. h as. pore/aliens e•Jtcrn,►c.► rrr e/rl.'c•t.} on pnhfic itci/ifies, See Chapter I 1-20)0.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Instead of squarely addressing these issues, however_ the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT simply ignores them. claiming that "Na heli erse secondary effects are expected since the development would utilife ts1iILL i11t'ri4structure. pro ide iilfill housing, t, and is not expected to result in substantial cl tlutiirl; Ii' t'e rin-. �•21�'ices." It iti a1 4L`Fi(as ()mission for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL :1SSESS\t[NT to rail t address the potential adi, Arse impacts of increasing the use cif L sr indard existiit4 infrastructure, like I<el;uana-oa Place. 5. The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of %tether the project would Hat e3 a _ti•rrh.stamial cakerse L*El on +x}11• /h.' heairlr. The Applicant claims. 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any •waV; storm w ater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures_ Traffic impacts Lave been Wkt:2Tj into careful cul '-1tltr'ration in F1•C lect CI4'sl tits Einphasisadded. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 1 1-200. I-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. 6. The Planning Department should not accept the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMI:NT's reliance on the SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report, which has the fallowing deficiencies: a. failure to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project; b, The 5SFM Traffic Impact Analysts Report uses a growth rate of 1%, In contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensat•rveto growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation; c. The SSFrvi Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to bulldout of the proposed project; d. I i • } FIV In.pact Analysis Report employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of AprIl 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis. Report, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2015, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also. at adds w th Figure 4 UI the 55FMV1 Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which 5110w5 approxirnately 1160 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference In volume is more than double the maxirnom 10% varatio-i generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable; e, The recommendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout at Queen Kaahurrtanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalired present traffic safety liability concerrss for the government; f_ The reconrunenciatton by 55FM Traffic 1rnpact Analyses. Report for monitoring of the intersection of Queers KaaF urnarru Highway and Kuakirii Highway is inadequate. Where, as mere, an intersection passes wrote than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioriti4ed for study and design of a signal for installation, This circumstance will, he exacerbated by the proposed project 7. In sum, the Draft Environmental Assessment and SSFM 'Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not present sufficient, credible facts and analysis such that the adverse impacts or ex,sling infrastructure arta resulting frons increased traffic can be folly understood and result in appropriate government planrring arid response. Flood Zones and Drainage 1 arty at resident of Kona ViM.aS Subdivision, County or Hawaii, Stare of Hawaii. The proposed land de4•c4c rnent prclject that is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental :i ties a�ierit ubiriitied by Royal Vistas Housing Project Tax Map Key Non. (3) 7 -ti -1)21:016. 7_6_ 021.017. 7-6-021:018, and 7-6-021:019 North Kona District, EHawai'i Island. State of Hawai` i affects me personally as well as affects my interest in real pri}perty. I reside within a half mile of the proposed land development project, In such capaciii s,. 1 have firsthand knowledgo of the 141114 44 inL t'ar'ts and could and }'~could testify thereto if i a I ;!lipk.Itt to do so. . have rew Bei ed the pending DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSNIENI and attachments, I am specifically concerned about: Floods similar or worse than those from 2015 which damaged hcmtes, exposed a criti.caI water main and posed dal -mei -to motorists on Ktlalcini highway, 3. The steep topography, historical rapid storm water rnn-off and associated. damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment. See I'i' 16 al id 69 thereof. it is clearly understood by the developer tlmt no certificate °I -occupancy is exl,ucted. tc be Ntiw11.1,:j Linhl the cOntpletmii tai' Flat drainage improvements are completed. Until that nece?.,s rr"v and required infrastructure is in plat: i}u kin dine permits should he. issued 4. I Hf _• tl .ts wage 21 of the DEA in to come .I,tt]aI drawin:4 illustrates the large flood plain that i+•ill l/L. ,11 !. :intil Concentrated into a ditch that runs over Or tiaader TWO Qi The subdivision roads, With roofs and pavement preventing any water absorption it will worsen ii0L, Iitip as it pi ceetis downhill_ in Stun, the Draft Environmental Assessment does not discuss sul"liciettt facts and aii;iksi1.1 I1 11GI1 rllt ne 'cr..-.1 \ drainage improvements and diversions can be understand. A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the fixture. As I understand it, such circtttaastauces would lead to unlawful prr+iert se .ttaentation, among outer errors. fi. A bare conclusion by the applicant or accept ITill tarttliuritv that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At a minimum. the Draft Environmental Assessment roust be revised to shtay.. specifically what infrastructure iniproveinents are required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function 9 Birds The DEA Table 2 Bird Species Observed In the Project Site seems incomplete which is not surprising if the held study only allocated an hour during daylight hours For bird observation. I have often heard the rooster from that direction and have observed Kalil pheasants caring from the direction of the proposed project several times. In the past I have heard the shrill cry of hawks and seen birds scatter that didn't want to be lunch. l'ye seen large living pan owls swooping low at night on the old trail. t can only suspect that they are also present in the nearby area of the prc.posed project. l have also seen back birds that didn't look like common myna but I have no reason or expertise to think they were endangered or extinct Hawaiian crows. The study for this DEA does however accept the responsibility to do a tb Drough and complete job and not just speculate, especially when rt Comes to endangered and migratory species. The review committee should reject this section of the DEA and require a proper .and thorough study be made. f am Including a time stamped picture of a Kalij pheasant taken 5/5/2020 at the edge of the Calvary Community Church property, Blackburn's Sphinx Moth I have seen large moths resting in shady areas of our lanai and have always Ieft them alone. They appear to be a match or similar to pictures of Internet images of $lackburn's Spd int Moths_ In the future I will try to take a picture from d distance when t see one. 10 It seems odd that an unrntanitor d survey that at one point in time doges rout Find evidence cif the Blackburn's Sphinx Moth would ,then allow the developer to destroy food and habitat for the endangered species from that point in perpetuity for 70 acres_ The DEA review committee should examine this approach carefully and verify it Is appropriate and supported by the governing agencies. Miscellaneous Infrasi Uciture While the lack of infrastructure regarding roads, traffic, floods and drainage has bean covered there is a shortage of schcoi infrastructure to support such a large medium density project, because the schools are already over opacity and expected to rerno aver opacity for five years or longer (See Appendix 1 of I he DEA). That will make it haul rc attrao buyers from other areas that commute to jobs around Kona bc:i, have school age children. Na scut ori Is offered Fcr this prob,eni. pdge 59 of the DEA ,pdf file (page 46 of the DEA), a fictitious telephone and data supplier has been specified as "Hawaiian Telephone'. Unanswered Questions There are so many .a pRrts of this project where no information Fs offered. The DEA Review Committee should be wary of what is riot in the EDEA. Sorne of my questions_ • Will these units have photovoltaic panels to help with the Hawaii initiat NE' far renewable energy? This should be 'yriuired just as solar hol water is required. Would any photovcalraic power be shared ■ With a single resident that would own the system? • With the Building residents? ■ With the entire development residents? ▪ Will there he batteries at every builellrig in fire protected utility areas? • Fire Protection on multi -unit clusters of buildings o Will there he 2 hour or better firewwraIfs to protect individual units? Will there be. a shared attic space that will spread fire danger? o Will there be sprinkler systems"' c, Will t! -,_re be permanent sire hoses and ` 5tr$ fc•.. fire department use? o Will t ' . `ingufshers be provided by the developer for each floor? o Will carports or garage structures he attached to the living spaces? Could orie bad turkey fry incident destroy a 6 -plea or cluster of units? • Access c, Will the units be ADA compliant? 11 Will the units have ramps? c Will the units have elevators? + Fees o Will there be a maintenance fee? Will there be a HOA fee Dr an HOA or just a management company? Will there be a fee for satellite dish installation. Landlords cannot ban satellite dishes Thank you for letting rely voice he I ea. -d on this very important issue. 1 a$so wish that everyone that gave me information ur had an opinion would comment, but sadly they probably won't, For every comment you receive there may be a hundred that stay in the silent majority. IF there are any a uestions or if fife attachments are damaged or missing, please contact me Sincerely, 9'454- 14214,1 Clyde Hemby 10/712020 Attachments: LOS 'Defined .pdf file SSFM October 30, 2019 reap at highest resolution available .1ogfile Vision Zero SSFM Oct 30 2013 Study .pdf file 12 Hawaii tsfand Vision Zero Traffic CollisH:in Data & Pwtapptng Page 1 October 3, 2019 liawaii Island Vision Zero Traffic Collision Data & Mappilt Traffic Collision Data Maps were prepared using. the following data sources: • NHTSA Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS). years 2013 through 2017: luta includes the specific locations .of fatal motor vehicle traffic collisions with pedestrians, bicycles. or other motor vehicles. Data incudes demographics of persons naveived in the collision, transp{rrtation modes innvolved, day .arid titin• o!' collision, and potential causes of the. collision (r. ., drugs. calaL'1E0.c-d t».. report. • r4IITSA National Center t'scr .St.ttinqic•s .incl ,\rt;tlysis (CSA). years 2t 13 through 2017: Average percentage 01 tratik. related within the state of] and r't.itioitially, associated 4Aith speed, aleoito., and ti tie ci1Fday, • (: ttnty of Hawaii Police I)epartmcnt, years 30 14 through 2918: INta includes location, when provided, cif major rotor vehicle traffic Lolliwitins. Milia ,r traffic collisions etre those in which the total property damage (damages to OR invol , ..I 4 ilic1es, fixed objects, animals. etc,) on a public trafficwvray amounts to inure than !S..;.0110. or one in which a traffic collisic►ra involves injury or death, Details on the chase t'c rescr.lis el the traffic € ollision. wGrC` Jn t provided with this data At times, locations w rc r4•l Aisentcci only by the rand and rncmrest fol. n in which. the collision occurred. v,iftt no iv l rUtttt r s crit - strec LII` 11c4icl ilii II poli. FI'I7cse limitations in the data redui.\ its utility liar determining Iii ,h-crhsh li _«i 111 s ;id identifb1ng mitigation treasures, hovvever, it still lentis itself to .an understanding of high collision corridors. • C.cnsuN HIJventt's API flir American Community Survey Years 2C13 titrti- ugli 2017: Percentage of the population, by census tract, whole income in the pest 12 months was below the priv rt' his, ni to ct high pet:is:Irt;I k• cal I Iiirccritics or persons ofcoloi, iu;iIkc up the fe;lcr:ri dentition lnr I'nvircanrnenr;tl !or rice (El) populations. A .i iiasru7rity-i7i;ticarir ,r:itc,, use of high poverty populations was detern}in.eci ro be most ;,r'fectivc i n asscssi_t Fi populations 111 Hawaii. o Year 2017: Reported commuter mode share, • Hawaii Department of Transportation: Miles of'roadway owned by the State of Hawaii. County of Hawaii, Federal Government, or other (often less -used reacts. reflective of private roars or "roads Areas ofdiscrepnncy existed in the years of' data. owed liom FARS (2013-2017),and C`.OH Pl) (2014-208). This was d tEi the desire to use iI;1iest 5 years of data front each source, with FARS data not beilrc. as recent as the data provided by the C0I1 PD. Going forward, it would be beneficial to work with COI1 P1) to find a means to record and provide more details: on all. involved. the potential cause, and specific locations of all collisions. fins will Bell the evaluation portion ofthe Vision Zero work, with the hope of identifying areas for increased engineering. enforcement, encouragement. and education. Traffic Collision ' 1ap Evaluation Hawaii Island Vision Zero Traffic CoOlsion Data !i Mapping Page October 30, 2019 1. Fatal Traffic Collisions: Vulnerable users were disproportionally killed ("bicycle: 5%: pedestrian: 12% motor vehicle: 83%) on Hawaii Hind as compared to the latest reported cornmuterinode share.(l c[e' 0"4%; walk; ?_2 : Personal vehicle: 87%). 't his indicates a higher likelihood or people dying on Hawaii Island runt s if Ir.;veling by fart Ill h bicycle. The majority of all fatalities (68%) occurred on State L,wned i L' t W evert though the Siatc owns only 28% of all government (State/County/Federal) owned mads on island, The highest conccntraitioi (37%) of'hicycle (2) and pedestrian (5) fatal traffic collisions occurred in lido. (t those, 5 (('°ro) rritsll traffic collisi].Ilis fell within areas where greater than 30% of the population's income is below the poverty level, Village and town eunters cxpeetcdl►, have the iiightst number o1' people w.ilkin ; and bicycling due tc the. Ca!^10 Or Graveling short t distances by means other than personal vehicle. 1 Itis is w•lly context ].hers in roadway design, and Safety of pedestrians iind Bicycle.. should l,c prioriti .t:J in [hoe ptapLil,_tHn centers. the 5 -year study period (2013-2017). fatal traffic collisions mere: -:sed low in 2i 1 a I I ,t } I'1lrtil r ec4r.lre l; ilt.4ti hi: it ric 1I N 11 1 Sr1 1':\RS dia.,. sho .,;; lli.iL 1cilloksiiig .] hi0.1 11111111?t`r IroLiic colll§tl11iI I[1 :OW) 115). 1v"4il'". i ii .;r;.l.cl�.l;lal} ]ctlticccl tiY �l 1 yeiir low ill 21i[ 1 (13). Total Lv;tc:liied a 19 - year low in 2014 (13). ro.iuwi_i , t hi ll :n 2004 [4' h When i:om urinng LI X114: 1inCS IJLILU anriii l vehicle mile k ir;r5.cl •i (...VM [) C tie Chi st.]:L of 1 lawcaii [n L t4L traTtic collisions for 1341waiii Island. it 4:x111 Fi ' '4.eCt7 Elul/ as VPI 1 increased gradually from 200 1, int: l 1r.;["iic collisions have rot ini-r `.iscd at the same rate. This is indicative or ]Itl l]-o-veI U flLs to vehicle safety. }Tow:ev er, the sfgriif=tcaltt reduction in V '(T realif.ed ir1 21.I i- dil L°ctly correlates with the redrlc Liori in traffic relaiccl f; [aliti s. hereby. lg fgc :ing "hat a transition to more susl 1inaiblt I.rilasportation H] LIt .wilt :Y ns bus Lransit_ hicyc1irlg. and walking, in addition to more tiu11p:Lei deVdOpmelit ii iI Irklice, c,irt hive tlic intended result ofti reduction in traffic related fatalities. Year Fatal Trafile Collisions Traffic Related Fatalities 2000 34 38 2001 ?f9 30 2002 27 28 2003 30 33 2004 33 41 2005 33 40 21)06 35 39 2007 34 38 21108 29 29 2009 )4 77 2010 29 31 . I01I 23 23 01, 21m, 101413 2115 34 38 21 1 13 1 6 21 2016 27 32 2017 33 35 2018* 30 32 Hawaii Island Vision Zero Traffic Colilsicn Data & Mapping Pde 3 October 30, 2019 * - During the work an this project, 2018 N1-IrTSA LAR data was. made available and included in this cable for.amp nsan but not included in the more del;:tited analysis. Hawaii l5[drd 'ail ca Traffic Co & Mapping Page a October 30, 2019 5. Residing Zip Code of Motorist Involved in Fatal Traffic Collisions: Tile l,4•L rwheltxung majority 07%) of all motor vehicle drivers involved in a fatal traffic collisi� of Hawaii Island.Othea' drivers involved were from neighbor islands (4"4;1 1 n:1 :►t°iLi (6%). Of those. drivers from Hawaii Island, the l:rr'gcst percentage were ti'tir,[I (1 -filo. 33), 9674D {KaiiLia Kona, 19), 96749 (Keuatl. 13), 96778 (F'a11c.]a, 13), and 91'17; (Ocean View, 7). Park of zip ei.}rlc *720 ()illy!), 96778 (Pahoa), arid all of 9(1717 (t.)e.'.ii Vis I have areas where greater than 25% of the piq'ulaticn is below the pov er'.: shows that the pri.ibltirn of motor vehicles l ll l ing peoplt• +Et Hawaii l ];:Axel rout_, i i lr : r "1rl needs to be addressee through the education grid L ncnuragement ui` [L1i: rll r t w icic rrl,. 6. High 1C"iltislily ' i-1 jai`#.: Iliglt Fatality Corriiior .11." r..ilc i ye 4 11Li 101 nlu]1I' roadway 4ginents 't,'iill the highest percentage of fatal traffic c4alllti[,>ti per lode' r, 11.. vall l ie il'1• End points l'L`r'L Ciloscri at termini such us interscei ilr'. 01 till;rl',!L ii Pal twliIileig4r'gr ►metric.. Whyte clusters or140t4[1 tl•41f're1t0a' • .1 .;7 i,;;,4 :.r_..:1 ir`unI a11l r i;l94a1 tl'.r''C4: c llitiiil}r>s. lre. aria u,1• cc lr.sider c3 a 'High 1'ur,]litc Lot...I L+1;. 11 rcra;l+ a Z fill [ice highest percenr:lrL• c"I`iota! [r,riFc c4 llisiofti per mile I];=.I 1'�4 1;1C1isity cif irkijilt lr,11'hL' L'llllL IOr1S 1lt'iiLLd t) bL Utl thc high-speed. t;. 1i•AL! arterial ti I loLVcti'». t".lL`]'L 1..ti'ci' soak. 4.ttiLl}:i alis, m.liicharc likely to Ile.! i,ire a result of roadway t;,e`i .iteirc 1.1; I,i4 }If ,rutin''. In summary. 14% of all State-owned roads and 1°fir or all County -owned 1 I .long a High Fatality Corridor, Parts of the High Fatality Corridor cross thror; fr 1;1 .•is with the highest percentage of poverty, s.rrcll tiff iu V31111 1 -filo and Hawaiian Paradise l":, 1 he arca adjuceiii to I fa waiian Ocean View l',st tics. a location with a. high percentage al` thw population Ix:low thc p'ovcrty level, was also itlen.tilied as High Fatality Local inn, Specific locations al tile 11t h 1-,11alir;• Network are as 11,,1io s: a,. I{L lit Bclt R1a:i,l (Route- l')). Ili ;Ile vicinity .,1" 1�::;xL1Bl4ti b. Hay..o.ii. licit Rood (Route 19), in ;11e: vicinity of Pepeekco c, Itawaii licit Road (Route 19). from 1 lonolii E.rid a (;1if' 4.5) to Wailuku Brid e (i'vtl'tt.5) dL Volcano load (Route 11), from Kahaualca Riad (MP 22.5) to Kiri ii conal street (MP 6.2) c. Kcaaru-Pahoa Roatl (Route 130), rroni f';:lite 11 to Airtaloa Boulevard (MP 7.7) f Hawaii 13eelt RErnd (Route 11). i11 thc vicinity of Glenwood g. Hawaii Belt Road (Route 11). in the vicinity of Volcano h. Hawaii Felt Road (Rout 11). in the vicinity of Hawaiian Ocean View Estates i. Hawaii 13&t .Recd (Rei ite 11). from .I Alrintii CJ Aoi (MP 101.1) to Ohia Malo Road (MP 92.9) j. Hawaii lklt Road (Route 1 1)/QucCI1 Kaahurnanu highway (Route 19), from Kealaola Road (Route 11. MP 11 l .87) to Route 1) (MP 89.5) k. Hawaii Belt Road (Route 190). fon tvIilepost31 to I-lina Lani Street (MP 35.1) 1. K.aimirlani Drive. from Queen Kaahumatnu. Highway (Route 19) to Hawaii Belt Road (Route 190) nt, i limit Lani Street, t'r'orti Queen Kaahumanu Highway (Route le]) to Hawaii Belt Road t, Route 190) Hawaii Island Vision Zero Traffic Collision Data & Mapping fag 5 CI tuber !0, 2019 2, Speed -Related Traffic Collisions: Traffic collisions where speed coirsideret.l a inaisc up 41%41f all fatal traffic collisior.s. I it the state of Hawaii. that percentage is tt+. Nationally, the averai t: 1s 28% of all fatal traffic collisions. The percent ac for f-laAaii Isla d is its line with the state of Hawaii however both are significantly higher than the your :,stat average, suggesting a problem throughout Hawaii that should. the addressed through education, enforcement, and engineering. The highest percentage or speed -related fatalities on Hawaii Island occurred on roads with posted speed limits of 30-35mph (40%). Tliis is true Thr a]1 ictal traffic collisions on Hawaii Island as well, where 35% orl7ata I traffic collisions were on roads with posted speed limits of 30- iiiph. National].. the highest percentage r.iF Fatalities is on roads with posted ped 1it7iit t:15O-55mpli + l 1'(Roads with pasted sued Ihniis nt tdc tip 17% oral! traffic rclui ..I tiatala[ieti rationally. ]Tic higher percentage of fatalities on 3i) -.35€t ph roads on f-Iuwaii island is I7otcIrtiall:. due to ra lower number cofroad miles s that hint' speeds higher than 35mph. However., the geometries :mil design of these roads may be a factor in inducing speeding. 3. Fatal Alcohol/Drug-Related Traffic Collisions: [he majority (55%) of fatal tr'ailic collisions were. noted to [lc: a]cohaal anc[;oi• 411 4IE}-r:•I.L-:Al ()f those cr.7IIisicans where alcohol and/or drugs were a factor, spL°ed was also considered a factor in L13"f,. 1 'tach separating oat trail']: L"ail1 where X116:11i : t not including drags alone.) was Li 1Erl"I;Mr, of all fatal traffic collisinr..4 involved alcohol. Ili the ,rate of the p?ercciitap;:e of traffic ♦rekLual Ittta;iticLs :issuc•iatcd with alcohol is ' " a,_ i` 'ri tictin.i[Iw•, t ae average is 317/{, of"aI] traffic is r' Ill.ill t4 1-.i [ti : ktiI iL to i? itn lily with the nu.mt, er Island. More significantly, the 10-25% LElilerriaie w4•Irera considering all forms uI irrehriaaiitan (drugs iiittlior ;iIctMlml), Nilitstowards a t: i'ckilt:r .I..,L] Jr'SMcultural Chan €c tlii'aM,,€l1 w.t.Irlc;Mllon. as well ars ti meed for incrcased enforcement. Over the 5 -year stretch Ilia-. l'AltS data was analyzed. fatal drug trnd!or alcohol roIated traffic cullisio€is h'tve increased Si .:td lw following a low in 2LDI4. 'Fhis is in line with ttt1 fatal traffic collision trend. Year Fatal Traffic Collisions DifferenceAlcohol Drug (only) Total 2013 7 3 10 2014 3 4 7 -30% 2015 6 4 10 , ,, 2016 7 9 16 c,, r{' 2017 9 9 13 1 r" 4. Fatal Traffic Collisions luring Day/Night: The majority (55%) of fatal traffic collisions on Hawaii Island occurred at nighttime. Nationcal[y, the average is 47% of ail fatal traffic collision:. With Iimilati,orns on stre-etlight luminescence levels, and hundreds of miles of rural, unlit, roadways, it is rata t€UVXp ected to have= a slightly higher than normal percentage of fatal traffic collisions on Hawaii Island occurring at nighttime_ M Hawaii Islas i Vin Zero Traffic C¢Iligior Data & Mapping Page October 30, 2010 7. Traffic Cu Vision Ikrtsita (1Itat Maps): 'I he NV la► i density of traffic collisions occurred in and around the most populated village and tow rr ccnttrs. Crash density was highest in and around Hilo town, Crash density in aid around Kailua-Kona was less concentrated, likely due to the lirnited road grid network, resulting iii collisions beim concentrated on major roads in the area. Simi€early, major it-lerials wroth of lIlk), which constitute the majority of commuter Traffic iii Ilse regio. had high densities of crashes, Waimea and Honokaa reflected smaller, yet coancentrated. densities of traffic collisions. Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Mr. Clyde Hemby Via email: wayneh724hotmail.com RE: Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Hemby: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 7, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The development is designed to use the least amount of materials, the least amount of labor, and is a large urban project being stuffed into a place with insufficient infrastructure to support if. Response 1: The project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. The proposed action being considered in the EA is the proposed development project within the current zoning. The project is consistent with medium density zoning and conforms to the guiding principles regarding urban growth patterns as defined by the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) . Comment 2: The schools are over capacity and projected to be for at least five years. Response 2: As described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. the project would be constructed in phases, and occupancy would occur over time. Additionally, it is expected that the project would provide mid -market, including workforce 'lousing for the local community. The project's first phase would construct rental Jnits, and it is expected that occupants of these units would be local and many of the students already attend local public schools. Section 3.7.1 has been revised to clarify that since the project would be constructed in phases, ❑II 99 students would not all arrive at once and occupancy would occur over a longer period of time. This is consistent with predicted rates of growth for the area which are considered by the Hawaii State Department of Education in their forecast planning for public schools. Comment 3: The flood control is insufficient and will be made much worse by this development. Resaonse 3: There is no history of flooding on this property. As discussed in the EA, the project would not contribute or exacerbate the flooding issues. Per Section 27-20 of the Hawaii County Code, the project is not allowed to increase any run- September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde H e rn by PaQQe 2 o1 12 off onto neighboring properties, so there are no effects on any neighbors from project run-off including on the County -owned parcels. Comment 4: The current roadway is ca rural two lane road, with wide shoulders to allow vehicles to yield to the frequent emergency vehicles, and is not adequate for current traffic, There will be a substantive traffic safety problem with more traffic congestion and more severe accidents if this development is allowed before the roadway is improved. Response 4: The ether two options would be to 11) add a signal at the proposed project and (2) distribute the inbound project volume to make a south -bound (SB) left tum (LT) at Lako Street, and a mauka bound LT onto Kekauna'oa Place to enter the development. Alternative 1 would add a signal, increase delay on Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. Alternative 2 would increase delay at Lako Street, and would add considerable travel time for the inbound traffic. A 58 LT at Kona Vistas would be basically waiting for a gap provided by the Lako Street intersection. A vehicle in alternative 2 using Lako Street would need to wait for a protected green arrow at Lako Street. Basically, the southbound left is waiting for a gap provided by the Lako Street intersection, it is more reasonable to provide and allow for left turns in at the roadway, Comment 5: While it is tempting to accept a development for the economic and property tax boost, the proposed development of Royal Vistas as specified will be hurtful to the community in the long run. Response 5: The project is consistent with medium density zoning and conforms to the guiding principles regarding urban growth patterns as defined by the Kona CDP, and is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents. Comment 6: It will adversely affect three or more established nearby subdivisions. It will not be substantially cheaper for buyers, Market value will put the units out of reach of local families. Most of the units will be sold to mainland investors or rented out by the Honolulu developer so money will not stay within the Hawaii island ecoromy. Response 6: The intent for the project as described in the EA is to address housing e ortages in Kona (Section 1 .2). 'To address housing shortages in Kona, the Kona CDP identifies Objective HSG -4: build More Units and Policy HSG -4.2: Workforce Housing. The workforce gap group (up to tib of median income) includes the part of the population that earns too much to qualify for affordable housing programs, yet too little to buy or rent decent housing close lo their jobs. The Project would build units that offer a variety of housing types for both the rental and buyer segments of the mid -market which includes the workforce group. Although the Project is rot specifically a workforce project, it would provide a housing option for the workforce gap group." As evidenced by resort projects on the Big Island, as well as communities such as Waikoloa and lower Kafaoa (Ka"iminani Street and environs), different housing September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde Hemby Page 3 or 12 product types targeting different socio-economic built in chase proximity do not necessarily adversely affect property values or quality of fife. cerement 7: Please consider that the best long term plan for this land might be to leave it undeveloped. It could be set aside or acquired as open space land and used for a purpose that has a light footprint. Response 7: Comment noted; however, rhe applicant action being considered and analyzed on private land in the EA does not include a proposal for change in zoning or creation of a public pork. Although the project site has been nominated For PANIC acquisition twice, both times the Committee declined. Comment 8: Page 125 of the DEA .pdf file (Page 9 of TIARj cites data counted on Thursday, August 24, 2019, which was a Saturday. Response 8: The TIAR states Thursday, August 24, 209, The wrong date is written here. It should be Thursday, August 29, 2019, as shown in the data sheets in the appendix and has been corrected. Comment 9: Page 125 of the DEA ,pdf file {Page 9 of TIAR) tells us data collection was an Tuesday, April 30, 2019 and Th 1,1 rsday, August 24, 2019 which are 116 days apart! Are they "cherry picking" data because of unfavorable results? Why was this done? Response 9: Based on the numbers for the 2018-2019 monthly tourism numbers, August 2019 had the 4th highest visitor total and April 2019 had the 10th highest visitor total. This is consistent with the information you provided. For all islands, the pattern is similar with high visitor volume in June -August, December, and March which corresponds to summer break, winter break, and spring break. These are when school is not in session, so visitor traffic is high as people travel more. When school is out, typically the overall traffic volume during the AM and PM peak hour is lower. Generally, traffic counts are taken during "worst case" scenarios, which are historically an Tuesday through Thursday during school days, This is information we know, and we purposely target school days as when we take our traffic counts. While tourism numbers may be low, the intensity of the peak during the AM and PM school day peaks are generally more intense than the AM and PM peak during non -school dors. Here is the HDOT station an Queen Kaahumaariu Highway in 2016. It shows that the monthly weekday average is very close to the yearly weekday average. The standard that traffic engineers use is the school day peck: therefore, the counts taken in April and August are defendable. Comment 10: The DEA is very inconsistent in reference to the very important TIAR, referring to it cis a Traffic Impact Assessment Report in the table of contents and the cover page for Appendi 2 cind a Traffic Impact Analysis Report elsewhere. With all the narrow scope and failure to address natty important areas, this report actually is reduced to o Traffic Volume Study. September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde H e rn icy Pace 4 or 12 Response 10: The acronym has been added to the table of contents and Appendix 2 cover page. The report does more than account tor volumes, it analyzes the impacts on traffic from the proposed project. Comment 11: Page 65 of the DEA .pdf file, numbered DEA Part I page 52 (Figure 9 - Proposed Improvements to Project Intersection with Queen Ka'ahumanu) is provided in very low resolution, making it difficult to see details to evoleate problems with turning lane capacity, refuge lanes location and length, or dangers and conflicts with the Kucakini intersection. Response 11: The MUTCD states: 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal„" There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others, The scope covered in this TIAL does not include that analysis. The TZAR does mention that where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. The EA has been updated to include a higher resolution Figure 9. Comment 12: The TIAR never examined traffic impact on PuaIani Estates or Kana Vistas roads even as Phase 11 plan= to use their streets. They also omitted La'oloc Ave and Sea View Circle which are signc!ized intersections between Lako Street and Kamehameha III which were studied. Respgrkse 12: Most of the proposed project's traffic would be wing to and coming from the north and would not affect developments south at Royal Vistas. Laaloa Avenue and Sea View Circle would not be impacted significantly from the inbound and outbound traffic south of the development. Not more than several vehicles would be added to the Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway through movement al these intersections, and those would be 'through' vehicles which have very little impact on an intersection, Comment 13: The TZAR does not mention the new Niumalu Marketplace at Henry Street that will open iri 2020. Or the approved Homelands' Villages of La'i "Opua 200 unit project in Kealakehe. Response 13: The TIAR does not include the Niumalu or La'i 'Opua projects. It included the Henry Street intersection, which is over 2.5 miles away Frorn the proposed project's access, for an in-depth look at the potential regional effects an the roads. The analysis showed that, as traffic to/from the proposed project disperses, there will be very little effect at these far away intersections due to the project's traffic, As for the two SB LTs from Henry that need to merge into ane lane, this problem has existed for a while. This is not a result of any particular development. This is the start of the bottleneck in the SB direction because of the September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde Hemby Page 5 o1 12 merge, and realistically will only be improved by then widening of Queen Ka `ahumanu Highway. comment 14: Safety and Health concerns were never mentioned and should be an important part of the evaluation. Mere traffic capacity is too narrow in scope. SSFM, which produced the TIAR in Appendix 2 should be well aware of safety problems in the area because they produced a study and a set of crash maps of accidents from 2013- 2017 for Vision Zero and classified every intersection in the Royal Vistas TIAR to be part of a "High Injury Network'. On Wednesday, Feb 20, 2019 the Hawaii County Council Transportation Committee passed Resolution Number 38-19 to adopt the goals, strategies and policies of the Zero Vision Task Force to prevent traffic -related fatalities and severe injuries in Hawaii County, by a vote of 8-1. Response 14: While the TIAR did not include an in-depth crash study, as this was not scoped, SSFM did do a cursory review of the FARS website and did not note any recent fatal crashes in the vicinity of the proposed project's access. Comment 15: Queen Kaahumanu highway south of Henry Street is riot on urban roadway or freeway. It is a two lane undivided road and One slow vehicle or accident can take it from free flowing to stopped. This means infrastructure must come before the project starts building. It would be a disaster to have this project delay road improvements or try to do both projects at the same time. Response 15: While the widening of Queen Ka`ahumonu Highway wouid help out traffic, the timing of this improvement is not known and is outside the scope of this project. Comment 16: The project will cause a substantive safety hazard and further study is needed, or this project should be delayed or abandoned until mitigation Under Hawaii County Code Chapter 25-2-46 (e) is completed for the 5 LOS E&F deficiencies listed an pages 25-29 of the TIAR. Response 16: The LOS E/F on these pages refer to left turns from Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway or movements from minor streets. These are typical of left turns on major highways or minor streets. Even the installation of a traffic signal would still likely result in LOS E/F for these movements. Comment 17: The traffic study report has many references to Level of Service or LOS, which is just a rating or a grade for the flow of traffic. Many of the state regulations, including Hawaii, accepts LOS D during peak hours as acceptable but LOS C is where general level decline is noticeable. Response 17: The analysis has been completed per State regulations regarding Level of Service, and has taken into account the peak traffic numbers. September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde Hemby Page 6 n1 12 Comment 18: The roadway section that is the key to the substantive safety hazard is state road 19 between Henry Street and Kameharneha II The road from Lako Street to Kameharneha 111 has only inches of shot lder which is often obscured by vegetation. Response 18: Although the condition of the Lako Street to Karneharneha 111 roadway is currently very narrow and offers little room to move over for emergency vehicles, this is a current need of the roadway and is out of scope for the project, Comment 1St: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TZAR} (Appendix. 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed H the TIAR. Response 19: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. comment 20: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substcndard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway_ I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 20: Kekuana'oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuaraa'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase 1 as designed as the connection of Kekuanaoa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase 11 in 2029. After that, once full build -cut is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles an Kekuanaoa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 21: This DEA requires evaluation of. among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the .sse of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekucana`oa Place. Response 21: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than hhe proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oca Place, the number of vehicles projected to use September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde Hlemby Pc -Joe 7 of 12 Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively). The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 22: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been token into careful consideration in project design:" Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 22: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health, The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above H the body of the EA. Comment 23: The Planning Deportment should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 23: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 24: The TIAR uses a growth rote of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. fiesponse 24: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast. Comment 25: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Respornse 25: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output, This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde Hemby Pace 3 n1 12 Comment 26: The TZAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 10.57 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at adds with f=igure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 20T6 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. the difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day -today measurements and thus unreliable, Response 26: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailuo Road and Hualalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher 'Engineering report is overcounfing, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count, Comment 27: The recommendation by the T1AR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 27: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices {MUUTCD) states, ''The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TZAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. it should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant o signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. Comment 28: I am specifically concerned about floods similar or worse than those from 2015 which damaged homes, exposed ❑ critical water main and posed danger to motorists on Kuakini highway. Response 28: Flooding has occurred malar of Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway from waters in the County -owned Holualoa Ditch and the Horseshoe Bend Ditch, and as described in Section 3.3.2 of the EA the proposed project would not September 13, 2021 Mr, Clyde Ftemby Page 5' of 12 increase the amount of water carried by these ditches from the entire drainage basin extending miles up -hill as the project is not allowed to do so. COmment 2?: The steep topography, historical rapid storm water run-off and associated damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the DEA. Response 29: As noted, the steep topography results in rapid runoff during heavy rain events. There is no record of dcamcge to the project site or adjacent nroperlies from said runoff. which is carried away by the two County -owned ditches and State-owned culverts, Comment 30: I cam aware that page 21 of the DEA in a conceptual drawing illustrates the large flood plain that will be directed and concentrated into a ditch that runs over or under two of the subdivision roads, With roofs and pavement preventing any water absorption t will worsen flooding as it proceeds downhill. Response 30: Any increase in drainage from improvements woulc be directed to alternative run-off or storage facilities such as dry -wells, as approved by a County -reviewed drainage plan. and would not flaw onto adjacent properties. Comment 31: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood, A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future. As 1 understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among other errors. Response 31: Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two County -owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revised to clarify that on INK (3) 7-6-21:19. "Infrastructure during Phase 11 of the Proposed Project includes installation of a culvert system [along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuana`oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kona CDP "Official Transportation Map." For TMK (3) 7-6-21:1$. the project includes infrastructure for chcinnelizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector road required by Ordinance and the Kona CDP"s "Official Transportation Map.'" Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by DPW. Text has been added in Section 3.3.2 of the Final EA to identify possible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde Hemby Pc -Joe 100t12 Comment 32: A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At c minimum, the Draft Environrnental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements ore required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function. Response 32: The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA. Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Plan would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed. Comment 33: The DEA Table 2 Bird Species Observed in the Project Site seems incomplete which is not surprising if the field study only allocated an hour during daylight hours for bird observation. The study for this DEA does accept the responsibility to do a thorough and complete job and not just speculate, especially when it comes to endangered and migratory species. Response 33: The biological inventory report documents the species detected (which took many hours and many avian species were detected) and potential habitat at the project site. The Biological Survey Report in Appendix 3 of the EA acknowledges the limitations of a biological survey of a large project area and the absence of any particular species cannot be warranted from the survey's results. While additional species may be present, it is the professional opinion of the Hawaiian biologist that there is no possibility that the Hawaiian crow is present in the project area. Therefore, the EA includes a description of species detected as well as potential habitat for native species in the existing conditions part of Section 3.3.4. The impact discussion includes potential impacts to individuals and to habitat for native species (including those not directly detected during the survey). The impact discussion including protection measures to minimize these impacts to native species (including avifauana and bats) and their habitat in Section 3.3,4, Comment 34: It seems odd that an unmonitored survey that at one point in time does not find evidence of the Blackburn's Sphinx Moth would then allow the developer to destroy food and habitat for the endangered species Response 34: During the survey, none of the host plants for either the adult or larval stages of the moth are present. As stated in Section 3.3.4 of the EA, to prevent potential impacts to the Blackburn's sphinx moth. the project would include the following protection measures, A biologist familiar with the species would survey for Blackburn's sphinx moth and its larval host plants (tree tobacco and native 'aiea) between November and April or several weeks after a significant rain and within four to six weeks prior to construction. Surveys should include searches for eggs, larvae, and signs of larval feeding (chewed stems, frays, or leaf damage). If moths or native 'deo or tree tobacco over three feet are found during the survey, Kona. Three would coordinate with the USFWS for guidance to avoid impacts. September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde Hemby Page 11 of 12 If no Blackburn's sphinx molh, 'area, or tree tobacco are found during pre - disturbance surveys, Kona Three would ensure that measures are taken to avoid attraction of Blackburn's sphinx moth and prohibit tree tobacco from entering the site. Tree tobacco can grow more than three feet in approximately six weeks, and above three feet in height the tree tobacco can become a host plant for Blackburn's sphinx moth. The Proposed Project would remove tree tobacco less than three feet tall and monitor the Project Site for new tree tobacco grown before, during, and after Project construction. Monitoring for tree tobacco after construction, can be completed by any staff, such as regular maintenance crew, provided with pictures of tree tobacco at different life stages. Comment 35; While the lack of infrastructure regarding roads, traffic, floods and drainage has been covered there is c shortage of school infrastructure to support such a large medium density project, because the schools are already over capacity and expected to remain over capacity for five years or longer. On page 59 of the DEA .pdf file (page 46 of the DEA), c fictitious telephone and data supplier has been specified as "Hawaiian Telephone". Response 3$: As described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. the project would be constructed in phases, and occupancy would occur over time, Additionally, it is expected that the project would provide workforce housing for the local community. The project's first phase would construct rental units, and it is expected that occupants of these units would be local and many of the students already attend local public schools. Section 3.7.1 has been revised to clarify that since the project would be constructed in phases, all 99 students would rol all arrive at once and occupancy would occur over a longer period of time. This is consistent with predicted rotes of growth for the area which are considered by the DOB in their forecast planning for public schools. Regarding telephone and data provider. the text has been revised to clarify that telephone and data services are provided by local utilities, Comment 36: There are so many aspects of this project where no information is offered. Response 36: These details would be identified during final project design, which would be completed close to project development. For the purposes of the EA, potential impacts from the project to the environment are disclosed. Comment 37: Fire Protection on multi -unit clusters of buildings. Response 37: The project would be compliant with all applicable codes and standards of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1, Uniform Fire Code, 2006 Edition (which is the Hawaii State Fire Code). September 13, 2021 Mr. Clyde Hemby Page 12 of 12 Comment 38: Will the units be ADA compliant? Will the units have ramps Will the units hove elevators? Response 38: -ext has been added to the EA to clarify that the development would be compliant with American with Disabilities Act Standards for accessible design. Comment 39; Will there be a maintenance fee? Will there be a HOA fee or an HOA or Just a rn:nogernent company? Will there be a fee for satellite dish Installation. Response 39: Consistent with standard practice for housing developments, tor Phase i of the project the rental units would not have any separate maintenace fees since these would be incorporated into the rental costs. For Phase 11 of the project, an Association of Apartment Owners (A0A0) would be established and that group will determine fees. Regarding satellite dishes, in Phase 1 the owners would likely provide reception to the tenants and in Phase 11 the installation of satellite dishes would be regulcted by the AOAO. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. niche le, lefebvre4stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LC Maija Jackson, County of Hawo[1 Planning Department DATE: October 8, 2020 TO: Michele Lefebvre Stantec Consulting Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Email: rnichele.lefebvre@stantec.com CC: County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Email: planninghawaiicounty.gov FROM: Janice Kerr 76-4320 Leilani St. Kona Vistas Subdivision Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 808-938-1185 RE: Project: Royal Vistas Housing Project Island: Hawaii District: North Kona TMK: (31 7-6-021::016, 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021:018 and 7-6-021:019 have reviewed the Proposal provided to the County of Hawaii Planning Department by the Developer of Royal Vistas. I currently live on Leilani Street in the Kona Vistas Subdivision, and have resided here since 1994. have some serious concerns about the negative impacts of this proposed development: have watched the traffic at the intersection of Lako Street and Queen "K" Hwy increase exponentially over these past 26 years. It is now at the point where the volume of West -bound traffic down Lako Street backs up from the intersection at the Highway to the extent that the signal turns RED, before all the backed -up vehicles turning NORTH OR SOUTH onto Queen "K" can proceed through the intersection. They are forced to endure a lengthy wait for another green light. Per the Proposal, this intersection's traffic flow grade is currently rated "C" and "D'''. The impact of Royal Vistas will cause deterioration to "E" and "F". The same is true of East -bound traffic corning up Lako Street to Queen IK". The volume of vehicles on Queen "K" North -bound AND South -bound is increasing at an alarming rate, and soon we will not even be able to turn onto Lako Street from Leilani Street (and other streets in Kona Vistas), due to the volume of vehicles backed up from the intersection. The additional traffic from Royal Vistas pouring onto the Queen "K", increasing the existing volume, will worsen every direction of travel significantly more than the models show. That is because the models do not depict the ACTUAL - on the street - difficulties of travel present now due to the current degree of congestion, Most likely the proposed subdivision will generate more traffic than presented in the Proposal because there will be more significantly more delivery vehicles, which are not considered in the Proposal. There will be more personal vehicles, also - - houseguests, rentals and purchased units with multiple families, vacation rentals with multiple parties per unit, to name just a few of the possibilities. In addition, the north end of Leilani Street. (from Lako Street to the Church) is a quiet (quasi -cul-de-sac), used by a significant number of Kona Vistas' families with children and pets, for walking, running, biking, etc. There are no curbs, everyone is on the street pavement. My driveway is less than 25 feet long, my only option is to back out of the driveway onto Leilani Street, which would be close to impossible with traffic. It would be very unsafe to add any volume of traffic to Leilani Street as it is. It would also add enormous vehicular noise pollution. This Proposal will significantly lower my property value and that of most of my neighbors in Kona Vistas. Itis unacceptable and very unfair to lose the value of our collective investment in order to make money for the Developers, We have all worked hard to keep Kona Vistas quiet, healthy and safe for Families and Seniors. Please do not destroy the good environment so many of us strive so hard to maintain here, merely for the benefit of a few greedy people. strongly recommend denial of this proposal. Sincerely, Janice Kerr Mori, Ashie From, Sent: To: Ce 54]bjec1: Attachments: };nice Kerr ajkkorsa�_c"ahsY:_��ie.ntrl nets Thursday, October O1 , 2020 Z_58 PM Michele Lefebvre Planning Internet Mail PROJECT: RoyalIles'tas Housing Project island of Hawaii; District of North Kona Final RV.docx FIFia4F2 sr.42! otm fieri response se to above refert:nced Royal Vistas Housirg P'rc eat, Flavedo island, North Kona District Sirr:.f,rFIy, Jana Karr Lew!' St I�erlra Krum], HI 943740 81)8-9.18 1 i is DATE: October 8, 2020 TO: Michele Lefebvre Stantec Consulting Inc. P.O. Box 191. Hilo, Hl 96721 Erna I: michele.lefebvre@a stantec.com CC: County of Hawaiii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilt, HI 96720 Emaek: pIarmink haw iicnunty.gov FROM: Janice Kerr 76-4320 Leilani St. Kona Vistas Subdivision Iia i I u a -Ko n a, HI 96740 808 9384185 RE: Project: Royal Vistas Housing Project Island: Hawaii District: North Iona TMK: (3117-b-021:016, 7-h-021;017, 7-6-021:018 and 7-6-021:019 1 have reviewed the Proposal provided to the County of Hawaii Planning Department by the Developer of Royal Vistas. I currently live an Leilani Street in the Kona Vistas Subdivision, and have resided here since 1994. 1 have some serious concerns about the negative impacts of this proposed development; I have watched the traffic at the intersection of Lako Street and Queen "K„ Hwy increase exponentially over these past 26 years. It k now at the point where the volume of West -bound traffic down Lako Street backs up from the intersection at the Highway to the extent that the signal turns RED, before all the backed-up vehicles turning NORTH OR SOUTFI onto Queen "K" can proceed through the intersection. They are forced to endure a lengthy wait for another green light. Per the Proposal, this intersection's traffic flow grade is currently rated "C" and "D". The impact of Royal Vistas will cause deterioration to "E" and "F". The same is true of East-bound traffic coming up Lako Street to Queen "K'', The volume of vehicles on Queen "K" North-bound AND South-bound is increasin�at an alarming rate, and soon we will not even be able to turn onto Lako Street from Leilani Street (and other streets in Kona Vistas), due to the volume of vehicles backed up from the intersection- The additional traffic from Royal Vistas pouring onto the Queen "K", increasing the existing volume, will worsen every direction of travel snificantly more than the models show. That is because the models do not ciepic:t the ACTUAL - on the street - difficulties of travel present now due to the current degree of congestion. Most likely the proposed subdivision will generate more traffic than presented in the Proposal because there will be more significantly more deliver vehicles, which are not considered in the Proposal, There will be more personal vehicles, also - - houseguests, rentals and purchased units with multiple families, vacation rentals with multiple parties per unit, to name just a few of the possibilities. In addition, the north end of Leilani Street (from Lako Street to the Church) is a quiet (quasi-cul-de-sac), used by a significant number of Kona Vistas' families with children and pets, for walking, running, biking, etc. There are no curbs, everyone is on the street pavement. My driveway is Tess than 25 feet long, my only option is to back out of the driveway onto Leilani Street, which would be dose to impossible with traffic. It would be very unsafe to add any volume of traffic to Leilani Street as it is. It would also add enormous vehicular noise pollution. This Proposal will significantly lower my property value and that of most of my neighbors in Kona Vistas. It is unacceptable and very unfair to lose the value of our collective investment in order to make money for the Developers. We have all worked hard to keep Kona Vistas quiet, healthy and safe for families and Seniors. Prease do not destroy the good environment so many of us strive so hard to maintain here, merely for the benefit of a few greedy people. strongly recommend denial of this proposal, Sincerely, Janice Kerr Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.D. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: {808) 494.2039 Ms. Janice Kerr 73-4320 Leilani Street Kailua-Kona, Hi 96740 Email: jkkonahawaiianintel.net RE: Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii island Dear Ms. Kerr: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: Traffic at the intersection of Lako Street and Queen "KT' Hwy has increased exponentially over these past 26 years. Per the Proposal, this intersection's traffic flow grade is currently rated "C" and "D The impact of Royal Vistas will cause deierioration to "E" and ,,F". Response 1: This traffic signal is long due to the split phasing, and the volume on Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway, which is still two lames at this intersection. A short term, interim improvement can include the changing of the phasing at Lako Street from split to protected, protected permitted, or permitted, and changing the cycle length. It is known that this cycle length is very long, shortening the cycle length could provide shorten waiting times for the minor street approach. Also, the widening of Queen Ka'ahurnanu Highway would improve the LOS at Lako Street, These improvements are discussed in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report {TIARl. Comment 2: Most likely the proposed subdivision will generate rriore traffic than presented in the Proposal because there will be more significantly more delivery vehicles, which are not considered in the Proposal. Response 2: The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Handbook referenced in the TIAR (Appendix 2 in the EA) used for the traffic analysis uses housing units. and it does not assume one person per unit, This is taken from the ITE trip gen handbook regarding land use 220: 2,72 residents are assumed for each unit. There is no trip generation f;;' number of bedrooms. It is difficult to analyze and make projections based cr nJmber of bedrooms, or how many people we expect in bedrooms. The ITE trip generation for land use 220 collected data on low-rise multi -family housing, and based on that data, the traffic model carne up with a best fitted curve, which discussed below. has a very low standard deviation, and a very high R squared value, which indicated September 13, 2021 Ms. Janice Kerr Page 2 of 2 that the data collected is not scattered. The TIAR assumes a land use that is typical, and with the best possible data, captures the number of project generated trips. Comment 3: In addition, the north end of Leilani Street (from Lake Street to the Church) is a quiet (quasi -cul-de-sac), used by a significant number of Kona Vistas' families with children and pets, for walking, running, biking, etc. There are no curbs, everyone is an the street pavement. Response 3: While it is possible that after Kekuana`oa Place is connected in Phase II of the project, some residents could travel into the protect site from the south by turning onto Sunset Avenue, then north on Leilani Street (or Pualani Street), then east an Lake, and then west on Kekuana`aa Place, this WOUld represent the majority of traffic or where I,.-:.-1 ,I could occur. This is why the traffic study focused on impacts at the intersections identified in Section 3.7.2 and in Appendix 2 of the EA. Comment 4: This Proposal will significantly lower my property value and that at most of my neighbors in Kora Vistas. It is unacceptable and very unfair to lose the value of our collective investment in order to make money far the Developers. We hove all worked hard to keep Kona Vistas quiet, healthy and safe for Families and Seniors. Please do not destroy the good environment so many of us strive so hard to maintain here, merely for the benefit of a few greedy people. Response 4: The project is consistent with medium density zoning and conforms to the guiding principles regarding urban growth patterns as defined by the Kona Community Development Plan. The analysis in the EA cannot speculate on property values. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA„ please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email, Sincerely, Stontec Consulting Services Inc. f. Il,L!' r Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre; :stantec.corn cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashie From: Marta Barr eras <bai erasrnarta@yahocs_com> Sent- Thursday, October 08, 2020 12 Z3 PM To; Nanning Nanning Internet Mail Subject Royal Vistas Housing Project EA comments DF CLA.RAT[{7N Or MARTA BARRERAS 1, MARTA BARRERAS. declare: 1 aim a .1› dent : i. I base my concerns upon Inc evaluation and analysis performed by Tern Pollak Stone, l have spoken with him personally and he has statements regarding the ancient historic; holua running through this site. He iS N cr ' int2re5ted in the restoration of this site 6. In Sum, the Draft. Environmental Assessment does not discuss sufficient facts a.nd analysis such that the important Ha vai`ian cultural and archaeological features r.an be understood. let alone properly presented. At a the Draft Fra. 'trona -net -nal Assessment must be revised to adclrt-sw rhe loc:.ation, data recovery and preservation of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject Iaan.x1s. N. The developer s repon state that they euHrsultcd tttaarr l and s ih-1111 t)I IA, cIL:, wltinn I personally kt >w are against this desecration. The developer's report set.'111 allude that they had consent from tllc e poetics, from whcrrn they definitely DO NOT have consent. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true. Dated. Karluii-Kon a, k Irtwai`i, October 8. 2020. Sincerely, Marta Barreras Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Senrtces Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Marta Barreras via email: ba-reresnarto,,ra:-' c:_C orr. RE: Comments on Cultural Resource Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Ms. Earrercls: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments.. Comment 1: 1 do not consider that the archaeological studies in support of the DEA are adequate. The EA wos done on only o very small portion of the large acreage area. The northwest and north area of the property is the home of an ancient holua and was not assessed or documented. Response 1: Numerous archeological studies were performed, covering 100% of the entire project's land area. Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there k a historic era road (Site 24211 ) documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected i€ the site were the remains of a holua. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of c Land Commission Award (LCA) #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a hdlua course since the parallel walls empty into a Targe gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a h€lua in the project site. Comment 2: I am aware that substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Holualoa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately desctibed as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. The Holualoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. Response 2: As described in Section 3.6 and included in Appendix 5 of the EA, two Archaeological Inventory Survey AIS) reports were prepared for the project. September 13, 2021 M. Marta Barreras Page 2of3 As part of the AISs, sites in the project area were documented and evaluated for their significance. The AISs were conducted fallowing Hawaii Administrative Rules 13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6_ All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the AISs ensures that their information is not lost. The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211 ) documented. this road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a halua, Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures, The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walks are located along the boundary of c Land Commission Award (LCA) #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is o gap in the Feature 2 wall of the same gulch. it is unlikely that this is a holua course since the parallel walls empty into a Targe gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of o holua in the project site. Comment 3: b base my concerns upon the evaluation performed by Tom Pohaku Stone, I have spoken with him personally and he has staterr`ents regarding the ancient historic holua running through this site. He is very interested in the restoration of this site. Jl`esponse 3: In the email provided. there is reference to "the portion of the holua at the Holua inn [that] has rock walls on both sides" and refers to parallel walls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 walls which are LCA #3660 boundary walls. Primarily, Mr. Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhau to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuna. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he`ehclua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the near coastal region, However, the complexes are located more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal, sacred or sociopolitical complexes, or a haluo, within the project area. The existence of a holua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone. As discussed above, there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a holua course existed within the project area. September 13, 2021 M. Marta Barreras Page 3 of 3 Comment 4: The developer's report states that they consulted many parties from Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA), etc, whom personally know are against this desecration. The developer's report seems to allude that they had consent from these parties, from whom they definitely DO NOT have consent. Response 4- Section 3.5 of the EA states that consultation was sought from OHA and other parties. Consultation does riot imply consent. As described in Section 3.5, consultation means gathering input in an effort to assess impacts. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 474-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre@stonfec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley .111 From angy chestier <Ai igy,m..ipc!:i icepts.cOm Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2320 1;27 RN1 To: Piarorrir}g interrtet 1~.+1ail Subject Royal Vistas Housing Project Attachments: KV Declaration re Traffic -non kw owrIers.pdf VIP-CQnuept6 http ,`r'M..,..N 'epc;onc491atS.Cam 75-01.30 Pautehie St_ PCailu •�#trrr ,Iii 56740 pa 805.9o0 2649 1-8O8.217 942 1366G0 L)I:t'l_ARA1-10\ OF 1. ANGl•.I .A { I [ESLER. declare: I _ I .till a resident r►1` I l'ctalani Estates s.ubdivisk n I. Count) of I hi vrt i' i. Stat" of I-1atiwai' i. The proposed land development project that is the sthj1ct rel the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas Housing Project Tax Map Key Nos. (3 ) 7-6-021:0 16, 7-6421:017. 7-6- 0211118, and 7-6-C1211)19 North Kana District. C at+w:ti'i Island. State of Ilawai'l affects me [ r,ctxnall‘' s ewc11 as a[Itiets iny interest in real property. reside within 1 mill! [distance' „['the l3rt.ipused Land development prcwjt:c1. In such cape I have firsthand know. ledve of the I' Iter 'iltg facts .hriLl ttrid vo.ni[d testify thereto if called iipmi to da qo_ ?. 1 have reviewed the pending DRAFT EN IRONVILN1 ",[ ..\S,SESSMENT including the `I rtrl1ic Impact Analysis Report by SSEM111tcatrtaiicaiatil. date) 11114 20120 anti attached as Appendix 2 to the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT. l am spceifically concerned about adverse traffic irnpacis both within arid without the Kana Vista: subdivision that are not fully or accurately addre=ssed in the S5F vl l'rattic Impact Analysis R pint. '1 r~.t1Tit nid the SSF11 Traffic Impact Analysis Report_ are discussed in :h4 hotiti 01 the I)RAI- I' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT at pp. 48...56. 67 and 71. 3. in the Kona Vistas subdivision, the rinivosed project relies on the use Of a substandard roadwa.. Kokuantroa Place. Kekuana`aa Place is very. steep. has limited sight distances duce la extreme curves and is narrow with na sidewalks. the impact of increased traffic- arising front Phase 1 anti Phase 2 huildauts of the Royal Vistas I-hm ing Project is inadequately Ada'essed in the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. N.vhich focusLs instead on impacts Queen Kaalhurnutsti 1.1i hwa+•. 1 am particularly eon cernL Li ti ;it :trliliii numerous vehicle trips to and front a separate subdivision will prt crt dan er. 11 is rc'iderii ;i11i9rii I�cktulna' >:� i' lace, 1 cvnsidtr that Lltc: Planet i' . C)epartntent should require the applicant u addrez-o; concerns. 1, Inc DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT requires evaluation or. among others. adverse ..q.1,..iinurary until/ y, .ti Y �1 i� /Y�orlxr+rrl," �d7changes err ern is an public So: C'Itapict 11-200.1-13. i Auliniristraiive [tLiles_ In.sEtacl of squarely addressing these i�;su�+ , heti cti�1, t1,4 1)IC 1I. I l IN.'ull iIN\1F \ IA1: ANiESSN4ENT simply ignores them, claiming tIkt1 "ti..1iit L I'•C ,,c,..ondiir erects SII'_ i' 1+c4L 11 tiitl C the kik:vt,:lopment ltiit.ild utilize existing intrastrilc.ture. provide mill ho int!, :i;tti! :,.pc.,;ted to result in substantial demands to County ices." It is tr serious omission tint Lhe [)K,\ 1"1 1°;NVI KONMFNI I AI. A s [:s \TENT 10. I<Lii Lig ackIR ss Llat' potential adv'er5e impacts of increasing the use of $uhstandardii.li.pstructure., like 1;.ekLLnna'on Place_ The DRAFT ENVIRONMEN I. ASSESSMENT addresses adverse traffic 1I-nriacts only in the context of whc tiler the project would Have a substantial aiker.so. epe'ct nn piihfu health_ The Applicant claims. 'The Proposed Project would nett affect public health in tan) w. storriw ater v,riiu1d be appropriately disposed i1 in drainage structures_ Traffic impacts have been takcul ,.9rto rare*C'uI coiisideratrntt in pa ct Emphasis added, This b Ltd conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11-200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Mules. 6. The Planning I)i:I arttrtenl should not accept the DRAT=']' 1 NV11t()NMLN11-#1. ANS[SSMENT'w reliance on the SSFM Traffic impact "\iialwsis Report. which has the following deficiencies: :t. failure iu awlcl.ress adverse traffic i PVT'U.r. within the K.onar Vistas subdivision arising from the project; I], 'the SS1. I 1 rattle Impact Attal±.sis Report ulies rate +I' 1 IIt c+murast to the 2°r0 growth, rate enipltis. d hr the 21118 E:Itgittecrirli.:'I'flLI'Iic Impact Analysis Itcpatrl. "I'raflie congestion is cry sots iti4L to grov,th rate in a ttmn-linear. °\ponential relation; c. '1 he SSI. Impact Analysts Report does not rGwLH Rife multi -generational housing chtaratcleriatiw 5 cornniort in Hawaii according to census data and liken' Irndcrc;sJJtnaies daily vehicle trips attril"utahle httildout of the proposed project; d. The SS1:%1 rratiic Impact Analysis Report employs an u,ttisttallk low tir�hick volume of It51 vehicles fir N iihhound QUeCTI Ka;thetruunu higItt}try pan the selected dates of April 111. 2t11' . ai WA:cktiay and August 24. 2019. a Snturda}. compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering 1`cul'li4 Itnptret Analysis Report. which reported 1057 vehicles for Jr nunry 14 and I. 2016, both weekdays. 1 he unusually lowv reported vehicle volume of 353 iw also at odds with Figure 4 othhr SSFM Triflic lntpact Analysis keport_ ww'lritih shows approximately 1050 +ralticles per hour in .2016 for Ncilthhntrrd Queen Kaaburnanu Highway at 7 a.m. The di [Terence in volume is more than double the maximum Iil°i v°ariati n generally accepted. in day -today me:lsurein nts and thus unreliable: The recommendation by S!f'M Traffic Impact Analysis Report fora roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Iiittlu ay and Huslalai Fuad (Nort:nl is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants bur remain Linsignalired present traffic safety liability concerns for the government f. The recorttmendatinn by SSFM Traffic Impact Ana.l}sik Report for monitoring: sof the intere.Liti!tt t+I uectt Kaalrurnanu I liglt way anti Kuakini flighwvat is inadequate. Where, as ;feet. an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions. it. should be prioritized for surd} and design of a signal Cur installation. This circumstance will he exacerbated by the lir 1posed prujeel. 7.. In sum, the Draft I: nvirontttcrttal r"4ssttiwrneSFh1 Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not present sufficient_ credible masts and analysis such that the adverse se impacts on existing infrastructure and resulting front increased traftic can he fully understood and result in apprupriatc gttterntriertt irlaitrttitg and response. tleelate under penalty or1,t:riwr}. %Irat tIi t: regoing is true. Dated: ICai nn-Kcun.. H ILr'Cll'I. 10.8.. 202U Signtttitre: '"' L,„, - e? er FririLtJ lEetirw ;Angels C Iic ,lei 4 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Angela Chesr via email: Angyti vipconcepts,com RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawal'3 Island Dear Ms. Chester: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Konci Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned That adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -cut is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana `oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is rouanly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2021 Ms. Angela Chesler Pope 2 of 4 Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Respons.e 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oca Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicont claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been token into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Adrninistrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed aria analyzed above in the body of tr,e EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rote employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Alit (7,1)0 we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers uses. 1 T_ from the 2025.LRTP forecast. September 13, 2021 Ms. Angela Chesier Page 2. a Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics cornreee in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. ResponsQ.Z: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very law standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway en the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAL, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway ❑t 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation genercally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to tee 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if Ene Witcher Engineering report is overcauntiig, or if the project's TZAR is unae oeeling, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those f rovvlded in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TZAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumariu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 9: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, ''The satisfaclion of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall riot in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents. geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2021 Ms, Angela Chesler Page 4ofA an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many ot these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project_ The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County ot Hawaii Planning Department Pr. Office Box 11517 I-ilc.I-t3wai98721 Stevan D. Strauss L.TOensed in California # Hawari Law Offices Of STEVEN D. STRAUSS Telephone (808)969.6684 Facsimile (808) 930-3887 e-rnail: steverslrausslawyerOgrnail.com fi,viI am Criminal Trals •' Inlelleulual Pro, »rty V Suairruzs Dve:opr ... nl T Environment & 1 srtirl ',Jse *may►;yT T —rT "IrIFT vtr ► TY T►��trir. iTTVTTT.TTIlry 7 TYVVV�'VVVVTrIt VV October 8, 2020 Nuchae! Yee, Director Hlawai'i County Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas KoUsing Project Tax Map Key Nos.. (3) 7-6-021.018,. (3) 7-6-021:017, (3) 7-6-021.018, and (3) 7-6-02.1:019 North Kona District, t-1awai'i Island, State of Hawaii Dear Mr. Yew represent Kona Vistas Association, Inc., a non-prof't corporation comprising an association of homeowners and residents of real properties Iodated within the Kona Vistas subdivision adjacent to the proposed development project. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input regarding the draft Environmental Assessment, This submission addresses three main issues: traffic impacts, archaeological information and stormwater drainage. These issues must de addressed individually and cumulatively. For the reasons stated below, my client considers that draft Environmental Assessment is deficient in each of these areas. Accordingly, the Planning Department should not accept the draft Environmental Assessment in its present form_ See, e.g., Kateikina v. Yoshioka, 128 Hawaii 53, 283 P.2d 60 (2012) (in context of accepted EIS, a reviewing court uses the "rule of reason' to determine whether an EIS is legally sufficient in adequately disclosing facts to enable a decision- making body to reader an informed decision_ Under the "rule of reason," an EIS need not be exhaustive to the point of discussing all possible details bearing on the proposed action but will be upheld as adequate if it has been compiled in good faith and sets forth sufficient information to enable the decision -baker to consider fully the environmental factors involved and to make a reasoned decision after balancin the nsks of harm to the env ronment against the benefits to be derived from the proposed action. as well as to ms=like a reasoner) choice between alternatives. Emnhasrs added, 136963 October 8, 2020 IVrchael Yee, Director Havvail County Planning Department Page: 2 Traffic Impacts The Traffic Impact. Analysis Report by SSFM International, dated July 2020 and attached as Appendix 2 to the draft Environmental Assessment does not fully or accurately address traffic Impacts likely to result from the proposed development both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision, Traffic and the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report are discussed in the body of the draft Environmental Assessment at pp. 45-55, 67 and 71. First, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuana'oa Pace, Kekuana'oa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project ,, inadequately addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Higim.vay. Of particular concern are the resulting addition of numerous vehicle trips to and from (he Royal Vistas Housing Project separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuana'oa Place. Kona Vistas Association, Inc. considers that the PlAnrxin€ Department should require the applicant to acdress these concerns. Second, the draft Errvironrnental Assessment requires evaluation et. among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. See Chapter 11-2001-13, Hawa,: Administrative Rules_ instead of squorely addressing these issues, however, the draft Environmental Assessment simply ignores them, claiming that "Na adverse secondary effects are expected since the development would utilize existing infrastructure, provide infill housing. and is riot expected to result in substantial demands to County services." It is a serious omission for the draft Environmental Assessment to fail to address the potential adverse impacts cf the proposed project's increased use and reliance upon substandard existing infrastructure, like Kekuana'oa Place. Third, the draft Environmental Assessment addresses adverse traffic impacts only In the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims. "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts. have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added_ This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11-200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. The Planning Department should October 8, 2020 Michael Yee, Director Hawaii County Planning Department Page 3 require the applicant to specifically address adverse traffic impacts resulting from the proposed project in the context of adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes cr effects oa public facilities as required by Chapter 11-200.1-13, Hawaii Adrininistrative Rules. Fourth, the Planning Department should not accept the draft Environmental Assessment reliance on the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Reportwhich has the following deficiencies' a. failure to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project: b. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Reprri. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non- linear, exponential relation; c. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report does nal recognize multi- generational Housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and lixely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project; d. The SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report employs an unusually Iowa: vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen i<aahumanu highway en the selected dates of April 30, 2019. a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 16, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which shays approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaanumanu Highway at 7 a.rn. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable; e. The recommendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road ;North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government; ' Please see attached Assessment of two TIAR nor the Royal Vistas ,f Kona Village Cevelopmeit dated September 25. 2020 by Patios D. Prevedouros, Ph,D. October 8, 2020 Michael Yee, Director Hawai'i County Planning Department Page 4 f. The recommendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for monitoring of the interseclion of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where_ as here: 8n intersection passes more than one warrant udder all nd tions, it should he prioritized for study and design o` a signal for installation, This circumstance will ce t*ateri by the proposed project, In sum, the draft Environmental Assess►np'it and SSFfvt Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not present sufficient, credible facts and analysis such that the adverse impacts on existing infrastructure and resulting from increased traffic can be fully understood and result in appropriate government olru ping and response. Arch s coloq ical Information The draft Environmental Assessment at pp. 42 - 43 recites that the applicant's experts sought consultation from, Inter Alia, .J_ Curtis Tyier 111, cultural descendent. and from Kekcia Nazara Kora Hawaiian Civic Club President. Supposedly, Mr. Tyler provided specific information that was riot included with the draft Environmental Assessment. Kona Vistas Association. Inc., however, is informed that neither Mr. Tyler nor Kekoa Nazara were contacted. Kona Vistas Association. Inc, is presently investigating these discrepanc,,es and will seek to supplement this input statement. In the interim, the Planning Department should require the n^plicant to verify the information presented in the draft Environmental Assessment and the Jurie, 2020 Cultural Impact Assessment For A 78.122 -Acre Property to i-ioluarca 1st Ahupua'a, North Kona District, Hawaii Island, Hawal'i jTMK: (3) 7-6-021:018-0191 attached to the draft. An open question exists whether the draft Environmental Assessment has been compiled in goal faith and sets forth sufficient informaton to enable the decision -maker to consider fully the environmental factors involved Next, the draft Environmental Assessment only lightly touches on potentially important cultural Archaeological Resources at pp. 71-73, Chapter 11-204,1-13, HAFT., however, requires agencies to consider irrevocable commitments of natural, cultural or historic resources when determining whether an Action has significant effects. Although the draft Environmental Assessment claims that "no valuable natural or cultural resources would be committed or lost as a result of the Proposed Project" and "No impacts to archaeological resources would occur with -the planned preservation of the railroad berm and petroglyph.", Kona Vistas Association, Inc. is informed to the contrary According to an evaluation and analysis performed by Tom Pohaku Stone, substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject land parcels includes October 8, 2020 Michael Yee, Director Hawaii County Planning Department Page 5 features of the Holuaica Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the draft Environmental Assessment_ The Holualoa Slide is an important Hawaiian cultural and archaeo?apical feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. See correspondence and figures attached hereto. It appears that the draft Environmental Assessment identifies the Holualoa slide parallel walls only as walls used for agricultural 1 ranching. Kona Vistas Association, Inc. is presently seeking to verify the information attributed to Mr. Stone and will seek to supplement this input statement upon receipt of such verlfication At a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revises to address the location, data recovery and preservation of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject parcels. 1 Drainage The steep topography, historical rapid stormwater run-off and associated damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the draft Environmental Assessment. The draft Environments- i Assessment does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood. A proper environmental assessment cannot Leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the Future, which would lead to unlawful project segmentation, among other errors. A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At a minimum, the draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to snow specifically what nfrastructure improvements are required to tie into the Comity's drainage system and how those improvements will function. 4. Cumulative Effects Once the three areas identified above are properly and fully addressed, the cumulative effects of adverse impacts in these areas and all others must also be addressed_ October 8, 2020 Michael Yee, director Hawaii County Planning Department Page 6 Thank you for your consideration of this input from Kona Vistas Association, Inc, Enclosures pc: client TRAFFIC IMPACTS Assessment of two TZAR for the Royal Vistas / Kona Village Development Panes D, Prevedcuros, PhD, P•ctassor o1 Transoortatir n Engineering, Univ. of Hawaii at Manoa I'onoi, . September 25, 2020 Throughout this document E refer to the Current 11AR (by S$FM international, dated July 202Q) and the OkiTIAR (toy Witcher Engineering, dated October IS, 2O1S. Both TEAR use the standard methodology in L H ighway Caoacityr Marual {r'iCM) for assessing traffic impacts, 601 kill Is generally accepted in Flawari. 1 was a past contributor r !sue EiE:catons in the I -}CM and teach it routinely in rny DLL- 462 —Tr it'ir Fhginecrr rig course at UH Manoa. A critical con-ipuntyrn Jo a TZAR is t1112 number of trips generated by the project during the AM and PM peak hours. Folli T1AFz used the standard ITE TrIp Generation motels and came to very similar results as shown below, Table 9: Estimated TrTps Gen errated - Phase 1 n Land Use [ITF Code] Multi-famliy 'lousing �Lu I. se} 12201 Dwelling Units New Trips Trip Distribution AM Equation Lrr('T)-L.05Ln{X}- 0.51 117 In2 Out PM Equation Ln C7} = 0.89"'Ln ( - 0.02 258 137 in Out. 77% 63% 37% 27 00 86 5.1 T=.Total number. Df trips generated, }C = °weII n Units (72 Typically we expect rrreasuraisie 'impacts when a project generate 100 or more trips along the peak direction. This project does not in Phase 1; in Phase 2 the right turn from Fiona Villages unto Queen kaahurnanu Hwy. will be 108 vehlctes per hour in the AM peakit s1Xould be noted that some movements, left turns in particular, can become protxl!ernatic with much lower volurIles. Another critical component is the "ba..:kgrrvund growth" which specifies the annual growth of traffic due to general Ocrpulotion growth, other d veloprnents in the region. etc, This number typically ranges between and 5%, with t% tCi 2% >i ;rig most typical rat kr areas experiencing growth, unless 1 detailed estimates are evadable from a regional planning model. The latter are preferred to an assumed growth rate. Traffic congeseiron is very sensitive to growth rate; it increases the vceurne in the Volwne-to Capacity ratio. WVhear the ViC ratio exceeds 0.75, the existing rapacity is 75% utilized. ft is a corelinear (eep' rential l relation, therefore delays "skyrer.ket" when thte'I/C ratio euceeds 0.9_ A growth rate of 1% rnean5 that a rod that carries 1,000 vehicles now will tarry 1,150 vehicles ire 15 years_ 4. growth rate of 2% means that a road that carries /AO vehicles iii?0 will carry 1.300 vehicles rn 15 years, If the capacity of the road k 1,500 vehicles per hour, tilers Lie rent. conditions are goad (the WC ratio is 0.67), the future conditions with 1% growth rate we be ccncerning (the WC ratio is 779'), and the future eorrciLlOns with 2% growth rate will be poor (the WC ratio is 87%). If one were to add just 5C] oth:Rio ed vehicles from a develnpri,. 11 .1 n ftetire rni, .lions with 1% growth rate well be concerning (the WC ratio Is SKI, and the fuel .i 2% growth rate will be poor (the Vit ratio is 90%), both of which will exacerbate lost time due to traffic congestion which In TAR is represented by the delay per vehicle, Interestingly, the Old TIAR used a growth rate of 2% and the Current TIAR used a growth rate of 1%, which, as I demonstrated in the paragraphs above, k a big difference. In the latter case, the e,st:n rated traffic impacts will be lower (e.g., lower delays) irid better level of servl!ce 1LQ5j. However, the justification given In the Current TIAR is credible. Old T1AR: "There ora several other developments in the general ere 111 tlit! planning stages. Nearly all have been in various stages of planning for some tirrie (3.0 years). The rc:as:. r s they have not proceeded vary from not obtaining proper zoning to requirements set by the i-l:',nninl; IDPFartrnent in the past. It canr:sot be projected when, or if, these projects will proceed. Therefore, the 2% rise per year in the traffic volume required by the County should suffice this development's coming or line." Current TIAft; "'The 2035 FedereI Aid Highways Long Rage Transportation Plan Forecasts average daily traffic in Kerte and Hawaii Belt Road to be 41,900 vehicles iii 2020 and 0,000 vehicles in 2035. This equates to a 1% annual [;rcw€Is rate over 15 years in the Kcna area, A background growth rate cif 1% per year was assumed, to account for additional traffic at the study intersections," Raring on a regional model for forecasts is err; feared to making an assumption. TIAL analysis depends an traffic volumes collected in the field to torm the base conditions upon which the fee,' re scenarios with anti without the project are ar.alyte"d, Both TIAR use pre Ccvrd data, therefore base volumes are fairly representative cit a norrnal econorny". and normal travel activity conditions, The two TZAR chose tc analyze different intersections and have only one intersection in common: pueeueenui 5t. with Queen Kaahumanu Hwy, The i+ciumcrs reported are shown In a screen capture for the Current TIAR, grid in my handwriting for the OId TIAR (see page 3) Due to day-to-day variation, a chase match in the volume of each movement is not realistic; small deviations are nermai. h Dwever, one large deviation is worrisome: the volume on Narthboi rid Queen 14aahumanu Hwy. 2 CIO TIAl4: 10S7 I taken on la r►ua ry k 4 and 15, 2016 Current TZAR: 853 taken on April 30 and Aug'sl 24, 2.019) The 2019 level af'uolurnt. in the Old TZAR assuming 1% growth over Three years would update to 1,a57x1.03=1,0115. It ,> cur:cern'rig that this critical volume on the Current TIM{ is lower by 236 vehicles u� 22 6, A tiiffererzte in volume over 10% is next generally accepted as normal day-to-day variation, mrlieularly for critical movements such as this heavy through movement on Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy. This lower level of volume on Northbound Queers Kaatlurnanu Hwy, likely affects all prior intersection uutwuen I'uapuaanui 5t. and Karr? ICI Rd. including I Inc access point fur Komi Villages. Low volumes resu.t ir lower irrr,aCt:s ani1 less ronsori tivr' est imnles on general. Unfortunately, due to prevailing conditions (with Covld), a quick verification of this volume Is not possible. However, Flcure 4 in the Current TIAR clear+r ,I r)ws that Northbound Queen Kaahurrwanu Hwy, carried apprcxirrrately 1,050 vehicles at 2 AM ii 201(i'n !I IL in question the accuracy of the 8 ail vehicles per hour volume used in the Currrr (°031 689 Legend N G� Queen iaihumlu Hwy Peak Hour Volumes err) AM (PM) 251 112 481,30) 694481 Thr —10 CC coy y 03 157 .(230),_; 4 5 (t11 26 (521 Queen Kaab 3 Signalized inti4rsec ion Unst Intl Both TZAR show L e-val of Service (LOS) results for the traffic movements at the irltersections. The A to F scale is easy tc Comprehend, In rural locations, LOS of B and C should dominate compared to LOS U and 6. which are common in busy cities. However, in bods TIAL several movements show a LO5 of 0 or worse. To improve my understanding of how condi! on sir likely to evolve, 1 prefer to use the! Volume -to - Capacity ratio reporters as the vie number In the Current 1IAR. As [ mentioned earlier, thus decimal number represents the portion of roadway c p icity (in vehicles per hour) that is utitized, Typically traffic impacts and delays are becoming Substartttal when this ratio exceeds 0.75, I counted those instances and summarized below. i also noticed that quite a few other movements hada vidc ratio of 0.73 or 0.74, so 1 included Cl-nse as wel'I, in a separate and ira a combined columr. Looking at the column In boldface, in 2019, 27% of the mov2rnents analyzed were substantially busy, that is, utiliared at 73%V capacity or more. The busy movements are expected to more than double Its 2029 without the project, and nearly triple by 2039. On the other hand, the incremental effect of the traffic added by the protect Is small, as rhe resultant 2%. 5% and 2% estimates indicate {at the bottom of the last column.) AM' Wiliam to cap achy ratlak f�M T:ki is or Currene TUR L,abie to Exict.ng 20:5Cr-lien rcklcir Level of }stroke adl t5 O.71, G.74 Sint rap.7r, 074,q,741 Sum 'Intal % ni mr54 a ,lents villi 1�jn V'f c with V?' 1.0 7.3 wet ti V,c 5 5 d 5 5`t 'Trifle 12: Fuhue /E.24 Wilt, out FrujCCiIR low AIL`!, LANAI ttf & I. != 1Q $ 1 _ 1 4E 4:36 •i ZAN iTable 29:Fu:%41.0:;]'�',Iti4�zIwOW lyMOa intersectiorr, L -. I of 41 3 14 t S 1 13 i3 BILK 513 Tatala 2__k FWIure 2Cin Oiltiwut Tabic 26 Fulrare 2479 With Irrafeet InlerseciIon Level ol5eraice 17 L 17 l~ 3 +t l 99i Protect rntersecslrrntrrwetof l5 1 1G 2 20 7S Table 14: hltuure 1pa4 With aralcc antrrser, T; GI LI o't 5 eriri Ci I. != R 10 # 4E LSF. r+3 Tah)e 2L Future 2A4q'Ni:hProject rrMMersep,on Level aiSer+lcc lfi lr 11 A L` srr7 1=6 Sil Tabic 26 Fulrare 2479 With Irrafeet InlerseciIon Level ol5eraice 17 L 17 l~ 3 +t l 99i r31' W. This outcome is in agrLerT1ern with the following concluding occtc from the Old PAW "It Can be seem from this discussion that the impact or exis.irg traffic by this development is rrilnimal. However, with other fleVelOpments factored to using the 2% per annum growth rate there can be sigrikficant impact of tile traffic if no mitigating measures are introduced." The Carrel -It TIAF# provides arterial speed estimates for Sout[hbouni v d Nott!.bound Queers. Kaahurrlaru.. Hwy.; see Table 50 on page 55. The Northbound directicrr I's xpecteecl to oper3-P substantially slower than current conditioris. The estimated 15.6 mph forte: !'4M tai -;rd is corrr:,3-; :,i,-. 10 busyarterlais iri 4 Honolulu (pre -Wild.) Average speeds over 20 mph along signalized arterials are considered good. i.e., LOS C or better.. Finally, I reviewed the recommendations for the mitigation of trod(fi:.rnt:t-tr, 'or intersections or Movements vvithr a poor LOS. A rrt @r weakness of the Oki TIAil t it Jic- nit offer any specific mitigations to improve the estimated future LOS=E or r to more acceptable LOS=C end D. The Current TIAR includes specific suggestions for every intersection but Is racking of specific assessments on whether the purposed improvements will actually work and improve LOS_ The Curren; TZAR recornm+mdhLir rs 3r'e? CapiLd below with my torrirnents adder) in boldface. 1. Queen KaahLima. nu Highway and Palm) Road Si ;;nal Um trig should be monitored grid updated to ensure that left turn ques.ies clear every cycle. This is an appropriate recommendation, 2 Queen Kaiatiumariu Highway and henry Street Signal timing should be monitored and updated tet ensure (hal left tura queues clear 121.rery tvCle?. ii, C'r� �t t' ; sFI°,pr iirI a riir-r nth'd Tner.":te k 7nlir h,: iir in' they -plft phasing to prttehrtnef left kr ii i'dSt� 1r1 flri 1p' tptf.tt: 001 441c...'iv .'ii]tr: giCUL. ;.li _lir . i' t '.dl it through movements, lowci.ing Lite (Ann,iI li:,iav of the :nt,,inntn.1 on, This is an appropriate recommendation. Quantitative r-,r,+-�,timent of the improvement of the proposed phasing change is needed. A Ween h{aahumanu Highway and Hualalal Road North) Based on the 2a1.9 traffic volumes, this intersection passes the Four -Hour warrant. This ir►tersc+rtion passed the peak -Hour warrant In the 2419 Atyl peak hour and far all peak hours In all future scenarios. Future traffic should be monitored, and a traffic signal or roundabout should Pe installed if rreedi d bu: priority should be givers to keeping Queen Kaahumanu Highway traffic moving and not installing a traffic signal If not warranted by 4- or ES -hour warrants, The nvcrall delay at th€s intersection is 41.i} and 50.6 seconds per vehicle in the 2039 AM peak hour, without and with the project, respectively. When the delay experienced by drivers reaches this level, the westbound drivers are like nf to find alternative routes. The suggestion for a roundabout is odd and will be incansrstent along this corridor. This intersection requires close monitoring and study for signalization possibly within 5 years, depending on economic and tourism conditions. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized area traffic safety liability for the agency in charge, 4. Queen Kaahurnanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) As the westbound left turn delay gets wos se, drivers may decide to use F'uapuzanui Street to access Queen Kaahumanu Highway in the soutghound direction. Based on the existing volumes, this intersection did not pass the Four -Hour warrant or the Peak -Hour warrant, This ir)tersecti4ra did pass the Peak -Hour warrant for all future lhi, peak hour scenarios. Future traffic should be monitored. Thal is an appropriate recommendation, Recall that Northbound Queers Kaahuntanu volume may be law in this TIAR which would conceal a potentially bigger problem. 5. queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanul Street Signal timing should be monitored arra adjusted as needed to increase the probability that queues an Queen Kaahurnanu Highway can clear the intersection in 1 ale, This is an agprrrpriat1 rerammendatit3 ,, However, it is riot dear whether there is enough space to accommodate the waiting queue of vehicles turning left. L. Queer Kaah+amaru Highway and Royal Vistas Roadway - Thi oadway This intersection will function acceptably ugh the full Phase 1 buildout. B fere any Phase 2 rw;iuer'.,ces are occupied, itis recommended that the connection to Kekuanao'a Place is complete',. that ixoyai Vistas Phase 2'telt out'. traffic can access the Liao Street traffic signal_ This is an appropriate recommendation. 7_ queer Kaahumanu Highway and IKuakini Highway This intersection passes the Pour -Hour warrant and Peak -Hour warrants during Eli peak (hours far all scenarios. Future traffic should be monitored, and a traffic signal or roundabout should ice installed if needed. The northbound left turn rrtnverrwent is very heavy {300 -GOO pelt/hour by 2039 with project], which will be nearly at capacity. The westbound left turn, while small, is already over capacity in 2019 .arc will kre far over capacity by 2039. Royal Vistas traffic has very little effect can this intersection. 7 his is a weak recommendation. An intersection that passes more than one warrant under all conditions should be on a priority list for study and design of a signal for installation. It can take aver 3 years to install a new signalized intersection. Monitoring is not adequate. A detailed study and pian by Hawaii County is needed, regardless of the Kona Vistas development. S. Queen faanumanu Highway and Lako Street The Lako Street intersection operates at LOS rfi) (AM/PM) with or without tl'e Royal Vistas project in the 2039 senario. Lako Street currently has split phasing (sequential rather than concurrent) ort the Lakya Street approacries, Changing the phasing from split to protected ;ett turns would help lower the delay This :ntersectic rt would also improve significantly it queen Kan} Jmalu Highway is widened to 4 'fines nr, Irl I've dll:i`_i iransoortandn Plar1 Quantitative aslu.5srnent of the improvement of the propo uti phassng change is needed. Recommendation 6 on this /1st may add more volume to this intersection. r;�. �: y Kaahurr%-ims -Ii-sway ant: r :;iuc'rameltia III Rs and 5iarral timing should be monitored and updated as needed. This is an appi opri.sto rrrcommerrdation. 7 ARCHAEOLOGICAL I NFORMA.TION 1.41. Holualog inn Stine Infflnnelkn Twin Wars el SJIde IiOJualcrj Slid Swam are ea n,urolrotiona with WI, lbrrj P.yw Jt.0 Sinlur about the Iwla, *aka ar<t Lha aflde wdh 8KUM Vratta ecard mowing& Beim ears a;prrirriuniGaU wvllh hic Tarn Prihrlku SW* atKalt the pilin wrglls and the sada with a Keine Mate Board members On Marr, .1141 1, 241 D. St E Ail Torn Pd,hislcu Stone wrote: Toga/war th* quaagarr regarding ,its walls `, 5. 1401 ap' hblue elides had wails but rweartV aG lienee an Pie wall beheld do The surpass was tea held tits hock In Iha Odea In *OfriO Item ltpnS roil IR wen thsl naackid to ba reload Man you rnan'Elcn rnereirtg t bpg from masa kr-rraakal tart ks an knportfrrri paint traoseell bis Kone Weal kw was M a tOVraer slearaldon when wwa were gnawing to part has for sear wale's, papaha'aernrlu. eta, Thu vi'u the main purpose of to slldlale genial of yslea man, Which otratrkeitt dtaefipld !o refle1l e n //setoff lattioel WO* gadget the Imo Jima (upland ►rsreal} aid that grdiialiHty we corrected with then and HOW Ther Islayaileat auLral t vids ipa found Of NI Mimi madam le Ilan Wine oaf the story what made !meta sap s 11 BMW invortanl id OUP Coitral peadtkvia especial'? emcee bra ,fialblaa Wheel1e S IIlrlelhea3 b Ra` ;alw tinea{ a, and els weal MI Niel of alis mokupual fk latid . Theta rots a canpce>~ae araaawg th#r ;wallop but rttano as gidra'Jaaef. airaraaselp6I MebutarrwpCehralit'u ke wa{nlher ilMW11J!'llia, lab'ahrril, and ItirdwIraui lMsutj wane the ealrlter ronelanetga astablahaci tee Pelprera gild the change in felkkan. The Wlualan burn6404.)Iflaar; lJ'te a;:genpfetq Knighton b 4f1umetablernetl MOW of Prim.. Ott Una. Al t, 2C14'N hl a1.5 AM aoltn Tem tilerrk yt i far taking the time to eel iii 1• me. M Ir, r to for llppeicial.ad- 1Tie hla.Wrp est 1-11311411.043 11 trui + tai aarkaabib, and Arm -6v t have tally aciatchrrl ttal Mcla*cas- ore r uasiiba`t I mewl. ut! krawci pctrliort et lae hull., a et link licetaeleas Inn has a ria wail on troth sklca. Vileeld flue wee have beer, L t et the ane We Pentrerd td keep the drarillagnied te51,ntily traveled down. l have folsne, in ire arulaased cyeveblimeol anus H sacrein, of :aarnitel rocas welts_ CC biota ra %et either Rehm have wells? I NAB thwtk ytu tv sj your heap. 'Very respectful and orl34teord. John an Min, Jsil 1.2!719, 6.36AA. Torn wrote Aloha John. I know t haw null been in t ontael faltsoma erne WI 1 haw/hem going harry' all my remrda anal into for this masa. You are n l gas'Ia to find miich In an r Shari, ANA Pet ads !because Ism the parson who csa re away 01 gm ansa Alert of a sieernpm.rani has changed Ihar as illtmel landscape in the stoat t; .+r teslas { pwrt200 raj end wrllh ft eery nave c ulh,rel end ar rCheseaural isndscrpe sa its a pUxzir- 1H elia9 host ba1A pan eat mr'aliF#ma end It has beer, rsy aaaderrok *pa >irchweulegi slfy anal wile Iy, I have repent yaws oneekilho culoral #+cation tea Du ,xar.,mum,ilr regerding ills skrinlaw efll49s'17mailine The Mori is to hatagraitr +ten at turrl Inrldacapa inn the dgvel+asrnn+ent 9r00011 If li wi saws the et treloal cultural linin p.. Alltr. ih at said. thetas 1g a Akre c -rt rla1:rsn b etweee the 1t4hialcr adds, lulanahthI, K.astl'+.oa4a tioma,m Karl -Whin -Wu 14.e.iie;tows'a. and kcamae �r-vmmi}"- 1'hri tirwrlopamm d teams. easy ttw y,rae man aur rated idealsoyee) lhi! Flake, c+pgr !,c Linn ffr :Fa Aida c 1u4 r1fll IR ,14 or 1tT&T i'ratmo Wit . w ; ^ itotua" molt ikn Mimeo sit.yn6an.oorsJb'searcb,+ko4>+urck-subioa%3A°% wd"aG.. 1tli lid Ccnmplr/Vali hod existed. The ccaotat area of mis complex l to6. p+crtt+nkod but not r sOeMhdrrs tlrl lire atJI undevehoped its Al this p*Cart the erlrha5i7JB 51oL k1 be ars pfraialcung ',hat Is had tills grant rxirnptasr, We do Irlsaw tti I KarriehereelutI wa s trai^gd ir. this s:wepieg irhisth included lefunln51 to Ito sidit anti scut t would aduiee you b kask at. the dreetaa WU& and fccs on stet la left at twent oa nplax 411,1 rscfw built would benefit tile euliunn history 04 icons& burry I'tli nol ° on 'nand CO arreiat, brill at Ihia ASI I br!IIev0 lr'e fievelcapfnentyaltletilzoy me If ym novo awnrDrie wll1 tlnMglMrllP Clatutairedlional aictiLecturaliamhosologIngli t>erdtgfaYfrtrJ Ire'rmme Itrvtw resin insist but If yew holed Or inearle *do in-depth rCF7R7it!'ich, poem* Onganiergene, rtrcuovica cxsinrnittirtx itrikm.1 kin INs can clacaurrrs ;hit Healy Utah, imisa ;yow dad Ins Mein orehateloginel rlaCard nrba+. rc++rxtrlsdpe, irrhtivflelnlInn, end I.nuel"erandrrro ref titi#.aa ra irn.esr AL' x.a.l haw W5 WI Inlaarewine,t hl significant Flra kis hi hj'II Torn Pnlisau Mona ICwnHlu {1039; la s Sr?t c 3 nor peot11 otgarieaMcrii lied atad to natural & ocean grill=Ilon blued' n tortflioris of our kupuna. Stantec September 13, 2021 Mr. Steven Strauss P.O. Box 11517 Hilo, HI 96721 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 RE: Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawai'i Island Dear Mr. Strauss: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) tor the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The submission addresses three main issues: traffic impacts, archaeological information and storrnwater drainage. These issues must be addressed individually and cumulatively. Response 1: Specific comments on the various resource are addressed below. Comment 2: The Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) included as Appendix 2 in DEA does not fully or accurately address traffic impacts likely to result from the proposed development both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision. Response 2: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 3: The proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuana'oa Place. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase f and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, and am concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present danpers and congestion to residents along Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Kekuana`oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kana Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuanca'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuarna'oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase II in 2029. After that, once full build -out k completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles an Kekuana`oo Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana'oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 4: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission September 1a 2021 Mr. Steven Strauss Page 2 of 32 to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana'oa Place. Response 4: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 31.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana'oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekouna`oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic (22 and 9, for the AM and PM teak hours, respectively). The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of _econdary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 5: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: stormwoter would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 5: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment b: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 6: Intersections within the proposed project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant_ Comment 7: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TZAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rote in 0 cion -linear, exponential relation, Response 7: Hawaii Department of Transportation (E&DOTl counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1 growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1 from the 2025 LRTP forecast, Comment 8: The TZAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. September 1a 2021 Mr. Steven Strauss Page 3 of 32 Response 8: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers {ITE} Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an f - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 9: The TIAR employs an unusually Iow vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30. 2019. a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually Iow reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum i0% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Response 9: The most recent Historic HDOT count available In the study area was the 2016 Queen Koaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TZAR is undercounting, but the TZAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comrraelnt 10: The recommendation by the [IAR for o roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Huolalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain Lin -signalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 10: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TZAR does not include that analysis. The TZAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily Triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. September la 2021 Mr. Steven S{ri]LJSS Page 4 of 32 Comment 11: The DEA recites that the applicant's experts sought consultation from, inter alio, J. Curtis Tyler 1 1 1, cultural descendent, and from Kekoa Nazara, Kana Hawaiian Civic Club President. Kona Vistas Association, lnc„ however, is informed that neither Mr. Tyler nor Kekoa Nazara were contacted. The Planning Department should require the applicant to verify the information presented in the DEA and the Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA). Response 11: In regards to the letter's statement that neither J. Curtis Tyler H nor Kekoa Nazara were contacted to provide, enclosed please find two email chains: one is between the project archeological consultant and Mr. Tyler and one between our cultural consultant and Mr. Nozara, confirming communication, contact, and request for consultation was made with both parties, Neither party chose to submit information to The consultant. In regards to the letter's assertion that portions of the "I-lolua Slide" may be on the property, a detailed investigation and analysis of this assertion was made (copy attached) and it is confirmed that there is no evidence of any slide being on the subject property. Comment 12: Next, the DEA only lightly touches on potentially important cultural archaeological resources. Although the DEA claims that no impacts to archaeological resources would occur, Kona Vistas Association. Inc. is informed to the contrary According to an evaluation and analysis performed by Tom Pohaku Stone, substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject land parcels includes features of the Holualoa Slide, including rock walls that are inadequately described as agricultural Walls In the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. Response 12: In the email provided, there is reference to "the portion of the holua at the Flolua Inn [that] has rock walls on both sides" and refers to parallel walls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31 182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 walls which are LCA #3661 boundary walls, Primarily, Mr. Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhou to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuna. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of he'eh5lua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the near coastal region. However, the complexes are located more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal, sacred ar sociopolitical complexes, or a holua, within the project area. The existence of a holua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Store. As discussed above, there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, ar archaeological evidence to suggest a hblua course existed within the project area, Comment 13: The steep topography, historical rapid stormwater run-off and associated damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the draft Environmental September 1a 2021 Mr. Steven Strauss Page 5 of 32 Assessment. The draft Environmental Assessment does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood_ A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future, which would lead to unlawful project segmentation, among other errors. A bare conclusion by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At a minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements are required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function. Response 13; Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the two County -owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revised to clarify that on TMK (3) 7-6-21:19, "Infrastructure during Phase Il of the Proposed Project includes installation of ❑ culvert system along with utilities and roadway across the ditch to extend Kekuana'oa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the KCDP "Official Transportation Map." For TMK (3) 7-6-21:18, the project includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this ditch and includes c road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector rood required by Ordinance and the KDCP's "Official Transportation Map," Figure 2 hcis been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three LLC would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by DPW. Tent has been added in Section 3.3.2 of the Final EA to identify possible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA. Even though the finch design cf the onsite Drainage Plan would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed. Comment 14: Once the three areas identified above are property and fully addressed, the cumulative effects of adverse impacts in these areas and all others must also be addressed. Response 14: There has been no substantive change in analysis as a result of the comments above. Cumulative effects are discussed under each resource in Chapter 3. September l3, 2021 Mr. Steven Strauss Facie 6 ot Traffic Supplement: Summarized Comments and Responses Summarized Comments Responses Failure to address traffic impact within the project area, The internal study intersections were not a part of this TIAR; internal volumes are expected to be srr u I and not cause significant impacts a- intersections. 1 growth rate as opposed to the 2%than used in the Witcher Engineering TIAR, A better comparison for the project's numbers ore historic HOOT counts rather a TIAR done by another engineering firm. Our counts at the H uaialai (north) intersection were compared to HDOT counts between Nang Kailuo Road and Hualalai (north), The report does not recognize multi -best generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii It is the professional opinion of the traffic engineer that the ITE trip generation is the source to determine the number of trips generated by the project, as it uses (iota points from existing developments. Without justification, the analysis cannot depend on the use an arbitrary number, i.e„ 3 vehicles per household. SSFNt traffic data seems to be lower than the data in the Witcher Engineering TIAR. The traffic counts were taken on different days' which can vary. However, the data were taken an a typical school/work day, or,d is comparable to historic HDOT volumes, Recommendation for roundabout is not consistent with corridor. Intersections that satisfy warrants but remain signalized present traffic safety liability tor the government The roundabout recommendations has been removed from the TIAR. The satisfaction of a signal does not mean that a signal needs to be installed. There ore other factors, such as signal timing and phasing that could cause delay and bottlenecks, rear end accidents that occur more frequently at newly installed signals, and others, The recommendation includes monitored, and that a further study can be done for the signal. The recommendation for QK Hwy and Kuakini Hwy to be monitored is inadequate_ recommendation will be changed from "Future traffic should be monitored, and a traffic signal or roundabout should be installed if needed" to "A future traffic signal study should be done tca determine if the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection is appropriate". The northbound volume seems low. It has much lower volumes than the old 2016 TIAR. The TIAR counts ore comparable to the HDOT historic courts. The counts used and comparison to adjacent intersections are defendable. At Kuakini Highway, the NB departing volume is 808, and the arriving NB volume at Puapuaanu+i is 877. The NB September 1a 2021 Mr. Steven Strauss Page 7 of 32 at Kuakini Highway is a little less than iO% lower than the NB at F'uapuaonui during the AM peak hour. During all other peak hours and at ail other intersections, the difference volumes of the arriving and departing vehicles is really small_ Also, aur sauthbound volumes are a little higher than the historic HDOT counts, but our southbound volumes are correct os well_ Recommen a-ic r s or the c arrent TAR includes specific suggestions, but is lacking specific assessments on whether proposed improvements will actually work. Comments were provided for each intersections recommendations. See responses below_ Additionally, as stated in the EA Section 3.7.2 and the TIAR, these are improvements for consideration by Hawoi'i County and the Hawaii Department of Transportation. 1 . Queen Ka'ahurnanu Highway and Palani Road: This is an appropriate recommendation. Comment noted. 2. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Henry Street: This is can appropriate recommendation. Quantitative assessment of the erased phasing is needed. The TIAR does not propose a change from the sptit phasing. This intersection works acceptably, it was merely stated that changing the split phasing can help the overall intersection 1.05. To clarify this, the recommendation for split phasing has been removed in the TIAR and EA, and this intersection has the same recommendation as Palani Road. 3. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Huolcalai jnorth): Roundabout is odd for this corridor. Intersections that warrant a signal and remain unsignalized are a traffic nobility for agency in charge Roundabout recommendation removed in the TIAR and EA. The signalizatian of the intersection should be further studied. The sa-ifaction of a wan -any does not mean a signal needs to be installed, 4. Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway and Huaialai (south): This is an appropriate recommendation. Recall that the NB OK Hwy volumes may be lower in the TIAR. See response to comments above about traffic volumes. 5. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street: This is an appropriate recommendation. However, it is not clear if there is enough space to accommodate the waiting queue of vehicles turning left', The recommendation says that this intersection works well, but lust in case, the signal can be acfustecf if future traffic patterns change and signal retirning or modification is needed. 6. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Royal Vistas Roadway: This is an appropriate recommendation. Comment noted. 7. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway: This is a weak recommendation. An intersection that passes more than 1 warrant should be a priority for study and design of a signal for instaliafion. A detailed study and p:on by Recommendation hos been changed to recommend ca traffic study be dome for installation of a traffic signal in the TIAR and EA. Sep'cr}ber 13, 2021 Mr, Steven SiraLJSS Page 3 of 32 Hawaii County is needed, regardess of KV development. S. Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and Lako Street: Quantitative assessment of the improvements of the proposed phasing change is needed. New Synchro analysis has been done and added to the report. Table shows the delay decreasing with protected, protected permitted, and permitted phasing. 9. Queen t:a'ahurnanu Highweoy and Kamehameha III Rood: This is an appropriate recommendation. Comment noted. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document, If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA. please contact me at {808} 494-2089 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. rich e le.lefebvre4sta ntec.com Enclosures cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department I. C. '1• '[,:r 111 joi: l.L nxi..r'•s arlaxl.cum Tu:O1ziil 17,s,:o11. Wed. 119 at 7:4$ P4.1 ,A1,1;1ha C,ilCIM1i. "tns, I ,rar, in in .1.7.S_tvhcr niv wife Fled Ian! wrapping ynp some nwelic;al crinsnits and husilksi Intltt r5. I will be hack in Kona and u.vailable to talk with you the week of March 9.. In the meantime. 1 will review '<tt9r ua hinem. 'l1tank you rot contintinia, to keel in. in the Iocq tni; this Irian r.1 nire3:unle vou have, aim) done the. same with Nieol1 A htti hoes. - On Fret 1 M. 2020, rit :3:34 13141. them" Fsvoit wrote: %.1:,11a c Curtis, Hitlli \ 3f1 (10i11,,! 44,2q1. 11 board you 44, ri, in _\ri7oni. i`T'c iii''* kLondUt'li1lL ;' i`L11iL�1`,ll 1l 1I.:lir :Ln,cs,111:111 I' i 1 i 1511L;:tol.k's prc1tlaty In li1111.1:I1na laL. North ltin[rI, it in+lLI LL talk [Irt}JL-I1\ with LJ I1LY[]rll for xv'h14.11 41i[l oonstilled an tli flea.c..ke the attached C.'l,\ r:uti:;t.tIt;ttc'rl rcLlt[c,t For 1;oiI I!,1-111.1 l,Iloa 1;Nt. Nlurth 10'01.$ �Ii' alltYUtl. � �. 1 ;,ir,1A (t;ry 1II lr-1llit(01) it' •11 ,1111 ? I):a`•I 11r I 111;. , lid it iliac:ilk:0i in i'ltilltiailoo laC plcus4: 1.1 kminiLtit IIID 1,i 4s llttilt,. l i1i il�! Ntii Lon. 1 1„ills Rq21. 93/4.094A Flvltuilon 1 CIA. CL1ntllllL L..ette,pdf Kekoa Na2ara , k>aaararr .gnail.coan - "folfLiterin Iii Wed. Fch 19 au 1{1 -Is AM ltit &elm Will do. lly l'the way 1 dad Iind one other contact for that deal and i)I.itiR project. I`ve Keen ss hu.se 1 hit en't had a chance To call him tut 1 will this week and get back to you thanks 'Citi Ihliii ITN iPhone I elh i 211211, 01 12:21!i I .I. (ileum l iitl gg,c,scot 4 rIn,tu.coaii - ►vruli tlahu r Kalaa� Nilthalo foroin.iullini [:•n the 1]I N1 kola pr.,1 ;i orea in I1]4n 511i .'r.hulaua s ll WLI stax,cl t6, talk shirr roach you and lake,. 4'4'ta un: Llindtidiing another CIA in 1 010/lira if you are interested m cony,llirtg on i.*tuIltnrul practico. al tho project tiro] lanai_ I'I�. r lice the carr ultatian requelt for lan& of I Iolualt*m tat, North Kona if you you l:n } e h.is intr,rniati ail rept-ding past or ongoing cultural praa-iicet in 1kInaloa 1+t. let colita.:1 rite to 4orthuli '\Iuhirh� Ntii I..KL, irlcnn. C.i, 1:rteaLt. wkT7l[1r : lrcltucrik)gtst Scientific Consultant 5arvices. Inc,. Srrr.tiTLF'w CoN,i r [.. i S1 u►Lt-[.,i t $37 }.,i1q'01-J@a 1301110t'Ird Stl11t Kit!, Front lel Lk, HI N.NT•I IJ;1w i i hind calTh.c. I4OI3 19 ° kw-a-rar 1E967-19 Richard L4huelncL Kona IAree_Ilk' Rid.:Y.I,;e:Ls°twastat.dlt i1r�t 1 ti_ 1.. <11}7 1 I I0'20I9 IRE I"1115111x1 i►'r111w Moe :r5.IL.1+1-37-.HI5r15,-.111v!r411, anLl-31187 (IFr+itaalrw► "!�u1ixt3) '1h11 11II 1. t 1x', F' 11I1i ti+111 911111 ,'rl+_6°,, 1 1Iv ;heti Ur. 76,122 3�.4're% /of Lannii.. 1114111111111M 1 ^1 I111I�111 Y'aI. 11.:IIIIIS1 korai. Iwai11r1 I5t.i1141, IMMw►s1i1 Iw land 1 I'+sr-rirrrtn iif TMK: (3) "4-021:IIL( Limit 01'tIwlr.}I. AI11htt t 1thc.Nluta9. AI tL1:.I1,;tIL!L,h. 11t'111111L t".',',I;II lnl Ser41'21:,. Inv a i1'.!+I concluded u 4!!1,`. Lll pt1rr111C1 will u:s hrunk...I .r 1 SL'1a1 1,1, l l 1 1i Ikliru",'ti lit 111(' 11111ti1 11eLitll llr +11 r1'1x I,`1re1 is l'I1rt (Filtrate Ihrrnigli Fig= .;,1 19rt :,I'tiu,L'rt puhliti 1:4'r11r11L111r :..Whr11sIL d Irr fe',1rnarmr thc Iirn#lr 11)1:A..1 In. [nrut 1al:Lr rI;1 rCL ,art Ili rcti Ies cot/null], 111:Il r o I)F,A mid .•r, 11. ic„'I,7211.1i ,:u.,flrtt c6tTIGittetet1 wa 1al,,n INac llraTle t urea did not t11LNrctiti 1h� crltirc pm,jct'I 1rd:1 1I1L1 °hi! LIi r.: I • an anion itf)hlti Aide 4.i thin the prol.ct men that oor, 17L>1 rL`v.a llLlwil in the kirc11:1ek-th alv:r1N Hi LAIC -A Pntivet `+tuella•% There wwera three airi:h.Ied'l+'+wrc:11 411C1r' cnndmied ww4thsn the 111r11 prevjet•I are 1 Figure .1, IL-inihl"r% N 1I1rL}{:G11 1j I.1t11,1, of the 111131L-ti1 area vh.c,r4 I.!act! ht 11,Ii1L1LIIkl1 eI .Il. 1 IL } 1 i ce 1101112 1 h11.1,.14 11 iLIL: 41.11 rei 1tw1111III the I?+'11Il1cfli portion rl 111 111,^ N!:i+rlrlr.11[ 41 11 1 lvn+l2) 1' \IS 11r4:1 1l',4 _\I~• •Ilul; crh+nlrplived Ni.10') :h:I'L,n OF I,51141 11,11111110 the :ulrL'I11 I}1'1.11east a1rca1 Ion; .rI4 1 174IwweL11 ;ZIP 1,, 1'1L11 Ic•l.:1 cL5 10 I(L It1cI1I ) iITUS! I 1 hl1,. 1 41 74-1.21 +YI V• ,laid 111?j. N'hwe Acrel ;whin the i ..1 s;.r ,''t the 1)1:A. 11hti"II1,k%! 1111111.7 A1'< St1,11 w Ilk' VI Irt• 1111}jtvl arrla 44914 !tt11111 :10.I 1Fr a1 petIc31111a131 str e!. and L"ltlsll ow; .nellau^41I J (Lal allex 111711: 1t•;L+rLl4xl 111 ate AIS rrputt 1 lir 1w1'i4 ItU he)ista IGICtitified iii II'lsal 51W(I}, Ilar: MS PILTUr1 rWl;(7t1I1114'ILl14YN n!s furtlicr u xk Lai all :1 wglt�s, Iigurr 1: S.$OC K..-tiartos Nitry of Ilawni i Ixland Showing I c+cation of Proi xt ,:iron (National Geographic "hkpo'. 2763. 1.)kata Sources. ? atit+atal ricw,eraphic Bode-, USES}. 1 now, 2: 7 r sr •.s 14/ar Silo,. 41 I r 12halit Apt,' :40L1en.N. 1 'SUSI 2 i• illrr Pr+,46.,1 Aria. 111,A;1111;ia, ITE, Nor*, 115%145 m L. 2; Trndn m N 201,1 Imatib: .- Wiriltgat. SDA, I 'N4IS Fat Wry J; T k-! Nina, harks L ni.h [r; r. •, r.; ln. '.1• til nun" h.`le t lie WI.,, 4Ltilv1r51I11046dl Mad., `-11,12,Sc ] I iwa 4 .LI I R:p:rt;irxF,'sis. 4r.r.1 h:alllki4,;.aljhu;d.f•SR[.;;J].).Ung•;•,.,r:.s:N.ul•rn.i]Lre,p4aliClc3cockt.l'SGSI. 1r iJ1,2 request of the Staid Historic ric I:trleun'ati air Divriston (SEIZED . additional da l•lrrtl4ni,'tlion of Sites 10q11. 10012. 10(131., 10049, recorded in t ,c Harriman e1 al_ t1992) „NIS rTrnri, 4111.? out mitred to ti11PD in a letter reprwrt (Harriman and Shidel ['J(F7)1 The Harriman ind ;ti11id.24.1/4.1 I'?FH)71 letter report quoted the -Xrti rettlminendui'm that "a11 surface Mies, in the area wer.2 r_iocirrteniedl- in the .1[ report and that -significant. maleriat from the stud, area has lleen re --covered and that further irlti:siati.:itr. rl would he of mininittiit ,lraldtietirily" t.}Ennirnadt and tihrdrlkr 7007:1 I p 1-iowever- the ,alta s,-ir��. ,t .! (hall prior to future rntk.wal of the sites, they 'tr.}uld tie relocated k doeumeni their a arta(: eorkliiion :mut iii &winning sate* 1,5 prevailing 811 PD \D rl a tilarkk Ila .t letter to the Cu.MItV r7f I/aww•ai-i ll.parirvwnl Plrumin * d:u.ct Julw 311 2018- (1..o.13. %Y} 'it I K.1 11X71 Div, No 2018 00878). 7l ), til1l'l,1 re[pweS1ed 1 944:kind .AIN wllrYiw or the Hammitt. el :11. (1`_l92) project area to identify all nrcil ola}g!Lul hi.l . n. pr4.p<rti., present_ maul to update 1+rcvinu4 :trehakologienl da+.-irmenl[atirwn to itre'Iudc sits plan4 '01111 sats houndanes and areas impacted I}4 !}kYIl44}f.19} pliirie}gr:lphi of all rir."J and. 1::irure•-. ria or their rniegniy., L1114}'�'i1c si paI'LAE,: it- Sk'S L intiit- SC'S i:uniplelei .r second AIS %Indy or " 1-1 ,1:r:, -1' 1r1.,rt l .11:s 11"\ K. al 7-1;- 021,116. 017 (pix,1. it18, and t1I91 (1=;iri'eolt and I. Y.r ; ti-sJt „1 rll[l submitted a &Ii,ilt LIS reliirr1 t„ Sllf'C} IEIr review Apia oval the 1C1}irrt jIhILYL1.,1 ,I 1,111 k G ,r.r.. in rli w*utIi i 1.',11 1if ,,1. the 11F.1. I}rr}iY I arca. Tire entire project ares %%xi siitii.-terl ton i desiti tri :11tH'.' .Ir..i 41logl.,il tit(.-, %Cie I.01arell (Figtu.. 51. 1 ww^r} til 1115' prew'i5rlmlv documented wl1 {witi 11•,u20 ;Ind Site 1I:0.'.1.) relocated hi SC'S rMl nt}lura! heli ocly 4Mlllin}pc fhie wi1e.. fonli,r NIli '11101 2 ra.i (.bated !umiak that were reirilierred }}II-pY1,Y1. 'I lr1 144).;. Iii t4iur renl:ttrrLlri; ISr<4 i. Sri�IS' 4Ii'LB1rr14'aaL1:1i ,al A 1!'1111.!; 1001.7 (hitt 1(I(49. and lar)7, I1 were bul1du4ed prior to ttic SC Il."1L7ti41 ii and tik' ttrllwutL, ..ii iliw tilt.', Mr: liar 'Oak: r 1rr.'x4l1 tin the ground rllltlrrculrrenled' Ili, wac clocurneill4•d... including a portieit 4)1'elle railroad ham {Bila 30592), a +utail 4ufree she'd enclosure (Site 311:11 t..vtLI s.-4.nd mulch ww•u l is 61..4: 1 11121 I here 5t' ae r1V rets anttm kir at ;'Slaw Ill th41 proiceL .1 111114 .114Il .eget and F24.0.)t1 7ry1X, r GS 111.3ir4 rated :21) wart t,csr,citu:led tri the 5.01 aY it r:.>ia;lY:,,•,; 'sik, I'JY: J}J?^ projeet ..uva 11 `51 Ew 1.) 7-(-L121 017 (par.)I tlwat wl,.ab. Ilo1 pro:ion-1y rtlLclr.'a 1 11+' , lrtir. 1 r,^,, 4 Leda wra: xuh',.,1.d Iia a pfcric,Ittiiti id.kr.c - anti ltwetltw 6wwo to"ti ut�ar.11u i�:11 LIR (I"'igun: l) wWrc recorded. 1}riiil.LfIN agricultural eomp1. an51 icrrnees r�yrxirlled ww tall 151.'r oiII hm rrll ilirrtup!,h, c<rtlV I,-1 1 "i1 is 1 .13 1.1 1 11,1, :5 .•, , i Lin ire yc. ww;iII!"i aid Cn.'I"�'+iIT.+. :r Ilrw :i 'I. I .Ii 1, I !u.1 ,1 r• ,•1 1'i- "! r.sllioad 1.[I}11 •SLlY::iI•.1l di1.11lliwerrtsil in Illy' I.1 • . , .ilk,.l, 5i : is .ii 7, .I i II',, a.a ,i- ,flit 111,0 railroad herrn. `t7s.'*r. were nil rental,: ,1 1,:..1. 1 In:7 11.01 111.I6A11 RA ,iirmatiememeeligliditA "silk. cT� :iii -10 I.MS 1,111 44411 IOW ri H X14.•G 7.S-gLiY mN...:rt ! L S'4.75 i.+oopt.plu: Harr Shn,1,31I:1 au4AYt+d.'0-4:iSia,!. -.II .Ct 1,1; 1. l'14..-; '..:.I I •k -11L S11111;',7!, KaIIL11341 1 1 KEN' .• nal Ect ARIA - MIE MADAM I RAILROAD BVID 1 ROCK Y•'.t1.1, /A 2. 01' FM UP '0111 Ivo 1-V2k111.^ I•' I iT.,:!I.1 \ 1,1i1 ,1141c.1 L— 1 E LIS(; Evidence fir ai Mr •r^J:,,lr.rr: C.'rlurne (iiahrra F1c+CMa) �'. .. .r Tteq Eaa, ZL:.11 • : r .'--;rtlrG ht9r'1r?] is a lc 17F'. very straight course on a slop,. 171 i'c73i+71 i1'.' 1. '-,' I,°.'I 1':1. 11 . .,•FIT!Ce SS'ltl'1 ..,.1.611 and pebbly 1owl:fiII 111.111 itilll; I •,II LI 11 i.. 1 . 1 :L. 11y 1 faults IIt17rt. IIi 111v yiitlal.. i t Oh: 200r42 wills gra,. ;!. • 11 d in i.i h. L,rt. '.. 4 very smooth and vcithnut hump; h4 this itl4tlttt't( #)1 41oi.11 :. L: [il lti 1114 i..1 1:- ,11 idd}IJlri .;our...<s .'a0 13:114'81'1 i°ilititlll appear as tiro stroighl smooth et h171.:t4t and IxlllldensL Th. 1 range in 151dth from 15 feet near tlw 1.p. rir Hi:1A4i7,, I?I'+x.11 i„! , i t htl fed in 4tiWili timber Ck,,7ww'n 1111 c[tiil`iac I lit; I:11r.1_`['coot.' Ih.. L•}LL linens 54.171E"t deprota,o•le. 117 Ili. L;7Yllti7L1 LaLi.`w tli. 001.1 W.l:'14 „t 111• .I,'•r.14 rl. £'Ilio. 1i'r}117 E. 17 •-.1rfao,. ^'1 11 ,41'711£; 1111' .[6:eti or r; Rn :114 11':Y1.w 11.I tti Til: I IL.' ''mow +Alai titled the edge% ...of the 6:411JI' h III tia. me .E •i th.} tv'a*re Iill.L] Istel with rook, In l tlrrh Ell,' .l.,111C'4; 11:- tit,luld appar a'1 wsllc extending ;r:: .'•+l:ri 1110 atolls 1wrr. not 1'L}I1strueied t, a •11.d1 mien }ten renehrrd 2peeds sirt7ight and no 1in4d viith noir,. to ritIcro. + # ick_ l itic llt 1.111 .L '_L rl :'4,_1 ,.,.•UI4L= :'-'A.atcA1 irl 11.'rlu-t1ILis I • .11:.d ?•° _ ,1.11-L,i,.l ., 1, 1'.n J uJ17 C'frL(+'%iva '1,L614 11i71E1.1I0.=. 1':ILI''I.LLL~d iN u 1t175L? Ind i4!ul ' 1`.11. LEI Lf! i 11 i' . PI% the 34�111:L1i} 1 1r '.t L:17+It5_ •"I 11111°:, 111;{�: 1hw .1 b.- ri.i ,L,113.4 1111 r114 ,r 111 ';!tilt+ 11.4.1 14.:1„I1.i Yt., ,y It► sating •'Ilii'..' ho t1L. 4'lI I:L!.. ,,' 11��ILI.iI•.,a Illi ori Oil k,,1 the I IaLL1iL; .47dIt4T ]t..ni 41..1. ival hwiIut1 slide 1liat ttavc'I'w ,1.41,1: 1,11,4 through the .IiL.L 11.1-,rtni_„ thorough tour r1r:+11::•;t it 1I,7ILtl.ao lust" !111.1.17\ 5,41114' ll•,hl:i,l4,.6iiu: tiLHtt IHR1.,11-.+1-t1Yt•-17..111:,-~.Inde' 1 Their Amp .11 the 1i111 171 •,1.'.71•, latl elto 'l). 1Yietett1 111,ILL.el.1a Irak! (I'I«d1Tt 71 II i,. ei1 :Ioar if the rnrrtrirrt.'.t,,.,1 .,t the t .Ltilrr :Ia :1 hiiillrl l4[rurto4 14 ti:76c{I Irri L1raYl Ir.iLhtLlui •1,r x11177.' .Ilh.,r 1111,'11FY.lil1`n I11."Lt 1• Ya,, 1111 LIfl74nted oral ltivtur).:ushio;r11 LIL+4tiiittnri, cs+ :ai'.lwltitllf7 Ir :Ll ,,lu4It wr .L- i nhlrllg 1.t I1{tratil 117 1111.. 1s.. _oi t i1 s71 Itl 11t31u4lll„I rt and Znwt ..liealstiat`a lite Lunt t1t[L'iaxljiwLltt Y.i1 :117i,..ihle hru'llo in 1 li.l7utlwiLl I"` and ?ed AThusintra'a la's included in .'q1 I.:+L thesis ht'iliutisa.ri hltllii•tLrli.lLtisi 4t�,LIw (174Shaku11 (Mtn*: T .I2) '_l Sr. Ston L. a1L aeL'4.1jjtpll,a11c41 Ilatv;a.wfl �.ultn.tud praetit1.4n.r `:. .Ih4uu. I11I.: `Ittirel!L' iii Mr. Stu11 `ai dciLl'riptiLatl ul' a1 pt .siblc 'Aral d cau 114L.• I 117,111ua,ltl.L lana IaL.operi) f"ulroll 'llti4 ua111. Edi emphLNrra 14 nliltl~. ., in tit. mountains :ilattv4" it,'ul/rcrr. Komi alert arc ski/ t1114 r'w: til11anI X571 1417at tR:a. I,,•:rl7Jpi, s1 grail Alli. From 11 ht.h !ha arca g+.Kx its name Ilditcaavci!. or " Alta lung Jnr lua slid.' '%Ite ittt SliZ,:Lllilirl Lil rloi% aired fi',Itftl .111sI .1 11E7tt11 pen -lion 1;rt1b ..,1111 ..1. iri ,Ill .+IaI i,rtTer ii ld melitis tit,: Ur,lrr.rlia.t I.ra M.. [Ii.,I11:1117.: brill, 1.4cni.d juNE h.l41t 11i,:stone, No nue far,ilul' rerntrrllhert alar ita'itEJelrir^xt rxr Elf colt' 4frarir.0 aherul Jr Irra7117 1171 1L7. ail in Unci from ttTi iI w. Inut4 .w1 1.]1: Iti :uiIt w1 slide 14.200 fcLt) 1 w.Niim11i0 iTh1 Jhrii• • • • "Jr.b...1J • I.,. 1 ijurr '7. 1 .j I-rn rI.Ic11 I IC,4.1.111. I. 711 Clulnalm On, 11iLti.° 11,:..11 1i:i nht7re in length, with a width r,rn;'slii I:r0111 7hixlr IYi I..,.7t (in Ill, .irc.i , 1 :ifi;- ll.l+li l:`:.Ir . int nt' to lroidthF. 1 hri +L11,41(101 the slide. l:ieeau•~c 7x11 7Atlferr 5egilleflf -LIT k 1, iri' it iw dit1-1,1A to determine whether the slide hail ;IP n:`crJr'J aar mr if it W ITL narrower (f reaTter rrtrplrartrztlr•2• L tam there are LI rr L1 ntemptorazrn' records al its arigin. fline riRf one. or When +i a'rtlsr'ri to he 1uee! ,I Jrrattuti how'. Mar it Fens. rumored re d la have aeXlisted, maid t'JtJt JrrrJ arra' tel Srr o sire illpet7trrfrt. flat_ LhL , r.LI tumor.. ;It the Ir;Iand. is extert:15'4. 371151 IL LHHJII i_66..w ionic (Inti to prhJtp anew, :r a .limit t11_1I .ai'IkY.rllti rr_r.•urtls some if1I11!ourilflll i Yore WIN !di[kr. [Marne ?Air! 1 111.1171 .rwtt.1[T tlludi.*t tit.'r..r.1Ll.Iu. i d on the Mina lrrul and R.L161in in 2004_ N.ee l fgtur57 4 Audy .) and tsrs C11 1t1ir. 1-IMtia.laia Inn property ll+lcchtrnan '_! 1 I ::; 1 iL`;L6ti: 4 Study I3p: the funnel' AIS slutt% i1_12.siktis and R...'Eiinrhn 2{%1.1) 1.11:rwlit.tL:tI L.<<tnnitrlr tar the Ii1 Ja:s:trall feature determined that n in an [Ilgturic era road (Site dSU-ltd-;7-24:1 I i 11.,,aisedan the ,.SriLI1l #i+ell And :mr.rtni.'tit5lt nI th+: soir, lln,torig 4T:Y nlripwrmadLiisr•411L1 Illy ttltilLnrii l in location: bawdu.nousultaliorl 5t illi turd wL}hnti lJ C7 Ll b% \a Ala.1kkkk7 Irr.i..20.104..' !nt HAI; dad tzah.d ern a 201.1-1 letter from the State .'ll. 1%1rL11z'Ye,. t_n.:rternI I.41sd l r_:1l l .,rlsttitrn lylt'i Ltt�fl :tit1an17LYau rar.i:LL7 11Yw' Iti.lnl, and ltrr.ltip l til Iii3turic rood 1i1.- 12,1113) rzpoo pra:lsar4J 1111 the entitc 1.I01tL:J.1st3Y Inn property slain did not id.;titi1. _1tr4 ,:two r'ilalxxl to a l x7.1:41.1 C41L11'ki (1 t•2,Lire ti) 191.• I liair,ric call I,o.Yd 1 tilt.: 7-67 1 I I Was J.trenincriled {Ikw11k1 In! !•:,,f11rr1.LYi 2i)04, hero.rc1Y [ 61n:,IasIYt.51t Ili LlIi l i\ ,1mILl 11i:14.It.LL 16,...1.1 41"I1!,1YI-e r)i I°e1' ,FL§ I II..:L tl r,. iL I, dant 4.c1. �1eai•;Ilt LYnt1 11,1k ri llu1$111rl 1 1 ,111111,•,:.rel„I: 71.1r11u at a;1ne li 11 a rL1 a1 1 1;:11:.: 1 .r L1 .0.lL41r11. 11114 iat'411t11r1 w1111:LL:'.Ii ih'I •1.,11'.11 In 111likL:,_ 11:151 it:1s,- .1 Int tti-f'IBi."h, .111111`, iY+•l vrt7cnt116, .Lr kt�1Y11L11L,: k• ll,;u1.•LI II 111w 1,211111'.11•, ,!1 ., .1r,JaCl !at}Ir.r.a it:::_rYrr 151 The Lh iili 17 rel 11 L.: road t. ;iit.'<I 1.1.:116,.. t1 1 v atia1 ". 0 u. I,'1 1 * !.'.. 1 1 c1r7.'ll, ry. 3`. It!, 111: 411200! 11, tit. the Vail ii'lttlll tII L1 -Liotti{ 11.5 164.1 11)4-L _t. .111'.1 b.L111L11.11i x+'16.1-1°1)., L the toad i14'LfJt[0.'4.1 1 11 inketur tet h1Lil h1 111: Lt :111” 1r. I,L•I eri alrk•iI.lLkitt r.xi,, IN :III+ It 1711 core fill in pla.'tK,. I'hc 1♦ ,IILL11_11 1,1 11ititu81. LAO lock %alb. cunNtr L.k .LI.11 Ilt*luri ,.i'11 It -id . pri•f1.r1A lttstttIJfl.i. [;u1Ll.n,_ ..n'.I ,..111 p:L,lut1L:.. 1110' Virt:7tL f.7t1 ternttuas iiI I IIhLorle Role' Su .14211 1, :11 111. hal-c coilutue;d ue/s1 along u trail ,11+.51%IL ,z I _', ..1..r 1 weh16J11 tent inns io1 that Irbil Iw .11 a I1tIItti ti5',LJII1 Lr:IL I .119*r`rN41np1. proJ1441 area. There are Lts i' iJliLta1L:LJ Pioti t ir'a1 l IL r`r1 Y 111111:; L11,11 I46Etiiri: mit I•irItrL1 I Iii l ll1: •,"LIt11,.11 '17ahInr i IT.YII 15;7 Li. L y, nii i, I I1 1111s'.T11 ill Clic 1'L11rLr1l l 1+11116 .Llrrtlr• il.c L1 !cll. 1,.1.1 Ile 11cv I I'9ilrIlf}d I1rrn1 44na.l?it1 tl h.-,1 ,, .1 1• a, 1 ' 11 .1.1:1191 Rad. tlliukith.. it t11'M ,L;1'ii 1Ir'4 9 and 1 f air. it) i. 111,: ^• "4.0 lli v-nt of the fll. [ha norill.Lrlllh trail 1:,ee Illi 1161':project air W.1 111. the 1)F. prt+jett area :•rrttl[I iratl.',11 +E� 41.If4""Or, "1"d11 iIHl 40: ',i te{ !.91kh 'ohne NVI 'Ili+' 4irr, °J" 10 0 '.4111•.1.11. SITE 24211 11Ii oRic RoAI) Mill"'•.r*r „lll'!�ra:w'{a;' 411 l %141, 14191'. *id wtxlr 1r ItlrlL 4J414. 1/21.1..40 'e 1 AP Figure 8: 1.161unkn Inn Properly Map Showing Loc%tieIrs at -Site 24211 lfial vie Road and _'irdrulwnll,gla-141 tiiw* I)45tilnn►brnr4`iJ lte htnijiii A1S rigi 11 (Rikehtrnim 2111313) 11 -„. 44-• • % r'irrrn ' !dumb.: r. ,a3,4 T.T.r,grdriLic L.p [ecrrhon 4n.131C£12.pC-11 '11.1.4. 1 r.IoJ Lril%ma , MktJi 1 1.411.1.111.M1.1 1] i 1.S.11.11 1111, 1• flr1 P 14 111 1 1111 q.r40,, 1111411 41 01. / 411 An. H.,. • • .114-1 • 1 011 • 1101 \ .Arig 7 f• - 17, L \ - ti Hill., 101 1."N II. kid!. ' !,11.44,10. I 111,141,, 1,41.1 I 10{1.. 11411rn.w.1 44,1 %,14ipieeo h 1 ▪ 11.4 1 711 tri 11 11 ;4.11 111', 11.111 6110 410 - - - - - -4?-7- - ,.1 • " * : • • - • , t Lo. [kJ . I W r • L. - ii Figsre T41F:-Y3d".-6-1?#1Nig, Miming t]nQrtrduinni`5itr^_111Hitan;Road ,1 -leaf $ImckLmeY. SITE. 2421'' HISTORIC YJ (IALR tea" as µ• ,41 • 41,11 x-. .,. m. •. • .'r..,.. a. • ..a • a r a ■ . .6 J +r• earr, A..+., '4 . 4.1.4 .1 .. 4e '414441. 4. Jaa. a. -• 1. ,n .e trmsn .. .M"iF t"I.,s •r ���'� "f °rJC I'irurr 12: k'?S tirlr,•o. Ilan of 1 ivocr (V►rooern} INArii it ,+l Slr, 24211 liworte R. rel [tilaks, IIu1u+►loa iddlo 111b.1Ii Iyi1 kio,d1 15 }ligkNY' !_: I'pp}i� .!It°a,'ti.. !'I.i: �,1 r+I7,:t'il.+-°�ni� '1n 4'� I \d, �-! I I t;t'�Yt11°I 111 1 R °�,7�� (?iona. 1 I',i I1u .1°.. - - - 1 F1214n J-0,11 I boo, 14,4,21 ;WI,. 1! Ftwe 15: Ilsaverapti QC St VI 1' •-- ri. 1. .1, ' • •- 1 q1 nvi rr1 r LookIn E41:,7 2011:-24). There L)J' ,ert.°oral walled gardens and corrals con the. DEA project tea. writ of the trail tertnrlltta, that ate nit related to the trail (see Tighe 9). The pastern gra, ofpm-alae! lvals Site 311595 and Site .1() )I are ii rt i•II.!.LI • ,rl•.. Ow e -t titt!` .I rl,c riiln d herrn indicating they viffe. built and us,i1 after 11 e.. r,i If.ai I5 -nu the wul1s are situ:kei - In•faced_ and are eahhlo con! filled ix. r' cultil:lri + d19.IurLr era Walls iloomnenied in. ilther places 1'n 1he Island.;•I' Ii:lwai'i "1 hock: th-,t insect the spate h-L11,'conlar 111irallr I wa1Ls. Finally_ the grt3linil n.nria,2et►cll1'Ccii 117C'waIIi Is LFn .o,l *IL'riped With natrrc Icolor kala±. fist 'n i level lerraa and t'4 dotted 01I11 bedrock rful_'i.^;, nL.f 141.is; hiAltt&rty. "the /Ink' oiIi_i' parallel wiilk 11 Lthiri the eurrera t}1' 'k priljtr."i [9[l*!1 LLrrL Sit._ 1I f �. t'4tEE1tirr 2 aid Feature i it .11, located i11 the northern and norlhenswril porr,'I+. f ",' 1 rr t cl ar & r_ pech.,els- f3 t s urs 4 .:n.1 9) These walls 21212 l::Waled ade<4F5: i i~ l Iold t 4irttfftkg84iLY1t ;iv, are, r1 4'.t.utitard..d John U. Munn (Figute 1tl . L1^, %.11i1e]L 1FL .I4.- i'It.^I.:': Ill 192S L,1.71'S Sia:. 111 le i''vitnre $ 'ii WA, 1'011111ax t0.1LI and rr. ttirL; 3 i> the northern !_L"_l bola la yialL The wegcro cold 1 .Lturt' 3 Lcrir.1 "_itv. ..i5 I''I 't•'rth hal4 t t .4s.4',t1ll nti c.h Arid theft is. a gar In the I i.iltir: v I1 .r( t]5,; LLLI,lt tt ille I4.1r:911r1 s,.,f^ I,,,LLIiJtiJ Luirf'+r% the y;4,rU[tit t4tub]. [!haft', into a L,,llt„II. 45' 1I.It F', :1 r7 rlrrllt;Llk 1114 r.4iL,:litF15 lc 't I,I•.9i Crdt, Ii ,L,r,J.,L tt:tir I F..iri,l.' NA:as ;1L L' iLsrltullt ved in .J1 \t$ renr,i1 i11i l 1. `.,-1 ,I1 •ir, .id'•1•}...ril r.r The nLtitl1C..l',t 1i.+4.inL1,51'. t'FOthe 111'. k. I'i,, l•.aI .}I CII `,r I Ilii. 1 y!Lp.14 t ), the DIA^, LI .LI 'I a terk.r( y. tC Lt IYYL1YtrL1 114 1c'.LLures all 1lisi,l4 Li,+ h,in,,LFS L11id the I 4 ...kali 1h4rr !1171c ji.1.1.r+4t.r+ii trail �itL•. rLI +ili1},,I ill dnll}.'.1hal .ILhLt 'here are tit) l9ul`l:i_e tc.ltiire +f ,l tin i ill, I lI l pr'Lt,L .r .LF .;a IIY,'t :xre 2axe14:1a6:r11 1.511/11 :t iireitoruu 4Pr tl" tl. 'I114` gttuuiLf.1 LatsL'tu.- 14Y1!Liii tai. LPL. i F,L.'»X1 .J . i LS L,I1:y'iIL xteppril 4,ith ii:dnti.1l izexllLx l�al�ti_Ilmirvc1 level I6'xraL:es_ :ti•,.l i, ti4,15w4' 1t1111 lleclrue(, and tit,5rul.l r' the ht111:r`': r011,1111% LSI a /Ohio 1.$01111d I5r 'n t,,•at.ii ii:.ii., rwxYlisllrlltill4 of a Iuftlt ,i i.! yL ,al•_ sru4ar>ll1 }'Y�Ir.Y1L l surt:F:i at eL>'Ixlsl,:a u111J 'lxisly' (hat 544t'iLld L'"'Ltr'1 t with the uneven LLpaLral}II\ IYi the Itlrttitvl u a .I Ll 99i)uli %er'<' uatry idvntill'. 'them FLrr Ilt) s;uc'h stiri'rw trauiaL:� ««uh1.11 lb.: I}1?.. pro' J.2t.aroa. 19 4.6.16 .n, A.yp ..r�1..I 11'111, 1115,1, .1111d 1]1.1: ri'. 11 ,ri.t l� il�, i� J ii_�,U 47� K, Tye 411.0111. 1j11.41 I )414 ML51.I1w,. 11110...Y.a,a1'14a. k.P.. k't x. 1. \f,\1 Response rip DF..,l C',rmnients Iswert ig lir Prresenceofst llrrkutr within lira Pr,.j.: t 41,:-a nu -- 1 „1 , L r •1'1 • .,n Feiruit J)ec tik�n, :ii'.i r r; srrlti" fs ‘rroc-hly Attorney Srr.III,- 1]g111fIL:; t1 c rrr.-r "I:,," li° 11.11 .uid rxrorr Fi.. T ponions ,eit' 11 , 1 t1 ' . ' ,1.•• IrofrlkIbre s1141r. I;ill.iltld7 rrtwk 4kiII 1il:rl 4tLYt r1 L"il idrntl.11,.1 ,1 II11...ircitm."Cik ienl <tlrCli LTs. It appear% IIsi rusptndi nic 1r r�tcnrlr , I 1, I ,,' !lure 3 walk which ;We LCA =.14-4111' M"ILIndktry 4+rill'. (hie t)f the L» s-cp. iidcr.i• r .1 .; inen1t i ,rt tlt_ Lona %i ii:s AIM() Ward, tl�rl, e.tmlur'le.drttr Iih,k11,,. y>..I , ,'t'",rt iI. I I'I', iI i t , ,L lu1} 1. -111°.I els ;thtiul IIi LI 1Ljsltsa hrili i Yllrri. 111c piii.i.. . . . .1,.11 1;.1.'1!111 I'I. •I'; it Mkt 1-11titi 11114 wlri;u1i. are c.varritrutric.lion.4 1'retw en 'ham lltr3iriiki1 '1 III•I 1.• I . ..,.-. r1 nrirtsh:r l,at1 J,s.^st rsl.+1 Kh:,r, thQ .tmrnI iddres?ior r Ilam .11 :1, :'1'cY,, •j, 1 'I .1, i (11111x ,'I •I' MWlur l,ro '1111 rwRt1 r5 LYI li1r: halt;, I rl,, 1 t:.' Iriri III -II h:r., r,•.k :,1: k , -11 .nl:.I : ..• •,i ;!i,.l +1.,1;.. ,.•.;Ellin the L16% el, II .IC:.I. vessih14" Sit,: .ii :ti: RnILLrL' 2 avi,L 4':Itlih are LCA 5..1.1. hL1i11,ta Ar', +.I I. kI'rl+rlariit:'_ 'tr, Sh.rl.2_1, a>ceuraie tY'1+;il'r1.111. �t a.+11�E:"'r7rc5�' Li;ti i:U111Lra1 .LI III, �11.1YYi.0 15h Sllc Ie,l.tl .LIU_I .1cll Ali ill! .1.011 lent^ _LI„tt+': 117w .. i, 0 I6k,'+3r- 4k)iL.Ii1 1,.;,i11.1.1. tll,, ,II,r;Li =11ii i,+7;hU11i1L. io 11'_ a,ILLIIX 1I1, 1t111,:1i1-. 151 1153714 Of tli4,: „ Irrltl *.` t .r tii l IYI.t1roF' 1 l t Ilei w hotaltuna. \Ii til.,r14 ,,ilknli. '• 1.`, 'I, r: V: •, tr9 mid I,L,i1L0 Iil llika11 .dh krl :t 11fA al a] it L.)iltiv:dioi111, 1I': , hla.i 117 L1 t•,. I,'j:1 It ti,Ji it111gj 1irw :inY 1 aiid AI 1I14 r1411r utwr.►lttl rr IuiI illy++tt:'I II':.•rlttl•Ir 1rr.:7._,1 111 .0.: 11.,111 1.0 k11 Wcy+t ,Il t11a 111' '1 1,101111A ;lrea _Lid ii I. . .,Iv LI.. ,_mLr `..tl r,[L:I ..r *.r,.. l•11a.r.11 t"dktjl7 li4t^x, L1j .l :,h;.'1, 1 5.5, liiii Ilio 1)1.1 111,1c...,I 1:, r 1. 1' a'..r,",.:Ili t; �r1 .�. i. �.••,, 1, 0111, 1lh: ! 11 r. 11rLt s<l .It[`al 14:1:+ ,..I•,._r'I...J t'S X 11 t I:,Il,riI I_ I1 11111 1IN 5.1: Slone. LILrL'IItnented twat 'I I.l .. 1 _ IIY.1 ‘1.• tit" ;la.,`.1111iFIv.I.I 41 tirttii' I+.r +r1lttpes.t ar Pti,(1.,., 11l' 'r I111`j.v nti;t �1 REFERENCES MED fleyiLcls. Al. ..11,1 1? !�4`.'IIr11s.Ir1 21 I- ;. ' :rit4"rrlr.r'L';TM rvr3' r T r 1i1':'rh'r recr'ellierr.Rood Ponnimr rrx !rrj- r. ' •. r•", •", •>,:, 1 [6irrfrrez'a .\"rzrdhKOMI.1115trrrt f;hind al k<<'a hl'.111.i61 Lf" 1 lr L•-(32-1-4 prep; ed for Curt .\, ",Yllrhll_ .Y 'r1:1 ll�t. P'r,7-.r liri 5. -tai ire1 f.ravat'r. find Rrerrion Peru - vales 1'11.1 .hril,L hprl.Jlatilillw, I ,FI,'!.I!LI I Paiv-311 1 lirck _ A.. 1. :Lr1,1 12 k<o.:hlmnii 2013 1''!'Frtr't.'[•fir, r±rf;,', Loi rlrae:l ;..i:,lr:''..il.af'i. Eta•. ,I.r:r,vii r...�n • ftii liquq1 l L L1.24Sf, krr.:I..Lr.:a I•_ r I dwArd RarL i:,. K. Ill., kona Lsc-Qt1, (*. IA7fl S. 201N jr r.•• :r r rf;N , I, ,, I'PT brahfid`fid " —:'..i'....'r. :Ir,. r,;:l ••r'."r, /1'a. +i ,..fe;; --.. �r. ".th fel =f.-iL 01— POLL Pf par,..L1 I 1.11. L '.L . 1•t- 4 Iti: ;+•.r1. 14-1. I1oIl,,Ir,ILL 20.2{1 ..11, Fr, r r I;r.';" e'cr f frrtv*.nr+rr' Srrvr.w• lfrpr't 1w -6 f _'J AC/V3 1-Decikd 21 HC32111 . tour 1 ° a. 12 241 .+ re�ytwJ'an ffrr�r�rer'r 11.q kkuli.l. Ill- 1-.1-�', sc h4purI 236. Ii'W141PuIu 1 E;!+hirll,ur. 11 11.. tk .11. 11,3.. ...ma T) tit Shideler '.JvtJ2 +P:r [,' rr• c:.+rr<r/PdEtcovaiirckerLePum'(, ��wrrliidirr. : r. tr11 .,; I. 1?d,r.,r� lwerared h3' Cultural Surveys. the 41:1Irilrl l [ Ir111ry1 alil,rry I .-jr",'I ",r11o1.!:111114SII1'1)1 ilwarr.li:Ijsr+I 11.181 rtILYk1. 11 11 1).W SiIaitider 17 i tillil" tio117rr'E '1i 111Y1Jlll lli :, a"}�.. ...r ..r,r Mfr(,."{ �� �o:, <<;T, prr. ". :,rJ!:+ tirI •f„” r* '.�.: r, - I Rtp,ri prepared IR). ('1111111..I 51114k\'b' 125131 Ik-:^,LI"y11.162 f'.Ir1111•r.• 1 1 (. 1.if7,"!: .11'1I4 :pI11I64 r�I' 1.i11rlili- i PHI. HI Y.Ik M k 11111;x1 1L1I1I i \�,7r7I 1111 Yry�.i :'bL . S"aale!.'x ,af rfrrl5.rl, 1 .A.,.^1: 11 ...I II -W..1 -.r Roclanlau. R. o ) . ! • Ei,"?` c?rthe I fNuaT..,.. • voperry, 77.6.-s! 3 •;) P. e)t(/ti krfttra-a • •' land Rochiir .1., 1 orisulthig Repoi RC --084111 FLAIL CromiL Lrn 1 • • .04 . t"*.%re 04 • • 1 1lt. t 41 4 Ii ijh.niiid Lthe 1T IiJ.i!.:1,1:‘,111 .1 1 IlirerN11). 11:11.1Mi wttiareinciliq tbr ili.,tiegre,2 of IN,Lisur iIArt% 111 PLA.ili.stuilt,2,... /3,410411u. 2.1 Mori. Ashle From: Sent: Tri- Subject: Attachments! Kurt White <thomaskurtwhitei�v�. gmarl.c'Jrrr, Thursday, Oct&ber Oa, 202Q 525 PM Planning Intern t Dail Ccrrirnrits on proposed Sub division KV Dei laration re rra#fiC-ron kv owners,ciocx 126987 L]E 'LARATION (J[ L 4°'11I1T., declare: 1. 1 in a resident of Sunset View -Terrace Lots still&ti isiun I. County of ll�wc ai'i, State of Hnwai'i, The proposed land development project that is the subject of the pending; Draft Environmental Assesstneirt submitted hy Royal Vistas Housing Piuje t 'Fax Map Key biers. (3) 7-h-02 i :111(-4 7-()-0217017, 7-6- 021:018. and 7-6-021:019 North Kona District, State of liawai`i affects me personally ally as well as affects my itilere t iii real property. 1 reside within 2 miles of the proposed land development pmcint priliect. 1E1 4i.ic l� capacities. 1 have firsthand knovilcdge of the iollowiyw, I ices and could and would tesii1y thereto iL called uj,an to do so. 1 hove iewd thi.0 petxding L RAF 1' I' NV1140NIML NI AL. ASS SSMENT including tlie'1raffio impact Analysis Repel t by SS FM Interri national, dated Jcily .7,02(1 [111,1 attached as Appendix 2 to the DIL'\t l LNVIRON ! 11'' '] .Al ASSI-SSM1=NT, 1 airs sp c,:ili. all concerned abotil adverse inif c impacts both withM aid without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the SSFIvl Traffic Impact Analysis Report. 'traffic e}r.1 iIi SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. are discussed in the l ody of the DRAFT 1'\ IRi).NMI-.\ 1 AL A : LSSMLNT- at pp. -1,8-56.67 and 7L ;- In the Kona \`psi:« tiLc1}4liwisi4oi7. the proposed project relies on the u.se ofa substandard roadway. l ckuana`i a Pl,ice. Kekuana`ua Place is very steep. has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic ririwiri from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the Royal Vistas Mousing Project is inadequately rultlrc- tial Ilk the SSFM Traffic lrlrpawt Analy2i is Report, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. 1 atn particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to iund front ra separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents alenti Kc:kuana`aat Place. 1 consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to :iddr.c;s these concerns. 4. The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT requires evaluation of. among confers, reekeise .kOVe itiao), irnJracts..rich il,c population change:, or efh'ets un qtr/. /ic.'./itciiirtcYs. Sce Chapter 1 1 -?00.1-13. Hawaii Administrative Rules. Instead ofsc u,areIy addressing these issues. however. the DR AFT ENVIRONMF: VIAL ASSFSSMEN''T simply ignero them. claiming that "No adverse secondary effects are exp erLrI since. the development lopment would utilire existing infrastrtrc;ure, prrlvicle irtlill housing, and is nut expected to result in substantial demands to (-'aunty services." It is a serious omission for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT to tail to address the potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of suhstartrlarLI ercititing infrastructure. Kekraarra'oa Place, The CRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT addresses ad 'arse frank impacts only in the context of whether the project would Hare u substantial aarfvetsc c; cc( On rahlr"c h'calrh. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Proj c1 would not affect public health in any way; stcyrrnwdter would be appruirr.itel,. disposed of in drainave structuresTraffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration it protect design." Emphasis added. This bold conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by i }-:ipr r 1 1 -,ria ! - ? .+, l l.rwaii Administrative Rules, 2 fr, Ihe Planning Department should not accept th` DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT'S reliance on the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which has the following deficiencies: a" failure to ackiress adverse traffic impacts within the lona Vistas subdivision arising from the project; h. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report uses a growth rate or 1 %, in contrasi to the 2% growth rate ..`1ripluyed by the 201$ VVitcher Engineering Traffic [rnpact Analysis Report. 1'r.iflic ccinp tion is very sensitive: ti rc v%tlt roto in a neon-linear. c ..punentirrl relation. The SSEM Traffic Impact Analy-sis Report dick..--; ra }l eee: iir�c iirulti-generational housing eilturact.risties common in Hawaii according to census da[LI ii d likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed preti.:e;a: d. The SSFM Traffic Irapa t Analysis Report etu ploys an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 Vehicles for Northbound ween Kaehunnunu highway on the selected elutes or April 31, 2(111. a weekday and August 21. 2(014, a Saturday. compared with the 2016 Witthcr Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which reported 1057 vehicles t,:Mr Januar: 14 and 15_ 13 lei, ncrth weekdays. The unusually lew reported vehicle volume CI S53 1, ilk.' at odds wi1.1i Figure 4 oldie SSFIVM Tratlic Impact Analysis Reiiort. appru*.i.il.rte'ly 1050 vehiLI per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 ami. The difference in volume is more than doable the maximum 19% variation genCrally accepted in day-tri-da} nreaaurenients and thus unreliable: e. The recommendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout at Queen Kaahutnurtu lii Away and I-[ualulai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor Intersections that pass warrants but remain linsigna1ized present trTte fei,! ;Lthi]ity concerns for the government; f; The recommendation by SSFM Trade impact Aitalysi4 Repor-I for ttftrttitrrriitu of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakin] Highway' is inadequate. Where. as 1LrL. elr1 IT 1L•r4ection passcK m,cxrc than one warrant under all conditions, it should hc privritix l for design cif a sira] tOr installation. This circumstance will he exacerbated hY the proposl'd project. f . In sum. the Draft Eiivirot1rii nta1 l sso: smerii wid SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report docs nor, lucent w rl ii4ttirt, crudihle facts and analysis such that the Etdverse impacts on e‘ Wing Ir 1Er.rwtrtictlre and resultin.' tenni increased traffic am he fully uritii:rsto xl and result irr rlpprOpriate g,uveriunent planning and reponse, declare under penalty ctrl perjury that the t'c regoing is true. l:)ated: KaiIua-Kona. Ilawai`i,IU-O 2IJ20. Printed name: rhotrais White Thomas 1'S'T1hxto 4 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Thomas White Via email: thornaskurtw ;-,,te grmil.com RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawai'3 Island Dear Mr. White: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumar7u Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place, I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase 1 as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -cut is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana `oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is rouanly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2021 Mr. Thomas Whfte Pace 2 of 4 Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them, It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place. the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: stormwaher would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design.' Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, und accurately summarizes the impacts detailed arid analyzed above in the body of tr,e EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance an the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR, Traffic congestion is vera' sensitive to growth rote in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Pian forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers uses. 1 T_ from the 2025.LRTP forecast. September 13, 2021 Mr. Ilion -las Wh[te Pace 3 i'' .1 Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics corn r-.. n in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response -Z: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with Nvo cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very law standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, o weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repoli, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAL, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway of 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum l 0% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Huolalai Road (north}. Qur traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if lege Witcher Engineering report is overcountiig, or if the project's TZAR is unaee:oJr'ling, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those f rov1ded in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North} is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumariu Highway and luakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than ane warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall riot in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where C11 September 13, 2021 Mr. T1iornas Whyte Page 4of4 an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many ot these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lerebvrestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Mcaija Jackson, County ot Hawaii Planning Department Mon. Ashley From: Jiro Johnson ohnson4 4 r`:.►outleok.eoma Sent: Thursday, October 08, 202C 4:40 PM To: Planning Internet !mail Cc: irlabapaci$ic@aoI.com; Diane Blancett-Maddock Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Project EA comments Attachments: kv De[I2ration re drainage -non Icy ovenewrs.docx; kV Declaration re Traffic -non kv awners.dao AIQha, Attached are my submittals related to the subject. James H. Johnson 76-157 Kamehamalu St KaiIua Kona, HI 96740-8937 808-326-4600 136968 DECLARATION OF 1AMLS 1 I- JoI INSON 1, James H. Johnson, declare: I am a resident of Kana Vistas, TMK 3-7-5-026.Oi 2, County of Hawaii, State of Hawai'l. The proposed land development projectthat is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas 1-10t15Ing project Tax Map Key Nos. 13) 7-6-021:015, 7.6-021:017, 7-6-4217418, and 7-6-D2 1;419 North Kona 4 istriet, Hawdi'i island, State of Hawari affects rn personally as well as affects my intenst in real property_ J reside v/017117200 it., cornet of terhr& and Itarnehontcykal St's. which is one of two access streets of the propused Jarrod development projecr In such capacities, I have firsthand knowledge cif the following facts and could and would test;fyr thereto if called upon to do SO, I have roN itwed the pending DRAFT FNVIRONlai[N.1.A l A"1atrwd atlaelume L . 1 .tiro spe ifically concent4'ci athoul maeaswxl tnitic. til ciesag!red for the w'olwaette proioci Leal Sr_ !rata l.erlticr Ica 'Ir{' rrinPl a rrtri'rSeeraiur, hal a downhill •f=r•cacld c tori c',s Fr) The rr7, Sign. llri' river 17 l'i'ars tliai 1 have P. .edl here, I hare iylr_snrtl.'r'd vehicles conn, to Ca&ar l .Urlarrrrrraftl. Church, ricolaronlior• R.rrlr t1'C ilrrti, r•taar the Stop.sign, ?. Thc. siccp topography, historical rapid stormwatet run-off and lissociatod damage I rescm hazards that are not arricgttt.itcly addressed air the Draft Eiivirocw eettal Assessment, Secy PP, then:or. 4. Addttiionally, 1 am aware that the drainage tired uta Crest Side vl 15 acre properly. collects wt•atcr from rr large area rrlbnt c, flu addition of acres of pavement and cltrjs collecting water thin ham"! hec>n a daetltwl€°ly addressed in Mc proposed proyeci, 1csraltirr�a a'rr;forl•rrsiop ' i.5.idr['.4 eJfi rhe 1ta +ro the acro! beyond. 5. In sum, tfre Draft Environrncntal Assessment do€s not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood. A proper environmental assessment cannot leave rneaninigEu1 details to be taken car: of in rhe future. As. l atn im-stand Ft, .such circumstrtnces ,icrtuld led to rilcnt'jl l project segIneliltilian, crrrroaao other errors. The applicant. in rfic current lots rerraarraing irr Krona i a da ~f. has been 'breed 1 rc build a c' rtc`r'e-te druinage .sruenT, diisgraisc'cl as a wall nith plazas ln, from, to rake care of current drainage is_wes. This new area would re aril to: r cldatitlrataaf .s-trsrr ns, G. A bare owlet ifl,inat by the applicant or accepting authority that needed infmtrueture will comply with goventmerit regulations is insufficient. At a minimum, the Draft EnVironitiMntal Assessment utast he revised. to show ectfically what in f'rastruc.tere improvements titre rcequircd to tie into the ('ounty s drain:v.4 system and liow those improvements will function, cic.'c:lar4 under penalty of perjury thkIt the foregoing is true, Dated: K<tilua-Kona. J lativ;ii'i, October 8, 2020, oUrr8 Prin[ed name: Juin's 1i. Johnson 2 DECLARATION OF JAMES 11. JOHNSON 1, James H. iohrpson, declare: [. I coin a resident of I'tstits sJrbeiiviNion 1.tJ 3 -'_6 -f)26 -t)17 Ctiurtty of Hawai° ii. State of Hawaii. The proposed land dcveloplitcnt project that is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas Reusing Project Tar ! lap Key Nis, (3) 7-()-021:111 6., 7-5- °21:017, 7-6-021:41K. K. find 7-6-0217019 North Knirl.i District. 1141wari'i lsla�ict, State of 1lawai'i affects me personally as w ell a5 affe, ;s rriy interest in real properly. 1 reside w•riii n +10 fr at 1.4'i!rura .fir )i )4 4.1 hrici rlrjis=rrluil grade and curve>.s to the Map Sign f. rrrrl Lake) t„ Acid r rr;tc•t 'c°<'irurr., plc mo fn the ei i tr• f 7 Years' Mali hove lived here, I haw observed vehicles coating to C''irl�1'itr ♦~'frmitiuttli iv (.i arch. tlftfarni1lett- wit d he ttr'E'rl, r-ttra the Scup -ci a ldistancc of the proposed laud development pry}iec:t, In sw h capa.uities. I have firsthand knowledge of the following Facts and °mild and would testify thereto it`called upon to do so. ?_ I have reviewed the pending DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT including the Traffic Impact Analysts IRepnrt by SSF 4i International, dated July 2020 and attached as Appendix 2 to the DRA.F"I ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. 1 am specifically concerned about adverse tratMc impacts both wit.h.in 4.1111 rwi1h iut the Kana Vistas Subdivision that are not Illy or accurately addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic. and th,c SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis f eporr. are discussed in the body of the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT. at pp. X15-56, 67 and 71. 1 In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed pr«jo :t relics on the use ofa substandard roadway, Kektiana'oa Place. Kekuana'e a Place is very steep, ha3 limited sight distances dues to extreme eutrvc S toad is ilrarmiaw with no sidewalks, No mention i, mares of1 c rl ori .St, which has the same issues with downhill s•I pe and curves, •4dditionally, this area hav more residences facing the strc e t Ultra the uhnve noted street, resulting in nwre driveways ei 'ays giving access tri the street l ltc 11fl ,tick cif increased tr:tlic :irking from Phase 1 and Phases 2 buiidouta ot`the Royal Vista Housing Project is inaik' 1 iiite1y addressed in the SSFM Tra1l-tc Impact Analy.sis Report, which focuses instead on iiaptich along Queen Kuahtitnunti Highway. 1 Oita particularly col -welled that adding ntlmerot:s vehicle trips t'. :ut l i ri..)rri a separate arate subdi ision ,vi11 pre viii ICII41 congestion n, iilonp,'„II'ti.C•kuana'4.1a. 1 1.5. Ori i!_t-/ rri "S't. I consider Haat tht I'] LmiI .L [}epartmzni should rccitnrc the.tppliu-'11t to;14Iwlr..Ns 47011cents. 4. 'File DRAFT 1FNVIR(:)N'v4ENTAL A SSESSNIENT rrquires evaluations or, arming uthern, etrly °j•sc' sec-•utadctrt• impacts, siwh trs popralearrorr circrrr es ryr a'1ii'ers trrl iwhirc See i"holster 1 1 -?(]0.1-13, I I.ILa %Ilk •At1miirl•Cr;itive Ru1c-,. Instead of squarely addressing these issues, ltcrrvcw'er, the DRAFT TwNVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT simply ignores them, claiming that -No adverse secondary effects are expecte...Al sint<ti the dev iopirient ‘vt.luld utilize existing infrastructure. provide xnt-t11 housing,,, and is not expected to result in substantial demands to County services." It is a serious omission for the DRAFT EN V1RONMEN 'AL ASSESSMENT tel fail ti acli1ra ss thy pot riiiui iinpac,ts of increasing the use or substandard existing i11ffrastructilre. take Kekiiana'oa Place and Leiiuni The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT addresses adverse traffic impacts only iii the context of` whether the project would HHa't ' a scabsrrailial at/verso ei±/ t nri public IuaIt . The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would riot affect public health in any sterinwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken Belg careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald condo S 1011 does nut address potential adverse irnptacrs as required by Chapter I 1-200.1-13, 1-1aL,ail Administrative Rules. h, The Planning Department should not accept the DRAFT E=NV11 ONMENTAI. ASSESSMENT'Srel unix on i1u SSEM Trailic. Impact Analysis Report, which has the following a, litiilure to address aulve e trittL trlrap:tcts'lathin the Komi 'iwl4r; sty}}t111,1s1tin arising IU,I l tIIL: I�r�wj4 1, h The SS 17 M '1rat±ic Impact Anal.ys15 ReIxprt uses a 1"?6_ in contrast to the 2% growth rate einplo pct by the 21118 Witcher Engineering '1`r,iflik: Impact AnaLy is Report, Traffic congestion is very, sensitive 10 growth r•ttte in a non-linear, exponential relation; file SS 11 1 r afti1 Impact .t , Snalysis Kc:ptYr1 does not recognize 1171ulti-gtnti:rtltior141 housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips asttnhutablc to buildout of the proposed pro,jed: d, The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles f r Northbound Queen KaaluIrn u in lit Oiway on the selected elutes of April 30. 2019. a weekday and August 24. 2019. a Saturday. ay... cu:u . arcd x iib the 30118 1Vi:elrr Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which reported 11157 vehicles for 14 ;mil 5.2016. both wcekdays, The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 201 fi for Northbound and t rreen Kaahuinarni Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the rnax.in um I O% variaitun generally accepted ria day-to-day measurernems tantt thus unreliable: c, I'he ret:ornmendation ha SSFM I-ra tic Impact Analysis Report: for a roundabout al Queen 1Criahur wiu Highwtav and 11ualal:si !toad {North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants 1- rrt rwmaira u64i -frarliz d present traffic safety liability concerns For the get ernme ti; f -Fig: recommendation by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for monitoring of the intersection ofQ7rkeea3 Kaahurnanu Highway and huakirli I iighway is inadequate. Where, as here. .trt kiltl'r 4'. ticlkt pi ssus more tluin (Inc warrant under all conditions, it should he priumitecl for study and design of a signal for installation_ This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project, 7, In sum, the !]raft Fnvironiueritul Assessment and SSFM Traffic Impact An.alysis Report does not present star kit audible facts. and that the adverse impacts VII xistirtt; int"rastructure and resulting from increased hall'', :IL be fully understood and result in appropriate p' ' crnrrent planning; and response. 1 do,:l:ri c um Ler li iI i} of perjury that the foregoing is true. Dated: Kailua-Kona, l awai`i, October S. 2020, Signature° Arix,r Printed name: James 11, Johnson 4 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stcntec Consulting services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494-2039 Mr. James Johnson Via email: jjohnson424:. outlook.com RE: Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Johnson: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I cam specifically concerned c lout increased traffic. Leilcrnt St. from l_cek° to the above intersection, has a downhill grade and curves to the Stop Sign. 1 have observed vehicles coming to Calvary Community Church, unfamiliar with the area, run the Stop sign. Response 1: Unfortunately, these events are not unique to this neighborhood or this pori of the island. The proposed intersection and minor collector roods in the project site would be built to County standards to ensure their safety. Comment 2: The steep topography, historical rapid stormwater run-off and associated damage present hazards that are not adequately addressed in the Draft Environmental Assessment. Additionally, I am aware that the drainage are❑ on West Side of Calvary's 15 acre property, collects water from a Targe area above. The addition of acres of pavement and roofs collecting water hasn't been adequately addressed in the proposed project, resulting in downslope issues all the way to the highway, and beyond. Response 2: Flooding has occurred makai of Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway from wafers in the County -owned Holualoa Ditch and the Horseshoe Bend Ditch, and as described in Section 3.3.2 of the EA the proposed project would rot increase the amount of water carried by these ditches from the entire drainage basin extending miles up -hill as the project is not allowed to do so. Comment 3: The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such that the necessary drainage improvements and diversions can be understood, A proper environmental assessment cannot leave meaningful details to be taken care of in the future. As I understand it, such circumstances would lead to unlawful project segmentation among other errors. The applicant, in the current lots remaining in Kona Vistas, has been forced to build a concrete dreiincge system, disguised as a wall with plants in front, to take care of current drainage issues. This new area would result in additional systems. September 1a 2021 Mr, James Johnson Page 2 of 5 Response 3: Section 1.2 of the EA describes the drainage improvements on the Iwo County -owned parcels. The text in Section 1.2 of the Final EA has been revsed to clarify that on TMK (3) 7-6-21:19, "Infrastructure during Phase 11 of the Pro.:c sed Project includes installation of a culvert system along with utilities and roaelmay across the ditch to extend Kekuanaoa Street, which would then be dedicated to the County as required by Ordinance and called for in the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) "Official Transportation Map." For TMK (3) 7-6-21:18, the protect includes infrastructure for channelizing a portion of this ditch and includes a road and utility system crossing this ditch to provide the connector rood required by Ordinance and the CDP's "Official Transportation Map Figure 2 has been revised in the Final EA to clarify the locations of the two drainages in the Project Area. Additionally, the text in Section 3.3.2 of the EA describes that Kona Three LLC would prepare a Drainage Plan to ensure that development runoff would be contained onsite. The Drainage Plan which would be reviewed and approved by DPW. Text hos been added in Section 3.3.2 of the Final EA to identify possible options for addressing the issues from existing flooding. There is no project segmentation since all the components of the project are described and impacts from implementation are analyzed in this EA. Comment 4: A bare conclusion by the applicant cr accepting authority that needed infrastructure will comply with government regulations is insufficient. At c minimum, the Draft Environmental Assessment must be revised to show specifically what infrastructure improvements are required to tie into the County's drainage system and how those improvements will function. Response 4: The potential impacts from these improvements are discussed in the EA, Even though the final design of the onsite Drainage Plan would be identified at a later date, the potential impacts from their construction are analyzed. Comment : I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TZAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEN. I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TZAR. Response 5: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 6: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substondard roadway. Kekuanaoa Place, Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inacieeJately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kachumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from c separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents September 1a 2021 Mr, James Johnson Page 3 of 5 along Kekucnaoa Place and LeiFani Street. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 6: Kekuana `aa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oo Place to Royal Vistas k not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -cut is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana'oa Place every 4 minutes tor the peak periods, which would not cause congestion, Comment 7: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however. the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana'oa Place and Leilani Street. Response 7: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project_ These effects ore not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA, Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana'oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna`oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic (22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectivelyl. The traffic analysis inciudes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 37.2 of the EA). Comment 8: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts 0111y in the context of whether the project would Have a substantival adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would riot affect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 8: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and 'Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 9: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 9: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local September 1a 2021 Mr, James Johnson Page 4ofw residential traffic. Delays lo these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 10: The TZAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-lineor, exponential relation. Response 10: Hawaii Department of Transportation HDDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Flan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 IRTP forecast, Comment 11: The TZAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project, Response 11: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will hove 10 people with two cars. or three people with four cars, or be uroccupied with na people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers {ITEJ Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R - squared value 'very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 12: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24. 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 109 variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Response 12: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Rood (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 I-IDOT count card was found to be fairly comparable, It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TZAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 14: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road {North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. September 1a 2021 Mr, James Johnson Page 5 of 5 The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumonu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project,. Response 13: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TZAR does not include that analysis, The TZAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre(stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: tvlur< Powell <rnarkpSO'Iart-rnet Sent: Tl-ilrsc rIv. Otto:Jo 08, 2020 4.24 PM To Piano r kiterrret Mad Subject: Royale Vistas Hou5Ing Project EA CDrnments Attachments' 1 c aal V6tas i -ab tat.pdf Fir e, Vistas Project EA 1.16969 []i�i'I ,ARA J ION (.)F FIP\BFI.1 ['"fl IREAll J f: f7: iiF:l{x.17 tit' 1. IFi)"a�'l'Il declare: 1. 1 urn a resident u1 Kona Vistas Stcixiivisio!,_ Cjtaritw of l Iawai"i. State l lawai'i. I be purposed land deve10.ptttcrst prg: ct that b the subject of the pcndiri 17rdfl 1.m vironmental Asses:An: tit stubtnitted It'4 1 c`cwttl 1 ist4is Huusing Projei:t Tax hirtp Key Nes. (+ J 7-6-021;016, 7-6-0121:017, 7-6-(121:018. and - r, -t121'( INiall Ktiwi 1)Istria_ 1 fa k;u'i 13huLJ, Slaw +)I`I-Irtww ii't at`tet:ts me pt nail+• 1 tiw•dl EIS affects ni'• inicr.:.gt in real property. I resic1L within liaaII- i Mile of the proposed hind dc-vc i'11;rittern project. hi eapate•iliI have tirstlt¢tnel kr ti walci] 1E7s i I:il+yin � I.t t� ..:,�1 emits.' and would icstify thereto it w: died to 0,1 3. 1have rc: [eti ;J the DRAT- 1 1 ., 11;i � 1'wshls['1"r I� ASSESSrsill.N1 It does rtul address the Ihrc,::ttencsl or t'ncl3n erej spetiiLt5 err Iia st baht tai I Ftave personall witrlcs.ed Hawks. and rhsls eu' ing. this property. 1 hey .appeait to tx liw"ino on the ul+per end ctif° this property. I haves •n Hawks in the LitI I)' tamrrtirtg Jiaiirs Laving this taller erceS rirt Ihe' tapper 41+14. Just heforc dark I have seen OwI: leu\ liar from the upper area flying over and tar the lower area Ic1'the properly hurtling. Also the 2tlt[ toot X 2811 root wide lw 40 fror + tall building: rrra} very well hamper or kill protected Ilawaii ut Scahird5, ('r}rnplere test for the Hoary pal 5hryulti hr dom.:. It appears t1i11t tltr habitat% iJI h trttallrr destroyed. Sound gest need to be pertbrn-t d in Ma> September before any destruction cif habitat. G -awn. the [raft inn.ni ent2 \ ' ' G ,r linpact Analysis Reprt doe.; na present k2m.cr i e bc>.6v iipsi %]tea, dVILA that th a]vb k[mpadx.m cx R(na Ha, iu E Threatened t Endan£ M cd Species 1dceEa?tinder permit,.u£eeue ma beA7oinkb Lruc, gate: K g1J6Ko a H L / \ Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. John Powell Via email: markip504att.net RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawal'3 Island Dear Mr. Powell: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: The DEA does not address the threatened or endangered species or loss of habitat. Response 1: The biological inventory report documents the species detected and paienHal habitat at the project site. The Biological Survey Report in Appendix 3 of the EA acknowledges the limitations of a biological survey of a large project area and the absence of any particular species cannot be warranted from the survey's results. Therefore, the EA includes a description of species detected as well as potential habitat for native species in the existing conditions part of Section 3.3.4. The biological section identifies potential habitat for protected species and the impact discussion includes potential impacts to individuals and to habitat for native species (including those not directly! detected during the survey). The impact discussion including protection measures to minimize these impacts to native species (including avifauana and bats) and their habitat in Section 3,3,4, Therefore, no impacts to these species are expected from the project. Comment 2: In sum, the DEA does not present sufficient, credible facts, investigation, and analysis such that the adverse impacts on existing Habitat, Threatened or Endangered Species. Response 2: The analysis is based an the presence not only of species detected but also of potential habitat in the project site, and protection measures are proposed based on the potentia presence of habitat and potential effects to the species. September 13, 2021 Mr, John Powell Page 2 of 2 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.letebvre 'stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona. Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From; Derek Inaba <derulaba 2)gmail,ccrn› Sent Thursday, October 08. 2020 4136 PM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: Royal 'Vistas Housing Projects EA, Request for Public Cornrnent Suhrnissiirn Rt v;al Vistas Housing; Pre?jcets Droll EA, Count) of Uawai'i Planning Department Request for Public it-oinnielle Attention' County cif ]It1wail Planning Department 11a %; ]lad the opportunity to see the Ray:tl Vistas 'lousing Project Draft Environmental Assessment. While it is 11Lc voluminous. it did seem lc inacicgLlatcitf :i)a,es 1110 rink to our rornt1stini1y in a nun1hL:r if ]treats. I am 1a 11h tiin1' l 1:14a,':!1F1 I.':iltd resident, horn arid] raised,, and I11v ulmiia ;irul I ;ire cry familial with the Lu -ca under rLiew Irti .0,1A! LE', 111r;t iSSLICS in and around] Kana and > ILalualoL I Luc:iewly Ilea In Iiia]{ini EisTa.les In \Vc,0 1 we have had substantial issues with water shclrt:tgcs and restnctiuns due to natural tactors and also inIr.isLructurt' `44'ithour numerous waiter well l:.LiILItL'' Lr7',.l 1L -pairs. 1n.fr stro,ALire 01i:LL`L'l11 111 U1*ntl IL and ili \ est H.L, aLlil ILIIl4 reviewed and s4es*ed Auld made til expand Ilii it 1 wilt"ll ;i 1;iig,e pry+• pet:ti i e dirvelop1Tment.' Additional infrastructure and required services issues need to be addressed at :.111 levels. it 1 lint cic;rr II..Lt an.„. cel ournorrTiall 4nfr1 :I11 ettureresr klrcc.s cera cquipp. I ,s1 .i11 (c+ handle large Condo dcvcl<ppm.ent and ill 11 LJ t11' population. 1 hese 111lratitruelare issues. ;tiui 14: "ti like electric, wafter, roadways; tair+;;lcly greatly stre;::cii iii this Luca), schools, and al. :-.euvi'.es(County. State, and Federal), 1 did not see these iinp mtt1t issues hilly addressed in the. do,bell nt, i'�ii1L11`0 tLt Fully identify and address these issues could resLIll in large backend costs nest initially noted or dctirftd Having grown up in floIualiclLL .11141 Kona. ai,L'1LIrlIIL' iii this- ,i IM111rttat';l. 1 aL11. very familiar 44'1;]1 the risk of changing rte altering land in any way and also related water flows and sheds problems. The lame aiddr ;;sed in the: Drat]: Ass rnent contains twee sigmitiQ nt waterways ant curre1111v Larry tw .stet safely w ty ft iii1 the L..+L.isting neighboring c timnu nittes;, llwater few is altered Iiorn the Efulualoa. DilL:li mild Horseshoe }Bence. ;]much damage could adversely affect all surrounding properties_ This would seem a huge r1�K for sitfely, protection of properties and homes where kamaa'aina like ltiyself live. This Tlec:d; to l~L: reviewed as aro. IiTlproper action here Iautentially poses great risk to our island JI1aata and !licit- pL .'..hies. 'We already have substantial traffic and safety cnt-teems in our district I.iving in Pulmilani Estates. ~eery close Lcf this proposed project, 1 can tell you that we have already expet'ient'ed significant infrastrL.Lc-tare capacity issues with affil; rtr,ltienti'al, secondary and rrlain roacivvay" a- torics_ There teas hem dirt active group iryni to resolve elitrl4cr,.1LL. r11;.1c1;5 Liv Itiwll 4 in our arm] and LIIci Illtorl1lxntl with the C'clunty. We 1iave sum accidents and near messes right aloe Piia1Tuanniii as well as just above and below Paulehia due to grade and angle. at1d blind spot i sacs. Unbelievably we even have speed control issues on our slightly iottgcr %c;iLhmtial streets. IFthe: development proceeds. Liew rotcdwatisamid access points would need to be buil! ail(' fully studied, Thorough and comprehensive study and review when we are hack td, n,Irlrn1 traffic tlow-s -would he essential_ The residents in the area will tincle:rylarndaihly+ want assurance o1' protection to rrlinimize any ad;. el se: impacts relalled roadway load, devaluations. loss of use and enjoyment, and other factors. Tliis is critical given oui , yii11 traffic patterns and flows that may zet even more challenging with development already occurring vv est lfawtti'i, suvh tL+ ScLIeS,.Iv tit HGni-y Street. Will I`c1c ltwt ,11 Vimasi developer he required. to fully disclose, review 1.36970 and seek public input, cin any llirratii i lu till infrastructure including ro-.Jig' iy access? l 'I:t.rty people arc n dist racreci T:��ti� ti` stir the issues kfrf Cirk id 19 bat will NV aril [Oren Forums to personally share, .we to face, the! r cotic,orns. That would afford the County aid any developers t1ir: crpporlunit' to expl;iir adLir ss_ Ails pi`Elial � allay eoriti..,rru. and -mirnrii ly ripen a much needed dialogue iniong all kvy parties. A, +, r have seers from oilier et c^itt; th,i7 Live facial, ,igni.fieliEtL prribl.crns, good, r ca ured, well consideree! wi 1 , iE4' �w,i4#iEi�311. 1 understand there arc number of historical and archeological features as. %yell tE4 at-risk and endan erud species ort the pmperiy as ',kelt.. These need til 1)e fully addressed, identified. and s1utliCdl, ET iipric;irs th:it the current draft contains only a partial a_ sc timcnt, Arc thcsc issues anticipated to be more c11.111Il1i'.toi rev'iewed'? It's my understanding that these steps arc necessary. Thank you for rcgUestitt continent Oi this draft. I'm sure there are many other F.igniticanf issues and tactors you. art reviewing or plan Lu rev cry, Th,C ,C011eerrts I've addressed are submitted for your consideration EIS you rc: 'rcw lh -•e mutters further RespeeftiLlly submit Derek r'.Ir,;ih;i Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. Derek Inaba via email: markp5O r att.net RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project. North Kona District, Hawaa'i Island Dear Mr. Inaba: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: In West Hawaii we have had substantial issues with water shortages and restrictions due to natural factors and also infrastructure failures with our numerous water well failures and repairs. Were infrastructure concerns in our district and in West Hawaii fully reviewed and assessed and were plans mode to expand the County's capacity with such a large prospective development? Response 1: As described in Section 3.3.3 of the EA, the water credits for this ��roject have already been committed and paid for. DWS assigns credits based on capacity, so the infrastructure can provide the water for this project. Comment 2: Additional infrastructure and rewired services issues need to be addressed at all levels. It is not clear that any of our minimal infrastructure resources are equipped at all to handle a large condo development and influx of population. Response 2: Potential impacts to infrastructure including utiiit'ies and public services is described in Section 3,7.1 of the EA. As described in Section 3.7.1, the project would be constructed in phases, and occupancy would occur over time, Additionally, it is expected that the project would provide workforce dousing for the local community. The project's first phase would construct rental units, and it is expected that occupants of these units would be local and many of the students already attend local public schools. Section 3.7.1 has been revised to clarify that since the project would be constructed in phases, all 99 students would not all arrive at once and occupancy would occur aver a longer period of time. This is consistent with predicted rates of growth for the area which are considered by the DOE in their forecast planning for public schools. Impacts to traffic are discussed in detail in Section 3.7.2. Water commitments for the project have already been secured as described in Section 3.3.3. Comment 3: The land addressed in the DEA contains two significant waterways that currently carry writer safely away from the existing neighboring cornmunities. If water September 13, 2,021 Mr. Derek hobo Pocje 2 of 2 flow is altered from the Holualoa Ditch and Horseshoe Bend, much damage could adversely affect all surrounding properties. Response 3: The County owns all of Holualoa Ditch and most of Horseshoe Bend Ditch in this area. The project would not increase the amount of water flowing in the ditches, nor would it change where the ditches enter or exit the project. Therefore, the project will not affect the existing drainage situation. Comment 4: We already have substantial traffic €and safety concerns in our district. We already experience significant infrastructure capacity issues with our residential, secondary and main roadway arteries. Response 4: Section 3.7.2 and Appendix 2 {Traffic Impact Analysis Report) in the EA include a discussion cf current traffic conditions and analysis of predicted changes to traffic. The EA includes a figure of the proposed intersection which is being developed in coordination with Hawaii Department of Transportation. The intersection is included as Figure 9 in the EA, and was available for public input during the public comment period for the EA. No comments were received during the extended comment period that resulted in changes to the design of the proposed intersection. Comment 5: 1 understand there are a number of historical and archeological features as well as at -risk and endangered species on the property as well. These need to be fully addressed, identified, and studied. Response 5: As described in Section 3.6 and in Appendix 5 (Archaeological Survey Reports) in the EA, the entire project site has been recently inventoried for archaeological resources. One inventory covered 76.1 acres and the other covered 5 acres. Section 3.6 includes a summary discussion of the findings for both surveys that cover the entire site, as well as a discussion of how potential impacts would be minimized. The reports have been submitted to the State Historic Preservation Division for review and acceptance. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc, Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvrestante c.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mari, Ashley From: A14iscrn Bennett <info@biissinblioom cora} Sent; Thursday, October 06, 2020 4:02, PI 1 To: Planning Internet Mil Subject: Royal Vistas Housing Projact E. comments re Archeological, Wildlife and Traffic Impact Aloha, I am writing to you with respect to the proposed land development project that is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas Housing Project Tax Map Key Nos. (3) 7-15-021:016, 7-6-021:017, 7-6-021:018, and 7-6-071:019 North Kona District,, Hawar~i Island, State of Hawaii. I have found that the Environmental Assessment of this project inadequately addresses its impact on Archeology, Wildlife and Traffic. The Assessment shows great detail on a 5 acre portion of the property that was performed in 20.18. The assessment of the remaining 65 acres included dated information and much less detail than the 2018 version, Within the property in question are very likely remnants of the Kealakekowa'a iI1 tI1F ri1 road. Koa Trees were harvested above Holualoa and logged down to the Kealakekowa'a Heiiau where the Koa logs were carved and made ready for canoe building. A portion of the actual path exists on the property of the Holualoa fun Bed and Breakfast, https.liwww.holpaloainn.{ mlni;tar r-of-the-hcrlt!a-- slide/ . Historically, most l Inluas were used for sport. Tris Horua, however was specifically built to haul Koa wood to the sea. One unique aspect of this Holua is its parallel rock walls that were used to contain the Koa as it was transported down the Holub. The Royal Vistas Assessment strictly shows the use of these walls for cattle In the late 1800s and early 1900s, In the assessment, gore samples cif the walls reveal the kukui nut. The ancient Hawaiians used kukui nuts and ti leaves to help lubricate the Holub for sliding the Togs. This would indicate that the walls are a physical and tangible piece of Ancient Hawaiian History. Holualoa is translated to English as "Long Slide". Lack of information regarding this piece of history is a serious emission in the assessment_ My family lives next to the Calvary Church land that is directly adjacent to the proposed Royal Vistas Housing Project. We enjoy seeing the copious wildlife that lives on this land. We regularly see multiple Hawaiian Hawks, Hoary Bats, and Owls! The assessment merely suggests that these animals could possibly reside in the proposed area. rhey DEFINITELY make their home On the proposed site. The traffic study is a:so flawed Interestingly enough, the study clairrls that the traffic has improved since the previous traffic study. The entire Kona population would agree without hesitation, that tragic has certainly not improved. In fact, it has become much worse since the initial study. To suggest that adding 1000 cars to this area won't have much of an Impact is wishful th=nkinq imagine the traffic light at Lake and the Highway during morning and evening rush-hour! It is additionally innapropriate that the owners of this land, currently zoned as multi family, have been using it as a cattle ranch allowing cows to trample archeological sights. The majority of the cattle have been removed recently, but I have seen at least two cows that are still within the property. For an owner to disregard the zoning of this land shows a lack of respect and indicates 1;16971 that we are dealing with an inves`trrment group who will do as they please. Laws do not allow for this, yet it appears KV3 doesn't want to play by the same rules as the rest of us. This blatant disregard does not bode well fora responsible, well planned, well vetted and culturally sensitive project. This project should NOT be allowed. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Allison Bennett '1' Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.D. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: {808) 494-2039 Ms. Allison Bennett via email: inforblissinbloom.cnm RE: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, t#awar"i Island Dear Ms. Bennett: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have found the analysis of archaeology, wildlife, and traffic in the DEA inadequate. The DEA shows great detail on a 5 acre portion of the property that was performed in 2018, and a much lesser detail, as well as dated, assessment of the remaining 65 acres. Response 1: As described in Section 3.6 and in Appendix 5 (Archaeological Survey Reports}, the entire project site has been recently inventoried tor archaeological resources. One inventory covered 76.1 acres and the other covered 5 acres, Section 3.6 includes a summary discussion of the findings for both surveys that cover the entire site, as well as a discussion of how potential impacts would be minimized. Impacts and protection measure for wildlife are included in Section 3,3.4 and impacts frorn traffic are included in __ otic n 3,7,2. Comment 2: within the property are very likely remnants of Kecllakekowa'a road ( path of the canoe). Most Hobos were used for sport, however this Holua was built for hauling Koa wood to the sea. One unique aspect of this Holue is its parallel rock walls to help contain the Koa as it was transported down the holea. The DEA shows these walls and how they were used for cattle in the late 1800s and early 1900s. This is d serious omission in the assessment. Response 2: Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211 documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a hclua. Also, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock wails constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures. he only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These Iwo walls are located clang the boundary of a Lond Commission Award (LGA) #3660. C11 September 13, 2021 Ms, Allison Bennett Page 2of3 Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a h&ua course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a holua in the project site. Comment 3: We regularly see multiple Hawaiian Hawks, Hoary Bats, and Owls! The assessment merely suggests that these animals could possibly reside in the proposed area. They DEFINITELY make their home on the proposed site. Response 3: The biological inventory report documents the species detected and potential habitat at the project site, The Biological Survey Report in Appendix 3 of the EA acknowledges the limitations of a biological survey of a large project area and the absence of any particular species cannot be warranted from the survey's results, Therefore, the EA includes a description of species detected as well as potential habitat for native species (including protected species) in the existing conditions part of Section 3.3.4. The impact discussion includes potential impacts to individuals and to habitat for native species (including those not directly detected during the survey). The impact discussion including protection measures to minimize these impacts to native species (including avifauana and bats) and their habitat in Section 3.3.4. Therefore, no impacts to these species are expected from the project. Comment 4: The traffic study claims that the traffic has gotten better than in their ereeous traffic. study, To suggest that adding 1000 cars to this area won't really have much of pan 'mood is wishful thinking. Response 4: Section 3.7.2 and the Traffic Impact Assessment Report (TIAR) in Appendix 2 of the EA include a discussion ot current traffic conditions and analysis of predicted changes to traffic. The changes in level -of -service from projected growth with and without the project condition in the analysis is based on the results of modeling by a professional traffic engineer, not wishful thinking. Comment 5: It is innapropriate that the owners of this land. currently zoned as multi family, have been using it as a cattle ranch allowing cows to trample archeological sites. The majority of the cattle have been removed recently, but V have seen at least two cows that are still within the property. Response 5: In response to neighboring community concerns, Kona Three LLC ceased cattle grazing in the proposed project site in 2019. To their best knowledge, Kona Three LLC knows of no cattle an the project site. However, it is possible that cattle grazing from the adjacent Gomes' property temporarily moved to the project site. C11 September 13, 2021 Ms, Allison Benne11 Page 3of3 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. LA Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.Iefebvrestantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department :r'• Ir, 1 Mori, Ashley From: ]ani a Kerr <jkkonaglhawaliaritel.net> Sent: Thursday, OttoOei 08, 2020 3;49 PM o: Plarrriirig Internet Mail Subject: Project: Royal Vistas Housing Frr ject. Hawaii Island; North Kona District Attachments: kV OWNERS Declaration re lraftic.doCx Please see attachod Dec.karakion with signature. Stricartaty, Janice Kerr 116972 DECLARATION AE ATION ill° JANICE KERR 1, Janice Kerr,. declare: 1. 1 am a resident oil_76-4320 L_cilani St. KorLi Count 0 t,Hawah. The pi.p.oNed land ilev'el.;Tric`Ill project that is the subject 1afthe pending Draft EnVirotaauzental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas Housing Project Tax Map Key Nos, (3) 7-6-021:016, 74)- 021 .017, 7-6-021:0E :0l 8. and 1-4)-021:019 North Kenn District,1-1awai'i Island. Scute u1 I- awai`i aftei is Trac personally as well as alicets my interest in real property. 1 reside within one anile' rthe proposed land development project. In such capacities. 1 have- tirsthanti knowledge Ithe tialltawing facts and could ttntl would c+v�:lily thereto it called upon to do so. 2. I liavc reviewed the pending DRAFT ENVERONMFN'1'A1. ASSESSMENT including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report by SSFM Into- ntationul, elated July 2020 and aarAclicd as Appendix 2 to the DRAFT ENVIRONMEN'I'A1, ASSESSMENT. I am spr:eine ally concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kola Vistas subdivision that arc clot fully i►r accurutc]y addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact AnttsySis Ripon. Traffic and the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. arc discussed in the body of the DRAFT C FNVIIWNM1-N 1 Af_ ASSESSMENT. at pp. 48-56, 67 and 71. 3_ In the Kona Vistas suhdivisit>tt. tlac: proptpsod project relies on the use of a substandard roadway. Kekuana`oa 1'1ae . Kelruana`ria Place is very steep, has limited sight distunces dus.: to extreme curves ,and is narrow with rta sidewalks. The impact of increased Iraf i fir; arising. from Phase I acrd Phase 2 buildouts oft -he Royal. Vistas Housing Project is inadequately addressed in the SSF? 1 Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which focuses instead on 1tnpacts alt i g: Queen Kaahunntnu tiiehway. 1 ani particularly concerned that adding nuni.e:rnus vehicle trips to and from a separate suhi i".+srcin will present dangers and Congestion ti,-) residents along Kekuana'+ a Place. l consider that -h: Plar.nuig Dcpart111`TiI ,11t:_ild require the applicant ti. address these concerns_ 4, The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT requires evaluation or, among others, titlr'ev5L' SeC turriA1►.id impacts. such as population. chaugex or+flfrr.t erre p1+ ,lac fcrrilitrc°s. Sec Chapter 11- i)+.". l- l ,. E lawail Administrative Rales. Instead of squarely addressing these issues. however. the t)It. ;: 1 I.NV110 )N.\ F;'~, AL. ASSESSMENT simply ignorest em. claiming tlutt "Ni..' a114..1s• 1-,Ctic11d:+.v etFi-ds..:ir : LA['reciL'd .111ti'w 111x: Lk\ Clopinc11t'Allah" utilize existing infrastructure, p ovi4i • is not expected ti' rem.ilt >u ;�,hstantial demands to County services." It is a serious omission for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT to fiiI to address the potential adverse impacts of increasing Ih,e use of substandard existing infrastructure like Kekuaria'oa Nue. 5. The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSL,SSMENT addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the cuntexl of whether the project would Have i a substantial adverse eifeei r�rt public health. The Applicant claims. 'Phe Proposed Protect would not affect public health in any way; sLomiwatcrwould be ripjaropntlrely dispnserl of in drainage structures, Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in C ro.[eign,' Emphasis added. This bald conc]usion dues not address potential adverse imparts as required by Chapter I 1-2010. I -13, Hawaii Admin i' tr. t1 'c Rules. fil. The Planning Department should not. accept the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT'S reliance on the SSIA1 Traffic; Impact Analysis Report, which has the following dcficicrtc1 s: a. failure to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision Liri,ing from the project; b. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Repon uses a growth Fate of l.%, a» contrast uta the 2°43 growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is yen,. s..rtiwidye to growth rote iii a non-linear, exponential relation: c, The SS1•Iw'1 Traffic tnipAcl AnLjt r;:w Ri.:port ilLLes not rnulli• ,eneraLional housing charuwteristies ccoinniR5L7 LC 1Ja v iii according to census data and likely Willi er2simm(cs daily vehicle trip attnhutablc h hLulsl,7tit of the pr+o1 iN l project; c1_ The. SSIN 'Traffic IL,mpact Analysis Report employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicle for Northbound Omen KaaJiuiiuuiu Highway en the selccten dates t'f April 31.1, 2t11 c). a weekday and August 24, 201)1(). a Saturday, compared with the 0113 Witcher Engineering Traffic impact Analysis Report. which reported 11157 vehicles for 7anutcry 14 and 15. 20.16. both'.yeekdav;c, The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with F4ure 4 or the SSFM Traffic. Impact Analysis Report, tivhich shmvs approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 20 [ 6 for Northbound Queen Kaahuznanu Highway at 7 -1•ike difference in volume is ,more that douhle the maximum 10°,6 variation gendrrall aLi. CCph d in day-to-day nteastrrcrnents and thus urdreltable'. e. The recommendation by SSFN1 Traffic .Impact Analysis Report For a round ahiou6 at Queen Kaahwnanu Highway and FIualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic 3 corridor. Intersections tltat pass ►w.,:rr:Snit hii r'iiiair :ffese11l traliic �:1 1t} Ii ibility concerns for the government; i'. The rvkecittilt7i iiiaiic5[I h' sS I'M Traffic Impact Analysis Deport for monitoring of the intersection of"Queen Kaahumanu I-Highvi.a.y and Ktialsini Highway is inadegitlatc. Where. as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant tinder all conditions, it Shunt] be prioritized for study and design of a signal tor installation. This. ciroulnstollno: wilt hl• cx.11eerb4,ted by the prcuposed projewt. mil It, the Draft Environmental Assiiwent and SSFM Trriflic Impact Artal.w is Hepoln clue not prescw. sufficient. credible fa is and analysis such dial the aclversc impacts on existing Iatcl resulting from inaeaticci trciftie can hi tully understood and result in i1I'propri:lte government planning and response. 1 doe law oiler penalty of perilwry ihitt the , Mw true, Datcd: October, , 2020 Signature: .ranice Kerr Printed name: _Twice Karr 4 Mori, Ashley From: Janice Kerr <,ikkvnaCcohawaiiapntel_net > -- Sent: Thursday. October 08, 2020 ? 2, To; Planting Internet Mail Subject: PROJECT. Royal Vistas Housing Proje.ct, island of Hawaii, District of North Kona Attachments: Declaration R V. rlorx Please see attached Declaration Sinr-eualy. Janice Kerr 1974 DECLARATION or JANit'F. l l�Rll; 1- Janice I{err. declatre: 1 ani a resident ci1'I ?6-4320 LeiiIuni St..' Kona Vistas subdivision). Ccstut,ty of l lstwa i, State of llawai`i_ The proposed land development project that is the subject or the pendingDrat' Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas Housing }Inject Tax Map Key Nos. 1. 7-6' . 021:(117, 7-6.021:01N, and 7-6-O21:01+1 North Kona District, Flw.var i. lslatrd, State cal Hawaii aaI +. is Lne personally as well as affects my interest in real properly, I reside within one mile ia1 the,° pr p9.wcc1 land development jarciieci. In such capacities. 1 have firsthand knowledge aal'the following facts and cituld and would testify thereto at' called upon to do Foto 2. I have reviewed Ile pending DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT iILc11 Jtli ilac'11,altie Impact Anal titil RQpor bi' SSF\I International. deltcd July 2112.0 and :attached pis Appendix ? to the 1)1t At 1 1 NVIRt1N \iI \ I AI. ASS1.. 'S‘].t.N 1 1 am specifically concerned about adverse trattic incl'act' both .111d without the bona Vistas suhdi ' . icon 'heal are not rolls ter taceuraie:l : addressed in the SS FM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. °i rztffic and the SSF .f Traffic. impact Analysis Report... are discussed in the body of the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT. at pp. 48-56. 67 anti 71. 3, i 4�_: `.. l . kitbtt the prupo ed prc,jt- L relies on the ust: of'tt substandard roadway, 1ti:s l..uataa°c,a PIatcc. Place is Very steep. has limited sight: distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of'inereascd traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequately addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which Focuses instead can impacts. along Queen Kaahttrttanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and (Torn a separate subdivision will present Ianger5 and congestion to residents along KeL ua na4oa Place. J consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant tcti address these concerns_ 4. Tit DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT requires c 't3ruation ot, among cithcrs. adverse secondary imlarlc'r,s, ,circh its fro/arr1iradr,)n changes ens or ciketso : /*Ifr A*fi c'i tine s', Sue Chapter t I-2O4l, I -13. Hawaii Admictisu utive Rules, instead cof•squarely addressing these issues. however, the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL, AL. ASST SSMI'N 1 ti:nij lv ignores them, claiming that "gist adverse secondary effects are expeckd since the dek.elopnrent would uti'lire existing rnlrastruclum!, provide in fill housing, and is expected [o rt ult in sch lantial demands to County services." It is a seriou' omission for the DRAFT FAVIRONMF M'IAI, ASSESSMENT to fail to acldrest, the potential adv rsi. impacts ofittaeasirx ! the usr cif` substandard existlru iiil'r1 1nic'iurL, like Kei:uana.c 1 3ec.. 1 h•, DRA1-1- I- L' VlR'_]N11E\TAL ASSESSMENT Rddr4sSCS ad cr'SC traffic impacts only in lite: t it vvntielthLr [fire project would Have a .Satsrantitr rrtiY•c rNr.- efiCcf on public health, The Applicant claims. "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any wary: storrnwater would be appropriately disposed of in dralni.ige mtructuree. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful cnnseratinn its pry d 5i; n." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse irrtp3ct4 as required by Chapter 1 I-200.1-1 ti, Administrative Rules. t . The Planning Dcpartrnerat should not accept the DRAFT CNVIaON1V1ENTAL ASSESSMENT'S reliance on the SSI';M Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which has the following deficiencies: a. tailurc to address adverse traffic impaet,s WiLhirt lhc' K MI V i4Tst111(11t•i ic'r1 arising from the prcojett: b, The SSFM Trunk Impact .4tralysii Report uses a growth rate of 1%, m contrast to the 2' growth rate employed by the 2()18 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic 'congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation; c. The SSF\•1 Traffic Impact Analysis Report dom not rccognirc multi-gii. rutica1 itc?using, characteristics common in Ila'vnii according to census data and likely utidcrest itnates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project; d. Che;SF I Traffic Impact Analysis Report employs an unusually low vehicle °olu ne or S33 vohiol ws for Nonbbutttttl Qt,t k:tt Kit altutx~at u itigbwav un the 8c1',:c:Lett dates u1 April .30, 2019. a weekday and August. 4..#11'3, cr Swat-illy. cirlltil}"r1.rial with ilii: 2i)1 i'��itchc:r Engineering Trattic Impart Analysis Report. i.vhich reported 1057 vehic•Ies for Jtutnary. 14 and 15, 2016, both v ookilay's. The innisii.iIly Io 1L]X1riL,l lurueorS}3 ()LW!,wn'oh Figure 4 of the SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report, which shows approximately, 1050 vehicles pa hour in 2016 for Northhound Queen Kaahumanu Higlwva y at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 14M, variation generally accepted in day-to-clay mtasurernents anti thus unreliable;, e. The recommendation b • SS1-NI Tra#tic Impact Analysis Report fora roundabout at Queen. Kaahumanu El.ighwa:k and Flualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrant; hut rernain unsignaIi e d present traffic safety liability concerns for the vemniciwt; The recommendation by SSFMrt Traffic Impact Analysis Report for monitoring of the intersection of Queen l;.aakaumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate_ Where_ as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design o r a signal for installation. "[his circumstance will be exacerbated by Elio proposed priijecr. i in sum. the Draft l:nvironrne;ntal Aswes, anent and SI 1 'I raffic. Impact Analysis Report does nni present sufficient, credible facts and rtrxaiysi: ucl+ that OIL: adverse impacts on exisrinM infrastructureiinri rc:suIiing from increased traffic ciin hk on.lcrstocad and result in appropriate government planning and response, 1 dei krc under Iaonalty of perjtury that filo foregoing is inti• Dated: Kaiiva-Kona, I Iaw+i`i. October N. 2029. Si griaturc: I'nnL'd name: Janice Kerr DECLARATION- OF JANICE KERR 1, Janice Kerr. declare: t. I am a resident of L76-4320 Leilant St. ! Kana Vistas subdivision]. County oil State of Hawai`i. The proposed land development project that is the subject of the pending Draft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vistas Housing Project Tax Map Key Nos. (3117-6-021:016, 7-6- 021:0 I 7, -b-021:017, 7-6-021:0t8, and 7-6-021:019 North Kona District, l lawai'ii island. Stag of t lawai'i affects me personally as well as affects my. interest in real pr' piny. I reskle within one rnile ot`the proposed land development In such capacities, I have firsthand knowledge . fthe following facts and could and would testily thereto if called upon to do qua, l have reviewed the pending DRAFT ENV1R()INMI:N t'A1..ASSESSM-ENT including the Traffic impact AnalysReport by SSFM International, dated Jul). '2112U Lod attacht d Appciitlix. 2 til tiro DRAFT L V1RONMENTA1_ ASSESSMENT'. l am specifically concealed. about adverse traffic impacts hath within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the SSA1 Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic and the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report. are discussed in the body of the DRAFT ENVIRON MEN 1'Ai, ASSESSMENT. at pp. 48-56. 67 and 71. 3. In the Kona Vistas •tihdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of u substandard roadway. Kekuana`oa Place. Kekuana`oa Place is very steep. has limited sight distances due in extreme curves and is narrow with rto sidewalks. The impact of -increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequately 1_369C4 addressed in the SS1 M fraflic Impact Analysis Report, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. 1 am particularly concerned that adding nurncrom vthicie trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuana`na Place_ l consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. 4. The DRAFT ENV1RONMF3s1TAL ASSESSMENT requires evaluation ot; among others, adver. c .%.econdru y impYart's. stuck as population changer Or a eets on public facilit k,r. S4 Chapter I 1-2(1.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Instead of"squarely addressing thew issues, however, the DRAlI- ENVIRONMENTAL. ASST=SSMINF simply ignores there, claiming that "No adye t e sccorndary effects are expected since the development would utilize existing infrastructure, provide infill housing, and is not expected to result in substantial demands to Calmly services,." It is u sericuus omission for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT to fail to address the omential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substandard existing infrastructure. like Kckuau`sa`oa Place_ 5. The DRAFT' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT add adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Nave a suhsrurrtlal adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The 1'rapossed Project would not affect public; health in any way; storrnwaaer would he appropriately disposed ()fin drainage structures. imj,acys have bega..ta:ken lnko careful cQu5idera iyri fn proleiaa"' Emphasis added. hold conclusion does not adldr-ews 1toten tial adverse impact=s as required by Chapter 11-200,1-13, llawaii Admin istrati e Ru Les. 6. The Planning Department should not accept the DRAFT ENVTROlENTAL ASSESSMENTS reliance an the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which has the following deftcienci es: a. failure to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas suhd`ivision arising from the project: b. The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report uses a growth rate of 1 %, in contrast to the 2% growth rale employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation; c. 'l he SSFM 'Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not recognize multi-generational housing characteristics common in f {await according in census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout ut the proposed project; d. The SSFM Fraffic Impact Analysis Report employs an unusually low vehicle volume 01'853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahuntanu highway on thc selected dates of April 30, 2014, :a weekday tuul August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 20l8 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Report. which reported 1057 vehie:lct, for January 14 and 15, 2016. both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of S53 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahurrtanu ffiLihway at 7 a.rn. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% VarialiOrl generally €eccepted in day-to-day measurements ;,tnd thus unreliable; e. The recommendation by SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report for aroundabout at Queen Kaahurnanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersection; that pass warrants but remain unsignati2tvi present traffic safety liability COOCCM3 for the government f. The recommendation by SSFlVl'Tratfic Impact Analysis Report for monitoring of the intersection of Queen kaahurnanu Highway and kuakinm 11 i ghway is inadequate. NlTherc. as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized fir study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will 1x cxac rbated by the proposed project. 7. in sum, he Draft Environmental Assessment and SSIN l 1 raffic Impact Analysis l.epon does not present sufficient, credible facts and analysis such that ::ld 'cr;4: (I! existing rnlrastru tare and rc,sultingfrom rcasL•d !raffle can 1)e tti]1w appropriate government planning and response. I de Tare under penalty of perjury that the rorr~uoing. is Iruc'. 1 -Mt d: Kai1ua-Kona, Hawaii 0 ctubc:r S. 2020. tlilLiCt".rCU&ftl ;L!k1 Signature: + .r_ Panted name Janice Kerr result in 0 Ira JJIl,I11.1.111i.,1,l„1,+N IIlli,ltIi1 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Janice Kerr 73-4320 Leilani Street Kailua-Kona, Hi 96740 Email: jkkona©hawaiiaantel,net RE: Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Ms. Kerr: Thank you for comment letters on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Since we received three letters (two by email one at 3:46 prn and one ai 3:49 pm on October 8, and by mail post -marked on October 8) with identical comments, these responses address all three sets of your comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are nal fully ar accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact at increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TZAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place. 1 consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Restonse 2: Kekuana`oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the some specifications as all other Kora Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana'oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase II in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 2.5 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2,021 Ms. Janice Kerr Page 2 of A Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur ata different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for an -island residents as described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekcuna'oa Place is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the A.M and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Hove a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, "The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11,200_1-13, 0.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons. and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rote in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to cor'ne up with the 1% growth rate. Alth,-,.,gh we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2, our traffic engineers uses. 1 T_ from the 2025 LRTP forecast. September 13, 2021 Ms. Janice Derr Page a Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics cornr,::,.,r7 in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Responsej: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very law standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30. 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019. a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 k also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahurnanu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani KaiLa Road and Hualoloi Road {north). Our traffic count token in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if lne Witcher Engineering report is overcountiig, or if the project's TZAR is unae7toJr'Iirig, but the TIAR for the project does use numbers similar to those f ro-ided in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TZAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalaii Road (North; is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TZAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kacahumariu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project. Response 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices {MUTCD states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope September 13, 2021 ianice Kerr Page 4 of A covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stontec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. miche le, le febvre '•stontec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Moija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Deportment Mori, Ashle From: Sent: To: Subject: AtUchrnents: D Blancett-rnaddax rdbilf*korta4 taa, corn; Thursday,, OctDbr 19, MD 3:36 PM Plarsrtirig Inierrel Mail ROYAL VISTAS HOUSING PROJECT EA COMMENTS KV EAD -DAVID SIGNED DECLARATION 1Q-C8-102U.pdt ALOHA. Attached please find my declarationlcomments to the Royal Vistas EA report. With aloha, David 8lancett-M addock 76-101 Kameharmaiu St., Kaiiva Kona Hi 96740 Kona Vistas 136974 1l s., ..IIx ;I1?,1k1[)Ftl...'\ s_•1 i 1-'41.\11itl11 F4 1. l).'\VID BLA.NL'I� l l - ]Al.)E7(c..'I declare: arc: 1 am at resid.1.1tl at 76-101 Karueliantialu St-rect. Kai lila Kona. HI 96740 of Iicaii t Vista's subdivision. (ou.nty Of 1 .1;0%40 S tate of 1la1tiwai`i. The proposed kind development project that is th`Y suhTet al the pending I)ritl Ltivrrc nntenta1 , ssesstn `ttt suhtniu J by R4r},•d1 Vista`; Heusi n Proje i t�f. Map Key Nos, (.i ) 7 6-17? I ;016. 7-6-021.1117. 7-6-021:01S, trnJ 7-6-021:1)19 N rilr Kuna District, l!a ; Lai Islaittrl. SLEW 1I iwai`i lillC at.". we personally as �ti'+�MI as silteeLs 111}' in real property. I re.stde till] tCY:. tllun. ' mils cfili- provosCJ land development project. In yuii L•,epatcI Ira,., tir>,ihaand knowledge of the folloo.inv tains and could and would testify flier-. to 11 upon to do so. 1 ltitrt rev roved the pc:m.1111r I)It.Al I l l' �'1k(1!' '�1J._,tiI.'til .r4SS SSMMF,N.1 itatl Luling the Tra111(7 impact Analysis Report bw SS FM littaitational, dated .Iuly 2012. aitd attache` J as Appendix 7 ro the DRA1-.F FN VIRUNN-1l•N 1 Al . ,ASS[?SSMENT. 1 arra slrecific:ill e:1mcer•ned'I aahout adverse trtllic impacts hc,tlh .N1111 r 4111d witheiuL the Kona.. Vistas subdivision that arc not tia11 .)t accirat.L I :r.ldr4•;st'Lt isi iiic SSF M Tiatliw !Mr aC t Anatlysis Reptsrt, 7 raltik _it'd the SSF1 t `1 raf`tic Impact r\ntlysi RC1.xyrt .FT • di ciettssedin the 11 cit thc DR.11=`l ENVIRONEN, 1 A. ,ASSESSMEN F. at pp.4 -5t_1. 67 ani 71. eitn i.:oro rrr:~J that Kona 1 -hire. 1.1.,{" (I) welt,per) rindirn.r Lif -no signiIicura Impact t.DEA-114,1 NS11 ig ni t sup.iorted by the fire. ts 1 ;stir concerned that T el clo ar°s, I)E .A study Ls prut-crnna„ getting forth dcelardtitrils irr beilerplatte fashion u•11ik obfustatiiN. omitting or material facts and analysiri. It appeaiI that Developer omiti rnatletial local faatial information timm its anal sis nec%ssary to e:aiti.ilate tete true cnVirortmv,ntul irrtpaL.t 1 retie that Developer ltirs omitted keV necessary to Lair and propel analysis environmental impact 1 anti concerned ed rhal Developer h115 sithstlturecl. generic moduli ng or otItinted inttrnrn 4atncrt in ;lisregard Lief known local condi iKarts and Ll1.1:-•1 t -].t] .t it valid tactual support in the record. Instead. it appcirs that Ixevel+-p=cr parrots agencies stated rtclt:irran4,at '.; th snore assaranue saf Iirture tiLrnapliarace. t miksiuns and unbctplrurted Assumptions. In my opinion. this report seems tcllirtt>h devoid 01. tactual stat:tnents or essential rottatL1atir1nal elorncrils necesi tr4 In a Valid :tssc smeatt 01- the. err rirourrienlal ural :let Lal. this large. high diensity project Some I3riIiI.is_4 c"4:il.tiple- loo. factual data Ini'laiIL" rhe. followsr.•rarcl L.cIr1 Ike c1l air id the tetter] expel:. population totals. either in aggregate tier c1Lt,a i I?L +c Iuylrt r tr t]}I* ,rlt+ .64 r.r dollar estimates assigned tort 11114' wail *. price, or •1L i' t" r, Iltr"elr'I °r oral Ls, i1t14 C 4 Ir r�tili Tt;ares r r cc]trtpletit+It tlektrs for a project ch;11 1 :par •t Iltret'rl1.tiacl4ts lalreaeic. '111. strl,artlssiuii is cleVidid rat data to ardecltr;atelw adLlx ... for detct•.Ii: kid ',.log space. t Ira Its Rice. 1]evchipor-w 4ttlalttr „]watt appears to make only proforma. report* o("l;4stttai:LN and titin ~'.LIh community representatives ung.I go~crntlieratul agencies with Male] atssuritratie to comply, btu' + ins, the status or t>ns„c intc:r-ticlitans. f)i cicrptbr intim ryhtier...rablea data of kniivs, n 1141 ►elict, and t;iil address or rtiti�Lltlalt1r tlescri be horn his deeel ptuer1i ill address the eottti,2,LI1 iter% Iii peveclat�L tl and wate..r rlan -iv I retraaaaa cic'arital ,and llteriatg and ailing rooftop rur]OLYta 7ti acres L}1• Ia.nd wcttr l�rlt�wra Itt•Mtatl cora+ itiutas- l?e' thhrpti stam tilLacs singlc variablenartltinal boilkrpl:ite rn,xicl in es -palate tml.Iit load irttlaaely valid) omits •and rails tc► ccantiitler observable eaat.i �tsc;ertaitt:IhI' local data and soc:tnlL►gry that more accurately retlzcts actual lora] conditions and likely eontrraaticrs underlying .assulrtptirrnc in the Ixailcrplate natiltn¢t1 models.. ti Titch would likely render those models inadequate rn hVial application applied An example of play (Aare io L;a}rixidkc local sccicilatgical dent}griatitste data is in xd tuate may help For example. 1 am concerned that Develnpet rhes exclusively” 03 a genetic t allic ianpact rnixtel that. mechanically appJ ies 3a national stantlarcl without regard to obvious known n and civ i table data_ 1 am concerned that by using this model. the 1/evLlttpers assessment i etiiic,ntly and r`zatel impact to our i2c>'tt1171Utiitiel, leezusL fi tenures i)hvit).usorreadily ascertainable data. In the instant cas.c. there is evidence. that 1 observe routinely. of a well-kriovvlt and empirically observable gridlock that ciccu (iaiih tttrriti rude ]tour lc+itl nice a limes for t:t}Tairrii,L tt, 44�cPrk1. 'ens penam 14irrg on this side of the island, incitkting rriyselt; has catnpetently ttbser..e=.l I&ttakir i I Iw Queer' K highway i the pritn:-Ar). commuter higlrhs,ray liar morning � and e .t;rtir:_.,~ coi-nnnitesi to, and tr Yni tlic proposed dt°v'elirpnie tt tel ,i reident's plax of +,w(irak 1 have tah'.crtcd the precovid grilikick of backed up tr:lliu durinU tnornin in LI L iaanutre pens tier wcw-er al rnilcs s.nitl (ttl•1cn itiorc than .a mile Nit King Kar charnefeet III road ► hie1-.., is a couple of miles smith cal 1 aka Street) and ttturtkt a couple of miles into Kailtui mil at Henri slrce't. II' you ttw,'tial I lore evidence ul this lwaei uteri inv tewtin1on)this lint Lc1tt Basil) a7Oriiirti1.d h puI1in 1 oil rit'• Council Members and \,1ar.yor's' tatil'?Ylertber% vvho have ciontittitletl toi lttiiJ :ii lit the "%V ;t llaw aii .'crnirtetlnitw ["utter for (wink:II lie rin ~ in 1011) via South, iliisclearly observable Flei ali iatef ti pritrietn 3: soraptioen tii hi.ts'e1hie Lruf114; rig st O1 assumed by the Iniukt and nut :ttiju*LLNt ttrr Lkik trs mid know ounditions 1 tint concerned tliat that blind applic-atiuit ti c.+t1-tltc• thc11 statistical hosed model fails ro reflect rahtiicii.t 4`ki Liit trartic aaittiraiiiat at peak Litres. rendering its dcriv itic.e cult`isl;etiLtnw ars invaaI %1 11c tALAI u1.1Lion is nppairctit_ msts.ILls con reflect :iu delta -change in v.ionsct{uerlcc' lxccmise the max.imunt ti iriiible has been met - tt *,kae model +.10es iir1 incorpic}rsale sartur:ttiurt as, a lase. the wi iild he invalid) 11,:,• mere ci sen.atitrn. Developer's C'w'ist° conclusion that traffic saturation on this cr tritti.tl Iter Ii .'111 ' 51J 1 relit rdIl.tblr. itd. )u . E t id ii4t:1i' aupCi"-3strtircitirin. ticc•aiii�ll , t)t•w•elupe" applies "nationally a ceepic.! hiiitl Les' rates trom the trip octl rnoola. 111 h l clition (1 Th, 2I11h} Pulte 1Q irat'tie. It uses tlit number the '-)S dwelliti units-- in Phase 1 as The stile-irtdcpeltIL'nt variable' It, tstinnttte new trips expended herrn the proposed prop:et and dwellii .1 nti; in Pl7a sie ? as. the sole "independent variable- to estimate new grip; eaprndcd. front the prtepit•+rd projt+c;t. Pigs. 19. 34. This results in ['has,: 1 morning L' !OLi l' rates L4 1 .2.7'4k1"? and evernrs+' INA i1l tines ICd,l31. And,. Phase '. morning 1Nr01.-T rates cli' 20'69 and cvcninu IN/OL-1- rates. 67'39. 39. Acccrnlingl) . Devel4e' etitirr:titt ultirnaaw pot projects after all phases cel the develnpnteri tri I* I 'OUT rate* ter total 47' 159 r ittii,tnps 'and 153790 evenings. This hciilGr-plate reel generated anal tiffs etira►enieritly ignores Iievelc:pi.r-s t,tiwn estimates ul' atutorntrbik demand Ias extrapct•Iaicct front planned parking spaces and un -street parking s well as knoNtr l ctr asccrtainarhk ilkita spec.;tit.: ttr regioxt about oceup irlcti Had ti' .hiele r,wrrershitr and usage stvei tit: to our west l lartifrii controunitr). I e au,e £el,cloper's reports disllerwe data thrc>ughtxut the repcori in a proforma disclosure. much of the data is obscured and hinders candid analysis required by the- rules and statutes. For urr pk. data that i5 di1 ticulL to extract Pruni tJte i arrativc Of the report s<:erns L�� rtir l}Lrt,? the Friedel ,; neratcd results rrescnted h • the IXticlk ►.r us cited above. V. ilc much ciitica I data is suggested in the rcp rl, it tastes a considerably close reading. g. i t the entire tett o1` the rcpwlrt. cross-rctcrcnccd Alt ki iriatuill reading ol'the pians with i rrl:tr rlifyin glass to trseentri1i thea mai !acts. A careful n.n ik wis tort] rea, r,pnable iiifererioeN dra r.rr Proal rhi+ tl rt:l miggcst that e+eil t.Ile$kt irtLl.tL�te(l tilers �vscn.1d c iiir,ciiel Lha" eonclL::sSons rr- chcti h), 1 )ccit] r> bald. uppliwLltit►a rrl'the national matt teal model. tt we e insider the non]bet of carr?i r ;!t.,,I' Irp4` 1.71,' 1i`lill designated parking, spaces .rl(rne.. this INee +uii s &Anions. t ";: r,i: • r '.�3 . r;. I, ,; Irt €11. lieveleTer appears tel r•cpresenl iii. lir- !thin intoe.? parking pet t siiictiti:J unit, regut.itr:,: • •I Llic silo Iit'the unit It'one takes isle I rn °Lr pieee together the data dispersed tltroughdlut the ti;irFatk+.'r i t the rcp rt. 1)evelorter proposes: 174 FOR KENT Units. 11 are mit ( w sttlries ir1 ltc:ighl. .111 are .1 units y,ctr ieoipr'ir1t 1`2 are 2 Ili -dramas *rti J ...irci;Inlw 1 Fool Prints hail it°i ttttlitillles, side her shit' like apa.ninent buildings 111 mot ,, spaces 52 :irc 3 Bi drtrun1s �r, I3:4€rlydriars 26. loot P-rint:, }'ii in mute! files. side b side time Aparimerti buildings 104 rl.ir: I°•. ��', C nnl!}ir�rcl I r�t:rl� FO I{1 I unif.+t 440 4X I'nrl.tnL S;}.k $7 Ciroaped Livts 274 Fur Salk Units, 10 are twt f ) stories in bc~ight• 34) are three. 11) stories in heighi. 4 Ail :are 2 tLt>iiw G e'T ti►��t} rittl 147 arc 2 acdro am s 2t}4 1-1edrtirriius 17431 rot -t Prints btu in mold pies. side by sick hke npartrocni htrticii>l ; 294 p;Srlr.lnv' Bruit cti 52 arc 3 Bewirctnlmc I lied:rSK)Lilt 2,5• 1.,i.o; 11rints hut in multiples, sir.lk h) side liar apartisicrlt huilcitn ;s 1 I paLrkir j: space$ ,.ii1hRna.:1 1:OR SALI•, limits r ? cryo its .a Heti ri 7x aii ;L};..: I'Lrh it 'sr.4r.:a 2 Mill i, t; lairs ? 11. nits 4 i 1 - i, 1*1 I appear:: .accilunied for in ti k,eLlrcrr,nt i•or',:rle Consider Phase 1 - Ockicloppci proposts Irr build tip 10 25A units iri Phds 1.-141iisc 1 wiLI itat'lwk.! rill Ftti.rtul unit; anti Sak uriirs." ityg this extrapolated ding Fur Iitrr•Ixin ti " alcrtl , DeIcla per antieipatcw 348 Ir:.rrkiriy tilt;ai � s for Phis+: 1 PINTAIL `l'AI c- and 172 rarirtr'ir. 'splices) Phase 1 parking spaces for S Lh Mgr units. I hal 's 5211 Vehicles in Phase 1 TI -ii tturnher does not consider lhe significant street parking that De elraper in ti ariticirtateri, to acc oinit;Odate additL ina.I reslitoriI owned vehicles; or isiIc r . Reviewing Develoyers projerio I traffic rates. DO vl Hart's raft -the shell modal projects, PIi; & I morning I_ iltil..1 rates ctit'?7.110 and Cry enin : IN{tit i'F r_ktcs 86151_ The results from thiti national hoilvr-plate model expect Alz:;heileVe thaar nearly no more I o1 t -at these vehicles in Phase 1 will leave tttir work :rt rush hour'? And that doe,n't e'en ticaraaidcr lines 17oIeis Chat Own mow: than rwa.oa airs or visitor_ 5 This result is. of coursL: c,►rril t unded. for the same r aso,, s by the fact that it wrr:: iir,ied to reach siluilir results in Pl ;i 5c' 71. Phase ' a3s a remaining 1.K03 units with 2 parking space; pur unit 1i'r a total oft?fit p.,arkinv tipsLeey- Revie wing f )evclirpt:rs projected rales_ Developer's off -the shell aiadeI pr4rj.ets. Ilia{c. inor iar.u. 1\ `t }l 1 rules r+i 211'69 and eveniri 67i.a'4. phis uliiiersct)res kviir the lntstlr:l analysis is inadequate where observable: and ase rtaihablc 1c►ca] regional data k aw'aiI:ahle and would change the conclusr an.s on impaction, l'rcuikly. that the 13rvcloper s n;r3icrrnah f+riilr r-l)i IL }.'Ll.l ori, It :.jrit" 11%, in the. [ace o1 observable :L17LI ascertainable local data tint clti< lc image areal Itac,tJ ,w . Ir�1, flit tI ti<rrn]I1 hate observed, aril aii mie who c;tres to Llrjtc n w..orhi r -class reci thlx'trhond in t1ir: Cori wfhstirVi:. irr lx� trtn�il 4411r1 row itc1w have thr ti 1.1) or trots Per residence. WI: cai'tnrit. dismiss our own ].rc} l t'':I'-TItCrLt ilial workers i ren1in often Strl le I`c.yrn.�rri4 Frt r�c �ri Iwo or trtrtre renters 1.ven t-ca1�l.ts data front tlic 211111 t -JS ('Lrttstis iti,11 is swtnie:ww.lial Fttrl.r,:J .n lrw:�tl4i;>�r''s 1tior. shows that sirivlc:-i'taltiil4 lik,ou5e1101.ds in ISailtt reported tli t*. rtiLJtilrlc h, F<ts� h.. l.: iLtci rl}4ts st, rc` work int+. Irt7uselitilc1 4w ilh 2 4ehicies v4a nod rare_ and l84/0 :tit rhe Nwil,ehs-i is 1i:tL13 or r1uare \Khialc`s According rc ing to this 1 4 L."ar old Census (.11( "„ of workers .irctvi: to work aurae. 170!'{, i.2arlruuled and ni1h ft .::, took pLihlic transportation 11 1liis cursory L'L7Tral:riai6son Lxtww rr appliL..Lrit+ia tir1'a local .areal sis impact tu.odel based Ori jiirt 11-tc r,hser.ahlc mid inlcrrttl Lkltu ti<.rntainewl in Developer' 'report could vl td 2 CCITICI1.1s.k011 of !riffle iiitlj�.rt 1i�.+ i ` rir,i,:w 1 i. T e I''11caa tlioriari honer-pl.te:model conclusions, it is likeily Mai properly Ci i,l1i0•tr•wi siud) and raitdc1 would sh,' w.w even g=reater iarapacl. I Tire oinittinQ local sociological data from Meese. calculations grossl,, 1indert stiinnles the iiiapao of this cicti-vinpni<nL :mJviolate!, the intended .mandate he Iegislaticin to lira icic Phase T- has a remaining L86411-115 with ? parliungvaces per kirk for a total or 276 parking Spaces. zipvlevuinE Drneetc)pr•rs piralected traffic ram, DevetcpEr's aff ttie'shettl m[rde1 protects. Phase 1 irroriting IN/001 o` 21,'69 rind e•,e!iiii6 39 this with as rcpot"l aceuratelv rctleciirEl the environmental Inlpait, the 13v,, l ask this hod!. Inti follow its duta toenlcncr..I Felt ,I: icily then TCLninahhf.,,r,2quiriE'tlt:ntsthat the ent-trfnmcntal asse:ssm nt. rnptsrt provide aecuritte. meanin tuL and Jata..:a:d ',trial}sis or the phi, sical, sc.c1�31. hk cl-hi: tI. ec{1nLFrt]FL , Auld natural res(puree con- sequences ol-the proposed Jetion. (Ser FIRS §3.43; COUNTY I41t.1.E 14) hi the Kona' Vistas subdivision, the propose l projet t relies on the use pit 241hsta1YJarJ Keknantt'tra flack., K kuana'Pr:1 Irkwv is steep. his litli>lit tl ,:c±itr distance dale to extreme carne~ and is narr+rlt- with net sijcvcaik4. I he intp:tt;t of int:n:tta.ttci lr',�l'lic arising Iron) l'ha,se I and Phase 2 httildouts tit the Royal Vistas Housing 1 iiFjecl is Yteucl4yti:alel} addressed in the SSEN1 It1]pa4t ,\ nal) 5 is Report. ' 'hit'h I01;Iaas..+ iibt aki on YtripaLls lla ll# VIP:co K+.ttthurttarttr EG hway. 1 aril partic:tuLirl\ c-cancle.rtc•cl th.11 adding numerous vet 'Ede trips 10 rant', from a separate suldiivisior. will present d rgcrs arid tori t tiort to residents along Kekuttl1Fr`II F Place. I consider that the l'I urlYrt IJcpartmeat should require the applicant 10 add re -ss these et mee r11:,. 4 'Line 1)RA1"l. l:NVIR(ONMEN'1'.' I_. AN` h SMI 1"x1 requires I:\aluati.on of aul.10. . others. ac ver1.r:. Nac-emdeirt rrrtptiCtt, such or.y jr[r mlar.krrr cinviges err e;ifee1s lFfir S'ee Chapter 11-200.1.13. E1;:l.U+aii AJrninistnrti++e Rules_ Instead or squarely :addressing these i sue,- however. the ',RAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSlm:SSM1.N r Ninrpl' iLrrc're the tri. Llaimtn , that "rso etdvers; skx.ondary et' eels are c rccte4l sinew the devek prlrt.+nt wi►uld uti1ixc existing infrastructure. provide rnhll housinLr. F nc! ig not expected to result in s,11l4taratiak dernands to t:ounn <e1I tc.trs." IL is a serious fur the DRAFT 1: \ \' ! lie ).M 1E. N -C A SI-:SS>4Tl \ 1 to fail LL ',dress the potential aciver:3e rt-1pacts of rote,:=•ins; the uS nt` sulitta;rtdard exi.stini inrrastratc,tlIre. like Kekuuna' on Place, 7 1 ilc 1_tRAF1 E ;V1RONM N ,\S.SESS 1ENTh .ttl+ rc -c~T ;tchercc trallic impacts chn1y ill the Context u(whether the pro eei would Jt rr ' . ,+rrbsdt /5±RP" ucic-4 fle e_ifect car, ��rah rc heath. The Applicit.rit "l he PropoM d Project would not alit .1 public' Ilc itJt ilr t4 way: storrroN ate'. would be appropriately dispt ccl tial ilr drainage structures_ 'Indite impacts have been tak rl tiLt ;ir ful c unsiderit ion in project design,' Emphasis added. This Liald conclusion does net address potential aciverge imparts as required by ('hapter 1 1-3[Dt), I-13, 11awale Administrative Rules. kc Nanning. Di:pain- nerli should not accept the I )RAFT ENVI! (_ \ N't1 N 1 A 1 AS FSSIVII-A t 0E1 1.11c SSFM1 Trdt1it Intpacl .Arrr.rl sis l{e;purt. ki`17iC;h has the 1 TlLoving delieiencic - .� LtLItlrr tcaatitirc;ss aclv.71(sc traffic nilpacts within the Kona V istaLq subditi~iskr tlri in erorn ihc' prcrjcw:t: h 1 he . SI \1 Trill lic Impact Analysis 1,4.cr,;),r1 ta,cti ; vru ath idle c'il 1 `' , in cc3rstrust to thr. •9°u goy,lit tate etriplot'ril by the. U X WI tclack Eng izerin , Trntt't"ir imp:l t Analysis Report. Traffic, congestion lw ver sensitive. to, 4rowth cite in a non-linear. Oxp011 lrtl;wl rl:3ti��Il: c. Iht SSFM. Thlt` is impact Analysis Report dies not recc3gnite rltttiti•gelrcratio:aal housing, chacrf.teicristies cumttion ur 'l lati+Stitt according to census data and 1iI I• tuide.restirttaates %lady tiw.tuelc trips attributable to beiltloict of the nrupt,:tsed project. The SSI 1 !raffle Impact Amity -cis Report cnipluya an uiusltall} lttw tietriitic tittiltrrrce cif 8 3•w.hieles rot \nrthh 7uair1 {)u.Gii Kcu iurnrni1 1eiiubwa " on the :ielected t s or April :43). QIc}, a ti+w eekda# rind Ati44ust 24.. 2019, a Salt Lrdav _ compared with the 2]1 li Vr'itchcr Engineering 1 ra1-lie impact _"tirxalyVsis Report. `i+w'h[ch reported 1057 vehicles for JaTtu:at° " 14 ani 15, 2016. tot weekd y . ' I he lctwv reported vehicle volume 01.853 is ase cit i'ldw with f iC. 4 k 1 Ln SSFM Trani,; impact Anaa1vsis Report. which shows c pprox1U: 0 weiti •Jc• per Iinur in. 2{.iIt, kir Northbound Qu,eera Kau uitnanu ilight+/iyy at 7 arm. I he dilrerLf`rii,:e in volume is more than double the maximum 1( fit variation gel -wrath accepted iri daY-to-claw' measurements and Inns.,Linr�•Jial le_ I'he recommendation bs 'SSW i rul i is impart Arialls s Report for a rt undaneut at QLieeii Kaiahurrianu 11ijhway an I I' i Li il'.Ltcix Tic.ad itilcrth i is irlt'nn iit2T7t taiih the irai'Ci corridor Inters ctikwiw that pass warrarits hLIL reiiiaii uitwignali7ed present traffic s IlL:ty 1i ihi1il} concerti :,i 1r Litc v.rwertinicr3;: ' ltc recurttmen:irlii n lad "SSFM 1 °1 reiriic Ln p,ict ,\trod} sis Report tor iii. nitcrir3g 01 the inrirsce.ti,)n of()lacer' 1. humarn.i 1IitLhWri'v :irlL1 Kualk..irii FI Higlio,.ay is 1T1itIeLlw1L:. '+\late, as here. an intersection passes more gran one smirra.ni Linder all conditions, it should bk; prioritized rc�i :lcixl� ilrsl design 1' a signal for installation 1 h.H eirtnimst trice will he ti: :iti k°i ti;IlrLl h} the. propLiA..0. r. 111 wain. I,Fnc 1'3r411 Lu' iisiici aJ A.ssessrxic 1 C.aid SSE M 1 rank Impact Anal:, sis f#epnri 1.1L1es irsni presC-rtt crvslible Ii ct and anal sis such that the aiherse iiirnLlLi tin exisiirip in1rdstrlri°.turc:uirt rl.`stlliilig morn increased traffic. can be full} LIXIdersiosX1 anti rc uIi ni appropriate government planningi and n-spons.u. I declare under penal of perjur\ that the foregoine is tale. Dated: lir:ilea-Kona. I-taw:'ai'L OCTOBER X_ 2020, `ti i final tire: Printed mime. I t NV11) FSI .:\\t'1-: 11.41ADL COCK Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Mr. favid Blancett-Maddock 76-101 Kamehamalu Street Kailua Kona, HI 96740 Via email: dbmkonc,: aol.com RE: Commenfs an Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated EONS! for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Mr. Felix: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 3, 2020, on the Draft Environnentol Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). 1 am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: 1 am concerned that the findings of 'no significant Impact (DEA-AFNSJ) is not supported by the facts. I am concerned that Developer's DEA Study is proforma, setting forth declarations in boilerplate fashion while obfuscating, omitting or material facts and analysis. Response : Please see detailed coon n,ien s on specific resource sections below. Comment 3: The DEA omits an estimate of population demographics and the total expected population totals, actual dollar estimates assigned for any sales prices or rental prices, estimate for completion dates. The DEA does not address recreational space or defensibility of living space. The DEA omits observable data of known flooding and fails to address or adequately describe how his development will address the consequences. The traffic analysis omits and fails to consider observable and ascertainable local data. Response 3: Regarding population demographics, Table 3 in Section 3.4 (Socioeconomics) of the EA includes existing population data for the state, county, and North Kona Census County Division which are the areas the project is located within. An estimate of occupancy at project completion would be speculative for 450 multi -family units,. Justification for modeling inputs for the size and number of units are included in Appendix 2 (Traffic Impact Assessment Report). Regarding cost for sale and rental units, the units would be rented or September 13, 2C21 Mr. DvFd Blancett-Maddock Page 2of6 sold at market prices and cannot be determined at this time. Regarding construction schedule, Section 1 .2 states that construction could start as early as third quarter of 2021,.following Plan Approval and construction permits. and would be expected to last 12 to 18 months. Regarding recreation, Section 1.2 describes that there would be two community centers including a pool and facilities and in Section 3.3.4 it states that landscaping would provide safe and adequate recreational space for residents. Kona Three has a long-standing record of coordinating with agencies to meet requirements for the project and would continue to do so as stated in the EA. Regarding flooding and drainage issues, the EA explains existing conditions and how Kona Three is working with DPW to address these, and how the project would not exacerbate these issues (see Sections 1.2 and 3.3.2). Per Section 27-20 of the Hawaii County Code, the project is not allowed to increase any run-off onto neighboring properties, so there are no effects on any neighbors from project run-off including an the County -owned parcels. Specific comments on the traffic report are responded to below. Comment 4: I am concerned that that blind application of off -the shelf statistical based model fails to reflect obvious existing traffic saturation at peak times, rendering its derivative calculations as invalid. Response 4: The methods for the traffic analysis completed in the TIAR for this project follows widely accepted industry standards - from the data collection, to the growth rote, to the use of HCM. independent comments provided by Professor Prevedourous on the EA (which were included in a separate comment letter) agree with many of the traffic analysis methods and approaches for the project. The TIAR uses HCM methodologies to analyze the traffic impact in a numerical sense. There are limitations to the improvements that can be made. The northbound queue seems to be a comment made a lot by residents, Those comments are recognized. The adding of a few vehicles, or the modification of a traffic signal will have little impact to the network. Signalizing unsignalized intersections may cause more dela•,. The main problem is the capacity of a two-lane Highway, and if/when the widening will be completed. The widening of Queen Ka'ahumanu Higl-,vay will likely lead to the most improvements in the delay, and this project has beer planned for a while. The TIAR recognizes the impact of the widening, but Kona _ '-iree LLC does not control over that. Comment 5: The traffic analysis applies "nationally accepted land use rates from the Trip Generation, loth Edition OTE, 2016]'". This boiler -plate model generated analysis conveniently ignores automobile dernand, parking, traffic impacts, and data specific to the region about occupancy and vehicle ownership and usage specific to our west Hawaii community. Response 5: It is hard to predict if a 3 bedroom house will have 10 people with 2 cars, or 3 people with 4 cars, or be unoccupied with 0 people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus_ The Institute of Transportation Engineers {ITE], Trip September 13, 2C21 Mr. D. -owlet Blancett-Maddock Page 3 of 6 Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low- rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very low standard deviation and an R -squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection for the project. The ITE trip generation handbook is the accepted practice to develop trip generation and distribution and future projections. Although some units in the development could have more than 2 vehicles, not all units will be occupied or have vehicles. It is impossible to predict now many cars will be in the development. We con assume a max number, which would be the total number of stalls provided. But the parking capacity will probably never be at 100%. Also, not all vehicles will leave or enter the development during the AM and PM peak, which is when the TIAR is analyzing. The ITE trip generation handbook analyzes many developments and produces data points and a best fit curve. This is used for the traffic projection for this TZAR. Comment 6: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is. inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead an impacts along Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents clang Kekuanaoa Place. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 6: Kekuana'oa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as ail other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase II in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana'oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is roughly one additional vehicle on Kekuaria`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. Comment 7: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure. like Kekuana'oa Place. jesoonse 7: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7.1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana'oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekoaina'oa Place is the Phase ll outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM September 13, 2C21 Mr. David Biancert-Moddock Pace 4 of 6 peak hours, respectively). The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts {Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 8: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, 'The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 8: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of the EA. Comment 9: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 9: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 10: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TZAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 10: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rote. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers used 1% from the 2025 LRTP forecast. Comment 11: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics common in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Response 11: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three peorre with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and nc cars, or if residents will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mic1-rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has o very low standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. September 13, 2C21 Mr. Dvld B1anceft-Moddock Pace 5 of 6 Comment 12: The TEAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dotes of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repo1 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway cat 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Response 12: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nan Kailua Road ano Hualalai Road (north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HOOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if the Witcher Engineering report is overcaunting, or if the project's TIAR is undercounting, but the TAR for the project does use numbers similar to those provided in the 2016 HDOT Count, Comment 13: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualaiai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor, Intersections that pass warrants Ibut remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project Response 13: The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices IMUTCD) states, 'The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing o signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. September 13, 2C21 Mr. Dvbd Blancett-tvluddock Page 6 of 6 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1 4 l Michele Lefebvre, Ph.❑. michele.letebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley From: Allison ttei ir'ett ‹info aiblissinblOcrrt.carn# Sent Thrursday, Ortohel 08, 2020331 PM To: Plarini rg, Ir7trrrt Mail Subject Royal Vistas Housing Project EA corrments re. Traffic I. A LL[SON BENN ETT. declare: 1. I ant a resident o1' K:iilua-KoreaKrona \'i=tai County ufHawai i. State cwf 1Inwiti'i. The pr+ paced land dcyclopment project that is the subject of thc pending Dun Environmental Assc4tirncist submitted by Royal Vistas f lousing Project Tax Map K.ey Ni'.s ( 1 7.6-021:016, 7-6-021:117, 7-6-021:01S, u.ml 7-0-021:01t) Non h Kona District, H awai i Island, State orllawai'1 aifecis uie personally as well asaliects my interest in real proprtrty. I re- iTiewithin 11111 yartl5 of the proposed lana doe.[upiueitl project. In such capa.citica. 1 have firsthand knowledge of the following facts and could and would testily thereto ii called upon to do so. i have reti'iewwcd the pending DRAFT 1 NVIkl)Nh1I-,N-1 Al. ASSFSS[ 1EN 1 irrclrrttitt the 1 W Impact Analysis Report by SSFM1 International., dated July 202L and aturc•he•rt .r4 .' pp rtt,irc il.r DRAFT ENVIRONMENT AL ASSIiSSNIENT. 1 am specifically concerned about aw'verse traffic infract; both within and wwr-nitout the Kota Visias ilia( are not fully. or accurately addressed in the SSFM Traffic Impact „Vial ysrs Report. Traffic and the SSFM 'Traffic impact Analysis Report. are discussed in the body (tithe DRAFT ENVII&ONMENTAL. ASSESSMVIENT. at pp. 4g-56, 67 and 71. 3, to the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project rclie cert tlw use (.)1' a substandard roadway, Kcicttanai'oit Place_ Kekttana`oa Place is very steep, has tiiniLed sight distances due to extreme curves and is marrow with no sidewalks. 'Lie innpact of inert:; sod traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the Royal Vistas Housing Project is inadequately addressed ire the SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report, which focuses instead on impacts along ; ucxn Kaahuma.nu Highway_ I am particularly concerned that adding 136975 numerous vehicle trips to and From a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents 'atom! Kekuana'oa Place. I consider that the. Planning Department should rewire the applicant to address these ecinccans, 4. The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT requires evaluation of, among othe=rs, adverse secondary impacts, strch en; population c•{rttngc>,t rrr ofjrrls cars public.Chapter 1 1- .00.1- 13. Hawaii Admitiistr'ative Rules, instead ofsquarely addressing these issues_ however_ the DRAFT. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT . Inipl), ignores theta, claiming that "No adverse secondary effects are expected since die development would utilize existing infrastructure, provide infill housing. ttryal is neat t.xpeetcd to restin -,111,titantial demands to County services." Itis a serious omission For the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT to tial to address the potential adverse impacts or increasing the use of 5rthst;ortiJisl iwtirtig int'rastructurc. like: Kekuttrtia'ott Place, 5, The DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the protect would Have ar rfekt.v-. 1r J rt't rtra puhlic- health. The Applicant claims. 'TItc; Proposed rrojtti.t would not atLet public: health in any way; store water would be ,`appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Trai i4: impacts have been Irtkcert itttuu careful ecnsiderution ui projei4 deli n," Eiupltatsi . added. Tills bald conclusion does trot 34iciress ►tenni adverse impacts as rtcltrired by Chapter 1 1-200,1-13, 1h.rtw}ati Administrative Rules, File Planning. Department should not accept the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT'S reliance on the SSFM Traffic Impact. Analysis Report_ vdiich has the Following di ficienct : a. failure to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas stthdi •isic►n arising from the project: h. The SSFM l ratthc impact Analysis Report usoi.a 1_7,R - with rale of I °'ti, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2011' Witcher. Enoneertng'traffic impact Analysis Report. Traffic congestion is eery sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation., 2 The SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report does not recognize multi -generational, housing characteristu cot -ninon in Hawaii according to census da.t a and likely underestimates daily acfne.ler trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project: d. The SSFM Traffic impact Analysis Report employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound. Queen Kaaheammul highway on the selected dates of April 10, 21.]19_ a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic impact Analysis Report. which reported 11157 vehicles .for January [4 and 15,2016_ 16_ brit]] w eel;dayw. The unusual Ii,' k,w reported vehicle volume of853 is also at odds width Fieurc 4 of the SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report, which shows ,tpprai+tun al.ely 1030 vehicles per hour in 2015 litr Northbound QuQcn Kauhuttl,aou I lighway at 7 Jun. Tile deference in voltaic is more than double themttxirnum 10% variation generally accepted in day -today measurements and thus cruel tkr!�•. e. )nor Lwy SSI M Traffic Impact Analysis Report for i roc undabout at Queen l uahuiini,lt. FI;g1o.kii •;i:td ; otill) is inconsistent with lddtir. lntcrscctic.wnsthat pass warrants laut remain LCnstL.11 d'ftad I,1tw,eaiI ir..Lffit: s.',fety liability ti'+r �wtiii- it,. !k ti y ,Ft .'I111riL`Ctt; recommendation by SS1' M 'i'rai3'ic 1rn.pact analysis Report for ii)i:r.lit.oring of the intersection of Queen Kaaliuntanu Highway and Kuakirni Highway is inadequate, 1t, hurt, as here. an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a si sal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project_ In sum, the Draft Environmental ASSesSrneni and SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report dues not pr ertt sufficient, credible facts and anal!. s such that the adverse impacts en existing infrastructure and resulting from increased traffic can be fully understood and result in appropriate; government l)laniliL1g and response. 1 declare under penalty of perjury that the lore ring is true. Dated: Kaitua-Kana, Hawai`i, October 8, 21.120. Respectfully. Allison Bennett 3 I. 1, .1 h ' I I .•,r .1 Cr+9,`,!.'N J 0'0'4 11.-',Lh.",' 4 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.D. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: {8081 494-2039 Ms. Allison Bennett Via email: info@'l. lissinbloom.corr RE: Traffic Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FON$I for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawaii Island Dear Ms. Bennett: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 buildouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Plcice. I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -cut is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana `oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak period. This is rouanly one additional vehicle on Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. C11 September 13, 2021 Ms, Allison Bennett Pogo 2 of 4 Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Respons.e 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place. the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Pince is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respective)A. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: storrnwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, ❑nd accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of tr,e EA. Comment 5: The Planning Deportment should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Althoeolb we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2, our traffic engineers uses. 1 T_ from the 2025 LRTP forecast. C11 September 13, 2021 Ms, Allison Benne11 Page 3 0, .1 Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics cornr,::,.,r7 in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Responsej: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if resit-::-rts will use the bus. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Genera ° on Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very law standard deviation and an R - squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 353 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway an the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAL, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highway of 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road {north). Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to the 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if lege Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, or if the project's TZAR is unde7 oJr'ling, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those f rovv lded in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TZAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TZAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queer Kaahumariu Highway and Kuckini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than ane warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project Response 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, 'The satisfac'i =>r of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility, and others. The scope C11 September 13, 2021 Ms, Allison Benne11 Page 4 of 4 covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed, It should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project. The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me of (808) 494-2089 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department :r'• Ir, Mori, Ashley Froin: D. Bianceit-madcJoc #dbmkorna@aol corn> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2[}20 2.23 PM To: Plan; lin Internet Mail Subject: ROYAL VPSTAS HOUSING PROJECT EA COMMENTS Attachments: KV DECLARATION DIANE OCTOBER 7.pdf ALOHA. Attached please find my comments to the Royal Vistas EA report_ With aloha, Diane Blancett-Maddock Kona Vistas 136977 DECLARATION. (..):F DIAN[ BLANCLTT-' 1Ai7DOCl L 1 iam RRI:tncr~it-i 1adducJc. tJcNlare: 1 I aims a resident of Kona Vistas siihdivisiun[. County of I lav,.ai`i. State iii i J:itia`ai i. The proposed land developrrteni prctiject th. tt is the subject o1 t ['ending Draft l-rt -irc,rintcntal T1s t,atitcatt ulliiiititil I'�� Ruyi1 \rertir' 1IOU ,EII' Project 'rax trs. 1307-6-021-A16, 7-6-0? 1 ;017, 7-6.021:01 R., and T ft-021:019 North Knim 1)istrict. 1 lahwarI Island. State ul' IJ:t►c;ti'i a13'ccts me past. ally ,.it leets m} interest in retail property. 1 reside tn:itllin .3 miles of the proposed land d R elopintttt p tttiect, Iii Srt6it et1pUCilic~. 1 hti,e 1irstJu:trrd knoiMeg:J a tit' the Itollo tire. facts and could aiiJ v6.01114 testily IJ c.reh if I:Idled ti(xiri tSti dc. tii1 1 1i ivo reviewed the Bending 1)R 11 '"J 1.:NV I RONN.1i?\ J AL ASSL: Sh1EN r including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report by NSI.N.1 Irtternrtlional (1 L\R . dated f+`I,i}f and airtitchcd as 4ppeindix 214.) the 1)RAF-1' ENVIRON%IFN'I.\L ;1w 1. 'v11. 1 Ism 4pecilically cons:CM:cl about rid crsie tratile intp tei., Both witlhin ari.1 'A.:thou! the Kona Vistris subdivision. that arc ito), tul]ti or accurately addressed iri the SSFM traffic impact Arialysis Report. 1 rut'#ic and the SSF A Traffic Ite'pact Rypien. arc (liscuvic l in ilii body fol the 1)RAFT ENVIRONMENTAL_ ASSESSMENT at pp. 48-56. 67 and I. When Lh i4 multi- kamily zoini:ng. was created in 1(44. Land was vacant and the innpict of tiddin 4 multi-t:trmulx mita would not hay.,: been a traffic isauc. Howercr. in :020. 11W :tr ii ha., been tk vctc,>'ped and this proposed ck'elopructit will have an cxtrer e1y r7 iti..c rzitpact nil the atlteai} strt.-7ssed infrastructure:. The proposed development indic;ises a nein- i_nH,d righi- 1 turn only exit onto the iiightiwue . 1lovw'ev'er. ilio 11. 11 inethrrrltticti w r.loes not riw47t,rsitLly reflect or consider the tact that :lie highway has alreaaly retched saxtur:tted status. Nor dnes the t IAlt Tres adequately address the impact to tie abutting neighborhood that wvill he caused wlic•i1 it ruuLes the stiuthhound irilli,. t'i,rt e,:,irir'i 'r,c tisi.s intersection for left torr. through :r small neit;hhQncoc}d sired, to the s:ttrirated trait. si��'sti:tl : 1..kiko Street. .hare it will st ek up fir;.t left (urn. rn short. Lu aivtiid proper 3i rtulir,sifi<tn m thy: primary highway inter cetion. developer shifts the burden. costs :Lind impact ri ito its nui ghbors and the iradegttate C'iminty Airnalization ni I likri Street_ In 2020, (trtn'er1I conditions tv'it1ti:fui kiurisnal 1 have personal!) ttilt,cl� el on rrn a. 'recki.l ivs. irtlurwc tiirri c7I the hi;'hwyEty. at Larks} street is gridlriel ed dttrini. noon -peak -rush hours such us. late iiiiitning. e;ir1 >iifts:ri on and car -h eveninvs. The intersection at .Lako is barely able to current loads algid emu Lit kit-ttiu 1) uiiv additional traffic From this cicv'cloprnenr_ BCCI / e rhea i tic) acceleration lane in :tnv direction at T...ttko Street iiitt:r•sr.•tt. tx11 Lilo Suect trtisfl'ic: rtitist stop prior iti i.sricring tFic h.iphw'iiv. As a result_ traffic already backs up the Adjacent neig_likrrtt i ds. both inauku nand omikitf Jh1 can be observed even tmv., even when we are not CNpe..riencU1g tlrl ptr.k-iip and discharge clf children by school bu y:N. trr the hvi►y liruri t trtfl'ic we etre;.t..cipttrini ire under non criarantirte conditions_ 111Visla.s Stibdivisiun, the pato rcast.f project miles ❑n the use of srth iarndard roadway_ L ekuana'na !'lace. Kekuatia`c+'a Place is very steep. has lilt] ttr) sit distances 4lt.ie to ettrr;:rtie carr i s and is narrow with not sidewalks. The impact of increlis4d traffic aris.ry from !'hare i and Phase buildi}uts of ttic; Royal' Vistas Housing Proic:ct is inadequatcb, addressed In theS 1 M Traffic Impact Artaly'sis Report. which focuses instead Cut impacts LIILwta�, Queen Kaahu nrtnei I e hvw'34'_ I am partrci.rlairly enncctned that adding, nurner€wus vehicle trips tri attrti from a separate subdivision will present darters and congestion to residents along Ki.:ktana`ea Pince. 1 cc n dcr that the Planninig Department should require the appte.ant a� ;tdulrt:ss ihcse concerns.. 4. The DRAFT 1=NVIRON`.IF \ FAL A.S4,E.SSME?4J'T requires evaluation gat'. among others,. iTdl`usc' :owl) kplo'ri reteeety on /mart- farileJlec_ wtcClrapLer 11-2..00.1-13, 1Eak44ir ul`6, 1fStc`. Ll 11. cluarely aeld:ressrnl these however. the DRAFT ENVIRONMP9T \I AS .. NIFN'T simlal} igttur:s them. r l�ritthing thin "No .utiveru• treund,ir el ILti t, r[1 ..• . i _ I ..1 .:ince the developrttciit vvotit.1 uti1t'L' existing infr:tsintt:ttire• provide 1i14l1 4iotttiirta.'i !,.," !ii result in suhsi inti31 tilettrctitds It is ci ritrir; ('ntissispn felt. ane 1)RAF'1 1 ` `\'IRI 1NiIANN 1 Al .A1,SSI:SSh1I'.N 1' tlr rail to address thL poterilit,i ti 1v roc invoetst►G ri r a;in ilu zt:e aFi siih trindarrd exi.iin ; ittlra.truettrte_ like Ptiec i1Lr.» 1)1&AFi HNVIRONMF:N.1AI tiSF4:+h11~A1 addresses 411.1NCISO i741110 ivapact Linty in the t.oilitst tit iodtetlhe+r they 1Projcet v.{ru1J 1-i'rrt'e a ,ctei,P ttmtrcrl crc16'4'r_.4 c'acce iirl paolriir bell/tot 11ie Applicant Natms. "Fht Pair [sett f'rUj. 1 wL}LJ..d. neat nilet•1 public he411tI1 in ani, tvul: titorruv iter^+\ 'Ltld h4 uppr•nprittiely iJisr+rticd+ifin drainage tnar:tures, 1 rtiItie inipgrct IZ.avt• been tai ea into cord -nil consideration in project tlesigrr." Emphasis added, This bald conclusion dues nut address; po:enual adverse impacts as required by C'hapicr 1 I-2tUt .1-1 w. l larw lrii ALLrriirlr.irative RalLN t'f. The Piaf tiing Department shertild rtoi',tempt the DRAFT I✓NVIRONMEN'1'AI._ ASSITSS\IC::\T'q reliance rtrr the SSTM fraftic Impact .°1nah•siis Rep rt. vthich has the EctlIotitin deficiencies: 3 �. I:Ill.lre Ic1 :aciclress {ialwe:ss traria: imparts within the Kona Vistas tulxlivisi+ln .1risiiig from the proleo: h. The SsFM 'Traffic Impaact Analysik Report ages a growth rate of i%. in contrast tol the 2".-1,trn'wthrate employcd hy the 20[8 Witcher i;a!ineerin.„t'1ra1'1ic• ltupaetAnalysis Rw c,n. Traffic congestion n i:, very tscnwitive to growth rate in a non-linear. cNiponential ;>vyl�xtiw7n; [lte SSF`TI [tat lc hiapict Analysis I' qu.rrt 'loci; haat ii-. g1air.r ntiiLCi-pencrati n nl housitig clurac:t+`ristics c trim. t in Ilaw•aii according to ccFISLIS data and likely underestimates daily Vehicle triply eutrilotrtahie to Knack in orthd proposed ed project: 4I. 1 ltc ` ";l h.1 1 Fa I'i ti tinppLic:I Aii ii .sis Report entppltr)an unusually Io' vehicle wtiluitae of 85ychicl:s for NoraQueen. I, aahauiianu I1igliway t'ri alie selteted dales April ;+[J. 2019. a weekday and lttt li •I 24. Sal ura>. eaainpared with the 2(I1?l Witt her Elit..iii eriii 1 raliic ltllj .t. 1 iepi.irted 11)57 vt•hii its; iiir .1ct1.1111s1r% 1a ':u1(1 I. 2111(1. I}I.I111't Y.1.:Iktiax) "ph' I-1111 wa1:t1I4 ii:+E rwp,orted vehicle volume of X53 k also al ocidi, Yoa..1 i°igure 4 c'I Ilit: SSI- ` 1 frail -a: Tant> ei ralna1ywis R.r pori. which s11clwws.1(_ipruxinitttcly 111.5+1 .,clo.IL!s per kiln. in I.I1(1 for Northbound Queen KnnhU111Ltrlli Ili ghw a in 7 tun 1. -he difference in volume i more then ilinthie the ma -simian 1110.'x.}'iria°iriiirt v,tii-ii ralth Icci.p ted iri d ty-rel-LL14 ideas1_iremei] Li arid Oak.; urtNli able; e. 1 he recommendation ndati& n by. SSF .1 Traffic Impact Arlaaltisis P.eptiart for a r4. in iakxlut . i Queen kaahuntatnu 11ip hway and I lualalai I4.cad {N(,rr'thoi is ineonsi ent ti sth the traffic eft riilar. I ers.cclitlt4. that pass IAimams but remain. ur]S'It..4'i ti,l pTe nr traffic s aror lisrhili>� vonc rrb.:, for the governrncttl, f'. the recommendation by S I- I •••1 ,ra' ri 1 r rnnnitorir1�. cit the intersection i1rQueen Kaahiunanu I-4ighwit> and Kuaki,1. auk. as 4 lack. an inrerse{titan passes rnor aura one warrant tinder :all conditions,. it:should prit�ri�irccl ror study and liCSi.0 {tt a Si to tl tilt '1 kt« l'i :tIITlstdtn c will he exite.erbatvi h'~° the pr1Vascd rrusect. 7. lrt surra_ tlae I?rtll Environmental Asscssrnent and SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report 1.1.ti ILUI pr;se°nt sufficient. credible NCB mid analysis such that the cetiversc itrtr:rcttion existing intrastiuettrrcluted resulting from iner ase -a traffic can be I`iall> uttckr.*Icxxl and reside in appropriate government planning. and response I declare uikler potato, of pLriu7 ;hat the k reLtottig. k true Coated: I ,fila;a l t►n;a. f iaw i'i. October 7, i)21. 5 Sig atur��: 1'rtt]Lcci rzttcrsc° I)i:attte Bltuacett- Liddo k Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.9039 .Ms. Dane Blancett-tvl addock Via email: dbmkonc a l.corn RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawal`i Island Dear Ms. alancett-Maddock: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 8, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA), for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Konci Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 bulldouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kcahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned That adding numerous vehicle (rips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents olanq Kekuanaoa Plcacel consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impact on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuano`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana`oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak. period. This is roughly one additional vehicle or Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2C21 Ms. Diane Rlancett-Maddock Fade 2 of A Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place, the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Ploce is the Phase II outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Hove a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, The Proposed Project would not offect public health in any way; stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been token into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added, This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed and analyzed above in the body of tr,e EA. Comment 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance on the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR. Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rate in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HOOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Flan forecast projections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Although we are not certain how Witcher Engineering got 2%, our traffic engineers usen117, from the 2025.LRTP forecast. September 13, 2C21 Ms. Diane rilancett-Maddock Page 3of Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics corereen in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. Responsej: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The institute of Transportation Engineers jITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and low-rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has a very law standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAR employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahur'nanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repol 1, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume of 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TZAR, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 far Northbound Queen Kaahumonu Highway at 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum 10% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable, Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kcaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Huolalai Road (north}. Our traffic count taken in August of 2019 was compared to tee 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if Ene Witcher Engineering report is overcounting, ar if the project's TZAR is unde7 oer'ling, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those f rovv -ded in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TIAR for a roundabout at Queen Kaahurnanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North; is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignaIized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumariu Highway and luakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under olI conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project Restonse 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other considerations that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility„ and others, The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2C21 Ms. Diane rilancett-Maddock Pacje4of4 an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. It should also be noted that many ot these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (8O8) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1' r: Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre@stontec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kano Three LLC Maija Jackson, County ot Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley Frain: Pert StefIenhagen <pesteffe@gmail.cam' Sent: Friday, October 09, 202018:33 AM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: F i4: Declaration RE Royal Vistas }attachments: Scan 27.pdt mistakenly sent my declaration only to the person supporting our responses from Pualani Estates. Please accept my apologies and my declaration submission this morning. Thank you! Peri I MON43 ti ---- Forwarded mtssaux--- From: ni: Peri StelTenhug n ''p�ytei' D:atc:: Thu, Oct 8, 2020 v. 5:01 I'M Subject: Dcctaraticrn 11I? ldnya1 Fisa% 1'r.: 1). 141 anuutt-r'ru1ddt i..4111mkutla(er:.1U1_coni f 'A/ IS 1 k'„i0..p p r”, I Il,,,..Lf14 ro 124B 136966 l.yl t'i.ARA I ICr `*i 'OF I'EI J S INFFFNH 1 E 1. PER] STE FENI[AGE \ , declare: I. I rtnti a residint oil Pualani states subdivision]. (,'c)uft\ or I I.dv,ai`i, State 01 tlawwdal-i. The propose lands do.c°larl?ntcrtl project that is the subject of the pending 1}raft Environmental Assessment submitted by Royal Vitas TEratG.winli Project Tax Map Key M1It35. (3 7-6-W1:016,. 7.fr 021:011. 7-6-121:1)1!#, and 7-6-021 .019 Norrh Kana I3astnei, llawai`1 island, state of Hrtrk•ai'i affects nee personally us well as affects my interest in real properly. I reside within 100 Yards [distance] of the pra pu J land develt prent project In such capacities. 1 have firsthand knowledge a Cthe: following liacts and could and would testify thereto it`ccallt t 111C011 10 L111 ?. 1 ility reviewed the pending DRAE i l;NVIIRfNtNIl:NTAI.. ASSE:RSSM1:T+i`I including the Toifiii impact Analysis Report by SSIN international, dated July ?€ICIaid :ctta>`lled N. Appendix 2 to tine DRAFT L:.NVIRONME.NT.AI.:ASSFSSMFN 1. 1 am specifically ;`cfr1cerned x>ut advent: traftic itrtpacts both within and without. the Kona Vistas sv ticlivisinn Lind arc: not sully or accLnateiy addressed in thti SS}'Mi Tnaitic Impact Analysis :Report. 'I.ratlic and the SSF I "1 ratfic Impact Analysis Report. are cii.cuswt:d in the hcady of the DRAFT ENVIRONME -M1 ASSESSMENT. at pp. 48-5(a. ti7 and 71. Ir the Kona Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use elft stabstandard roadway. Kekuana`ea Pi v.x. Kektiaartu`oa Place is vti,:ry atcr`p, bill limited sight distances Joie to extrerne caftans and is narrow with no Sitte+ ulkw. The impact of increased traffic i hale 1 and Phase 2 buiidouts i fthe Royal VP.; Homing ting I'ruacct iy uladequateh i ,' SSFM Traffic impact Arial> sis Report. which titcuses in.steaki op iutintct.. along ! arn particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips anii from a separate s1J1'rdiYision will present dangers and congestion ttt residents iikng Kekt ana`cia Fla e. 1 consider that the I'larrriiJI Department .1tuttld cc -quire the applicant to. c�aklns LJJesc concerns. 4 Lino ))RAFT I NVIRl"`NME T:\1. ASSESSMENT reyuiu s e-v;iIuation aw mg„ Nalher .. uciitT,Yce sn:crrrcicari` et iJ.rsac ts, s1ach cas a' iviritjrii n Oranges or eltects ort prahfte ��wr!aties., See Chapter 11-200.1-13, Ilawaii Administrative. I ulc c. tnstrrad of squarely addre.$sing these issues, huwevcr. the fRAll I...NVIRL)NM1'.N IAL ASSESSMENT simply igtiorea theta, c l,.tiiuiii this -No aialverse. secondary efteets arc exp.:cu.:LI : irtce the development would utilize existing infrastructuri, provik anlill housing. and i$ not expcel &I to result in 4tJb t,Etfl.i:7: detrtar[tcla 10 ("Canty sr-rwrces," it is a serious omission fur the 1)RA.I1" ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMEN N 1' to tail to address the potential aslveri-c irxtpwts cif incrCasin the use of substantia -c1 existin , infrastructure. like kekit arya`oa Place, 5 t h F )RAl-' l EN V I lt(JN 1VML:N1 AL ASSESSMENT addiesses adverse tragic impacts only in the context of wliethea the project would Have ca subsrantiai adverse effect rin puhiic• health. The Applicant claims. "Mc Proposed Project would not affect public health in arve way, stvrrrtict•ntnr would he appropriately di paced of in drainage siniettures. 1`ral)ic impacts have been taken into careful considcratit girLpru j_et t design_" Ernpha,sis aided. This bald cnnclusion does; not potential adverse Impacts as requited by( tater 11 -24)0.1 -Li. Aduii,aittative Rides. 2 I he Planting I.)epartruenr should not leeelst the DR.A[ r ENV IRON MENT..l.. ASSESSMU.N l..'s raliarn on the SSFM Traffic lm}a.e.t Analysis Report_ whirh has the following deficiencies: failure Et) addrerss ail\cry:: trafriti iL iirtets'vithirt ili Kona Vistas subdivision arisial Irani the project; l,. Th S.q110'1 riflic impact Analysis Report testi i4 growth mite 41%. in cxartlxil.`ri ILr the 2' Brow h ratrtipluy cel 1av the 20111 Witcher Engi leering, I°miTie' iratpuet Ari 1ysk Report. Truflic congestion is very sensitive tco growth rate in a non-linear, exponential rehatiOri. c. Th- SSI•M 1 rrri'lic impact Analysis Report does not reexignife multi -generational 'lousing charii tcristics corninOn in il:iwari sacci rding to census data and htkely u detestinaates dally vehicle trips attiihuir:ahie iri h1.1IWOW t>1 th.L:' proposed project: d.. TEte SSFM 1 ratllic impiact Analysis Report employs an uiai,51Ial y 1L7vti vehicle ulutaie of 85 ► i.•chiclev fur Northbound .. neen 4a.lrurrtlriia highway net the selected dater.) of April O. 2019, •t weekday wui August 24. 2019. a Saturday, compared %kith the 201 R Witcher Engineering Truffle impact Analysis Report. ti'hied reported 1157 vehicles for itirivary 14 and 15. 201 ;S. both weekdays. The unusually low reported skiff k Velurxte cif 833 is INAin (}Jib with Figure 4 at the SEM traffic impact Analysis is Regi rt, which slwws approximately I050 vehiches per hour in 014s for Northbound Queen Kaahuntarru Highway at a.m. The difference in volume is nmre thArt efouhle the maximum 10% •wtr'irairun generally aLcepted in day-to-day rneasureinuos and tlit.ti ttnreiiahle. e. I'iter ix m.rnendatiort by SSFM Traffic Impact Analysis Report for a roundabout at Queen Kaahw ianu Highway and Hualalhii lead (North) is iriconsistertt with the 'traffic 2 corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but rurrtiairs =signal ietl present t al safety ltahilit) concerns fbr the governlncnt; f The reeDranierdati w by. SSFM Traffic, Impact Analysis Report kir monitoring of the interaction of Queen l aahurnanu Highway and K«akini Highway k insadeeittne Where, as lm :rc. an inteniecilort passes ruore than one warrant under all conditions_ it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal far installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposetl prn i cci 7. Int sum, the I)ratt Elm- itonntental .Assessaient and SSFM Fratlic Impact Analysis Report dues not present sttlilt:iertt. credihltr facts and analysis such that [he adverse impacts on cxisIing irti'rastrut;tu.rc and resulting from iiia teied traffic can be fulls understood arnd result in appropriate gokicrnincn1 planning and nevi., se, I declare ringer penalty of perjury that the foregoing, , is true. I)atcd- Kuiluut-KortEl, II ()ember ()ember K . 202(1. Signature: I'n nteti name: sT 1 `) Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Peri Steffenhagen Via email: pesteffe: gmail.com RE: Comments on Traffic Concerns in the Graft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated FON$1 for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kana District, Hawal'i Island Dear Ms. Steffenhagen: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 9, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment including the Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) (Appendix 2 of the DEA). I am specifically concerned about adverse traffic impacts both within and without the Kona Vistas subdivision that are not fully or accurately addressed in the TIAR. Response 1: Specific comments for traffic impacts are discussed below. Comment 2: In the Konci Vistas subdivision, the proposed project relies on the use of a substandard roadway, Kekuanaoa Place. Kekuanaoa Place is very steep, has limited sight distances due to extreme curves and is narrow with no sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic arising from Phase 1 and Phase 2 bulldouts of the proposed project is inadequately addressed in the TIAR, which focuses instead on impacts along Queen Kaahumanu Highway. I am particularly concerned that adding numerous vehicle trips to and from a separate subdivision will present dangers and congestion to residents along Kekuanaoa Place, I consider that the Planning Department should require the applicant to address these concerns. Response 2: Kekuanaoa Place is a County -owned road built to County standards, with the same specifications as all other Kona Vistas roads, including paved swales as sidewalks. There will be no traffic impcct on Kekuana`oa Place from Royal Vistas Phase I as designed as the connection of Kekuana`oa Place to Royal Vistas is not planned until Phase H in 2029. After that, once full build -out is completed, the TIAR estimates a total of 30 additional vehicles on Kekuana`oa Place during the AM Peak period, and 25 additional vehicles during the PM Peak. period. This is rouanly one additional vehicle or Kekuana`oa Place every 4 minutes for the peak periods, which would not cause congestion. September 13, 2C21 Ms. Per Steffen hagen Page 2 of A Comment 3: This DEA requires evaluation of, among others, adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Instead of separately discussing these issues, however, the DEA ignores them. It is a serious omission to fail to address potential adverse impacts of increasing the use of substantial existing infrastructure, like Kekuana`oa Place. Response 3: Secondary effects are indirect effects, or effects that would occur at a different place or time than the proposed project. These effects are not expected since the project is expected to provide infill housing for on -island residents as described in Section 3.7,1 of the EA. Regarding potential traffic impacts to Kekuana`oa Place. the number of vehicles projected to use Kekauna'oa Place is the Phase 11 outbound traffic 22 and 9, for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The traffic analysis includes a detailed analysis of secondary traffic effects impacts (Section 3.7.2 of the EA). Comment 4: The DEA addresses adverse traffic impacts only in the context of whether the project would Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. The Applicant claims, The Proposed Project would not affect public health in any way: stormwater would be appropriately disposed of in drainage structures. Traffic impacts have been taken into careful consideration in project design." Emphasis added. This bald conclusion does not address potential adverse impacts as required by Chapter 11.200.1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules. Response 4: The EA describes potential impacts under respective resource sections as they could impact human health. The summary statement quoted is included in Part 5: Findings and Reasons, and accurately summarizes the impacts detailed aria analyzed above in the body of the EA. Commei>wt 5: The Planning Department should not accept the DEA's reliance an the TIAR, which fails to address adverse traffic impacts within the Kona Vistas subdivision arising from the project. Response 5: Intersections within the Kona Vistas project were not analyzed since those internal intersections are probably stop controlled and have only local residential traffic. Delays to these intersections are not expected to be significant. Comment 6: The TIAR uses a growth rate of 1%, in contrast to the 2% growth rate employed by the 2018 Witcher Engineering TIAR, Traffic congestion is very sensitive to growth rote in a non-linear, exponential relation. Response 6: Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) counts did not show an increase in traffic volume. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecast proiections for 2020 and 2035 were used to come up with the 1% growth rate. Alit (,iu :ill we are riot certain how Witcher Engineering got 2, our traffic engineers usec. 1 T_ from the 2025 LRTP forecast. September 13, 2C21 Ms, Ped Steffenhagen Page J . ",1 Comment 7: The TIAR does not recognize multi -generational housing characteristics con een in Hawaii according to census data and likely underestimates daily vehicle trips attributable to buildout of the proposed project. ResponsJ: It is hard to predict whether a 3 -bedroom house will have 10 people with two cars, or three people with four cars, or be unoccupied with no people and no cars, or if residents will use the bus. The institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook was used and law -rise and mid -rise was considered. Low-rise multifamily housing was used since it provided a higher volume output. This land use has o very law standard deviation and an R- squared value very close to 1.00, so statistically this is the best projection used by the traffic engineer. Comment 8: The TIAL employs an unusually low vehicle volume of 853 vehicles for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu highway on the selected dates of April 30, 2019, a weekday and August 24, 2019, a Saturday, compared with the 2018 Witcher Engineering Traffic Impact Analysis Repoli, which reported 1057 vehicles for January 14 and 15, 2016, both weekdays. The unusually low reported vehicle volume ot 853 is also at odds with Figure 4 of the TIAL, which shows approximately 1050 vehicles per hour in 2016 for Northbound Queen Kaahumanu Highwoy ot 7 a.m. The difference in volume is more than double the maximum l 0% variation generally accepted in day-to-day measurements and thus unreliable. Response 8: The most recent Historic HDOT count available in the study area was the 2016 Queen Kaahumanu Highway section between Nani Kailua Road and Hualalai Road (north}. Our traffic count token in August of 2019 was compared to tee 2016 HDOT count and was found to be fairly comparable. It is hard to say if lege Witcher Engineering report is overcaunting, or if the project's TZAR is unde7 oJr'ling, but the T1AR for the project does use numbers similar to those f rovvlded in the 2016 HDOT Count. Comment 9: The recommendation by the TZAR for a roundabout at Queen Koohurnanu Highway and Hualaiai Rood (North} is inconsistent with the traffic corridor. Intersections that pass warrants but remain unsignalized present traffic safety liability concerns for the government. The recommendation by the TIAR for monitoring of the intersection of Queen Kaahumariu Highway and Kuakini Highway is inadequate. Where, as here, an intersection passes more than one warrant under all conditions, it should be prioritized for study and design of a signal for installation. This circumstance will be exacerbated by the proposed project Response 9: The Manual an Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) states, "The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall riot in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal." There are other consideraticns that need to be done before installing a signal, such as the increase in delay, the likely increase in rear end accidents, geometric feasibility„ and others, The scope covered in this TIAR does not include that analysis. The TIAR does mention where September 13, 2C21 Ms, Per Steffenhageri Page 4 of 4 an intersection may warrant a signal, and that further study may be needed. kt should also be noted that many of these intersections currently warrant a signal without the proposed project The proposed project is not necessarily triggering the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant. We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (8O8) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1' r: lvlichele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department Mori, Ashley Front Peri Sreffenitagen epestetfe grnailWIT1 Sent Friday 0_ tuber 09, 2320 8.36 AM To: Planning Intorno Mail Subject: Fwd_ Signed Docr.,rna=rlt Regarding Royal Vi5tas Attachments: Royal Vistas Document 1_pdP I mistakenly sent my declaration only to the person supporting our responses from Pualani Estates. Please accept my apologies and my declaration submission this morning. Thank you! F'Cx, eri•enl1agen I YV15 urn (',11;rsfr l owirkt- 1 I hil. # `t rrwarde€1 message --------- Fi Fill, Peri Sretferr1mg n c pL. k lL"r' l!111iIlI.(-' Ill> L] 1ka I'htl, 4 $y! N. )11 rl al 45ti P 1 Subject: Sigued Dueulnt:itt Regarding I ily tl Vistas To: ID_ Blal7ceit-iiiadtdoc rdlhnt i'na.. ,rol,tirinl Sending this one separately as I may not get the other- one to you by 5 PM. 126965 I )1:Cl.ARA:l'loN OF PER S'I P1JAL AN1 [ S I . 1'w -S w It 911EOWNEK_ 1. 1'FRI STFFFU 11AGFEN , declare: 1. I am a resident of F.ailua•KOIk _. [`cora'. of 1ltaw:Yi'i. State. or 1 Ez tiv� i'i l'he proposed land de. clop m i.t project that is the sut jact of the pending Draft Environmental A .sessment submitted hti R ;-al Vistas Housiirp Project I ax Map Key Nos. I:3) 1-6-C21:0I ft. 7-6-- 021:017. ..6..fl?1:017. 7-6,021:0 1 ki.„ and 7-6-021 :LI 19 North Kona District. Haw bland, State of 1ittwu ` affects fire personlll) well as al cues rimy interest in nrul prtrpe;rt}. l reside within _I NI yards _ [distance] of the prul csed land development project. In such carol.; ities. 1 httv2 !it thsrnd knowledge of the Boll+,whit! Lads and could and would tesiily thereto it. called lipon no do se, reviewed the pctiding 1..)101:1 l N\ IIRONMINT Al., ASSE•• Ski N -F anti attachments. 1 am spetiliod15 concerned about- culturar': artifacts and native fatttrut Ftuhitsrt. sped fecal l v' Ihc: puck) ler eN) and bats that l wee marl" nightly from my lanai. ?. 1 tilt.) not cc*rtsider that the lrchaeolo icul sti offered in yuppctrthc Jr:tit 1-:itvironnierttal adequate. Sce pp. 4. 1 am m..sare ti;at.substantial evidetnc4: ovists that tete land encompassed by the subject land parcels inchtdeg features or the Holtta loa NI;de. including rat_l: walls that are inadequately described as agncnllural wall;. in the, archaeological sLiiii . Oflercd in support ell` the Dratt Environmental Assessmriii. The.. tiohtalt .i Aide. is an imptrtant .cultural irtd archaeological t"eatutw from pre -Western contact ting that catrrr101 he replaced if damaged or destroyed. 1 5. 1 Kase my concerns upon the evaluation and an; IyAis perforrned by Tem Pnhaku Stone_ a copy or which i:, attached_ t'i. In sum. (he I7rafd Frtv;rortn. ental r'ls rnent %lots n t discus 5u}ficient facts and analysis cutch that t1i,-.# important 1Eawai'tan cultural, archaeological, and native fauna features can } Lrntiltrst,.ti)d. Iet alone properly preserved. Al minimum, the I)ru H.nvironmentnl Assessment must be revised to address nlocation. data -ind k. 1 Lrvution ul'the }lolualux Slide enrnponents present on the ��dtajcLl narti'rks. declare. ander penalty of perjury that the tbregoing is true, I)ated' l4ailun K t Einw;u'i .2021 . Signature: Printed narne: Peri SCLe1T nhn 2 Stantec September 13, 2021 Stantec Consulting Services Inc, P.O. Box 191 Hilo, HI 96721 Tel: (808) 494.2039 Ms. Peri Steffenhagen Via email: pesteffcc rgmaail.cor RE: Comments on fhe draft Environment ll Assessment and Anticipated FONSI for Royal Vistas Housing Project, North Kona District, Hawal`i Island Dear Ms. Steffenhagen: Thank you for the comment letter dated October 9, 2020, on the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the proposed project. Please find responses below to your substantive comments. Comment 1: I have reviewed the pending Draft Environmental Assessment and attachments. I am specifically concerned about cultural artifacts and native fauna at, specifically the oueo (owls) and bats that I see nearly nightly from my lanai. Response 1: The EA discusses cultural resources including how impacts to cultural resources would be minimized in Sections 3.5 and 3.6. The presence and potential habitat for biological species are included in the existing conditions part of Section 3.3.4, and potential impacts to habitat for native species including protection measures to minimize these impacts are discussed in the impacts part of Section 3.3.4. Any awls observed at night are not pueo, but are non-native barn owls which prey on native species including Newell's shearwaters, Hawaiian stilts, Bulwer's petrels, brown noddies,. Hawaiian ducks. and nene goslings. Comment 2: I do not consider that the archaeological studies in support of the DEA are adequate. I am aware that substantial evidence exists that the land encompassed by the subject parcels includes features of the Halualoa Slide, including rock walls that ore inadequately described as agricultural walls in the archaeological studies offered in support of the DEA. The Halualoa Slide is or important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological feature from pre -Western contact times that cannot be replaced if damaged or destroyed. Response 2: As described in Section 3.6 and included in. Appendix 5 of the EA, two Archaeological Inventory Surveys (AISsj were prepared for the project. As part of the AIS, sites in the project area were documented and evacuated for their significance. The AISs were conducted following Hawaii Administrative Rules §13-276 and were evaluated according to the process required by 13-284-6. All 40 sites were considered significant under criterion d because of the information that was learned during the study. Documentation of these sites as part of the September 13, 2021 Ms, Per Steffenhagen Page 2 of 3 AISs ensures that their information is not lost, The documentation done was adequate to mitigate the project's effects to the sites. Regarding the rock walls within the project site, there is a historic era road (Site 24211) documented. This road is not very straight, has obtuse angle turns, the ground surface is not smooth, as would be expected if the site were the remains of a holuc. Aso, the walls were 1.0 meter in height and is similar in constructed to similar historic era rock walls constructed along historic -era roads, property boundaries, gardens, and cattle pastures, The only other parallel walls within the project site are Site 31182, Features 2 and 3, walls located in the northern and northeastern portions of the project site. These two walls are located along the boundary of a bond Commission Award (LCA) #3660. Additionally, the western end of Feature 3 ends in a gulch and there is a gap in the Feature 2 wall at the same gulch. It is unlikely that this is a hblua course since the parallel walls empty into a large gulch. Therefore, there is no evidence of a holua in the project site. Comment 3: I base my concerns upon the evaluation performed by Tom Pohaku Stone, a copy of which is attached. The DEA does not discuss sufficient facts and analysis such khat the important Hawaiian cultural and archaeological features can be understood let alone properly preserved. The DEA must be revised to address the location, data recovery and preservation of the Holualoa Slide components present on the subject parcels. Response 3: In the email provided, there is reference to "the portion of the holua at he Raba inn [that] has rock walls an both sides" and refers to parallel walls within the proposed development area, possibly Site 31182 Feature 2 and Feature 3 walls which are LCA #3660 boundary walls. Primarily, Mr, Stone's email responses provide accurate information concerning the cultural importance of the royal and religious complexes along the coast and within the near -coastal region between Kailua to the north and Keauhcu to the south. The remains of many of these complexes were first mapped by Henry Kekahuna. Mr. Stone correctly states the religious and social importance of fie'eholua and its connection to the sacred and sociopolitical structures along the coast and in the near coastal region, However, the complexes are located more than 1.0 km west of the project area and there are no remains of royal, sacred ar sociopolitical complexes, or a holua, within the project area. The existence of a holua within the project area is not asserted by Mr. Stone. As discussed above, there is no documented oral history, archival documentation, or archaeological evidence to suggest a holua course existed within the project area. September 13, 2021 Ms, Ped Sieffenhagen Pace 3 of 3 We sincerely appreciate your review of the document. If you have any additional comments or questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 494-2039 or by email. Sincerely, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michele Lefebvre, Ph.D. michele.lefebvre@stantec.com cc: Richard Wheelock, Kona Three LLC Maija Jackson, County of Hawaii Planning Department APPENDIX 2: Traffic Impact Assessment Report Royal Vistas SSFNJ international FINAL Royal Vistas Tax Map Key (3) 7-6-021: 016, 17 Traffic Impact Analysis Report Kona, Island of Hawaii May 2020 Prepared for Kona Three LLC, Prepared by Intern :ioriaR Royal Vistas 5SFM international Table of Contents I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION........ 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS..,,..,, 4 A. Geometric Configuration 4 1. Roadway Configuration 4 2, Study Intersections ... ...... ............................. ...... ..,,,.,,.........,....,.,,.............,,.......,.............,,.......,4 3. Pedestrian Facilities ..,, 7 4. Bike FaciIities 7 5. Bus Stops and Bus Routes ... 7 B. Volumes 7 1. Vehicular Volume 7 2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Volumes 9 C. Traffic Operation Analysis 11 1. Level of Service Methodology 11 2. Existing 2019 Intersection LOS 12 3, Existing 2019 Traffic Signal Warrant ..........:................ 13 111. Near -Term (2024) — Completion of Phase 1 17 A. Surrounding Areas ...17 9. Volumes 19 1, Future 2024 Without Project Volumes.. 19 2. Project Related Volumes 19 3. Trip Distribution 19 4, Future 2024 With Project Volumes 21 C. Future 2024.Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis....................................::................:....:..25 1. Future 2024 Without Project intersection LOS 25 2. Future 2024 With Project Intersection LOS 27 3. 2024.Traffic Signal Warrant 30 4. 2024 With Project Segment LOS 31 IV. Mid -Term (2029) — Completion of Phase 2 32 A. Surrounding Area Conditions 32 B. Volumes ......., 32 1. Future 2029 Without Project Volumes 32 ii Royal Vistas SSFM international 2. Project Related Volumes. 34 3. Trip Distribution 34 4, Future 2029 With Project Volumes 34 C. Future 2029 Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis 39 1. Future 2029 Without Project Intersection LOS 39 2. Future 2029 With Project Intersection LOS 41 3. 2029 Traffic Signal Warrant 44 4. 2029 With Project Segment LOS 45 V. Long -Term (2039) 46 A. Surrounding Area Conditions 46 B, Volume8 .... 46 1. Future 2039 Without Project Volumes 46 2, Prcject Related Volumes 46 3. Future 2039 With Project Volumes 46 C. Future 2039 Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis ....... .....„..,„ ..... ........ ........ 49 1, Future 2039 Without Project Intersection 105 49 2. Future non With Project Intersection LOS 51 3. 2039 Traffic Signal kiVarrant 54 4. 2039 With Project Segment LOS 55 Vi. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 56 VtI. REFERENCES .... ................... ...... ...,...„..„. ................. List of Figures Figure 1: Project location Map 2 Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan 3 Figure 3: Existing 2019 Lane Configuration 6 Figure 4: Queen Kaahumanu Hwy (Nani Kailua Dr to Hualalai Rd}, 24 -Hour Volume Distribution (20/6) 8 Figure 5: Existing 2019 Peak Hour Volumes 10 Figure 6: Kona Community Development Plan 18 Figure 7: Future 2024 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes 20 Figure 8: Expected Future Lane Configuration . 22 Figure 9: Phase 1 Prcject Related Trips 23 Figure 10: Future 2024 With Project Peak Hour Volumes 24 Figure 11: Future 2029 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes . 33 Figure 12: Future Lane Configuration for Phase 2 35 Royal Vistas 5SFA4 International Figure 13; Phase 2 Inbound Project Related Trips 36 Figure 14: Phase 2 Outbound Project Related Trips 37 Figure 15: Future 2029 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes . 3$ Figure 16: Future 2039 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes . 47 Figure 17: Future 2039 With Project Peak Hour Volumes 48 List of Tables Table 1: Roadway Traffic Volumes 7 Table 2: 2019 Pedestrian and Bicycle Volumes ........................... .,9 Table 3: L05 Criteria for nsignalized Intersections 11 Table 4: LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections 12 Table 5: Existing 2019 Intersection Level of Service 14 cable 6: Existing 2019 Intersection Level of Service (continued)15 Table 7: Four -Hour Warrant based on 2019 traffic volumes16 Table 8: Peak -Hour Warrant based on 2019 traffic volumes 16 Table 9: Estimated Trips Generated - Phase 1 19 Table 10: 2019 Volumes on Ctueen Kaahurnanu Highway between Puapuaanui St and Kuakini Highway 21 Table 11: 2019 Outbound volumes at Puapuaariui Street 21 Table 12: Future 2024 Wit"out Project Intersection Level of Service.,... 26 Table 13: Future 2024 Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) 27 Table 14: Future 2024 With Project Intersection Level of Service 29 Table 15: Future 2024 With Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) 30 Table 16: 2024 Peak -Hour Warrant 31 Table 17: 2024 with Project Segment LOS 31 Table 18: Estimated Trips Generated by Project — Phase 2 34 Table 19: Future 2029 Without Project Intersection Level of Service .............. ..................... ........... 40 Table 20: Future 2029 Without Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) 41 Table 21: Future 2029 With Project Intersection Level of Service 43 Table 22: Future 2029 With Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) 44 Table 23: 2029 Peak -Hour Warrant 45 Table 24: 2029 with Project Segment LOS 45 Table 25: Future 2039 Without Project Intersection Level cf Service 50 Table 26: Future 2039 Without Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) 51 Table 27: Future 2039 With Project Intersection Level of Service 53 Table 28: Future 2039 With Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) 54 Table 29: 2039 Peak -Hour Warrant 55 Table 30: 2039 with Project Segment LOS 55 iv Royal Vistas SSFM International List of Appendices Appendix A - 24 -Hour and Peak Period Traffic Counts Appendix B - Bus Route Schedule and Map Appendix C -Analysis Reports Existing (2019) Conditions Appendix D - Analysis Reports Future (2024)) Without Project Conditions Appendix E - Analysis Reports Future (2024) With Project Conditions Appendix F -Analysis Reports Future (2029) Without Project Conditions Appendix G - Analysis Reports Future (2029) With Project Conditions Appendix H -Analysis Reports Future (2039) Without Project Conditions Appendix I - Analysis Reports Future (20139) With Project Conditions Appendix .1- Traffic Signal Warrant - Peak. Hour and 4 -hour Warrants v Royal Vistas SSFM International I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Kona Three LLC is planning to develop a Multi -family residential subdivision named Royal Vistas in Kona, on the Island of Hawaii. The property is located on the mauka side of the Queen Kaahumanu Highway at TMK (3) 7-6-021:016, 17 between Kona Vista Subdivision and Pualani Estates Subdivision. Only one roadway is planned to provide access for Phase I of the property. This roadway intersects with Queen Kaahumanu Highway, approximately 600 feet north of the intersection with Kuakini Highway, For this traffic impact analysis report (TZAR), this access is referred to as "Royal Vistas Roadway". The project location, along with the study intersections associated with this TZAR, are shown in Figure 1. The proposed site is 70 -acres and zoned "RMVMM-5". Even though the new development's total buildout is estimated as 450 units, only 258 units are planned as Phase 1, Phase 1 is expected to he completed by 2024. Phase 2 will include the full buildout of the remaining 192 units. Phase 2 is expected to be completed by 2029_ The Royal Vistas proposed conceptual site plan is shown in Figure 2. The intent of this TIAR is to evaluate existing conditions and assess Impacts in the surrounding areas as a result of the proposed development, 5 -year (Phase 1 completion) in 2024, 10 -year (Phase 2 completion) In 2029, and 20 -year future scenarios in 2039 will be analyzed_ Future years will be evaluated with and without the Royal Vistas project. 1 Royal Vistas SSFN1International Prrsjrtn Las.ai10n Ishandofiiaw it 4 [5 Fa /Rd PearySt )144ahai4t Sr Worth) Hurladni Sr iSouthi Puapuaanut St Kualtini Hwy Loft* St �M�1r�r,,,,a� r�47 .MF 4 E ganIthieli11010ilS Rd roiotseM Sx, Kilathe' moi:'+dr- I. P1111 arra # C.id 113md7ag1lllfi Figure 1: Project Location Map 2 Royal Ws -Ms 55n4 International a Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan 3 Royal Vistas SSFM International II. EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Geometric Configuration 1. Roadway Configuration aJ Queen leouhumanrl Highway Where it intersects with Royal Vistas Roadway, Queen Kaahumanu Highway (Route 19) is undivided, two- lane, State-owned arterial, oriented in the north -south direction. Queen Kaahumanu Highway extends front Kawaihae Road (Route 19) in the north to the intersection with Palani Road (Route 130) where it turns into State Route 11. The posted speed limit varies from 45-55 mph. At the future Royal Vistas Roadway, the posted speed limit is 45 MPH. Queen Kaahumanu Highway opens to 4-5 lanes with dedicated Ieft turning and right turning lanes at major intersections northwest of Henry Street. 2. Study Intersections The study intersections include the following: 1. Queen Kaahurnanu Highway and Palani Road a. Queen Kaahumanu Highway is predominantly oriented in an east -west direction and Palani Road is predominantly oriented in a north -south direction, b. Four -leg signalized intersection with dedicated Ieft turning lanes and channelized right turn lanes for all approaches.. The Queen Kaahumanu Highway approaches and the northbound Palani Road approach have double left turn lanes. c. All Ieft turns are protected (have green arrow phases). d, The north leg of the intersection extends and connects with Marnalahoa Highway, another state-owned facility. 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street a. Queen Kaahumanu Highway is oriented in an east -west direction and Henry Street is oriented in a north -south direction, b. Four -leg signalized intersection with dedicated Ieft turning lanes and channelized right turn lanes for all approaches. The Queen Kaahumanu Highway approaches have double left turn lanes, c. Left tuns from Queen Kaahumanu Highway onto Henry Street are protected. The Henry Street phases are split (sequential rather than concurrent). d. The north leg of the intersection extends and connects with Ane Keohokalole Highway, another state-owned facility. 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) a. Queen Kaahumanu Highway is oriented in a north -south direction and Hualalai Road is oriented in an east -west direction. b, Three -leg, STOP sign controlled intersection with dedicated Ieft turning lanes for the northbound and eastbound approaches. c. Channelized right turn lanes exist for the eastbound and southbound approaches. d. A refuge lane is provided for the eastbound left turns onto Queen Kaahumanu Highway. 4 Royal Vfstas SSFM ill tem atiorrcr� 4. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) a. Queen Kaahumanu Highway is oriented in a north -south direction and Hualalai Road is oriented in an east -west direction, b. Three -leg, STOP sign controlled intersection with dedicated left turning Fanes for the southbound and westbound approaches. c. Channelized right turn lanes exist for the northbound and westbound approaches. d. A refuge lane is provided for the westbound left turns onto Queers Kaahumanu Highway. 5, Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street a. Queen Kaahumanu Highway is oriented in a north -south direction and Puapuaanui Street is oriented in an east -west direction. b. Three -leg, signalized intersection with dedicated left turning lanes for the southbound and westbound approaches.. c, The southbound left turn is protected. d, Channelized right turn lanes provided for the northbound and westbound approaches. 6. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway a. Queen Kaahumanu Highway is oriented in a north -south direction and Kuakini Highway is oriented in an east -west direction. b, Three -leg, STOP sign controlled intersection with dedicated left turning lanes for northbound and eastbound. c, Channelized right turn lanes exist for the eastbound and southbound approaches_ d. A refuge lane is provided for the eastbound left turns onto queers Kaahumanu Highway. e. Kuakini Highway is a state-owned facility. 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street a.. Queen Kaahumanu Highway is oriented in a north -south direction and Lako Street is oriented in an east -west direction. b. Four -leg, signalized intersection with dedicated left turning lanes for each approach. c. Left turns from Queen Kaahumanu Highway onto Lako Street are protected -permitted. This is the only intersection in the project area on Queen Kaahumanu Highway that uses protected -permitted phasing. The Lake Street phases are split, d, Channelized right turn lanes exist for each approach. S. Queen Kaahumanu, Highway and Karnehameha 111 Road a. queen Kaahumanu Highway is oriented in a north south direction and Kamehameha III Road is oriented in an east -west direction. b. Four -leg, signalized intersection with dedicated left turn lanes exist on northbound, and southbound approaches. c. Left turns from Queen Kaahumanu Highway are protected. The Kamehameha 111 Road phases are split, d. Channelized right turn lane exists for southbound and eastbound approach. Existing (2010 lane configurations and traffic controls at the study intersections are shown in Figure 3. Roy& Vistas SSFM international Palani Rd 4— z 4 II E ee 11 1J111 IIL le CI: _.-7 __7 lI l IIF T T (11 —40 Th4. Palani Rd a z Queen Kaahumanu Hwy (u) --'71.+N)T Henry St 4 4--- 7. i lUI<IIIIII 711, IIIII ILII+ —4 w cu Henry 5t Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 3 )1 ()Yin —I—N.I. T SC ' 11111 Illll_ T di 11111110 T3 a Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 1 North Lewd riN) intersection Unsignalized Intersection stop sign IIIIIIIIIII Crosswalk Figure 3: Existing 2019 Lane Configuration 6 Royal Vistas SSFMInternational 3. pedestrian Facilities Sidewalks are provided on each corner of Palani Road and Henry Street. A sidewalk is provided on the south side of Queen Kaahumanu Highway between Palani Road and Henry Street, Sidewalks are provided on both sides of Puapuaanui Street and stop just before the intersection with Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. The crosswalks provided at each intersection are shown in Figure 3, 4. Bike Facilities Marked bike lanes are provided on Queen Kaahurnanu Highway at Henry Street and extend north. There are no marked bike lanes south of this intersection. There are bike lanes ori Lako Street east of Queen Kaahumanu Highway to Huaialai Road. Based on the State Route System, marked shoulders along Queen Kaahumanu Highway in the study area range from 6 feet to 10 feet. 5. Bus Stops and Bus Routes The County of Hawaii's transit system (Hele-on Bus) doesn't have bus routes that travel along Queen Kaahumanu Highway near the study area. The closest bus stops to the proposed facility are located at. Kona Commons Shopping Center, more than 3 miles away, The Intra Kona bus route serves this stop and operates between 5:55 AM to 8:30 PM, Monday to Saturday. Appendix B includes the detailed bus route schedule and map for this route. B. Volumes 1. Vehicular Volume a) Roadway Traffic Volumes Historical average daily traffic (ADT) and peak hour volumes along Queen Kaahumanu Highway in the study area are shown in. Table 1. The ADT is based on Hawaii DOT traffic counts included in historical Traffic Station Maps, Table 1: Roadway Traffic Volumes Roadway Location ADT Year Queen Between Nani Kailua Drive Hualalai 2016800 Kaahurnanu and 2015 H`rgh v Road, 25,900 Source: Historical Traffic Station Maps (HDOT) The 24-hour traffic volume distribution along Queen Kaahumanu Highway (see Figure 4) at the traffic count station shows a variation `Hi travel patterns throughout the day with prominent morning and afternoon commuter peak periods. Detailed 24-hour counts are included in Appendix A. Along Queen Kaahumanu Highway, during the morning peak hour of 7:00 - 8:00 A.M, there were approximately 1,083 vehicles per hour (vph) travelling northbound and 755 vph travelling southbound for a total of 1,848 vph. During the afternoon peak hour of 3:45 — 4:45 PM, there were approximately 914 vph travelling northbound and 1,017 travelling southbound for a total of 1,931 vph. 7 Royal Vistas 5SFminternational = rJMrthnound - oa it ma(vehicles perp v ■ , Figure 4 Queens ahumenu Hwy (Nan Kailua Dr toHumm Rd), 24 -Hour Volume Distribution ( 1 2 Roy+zl Vistas SSFM international frf Existing 2019 Intersection Peak Hour Volumes Manual intersection turning movement traffic counts were taken at the eight study intersections: 1) Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Road, 2) Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street, 3) Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (north), 4) Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (south), 5) Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street, 6) Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway, 7) Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street, and B) Queen Kaahumanu Highway and I{arneharneha 111 Rod. Counts were collected during the peak periods on Tuesday, April 30, 2019 and Thursdayr August 24, 2019. Counts included tabulation of passenger vehicles, heavy trucks, pedestrians, and bicycles. The Existing (2019) peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 5. Detailed peak period counts are included in Appendix A, Pedestrian and Bicycle Volurnes 2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Volumes Queen Kaahumanu Highway is a frequently used training route for Ironman and therefore has regular bicycle activity. Table 2 shows the 2019 pedestrian and bicycle volumes. Most of the observed pedestrian activity occurred at Henry Street. Bicycle counts were higher in the AM peak hour thar the PM peak hour. Table 2:2019 Pedestrian and Bicycle Volumes Study Intersection AM PM Ped Bike , Ped Bike Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Palani Rd 1 3 4 3 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Henry 5t 9 4 124 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai Rd (N) 0 3 0 1 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai Rd (5) 0 4 0 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Puapuaanui St 0 2 1 0 Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy & Kuakini Hwy 0 2 0 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy &. Lako St 1 2 1 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kameharneha 111 Rd 1 10 0 2 9 Royal Vistas SSFM international Queen Kaahumanu HVifyr Palani Rd HenrySt a g 23 (41) E 457 (314) -- 678 (609) c11— — 600 (548) ,,,,) ems" 163 (p .3)4 52 I n) + (1 .' ..( s_) I. (190 _,-- TrI, Tr 359 I663' -..4 124 {231)"�._ s v r V HenrySt Queen Kaah Li nunu Hwy 71 1260) 457 {877) 2-18(503). Palani Rd Queen Kaahu nIii Hwy s v U 0 .. 0 z — 4) T 44 (10) I +-.)11. re ,Z -0S {7b) 2 ft' C Ln -I 7E, 7.3 v m f1 140 (71) 9 (14) Trt ❑ 4 8 _P +� a 185 (107) 87 {34) as Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Hualalai Rd (South PuapuaanuiSt L4) I ) VI„ (u 7(13)h TT 169 (3n)r 141 �M y 267 (193) 4 36 (39) /` 69 (62) J 4-.) I r w AD ti 15 (18) 4-12 (11) ,x"`16(7) Q u„ Fa _9 251 (U7) n 8 (30) -4 69 (413)-Thr d C f4) 157 MO} fi 5 (11) ---- I 26 (52) Thr t Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Queen Ka a hu manu Hwy ic,� niehameha 111 Rd 1 North Legend (r) Peak I -dour Vc7lurnes AM (PM} (veh/hr) C" Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection _di_ Stop Sign Figure 5: Existing 2019 Peak Hour Volumes 10 Royal Vistas SSFM international C. Traffic Operation Analysis 1. Level of Service Methodology Level of service (LOS) Es an operational analysis rating system used in traffic engineering to measure the effectiveness of roadway operating conditions. There are six L05 ranging from A to F. LOS A is defined as being the least interrupted flow conditions with little or no delays, whereas LOS F is defined as conditions where extreme delays exist. Guidelines from the County of Hawaii Chapter 25 (Zoning), Article 2 (Administration and Enforcement), Division 4 (Amendments), Section 46 (Concurrency Requirements) state that an"Acceptable level cif service" means that the level of service of atranspartation facility at the a.m. and p.m. peak hour is "0" or better. Level of service, or LOS, means a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream and shall be determined using the procedures in the latest edition of the Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board. Intersection LCIS and delay were determined for the AM and PM peak hours using Synchra 10 traffic analysis software and analyzed using I-iCM 6'" Edition (TRB, 2016) methodologies. As stated in the Highwoy Capacity Manual (HCM) 6'h Edition (TRB, 2016), LOS for a two -Way stop controlled (TWSC) intersection is determined by the measured control delay (see Table 3) and is defined for each movement. Vehicles traveling along the major, free-flow road, of a TWSC intersection, proceed through with minimal delay or no delay at all. Those vehicles approaching the intersection along the minor movement are controlled by a stop sign and thus experience delay attributable to the volume of vehicles passing along the free -flog road and the gaps available. Table 3: LOS Criteria for LlnsignaIized intersections Average Control Delay (s/veh)-1.0 LOS by vie Ratio X1.0 < 10.0 A F >10and 515 B F >15 and 525 C F >25 and 535 D F >35 and S50 E F >50 F F Source: HCM (TRB, 2 116) The LOS analysis for signalized intersections is based on average total vehicle delay based on the methodologies of the HCM (TRB, 2016), as shown in Table 4. The HCM 6"' Edition doesn't support the analysis with both exclusive and shared lanes. In those cases, methodologies from HCM (TRR, 2000) are used. Another measure of intersection delay is the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio. This is the ratio of the volume of traffic utilizing the intersection compared to the maximum volume of vehicles that can be accommodated by the intersection during a specific period. A v/c ratio under 0.85 means the intersection 11 Royal Vfstds SSFN1 International Is operating under capacity and excessive delays are not experienced. An intersection isoperating near its capacity when v/c ratios range from 0.35 to 0.95. Unstable flows are expected when the v/c ratio is between 095 and 1.0. A traffic movement can have a poor LOS but law v/c, which suggests that the traffic volumes along that movement are row but must wait a Tong time to make the movement. This is common for low volume protected turn movements or side streets that must wait through a long cycle length for their split to come up. Table 4: LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections 105 by Average Control [May (s/veh) v/c Natio LOS by v/c Ratio <=1.0 >=1.0 5 10.0 4 F >10 and 5.20 B F >20 and 535 C F >35and <_55 D F >55 and 580 E F >80 F F Source: HCM (TRB, 2016) Where signalized intersections are less than 2.0 miles apart, the facility should be classified as an urban street and analyzed with the methodologies of Urban Street Facilities (HCM, Chapter 10). For Urban Street Facilities, through vehicle travel speed is used to analyze vehicular LOS. This speed reflects the factors that influence running time along each link, and the delay incurred by through vehicles at each boundary intersection. This performance measure indicates the degree of mobility provided by the facility. 2. Existing 2019 Intersection LOS Existing intersection and movement 105 and average delay (in seconds per vehicle) were determined for the AM and PM peak hours, 1. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Road. Overall Intersection LOS = C/C (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized Intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Palani Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours, 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street Overall Intersection LOS C/C (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahurnanu Highway with Henry Street resulted in appropriate LOS L) or better during AM and PM peak hours. 3. Queer? Kaahurnanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahurnanu Highway with Hualalai Street (north), eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 1.31 and 0.23 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway_ The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours.. 12 Royal Vistas SSFM International 4. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and l-fualalai Road (South) At the unsignaliaed intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Road (south), westbound left turning movement has LOS F (\/c of 0.18 and 0.31 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 5. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street Overall Intersection LO5 = A/A (AM/PIM The AM left turns operate at LOS E. The westbound left turn operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour. The left turn volumes are low and should clear every cycle. These delays are due to the cycle length. 6. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway At the unsignaliaed intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kuakini Highway, eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 1.08 and 0.45 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street, Overall Intersection LO5 = C/C (AM/PM) At the signali2ed intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Lako Street, the eastbound left turn operates at LOS E during the AM peak hour. This delay is attributed to the high eastbound left turn volume, and the split phasing for the Lako Street approaches. AM other movements at Lako Street operates at LOS 0 or better during both peak hours, 8. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kamehameha III Road. Overall Intersection LOS = B/C (Alv7/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kamehameha in Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. Tables 5 and 6 show the existing vehicular delay and level of service at each intersection. The shaded row indicates the overall intersection delay. Synchro output is in Appendix C. 3. Existing 2019 Traffic Signal Warrant Four -Hour and Peak -Hour traffic signal warrants were evaluated at the unsignallzed intersections. The 2009 M[JTCD states: "At an intersection with high volume of left -turn traffic from the major street, the signal warrant analysis may be performed in a manner that considers the higher of the major -street left - tum volumes as the 'minor -street' volume and the corresponding single direction of opposing traffic on the major street asthe 'major -street"' volume' For analysis purposes, the Queen Kaahumanu Highway left turn was considered the minor street approach, and the opposing through volume was considered the major street approach. The satisfaction of a warrant does not necessarily require installing a traffic signal. The single Peak Hour warrant especially is nota good measure of whether or nota traffic signal should be installed in this setting. It is being evaluated and provided only as an indicator of when an intersection should be monitored, Traffic Signal Warrant analysis can be found in Appendix J. For the Four -Hour warrant, Figure 4C-2 (MUTCD) was used since the posted speed limit on Queen Kaahumanu Highway is over 40 MPH, The "1 Lane & 1 Lane" curve was used for analysis. Table 7 shows the Four -Hoer warrant analysis. 13 Royal Vistas SSFM International For the Peak -Hour warrant, Figure 4C-4 (MUTCD) was used since the posted speed limit on Queen Kaahurnanu Highway is over 40 MPH, The "1 Lane & 1 Lane" curve was used for analysis. Table 8 shows the Peak -Hour warrant analysis. 1. Queen Kaahurnanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) This intersection passes the Four -Hour warrant and the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM peak hour. 2. Queen Kaahurrianu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) This intersection does not pass either warrant. 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway This intersection passes the Four -Hour warrant and the Peak -Hour warrant in both the AM and PM peak hours. Table 5: Existing 2019 Intersection Level of Service Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LO5 Delay (s) v%c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Palani Rd (overall) 23.7 - C 26.1 - C Queen Kaahurnanu E8 Left 38.6 0.45 0 3.0 0.74 0 Queen Kaahumanu ES Through 14.1 0.30 B 17.9 0.57 B Queen Kaahurnanu WB Left 38,9 0.67 D 38,8 0,72 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 14.2 0.42 B 16.4 0.41 P Palani PJB Left 37.4 0.72 D 39,1 0.73 L. Palani NB Through 25.8 0.25 0 28.8 042 C Palani S13 Left 47.7 C.50 D 46,3 0.68 0 Plan; 55 Throuip, -' . 01.66 C 33.6 0.62 C Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Sr, Henry St (overall) Queen Kaahuirlanu ES Left Queen Kaahumanu ES Through Queen Kaahumanu EI3 Right Queen Kaahumanu WB Left 31.8 43.6 24.6 22.0 O.62 0 0.50 0.34 0.08 C 32.6 0.65 c 46.7 27,8 0.65 0.57 0.19 45.0 0.37 b 48.4 0.52 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 30.5 0.60 0 31.0 0,56 C Queen Kaahumanu WB Right 25,9 0.31 C 25,7 0.21 C Henry NB Left 34.9 0.46 C 35.9 0.41 D Henry NB Left -Through 35,8 0.58 D 37.1 0.56 0 Henry NB Right 31.0 0.03 C 32.5 0.02 C Henry SB Left 38.3 0.72 D 39.3 0.73 D Henry SB Left -Through -Right 34.6 0.69 34.2 0.67 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (N} (overall) 10.3 1.0 Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 10.8 0.22 1.2 0.13 Huaialai EB Left 429.0 1.31 107.3 0.23 14 Royal Vistas S5FM international Table 6: Existing 2019 Intersection Level of Service (continued) Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s} v/c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Huai:alai (S) (overall) 3.3 - - 1.7 - - Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 11.5 0.13 B 10,8 0.09 B Hualalai WB Left 87,5 0.18 F 112.9 0.31 F Hualalai WB Right 35.8 0:58 E 20,4 0.24 C Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Puapuaanu St (overall) 9.7 - A 9.8 - A Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 60.4 0.71 E 53.1 0,81 D Queen Kaahumanu WE Through 3.3 0.50 A 3.0 0.57 A Puapuaanui WB Left 55.4 0.78 E 56.0, 0.62 E Puapiiaanui WB Right 7,9 0.54 A 8.5 0.63 A Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kuakini Hwy (overall) 1 7.7 - - 2.8 - - Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 17.6 0.67 0 12.1 0.33 B Kuakini EB Left 1035.4 1.08 F 208.2 0.45 F Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Lako 5t (overall) 30.6 - C 21.8 - C Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 12.8 0.10 B 12.8 0,14 B Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 30.4 0.87 C 18.8 0.75 B Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 21.9 0.58 C 13.5 0.51 B Queen Kaahumanu SB Through 19.2 0.68 B 20,1 0.82 C Lako E3 Left 60.2 0.88 E 44.2 0.76 0 Lako EB Through -Right 34.1 0.16 C 35.7 0.17 0 Lako W B Left 50.5 4.66 0 45.9 0.64 D Lako WB Through -Right 44.5 0.33 13 41.2 0.39 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Karn III Rd (overall) 17.7 - B 22.0 - C Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 43.5 0.79 D 47,2 0.75 D Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 12.4 0.55 B 17,4 0.60 B Queen Kaahumanu 5B Left 42.2 0.46 D 45.7 0.48 0 Queen Kaahumanu SB Through 10.3 0.27 B 14,0 0.34 B Kamehameha E8 Left -Through 32.0 0.73 C 34.1 0.84 C Kameham ha WB Left -Through -Right 41.4 0.6E D 44,9 0.61 0 15 Royal Vistas SSFP4 international Table 7: Four -Hour Warrant based on 2019 traffic volumes Existing - Hualalai (N) 4 -Hour Warrant Major Minor Warrant? 6:45-7:45 AM 776 164 YES I 7:45-8:45 AM 692 145 YES 3:00-4:00 PM 1005 84 YES 4;00-5:00 PM 926 74 YES 5:00-6:00 PM 986 58 NO Existing- HuaklIai {SI 4-Hour'JVarrant i Major Mirtcr I Warrant? 6:45-7:45 AM 1006 70 YES 7;45-8:45 AM 1030 26 NC) 3:00-4:00 PM 940 59 NO 4:00-5:00 PM 864 64 NO 5:00-6:00 PM 765 56 NO Existing - Kuakinl 4-Hour'L+U3rrant Major Mirrr)r I Warrant? 6:45-7:45 AM 776 335 1 YES 7:45-8:45 AM 683 467 YES 3:00-4:00 PM 881 224 YES 4:00-5:00 PM 872 264 YES 5:00-6:00 PM 870 217 YES Table 8; Peak -Hour Warrant based on 2019.traffic volumes' Exlsti ng Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Mirror Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (Nil 775 164 YES 1005 84 NO Hualalai (5) 1006 73 NO 940 61 NO Kuakini 733 517 YES 887 243 YE5 Single Peak Hour warrant was evaluated because sufficient data was available and to give an indication of whether or not an intersection should be considered and monitored for a traffic signal, 16 Royal Vistas SSFM International Ill. Near -Term (2024) — Completion of Phase 1 A. Surrounding Areas Phase 1 is expected to be completed by 2024, representing the 5 -year future forecast. Phase 1 will contain 258 dwelling units, and the only point of access will be the Royal Vistas Roadway intersecting with Queen Kaahumanu Highway, about 600 feet north of the Kuakini Highway intersection. The official Transportation Network Niap — Nani Kailua Area from the Kona Community Development Plan shows future connections of 'minor collectors` running parallel to Queen Kaahumanu Highway in the location of Royal Vistas, extending Hoamama Street to Leilani Street and Paulehia Street to Kekuanaoa Place, as shown in Figure b. The Mining of these improvements is undetermined, but it is riot expected they will be completed prior to 2024, The most likely scenario is that the developers of Royal Vistas will complete a collector to the south before Phase 2 is occupied, Based on the HDOT Federa -kd Highways 2035 Transportation Man for the Distnct of Hawaii (July 2014), Kuakini Highway from Henry Street to Kamehameha 111 Road will be widened by 2 travel lanes and include bicycle facilities and sidewalks, Bike Plan Hawaii (2003) references several near-term projects. Two of the projects nearby are: a signed shared road on Kuakini Highway from bake Street to Hualalai Road, and a signed shared road on Queen Kaahumanu Highway from Henry Street to Kuakini Highway. The 2011 Statewide Pedestrian Master Plan does not include any pedestrian facility upgrades or construction in the project area. No other significant developments or future construction projects are expected in the surrounding area that would significantly affect the roadway geometrics or traffic volumes at the study intersections. This is based on research completed on October 10, 2019 at the State of Hawaii Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) website and the Statewide Transportation Improvements Program (STIP), The projects referenced in the long-range transportation plan and Bike Plan Hawaii are not fourrtl in the STIP, The impacts of these projects were not considered in this TEAR. 17 Royal Vistas SSFM international 6.tgerld PrppOggd Rmadis CFI ti:f:caltiwr ▪ • :DP L x.aii - [flp, rani.Clor_ maw — ▪ ' caileeifft Magi aP. a:Llgr[nr rmirry PtdeNfiarl.elks Podia R CDPr TYPE ' 41+ • 'Bh g —mow ... pog.trail ▪ Stinted --Alder " Po/icy Lager PTUVaird Tri Lane' TP. k Svcoredsry 4i.5 Trance rub' EN T. ars!' Slat uii TOO Type r b"miaad i k.ena (lobar Aram' F",1'41 Ton Tex' 0 i:io 1 gee 3 64) T _ Feet • inch equals 2 GX ftp. Source: County of Hawaii The County of Hawaii PPannonc Department os the repository or Ole offrc ei' map Kona +`:,ommunrty Dewe o ,meat Plan Figure 6: Kona Community development Plan 18 Royal Vistas SSFM international B. Volumes 1. Future 2024 Without Project Volumes The project study area within Kona has been experiencing modest growth. HOOT ADT counts on Queen Kaahumanu Highway between Nani Kailua Drive and Hualalai Road didn't show any increase in vehicular volumes from 2015 to 2016. The 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecasts average daily traffic in. Kona an Hawaii Belt Road to be 41,900 vehicles in 2020 and 48,000 vehicles in 2035. This equates to a 1% annual growth rate over 15 years in the Kona area. A background growth rate of 1% per year was assumed, to account for additional traffic at the study intersections. The estimated future volumes without the project for the future year 2024 are shown in Figure 7. 2. Project Related Volumes The proposed Royal Vistas include 258 multi -family residential dwelling units for Phase 1. All of these are expected to be low rise units with two or three stories. Trips generated from the proposed facility were estimated using nationally accepted land use rates from the Trip Generation, 10`Y Edition (ITE, 2016). ITE defines the Multi -family Housing ILow Rise) Land Use 12201 as follows: `includes apartments, townhouses and condominiums located within the same building with at least three other dwelling units" The analysis used 2.58 dwelling units as the independent variable to estimate new trips expected from the proposed project. The estimates for new trips generated by the project are shown in Table 9. Table 9: Estimated Trips Generated - Phase 1 T = Total number of trips generated, X= Dwelling Units 3. Trip Distribution Trips generated by the Royal Vistas Phase 1 will enter and exit at the Royal Vistas Roadway and be distributed onto Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The trips were distributed according to existing travel patterns. The segment volumes between Puapuaanui Street and Kuakini Street were used to determine the inbound percent distribution. z In arid Cut split provided by Trip Generation, 10th Edition (ITE 2016) for Larid Use 220 19 AM PM Land Use [ITE Code] Equation Equation Multi -family Housing Low Rise) [220] Ln (T) = 0.95 Ln (X) — 13.51 Ln (T) = 0.89*Ln (X) -0.02 Dwelling Units 258 258 New Trips 117 137 In Out In Out 23% 77% 63% 37% 27 90 86 51 T = Total number of trips generated, X= Dwelling Units 3. Trip Distribution Trips generated by the Royal Vistas Phase 1 will enter and exit at the Royal Vistas Roadway and be distributed onto Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The trips were distributed according to existing travel patterns. The segment volumes between Puapuaanui Street and Kuakini Street were used to determine the inbound percent distribution. z In arid Cut split provided by Trip Generation, 10th Edition (ITE 2016) for Larid Use 220 19 Roy& Vistas SSFM intetn tional Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Flualalai Rd (North) Paiani Rd fir 24 (43) 713 (640) 171 123+1) 75 (273) 111 4-80 (922) —1 Ti( -4 229 (5 29) e 5.11 ra :r Palani Rd w g Queen Kaahun7anu Hwy 1 4G J1 46 1111 I T 501741 0 w pffi33 queen. Kaahurnanu Hwy 133 ,17) ) Ks‘ run PuapuaanuiSt Henry St Uri g v 1 491 1330 •� m 4631 X576 1---7C Ss) S • 112 (11r2 )00) 377 1597)—f T 130 1305) w r t Henry St 0 Queen Kaahuranu Hwy 264 1133)--11' 50 (32) — 73 (50) ct IT, igt 40 165 1305)J 4) Tri, en 113); Ire 77 )55) A O. nJ --- Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 3 281 (203) 4 38 141) 73 (55) T 2 7-371 15 (13) 4-13 (12) 17 t7 Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy N c rth legend PeakHour VoiLoneS 4 (#) AAA (PM) lveti/hr) I' Signalized 0 Unsignalized Intersection Intersection Figure 7; Future 2024 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes 20 Royal Vistas SSFM in tem ati'o -w Based on the existing traffic volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway between Puapuaanui Street and Lako Street, the AM peak hour direction is northbound, and the PM peak hour direction is southbound. Table 10 shows the directional percentages at Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street that were used to determine the inbound trip distribution. Table 10: 2019 Volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway between Puapuaanui St and Kuakini Highway The outbound volumes at Puapuaanui Street were used to determine the outbound percent distribution. Royal Vistas will have the same land use as Pualani Estates, which is just north of Royal Vistas and currently uses Puapuaanui Street as the main access to Queen Kaahumanu Highway, Outbound traffic distribution for Pualani Estates at Puapuaanui Street is anticipated to have a similar outbound distribution at Royal Vistas Roadway. Table 11 shows the existing outbound volumes for Pualani Estates at Puapuaanui Street during the AM and PM peak hours_ The percentages shown in Table 11 were used for the outbound trip distribution at the Royal Vistas Roadway intersecting Queen Kaahumanu Highway, Table 11: 2019 Outbound volumes at Puapuaanui Street AM PM JR SB NB 1 Sia Volume 377-' UL, 873 940 Percent 52% 48; Royal Vistas SSFM international Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Palani Rd 'C._Henry St 4— ` 4--- 1 Nr 1 � 4r-- Queen � a . 4)TT(' —:71k 4) T r' c --,,4 iRd THenrySt 4)i To Royal Vistas Roadway Hualalai Rd (North) ` 4.1 Kamehamefia 111 Rd 4)1 4 1 North • Piiapuaanui4l wir } ffr Tr+ 0 Queen Kaahurnanu Highway To Kuakini H ighway LeRend I (#) Peri: Hour Volumes t M IPM) V&/ht) 5 Signalized Inter$ettion Unsignalized Intersection .E. Stop Sign Figure 8: Expected Future Lane Configuration 22 Roy& Vistas SSFM international Palani Rd bis, i1\4..1 S 191 (1° Henry St 21 (11) d i''\-, 4-- 27 120) Z (3t Queen x C 5 12_5) — �# Henry St Palani Rd To RoyalVistasRoadway Hualalai Rd (North A 1 tai rc Karnehameha 111 Rd �; Q (-4 c II )H,�- + e + ) Ir+ Mir NIC Queen Kaahumanu Highway i t North 12) To Kuakini Highway aIalai Rd (South) PiiapuaanuiSl Legend # (S) peak Hour Volumes aa1 PM) RVehihry SignalizedUnsignalized Intersection �•-J Intersection .a. Stop Sign Figure 9; Phase 1 Project Related Trips 23 Royal Vistas SSFM international Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Palani Rd J1� 75 12731 434 1941) 2291329 i `w v ~. • y Palar1i Rd To Royal Vistas Roadway a 4 ro 1781391) - rc Kameharneha III Rd S Fe 7114) 0• 7871315► 5132) •--4 :7 (55) Queen Kaahurnand H ishvray l,I�,Rertd # (# Peal. Hour p!,14:-., n _ Hery4) C‘\-0 St 512c3a1} —651 (596} 57 179) Queen 9 112120G9 L 38,2 ('ice} :2•01-306 ThrG tiI rr i Henry St M Hualalai Rd (North) Karnehamefia III Rd 4Fr(11} 51 (77')""`q r t North 147175) 9115) g f r-• 1' + sir X .- To KuakiniH hway PiiapuaanuiSi -17 et) It Signalized AM 1PMInk9rSeCtiOn Unsignali ted Intersection —a— Stop Sign Figure 10; Future 2024 With Project Peak Hour Volumes 24 Royal Vistas SSFM intem artiorw C. Future 2024 Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis 1. Future 2024 Without Project Intersection LOS The 2024 Without Project intersection and movement LOS and average delay (in seconds per vehicle) were determined for the AM and PM peak hours. 1. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Road, Overall Intersection LOS = C/C (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Palani Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. 2. queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street, Overall Intersection LOS = C/C (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Henry Street resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) At the unsignaliaed intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Street (north), eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 1.65 and 0.30 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours, 4. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Road (south), westbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 0.22 and 0.39 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes an Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. S. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street. Overall Intersection LOS = B/B (AM/PM) The AM westbound left turn movement from Hualalai Road and southbound I:eft turn movements from Queen K Highway operate at LOS E. The westbound left turn operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour. The left turn volumes are low and should clear every cycle. These delays are due to the cycle length. 6. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kuakini Highway, eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 1.51 and 0.62 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lakin Street. Overall Intersection LOS = E7/C (AM/PM) At the signalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Laky Street, the eastbound left. turn operates at LOS E during the AM peak hour. This delay is attributed to the high eastbound Left tum volume, and the split phasing for the Lako Street approaches. All other movements at Lako Street operates at LOS D or better during both peak hours. S. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kamehameha III Road. Overall Intersection 105 =13/C (AM/PM) All movements at the sipnalixed intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kamehameha III Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak Fours. 25 Royal Vistas SSFM international Tables 12 and 13 show the expected 2024 vehicular delay and level of service at each intersection. The shaded row indicates the overall intersection delay. Synchro output is in Appendix D. Table 12: Future 2024 Without Project Intersection Level of Service Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s) vfc LOS Queen Kaah. rnani.s Hwy .34 Palani Rd (overall) 24.3 - C 27.1 - C Queen Kaahumanu -,If ;... 39.2 0.47 0 39.3 0.75 L) Queen Kaahumanu EB Through 14.8 0.32 B 19.2 0.61 B Queers Kaahurnanu W[3 Left 39.3 0.68 D 40.1 0,73 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 14.9 0,45 B 17.4 0.44 B Palani NB Left 37.8 0.73 D 40.5 0.74 D Palani NB Through 25.7 0,26 C 28.9 0.42 C Palani SB Left 48,1 0,51 0 49.8 0.71 IJ Palani SB Through 34.0 0.66 C 33.9 L. 0,63 C Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Henry St (overall) 32.9 ►- 065 C . 33.8 0.68 .. C 4 Queen Kaahurnanu EB Left 45.2 0,53 D 49.7 0.69 D Queen Kaahumanu EBThrnugh 25.7 0.37 C 29.3 0.60 C Kaahumanu EB Right 22.8 0.09 C 24.0 0.20 C _Qu t;;;-,,- K.-i;ii,.,..., gnu WB Left 46.10,40 0 50.9 0.57 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 32.3 , 0.65 C 32.6 0.60 C Queen Kaahumanu W[3 Right 27.9 0.33 C 27.5 0.22 C Henry NB Left 35.4 0.48 0 36.3 0.42 D Henry NB Left -Through 36.6 0.60 D 37.9 0.58 [) Henry NB Right 31.3 0,03 C 32.8 0.02 C Henry SB Left 39.3 0.74 ID 40.2 0.75 ID Henry SB Left -Through -Right 35.2 0.71 D 34.8 0.59 C Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (N) (overall) 14.1 - 12 - Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 11.2 0,24 B 11.5 0.14 B Hualalai EB Left 603.1 1,65 F 135.9 0.30 F Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (S) (overaill) 4.0 - - 2.0 - - - Queen Kaahumanu 58 Left 12.0 0.14 B 11.1 0.10 B Hualalai WS Left 105.7 0.22 F 143.3 0.39 F Hualalai We Right 43,7 0,65 E 22.1 0.27 C 26 Royal Vistas SSFM international Table 13: Future 2024 Without Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s) v/c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Puapuaanui St (overall) 10.2 - B 10.5 - B Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 61,3 0.73 E 54.4 0.81 D Queen Kaahumanu WE Through 3.6 0.52 A 3.3 0.60 A Puapuaanui WB Left 55.2 0.78 E 56.2 0.53 E Puapuaanui WB dight 8.1 0 68 A 9.4 0.66 A Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kuakini Hwy (overall) 9.8 - - 3.5 - - Queen Kaahurnanu NB Left 2C.1 0 .r_ 0 12.8 0.36 Li Kuakini EB Left I E'r'. 1 35.4 1 I - 0.12 F D B =,02. I 24.5 14.8 C..62 - 0.17 F C 8 Queen Kaahumanu Hviy & Lako St (overall) Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 14.1 Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 38.0 0.93 D 21.4 0.80 C Queen Kaahumanu 513 Left 30.1 0.70 C 16.0 0.58 B Queen Kaahumanu 5B Through 21,3 0.72 C 23,8 0.87 C Lako EB Left 63.7 0.89 E 44.5 0.77 D Lako EBThrough-Right34.1 0.16 C 35.7 0.17 D Lako W8 Left 51.1 0.68 D 46.1 0.65 D Laky W8 Through -Right 44.9 0.33 D 41,4 0.40 D Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kam III Rd (overall) 18.2 - B . 23.3 - C Queen Kaal1umano NB Left 43.1 0.79 D 49,.0 0.78 D Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 13.3 0.58 8 19.0 0.64 B Queen Kaahumanu 58 Left 42.1 0.47 0 46.1 0.49 0 Queen Kaahumanu SB Through 10.8 0.28 B 14.8 0.36 B Kamehameha EB Left -Through 32.0 0.74 0 35.7 0.85 0 Kamehameha WB Left -Through -Right 42.1 0.68 0 45.7 0.63 D 2. Future 2024 With Project Intersection LOS The 2024 With Project intersection and movement LOS and average delay (in seconds per vehicle) were determined for the AM and PM peak hours. NOTE: All Royal Vistas vehicles are routed through the one Royal Vistas Access Roadway to Queen Kaahumanu Highway for purposes of the Phase 1 analysis. 1. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Rod, Overall Intersettiou LOS = C/C (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of [queen Kaahumanu Highway with Palani Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. 2. Queers Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street. Overall Intersection LOS = C/C (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Henry Street resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours_ 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and HualalaI Road (North) 27 Royal Vistas SSFM international At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Street (north), eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 1,98 and 0.34 respectively) during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours, 4. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Road (south), westbound Ieft turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 024 and 034 respectively) during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway, The westbound right turn also operates at LOS F (v/c of 0.71) during the AM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of ,.ervice during the AM and. PM peak hours. 5, Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street, Overall Intersection LOS = B/8 (AM/PM) The AM left turns operate at LOS E. The westbound Ieft turn operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour. The left turn volumes are low and should clear every cycle. These delays are due to the cycle length. 6. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Royal Vistas Roadway At the proposed unsignalized intersection of queen Kaahumanu Highway and the Royal Vistas Roadway, the southbound Ieft turn movement from Queen Kaahumanu Highway into Royal Vistas Roadway functions well, with minimal delay, an average of 10 to 11 seconds during both peak hours. The westbound Ieft turning movement has L05 F (v/c of 0.41 and13,Z7 respectively) during both AM (29 vehicles) and PM (12 vehicles) peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The intersection functions acceptably, with an average of 2.0 seconds of delay per vehicle in the AM peak hour and 1.2 seconds of delay per vehicle in the PM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highwayand Kuakini Highway At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahurnanu Highway with Kuakini Highway, eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 1.88 and .68 respectively) during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM pek hours. 8, Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street. Overall Intersection LOS = D/C (AMIPM) At the signalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Lako Street, the eastbound Ieft turn operates at LOS E during the AM peak hoer. This delay is attributed to the high eastbound left turn volume, arid the split phasing for the Lako Street approaches. All other movements at Lako Street operates at LOS D or better during both peak hours. 9. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kamehameha III Rod. Overall Intersection LOS = BjC (AM/PM) Ali movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kamehameha 111 Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. Tables 14 and 15 show the expected vehicular delay and level of service at each intersection. The shaded row indicates the overall intersection delay. Synchro output is in Appendix E. 28 Royal Vistas S5FM International Table 14: Future 2024 With Project Intersection Level of Service Intersection AM PM Delay (s) vfc LOS Delay (s) v/t LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Palani Rd (overall} 24.2- C 27.2 - C Queen Kaahumanu [8 Left 39.2 0.47 0 35.3 0.76 0 Queen Kaahumanu EB Through 14.9 0.33 5 19.5 0.62 B Queen Kaahumanu WE Left 39.3 0.68 0 40.2 0.74 0 Queen Kaahumanu W8 Through 15.1 0.46 B 17,5 0.45 B Palani NB Left 37,8 0.73 D 40.5 0.74 0 Palani NB Through 25.7 0.26 0 28.9 0.42 C Palani 5H Left 48.1 1151 D 50.0 0.71 D Palani SB Through 34.0 0,66 C 34.0 0.63 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Henry St coverall} 33.2 0.66 C 34.1. 0.69 C Queen Kaahumanu ES Left 45.5 0.54 D 49,5 0.69 D Queen Kaahumanu E8 Through 26.1 0.38 C 30.0 0.63 0 Queen Kaahumanu EB Right 23.1 1109 C 24.1 0.20 C Queen Kaahurnanu WB Left 46.5 0.42 D 52.5 0.59 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 33.4 0.68 0 33,2. 0.62 C Queen ICaahumanU W13 Right 28.5 0.34 C 27,8 0.22 0 Henry NB Left 35.7 0.48 D 36,4 0.42 D Henry NB Left -Through 36.9 0.60 0 38.0 0.59 D Henry NB Right 31.5 0.03 0 32.9 0.02 C Henry SB Left 38.4 0.72 D 40.4 0.76 D Henry 5B Left -Through -Right 34.8 0.70 0 35.0 0.70 D Queen Kaahumanu liwy & Hualalai (N) (overall) 17.7 - - 1.3 - - Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 11.3 0.26 5 11.9 0.15 B Hua1alai EB Left 789.5 1.98 1= 163.1 0,34 F Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hual alai (S) (overall) 4.5 - - 2.2 .,- Queen I{aaumanu SR Left 12,4 0.15 B 11.3 0.10 B Hualarai lA' ii Left 121.6 0.24 F 172,6 0,44 F Hualalai WB flight 52.8 0.71 F 23.3 0.28 C Queen Kaahumenu Hwy & Puapuaanui 5t }overall) 10.8 - 8 10.8 - 8 Queen Kaakumanu 58 Left 61.3 0.73 E 54.5 0.51 0 Queen Kaahumanu WE Through 3.7 0.53 A 3.6 0.63 A Puapuaanui W5 Left 55.1 0.78 E 56.4 D.64 E Puapuuaanui VtdRi Right 9.8 0.73 A 10,1 0.69 B 29 Royal Vistas SSFM International Table 15: Future 2024 With Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s) v/C 105 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kona Vista Rdwy (overall) 2.0 - - 1.2 - - Queen Kaahurnanu 56 Left 10.0 0.02 A 10.5 0.07 0 Kona Vista WB Left 81.0 0.41 F 105,9 0.27 F Kona Vista WE Right 18.8 0.20 C 19.0 0.14 C Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kuakinl Hwy (overall) 11.4 - - 3.7 - - Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 21.8 0.75 C 12.9 0.36 0 Kuakini EB Left 1998.6 1.88 F 344,6 0.68 F Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & L ko St (overall) 36.9- D 25.9 - C Queen Kaahurnanu NB Left 14.6 0.12 3 15.3 0.18 Queen Kaahurnanu NB Through 40,4 0.94 0 23.5 0.83 Queen Kaahumanu 56 Left 34.2 0.74 C 18.5 0.62 Queen Kaahumanu 56 Through 22,2 0.74 C 24.9 (x•88 C Lako EB Left 65,4 0.90 E 44.5 : ': Lako EB Through -Right 34.1 0.16 C 35.5 i;. i Lako WB Left 51.3 0.68 0 46.2 0.65 L.'. Lafco WB Through -Right 45.1 0.33 0 41.5 0.40 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kam III Rd (overall) 18.3- B 24.1 - C Queen Kaahumanu NO Left 43.1 0.19 D 49.3 0.78 D Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 13,5 0.59 6 20,1 0.67 C Queen Kaahumanu 56 Left 42.2 0.47 0 46.5 0.49 0 Queen Kaahumanu 56 Through 10,9 0.23 3 15.2 36.7 0.37 0.85 0 0 Kamehameha EB Left -Through 32.0 0.74 C Kamehameha WE Left -Through -Right 42.2 0.68 0 46.3 0.64 D 3. 2024 Traffic Signal Warrant Peak -Hour volume traffic: s:l;rtial warrants were evaluated for the 2024 with and without project scenarios. Table 16 shows the Peak -Hour warrant analysis in 2024 with and without the project. Traffic Signal Warrant analysis can be found in Appendix J. 1. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM and PM peak hour with and without the project. 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM peak hour with and without the project. 3• Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Royal Vistas Roadway This intersection does not pass the peak hoar warrant in either peak hour. 30 Royal Vistas SSFP4 international 4. Queen Kaahumanru Highway and Kuakini Highway This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM and PM peak (hour with and without the project. Table 16: 2024 Peak -Hour Warrant 2024 Without Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM i`vtajor Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? HuFil,lai (N) 815 172 YES 1056 88 YES IHualalai (5) 1057 77 YES 988 54 NO Kuakini 842 513 YES 932 255 YES 2024 With Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (MI 827 180 YES 105 91 YES Hualalai (5) 1117 77 YES 1025 64 NO RKV Roadway 819 13 NO 912 45 NO Kuakini 856 543 YES 944 255 YES 4. 2024 With Project Segment LOS Arterial LOS was analyzed in Synchro on Queen Kaahumanu Highway from Hualalai (north) to Lako Street. Where signalized intersections are Tess than 2,0 mi apart, the facility should be classified as an urban street and analyzed with the methodologies of Urban Street Facilities. For Urban Street Facilities, through• vehicle travel speed is used to analyze vehicular LOS. Analysis worksheets can be found in Appendix E. The arterial LOS can be found in Table 17. This segment of Queen Kaahumanu Highway operates at LOS C in the northbound direction and LOS B in the southbound direction during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, satisfying the County of Hawaii Chapter 25 (Zoning), Article 2 (Administration and Enforcement), Division 4 (Amendments), Section 46 (Concurrency Requirements) regarding "acceptable level of service" for transportatican facilities. Table 17: 2024 with Project Segment LOS 31. Northbound Southbound Speed 1mph) LOS Speed (mph) LOS AM Peak Hour 113.3 C 25.3 B PM Peak Hour 20.7 C 24.6 13 31. Royal Vistas SSFM it! rem artiorrai IV. Mid -Term (2029) — Completion of Phase 2 A. Surrounding Area Conditions Phase 2 is expected to be completed by 2029, representing the full buildout 10 -year future forecast. Phase 2 will contain 192 dwelling units- Inbound trips and Phase 1 outbound trips continue to use the Royal Vistas Roadway and Queen Kaahumanu Highway intersection. Based on the HDOT Federal -Aid Highways 2035 Transportation plan for the District of Hawaii (July 2014), Kuakini Highway from Henry Street to Kamehameha III Road will be widened by 2 travel lanes and include bicycle facilities and sidewalks. No other significant developments or future construction projects are expected in the Immediately surrounding area that would significantly affect the roadway geometries or traffic volumes at the study intersections. This is based on research completed on October 10, 2019 at the State of Hawaii Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC} website and the Statewide Transportation Improvements Program (STIP). The current STIP has a 4 -year outlook, frons Fiscal Year 2019-2022. Future projects may impact roadway geometries or traffic volumes- The Mid -Term future analysis may need to be reanalyzed and updated if the kuakini Highway widening project is scheduled. This project was not included in the analysis_ B. Volumes 1. Future 2029 Without Project Volumes The project study area within Kona has been experiencing modest growth. HDOT ADT counts on Queers Kaahumanu Highway between Nani Kailua Drive and Hua#alai Road didn't show any increase in vehicular volumes from 2015 to 2016. Similarly, the 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecasts average daily traffic in Kona to be 41,900 vehicles in 2020 and 48,000 vehicles in 2035. This is approximately equal to a 1% annual growth rate. The estimated future volumes without the project far the future year 2029 are shown in Figure 11. 32 Royal Vistas SSFM international Queen Kaahumanu Hwy s 0 Palani Rd i 25 (45} 749 (673} 180 { 245} ti Henry St 0 N I [PGT11 M 8 515 (347) j 633{Stj} (50;, 57 1�1 } 78 (287) 505 (969) 4) Tr" 241 (556)+ "' r Palani RKY ; Queen Kaaht,i!,., ;u Hwy 49 53 1' 8- a Trt v ,r sr 0 204 (118) 96 { 38} uo Y-� Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Hua lalai Rd PuapuaanuiSt 118 (210) —7 397 (732) - 4 4--)Tr4 137 (321) CT! 4.4 m HenrySt Queen Kaahumanu Hwy d tan OM J1 44).11 277 (140) 53 (33) 76 (53) s 4) E f 173 (320}.J fi 6 (12)-0. Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 4) I V 7.6 295 (213) �— 40 (43) 76 (68) 4-) I (-4 rw ad n 17 1201 X13 (12} 18 (9) Queen Kaahumaeu Hwy 3 ic,� niehameha 111 Rd 1 North Legend (r) Peak hour 11clurnes AM (PM) (veh/hr] Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection _in_ Stop Sign Figure 11: Future 2029 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes 33 Royal Vistas SSFM international 2. Project Related Volumes The proposed Royal Vistas include 192 multi -family residential dwelling units for Phase 2. All of these are expected to be low rise units with two or three stories, Trips generated from the proposed facility were estimated using nationally accepted land use rates from the Trip Generation, 10' Edition (ITE, 2015). ITE defines the Multi -family Housing (Low Rise) Land Use [2201 as follows: "includes apartments, townhouses and condominiums located within the same building with at least three other dwelling units' The analysis used 192 dwelling units as the independent variable to estimate new trips expected from Phase 2 of the proposed project. The estimates for new trips generated by Phase 2 are shown in Table 18. Table 18: Estimated Trips Generated by Project — Phase 2 AM PM Land Use [ITE Code] Equation Equation Multi -family Housing (Low Rise) [22i] Ln (T) = 095 Lr' (X) — 051 In (T) = 0,89*Lri (X) - 0.02 Dwelling Units 192 192 New Trips 89 105 Ino Out In Out 23% 77% 53% 37% 20 69 67 39 T = Total number of trips generated, X = Dwelling Units 3. Trip Distribution The trips were distributed according to existing travel volumes. The segment volumes between Puapuaanui Street and Kuakiii Street were used to determine the inbound percent distribution. Future inbound trips will continue entering at the Royal Vistas Roadway at Queen Kaahumanu Highway, It is expected that once a connection to Lako Street is provided, Phase 2 left out .(southbound traffic) will utilize the Lako Street intersection during the peak hours, since the traffic signal will provide guaranteed exit opportunities and drivers will not have to wait for a gap at the stop -controlled Royal Vistas driveway. Figure 12 shows the Future lane configuration, It is the same as Phase 1 lane configuration, Figure 13 shows the Phase 2 inbound project generated and distributed trips. Figure 14 shows the Phase 2 outbound project generated and distributed trips. 4. Future 2029 With Project Volumes Phase 1 (Figure 9) and Phase 2 project related trips {f=igure 13 and Figure 14) were added to the Future 2029 Without Project volumes (Figure 11) to estimate Future 2029 With Project peak hour volumes (see Figure 15). In arid Cut split provided by Trip Generation, 10th Edition (ITE 2016) for Land Use 220 34 Royer! Vistas SSFM international Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Palanii Rd 4- 4 ---- eq I C 4)4Yr T(* I r4 Palani Rd Henry St 4--- 4- .' Queen 9 r North THenrySt 4)j To Royal Vistas Roadway Hualalai Rd (North) Queen Kaahurnanu Highway 0 Kamehamefia 111 Rd • Piiapuaanui4l c To KuakiniHighway Legend I (#) Peri: Hour Volumes AM 1PM) RVeh%hr) 5 Signalized Interne[tion Unsignalized Intersection .E. Stop Sign Figure 12. Future Lane Configuration 35 for Phase 2 Royal Vistas SSFM international PaIani Rd r J Henry St 3115i lif) I. (4 Pala i Rd To RoyaIVistas Roadway rc Kamebameha 111 Rd .411 ) I Jt - 2 {fi} 214} �111 =1--- 21"L.—) Queen Kaahurnanu Highway 4 f 201 (.4 Henry St Hualalai Rd (North 0 Kaneharneha 111 Rd +)T t North 1r lai Rd (south) PiiapuaanuiSl To Kuakini Highway l.�P nil (#) Peat: HourVC2lurfle5 AM 1PM) IVe#3/hr) eeere Signalized intersection unsignafized IntorsectiQrl —a— Stop Sign Figure 13: Phase 2 Inbound Project Related Trips 36 Royal Vistas SSFM internati+�nad Palani Rd J1� • ��s'11�' Henry St 1601 4_ 21 OS) 2 12) =;41 4--16110? 1;11 v Palani Rd To Royal Vistas Roadway • Kamehameha 111 Rd .41 40, 4) T d IIh }----3 i it r...l111, i Thr Queen Kaahurnanu Highway (41 r+ • 41r Henry St 1) l Hualalai Rd (North) 0 Karneharneha 111 Rd f C 1 North ITr To Kuakini Highway f. €alalai Rd h) PiiapuaanuiSi j3fild (N) Peav: Hour V Iurnes AM IPM) lkrehf her) Signalized InterseMon Unsignalited Intersection —a— Stop Sign Figure 14: Phase 2 Outbound Project Related Trips 37 Royal Vistas SSFM internati+vnal a ra Palani Rd f_21, -R`£ 4 I5r1 _ Henry St `7-, 55a 1387} 4— 711 f 6dI}} ir) i c,....„..0 rr1 18S p Queen E 118 (2191-..., 4) C m116 am ----4 1. r , 9 13 f3211"�� m" Cu - - .-.- - - -0 , . 4 4 r 5 1 Henry St 78I28Tj 512211003) 241 (5581,----..\4„ F.03 v Palarti Rd t: To Royal Vistas Roadway 1 3.0 122E, 4-431 : ,� 91 75 �. ..; ► :132 1149F__-)' 1+x9r 5 031 --- 761531 171111 1---'13 42) 1818} 177 4 339)J -�` 61121 —4 1 Kamehameha III Rd r 1- 29 (57'1 Queen Kaahumanu H ishvray Hualalai Rd (North) 4-1 Karnehamefia 111 Rd 9(11! �ie21 jet arc as 155 1785 1101151 4--)T 5 t North a• 4 DE .17 IOU ry - 141: iii PiiapuaanuiSi 8 61 108 4 681 �941�5 , ▪ >' JAI C' To Kuakini Highway 12gend # (#) Pea How Signalized, Unsignalized Ahs M+I} cveh/hr1 - Inter•SeCtiOn - Intersectio' — Ak.. Stop Sign Figure 15: Future 2029 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes 38 Royal Vistas SSFM innematronai C. Future 2029 Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis Future 2029 Without Project Intersection LOS The 2020 Without Project intersection and movement LOS and average delay (in seconds per vehicle) were determined for the AM and PM peak hours. T. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Road, Overall Intersection LOS = C/C (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Palani Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street, Overall Intersection LOS n C/D (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Henry Street resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) At the unsignaliaed intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Street (north), eastbound left turning movement has LOS F v/c of 2.20 and 0.37 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours, 4. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Road (south), westbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of C.28 and 0.47 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The westbound right turn also operates at LOS F (v/c of .74) during the AM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 5. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street. Overall Intersection LOS = B/B (AM/PM) The southbound left turn operates at LoS E during the AM and PM peak hour. The westbound left turn operates at LOS F during the PM peak hour. These delays are due to the cycle length. The left turn volumes are low and should dear every cycle. 6. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahurnanu Highway with Kuakini Highway, eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 2.87 and 0.79 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Laky Street. Overall Intersection LOS e a/C (ANI/P) At the signali2ed intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Lako Street, the eastbound left. turn operates at LOS E during the AM peak hour. This delay is attributed to the high eastbound left turn volume, and the split phasing for the Lako Street approaches. The southbound left also operates at L05 E during the AM peak hour. All other movements at Lako Street operates at LOS D or better during both peak hours. 8, Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kamehameha 111 Road. Overall Intersection LOS =13/C (AM/PM) 39 Royal Vistas SSFMinternational AIL movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kamehameha 111 Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. Tables 19 and 20 show the expected vehicular delay and level of service at each intersection. The shaded raw indicates the overall intersection delay. Synchro output is in Appendix F. Table 19: Future 2029 Without Project Intersection. Level of Service Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s) v/c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Palani Rd (overall) I 24.9 - C 28.3- C Queen Kaahumanu EB Left 39.8 0.49 0 40.7 0.77 0 Queen Kaahumanu EB Through 15.7 0.35 B 20,7 0.65 C. Queen Kaahumanu WB Left 39.8 0.69 D 41.6 0.75 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 15.7 0.47 B 18.5 0.47 B Palani NB Left 38.3 0.74 D 42.0 0.75 0 Palani NB Through 25.5 48.5 0.26 0.51 C 0 28,9 51.3 0.43 0.73 C 0 Palani 513 Left Palani SB Through 34.7 0.67 C 34.3 0.64 C Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Henry St (overall) 34.0 0.67 C 35.2 0.71 D Queen Kaahumanu EB Left 47.6 0.58 0 53.1 0.74 0 Queen Kaahumanu Ee Through 27.2 0.40 C 31.0 0.65 C Queen Kaahumanu EB Right 23.9 0.09 C 24.8 0.21 C Queen Kaahumanu WB Left 47.3 0.42 D 53.8 0.60 0 Queen Kaahumanu Wi3 Through 34.0 0.67 C 34.2 0.64 C Queen Kaahumanu WB Right 29.4 0.34 C 28,5 0.23 C Henry NB Left 35.9 0.49 0 36,7 0,44 D Henry NB Left -Through 37.4 0.62 0 38.40.60 y 0 Henry NB Right 31.6 0.03 0 33.0 0.03 C Henry. 5B Left 39.9 0.75 0 42.1 0.78 0 Henry 5B Left -Through -Right 35.6 0.72 0 35.8 0.72 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (N) (overall) 20.8- 1.4 - 1 - Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 11.6 0.26 5 12.0 0.16 B Hualalai EB Left 893.5 2.20 F 277.1 0.37 F Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (5) (overall) 5.1- - 2.3 - - Queen Kaahumanu 55 Left 12.5 0.15 B 11.4 0.11 B Hualalai WB Left 133.6 0.28 F 187.7 0.47 F Hualalai WE Right 55.7 0.74 F 24,1 0.30 C 40 Royal Vistas SSFM International Table 20: Future 2029 Without Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s) v/c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Puapuaanui St (overall) 10.9 - B 11.3 - 13 Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 62.3 0.74 E 55.9 0.82 E Queen Kaahumanu WE Through 3,9 0.55 A 3.6 0.63 A Puapuaanui WB Left 54.9 0.78 D 56.5 0,65 E Puapuaanui WB dight 9.8 0.72 A 10.6 0.70 R Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kuakini Hwy (overall) 16.1 - - 4.3 - - Queen Kaahurnanu NB Left 25.0 0.79 C 13,6 0.40 8 Kuakini EB Left 2938.5 2.87 F 429.8 0.79 F Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Lako St (overall) 43.7 - D 25.7 - C Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 15.5 0.14 B 17.4 0.21 B Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 51.3 0.99 0 25.1 0.85 C Queen Kaahumanu 5B Left 56.6 0.87 E 21,0 0.57 C Queen Kaahumanu 5B Through 23.7 0,77 C 2.9,5 0.92 C Lako E3 Left 67.3 0.91 E 44.7 0.78 0 Lako EBThtaugh-Right 34.2 0.16 C 35.7 0.17 D Lako W8 Left 51.7 0.68 D 46,3 0.65 D Lako WBThrough-Right 45.5 0.34 0 41.6 0.40 D Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Karn III Rd (overall) 18.8 - B 24.7 - C Queen KaahurnanL1 NB Left 42.7 0.79 D 48,8 0.78 0 Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 14.3 0.62 8 20.0 0.69 C Queen Kaahumanu 58 Left 42.5 0.47 0 46.5 0.50 0 Queen Kaahumanu SB Through 11.3 0.30 B 1.5.7 0.39 B Kamehameha E8 Left -Through 32.0 0.75 C 37.5 0.86 0 Kamehameha WB Left -Through -Right 42.8 0.69 0 46.8 0.64 D 2. Future 2029 With Project Intersection LOS The 2029 With Project intersection and movement LOS and average delay (in seconds per vehicle) were determined for the AM and PM peak hours. 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Road, Overall Intersection LOS = CAC (AM/PM) All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Palani Road resulted in appropriate LOS 0 or better during AM and PM peak hours. 7.. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street. Overall Intersection LOS - C/D (AM/PM) The westbound left turn operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour. The overall delay and L05 have gradually gotten worse due to the increase in background volume and the trip generated by Royal Vistas, The westbound left during the PM peak hour has a volume of 85 vehicles. This volume will clear the intersection in 1 cycle. The delay increases from 53.8 seconds without the project, to 57 seconds with the project. The Royal Vistas traffic volume causes a slight increase in 41 Royal Vfstas SSFM international the overall delay, Other factors that increase the delay are the increase in background volume and the split phase. All other movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Henry Street resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. 3. Queers Kaahurrranu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Street (north), eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 2.93 and 0.45 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 4. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Road (south), westbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of C.35 and 0.57 respectively) and Tong delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The westbound right turn also operates at LOS F (v/c of 0.86) during the AM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 5. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street. Overall Intersection LOS = B/B (AM/PFv1) The southbound left turn operates at LOS E during the AM and PM peak hour. The westbound left turn operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour. These delays are due to the cycle length. The left turn volumes are low and should clear every cycle. 6. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Royal Vistas Roadway At the proposed unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and the Royal Vistas Roadway, the southbound left turn movement from Queen Kaahumanu Highway into Royal Vistas Roadway functions well, with minimal delay, an average of 12 to 13 seconds during both peak hours. The westbound Ieft turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 0.53 and 0.48 respectively) during both AM (29 vehicles) and PM (12 vehicles) peak hours due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. Phase 2 left turas exiting Royal Vistas are expected to use Lako Street to access Queen Kaahumanu Highway, The intersection functions acceptably, with an average of 3.1 seconds of delay per vehicle in the AM peak hour and 2.3 seconds of delay per vehicle in the PM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kuakini Highway, eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 0,89 during the PM peak hour) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hour are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. B. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street, Overall intersection LOS = DIC (AM/PM) At the signalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Lako Street, eastbound Ieft operates at LOS F (v/c of 0.96) during the AM peak hour. The westbound left operates at LOS E during the AM peak hour. The eastbound Ieft and westbound left operate at LOSE during the PM peak hour. This delay is attributed to the high volume and the split phasing for the Lako Street 42 Royal Vistas SSFM International approaches. All other movements at Lako Street operate at LOS D or better during both peak hours. 9. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kamehameha 111 Road. Overall Intersection LOS = C The westbound approach operates at LOS E during the AM peak hour. During the PM peak hour, the westbound approach, the northbound Left, and the southbound left operate at LOS E. All other movements during both peak hour., operate at L05 D or better. Tables 21 and 22 show the expected vehicular delay and level of service at each intersection. The shaded row indicates the overall intersection delay, 5ynchro output is in Appendix G. Table 21: Future 2029 With Project Intersection Level of Service Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LO5 Delay ts) v/c LO5 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Palani Rd (overall) I 24.8 - C 28.4 - C Queen Kaahumanu EB Left 39,8 0,49 D 40.8 0.77 0 Queen Kaahumanu EB Through 15,7 0.35 B 211 0.67 C Queen Kaahumanu WB Left 39.7 0.69 0 41.8 0.75 D Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 16.1 0.50 B 18.8 0.4€3 B PaIani NB Left 38,3 0.74 D 42.0 0.75 0 Palani NB Through 25.5 0.26 C 29.0 0.43 C Palani 513 Left 48.5 0.51 D 51.8 0.74 L) Palani 513 Through 34.2 0.67 C 343.0 0.64 , C Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Henry St (overall) 34.7 0.70 C 35.9 0.73 D Queen Kaahumanu ELI Left 48.0 0.58 0 53.9 0.74 0 Queen Kaahumanu EB Through 27.5 0.41 C 32.4 0.69 C Queen Kaahumanu EB Right 24.0 009 0 25.1 0.21 C Queen Kaahumanu WB Left 47.7 0.45 D 57.0 0.64 E Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 1 36.7 0.75 0 35.5 0.68 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Right 29.9 0.37 C 29.0 0.24 C Henry NB Left 36.1 0.49 D 37.0 0.40 0 Henry NB Left -Through 37.5 062 0 35.8 0.50 0 +henry NB Right 31.7 0,03 C 33.3 0.03 C Henry 58 Left 39.9 0,75 0 42-4 0.7S 0 Henry SB Left -Through -Right 35.7 0,73 D 32.0 0.73 0 Queen Kaahumanu. Hwy & Huaialai (N) (overall) 28.5 - - 1.6 - - Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 12.0 0,29 8 12,7 0.18 B Hualalai EB Left 1310.5 2.93 F 237.0 0.45 F 13 Royal Vistas 55FM International Table 22: Future 2029 With Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v{c LOS DeLay (s) v/c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (S) (overall) 6.8 - - 2.7 - - Queen Kaahurnanu SB Left 13,4 0.17 5 11.9 0.12 0 Hualalai WB Left 1735 0.3.5 F 251,0 0.57 F Hualr lac WB Right 83.5 0.86 F 26.7 0.33 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Puapuaanui St (overall) 12.6 - 8 12,5 - B Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 78.0 0,78 E 59.0 0.84 E Queen Kaahtrrnanu WB Through 3.9 0.56 A 3.8 0.67 A Puapuaanui W8 Left 65.9 0.80 0 72,2 0.74 E Puuapuaanui WB Right 11,4 0.77 8 11.1 0.72 B Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kona Vista Rd (overall) 3.1 - - 2.3 - - Queen Kaahurnanu SB Left 10.4 0.04 8 11.7 0.14 B Kona Vista WE Left 118.2 0.53 F 228.2 0.48 F Kona Vista WB Right 24,9 0,40 C 25,2 0.29 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kuakini Hwy (overall) 21.8 - - 4.6 - - C7r,,:_f... Kaahumanu NB Left 27.4 0.82 0 13.7 0.40 B Kud .uii EB Left - F 507,5 0,89 E Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy & Lako 5t (overall) 43.4 - 0 28.0 - C Queen Kaahuumanu NB Left 16.6 0.13 8 17.7 0.18 B Queen Kaahumanu N8 Through 42.8 0.94 D 23.9 0.82 C Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 50.2 0.84 D 23.9 0.68 C Queen Kaahumanu 50 Through 23,8 0.74 C 24.1 0.85 C Lako EB Left 88.4 0.96 F 60.4 0.83 E Lako EB Through -Right 41.9 0.17 D 45.7 0.17 0 Lako WB Left 62.1 0,75 E 59,3 0.71 E Lako WB Through -Right 53.6 0.33 D 52.7 0.41 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kam 111 Rd (overall) 20,8 - C 27.9 - C Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 52.9 0.79 0 57.3 0,78 E Queen Kaahurnanu NB Through 12,6 0.5 5 21.4 0.67 C Queen Kaahumanu 511 Left 54,6 0.50 D 57.0 0.52 E Queen Kaahumanu 56 Through 11.0 0.27 8 16.7 0.36 0 Kamehameha ES Left -Through 43.3 0.79 D 45.9 0,88 0 Kamehameha WO Left Through -Right 61.B 0,79 E 60.1 0.71 E ' deiay r=xcc ds 1,000 seconds per vehicle 3. 2029 Traffic Signal Warrant Peak -Hour volume traffic signal warrants were evaluated for the 2029 with and without project scenarios. Table 23 shows the Peak -Hour warrant analysis in 2029 with and without the project. Traffic Signal Warrant analysis can be found in Appendix J. 44 Royal Vistas SSFM International 1. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM and PM peak hour with and without the project, 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM peak hour with and without the proR ct. 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM and PM peak hour with and without the project. Table 23: 2029 Peak -Hour Warrant 2029 Without Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai N) 857 181 YES 1110 93 YES Hualalai (S) 1111 81 YES 1038 67 NO Kuakini 885 571 YES 980 268 YES 2029 With Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (N) 876 196 YES 1181 98 YE5 Hualalai (5) 1216 81 YES 1103 67 NO Kuakini 810 579 YES 980 271 YES 4. 2029 With Project Segment LOS Arterial LOS was analyzed in Synchro on Queen Kaahumanu Highway from Hualalai (north) to Lako Street,. Where signalized intersections are less than 2.0 mi apart, thefacility should be classified as an urban street and analyzed with the methodologies of Urban Street Facilities_ For Urban Street Facilities, through - vehicle travel speed is used to analyze vehicular LOS. Analysis worksheets can be found in Appendix 0. The arterial LOS can be found in Table 24, This segment of Queen Kaahurnanu Highway Operates at LOS C northbound direction and L05 E in the southbound direction during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, satisfying the County of Hawaii Chapter 25 (Zoning), Article 2 (Administration and Enforcement), Division 4 (Amendments), Section 46 (Concurrency Requirements) regarding "acceptable level of service' for transportation facilities. Table 24: 2029 with Project Segment LOS 45 Northbound So tilm.jrnd Speed (rnph) LOS Speed (mph} LOS AM Peak Hour 18.6 C 25.2 6 PM Peak Hour 20.4 C 24.5 6 45 Royal Vistas SSFM inremationai V. Long -Term (2039) A. Surrounding Area Conditions No other significant developments or future construction projects are expected in the surrounding area that would significantly affect the roadway geometries or traffic volumes at the study intersections. This is based on research completed on October 10, 2019 at the State of Hawaii Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) website and the Statewide Transportation improvements Program (STIP). B. Volumes 1. Future 2039 Without Project Volumes The project study area within Kona has been experiencing modest growth. HDOT ADT counts on Queen Kaahurnanu Highway between Nani Kailua Drive and Hualalai Road didn't show any increase in vehicular volumes from 2015 to 2016. However, the 2035 Federal Aid Highways Long Range Transportation Plan forecasts average daily traffic in Kona on Hawaii Belt Road to be 41,900 vehicles in 2020 and 48,000 vehicles in 2035. This is approximately equal to a 1% annual growth rate over 15 years in the Kona area. Since there is a scope for development and to acknowledge all other projects which are in planning stage, a background growth rate of 1% per year was assumed, to account for additional traffic at the study intersections. The estimated future volumes without the project for the future year 2039 are shown in Figure 16. 2. Project Related Volumes Phase 1 and Phase 2 will be completed by 2024 and 2029, respectively. The trips generated and distributed by Phase 1 and Phase 2 will not change_ 3. Future 2039 With Project Volumes Project related trips from Phase 1 Figure 9) and Phase 2 (Figure 13 and Figure 14) were added to the Future 2039 Without Project volumes (Figure 16)to estimate Future 2039 With Project peak hour volumes (see Figure 17), 46 Royal Vistas SSFM International rp s 0 z Palani Rd r y tv `� 28 (50)) 827 {7243)) it) c 159 (272) Henry St fNLrirn- .17 447 87(317} {' 558 (1070) —`—F i 266 (614) --AMY • AM• AMY. -%,„4„ Palani Fid 5 8 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy klEr 07. CC tri Trt u1 Y y' 226 (131) • 106 (41) i(' Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Hualalai Rd (South Puapuaanu1St 131 438 151 (57)'"e- 87 ) c -k 53 (083) 732 (669) 63 (88)) (8091 _ 4 t 4 (355) � to w H w a HenrySt V Quem Kaahumanu rr rti ) 1 sic rici 5 (16)) 206 (454)-~` r tw 1 .ryd !tit N fel CPI (N 306 (455)) 55 (37) 84 (59)) v v V) C• 152 (354)---7 T (4-4 0.1 32 (63)) Thr w a 5; Queen KaahumNnu Hwy Hwy W 1d O .mow 326 (235) .4— 44 (48) r- 84(76) T wa`d 18 122)) ll -13 (13)) 20 (9) Queen Kaahumaou Hwy 3 ic,� niehameha 111 Rd 1 North Legend II (4) Peak hour Volumes AM (PM) (veh/hr] Signalized Intersection Unsignalized Intersection Stop Sign Figure 16: Future 2039 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes 47 Royer! Vistas SSFM internatr+vnal a ro 3 rc Karneharneha III Rd Palani Rd h� B7 13171 565 111041 "--f 266i6141 hi P. ky ► tiZ . w Palani Rd 371591 355 7671 4) I Henry St To Royal Vistas Roadway 4 T .ra k 151 116k 206143-:{ .., 53;. 123C 100 1931 608 [403) 1 4-780 L704 67 93 Queen at 44.7 ) 131(13�i (t#541 151 (355) Henry StV Hualalai Rd (North) 31113641 59 (371—...-- 84 159k Thr rn Id1 F 196 (3731 6 (13)---i 32 163} Queen Kaahumanu ighvray 1,egend # (#) "eat: Hour AM IPh+l} (veh/hrd Karnehamefia 111 Rd North `7 L 109 468} 29 41s To Kuakini Highway PiiapuaanuiSi o Signalized — intersection r y Unsignali zed •J Intersection �.. Stop Sign Figure 17; Future 2039 With Project Peak Hour Volumes 48 Royal Vistas SSFNMlntematronal C. Future 2039 Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis 1. Future 2039 Without Project Intersection LOS The 2039 Without Project intersection and movement LOS and average delay (in seconds per vehicle) were determined for the AM and PM peak hours. NOTE: 2039 Future projections assume 1% annual growth rate for 20 years, which is a conservative assumption. Tables 25 and 26 show the existing vehicular delay and level of service at each intersection. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Road. Overall Intersection LOS z C/C, The PM southbound left turn operates at LOS E. At 62 vehicles in the PM peal< hour,, this results in about 1 vehicle per minute. This movement should clear every cycle. The increase in delay is based on the increase of the background traffic volume, 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street. Overall Intersection LOS = DfD. The PM eastbound and westbound left turns operate at LOS E. The overall delay and LOS have gradually gotten worse due to the increase 1ri background growth rate. The increase in delay is based on the increase in background volumes. 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Street (north), the delay at this intersection is 41 seconds per vehicle. This is due to the nigh delay in the eastbound left turn volume. The eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 0_S9 during the PM peak hour) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahurnanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 4. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Read (south), westbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 0.46 and 0.75 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The westbound right turn also operates at LOS F (vje of 0.97) during the AM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 5. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street. Overall Intersection LOS = B/B. The southbound left turns operate at LOS E during both peak hours. The westbound left turn operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour. These delays are due to the cycle length. The left turn volumes are low and should clear every cycle. 6. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kuakini Highway, eastbound left turning movement has LOS F and long delays during the AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours, 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street. Overall Intersection LOS = E/D. At the signalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Lako Street, the eastbound left turn, northbound through, and southbound left turn operate at L05 F (v/c of 1.01, 1.1, and 0.99 49 Royal Vfstas SSFM intem atio'w respectively). The PM southbound through operates at LOS F (v/c of 1.03). The delay increase is caused by the volumes generated by the background volume and the split phasing. 8. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and I(amehameha III Road. Overall Intersection LOS = C/B, Al[ movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kamehameha III Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours_ Tables 25 and 26 show the expected vehicular delay and level of service at each intersection. The shaded row indicates the overall intersection delay. Syne..hro output is in Appendix G. Table 25: Future 2039 Without Project Intersection Level of Service Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s) WE LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Palani Rd (overall) 26.3 - C 31.1 - C Queen Kaahurnanu ES Left 41.4 0.53 0 44.2 0.80 f:) Queen Kaahumanu ES Through 17,7 0.40 B 24,6 0,74 Queen Kaahumanu WB Left 40.8 0.71 0 45.3 0.78 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 17.9 0.54 0 21.1 0.54 Palani NS Left 39.7 0.77 0 45,8 0.78 0 Palani NB Through 25.3 0.27 C 29,2 0.44 C Palani SE Left 49.6 0.53 D 55,2 0,78 E Palani 53 Through 34.6 0.69 C 35,1 0.67 0 Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy & Henry St (overall) 37.5 0.74 D 38.9 0.78 D Queen Kaahumanu E8 Left 53.9 0.67 0 65,5 0.84 E Queen Kaahumanu ES Through 29.9 0.46 C 35.6 0.74 0 Queen Kaahumanu EB Right 25.7 0.10 C 26.8 0.23 C Queen Kaahumarnu WB Left 50.0 0.49 D 62.2 0,69 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 40.8 0.80 I] I 39,0 0.73 I] Queen Kaahurnanu WB Right 32.7 0.42 C 30.6 0.25 C Henry NB Left 37.2 0.52 D 37.6 0.46 0 Henry NB Left -Through 38.9 0.65 D 39.9 0.64 0 Henry NB Right 32.2 0.04 C 33,4 0.03 C. Henry. SB Left 43.4 0.79 0 4{x,0 0.82 0 Henry 5B Left -Through -Right 37.8 077 - 0,32 D - B 37,8 2.1 13,1 0,77 - 0.19 D - B Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (N) (overall) 41.0 12.7 Queen Kaahumanu NB Left Hualalai F3 Left *F 316.3 0.59 F Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy & Hualalai (5) (overall) 9.2 _ - - _ 3.7 - - R Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 13.7 0.19 B 12.3 0,13 Hualalai WB Left 229.1 0.46 F 345.7 0.76 F Hualalai WB Right 109.5 0.97 F 30,3 0.39 0 'delay exceeds 1,000 seconds per vehicle 50 Royal Vistas S5FM International Table 26: Future 2039 Without Project Intersection Level of Service continued) Intersection AM PM Delay jsj v/c LOS Delay (s) v/c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Puapuaanui St (overall} 13.0 - B 13.3 - B Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 64.1 0.78 E 58,4 0.83 E Queen Kaahumanu WE Through 4,8 0.62 A 4.6 0.70 A Puapuaanui WB Left 54.5 0.79 D _,:'.1 0.57 Ir jp Puapuaanuk WR Right 13.0 0.80 B L3 :. 0.79 B Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kuakini Hwy (overall) 11.3 - - 8.6 - - Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 46.0 0.95 L _5.8 0.48 C Kuakini EB Left * - - - F Queen Kaahumanu Fiwy & Lako St (overall) 64.6 - E 48.8 - C1 Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 18.2 0.19 B 22.5 0.32 C Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 55.1 1.10 F 44.8 0.95 D Queen Kaahumanu 5B Left 93.0 0.99 F 57.0 0.90 E Queen Kaahumanu 5B Through 29.4 0.85 C 52,9 1.03 F Laky E3 Left 92.7 1.01 F 46.1 0.80 D Lako EDThrough-Right34.6 0.19 C 365 0.18 D Lako W9. Left 51.6 0.70 D 47,7 0,67 D Lako WB Through -Right 45.3 0.35 0 42.8 0.41 D Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kam III Rd (overall) 20.4 - . C 28.3 - B Queen Kaahumano NB Left 42.0 0.79 0 51.0 0.78 D Queen Kaahumanu NB Through 17.0 0.70 B 25.7 0.78 C Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 42.6 0.48 0 47.9 0.51 D Queen Kaahumanu S8 Through 12.6 0.35 B 17,8 0.44 B Kamehameha E3 Left -Through 32.1 0.76 C 41,9 0.88 0 lamehameha WB Left -Through -Right 44.7 0.73 0 49,3 0.68 D *delay exceeds 1,000 seconds per vehicle 2. Future 2039 With Project Intersection LOS Existing intersection and movement LOS and average delay (in seconds per vehicle) were determined for the AM and PM peak hours. 1. Queer! Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Road Overall Intersection LOS = C/C. All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Karehameha 111 Road resulted in appropriate LOS D ar better during AM and PM peak hours. 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street. Overall Intersection LOS = D/D. All movements at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kamehameha 111 Road resulted in appropriate LOS fJ ar better during AM and PM peak hours. 51 Royal Vistas SSFM international 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Street (north), the delay at this intersection is 505 seconds per vehicle, a slight increase from the 2039 Without Project scenario. The eastbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 0.73 in the PM peak. hour) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours, 4 Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Hualalai Road (south), westbound left turning movement has LOS F (v/c of 0.56 and D.97 respectively) and long delays during both AM and PM peak hours are due to high through volumes on Queen Kaahumanu Highway. The westbound right turn also operates at LOS F (v/c of 1.14) during the AM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. 5. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street. Overall Intersection LOS= 6/3. The southbound left turns operate at LOS F (v/c of 0.78 and 0.87, respectively) during the AM and PM peak hours. The westbound left turn operates at LOS F (v/c of 0.77) during the PM peak hour. These delays are due to the cycle length. The left turn volumes are low and should clear every cycle. 6, Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Royal Vistas Roadway At the proposed unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway and the Royal Vistas Roadway, the southbound Tett turn movement from Queen Kaahumanu Highway into Royal Vistas Roadway functions well, with minimal delay, an average of 11 to 13 seconds during both peak hours. The westbound left turning movement has WS F (v/c of 0.70 and 0.69 respectively) during both AM (29 vehicles) and PM (12 vehicles) peak hours are due to high through volumes an Queen Kaahumanu Highway. Phase 2 left turns exiting Royal Vistas are expected to use Lako Street to access Queen Kaahumanu Highway, The intersection functions acceptably, with an average of 4.1 seconds of delay per vehicle in the AM peak hour and 2.9 seconds of delay per vehicle in the PM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours, 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway At the unsignalized intersection of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kuakini Highway, the eastbound left turning movement has L05 F during the AM and PM peak hours. The northbound left turn operates at LOS F (Nolo 0.98) during the AM peak hour. The major and other minor movements operated at acceptable levels of service during the AM and PM peak hours. S. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street. Overall Intersection LOS = E/b. The overall intersection operates at LOS E during the AM peak hour and LOS D during the PM peak hour. The delay is dueto the increase in background volume, the traffic generated by Royal Vistas, and the split phasing. During the AM peak hour, the eastbound left turn, northbound through, and southbound left turn operate at LOS F (vfc of 1.04, 1.05, and 1.11 respectively), The PM eastbound left turn operates at LOS F (v/c of 0.87). 9. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kamehameha III Road. Overall Intersection LOS = 52 Royal Vistas 55FM International AIL rnovenlents at the signalized intersections of Queen Kaahumanu Highway with Kamehameha 111 Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better curing AM and PM peak hours. Tables 27 and 28 show the expected vehicular delay and level of service at each intersection_ The shaded row indicates the overall intersection delay. Synchro output i5 in Appendix I. Table 27: Future 2039 With Project Intersection Level of Service Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s) v/c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Palani Rd (overall) 26.3 - C31.3 - C Queen Kaahumanu EB Left 41.4 0,53 0 W 44.3 0,80 0 Queen Kaahumanu EB Through 17.8 0.41 B 25.4 0.77 C Queen Kaahurnanu WE Left 40.8 0,71 0 45.5 0.78 0 Queen Kaahumanu+B Through 18.3 0,56 B 214 0.56 C Palani NB Left 39.7 0.77 D 45.8 0.78 0 Palani NB Through 25.3 0.27 C 29.3 0.44 C Palani SB Left 49.6 0,53 0 54.7 0.77 D Palani SB Through 34.6 0.69 C 35.1 0.57 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Henry St (overall) 38.6 0.76 0 40.2 0.80 D Queen Kaahumanu EB Left 53.0 0,67 0 64.6 0.84 E i:tueen Kaahumanu EB Through 30.2 0.47 C 41.4 0.84 D Queen Kaahurnanu EB Right 25.8 0.10 C 28.1 0.23 C Queen Kaahumanu WB Left 50.5 0.51 ❑ 51.3 0.56 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Through 44.3 0.85 0 42.4 0.8d 0 Queen Kaahumanu WB Right 35.0 0.51 0 31.4 0.26 C. Henry NB Left 37.2 0.52 D 37.3 0.46 0 Henry NE3 Left -Through 38.9 0.55 D 39.6 0.63 0 Henry NB Right 32.2 004 C 33.2 0.03 C Henry 56 Left 43.4 0.79 0 44.6 0.82 0 Henry 56 Left -Through -Right 38.0 0.78 D 37.2 0.77 0 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (N) (overall) 50.6 - - 2.5 - - Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 13.2 0.35 B 13.9 0.21 B Hualalai EB Left F 425.9 0.73 F Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Hualalai (5) (overall) 13.1 - - 4.6 - - Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 14.8 0,21 B 12.8 0.14 B Hualalai WO Left 308.6 0,56 F 495.2 1 0.97 F Hualalai W13 Right 168.4 1.14 F 34.3 0.43 0 *delay exceeds 1,000 seconds per vehicle 53 Royal Vistas S5FM international Table 28: Future 2039 With Project Intersection Level of Service (continued) Intersection AM PM Delay (s) v/c LOS Delay (s) - v/c LOS Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Puapuaanui St (overall) 15.7 - 8 15.3 - B Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 91.4 0.78 F SZ.) 0.87 F Queen Kaahurnanu W13 Through 4.9 0.62 A 4.6 0.72 A Puapuaanui WB Left 65.6 0.81 E 843 0.77 F Puapuaanui WB Right 16.1 0.85 B 14.0 0.78 8 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kona Vista Rdwy (overall) 4.1- - 2.9 - - Queen Kaahumanu SE Left 10,9 0.04 B 12.5 0.15 Kona Vista WB Left 190.1 0.70 F 375.9 0.69 Kon, -1 Vista WB Right 301 0.46 0 29,9 !). Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kuakini Hwy (overall) 123 - - 9.3 - 0.49 - C Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 52.8 0.98 F 16.1 Kuakini EB Left x • # F Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Lako 5t (overall) 65.7 - E 37.0 - D Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 20.1 0.19 C 25.9 0.26 C Queen Kaahumanu Ne Through 72.4 1.05 F 29.0 0.86 C Queen Kaahumanu 513, Left 141.3 1,11 F 46.1 0,87 a Queen Kaahumanu 513 Through 292 0,83 C 30.6 0.91 C Lako EB Left 109.6 1.04 F 85.9 0.87 F Lako EB Through -Right 42.1 0.19 0 55,7 0.1.::5 Lako WB Left 62.3 0.76 E 73.0 0.76 E Lako WB Through -Right 53.6 0.34 0 64.5 0.44 E Queen Kaahumanu Hwy & Kann III Rd (overall) 22.5 - C 33.1 - C Queen Kaahumanu NB Left 53.6 0.80 0 66.8 0.79 E Queen Kaahumanu NO Through 14.9 0.61 B 25.8 0.71 C Queen Kaahumanu SB Left 55.9 0,51 E 67.8 (156 E Queen Kaahumanu 5B Through 12.4 0.31 B 19.8 0.39 B K, rnehameha E8 Left -Through 44.4 0.81 0 53.5 0.90 0 Kamehameha W13 Left -Through -Right 60.4 0.78 E 73.2 0.77 E *delay exceeds 1,000 seconds per vehicle 3. 2039 Traffic Signal Warrant Table 29 shows the Peak -Hour warrant analysis in 2039 with and without the project_ The Traffic Signal Warrant analysis can be found in Appendix J. 1. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualaiai Road (North) This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM and PM peak hour with and without the project. 54 Royal Vistas SSFM intemationai 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (South) This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM peak hour with and without the project. 3. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kuakini Highway This intersection passes the Peak -Hour warrant in the AM and PM peak hour with and without the project. Table 29: 2039 Peak -Hour Warrarrt 2039 Without Peak Hour Warrant AM 1h11 PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant Hualalai (N) 947 200 YES 1225 102 YES Hualalai (S) 1228 89 YES 1147 74 NO Kuakini 894 631 YES 1082 297 YES 2039 With Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (N) 965 215 YES 1297 107 YES Hualalai (5) 1333 89 YES 1212 74 NO Kuakini 894 639 YES 1082 300 YES 4. 2039 With Project Segment LOS Arterial LOS was analyzed in Synchro on Queen Kaahumanu Highway from Hualalai (north) to Lako Street. Where signalized intersections are less than 2,0 mi apart, thefacility should be classified as an urban street and analyzed with the methodologies of Urban Street Facilities, For Urban Street Facilities, through - vehicle travel speed is used to analyze vehicular LOS. Analysis worksheets can be found in Appendix i. The arterial LOS can be found in Table 30. This segment of Queen Kaahumanu Highway operates at LOS D in the northbound direction and LOS B in the southbound direction in the AM peak hour. During the PM peak hour, both directions operate at LOS C. The arterial LOS for the AM and PM peak hours satisfies the County of Hawaii Chapter 25 (Zoning), Article 2 (Administration and Enforcement), Division 4 (Amendments), Section 46 (Concurrency Requirements) regarding "acceptable level of service for transportation facilities. Table 30: 2039 with Project Segment LOS 55 Northbound Southbound Speed (mph) LOS Speed (mph) LOS ..................... AM Peak Hour 15.6 D 24.2 B PM Peak Baur 18.6 C 23.6 C 55 Royal Vfstos SSFM International VI. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Federal -Aid Highways 20.35 Transportation Plan for the District of Hawaii (July 2014) Includes improvements to Kuakini Highway from Henry Street to Kamehameha III Road. Kuakini Highway will be widened by 2 travel lanes and include bicycle facilities and sidewalks. This project would have a significant. impact on traffic operations. The installation of bike facilities and pedestrian facilities may lead to an increase in bicycle and pedestrian traffic, in which case bicycle and pedestrian safety will need to be further analyzed. Due to the difficulty of crossing a 4 -lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 45 MPH, stop -controlled intersections may need to be signalized or converted to roundabouts.. Based on the existing traffic volumes and future projections of Royal Vistas on the surrounding roadways, the following stem wide intersection improvements are recommended for consideration by Hawaii County and HOOT: 1. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Palani Road Signal timing should be monitored and updated to ensure that left turn queues clear every cycle. 2. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Henry Street Signal timing should be monitored and updated to ensure that left tura queues clear every cycle. Henry Street approaches currently operate in split phases. Changing the split phasing to protected left turn phases on Henry Street will allow more green time on the major through movements, lowering the overall delay of the intersection. 1 Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Hualalai Road (North) Based on the 2019 traffic volumes, this intersection passes the Four -Hour warrant. This intersection passed the Peak -Hour warrant in the 2019 AM peak hour and for all peak hours in all future scenarios. Future traffic should be monitored, and a traffic signal or roundabout should be installed if needed, but priority should be given to keeping Queen Kaahumanu Highway traffic moving and not installing a traffic signal if not warranted by 4- or 8 -hour warrants. The overall delay at this intersection is 41.0 and 50.5 seconds per vehicle in the 2039 AM peak hour, without and with the project, respectively. When the delay experienced by drivers reaches this level, the eastbound drivers are likely to find alternative routes. 4. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and HualalaI Road (South) As the westbound Left turn delay gets worse, drivers may decide to use Puapuaanui Street to access Queen Kaahumanu Highway in the southbound direction. Based on the existing volumes, this intersection did not pass the Four -Hour warrant or the Peak -Hour warrant. This intersection did pass the Peak -Flour warrant for all future AM peak hour scenarios. Future traffic should be monitored.. 5. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Puapuaanui Street 5ignel timing should be monitored and adjusted as needed to increase the probability that queues on Queen Kaahumanu Highway can clear the intersection in 1 cycle, 6. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Royal Vistas Roadway This intersection will function acceptably through the full. Phase 1 buildout. Before any Phase 2 residences are occupied, it is recommended that the connection to Kekuanao'a Place is completed so that Royal Vistas Phase 2 'left out' traffic can access the Lako Street traffic signal. 7. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Koakini Highway 56 Roy& Vistas SSFM international This intersection passes the Four -Hour warrant and Peak -Hour warrants during all peak hours for all scenarios. Future traffic should be monitored, and a traffic signal or roundabout should be installed if needed. The northbound left turn movement isvery heavy (300-600 veh/hour by 2039 with project), which will be nearly at capacity. The westbound left turn, while small, is already over capacity in 2019 and will be far over capacity by 2039. Royal Vistas traffic has very little effect on this intersection. 8. Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Lako Street The Lako Street intersection operates at LOS E/D (AM/PM) with or without the Royal Vistas project in the 2039 scenario. Lako Street currently has split phasing (sequential rather than concurrent) on the Lako Street approaches, Changing the phasing from split to protected left turns would help lower the delay. This intersection would also improve significantly if Queen Kaahumanu Highway is widened to 4 lanes as in the 2035 Transportation Plan. 9, Queen Kaahumanu Highway and Kamehameha 111 Road Signal timing should be monitored and updated as needed. Arterial LOS was analyzed in Synchro on Queen Kaahumanu Highway from Hualalai (north) to Lako Street. Where signalized intersections are Tess than 2.0 mi apart, the facility should be classified as an urban street and analyzed with the methodologies of Urban Street Facilities. For Urban Street Facilities, through - vehicle travel speed is used to analyze vehicular LOS. This segment of Queen Kaahumanu Highway operates at LOS ID or better for each scenario in the AM and PM peak hours. The arterial LOS satisfies the County of Hawaii Chapter 25 (Zoning)i, Article 2 (Administration and Enforcement), Division 4 (Amendments), Section 46 (Concurrency Requirements) regarding "acceptable level of service" for transportation facilities. 57 Royal Vistas SSFM international VII. REFERENCES American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2011. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation, 10th Edition: An !TE informational Report, September 2017. Office of Environmental Quality Control. EA and EIS Online library, accessed July 2019. chttp://oegc.doh.hawaii.gov/default.aspx>. State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation, Federal -Aid Functional Classification Update: Pa7licy and Procedures, December 2012. State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation. Federal -Aid ,Highways 2035 Transportation Plan for the District of Hawaii, July 2014. State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation, Historical Traffic Station Maps, 2016. State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation. Historical Traffic Station Maps, 2015. State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation, Historical Traffic Station Maps, 2014. State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation. Historical Traffic Station Maps, 2013. State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation. Statewide Transportation Improvements Program, Accessed July 2019.-http://hawaii.gov/dot/highways/STIP>. State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation. Statewide Uniform Design Manua far Streets and Highways, 1980. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council. Highway Capacity Manual, Washington, D.C., 6'" Edition. 58 Appendix A 24 -Hour and Peak Period Turn Movement Traffic Counts Type of peak hour being reported: user -Defined Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering VO ,1rre LOCATION: Palanl Rd -- Hawaii Beit Rd . QC JOR #° 14972601 #TY/STATL: Hawaii, HI DATE: Tue, Apr 30 2019 51 226 + t 177 321 20 Peak -Hour: 7:20 AM -- 820 AM Peak 15-Nin:7:30 AM -7:45 AM 14 343 f t j 1:93 .. 11 j C.7 1. 746 ► 76'18 1. I9.a8 t, 23 « ami +L3.. 113 j r 6789 y r 263 5&6 CE "k7 * 1Q6 s Y.. '�, j, 43 .. 51 r• 55 j7 r 7.5 2K3 132 ]L39� 7q2 5A4 ..yy }Counts :� GY� L CAT 1t'1I4T C?RNE5 C:OMMUNT13:S 37 0 28 • n 2.3 1 1 a 0 1 0 0 r 0 1 .• ! 3 ,„ 1 i. a € -• 1 7 r 4- Cr o 4-.1 PA r. « .1 NA . t J `'' ran -- t ria 44- -► r �. *y t r I I Ir P 1 rU' r 1! -Min Count Period Beginning At Palani Rd {Northbound} Palmi Rd (Southbound). Hawaii Belt Rd (Eastbound) Ilawaii Belt Rd (Westbound) Total Hourly Totals Left Niru Right ti I_��Ik Thru NM 0 Lr:fi Thru lii�hd LJ Q.twfl T11ru JJ';i�I71 U 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 48 1E 29 _ 51 35 26 1 51 39 27 57 29 0 5 55 17 0 4 78 33 1 17 75 31 0 11 91 38 0 20 122 38 0 48 175 2 0 1 36 179 3 0 45 157 0 535 548 652 7:30 AM 54 51 26 0 8 91 38 0 13 131 58 0 i 40 163 11 0 684 2379 7:45 AM 8:00AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 63 55 28 0 SS 39 29 0 58 34 27 0 55 48 765 0 1 80 49 0 7 70 51 0 5 65 29 0 8 05 78 0 23 102 59 0 12 111 53 0 22 129 5_ 038 25 136 75 0 45 144 7 0 44 184 3 0 223 5 0 ! 61 187 4 0 656 671 682 1i.3: 2500 2623 2693 7740 Peak 15=Mln Elowtates Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Tota! Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U All Vehicles Heavy Trucks Pedestrians Bicycles 8ailroad Stopped Buses 216 204 104 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 364 152 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 52 524 232 0 4 52 28 0 0 0 0 160 652 44 0 0 28 C 0 0 0 7. 2736 128 0 C Comments: Report generated on 5/13/2019 3;10 PM SOURCE; Qu.ality Counts, LLC(hitp://www.quiityt.uunts.net1 Y-877-58042212 Pale 1o'1 Type of peak hour being reported: U5er-0et:fed Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering V0',lrr8 LOCATION: Palani Rd -- Hawaii Belt Rd QC 1f3R #' 14972602 "Y/STATL: Hawaii, Ill IJAlt;: Tue, Apr 30 2019 471 582 11P 313 Sl 4 t Peak -Hour: 3:45 PM -- 4145 PM Peak 15 Min: 3:45 PM — 4:00 PM IS 17 f t 0 27 0 .w 4 941 « 290 J. 377 y 16-0 0 n 513 1 CAS i. 41 Y. 873 3,6 r 2.7 J « f09 26 y t c3 ♦ 122S + 1 i CE `°, j, 14 .. iii IP as t R9 r 2Z 7 f alZ 1m. � DM 75? Quality Counts 31 07 0 . Lz I 0 0 d____ 11) 1 1 1 I 1 I A i : 1 1 f i 6 r NA .t 1 - NA - 1 L r 1 L —y J NA ..p. hh 1 r wRw L « t;n r 11 it } T �+ I I "� ■� '" r 0• 1 r No 4 0 i 4 r HA 1S -Min Count Period Begir1ningAut Palani Rd (Northbound) Palmi Rd �Southboitnd} Hawaii Belt Rd (Eastbound] Hawaii Belt Rd (WeV-hu rrd� Total 14DlY ur Totals LcFI I.t;,, Righl. 0 Calk Thru Ri ht ;P tt'iI Thru Ri5hl LI 1.111 711ru WV!! t1 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 66 -:' 56 76 0 77 61 59 0 ES 4 65 0 _C 1112 35 1 _3 84 29 0 :5 94 27 0 21 93 29 0 :kl9 93 46 175 115 1 53 193 1.14 0 55 19.6 131 1 :1,1 1.84 :3 C 55 156 3 0 52 158 4 0 56 154 11 0 937 875 907 951 3670 4:01 PM 4:1.5 PM 4:30 PM 52 57 48 1 73 69 61 0 46 75 73 0 9 74 27 0 12 79 32 0 9 67 19 0 80 227 129 0 611 213 134 0 63 239 109 1 ' 56 172 9 0 55 138 6 0 55 145 15 0 941 , 933 936 3674 3732 3741 4:45 PM S:00 PM 5:1.5 Pm 9:30 PM 5:65 P'64 59 1 63 0 67 79 57 1 64 68 66 0 417 75 55 0 51 23 54 0 15 94 47 0 15 69 36 0 A 95 3.1 0 3 66 19 0 7 59 13 0 64 I 7 6 1.73 0 63 229 111 2 66 1.76 101 0 46 i66 94 0 38 161 69 1 57 1:4 i7 4 47 155 8 - 63 142 8 0 57 120 8 0 11 101 9 0 867 932 883 756 691 16/2 3668 3616 3458 3262 Peak 15 -Min Flowrates Northhoond Snuthhaund fatr#uwnd We;rthound to al Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U All tile1rirles Heavy Trucks Peds Lreans Bityeles ' 3a,lroad „Sto2vtd B.Ises_ 770 328 290 ❑ 1 16 0 4 0 0 0 0 84 377 7:16 0 0 S C 1 0 0 0 270 792 524 4 12 20 8 4 0 0 0 724 616 44 0 4 44 0 4 0 0 0 3iO4-- 117 12 ❑ Comments: Report generated on 5/13/2012 3:06 PM 900 RCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www,qualitycounts,net} 1•S77.5S0 2212 Pgi96 1 ca 1 Type of peak hour being reported: User -Defined Method fordeterminiri0 peak hour: Total Entering Vo ,erre LOCATION: Henry St -• Hawaii Belt Rd CLC JOR #' 14972603 LI rilS1ATL: Hawaii, HI JAR: Tue, Apr 30 2019 as 912 Peak -Hou: 7/0 AM -- 8:20 AM 1 r Peak 15 -Nin: 8:15 AM -- 8:30 AM .12A 3.34 362 1 `� =9 32 43 4A 1 * '" 870 .. LP t 359 •. X80 r 124 S �J L. 467. 1119 55..111 J E ...cm ]613 y `°, 1 52 4.. 762 %7 i 4,6 i CE ,L 2b w 4.S r 58 r 59 + 5.7 146 237 c 515 SIS 0 L QualityCounts CATS 171AT Didd`i65 CO 4V0VTIf:S 45 2.7 71 • 43• ifi 94 i 4 3 0. AIt 0 1 t 1 ! 0 4 + IJP. 4 4 _... 7 _S 4- —4 .. f r NA J 4 4 s .# t.' nr• 1 • r -Y i r 1S -Min Count Plod Beginning At1 Henry St (Narthboun,i; Henry 5t (Southbound) Hawaii Belt Rd (f.mrbound) 11awa,; 3e<t Rd (We:I:lourrd� Total Hourly c Yals lrf� TPrru RiJ�iil 11 Lek Thr LP Bight II !t'fl Thru Eii};Yrl t.l It•dC Ulm I1:Y�Yi! ti 6:45 AM 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 3: 57 5 32 40 13 0 44 81 8 0 24 81 7 0 34 82 7 0 40 83 15 0 50 81 12 0 77 48 26 C 109 69 20 0 112 78 25 0 79 68 35 0 82 93 31 1 86 85 26 0 89 77 37 0 16 .' % L' 19 J+i 0 27 7 18 0 32 40 0 23 7'+ 27 0 27 93 30 0 2S 97 37 0 15 1.0.2 :,03 0 7 170 89 0 8 138 132 0 14 160 124 0 24 142 110 0 13 165 117 0 19 L84 86 0 038 620 778 768 725 782 794 7854 2941 3053 3069 S:'i?:AVI 476 €,8 -1,1 fl 84 n3 4C 0 CO. 00 3?a 0 i6 IFi-t 51 1] 7 105F. Pt•:1k 15 -Min 1-iovorSteS Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Left Thru Right U left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thry Right IJ '.II •.;L0. ties : r -....,i Trucks '•a:•Iriens '.r. ,.. `' is:r•1„'u S:ar:r:•r '' .I.V.', 200 324 48 0 ' 4 16 4 0 0 0 0 356 308 148 0 12 8 0 0 0 0 0 100 388 148 0 0 36 16 12 0 a 0 76 736 344 0 4 44 20 4 0 0 3 3176 164 16 2 :Y; t' • r.. - I i'r u''. i i 1 t/ _) i 1 `' 3 :1 is P Nl SOURCE; Qu.ality Counts, LLC (http:ffavw .qua ii tyt.uurrts.ne1} 14877-180.2212 Pule 1 o' 1 Type of peak hour being reported; User -Defined Method for determiniri8 peak hour: Total Entering Vo ,)rre LOCATION: Henry 5t -- Hawaii Belt Rd CIC JOB #' 14972604 LII f/51AIT: Hawaii, HI DAIL: Tue, Apr 30 2019 293 V22 IF t 195+ 347 ti Peak -Hour: 3:45 PM -- 4145 PM eak 15 3:45 OS 22 t 1.1 Pus it9 4 3 rt 661 «.191 f L 114 WI ad .0. 4.1 41 OM y GtsB t $43CE 2-3 y 1144. 291 i P 72 . 1045 zz . as `°, imp4,4 _ .4, 1.9 « 31 42 r a 1.E 47? Quality Counts (1.4L7 I J + 46 g # ti ' `R ir 1 1 ‘,. il 4i A 7 4. i 0910 « 1 6 6 NA J • ,_ _ 4 NA - 1 L f J L . —4 J NA .r, s• NA t4A y L + t.,'.1r 0,*y I 1 1 1t r , r r Nn 1 6 I r NA 1S -Min Count Plod Beginning At Henry St (Northbound) Henry St (Southbound) Hawaii Reit Rd (Eastbound) Hawaii Be t Rd (Westbound) Total HToour y Left Thru RipFrl. U L+3R Thru Right 0 tr:fi Thru Right LI Left Thru Right U 3:00 PM 3:15, PM 3:30 PM 3:45 PM 43 74 0 29 80 0 42 85 20 0 31 72. 12 0 31 93 61 110 83 52 0 84 73 41 0 95 80 51 0 4b 149 5'_ 0 46 156 54 0 56 156 58 0 45 182 67 0 8 152 85 0 18 143 76 0 29 145 82 0 17 147 74 0 803 871 871 877 ? 3482 4:00 PM 4:1.5 PM 4:30 PM 36 71 7 0 29 88 5 0 30 87 9 D 80 94 54 0 88 70 34 0 82 98 51 0 40 161 69 0 51 164 73 0 54 1.56 82 0 14 127 73 0 2.5 148 84 0 16 126 83 0 826 850 873 3445 1.434 3436 4:45 PM 0:00 PM 5-1.5 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 78 80 6 0 30 85 7 0 23 89 13 0 27 62 8 0 18 76 4 0 R7 C 47 i) 87 82 54 0 78 m 85 0 82 6. 48 0 78 6a 27 0 ;4 11 9 84 L) 10 15.1 72 0 4,) 167 51 0 41 150 39 0 48 1.13 40 0 la 1:8 85 6 8 123 SC 0 12 1,27 80 0 12 1.8 03 0 5 101 77 0 09 822 816 696 685 3388 338.1 1140 3163 301E. Peak 15 -Min Plow rates Northbound Southbound fasthound Westbound to al Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right 0 Left Thru Right U All Vphi [Jes Heavy Trucks Pd'tsLrians Bityeles ia,lroad ,5too2ved Rusts 174 788 48 0 8 0 47 0 0 0 0 316 370 7.114 0 4 d 0 0 0 0 0 1.847 728 268 0 4 17 0 8_2 4 0 0 68 588 296 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 - 5506 68 20 0 Comments: Report generated on 5/13/2019 3:08 PM SOURCE: Quality CQunts, LLC (hitp://www.qualitycounts,net} 1•S77.580.2212 Nita lo?1 Type of peak hour being reeorted:Systern Peak Method fordeterr,InIng peak hour: Total Entering Volume LOCATION Queen !(aahumanu Hwy -- Hualalai Rd (Northern Most) QC 10B #: 15039901 ITY/STATL: ICailua, HI DATE: Thu Aug 29 2019 836 Keg + r :Cl 774 9 s 1 4 Peak -Hour 7:DD AM -- 8:00 AM Peak 15 -Min: 7:15 AM — 7:30 AM 6. 18 f4 t P 5,7 0 rr 4 .. 194r14 A a . 97. r 1 17'_F3 1, 0. 0 O r o$ r 9 0• l 9 r.0 :1 9+ 4 i 1 "°, t 0 r J - 0 9 r 3 1 r 1E4 955 0 BA 1249 Quality Counts 7 - $ r 5s L7 Iobo___ 1 m, �fl R a o* 1 1 coo r 9 r 0 C a 1 RA Jo- ■ '- -1 t r 1 r. n /AA - 1 L r J L + J L NA r NA 4 11 p r • I I NA • t to. r N r1 Nn 1 t 11 r NA 1 i, -Min count Period F3r5inn,ng4t Queen Kaahurtlariu Hwy (Northbound) Queen Kaahunanu Hwy (Southbound) Hualoiai Rd {Northern. Most] (1:i rboundl Hualaiai Rd (Northern Most) (Wer.tbritihri} iotai Hourly ldstali Carl Thru Right U a Lott Thr IJ Right 11 1tfl Thru Right LJ Li,T1 Ulm 14.ptl 7:+J.AM 7;15 AM 28 239 0 0 36 2013 0 0 0 190 -• 0 212 _ 0 ti 6 0 9 0 As 0 0 u u u 0 U 0 0 41). 549 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 32 260 0 0 68 223 0 0 0 198 8 0 0 176 7 0 24 0 14 0 6 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 536 490 2047 8:00 AV 8:15 A' 1 3:3i:A41 51,--]; .,',.;A 38 229 0 0 36 232 0 0 '34 2i1 11 1 'i 1 7 ;4 i1 0 0 164 4 0 0 168 3 0 0 178 0 0 187 7 0 0 0 7 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 t 1 0 0 :7 [) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i) 0 0 0 0 0 G' 44; ‘15,1 •li12 .1;f 7 7171. t <<22 IK'1-1 I H rl'- Perik 1'r -Mir, 1 low,dio,tig Ns1rIhhn:)rad Southboufid Eastbound Westbound to al Let! 1 hr /light U Lott Thru Right U Left Thr Right 41 $ inFl Thru Ri ht fJ B .%II'. ehirles ,:. vy-rra..k 'F^F,rii-r.; ?j.;•,;°e_ ?i 1:: um S 1,-,t:t7.-: R i.s s 14+1 _t; .2 0 0 ' 0 24 0 0 0 0 a 0 848 44 0 0 44 12 0 0 0 0 35 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2196 64 0 0 1 r ,.;'.jlLcl :m 9112/2019 10:40 AM SOURCE; Quality Counts, LLC.(http://www.qualitycounts.net) 1-877-580-2212. Pale 1 o` 1 Type of peak hour being reported:System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering VO ,jrre LOCATION: Queen !(aahumanu Hwy -- Hualalai Rd (Northern Most) QC JOB #: 15039902 "Y/STATL: ICailua, HI DATE: Thu, Aug 29 2019 JI KU 9S3 r * .r 4 4 Peak -Hour: 3:00 PM -- 4100 PM Peak 15 -Min; 3:30 PM — 3:45 PM 14 36 4 * j ft .+ } 4 101«10$ 0 4 93 r 70 1 697 q 0 w 0 1 40$ r 0 O y r 47 r 0 .. 9+ 4 1 b 0 w til t 0 9+ Bri 923 f 10-5 1037 0 Quality Counts ► 3.7 4 12 94 1000 iri 1 ea 0, ufl 01Ir '* `. 0 0. 01 diab t to IF* 0 C 4 1 NA a i '- � -, t r 0 I 0 1Y ran - 1 t NAt * z NA 1 * NA r 11 I r re I i 7 t r NA r 1 r ear. 15 -Min Count Period Beginning At queen Kaahurnanu Hwy (Northbound) queen 1Saahumanu Hwy (Southbound) Hualalai Rd (Northern Most) (Eastbound Hualaiai Rd (Northern Most) (Weqbound) Total HTootallr I.r�fl Thru Right U Leh Thru Right if It'll Thru Righl LI 1_t•fi lino 4)11 U 3-00 PM 3;15 PM 3:30 PM 2 f 219 0 ,7 9 227 0 0 22 261 0 0 0 247 o u 239 4 0 0 242 3 0 .S 24 Li 4 0 18 u 0 0 18 0 0 :j 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 525 521 546 3:45 PM 25 216 0 0 0 257 5 0 3 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 517 2109 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:10 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5-1.5 PM 5:30 PM S:45 PM 74 305 0 0 22 221 0 0 11 198 0 0 74 718 0 0 12 178 0 0 17 209 0 0 16 195 0 0 13 141 0 0 0 256 4 0 0 226 4 0 0 200 2 0 0 7,32 1 0 0 2S7 6 0 0 252 2 0 0 225 3 0 0 252 3 0 1 0 31 0 3 0 23 0 5 0 23 0 5 0 27 0 3 0 30 0 4 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 1h 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 523 499 440 507 486 513 450 425 2107 2085 1,479 1969 1932 1!i16 1456 1674 Peak 15 -Min Flowrates Northbound Snuthhaund fasrhound Westbound fatal Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U All Ve0ir:lr Iigavy Trucks Pedis eons I3:cy€IQs 'la ill odd Si uFpL'd rain " 53 :044 0 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 968 17 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7134 64 0 a Rr-:,n,t ge..n5:ratcd on 9/12/2019 10:43 AM $OU RCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www.qualitycounts,net) •S77.580.2.212 Facia 1ca1 Type of peak hour being reported:System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Vo ,lrre LOCATION: Queen !(aahumanu Hwy -- Hualalai Rd (Southern Mos* QC 1OB #: 15039911 CITY/STATE: ICailua, HI DATE: Thu Aug 29 2019 al ma t a wo 73 } ti Peak -Hour: 7:00 AM -- 8:00 AM Peak 15 Min: 7:30 AM — 7:45 AM 5 1.6 n 49 sf> +r 1 1. u. D J u+ u r 6 1 0. i t 10 . 99 0. 0 j .@CE 0 y r 9. u + 41 t 1/ .. 13 - 0 r + 7.7 0 1005 15 7s7 sus Quality Counts I0 0 1.6 133 4s 1.8 1 1 40 :L. 0 1 r 4 0 NA - 1 '- -, t r n 1 0 NA - 1 . J L + J t ill> N. -. r . I# NA v. .. NA 1 * tJ� y . t;A r rin NA 15 -Min Count Period Beginning At Queen Kaahunianu Hwy (Northbound) queen Kaahumanu Hwy (Southbound} Hualalai Rd {Southern Most) (Eastbound) Hualalai Rd (Southern Mast) (Westbound) Total HoolalMr T IA ,f1. Thr u Fight LI Len 1-1ru Right 1) ILil Thru EiiAhi 1.1 Lr4F1 7Tiru Right U 7:0O AN1 7:15 AM 7:30 AM LI 24] U 207 0 267 a 0 9 183 0 ) 23 191 0 3 23 193 0 0 li J 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 ., 13 12 0 u a5 0 7 0 37 0 448 523 535 7:45 AM 0 2 31 _ 0 , 15 181 0 0 C. 0 0 0 _ 0 56 0 485 , 1991 8:0C A M 8:15 ANA 8:9C AM A:45 A'vY 0 2 39 0 0 0 260 13 0 749 = ;1 hl ?A? i] n 7 172 0 1 i 172 0 0 4 192 0 0 1 71 t7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ 0 0 0 11 11 2 0 20 0 0 13 0 7 17 17 0 L] 100 0 439 452 466 4R i 1987 1911 114+17 :RIR Peak 15 -Min Flow ralt?S Northbound 'outhbound Eastbound Westbound Total Left Thru Right U Loft Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Lc,FI Thru Rrghl tJ All Vehicles Heavy Truck= PP.4estri r:s Bityche= RaiIrci d Stoppad Ruses 0 _008 32 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 4 92 773 C 7 5 33 13 13 _ 0 0 Cr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 13 29 0 14S 0 0 0 4 113 0 0 1 2140 52 0 2 ite0ort generated. on 9/12/2019 10:40 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC.thttp;Jlwww.qualilyt.ounts,ne1) 1-g77-580-2212. Page 1 0,1 Type of peak hour being reeorted;System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Vo ,jrre LOCATION: Queen !(aahumanu Hwy -- HualaFai Rd (Southern Mosta QC 1OB #: 15039912 "Y/STATL: ICailua, HI DATE: Thu, Aug 29 2019 toss MB i + (? 1015 61 J e 4 Peak -Hour: 3:Cta PM --4:00 PM Peak 15 Min: 3:00 PM - 3:15 PM Le 3 0 + 0 15 i1.7 - # r 0 .. 0 A 9• 0. 0% OEF7 t 71 . ES 0. 0 j r 9 0 i 9+ 4 i t 14 r 9(4:ii• "°, omp .1. La « 2n f 13 r 7,1 r 79 4 * UM 944 Quality Counts 7 0 3.1 0 16 11 4.110 - 1 4 14 IL 0 j 4. il 0 1 r 4 C NA a, 1'- � "a t r 0 � � NA - 1 Jr L J t NA 4 4 NA ioto. 11.r re T. NA 4 r 1 1 NA r II I5 -Min Count period Beginning At Queen Kaahumanu Hwy (Northbound) queen Kaahunanu Hwy (Sruthbound) Hualafai Rd (Southern Most) (Eastbound) Hualalai Rd (Southern Mast) (Westbound) Total Haurfy Torah Left Tlhru Right Il Lett 1. r Rtilt 1 te;f1 Thru Right U Liti III rr� 1110itJ 3:00 PM 0 242 0 0 _ -t !:;S 0 1 0 0 13 U 5 0 2.1 0 541 3:15 PM 3:313 PM 3:45 PM 0 217 2 0 0 254 1 0 0 222 1 0 7 ,66 0 0 :4 24b 0 0 =4 245 0 1 0 13 0 t] 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 4 0 1.3 0 19 0 4 0 18 0 519 540 505 2105 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 1:31) I'M 4:49 PM 9:00 PM 971.5 PM S:30 PM 5:45 P M 0 202 0 0 0 242 1 0 0 207 2 0 ❑ 21.3 5 0 0 194 1 0 0 205 0 4 0 1913 1 0 0 163 1 0 25 + 0 10 244 0 0 14 206 0 0 15 250 0 0 1$ 269 0 0 75 255 0 4 6 246 0 0 7 247 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 00 1 0 11 0 2 0 6 0 1 n 11 0 4 ❑ 14 n 0 0 12 0 1 0 15 0 2 0 5 0 0 2 0 5:1 505 441 417 495 503 458 421 2075 2061 1-'32 1994 1938 1!a36 1453 1077 Peak 15 -Min Plow rates Northbound Snuthhaund Eastbound Wesrhound to al Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U , Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U All VE 1irles I -ea (Trucks PeLietheans R;cycic.s 'lall1 O Ed 51UFpLd Gt_nc.9 0 566 0 0 13 12 0 0 0 0 13 55 1037 0 4 4 70 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 13 i] 0 13 0 0 20 0 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 71g.4 — 35 0 0 Firmoot ge..n5;ratcd on 9/12/2019 10;43 AM 5013 RCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http;//www.qualitycounts,net)1-577.580.2212 Page 1 0 1 Type of peak hour being reeorted:System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Vo'•lrr LOCATION: Queen !(aahumanu Hwy -_ Puapuaan tri St QC JOB #: 15039905 ITY/STATL: ICailua, HI DATE: Thu, Aug 29 2019 761 EBB * t 0 TEI 43 i + 4 Peak -Hour 7:DD AM -- 8:00 AM Peak 15 -Min: 7:15 AM — 7:30 AM 1 ! x3 + t ::. 4.9 7, -, } ..- 0 0 .. a A 0•IILI94 0. 0% i. AS . 02 0 . , r a 9• r $7 • a"7 9+ 4 1 (a: rt 16 « i1 . 3 t 9 + 1.5 0 853 24 Ea aTT Quality Counts 42 24 Q 1 P. 4 C 4 1 NA a 1,- � 0 1 0 NA - 1 J L + J L ioto, -t. r reIF I r w r i 1 r NA 1'r -Min count Period inn, At G .g queen *Caahurnariu Huey (Northbound) queen xaahuntanu Hwy (Southbound) Puaeualnui 9t (Easrboundj PlrapuaanuiSt (Westbound) Total Hourly Totals IA41. -WU Right U LeKk. Thru Right 1) 11.11 Thru EkiAhl LI 1.111, Thru Right U 7:0;; A.0 7:15 AM U 224 5 0 0 246 3 0 12 171. 0 0 8 t84 0 0if ;; 0 t 0 I - 0 27 0 20 0 48 0 450 509 1 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 0 209 4 0 0 174 12 0 :2 188 0 L} 11 175 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 f) 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 48 0 28 D 62 0 18 0 39 0 9 0 30 0 F. 0 .31 0 :7 0 73 0 489 462 459 440 :lfiti 4fi9 1910 1919 1850 11479 IR3F B:CC M1 8:15 AM 3:'M:1 AM 5`,"'-;is`•h 0 21B IC 0 0 213 15 D 1 0 270 c i 0 0 745 11 0 9 165 0 0 19 154 0 0 10 179 0 0 14 1F9 0 0 Perik 1'r -Min 1lowrrilr:s Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound To al u,41 Thru Right LI 1e11 Thru Right U Left Thru Right tl 11.011 Thru Right 1.1 .°•II'wehirles ",:.-.0, Tru•:k, 7lF^F,:t., r.; 3' •, :'. r -. 51. :p.•-, R•i, 0 984 12 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 32 736 0 D 4 20 1r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D D 0 8Q 0 192 0 0 0 8 0/� 0 0 1 2036 52 0 G 1 r r,ikeci irn 9112/2019 10,40 AM SOURCE; Quality Counts, LLC.ihtte://www.qualitycounts.nell 1-877-580-2212. Pad@ 1 o` 1 Type of peak hour being reported:System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Vo ,1rre LOCATION: Queen !(aahumanu Hwy -- Puapuaan ui 5t QC JOB #: 15039906 ITY/STATL: ICailua, HI DATE: Thu Aug 29 2019 loo 932 • r 0 9r vii J � 4 Peak -Hour: 3:00 PM -- 4100 PM Peak 15 -Min: 3:30 PM — 3:45 PM 14 3 + 1.0 n 17 1 1 �« 0. 0 r 9 0. 0 t ID; . 141 0 w 0 4 u r C O y r 34 • 190 0+ 4 1 4. Ar w 35 a 0 0 r 11 �I y 825 IB 1 91.1 873 0 Counts 7 .1 4 e 4 e 8 42 Quality is ZS I 0 0 0 -• .4 6.� I i L if 0, un o II it 1 1 't� o *(� 0 1 .-0 r 0 4 a t r 1 i NA �°ate I NA « Jt L 4 1L NA -fr ioto, -1.t re 4. bIgt r w r r rin 5♦ r NA 15 -Min Count Period Beginning AtTotals �� C queers Kaahunianu Hwy {Northbound} queen 1Saahumanu Hwy (Southbound) Puapuaanui 5t (E astboiandj Puapima nur St (We;t lnurrdj Total Hourly Li�fl Tteri� Ri�FSt U I_r•fl' Thru Right ;7 It�fl f}7ru Eii};Yrs U I_tkll I}reu Right. U 3-00 PM 3;15 PM 3:30 PM U 199 -'a 0 205 14 0 0 230 12 0 .17 2.31, 0 0 27 243 0 0 37 213 0 0 u J 0 0 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 LI 23 0 12 a 23 0 9 0 27 0 52.; 528 3:45 PM 0 191 8 0 31 219 0 0 (1 0 0 0 6 0 34 0 489 2052 4:00 PM 4:15 PM A:31) PM 4:4SPM 5:00 PM S:15 PM 5:30 PM SA5 PM 0 192 7 fi 0 207 15 G 0 187 10 fl ❑ 701 15 0 0 159 7 0 0 105 11[� 0 0 177 14 0 0 131 S 0 34 235 0 0 38 209 0 0 7.7 197 0 0 3n 217 0 0 49 21S 0 0 36 21.9 0 0 24 220 0 0 29 221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 15 0 11 0 35 0 4 0 17 0 13 n 29 0 4 0 17 0 7 D 23 0 10 0 22 0 7 0 23 0 495 3_5 477 .,17 454 40' 459 419 71}37 20U VP? 11)Si: 190 I P..- 1 1i.'! 1l,:, : Peak 15 -Min Flow rates Northhaund Snuthhaund Fa,thaund Westbound to al Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U All VEinides FfPauy Trucks Ped'rps ions 13:cycles 'la di Si Lift:2d Gin. 0 920 48 0 0 28 4 0 0 0 0 148 85? 0 0 0 0 r,` 0 0 0 5 t; [1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 1 d- 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 — 71"17 44 0 0 Fir- �n t gcnS:ratcd on 9/12/2019 W.43 AM SOURCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http://www,qualitycounts,net} 1•S77.580.2.212 Papa 2o?1 P.Jd OPE ICVEIIS PO p _..L 1 n L 4 8 N. PS 2 C m"- rlt g ur, f p 6 I. 7P an. . 4 . .1, 113 .. .R•41.v,9.6,-#.,1.7 M. . 4.1.,.• ',.•i'.1Z ...-, .7. _ .1 P a T . , , .. ..0, I LIPi nil- ,.,.._: a . — 7 l 2 .7 . ... OPI-p. 0 M 0 P:C' r.4'., 2 5 - g . G AA 3 = c, _ . 3 3 C", LA P.13000PPC 00000000 44.4000,4, L.' '. ' • 1 7 - 0 7. = Hwy I. nut bound I . . Fj C WI M a' KE 'q,-,•• A 5 7 a n [a, r8 IP 3›, g t. 2 —i. . .., ' - ' c ' A7'1.. n r.- m = g • c t.C•ntnoent.e.u. ''.6aTr., =,.......,. g g g r..; – " = 7 " i I - I 6 i ... o = ',3: . = .1,3_ E1 '.; i 1 7 C = •.8':',':-• la .ri• L ....r.:r. , ': - - ,,, ...._,._.. c . = _ ,li 1:-.. T . a- g .. '., ' l l! - - , ,t , • 5.t.. J ' k 0. ' 7 , . ,r 5 -,. t r1-, t Fr in i F.. '',•'•2 '.', t?. f..t tt.i. I t r^,ss ccs m.u'oPpl y5+ e19' rte, & Y.. u`, i • ^ ti V. S ..°4 "W. ° V -. . FI 1 n L . # . L L1JLATON: Kuokirti F#wy-- Hawaii F#PIt ftd 4a CITY}STATE; Nawa ' 'II :. Tue, ATIF , 05, ::; C} Ncxl hhmuul j 7 ihw ROI ll 1-40...44. 590CG.: �p _ CGCC{- Ci A . Cr . 4 .:. e7P:::ti _ _ _ _ 7 _ 4, . )\ .4.0...›. . 4. . ' _11.2.1 *fir �i . .ir L ❑ r 9 , 7 imp: r �: O n _ _tib _ -`-� ''.7. ? e {L 'nano_ O644C_ .....,......, :_. -ur_: =GCC=C kuaklni Hwy nut bound I I••II I�ini RIRhf II n a _. J- = .moo% 44" :E'E::::E: 7 +y f! C 08: t+bcc lJ4 YMI�Q QJ _ _ ..;cis c, Vi1i VY 9� _ Y 1 YI a�. i '} JhL .1:0-' p o C A �i Ln 00.-2,-, .} M1 -k ti :e.i ` o u a o e e-i, A ii IIII c 1 r - 3 J r . - -.- z r 1 s r t F y{ =r �± 1r n A i NW4,G 4; r00l ti.GC-1 NN twa.A.. 4� gG Type of peak hour being reported: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering VO ,,rre LOCATION Kuakini Hwy, Lako5t QCJOB#: 15039907 LI nisi ALL: Holuaioa, Iii DATE: Thu Aug 29 2019 913 rm. a r 125 647 141 J # 4 Peak -Hour :DD AM - ; OE) AM Peak 15 -Min: 7:45 AM -- 8:00 AM _� 15 4 4 *a ;A 57 - { 4 4 .. 251 # 48 4 368 r bTJ -I U9Ft L .367 . 372 15 . 2 . r 35 (4412.1 y r ce M 244 19 r 14 1 dap t 19 w 19 0" 0 r 2.9 r 45 .% f r •75 Quality Counts 7, Ill 4. 32 L3 I + 0 1 r 0 } r C 1 f NA -P 1 '- r � _3 a , ;a NA - 1 . JL + --y J NA w r NA Nu4 •r iw1�� L -'NA 1 r -. 1 6 Nn 6 r r Pin. 1'r -Min count Period Beginning Ai Kualcini Fiwy (Northbound) Kualdnrr liarvy (Southbound) LakoSt (Eastbound) Lako St (We;# sound) Total doll' Evil. Thru Right U Lett Thru Right if tt fI Thry llii;ht LI I_1.ft Ulu, Right U 7:0 °AM 7:15 AM 7:34 AM 7:45 AAi _s 221 l5 0 8 188 14 0 6 202 15 0 6 181 11 0 34 152 29 0 36 154 35 0 34 171 35 0 37 170 26 0 1'. 4:..i 0 10 9 2:. 0 57 11 '9 0 77 24 1.6 .0 9 E. S3 0 _7 7 61 0 16 10 67 0 27 13 86 0 589 616 654 674 2513 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 1:15 AM 3 206 17 0 5 749 12 0 4 220 15 0 9 716 70 11 37 145 24 0 19 165 15 0 30 180 22 0 36 150 28 0 35 18 11 0 44 6 5 0 42 9 10 0 35 10 9 0 13 7 65 0 14 12 51 0 15 6 70 0 13 8 64 0 601 570 624 i01 2545 2499 2469 7391 Peak 15 -Min Floua'rate5 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right uTota! All Vehicles Heavy Trucks Pedestrians Bicycles Raiiroad Strapped Buses 24 724 44 0 ' 0 8 4 0 0 1 0 148 680 104 0 15 40 4 0 0 0 0 308 96 64 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 108 52 344 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 r 2696 50 0 2 Coarrr ent Report generated on 9/12/2019 10:40 AM SOURCE; Quality Counts, LLC(hltp;//wwwr.uualitys.uurrts.net) 1.877-58042212 Pale 1 o' 1 Type of peak hour being resorted: System Peak Method for determining peak hour: Total Entering Vo •jrre LOCATION Kua ki ni Hwy , Lako St qC JOB #: 15039908 LI rf/5-w A IL: Holuaioa, Hi DATE: Thu Aug 29 2019 1220 WM f r 170 377 181 J 4, 4 Peak -Hour: 3:00 PM -- 4100 PM Peak 15 -Mien: 115 PM — 3:30 PM 12 36 4 M 3 Gs 3.3 1 1 4 146 .. 517 ,j 30 + 20S . 48 i ^-[ 0.Yt k t. 193 . 274 16 • 39 j r 33 0 y r 6`' • 375 7"9 r l 1 OM LAP • 45 - 51 r lb r 3.S --1 31P 754 ` 987 55. 0 Quality Counts 77 33 *6 * 1 32 1 gi r Y i O f '� 4 4 0 I it f 3 ,. 0 • 0 1 CAD 42 : 0 "a t r Nes -. 1 L NA - 1 50,+ r NA NA r a• t;n r 1 C . M I i r Kr., 4 0 .1!, -Min Criunl Period Be inn,� Ar E .g Kuakini Hwy (Northbound Ktuldnr Hwy (Southbound) Lako St (Eastbound) Lako Sr (We;#,nurrd Iotal Hourly Totals Ci•fr Thr Ri�hL U Leik. Thru Right 41 lr�fl Thni Ri Ftid LI R r k, I_r.0 !}leu I{: ri! 11 2:0I2 PM 3:15 PM :,s }`:l] 0 7 191 15 0 • 42 216 35 0 51 2.43 :5 0 21 5 :0 0 28 8 14 0 2i 9 5] a 17 9 46 ii L.4: ,.L.,. 3:30 PM 3:45 PM i? 136 17 0 5 176 9 0 4_ 211 y_. 0 47 207 46 0 57 220 33 0 51 223 60 0 42 202 39 0 52 240 42 0 30 225 57 0 55 242 53 0 60 209 44 0 32 215 50 0 —mg28 353 8 7 0iC 33 9 17 0 33 10 12 0 25 9 14 0 31 10 7 0 30 10 7 0 31 6 8 0 28 11 13 0 20 11 6 0 15 10 0 . - 63 0 11 10 33 0 17 S 35 0 2.1 11 43 0 20 3 41 0 19 9 36 0 7 8 39 0 10 10 34 0 11 38 0 13 7 23 0 552 603 631 699 607 675 609 ,58 592 5•}6 2582 256r • 2595 2.540 7617 2590 7, 1,, 2:>:+1 240L• 4:00 PM 4:15 PM .1:31) 1'N4 4:4S Pm 5:0D PM 571.5 PM S:3G PM 5:45 PM 23 1:i: 2 .01 19 2n:: - D 10 177 ... 0 12 199 :2> 0 10 168 2`i 0 12 177 H 0 6 167 9 0 5 1.36 12 0 Peak 15 -Min Plow rakes Northhound Seuthhaund Eastbound westbound IQ al Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Leff: Thru Right U Left Thru Right U All VEhickis F -f avy Trucks Periethians 13icy€Ic.s 71a i11' O ELI Stop p d 9uJ3E7., M 765 77 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 704 977 :80 0 4 S 0 0 0 0 0 112 37 56 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 36 104 0 • 0 0 12 4 0 0 0 7697' 5E, 4 0 • RE:,o,t generated on 9/12/2019 10;43 AM 5012 RCE: Quality Counts, LLC (http;//www.qualitycounts•net} 1•S77.580.2.212 Page 101'1 tWd OPE 614E±Et}5. u❑ p Mesad far deter nin,ng peak hour: Total Entering Volume O .' y'. L °PkS'ac ate'' SV 57. Std, W. ,LL 2EA!c [ - 7.•�J W Y • !... t� n8 Do FMN [y M yr Eye � S t W # 'HFn' 1.N ti V o r � --;45 33 . C =OGC cc'=C, - gt [h 3 E , • �. ,, 7_ 1::r jPQ` . r 7-, 4 r a. i T 44c' 2 r C 4A.l.FA 444,'4444,..= A4irr S- 2r : rt "'<y { , _ '. -Y "' N b 64 4 o 0 00 W fasthound Left not FtiphF U ..... W 1r Grp rmp a.�.,m.2. y�.rr �y. y� j - w u J r L # 1:; +1111 �I 1 L • 1(1111 'F � Y! p r�o'u,� Js o =` '� .3 p _ ' 6+-1 lPMr rr�r�w,a Ml. i..1�N0 ,u+arn W.n .+i� w..>w� at! aPc oma L. :,.rt`4"a ^q I. Gy « a 1 4 r "i 7, r 7 h7 1i' 4 1, E• az Mesad far deter nin,ng peak hour: Total Entering Volume I Jd 90.E G14) JEt/5 uo paWcJaua8 `■odad 6 1 greWafi fi 4 Yi 7 i'in;EsKr` 4 'L S 1 1:.: L_ n .� '.1 moi' - N N 1 ���FFF ..- = ... PI M R '32 ` 1. J� c 'Y.'°�.OW�r+04VNMwY~"-1 .q � .. 1�: .1t,� ]y v,tyy {Tmp,M w rJ1b7 p..17. 4�mSv _� r _ i t M f . _1 1 t <,....k> - 7 I *t. g.§.' .. us. *' 1 . g . ril ' = —ii II 7 7 01411 r e # I. ! .,. a 8 4r yJ 2i 'D c c'..it. 6-'C 1 ' ua-,= _ C9K�Qv0... s. rte .-n:- __ 3 __ ' il :,- . r� lig. r - J. _L! c J -a r 0 ,,i. Eh Q4�'�* c. n [11 . C YJswir.rt F.F.r •, r%r �iu,isrS'is 000 r S.usT "- s-.t+Nu-.t+r 7sr`$w- oG60===.! . = _ ,-.1 ',4.., a' r S C J 1 ..L We bound Let Thru A' t U 64 5A8 0 32 0 0 0 0 .03:7-.',...1;t.15'7'..:' a ]IX .. • yy h.. Y. +>. Dori CJvO'v.G000u w. m e., w ,w w ,,,.. vm n r.a-2 E r y 4 1. .. .. .: l r .. r_ 1! r t F1 r ,57 Traffic Data Service Traffic Station Sketch (Eon JJ]<SLaiion t: B71001 1 1 2038 Hualalai Road 1SFtl1[l: [1awiiL Area: KLxnai ?betty 4 File Name bw(+7 U0910037 t37111O11' 12036 D001003& B71001112038 19.63455, -155.9779 Station Description; queen Kaahumanu Hwy:: Hualelei Roar) to Mani Kailua Dr S'_r5'23' 1ie,..in 'an, L}SLS. Time: 4.•113:15r t LN1i]O 1sur,u). 1'. nJILnL Dab:- rune 111 15.r 1a111a SLw 'r !+lciJL: i1: RLxtd Tubi Dmi3 T pc. L Lius. Suirti>ew Crew: L.'17 C1B SkwLcll L.pJa k:J: By: SR 1{c Inal'k.s: 1 11!? LACILL Pi NA.11L J1:[4.1 RTh1C CLASS 1fiF:A TYPE ROUTE No X11` F Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy I4 0119 91 birectiuii to End 1)1.: Ntni Kailua Dr Pi, iani lid (Rae 14175 D2 , Dir.v'LULLi Ba in 92. Hialalal Rodd r Kameisuntella AvetRte 19} Run Dato: 20161)&1 S Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division Highways Planning Survey Section 2O 5 Program Count - Summary SUE ID: 67-1001i12038 Town: Hawaii Din 1:_>.IP 2: -MP F1naFAADT2 25giO0 F1Inc1io4ToI Class: UREM :PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL •OTHERCountTypa:CLASS Courtier Type: T,ibe Route Mo: 11 Lac431tioni: Queen Kaahu RSanIU Mwy - Hualelai Rd isr Nani Kailas Dr TOLCE.AM 01 1 C7R 2 TOTAL TIME•AM OIR 1 DIR 2 TOTAL T4IF-P 1A Ci IR 11 DIES 2 TO'AL TIME=P1,1 DIR 1 DIR 2 TOTAL DATE : 0EV141r2D7 5 12/10.12:15 2013 38 62 104 240 12.03-12.15 273 233 434 7439-06.15 240 193 433 12:1512:30 17 5 22 :.t 95 223 318 12:15-1233 225 229 454 06:1E-0836 235 168 403 123012'45 19 7 25 • 5 105 275 5014 12:311,12.455 239 744 473 0621776'4I5 735 175 401 12:45-01110 15 11 26 .. ..17 124 254 485 12:4541.00 217 275 492 175.45.07 04 211 561 372 01 740.01 15 12 3 15 i,:`, 7- ' 5 158 242 410 4400441:15 211 245 459 07 00-07.15 201 129 330 01 15 91 30 8 9 17 ,1i 2711) 233 279 515 471.15{11.33 220 5011 438 n7.1 t 5138 177 55 5075 0130-01.45 5 5 14 + ::,.0' 15. 199 278 454 45:30-1'1:45 217 2139 425 07316-0745 172 22 264 0115,0260 II 11 19 . ..•+_ 154 283 447 41.45-02.131 255 aid 520 0741-08175 157 75 215 0750-62,.15 b 4 117, •h5 1!i 157 2158 455 517177-777.19 249 1794 555 761311-115'17 134 119 747 02'152 030 1r 3 12 .- '5 -wart 172 273 445 41215-5230 254 207 521 08150830 119 69 186 02.39 0246 .1 4 d -',1 5-4 1.5- 135 274 410 42:33.02:45 243 235 4111 09300545 (31 77 2139 142:421.0396 4 6 10 : r . '11 155 273 433 02'45-03'.32 259 271 530 73'45.7603 33 )5 456 13356.0315 2 9 11 v.., 1; Run Date: 20161)&18 Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division Highways Planning Survey Section Kri5 Program Count - Summary 511E ID:R71i7O1112O3 Town: Hawaii DiR1:.75.IP 2: -MP F1naFAADT: 258OO Ft4ncliorral Class: UREM :PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL OTHERCoon!Typa:CLASS Counter Type: T,Ihe Route No 11 Location: Queen Kaahurnanu HIWW - HuaFalai F{d isr Nani Kaailus Dr T •Ai,T DIP 1 DM 2 TOTAL DATE : 0911,201S 12126.12:15 12:15.1230 1290 12'45 12:45-0100 01126.01 15 51'1501'30 013D-01 45 0115,02 :16 07 00.-00 15 0215.02 3D O 230 02:45 013:45.0250 LD 10603'15 03.15-03.30 03300345 03:45-04:615 • .0.6.04 15 04.10,134.39 1.0 3004:45 L1015-054101 0500.05:15 O 5.15.0530 1153. 05.45 0.5:05136 00 17 10 B 1 3 2 9 5 2 2 5 8 5 4 6 11 2 40 5 50 r 21 119 i9 x 15 45 12 08 10 ea 23 162 C3 131] L3 191 TIME AM DIFI 1 DIR 2 TOTAL TH44 .-Pb RIR 1 DIP 2 TO -AL TIME•PAi dIR 1 Din 2 TOTAL 22 69 191 250 11) :.t 138 220 309 16 102 214 350 13'10 135 271 407 4 ,.'` 1J 15 174 292 4-37 9 . ,,x.5730 714 287 !X11 5 + '3:.-," 45. 195 299 4941 7 ...i2 174 25.9 4-12 5 =;,4 I3- i54 280 434 I I :- '`,.{6.310 1B8 276 454 10 - '..1 wi 43 101 242 443 13 : r .' ''1:1 156 2:45 405 19 ....'. 0 11, 145 2.42 434 15 69.15-09.36 15t 234 335 26 59 311 59 45 165 264 449 19 C8 45-10126 1715 261 431 26 1000-70.15 156 249 405 29 15 15-111.30 175 767 443 69 150.52-10.45 166 257 425 75 7045-1...40 2116 245 452 214 11120 11.10 154 243 407 125 11.1`.-11:30 204 249 453 193 113511:45 230 230 465 240 71145,.12.40 191 2631] 421 12:03-02,15 12:15-12: 0 1210-T2'46 12:45-01.00 44:00-411:15 41'10{51'30 41:30-01:45 91.45-02.15 6201-1:41.15 6215-45232 42:30 402:45 02'4543'.141 83:66-637155 63:15-03330 (0'a" 4349 68:454.00 01:03-04:15 1)1.15.44'30 04:32-54:45 44:45{45.00 06:00-56.15 66:15-0532 05:31-06:45 05:45 46:00 141 144 219 214 210 230 231 242 710 241 241 730 218 224 2x0 190 155 219 239 157 253 245 256 215 2133 214 s90 370 202 2051 246 192 2420 227 49 260 260 255 254 223 215 255 259 2.1.6 229 090 199 170 394 05126-08.15 220 150 379 409 08:15-0836 204 143 347 4951 063.,06'45 052 422 2244 423 I:6.45 -070D 1317 430 305 412 07 .00.07.15 173 133 305 435 5715-02+'31) 005 106 251 439 07 36-07 45 751 67 238 434 0715,08126 039 102 241 413 301141-.50 15 131 71 202 458 08'15.08 30 432 72 254 470 0931)00,45 145 64 209 490 08'45009139 131 88 219 420 EN 012-41915 1T0 54 154 433 09.15-09 06 97 57 154 474 09 35.09 1419 02 86 1401 413 5345-10,16 55 311 1113 413 1.0 05.113 15 74 51 125 415 10.15.11135 52 79 101 467 10,36-79.45 56 31 405 5041 1015.11:00 51 20 37' 4412 11:a3-11:10 49 38 84 438 /11 5-11345 25 25 54 449 1136.11:45 30 26 56 11:45124111 30 25 541 AM COMMUTER PEP1430105.00-091261 TWO DIRECTIONAL PEAK AM - PEAK0443 TIME AAI - PEAK i4R VOLUME AM - K FA],TDR I%1 444-1).;%1 DIRECTIONAL PEAK Ak7 PEAK H5 TIME Au PEAK 140 VOL41ME 01R1 0432 0700 AM la 06.46 AM 757 1107 156.1 7 10 46.51 5639 10010 07: 06 AM la 08.00 AM Cl :1.5 AM01ogle AM 7127 1121 PM COMMUTER PERDU 115 0C. -f9.301 01R TWO DIRECTIONAL. PEAK PM - PEAK HR TL1E 04:15 PO4 10 05:15 P44 PM PEAK HO VOLUME 665 962 PM K TACTOR V%) PM D 1%4 51.15 5i 5 0 ONAL 09914 Pia- PEAK HRTIME PM PEAK VOLUME 1006 13012 ID E4 1930 7 39 1E000 C4A50M 1121915'4$ PM 03:CA PIAW94.000M 14508 AM PERIMD 160:133-12:11X45 TWO DIRECTIONAL PEAK 71121 • PEAK FIR TIME 540 - PEAK HR VOLUME 41,1.54 FACTOR 10;.4 NON- OM1AUTER PE#1L01 II019.7 5.110 , TWO 0105C11i1NAL 04-90 r=AS:H41715: PEM IIII VD _UWAE. DiREC1201,1A1y PF AS PEAK 4416715,1E PEAK HR VOLUME 0750 MMICO9:W AM 757 1147 45.51 1854 7 13 19319 100.615 02.`00 P10109310 PM 922 9t9 t441 15145 PM to 02.45 PM 06:90 A1M10 10:30AM 914 1041 Pal PER:COb i 42:00-24:061 TWO 941EOVIONIAL PEAK PM - PEAK 1434 TME PM - PEAH HH VOLUME ph.1. K FACTOR 1 1 PM -01"x1 6.1-111 12-H1, 24 -HR PERIODI9 AM 6 -HR 502-0435 (1761[1-13 0161 AM 12 -NR PERICU 10050-125901 PM 5 -HP PEJI2D 112120-14:001 PM 12-1414 00173104) 1 1 2 118 4 11]! 24 1-161311 PERIOD U 1951 02:45 R64 0o 03:45 PM 892 10,99 40.16 513.91 010 5113 2 Po -41 4.1.551 61345 11) 1:115 4,256 6.782 11 045 5.390 6,292 10.072 5154 7,1741 12,340 13829 26. -59 47.13 6257 1{0;:100 1931 735 11)1150 Run Date: 2C16/05/19 Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division Highways Planning Survey Section Vehicle Classification Data Summary 2015 Silo ID: 671061112438 Route N6: 11 Town: Hawaii Direction: -MP Location: Queen Kaahumariu Hwy - HLalalai Rd to Nani Kailua Dr Functional Classification: Date From: 2015/09/10 0:00 Date To: 2015+09.11 23:45 14 URBAN:PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL - OTHER REPORT TOTALS - 46 HOURS RECORDED VOLUME NUMBER OF AXLES Cycles 263 0.49% 525 PC 45148 84.23% 90296 2A -4T 7438 13.88% 14878 LIGHT VEHICLE TOTALS 52849 98.60% 105697 HEAVY VEHICLES Bus 85 0.16% 213 SINGLE UNIT TRUCK 2A -6T 96 0.16% 192 3A -SU 164 0.31% 492 4A -SU 29 0.05% 116 SINGLE -TRAILER TRUCKS 4A -5T 266 0.50% 1064 5A -ST 50 0.09% 250 6A -ST 30 0.00% 180 MULTI -TRAILER TRUCKS 5A -MT 6A -MT 7A -MT 12 1' 15 0.02% 0,00% 0,03% HEAVY VEHICLE TOTALS 748 1.40% 60 6 105 2878 CLASSIFIED VEHICLES TOTALS UNCLASSIFIED VEHICLES TOTALS AXLE CORRECTION FACTOR (NM-, 0.989 53597 (A} 1000.00% 108375 (6) 2 0.00% ROADTUSE EQUIVALENT(BI2)= 54187 HPMS PEAK HOUR VOLUME : 2034 PEAK HOUR TRUCK PEAK HOUR VOLUME 24 HOUR TRUCK VOLUME AADT %oF AADT K -FACTOR (PEAKAADT) (ITEM 66) 2015 d91d 1a;40 VOLUME SINGLE UNIT (55A-1) 05A -2j TRUCKS (TYPE 4-7) 10 0.49% 187 0.72% 7.85% COMBINATION (85B_1) 25900 (656-2) (TYPE 8-13) 10 0-49% 187 0.72% 7,65% N Section 1DIStati n #: B71.O01 lima Hualalai Road 1)2 D1 Trallic Data Service Tru.tlk Sidi win Hanoi: Hawaii Area: I{,olut 4 Queen Kaahuiianu Hwy Dara Kailua Dr Meier 1- hv67 file Mune D0503007_13710011112038 D050300,13 JR7IDOI t12032 G1s 1943455, 455,9779 Station description: Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy: Huaialal Road to Nani Kailual Dr Siirvt:y Bi iiit iiig DAEOTinie'_ 50f16 0 000(1 S ovey Ending Daterlime: 5?.rf 16 0 2400 Snr4'ey M dt+.ail: Road Tule [} t t Type: CIadz, Survey Crew. LM C I B Sketch LJpdAted: By: SR Remarks: I '_ FACILITY NAME JUk1 FDNC CLASS ARM TYPE ROUTE NO_ MILE Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy It 11110 I 1)1= Duction tr, End 1)1: Nani I(ailud Dr/ Puloni R<I SRry 1901, 172= Direction FO 13,ygia 1}2. Hua1a161 Road 1 Kip ttmeh iweha Ave 1 Rte 191 RUA Date: 2W7IL-8+06 Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division Highways Planning Survey Section 2016 Program Count - Summary Situ ID: 871Qd11112038 Town: Hawaii rurscttor3Ed Cicala: UREAN:PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL • OTHER Count Type: CLAS LOv9rtiwr1: Q5J0.er1 I(aahurnanu I -I y - Hualalai Rd to Nari Kana Dr DIA 1: DIR :-MP Final AADT: 2581X] Countor Type: Tube Route No: 11 TIME.AM DIP 1 DIA 2 TOTAL TIME•AM Dirt 1 OM 2 TOTAL TIME -PM DIA 1 DIF1 2 707AL '7IME-PM Uhl 1 D:II? 2 TOTAL DATE : 06;01201s 12:03.12.15 59 5 24 06.4.`0416.55 6'9 265 274 1241012:55 312 199 402 '3.,411 21, ,5 1954 111 325 12:15-12.30 16 3 19 05:15-06:30 79 225 306 12:15-1.2,30 220 282 122 00.55-70 30 M3 127 354 t2:3L1.52 45 54 0 15 06:54 09 45 11' 202 409 124) 12,45 215 200 415 22'21 7.642 175 1541 315 52:45-31 OD 7 7 14 05:45-2 147 242 392 12-45-01:00 214 285 413 .1645-07045 154 127 311' 01'51947'1 15 6 4 141 07:84111." '3 113^ 2751 45n En wa,OT'r6 234 158 422 ::: m ; ' 1 r, 153 1+19 267 01'16-01.30 4 2 6 071.647 se) 211 252 463 01'15-01;.90 210 174 394 i`1 151 185 257 01:34.4)1:45 9 3 12 07.30 07 .4,5 59? 281 458 05,30437:45 233 101 424 ft. .r.' :7 415 189 142 270 11'4445209 7 n 11 0741,S2P,00 107 455 442 5145-(12:641 725 213 435 :I. 1,1..19 o11 141] 59 215 02:00.0215 4 6 10 0500 X16 15 144 267 417 02520-0225 245 224 472 7.1 : , 7.1a ,5 114 65 163. 110:154230 5 12 "11i '&1251:54 154 252 416 02.15-02:319 239 212 455 7.-. ' • ?4 .w0 111 76 102 0833-08:45 3 5 9 OE 015145 153 259 421 0220-02:45 245 213 459 06.37.26 45 132 E4 196 42149-03 OD 4 5 9 0945.75110 142 257 416 0245-03:(0 293 291 524 06.4.54]9. MI 104 55 159 14:040423:15 5 a 17 00 00 19 15 140 253 345 03180-03:15 223 240 493 0900479 15 35 53 1419 03'15.43'38 5 e1 14 7.14. '";415'34 179 434 448 9315,(13'30 56R 7271 499 111]-ca4•'9'39 96 43 139 (04'37473:45 5 17 22 052111-85:05 179 288 445 33.30-03:45 225 257 493 1N.13,09.45 93 52 1115 83:49-04-00 6 20 26 4.9.1,10-151)0 153 255 873 03:49-4]4:7[' 262 24,5 105 00:40-x0.08 143 41 144 04:00-04.15 7 19 25 1500-10:15 171 159 399 04.10-01.15 249 246 495 109]0-10,15 19 35 111 154.154s4. -a0 8 27 33 18:15.15'34 151 213 374 0115101115 039 2251 488 101;5.103.0 945 39 10T 84:30-04 45 8 .19 35 1820-10'45 157 210 373 04 20.04.45 275 2309 497 10:30-10 45 45 32 85 154:4542,01 73 56 fig 1045-11011 1+95 138 393 04'45.'I'14: 236 218 449 1045,11 00 51 20 71 05:00-05'15 23 73 98 11'0112:45 21^1 200 420 05,90-01..I 7, 245 179 422 15'60-11.55 17 23 70 55.15{7}'3(1 25 73 99 11'1 '4n 19!: 201 396 51.1 15.130':',5, R1,1 11% 41? 11-111-11'3(1 1 54 ra {75.30-0645 41 640 t8: 1135•-- 45 155 223 441 05.30.05:.15 260 178 4351 19.30-x1:45 27 25 42 08:45410.00 54 120 =s4 11 41 ' 2 69 18, 182 7119 uS 15 06.00 228 174 402 11-45.1'1190 21 5 38 AM COMMUTER PERIOD 105.10-05:(07. DIP 5 TWO 5 50CTlne44LPEAK AIA- PEAK HA704E 077609915308,30Am Aµ PEAK HP VOLDHE 755 1040 AYd- K FACTOR 641 Asn • D I''' 42.35 0134EGT10r4AL PEAK AM • PEAK HEi 16.1E 41'5731006] 08:404591 651 P5dK HR V9. 1.L51.40 7 C:r1 2 PFA" COMMUTER PERIOD (15530-19:301 1,3(1 p1RECTTONAL PEAK PM- PEAR HH TIME 1813 1314 PERK HR VOLUME 7.09 PM- K FACTOR 1'*7. 5744 100.41} Phi -0"161 5161.1 /TONAL PEAK 06:30 AM 50 02304591 PM • PENS HH 1044E 15160 4151. PEA54 H111V'O1.U54E 3061 001R2 03215 P5110134.15 254 1004 973 5085 49.34 1942 774 '00.120 23:45 PIA w 44:45 AM 03.03 PM 15314:00 4391 1028 942 nM 'EFI1742 .11+1'01; 1200, x'.50 OIF15CTIC444L PEAK AIA • PE 44 HR 1 5.1E 07:60 AM to 995313 AM 1414 PFM, HR V^.5 ,1441 K ``ALI{71?r'o. hM D t' 42.35 4;1J.\dM1. !EH I'95(35 Mg 5Vh157355 1"0110 i7IR45(111CC.7 6L, PEAK PEAK i l 1' 8r F 02351 P14 98519 PH2 PEAK.HR VOLUME 963 945 DIRECTIONAL PEAK P'EA2 H1i TOM PE7+.44. HP VOLUME 563. 959 788 1045 1953 1135 87 414 160.611 1508 42.00 015 11.5.3.3 08 PM 951:60 AM hp 11.16 AM 4114 51E 81o1 5 42:04024'35I TWO D04ECTIOMSL PEAK PYA. PEAK NR TME. Plat PEAK HR VOLIR4E pLi - K PA0TOF1 I'''1 PFA D 1'151 0 -HA. 52-1131 24415 41EFd005 Aka 44-15 4E61145 124570.12403 Al) 10.4115 5FF.11, :sl lqs 37171.11 PM 6 -HR PERIOD 112.10 56.20`' PM 12 -tin PERIOD ,12 1)13.22 05, 21 51951 P86101) O {^1d 0245 4144m5554.54191 9451 1637 4776 32.'22 OM1 GR}2 Total 3.923 5,580 9,663 4.220 5,409 115529 5,690 5,042 10,792 5,325 6,544 14.989 12445 13952 25.597 44.61 50.4019 105.00 5996 7 76 510.188 Run Date: 2W7IL-8+06 Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division Highways Planning Survey Section 2016 Program Count - Summary Situ ID: 871Qd111120a Town: Hawaii rUaCtiarbeil Ciatur URBAN:PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL • OTHER Count Type: CLAS LOcartioril C leell Icaahurnanu 4-I y - Hualalai Rd to Nardi Kaitua Dr DM 1: DIR :-MP Final AADT: 25801X] Colin tor Type: Tube Route No: 11 TIME ,A141 DIP 1 071412 TOTAL TIME -AM Dirt 1 DMR 2 TOTAL TIME -PM DIP 1 DIP 2 TO AL TIME -PM GIP 1 4:1(7 2 TOTAL DATE : 06104'4016 52:1710.92.15 13 2 15 663`8416.45 63 135 249 1241012:95 341 155 425 711.170.416.15 289 141 366,2 t2:15 -t2.30 12 8 29 05:1)5-0622 97 255 352 1215-1.2520 253 224 177 21.55-0634 2943 154 369 1)2:30.1245 9 4 13 06:7049'45 122 249 571 129412:45 259 194 14,77 71,':1)i,545 94.3 199 122 12:45-91 00 12 5 17 06:45.7 00 135 242 330 1245-01:90 229 219 414 96 45-117 04 157 35 273 91'69-97115 11 6 11 07111) `I."'5 197 378 471 01917.175.95 337 244 .1:.: "1:'.' 15 1411 99 344 41'15-91.30 8 1 9 07 96-.17 30 197 284 481 01 , 5-01;.90 213 216 1 " .. - :'1 148 102 250 4133.11.45 41 7 13 07.76 47.45 202 242 445 01 .]0']T:45 236 292 ....r."17 45 141 79 224 41.43-4702 00 6 3 4 517 41'1.119, 11.1 155 255 433 01 45-412:947 313 215 .I.' - ': 1',-19 110 154 85 0214 62:0002 15 0 6 6 0604 16 "5 145 244 397 02160-02:95 319 215 ,:i 1 ::,: v.' .712 '0 127 70 497 00:15-0233 5 11 16 '11'.'5.96:40 154 253 4917 0215-02511 245 235 14, ;:r-'.• ?r, ,Il 130 59 159 4220.42:45 8 5 19 09.711-111114. 155 233 311 0200-02:45 226 233 159 13:.:7' 29 15 125 97 192 fie 15-63CC6 3 11 43E -15.519. 90 141 2.34 331 0245-03470 290 258 485 541 15.09130 145 55 1711 114:11343:15 7 7 14 05 00111 r5 189 297 376 03450-03:95 245 228 465 199 00-019 15 127 ea 194+ g 3'15.63'30 7 7 11 S1?. '5 41954 1397 331 767 9317,53''0 567 212 474 (p9 -45,Q9 -.3g 1943 57 153 4741.33-00:45 5 17 22 65397-64115 197 227 424 ea 20-03:45 228 127 435 SLS 30-09 45 93 50 141 03:45-0400 7 21 24 05'40-10'44 1555, 239 407 03:411-04: ' 251 311 415 09'45-10.09 92 55 1114 44:[.].}4.15 8 12 24 1E1,0-15:15 155 294 359 04.110-31.15 256 227 452 10170-10,15 56 30 104 4]4'15.44.-a41 4 45 44 15:15.13' 15,7 262 420 '31.15n,1"It 215 231 445 10:15.1030 59 30 93 4433-04 45 11 50 61 1010-14'45 144 24.2 422 04 20.44.45 275 221 496 10:30-80 45 133 27 98 04:454X100 15 14 79 113'45-1104 283 931 194 0445..I'-;49 2450 218 473 10-45•I1510 49 r5 84 11590-05'15 26 75 001 11:6019:45 242 209 411 054}0-(1`..15 349 197 446 11'60-11.15 12 !4 55 414,5 1506391 31 05 Try9 11.1^.•' 41 240 1413 313 nri 15.11" ;5n 293 17+5 435 11 15-11341 *7 23 814 4533-05 45 36 .27 165 11 36." 45 2+ 11 337 417 05.90.05:45 255 151 402 19.30-11:45 25 53 33 06545415.06 46 1976 272+1 13. 1411 417 u? 15 66.,110 240 179 414 14-45.1590 35 1- 43. AM COMMUTER PERIOD 105.40-0630} 1'.407 1515ECTR764AL P5AK AMI - PEAK HA TNIE Au , PEAK HR VOLLNE AYd- M FACTOR 1%9 AO•Dm:. pI0EGT10►4AL PEAK AM • PEAK Hfi 14.30 AM PEOK HR 1+;31.L?L1.'E DIP 9 0:12 07700 4M (0 me) Ann 751. 1119 40.48 55.555 1684} 7.20 100.46 a7re3AA1o40a:90ANI o1OoAMrone:(ID AM 71;1 11134 PLM COMMUTER FERIOD (15.'08-19:401 1»1(1 DIRECTIONAL PEAR 1'94- 55AIf HH TIME PM PEAR HR `.'OL11n1E F94- K FACTOR 146} FM -A1 121REG RONAL PEAR PM PEN(H0 111E PFM . PEAK HA VOLUME 3691 52-52 0,R2 14345 PM 4o 04:45 PM 896 1'+' 19 4899 7 39 '00.119 04:30 PM 14415:30 PM 0345 Plow 94:45 PM 11537 895 4' 41 'LFII3' 1941.01; 1200, TWO a1F11CT11744L SCAR AMA • PE 61-: HFI 16.1E r4µ PFM, HR %-n1) i,ME AM- M `° AL:I OH I'R, hM 1} I',,, N{"1' 41I:1dMl, 1 EH 1'41111.7 ,I1;1 4511 ' ".-1(1(1 1".40]17]935.171 I5y ,4L. 54.AK PEAR -Ik 1'614- PEAK HR VOLUME DIRECTIONAL PEAT{ P,EA3 HA TOM FEAR FIR VOLUME 07:60 AM to Dago AM 791 1119 1880 622 1410.313 411.48 n2141 P149n 413391 PM 924 942 1662 12.0(1 PM tta 41 041 PM 03'45 AM 10 10.45 AM 492 957 PM 55 RICO f 421713.24'001 TWO D8IECTIONAL PEAK PM- PE931 NR TIME. PM PEAK HR VOL INE aki - It 9AGTOF1 I'i61 Pµ D fled 5 -HA. 924401 24-41 R PEFtIO05 Aka 6-40 2ER100 9]F.'170.12.081 A9) 1244'1 5105*11"1.:71111: 170411 PM 6 -HR PERIOD 112.:0 15.00+ 54412811010047900.141932345, 21 560U0 24510b O {.g.4 93.45 PM to to .A5 PA1 14703 838 52.52 47 rLi 041 1 IPA 2 Tata' 4.0470 5,610 9,610 4,357 5,351 117.644 3,792 5,046 10,1336 8,462 6,575 15307 12_749 12.532 25.501 48-84. 5026 144.00 4999 7 99 448.08 Run Date: 207108108 Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division Highways Planning Survey Section Vehicle Classification Data Summary 2015 Silo ID: 671ag1112435 Route No: 11 Town: Hawaii Direction: -MP Location: Queen Kaahumarni Hwy - Huelalai Rd to Nani Kailua Dr Functional Classification: Date From: 2015/05f03 0:00 Date To: 2016)05,04 23:45 14 URBAN:PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL - OTHER REPORT TOTALS - 48 HOURS RECORDED VOLUME NUMBER OF AXLES Cycles 338 0.66% 577 PC 35846 69.91% 71692 2A -4T 14198 27.69% 28396 LIGHT VEHICLE TOTALS 50382 98-25% 100765 HEAVY VEHICLES Bus 234 0.46% 565 SINGLE UNIT TRUCK 2A -6T 157 0.31% 314 3A -SU 145 0.28% 435 4A -SU 31 0.05% 124 SINGLE -TRAILER TRUCKS 4A -5T 153 0.30% 6 T2 5A -ST 95 0.19% 475 6A -ST 31 0.06% 186 MULTI -TRAILER TRUCKS 5A -MT 6A -MT 7A -MT HEAVY VEHICLE TOTALS 14 1 33 0,06% 231 894 1.74% 3038 0.03% 0,00% 70 6 CLASSIFIED VEHICLES TOTALS UNCLASSIFIED VEHICLES TOTALS AXLE CORRECTION FACTOR (A.C) = 0 988. 51277 (A) 100.00% 103893 (B) 1 0.00% ROAIr1TUBE EQUIVALENT(BI2) = 51901 (CI FIRMS PEAK HOUR VOLUME : 1970 PEAK HOUR TRUCK PEAK HOUR VOLUME 24 HOUR TRUCK VOLUME AADT % OF AADT K -FACTOR (PEAI(AADT} (ITEM 66) 201E 05.03 15;00 VOLUME SINGLE UNIT (55A-1) (55A-2) TRUCKS (TYPE 4-7) g3 1.613% 283 1,10% 7.64° COMBINATION (655-1) 25800 (6516-2) (TYPE 8-13) 27 1.379 163 0,63% 7.64% Appendix B Bus Route Schedule and Map T. 0 1-1i1,0 .KONA,TELO BUS ST EffEUCLE Optru.: Moutim:y.- through Sal -leaky Efferczive :V612017 5:0.5 5155 tit0c1 6..:0-:k 6:11, an I 6,06 ...— 6145 1 6:5 -- 7:311 430 r 9 :CFB : RAO 1 1''` ' 1117 5:13 1 2 ' — . ih2.5 1:40 — — T&•35 fr: 11. 6:45 — — 7:1)5 ._. — i ,;35 : Di) 1 gos 8,15 g Lie v20 — — ..- — pm — — 4:I) 4:03 4:13 — --- 1 -.I1AS _ -- -- — -•- 11 fI TO 1(71N4 '--1-1------- 1 ."-'---1---- .97.15 "Or:. . . — I C - ' 1 '' '.. , 4:$5 430 r 9 :CFB : RAO 1 1''` ' 1117 5:13 1 2 ' 5:15 1.3.0 ih2.5 1:40 '9-1-05-9; ',' 'hal" r 9.:34.1 4;i 5 *.•;4.5 li,15.2: ,It.5.7 !PAC 107.-01 0:05 — 6,): 1 ti v20 9: 5 91411) 04.f. pm -- ,315.5 zo:ou to:oF, — --- 1 -.I1AS _ -- -- — -•- 11 +.;'.! 6G 6 -,la -- c, .:. . fr if] 7 ,ro -- --- __ '.•..;:. -- TO 1(71N4 '--1-1------- 1 ."-'---1---- .97.15 "Or:. . . — . _ '5:41111 . 3:45 -- . 4!00 .1 tr.0.5 4:$5 430 4;4 9 :CFB : RAO 1 1''` ' 1117 5:13 1 2 ' 5:15 1.3.0 ih2.5 1:40 kk:.,..5 i :36 9.;40 ] L.': 5 1 :45 : -710 9:$6 2-0-5 9 r55 2. ;(1 1..1:1:05 2.2.7. 10420 2:0 .3;;;0 ..I Gym Cori =,tic, L'.71ric.,"F'Irkirrr. 1-:0117i.121 Cym Corryl..cri 1 ipper Parkin 1.0t SOLD MOW KGS • r . , , . - - -, -r- :3C kW ' • — --- (1:3n 1.:41I1 11. 4E4_5 — — — — -.-.• --• `01:05 11;.±,.. --- 1 -.I1AS ft -5'J ,' -- -- — -•- —1 .- — — — •-••• m 1 2....1:-.. 4 •• .1. .., J .. '.•..;:. -- fl:P.5. 4...5:1-.1) 5:15 5:20 :i :,(i SOLD MOW KGS KONA/1IILO Bus Route Konstai1,3 Laupahridhlae ftainaliu seolakekuu Captain Cook toz)_` Kea/ia 1 L•L:'AUAiI-• • KE .41 AKA). S7 - [NSET 2 4A i9FrLi M1rrrli Ilrprl A.'{EHAMELIRcr k1L iH_ A d L'Pt"_,n 43 ;omisn Pr AO f L'iiF.'LLL IO!' 1: PLYnniEnwT COUNTY' OF HAWAII MASS TRANSIT AGENCY 961-8744 KONA TO HILO BUS SCHEDULE 1 n Inns irkrai inn of rlth,r, and for your , i FNy: 1 .titans .1n,1 helm oar arr, r:,11ure11 2.;+tiL 1 7tI'.II1711Ir. caiLll.Iksli [f1r :mit miasmal -. N.) sul..4.Il le. t.L}Itl41h LIFILIX}I1 nt kind LY LICwerdue -1 Discord:1,u L,r !o'er 5. Exp tor:11111L• Vr spicrinta. T1saplay l * "[ r,klos. rape players- dti'dpltryers. ai4 tell lil:inu_'w. are ,m11rittred v irlmlu 11.ad1rlr.;rk: I ciran 1, inu Iwwr,epLiy.11#. vcLLinp. err Talking Icyadlr '1 Iv 1,11, rp ITL -.II, ane Irmdxhile,l Calks prior 11irioiss Inl' 1; 1,1a:1101r Hod+. [nor& 'i SL_I7L7 r11.r.r u for pm [uFrrl,l w,rL'icr pnl id .d tb' nru Lwrti in no unrrnand Vi111A Iii i rtr e:11/4.. Iw'Y 'S1-I1O rblirrr plrr ilnm .1.t rr (imp. ]f1" Y 111"or worry Th it nor ilrin 11141 rnnnol fit 5ILdQrIv.I ,'our?A'14. 51.41E F11.twat, For iplrk�tls. 11. PLense Tai laa dBL6,tCrlafud buts 5TI I 2.01-1011v11e117,,,'1,: ,1144 flow to hnald Ik h 1 til ail • I' • 1.C' Sidle ottitc reodvaly Lin t11r leu RC L-x1I IL1r lAR o.up 4 .:. i Mui lla.AL'S d camphor slop. r., 11 lulxasyrtodry epLlitsar rn . r:.-.X;,,:1:d Lan [MOT •x 1iLa a. eargaeed in '- s hies that s'irrlere a 1:} caber low or irditia lif. 11 pis li•u 1111111- 1'.1, I I•.:• .1 yoarr .1 4 11 1 tl xlri. P111 .• ,: 1x,11 61 v 11Li s,truklli' 3f rlrr bus. :Ll;n;u yNr 111 acid di. kis eoales m a itompkne ,ap }5. F lRODI In ^ , • I.,, 1.1.1'..4'1 A.INIERt 1 Iw r canL5 of H.wali wlil.ui be ,'i".11LnrNifi In fry 9114' elpC411, 5'nnifnn�n oxpiame. or l:lnll1.i1• rosialtiip hunt 11h1i nrllrlly Fodlp111'111r 1111riNe al ,LULed LHnrz or fir i - ■'.dtrut btrFag .tr.b. 612. ffa mom ilttorl,ItlIii t;tilt r+xw h®Ieunbt Gini t: [+W In ryJ ifi'rn.11 p:yLI Ey.ui}[.4Y' t•qu'n J<'rmN^', hY „lui +a,M filar rsn>'+ Appendix C Analysis Reports — Existing Conditions (2019) HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 AM 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 1cI/ 8r2o19 Movement EBL EST Esta V L VAT MR NE3L NBT lJBR SRL SRT SEAR Lane Ccnfiquratlons VI tf il )) ++ r •311 ft r vi ++ r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 71 457 218 163 678 23 243 192 105 20 321 177 Future Volume (vehTh) 71 457 218 163 678 23 243 192 109 20 321 177 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1737 1767 1737 1841 1811 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 72 466 0 166 692 0 243 196 0 20 328 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cap, vehlh 161 1537 249 1656 344 780 40 500 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.46 0.00 0.07 0.48 0.00 010 0.22 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.00 sat Flow, vahfh 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1560 3401 3554 '1572 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 72 466 0 166 692 0 248 196 0 20 328 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh,4n 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1685 0 Serve(g_s), s 1.7 6.9 0.0 3.8 10.4 0.0 5.6 3.6 0.0 0.9 6.9 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(c,_c), s 1.7 6.9 0.0 3.8 10.4 0.0 6.6 3.6 0.0 0.9 6.9 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1,00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 161 1537 249 1656 344 780 40 504 WC Retic (X) 0 45 0.30 0.67 0.42 0 72 0.25 0.50 0.66 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 251 1537 445 1656 613 2108 123 1714 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Falter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 36 6 13.5 0.0 35.8 13 4 0.0 2.4.6 25 6 0.0 38 4 32 3 0.0 Ince Delay (d2), slush 1.9 0.5 0.0 3.1 0.8 0.0 2.8 0.2 0.0 9.3 1.5 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %Ile Back040(50%),vehlln 0.7 2.5 0,0 1 6 3 8 0.0 2 4 15 0,0 0.5 3.0 0,0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 38 6 14.1 0.0 38 9 14.2 0.0 37.4 25.8 0.0 47.7 33.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS D 5 D 6 0 C D C Approach Vol, vehfh 538 A 858 A 444 A 348 A Approach Delay, sfveh '17.3 18.9 32.3 34.5 Approach LOS B El, C 0 Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 6.3 21.9 10.3 40.9 12.5 15.7 8.5 42.7 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4,5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 47.1 10,4 34.0 14.3 38.3 6,2 38.2 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 2.9 5.6 5.8 8.9 7.6 8.9 3.7 12.4 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 1,3 0.2 3.1 0,5 2.2 0.0 4.9 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.7 HCM 6th LOS Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and interseetton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2019 AIV1 10/2812019 -- Movement EBL EBT EBR W6L WRY WBR NQL NBT NBR SRL SBI SBP Lane Configurations If) ft if vi) ti, iir vi 414 rf 1 4 Traffic Volume (vph) 107 359 124 52 600 467 146 337 42 362 339 124 Future Volume (vph) 107 359 124 52 600 467 146 337 42 362 339 124 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1903 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0,97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0 91 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1 00 1,00 0.85 1 00 1,00 0,55 1.00 1,00 0.85 100 0 97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 095 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1545 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Fft Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 1.100 1.00 0 95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 110 370 128 54 619 481 151 347 43 373 349 128 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 86 0 D 336 0 0 35 0 23 01 Lane Group Flow (vph) 110 370 42 54 619 145 136 362 8 283 544 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl Bikes (kt/hr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 13% 109 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 3% 7% 3% 4% 5% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected phases 7 4 3 5 2 2 6 6 Permrtted Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.6 30.6 30.6 4.1 28.1 28.1 17.5 17.5 17.5 23.1 23.1 Effective Green, g (s) 6.6 30.6 30.6 4.1 28.1 28.1 17.5 17.5 17.5 23.1 23.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.07 0.33 0.33 0.04 0 30 0.30 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.25 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 10 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Gap (vph) 219 1076 497 145 1025 465 293 627 275 394 785 Ws Ratio Prot c0.04 0.11 0.02 c0.18 0.09 00.11 c0.18 0.17 Os Ratio Perm 0.03 0.09 0.01 v(c Ratio 0.50 0.34 0.08 0 37 0.60 0.31 0.46 0.58 0.03 0.72 0 69 Uniform Delay, di 41.8 23.7 21.7 43.3 27.8 25.1 33.7 34.5 31.0 32.1 31.9 Ptrxgresron Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1 8 0.9 0,3 1 6 2.6 1 7 1.2 1.3 0.0 6.2 2.7 Delay (s) 43.6 24.6 22.0 45.0 30.5 26.9 34.9 35.8 31.0 38.3 34.6 Level of Service f7 C C D C C C D C 0 C Approach Decay (s) 27.5 29.7 35.2 36.8 Approach LDS C C 0 0 Intersection Surnmary HCM 2000 Control Delay 31.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C KM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,62 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 93.3 Sumof lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 68 9% 100 Levet of Service G Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cr itical Lane Group 5:00 pro Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2019 AM 10/2812019 Intersection Int Delay, sJveta 10.3 Movetnenll to_ EBR NBL '' . SST SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, vehfh 44 48 164 985 776 30 Future Vol, veh/h 44 48 164 985 776 30 Conflicting Peds, Iiihr 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - 70O Veh in Median Storage, # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 Mvrnt Flaw 47 52 176 1059 834 32 Major/Minor Minor2 Major Maj Conflicting Flow All 2246 835 0 - Stage 1 835 Stage 2 1411 Celtiod Hdwy 6.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver - 46 0 798 Stage 1 426 0 Stage 2 225 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver - 797 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 36 Stage 1 331 Stage 2 225 Approach EB NB SB HOW Control Delay, 6 429 1 5 r} HCM LOS F Minor LaneJhflajar 4lunrt NEL NET ERl,.n 1 FELn2 SET SER Capacity (vehih) 797 • .+:i HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.221 - "J1/4 1' 11CM Cdnlrol Delay {s} 10.8 - a 429 HCM Lane LOS B F A HCM 95th %tile C{veh) 0.8 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Dela/ exceeds 300s -: Comeutation Not Defined • All major volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 2019 AM 10/28,2019 Intersection Int Dei ey, sfveih Movement Larne Configurations Traffic Val, vehfh Future Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds, #Jhr Sign Control RT Channelized 33 WOL 9 9 0 Stop Storage Length 0 Veh in Median Storage, # t] Grade. % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvrnt Flaw WBR NBT NBR SBL SOT 140 140 0 Slap Stop 0 1006 15 73 748 1006 15 73 748 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free - Yield - None 0 - 0 - - 0 0 0 0 93 93 93 93 93 93 2 2 2 13 5 5 10 151 1082 16 78 804 Maj rIMI olr Whorl Ma r1 Majrsr2 Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 Follow-up Hein)? Pot Cap -1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 2050 1090 0 0 1082 1090 960 6.42 622 - 4.16 5.42 5.42 - - - 3.518 3318 - 2.254 61 262 - 630 322 372 53 262 - - 630 53 - 322 - 326 - Approach WB HOW Control Delay, s 38 9 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvrilt NB a SB BT NBRWSLn1WOLn2 SBL. SOT Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCM Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 53 262 630 - 0.183 0-575 0.125 - 87.5 35.8 115 - F E B - 0.6 3.3 0.4 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 5: Puapuaanui St 2019 AM 10t2812019 Movement WEIL WBR f4 T t~t8R SRI. SST Lane Canfiquratlons 11 r t if 1 t Traffic Volume (vehlh) 87 185 853 24 43 718 Future Volume (vehfh) 87 185 853 24 43 718 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1,00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veetlfhlln 1870 1870 1656 1870 1870 1826 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 93 0 907 0 46 764 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 3 2 2 5 Cap, vehlh 120 1409 65. 1536 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.04 0.84 Sat Flow, vehfh 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1825 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 93 0 907 0 46 764 Grp Sat F1ow(s),vehlh In 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 0 Serve(g_s), s 5.1 0.0 22.7 0.0 2.5 11.3 Cycle Q Ct r(g_0), s 5.1 0.0 22.7 0.0 2.5 11.3 Prop In Lane 100 1 00 1 00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 120 1409 65 1536 WC Ratic(X) 078 0.64 0.71 0.50 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 325 1409 117 1538 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 45.3 0.0 5.6 0.0 47 0 2.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.2 0.0 2.3 0.0 13.4 1.2 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 2.6 0.0 7.5 0 0 1 4 2.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 55 4 0.0 7.9 0.0 60 4 3.3 LnGrp LOS E A L A Approach Vol, vehfh 93 A 907 A 810 Approach Delay, sfveh 55.4 7.9 6.5 Approach LOS E A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 8.1 79.4 87.5 11.1 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 72.0 83.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 4.5 24,7 13.3 7.1 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 9,3 7.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 0th Ctrl Delay 9.7 HCM 6th LOS A flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [NBR, WBR[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2019 AM 10/2812019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 7 7 Movement. to_ EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations j it " Traffic Vol, v&fh 7 169 517 801 733 61 Future Vol, veh/h 7 169 517 801 733 61 Conflicting Pads. #hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 Mvrnt Flaw 8 182 556 861 788 66 Misr/ tlnolr Minor2 hi 1 Maj r2 Conflicting Flow All 2761 - 788 0 Stage 1 788 - Stage 2 1973 Critical Hdwy 5.42 - 412 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up HdiAry 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 22 0 831 Stage 1 448 0 Stage 2 118 0 - Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver ~ 7 - 831 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 7 Stage 1 148 Stage 2 118 Approach EB PJB SS HOW Control Delay, S 1035 4 HCM LOS F Mlnot Lnne/hflajar 'vlunrt NEL._ ..1kBTEBLn1 BBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (ve#r/h) 831 - 7 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.669 - 1.075 - tfCN1 Control Delay {s} 17 6 S 1035,4 0 HCM Lane LOS C - F A HCM 95th %tile C{veh) 5.3 - 1.7 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Dela/ exceeds 300s: Computation Not Defined All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: l_ako Street 2019 AM 10t28f2019 4 t 1 Movement E0L EBT EBR WM. WBT WEIR NOL NBT IJBR $RL SBI SSR Lane Configurations ) T ) T ) + II Traffic Volume (vehlh) 251 48 65 69 36 267 33 792 55 141 647 125 Future Volume (vehfh) 251 48 69 69 36 267 33 792 55 141 647 125 Initial Q (Qb), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1670 1870 1856 1670 1870 1870 1870 1841 1811 1856 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 267 51 0 73 36 0 35 8430 150 588 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cap, vehlh 303 318 110 116 344 971 258 1016 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.52 0.00 0.06 0.55 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 15135 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 267 51 0 73 38 0 35 843 0 150 588 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 14.0 2.2 0.0 3.9 09 0.0 0.9 37.7 0.0 3.8 25.5 0.0 Cycle Q Cl ar(c,_c), s 14.0 2.2 0.0 3.9 1.9 0.0 0.9 37.7 0,.0 3.6 25.5 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0,00 140 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 303 318 110 116 344 971 258 1016 VPC Ratio(X) 0.88 0.16 0.66 0.33 010 0.87 0.56 0.68 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 336 353 333 353 381 971 270 1016 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 38.7 33.8 0.0 43.8 42.9 0.0 12,7 20.1 0.0 19.0 15.5 0 0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 21.5 0/ 0.0 6.7 1.6 0.0 0.1 10.4 4.0 2.9 3.6 0.0 Initial 0 bale+y(d3),slveh 0 0 0,0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °!idle BackOf0(50%),vehlln 7.8 1.0 0,0 1.9 0.9 0,0 0 3 17.9 0.0 1 7 11 0 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sNveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 60 2 34 1 0.0 60.5 44 55 0.0 12.8 30.4 0.0 21.9 19.2 0.0 LnGrp LOS E C D D 13 0 0 B Approach Vol, vehih 318 A 111 A 878 A 538 A Approach Delay, sfveh 56.1 48.4 29.7 19.6 Approach LOS E D 0 B Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+y+Re), S Change Period (Y{Re), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green [xi Tirne (p 0), 5 Intersection Summary 1 2 10.2 4.5 6.4 5.8 0.0 4 5 6 8 54.1 20.7 7.5 56.5 10.4 4,5 4 5 4.5 4,5 4 5 49.6 18.0 5.0 51.0 18.0 39.7 16.0 2.9 27.5 5.9 4,4 0.2 0.0 5,1 0.2 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 30.6 flutes linsrgnalized Delay for jNBR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and interseetton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Syr;chro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 AM 8. Kamehameha 111 Road ex Queen Ka humane Hwy/0128/2019 20'-r Movement BBL EBT EBR lArIn VAT WBR NOL klBT N8R SRL SBT S5 Lane Configurations 4 if 4 19 '14 .1 ti* Traffic Volume (vehlh) 157 5 26 16 12 15 76 475 15 14 417 285 Future Volume (vehlh) 157 5 26 16 12 15 76 475 15 14 417 285 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) t00 1.00 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1722 1781 1781 1781 1752 1811 1611 1870 1811 1811 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 169 5 0 17 13 16 62 511 16 15 448 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 093 0.93 0.93 193 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, 917 2 2 12 8 8 8 10 6 6 2 Fi 8 Cep,vehlh 230 7 20 20 24 103 933 29 32 1690 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.13 0.00 4.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.53 0.53 0.02 0.49 0.50 Sat Flow, vehfh 1732 51 1459 898 457 553 1668 1746 55 1781 3532 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 174 0 0 46 0 0 82 0 527 15 448 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhlln 1784 0 1459 1618 0 0 1668 0 1800 1781 1721 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.2 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 12.8 0.6 5.1 0.0 Cycle Q Ctear(c,_c), s 62 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 12.8 0.6 5.1 0,0 Prop In Lane 0 97 1.00 0 37 0.35 1.00 0.03 1 00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 237 0 70 0 0 103 0 962 32 1690 WC Retic (X) 0 73 0.00 0.66 0 00 0.00 0 79 0.00 1155 0 46 0.27 Avail Cep(ow,a), vehfh 696 0 622 0 0 229 0 962 137 1690 HCl Plabora Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 27 7 0.0 0.0 31.3 0.0 0.0 30.7 0.0 10.2 32 3 9 9 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), slush 4.4 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 12.8 0.0 2.2 9.9 0.4 0.0 Initial 0 Dela+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le Back040(50%),vehlln 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 4 3 0.3 1.6 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s&veh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 32.0 0.0 0.0 41.4 0,0 0.0 43.5 0.0 12.4 42.2 10.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS 0 A D A A 0 A 8 D B Approach Vol, vehlh 174 A 45 609 463 A Approach Delay, sfveh 32.0 41.4 16.6 11.3 Approach LOS C D B B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+y+Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), 5 Intersection Summary 13.3 8.6 37.1 7.4 5.7 40.0 4,5 4.5 45 4,5 45 4,5 25.9 9.1 31.5 25.5 5.1 35.5 8.2 5.2 7.1 3.9 2.6 14.8 0.8 0.0 27 0.2 0.0 3.0 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay 1 -ICM 6th LOS 17.7 B Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 PM 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 10/28/2015 Movement EEL EBT EBR Wilk, VAT WER 49L NBT NBR SRL SBT SBR Lane Canfiquratlons Vi ++ r ) ++ r ..il tt r vi ++ rf Traffic Volume (vehlh) 260 877 503 223 609 41 227 283 247 51 313 107 Future Volume (vehfh) 260 877 503 223 609 41 227 283 247 51 3"3 107 Initial Q (0b), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.Q0 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No Na Na Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1856 1856 1870 1870 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 265 895 0 228 621 0 232 289 0 52 319 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 01.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 Cep,vehlh 357 1578 316 1521 319 991 76 512 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.45 0.00 0.09 0.43 0.00 0.09 0.19 0.00 0.04 0.14 0.00 sat Flow, vehfh 3428 3526 1585 3455 3497 1585 3428 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 265 895 0 228 621 0 232 289 0 52 319 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh,4n 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.0 15.1 0.0 5.2 9.8 0.0 5.3 5.7 0.0 2.3 6.8 0.0 Cycle 0 CEear(g c), s 6.0 15.1 0.0 5.2 9.8 0.0 5.3 5.7 0.0 2.3 6.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 357 1578 316 1521 319 691 76 512 WC Relic (X) 0 74 0.57 0.72 0.41 0 73 0.42 0.68 0.62 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehfh 533 1578 451 1521 448 1838 197 1767 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1..00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 35.0 16.5 0.0 35.5 15.6 0.0 35.5 28.4 0 0 38.0 32 4 0 0 Incl. Delay (d2), slush 3.1 1.5 0.0 3.2 0.6 0.0 3.6 0.4 0.0 10.3 1.2 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 line BackOfQ(54%),vehlln 2.6 5.9 0.0 2.2 3.8 0.0 2.3 2.4 0,0 1.2 2 9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 38 0 17.9 0.0 38 8 16.4 0.0 39.1 28 8 0.0 48.3 33.6 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B 0 C 0 C Approach Vol, vehlh 1160 A 849 A 521 A 371 A Approach Delay, sfveh 22.5 22.4 33.4 35.7 Approach LOS C C C D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 7.9 20.2 11.8 40.5 12.0 16.1 12.9 39.5 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4 5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4 5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.9 41.6 10.5 36.0 10.5 40.0 12.5 34.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 4.3 7.7 7.2 17.1 7.3 8.0 0.0 11.8 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 0 0 2.0 5.2 6.0 0,2 2.2 0.4 4.2 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 26.1 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 2019 PM 10/2812019 MOverrhent RBI_ EBT EBR W0L VAT WEIR PIAL NBT NBR SRL SBT SBRR Lane Configurations Vi tf if 14 if vi 414 tf 1 4T Traffic Volume (vph) 190 663 291 72 548 314 126 318 34 348 342 190 Future Volume (vph) 190 663 291 72 548 314 126 318 34 348 342 190 ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1930 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane U5I. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0 91 Frpb, pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 1,00 0 85 1 00 1,00 085 1.00 1,00 0.85 100 0 95 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prof) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1510 3193 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.06 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 3193 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.9E 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 194 577 297 73 559 326 129 324 35 355 349 194 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 197 0 0 228 0 0 29 0 47 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 194 677 100 73 559 92 116 337 6 302 549 0 Conli. Peds (Mir) 1 1 4 7 7 4 Confl Bikes. (trhr) 1 1 1 Heavy Vehicles (95) 5% 2% 2% 2% 496 2% 3% 296 3% 2% 2% 296 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split 4A Perm Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 0 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.6 32.5 32.3 3.9 27.6 27.6 16.9 16.9 16.9 24.4 24.4 Effective Green, g (S) 8.6 32.3 32.3 3.9 27.6 27.6 16.9 16.9 16.9 24.4 24.4 Actuated c!C Ratio 0.09 0.34 0.34 0.04 0.29 0.29 0.18 0,18 0.18 0.26 026 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (c) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Gap (vp4l) 300 1190 535 140 1003 451 282 598 271 411 815 Os Ratio Prot x0.06 c0.19 0.02 0.16 0.07 c0.10 c0.19 0.17 Os Ratio Perm 0 06 0.06 6.00 v!c Ratio 0.65 0.57 0.19 0.52 0.56 0.21 0.41 0.56 0,02 0.73 0.67 Uniform Delay, di 42.0 25.9 22.3 44.9 28.8 25.7 34.9 35.9 32.5 32.6 32.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4 7 1.9 0.8 3 5 2.2 1,0 1 0 1.2 0.0 6,7 2.2 Delay (s) 46.7 27.8 23.1 48.4 31.0 26.7 35.9 37.1 32.5 39.3 34.2 Level of Service D C r D C C D 0 0 3 C Approach Decay (s) 29.8 30.9 36.5 36.9 Approach LOS 0 0 0 b Intersection Summary HCTY1 2000 Control Delay 32.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service 0 HC1I 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 95.5 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 72.7% ICU Leve! of Service 0 Analysis Period (min) 15 c Ci itical Lane Group 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2019 PM 10/2812019 lnterceclinn Int Delay, Jveh 1 Movetnent to_ EBR NBL NOT SBT SBR Lane Configurations j r ilk at j( Traffic Vol, vehfh 10 70 84 923 1005 17 Future Vol, veh/h 10 70 84 923 1005 17 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stmt Free Free Free Free RT Channelized • Free - None Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage, # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 4 2 6 Mvrnt Flow 10 72 87 952 1036 18 Mier/Mlnor Mft ort Mori Mailed Conflicting Flow All 2162 1036 0 Stage 1 1036 Stage 2 1126 Critical Hdwy 5.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Fldwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3,518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 52 0 671 Stage 1 342 0 Stage 2 310 0 - Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 45 - 671 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 45 Stage 1 298 Stage 2 310 Approach EB k9 SB HOW Control Delay, s 107 3 0 9 0 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major .i1vr t NBL NBT EBL.n 1 F9Ln2 SET S Capacity (vetalh) 671 - 45 - HCM Lane ViC Ratio 0.129 - 0.229 - HCtv1 Control Delay {s} 11 2 - 107,3 0 HCM Lane LOS B - F A HCM 95th %tile € {veh) 0.4 - 0.8 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 2019 PM 4: Hualalai Rd (South) 10/2812019 intersection Int Delays, slveh 1 7 Movetnent INBL WEIR NBT NBR SBL SOT Lane Configurations 1 er I vi Traffic Vol, vehth 14 71 940 4 61 1015 Future Vol, veh/h 14 71 940 4 61 1015 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Stop - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 0 - Veh in Median Sierage, # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 0 2 Mvrnt Flaw 14 73 969 4 63 1046 Mli r°1 ln'olr Mftor1 Majurl Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2143 971 Stage 1 971 Stage 2 1172 - - Critical Hdwy 6.47 6,22 - - 413 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.47 - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 6.47 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.563 3.318 - - 2.272 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 52 307 - 688 Stage 1 360 Stage 2 288 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver 47 307 - - 688 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 47 Stage 1 360 Stage 2 262 Approach WB 1~k9 SB HOW Control Delay, s 35 6 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvrilt Capacity (vela/h) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCM Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LDS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) 0 06 NBT °NB INBLn1YWBLn2 SBL - - 47 307 688 - 0.307 0.238 0.091 - 112.5 20.4 10.8 - F C B - 1.1 0.9 0.3 ser 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 PM Puapuaanui St 10f2812019 Movement WBL WEIR NBT NEIR SBL SET Lane Configurations ) r t r 1 + Traffic Volume (vehlh) 34 107 825 48 132 906 Future Volume (vehfh) 34 107 525 48 132 906 Initial Q (Ob), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach Na No Plc Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1626 1856 1841 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 35 0 851 0 130 934 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent He vy Veh, 5 2 5 3 4 2 2 Cap, vehJh 57 1358 168 1634 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.09 0.87 Sat Flow, vehJh 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 35 0 851 0 136 934 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1781 1547 1556 1560 1781 1870 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 0.0 21.6 0.0 7.1 12.0 Cycle Q Claar(c,_c), s 1.8 0.0 21.6 0.0 7.1 12.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 t 00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 57 1358 168 1634 VPC Relic (X) 0 62 (1.63 0.81 0.57 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 337 1358 253 1634 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter -CI) 1.00 0.60 1,10 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 45.4 0.0 6.3 0.0 42.2 1 5 lncr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.5 0.0 2.2 0.0 11.0 1.5 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),slveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °l�le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 1 0 0.0 7.4 0 0 3.6 1.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp t:relay(d1,slveh 56 0 0.0 8,5 0.0 53 1 3.0 LnGrp LOS E A D A Approach Vol, vehlh 35 A 851 A 1070 Approach Delay, sfveh 56.0 8.5 9.4 Approach LOS E A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 13.5 74.0 87.5 7.5 Change Period (Y{Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Seting (Gmax), s 13.5 65.0 83.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+I1), 8 9i 23.6 14.0 3.8 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.1 8,1 10.2 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th CirI Delay 9.5 HCM 6th LOS A l�lvtes Unsrgnalized Delay for [IJ$R, W8R[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2019 PM 10/2812019 intersection Int Delay, Jveh 2 8 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Larne Configurations r + + jV Traffic Val, vehfh 13 372 243 854 887 36 Future Vol, vehlh 13 372 243 854 887 36 Conflicting Rads. #Jhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Fraa FreE Free RT Channelized - Free - None Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - 700 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 2 2 3 2 6 Mvrnt Flaw 13 384 248 871 905 37 Major/Minor Minor2 Major! Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2272 - 905 0 Stage 1 905 Stage 2 1367 Critical Hdwy 6.48 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.48 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.48 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.572 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 43 0 752 Stage 1 385 0 Stage 2 230 0 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver 29 - 752 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 29 Stage 1 258 Stage 2 230 Approach EB NB SB HOW Control Delay, s 208 2 2 7 0 HCM LOS F Minor Lafte/hflaior Mvnrt NBL EBL n 1 FSLn2 SBT SRR Capacity (vetalh) 752 - 29 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.3.3 - 0.457 HCfu1 Control Delay {s} 12 1 - 208.2 f; HCM Lane LDS B F 1 FICW 95th %tile € {veh) 1.4 1.5 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: l_ako Street 2019 PM 10/28;2010. 4- t ( 1, 41 Movement EFIL EBT OBIS WOL WRT WER NOL NBA" NBR SRL SBT SEAR Lane Canfiqura9ons ) , ) 1 "i t r yi + rl Traffic Volume (vehlh) 127 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Future Volume (vehTh) 127 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 t81 877 170 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1:00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh!hlln 1841 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1856 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 132 31 0 65 41 0 39 785 0 189 914 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 13.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Cep,vehlh 173 184 102 104 277 1050 373 1119 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.57 0.00 0.07 0.60 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1757 1856 1565 1767 1870 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 132 31 0 65 41 0 39 785 0 189 914 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh3ln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1565 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.3 1.3 0.0 3.0 1.8 0.0 0.8 27.2 0.0 3.7 32.8 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(c,_c), s 6.3 1.3 0.0 3 0 1.8 0.0 0.8 27.2 0:.0 3.7 32.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0.00 1 00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 173 184 102 104 277 1050 373 1119 WC Ratin(X) 076 0.17 0.64 0.39 014 0.75 0.51 0.82 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 370 395 376 385 318 1050 426 1119 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1 00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 37.5 35.2 0.0 39.4 38.8 0.0 12 6 13 9 0.0 12.4 13.5 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.9 0.4 0.0 6.6 2.4 0.0 0.2 4.9 0.0 1.1 6.7 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le BackO#Q(50%),veMn 3.0 0.6 0.0 1 5 0 9 0.0 0 3 115 0:0 1 3 13.9 0,0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 44.3 35.7 0.0 45.9 41.2 0.9 1.2.8 18 8 0.0 13.5 211.1 0.0 LnGrp LOS D D D D B B B C .......... Approach Vol, vehlh 163 A 106 A 824 A 1103 A Approach Delay, sfveh 42.7 44,1 18.5 19.0 Approach LOS D D B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 10.3. 52.7 12.9 7.5 55.5 9.4 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.3 47.7 18.0 5.0 51.0 16.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 51 29.2 8.3 2.8 34.8 5.0 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 0.1 5.6 0 3 0.0 6,6 0.2 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 21.8 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and interseetton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si naiized Intersection Summary 2019 PM 8. Kamehameha 111 Road & Queen Keahumanu Hwy 1012612019 Movement EEC EBT EBR WPI- WET WER NOL NOT NBR Sol. SBT SBR Lane CanfiquraUons 4 if 4. 111 1* 1 ft, Traffic Volume (vehlh) 290 11 52 7 11 18 64 495 11 17 511 284 Future Volume (veh/h) 290 11 52 7 11 18 64 495 11 17 511 284 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1767 1767 1811 1870 1870 1870 1856 15566 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 305 12 0 7 12 19 67 521 12 18 538 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 6 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cap,vehlh 364 14 11 20 31 89 862 20 37 1592 Arrive On Green 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.48 0.413 0.02 0.45 0.00 sat Flow, vehfh 1622 64 1535 313 537 851 1757 1806 42 1781 3647 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 317 0 0 38 0 0 67 0 533 18 538 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlh/ln 1686 0 1535 1702 0 0 1767 0 1848 1781 1777 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 13.4 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 15.8 0.7 7.4 0.0 Cycle Q Cl r(g_o), s 13.4 0.0 0.0 1.6 0,0 0.0 2.0 0,0 15.8 0 7 7.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 96 1.00 0 18 0.50 1.00 0.02 1 00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 378 0 62 0 0 89 0 882 37 1592 VPC Retic (X) 0 84 0.00 0.61 0 00 0.00 0 75 0.00 0.60 0.48 0.34 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehfh 584 0 580 0 0 168 0 882 122 1592 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1 00 000 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0,00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 27 7 0.0 0.0 35.5 0.0 0.0 351 0.0 14.3 36.2 13 4 0 0 Ince Delay (d2), slush 6.4 0.0 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 12.1 0.0 3.1 9.5 0.6 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9. Ie BackOt (50%),vehlln 5 8 0.0 0.0 0 8 0.0 0.0 1 4 0 0 6.2 0.4 2 6 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 34 1 0.0 0.0 44.9 0,0 0.0 47.2 0.0 17.4 45.7 14,0 0.0 LnGrp LOS G A D A A 0 A 3 D 13 Approach Vol, vehfh 317 A 38 600 556 A Approach Delay, sfveh 34.1 44.9 20.7 15.0 Approach LOS C D C 13 Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 2 3 4 6 7 8 21.3 8.3 38.0 7.2 6.1 40.2 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 45 45 25.9 7.1 33.5 25.5 5.1 35.5 15.4 4.8 9.4 3.5 2.7 17.8 1,4 0.0 3.3 0.1 0.0 2,9 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.0 HCM 6th LOS flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 Appendix D Analysis Reports — Future Without Project Conditions (2024) HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2024 AM WO 10/28/2019 t for \fiw t Movement EBL EBT EER W0L. WBT WER NE3L NBT IVBR SRL 387 SBI Lane Configurations Vi 14 r vi) tf r •1 ft r yi tt r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 75 480 229 171 713 24 255 202 115 21 337 186 Future Volume (veh/ti) 75 480 229 171 713 24 255 202 115 21 337 186 Initial Q (Qb), vel? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh!hlln 1737 1767 1737 1841 1811 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 77 490 0 174 728 D 260 206 0 21 344 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, 917 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cap, vehlh 164 1512 257 1634 355 807 41 518 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.46 0.00 0.08 0.47 0.00 0.10 0.23 0.00 0.02 0.15 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1550 3401 3554 1572 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 77 490 0 174 728 0 260 206 0 21 344 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlh/ln 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1685 0 Serve(g_s), s 1.9 7.6 0.0 4.0 11.3 0.0 6.0 3.8 0.0 0.9 7.4 0.0 Cycle Q 0teer(g_c), s 1.9 7.5 0.0 4.0 11.3 0.0 6.0 3.8 0.0 0.9 7.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1 00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 164 1512 257 1634 355 807 41 518 VPC Retic (X) 0 47 0.32 0.68 0.45 0 73 0.26 0.51 0.66 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 247 1512 440 1634 605 2081 122 1692 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1 00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 37 1 14.2 0.0 36.2 141 0.0 24 9 25.5 0.0 38.8 32 5 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), slush 2.1 0.6 0.0 3.1 0.9 0.0 2.9 0.2 0.0 9.2 1.5 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 %le Back040(50%),vehlln 0.8 2.8 0.0 1 7 4.2 0,0 2 6 1.6 0 D 0 5 3,2 0,0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d1,slveh 39.2 14.8 0.0 39 3 14.9 0.0 37.8 25.7 0.0 48.1 34.0 0.0 LrGrp LOS D B D 3 0 C D C ........... Approach Vol, vehlh 567 A 502 A 466 A 365 A Approach Delay, sfveh 't8.1 19.6 32.5 34.8 Approach LOS B B C 0 Turner - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 6.4 22.8 10.6 40.7 12.9 16.2 5.6 42.7 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4,5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 4,5 Max Green Seting (Gmax), s 5.5 41.1 10,4 34.0 14.3 38.3 6,2 38.2 Max Cr Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 2.9 5.8 6.0 9.6 8.0 9.4 3.9 13.3 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 1,4 0.2 3.3 0,5 2.4 0.0 5.2 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 24.3 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for IN BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 2024 AM WO 100I2019 **- t 41 Movement EBL EBT EBR W8L WBT WER NRL NBT NBR SRL SRI SBR Lane Configurations )) 14 if 1111 1f r 'i 4t r 1 41 Traffic Volume (vph) 112 377 130 55 631 491 153 354 44 380 356 130 Future Volume (vph) 112 377 130 55 631 491 153 354 44 380 356 130 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0 97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 091 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1 00 1,00 0 85 1 00 1.00 0,85 1.00 1.00 0.85 100 0 97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.03 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 334.8 1487 1595 3174 Fft Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,041 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 115 389 134 57 651 506 158 365 45 392 367 134 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 91 0 0 356 0 0 36 0 22 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 115 389 43 57 651 150 142 381 9 298 573 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl Bikes ( hr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 13% 13% 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 3% 7% 3% 4% 5% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.6 30,6 30.6 4.1 28.1 261 18.1 18.1 18.1 24.1 24.1 Effective Green, g (S) 6.6 30.6 34].6 4.1 28.1 28.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 24.1 24.1 Actuated c/C Ratio 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.04 0,30 0,30 0.19 0,19 0.19 025 025 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vp4i) 215 1058 488 142 1008 455 298 638 283 405 806 vks Ratio Prot x0.04 0.12 0.02 cO.19 0.09 c0.11 c3.19 0.18 Os Ratio Perm 0.03 0.10 0.01 v!c Ratio 0.53 0.37 0.09 0 40 0.65 0.33 0.48 0.60 0.03 0.74 071 Uniform Delay, di 42.7 24.7 22.4 44.2 29.1 26.0 34.2 35.1 31.3 32.5 32.2 Prrxt„resron Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.5 1.0 0,4 1 9 3.2 1,9 1.2 1,5 0.0 6 8 3.0 Delay (s) 45.2 25.7 22.8 46.1 32.3 27.9 35.4 36.6 31.3 39.3 35.2 Level of Service D C C D C C f3 D C 0 D Approach Decay (s) 28.6 31.1 35.9 36.6 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Conlroi Delay 32.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C KM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,65 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 94.9 Sum of lost Lint (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 70.0'x, ICL! Leve! of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2024 AM WO 10/28,2019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 14 f Wtovetnent teL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Larne Configurations "j r + + i( Traffic Vol, vehfh 46 50 172 1035 815 32 Future Vol, veh/h 46 50 172 1035 315 32 Conflicting Pads. #Jhr 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 Mvrnt Flow 49 54 185 1113 877 34 MitorilMinor Whoa Mqor1 Maielr2 Conflicting Flow All 2361 - 878 0 Stage 1 878 - Stage 2 1483 Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 412 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Flitio Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver -39 0 769 Stage 1 406 0 Stage 2 208 0 Platoon blocked. % MMv Cap -1 Maneuver - 30 - 768 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 30 Stage 1 308 Stage 2 208 Approach EB NB SB HOW Control Delay, s$ 503 1 1 6 r} HCM LOS F Mbnor• Lane/Major 4lunrt NPL NBT F OLn 1 FBLn2 SBT SBfr_ Capacity (vehih) 768 - 30 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.241 . ' 649 tfCN1 Cdnlrol Delay {s} 112 -S 603;1 t' HCM Lane LDS B F / HCM 95th %tile C l(veh) 0.9 5.7 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delay exceeds 300; + C: moutation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 4: Hualalai Rd (South) 2024 AM WO 10/2812019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 4 Movetnent WOL WMR NOT NOR SOL SOT Lane Configurations j Traffic Vol, vehfh 9 147 1057 16 77 7136 Future Vol, veh/ti 9 147 1057 16 77 786 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Cttanneiized Stop - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 0 — Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 13 5 5 Mvrnt Flow 10 158 1137 17 83 845 M&j€rfMlnolr Ninon Major1 Mat Conflicting Flow All 2157 1146 0 0 1137 Stage 1 1146 - Stage 2 1011 — Critiod Hdwy 6.42 622 - 4.16 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - - — Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 3.318 - - 2.254 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 52 243 - 600 Stage 1 303 — Stage 2 352 - Platoon blocked. % MMv Cap -1 Maneuver 45 243 - - 600 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 45 - - Stage i 303 Stage 2 303 - - Approach WB NB SB HControl Delay, s 47 3 0 1 1 HCM LOS F Minor Lair-ie./14;K Mvnrt Nl3T 1JBRWSLn1W0Ln2 SBL SRT Capacity (vetalh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCfu1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICJM95th %tile € {veh) - 45 243 600 - 0.215 4.65 0.138 - 105.7 43.7 12 - F E B - 0.7 4 0.5 5:00 prn Baseline Synctnro 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM WO 5: Puapuaanui St 10/2812019 t Movement WEL WBR NBT NBR SBL SST Lane Canfiquratlons 'Pi r t r 1 t Traffic Volume (veh1h) 91 194 897 25 45 755 Future Volume (veh/h) 91 194 897 25 45 755 Initial Q (Qb), vat', 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No tic Adj Sat Flow, veehrh/ln 1970 1870 1856 1$70 1870 1826 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 97 0 954 0 4.8 803 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, 91) 2 2 3 2 2 5 Cap, vehlh 125 1404 86 1532 Arrive On Green 007 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.04 0.84 Set ow, veh)h 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 Grp Volurne(v), veh/h 97 0 954 0 48 803 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h,4n 1781 1585 1855 1585 1781 1826 0 Serve(g_s), s 5.3 0.0 25.5 0.0 2.6 12.5 Cycle Q Clear(c,_c), s 5.3 0.0 25.5 0 0 2.6 12.5 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 100 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 125 1404 66 1532 VPC Ratin(X) 0 78 0.68 0.73 0.52 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 324 1404 117 1532 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 45.2 0.0 6.0 0.0 47.1 2.3 Incr Delay (d2), slush 9.9 0.0 2.7 0.0 14.1 1.3 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),sfveh 00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °l�le BackafQ(5O%),veh/ln 2.7 0.0 8.5 0 0 1.4 2.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 155.2 0.0 8.7 0.0 61.3 3.6 LnGrp LOS E A E A Approach Vol, vehih 97 A 954 A 851 Approach Delay, s/veh 55.2 8,7 6.8 Approach LOS E A A Timer - Assigned Plus 1 2 5 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.2 79.3 87.5 11.4 Change Period (Y{Re), s 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 Max Green Seting (Gmex), s 6.5 72.0 83.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 4.6 27.5 14.5 7,3 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 10,2 7,6 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th CirI Delay HCM 6th LOS 10.2 E llvtes Unsrgnalized Delay for [1,113R, W8R1 is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2024 AM WO 10t2812019 Intersection Int Delay, s1veh 9.8 Movetnenll teL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations ] er 4' + r Traffic Vol, vehfh 7 178 543 842 770 64 Future Vol, veh/h 7 178 543 842 770 54 Conflicting Pads. liihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - Nene - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage, # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 i HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: l_ako Street 2024 AM WO 10/78f2019 Movement EBL EBT EBR W$L Wl3T WEIR NOL NBT NBR SBI: Sr SBFT Lane Configurations ) T ) 111 t r 1 t r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 264 50 73 73 38 281 35 832 58 148 680 131 Future Volume (vehfh) 264 50 73 73 38 281 35 832 58 148 880 131 Initial Q (01b), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1570 1841 1811 1856 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 281 53 0 78 40 D 37 885 0 157 723 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, 91) 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cep,vehlh 314 330 115 122 313 955 225 1003 Arrive On Gwen 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.51 0.00 0.06 0.54 0.00 Set Flow, vehfh 1781 1870 Q 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1586 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 281 53 0 78 40 0 37 086 0 157 723 0 Grp Sat F1ow(s),,ehlhlln 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 15.0 2.3 0.0 4.2 2.0 0.0 0.9 42.7 0.0 4.1 28.5 0.0 Cycle Q Cl ar(c,_c), s 15.0 2.3 0.0 4.2 2.0 0.0 0.9 42.7 0,.0 4.1 28 5 0.0 Prop In Lane 1 00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 314 330 115 122 313 955 225 1003 VPC Ratio(X) 0 89 0.16 0.68 0.33 012 0.93 0 70 0 72 Avail Cap(cw.a., vehfh 330 347 328 347 346 955 231 1003 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1 00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 39 1 33.9 0.0 44.4 43.3 0.0 13.9 22 1 0.0 21.5 16 8 0 0 Incr Delay (d2), slush 24.6 0.2 0.0 6 7 1.5 0.0 0.2 16.0 0.0 8.7 4.5 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 Ie Back040(50%),vehlln S. 1.1 0.0 2 0 1.0 0.0 04 216 0,0 2 3 12 5 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, shveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 63.7 34.1 0.0 51 1 44.9 0.0 14 1 38 0 0.0 30.1 21 3 0.0 LrtGrp LOS E C D D B 0 0 0 Approach Vol, vehlh 334 A 118 A 922 A 880 A Approach Delay, slush 59.0 49.0 37.1 22.9 Approach LOS E. D D 0 Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 S Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 10.5 54.1 21.6 7.7 57.0 10.8 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.4 49.6 18.0 5.0 51.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 6.1 44,7 17.0 2.9 30.5 6.2 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 0.0 2.7 0.1 0.0 5.2 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS :35.4 Notes Unsfgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM WO 8. Kamehameha 111 Road & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 1012812019 Movement EBL EBT EBR WEL VAT WER NEIL NST Ni3R SRL SBT SBR Lane CanfiquraUons 4 if i+ .1 no Traffic Volume (vehlh) 165 5 27 17 13 15 80 499 16 15 438 300 Future Volume (vehTh) 165 5 27 17 13 15 80 499 16 15 438 300 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 t00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1722 1781 1781 1781 1752 1811 1811 1870 1811 1811 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 177 5 0 18 14 17 86 537 17 16 471 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 2 2 12 8 8 8 10 n 6 2 6 6 Cap, vehlh 239 7 27 21 25 108 924 29 34 1665 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.53 0.53 0.02 0.48 0.00 sat Flow, vehfh 1735 49 1459 595 462 562 1668 1745 55 1781 3532 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 182 0 0 49 0 0 86 0 554 16 471 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhJln 1784 0 1459 1618 0 0 1668 0 1800 1781 1721 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.6 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 14.0 0.6 5.5 0.0 Cycle Q Ct r(g_o), s 6.6 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 0,0 14.0 0.6 5.5 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.97 1.00 0 37 0.35 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 246 0 72 0 0 108 0 953 34 1665 WC Ralin(X) 0 74 0.00 0.68 0 00 0.00 0 79 0.00 0.58 0.47 0.28 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehfh 689 0 616 0 0 226 0 953 136 1685 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Falter(I) 1 00 000 0.00 1.00 0.00 000 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 27 7 0.0 0.0 31.5 0.0 0.0 30.9 0.0 10.7 32.5 10 3 0.0 In Delay (d2), s/veh 4.3 0.0 0.0 10.5 0.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 23 9.5 0.4 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 3 0 0.0 0,0 1 0 0.0 0.0 1 6 0 0 4.5 0,3 17 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 32.0 0.0 0.0 42 t 0.0 0.9 43 1 0.0 13,3 42.1 10.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A D A A D A B D B Approach Vol, vehfh 182 A 49 640 487 A Approach Delay, sfveh 32.0 42.1 17.3 11.8 Approach LOS C D B 9 Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting 6 ax) s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 13.8 8.9 36.9 7.5 5.8 40.0 4.0 4,5 4.5 4,5 4 5 4 25.9 9.1 31.5 25,5 5.1 35.5 8.6 5.4 7.5 4.6 2.6 16.0 0.9 0'.0 2.9 0.2 0.0 3.2 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 18.2 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2024 PM WO 1012912019 t Movement EOL EBT EBR W0L. WST WER NOL NBT N8R SRL Sr SB Lane Canfiquratlons )11 14 r vi) tf Iv ) tt tv yi Ikt Traffic Volume (vehlh) 273 922 529 234 640 43 239 297 260 54 329 112 Future Volume (vehfh) 273 922 529 234 640 43 239 297 260 54 329 112 Initial Q (Ob), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pad -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1 00 1,00 1.00 100 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No Na Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1856 1856 1870 1870 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 279 941 0 239 653 0 244 303 0 55 336 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 098 0.98 098 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, vehJh 369 1553 325 1493 330 717 78 530 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.44 0.00 0.09 0.43 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.00 0.04 0.15 0.00 Sat Flow, vahfh 3428 3526 1585 3456 3497 1585 3428 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 279 941 0 239 653 0 244 343 0 55 336 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.5 16.7 0.0 5.5 10.8 0.0 5.7 6.1 0.0 2.5 7.3 0.0 Cycle Q CEeat(g c), s 6.5 16.7 0.0 5.5 10 8 0.0 5.7 6,1 0.0 2 5 7.3 0.0 Prop In Lane 1 00 1.00 1 CO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 369 1553 325 1493 330 717 78 530 VPC Ratin(X) 0 76 0.61 0.73 0.44 0 74 0.42 0.71 0.63 Avail 0ap(ow,al, vehfh 524 1553 444 1493 440 1808 194 1739 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1 00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 35.4 17.5 0.0 36.0 16.5 0.0 36.0 28 5 0.0 38.8 32 7 0 0 Incl. Delay (d2), slveh 3.9 1.8 0.0 4.1 0.9 0.0 4.5 0.4 0.0 1.1.2 1.3 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile Back04Q(50%),vehlln 2.8 6.5 0.0 2 4 4.2 0.0 2 5 2 6 0,0 1.3 3,1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh 393 19.2 0.0 40 1 17 4 0.0 40.5 28 9 0.0 49.8 33.9 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B 0 C D C Approach Vol, vehJh 1220 A 892 A 547 A 391 A Approach Delay, sfveh 23.8 23.5 34.0 36.2 Approach LOS C 0 C D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 8.1 21.0 12.2 40.5 12.4 16.7 13.3 39.4 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.9 41.6 10.5 36,0 10.5 40.0 12.5 34.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 4.5 8.1 7.5 18.7 7.7 9.3 8 5 12.8 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 2.1 0.2 6.1 0.2 2.3 0.4 4.4 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 27.1 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 2024 PM WO 10/29f2019 Movement RBI_ EBT F131INK WBT MR NBL NBT NBR SRL SBT SBP Lane Configurations Vi ++ Pr VI 14 if vi 4 j 1 4 Traffic Volume (vph) 200 697 306 75 576 330 132 334 36 365 359 200 Future Volume (vph) 200 697 306 76 576 330 132 334 36 366 359 200 ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1903 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0,97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0 91 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.96 1.00 0.99 Flpb, pedlbike8 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 1,00 0 85 1 00 1,00 085 1.00 1.100 9.85 100 0 95 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prof) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 3193 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 01.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 _3193 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 204 711 312 78 588 337 135 3,11 37 373 365 204 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 206 0 0 241 0 0 30 0 46 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 204 711 104 78 588 96 121 355 7 317 580 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 1 1 4 7 7 4 Confl Bikes. (tlhr) 1 1 1 Henry Vehicles (95) 5% 2% 2% 2% 496 2% 3% 296 3% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.6 32.2 322 3.9 27.5 27.5 17.4 17.4 117.4 25.,4 25.4 Effective Green, g (8) 8.6 32.2 32.2 3.9 27.5 27.5 17.4 17.4 17.4 25.4 25.4 Actuated giC Ratio 0.09 0.33 0,33 0,04 0,28 0.28 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.D 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vp4l) 295 1176 526 138 986 443 286 607 275 422 836 Os Ratio Prot x0.06 c0.20 0.02, 0.17 0.08 00.10 c0e20 0.18 08 Ratio Perm 0 07 0.06 0.00 yip Ratio 0.69 0.60 0.20 0,57 0,60 0.22 0.42 0.58 0,02 0.75 0 69 Uniform Delay, di 42.9 27.0 23.1 45.7 29.9 26.5 35.3 36.4 32.8 32.8 32.2 Prrxt„res8ron Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1 50 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6 8 2.3 0,6 5 2 2.7 1,1 1 0 1.4 0.0 7.4 2.5 Delay (s) 49.7 29.3 24.0 50.9 32.6 27.6 36.3 37.9 32.9 40.2 34.8 Level of Service ❑ C C D C C 0 0 0 t3 C Approach Decay (s) 31.4 32.3 37,1 36.6 Approach LOS 0 0 0 0 Intersection Surnmery HCM 2000 Control Delay 33.8 FiCM 2000 Level of Service 0 KM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,68 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 96.9 Surr7 of lost Lint (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 74.1% ICU Leve! of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Ci itical Lane Group 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2024 PM WO 10P29(2019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 1 2 Movement EBL EBR tiBL NBT SBT SBR Larne Configurations 111 + + jV Traffic 'hi, vehfh 11 74 88 970 1055 18 Future Vol, vehlh 11 74 88 970 1055 18 Conflicting Rads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Free Free RT Channerized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 4 2 5 Mvrnt Flaw 11 76 91 1000 1089 19 M'ajorlMinor Minor2 Ma oil Maki -2 Conflicting FIow All 2271 - 1089 0 - 0 Stage 1 1089 Stage 2 1182 - - - Critiod Hdwy 5.42 - 412 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - - - Follow-up Hdiiry 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 44 0 641 Stage 1 323 0 - Stage 2 291 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 38 - 641 - - Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 38 - - - Stage 1 277 Stage 2 291 - Approach EB 1+k9 SB HOW Control Delay, s 135 9 1 0 HCM LOS F Minor LnneJroalar'vlunrt NBL r,tST Ent.n 1 SSLn2 SBT SRR Capacity (vehih) 641 - 38 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.112 - 0.298 - HCW1 Control Delay {s} 11 5 - 135.9 0 HCM Lane LOS B - F A. HCM 95th %tile € {veh) 0.5 1 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 2024 PM WO 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 10/29(2019 intersection Int Delay, Jveh 2 Movetnent WOL. WOR NBT NOR SOL SOT Lane Configurations 11 if i Traffic Val, vehfh 16 76 988 4 84 1057 Future Vol, veh/h 15 75 988 4 64 1067 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Fraa Free Free RT Channelized - Stop - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 - 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 8 2 Mvrnt Flow 15 77 1019 4 66 1100 MEOW or1 Maori Maj r2 Conflicting Flow All 2253 1021 0 0 1019 Stage 1 1021 Stage 2 1232 - Critical Hdwy 6.47 6,22 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.47 Critical Fldwy Sig 2 5,47 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.563 3.318 - 2.272 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 4-4 287 - 658 Stage 1 340 - Stage 2 269 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap- 1 Maneuver 40 287 - - 658 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 40 - Stage 1 340 Stage 2 242 - - - 4.18 Approach WB NB SR HCH Control Delay, s 42.3 a 0.5 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/major Mvrilt NBT NBLn1WBLrt2 SBL SET Capacity (vehih) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCfu1 Cdnlrol Delay {s} HCM Lane LDS HCM 95th %tile € {veh) 40 287 658 - 0.387 0.269 0.1 - 143.3 22 1 11 1 - F C B - 1-3 1.1 0.3 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM WO 5: Puapuaanui St 10/29(2019 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SEX S87 Lane Ccnfiquratlons vi r t jrt ii t Traffic Volume (vehlh) 36 112 857 50 139 952 Future Volume (vehfh) 36 112 867 50 139 952 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 100 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1626 1856 1841 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 37 0 894 0 143 9981 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent He vy Veh, % 2 5 3 4 2 2 Cap, veh/h 58 1348 176 1632 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.10 0.87 Sat Flow, vehfh 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 37 0 894 0 143 981 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 0 Serve(g_s), s 2.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 7.5 13.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 7.5 13.4 Prop In Lane 1 00 1 00 1 00 1,00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 58 1348 176 1632 VPC Ratin(X) 0 63 0.66 0.81 0.60 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 337 1348 253 1632 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 45.4 0.0 6.9 0.0 42.0 1.5 Incr Deiay (d2), s/veh 10.8 0.0 2.6 0.0 12.4 1.3 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °l�le BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1 0 0.0 8.5 00 3.8 1.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 56.2 0.0 9.4 0.0 54.4 3.3 Lr Grp LOS E A D A Approach Vol, veh/h 37 A 894 A 1124 Approach Delay, s/veh 56.2 9.4 9.8 Approach LOS E A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 13.9 73.6 87.5 7.6 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4 5 4 5 Max Green Seting (Gmax), s 13.5 65.0 83.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.5 26.2 15.4 4.0 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.1 8,8 11.3 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 10.5 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [NBR, WBR[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2024 PM WO 10/29(2019 Intersection Int Delay, Weh 3 5 Movetnenll EBL EBR NBL fiat SBT SBR Lane Configurations 11 ? + + i Traffic Vol, vehfh 14 391 255 898 932 38 Future Vol, veh/h 14 391 255 898 932 38 Conflicting Pads. Iiihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - Nene - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 2 2 3 2 6 Burnt Flow 14 399 260 916 951 39 Major/Minor Minar2 ... Maje 1 Mator2.. Conflicting Flew All 2387 - 951 0 - 0 Stage 1 951 Stage 2 1436 Critical Hdwy 6.48 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.48 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.48 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.572 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 36 0 722 Stage 1 366 0 Stage 2 212 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 23 722 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 23 Stage 1 234 Stage 2 212 Approach EB NS SB HOW Control Delay 4302 1 2 8 0 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvnr1 NBL NET Ela n 1 08Ln2 SBT S88 Capacity (vehih) 722 - 23 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.36 - 0.621 l;Cfu1 Control Delay {s} 12.8 -S 302.1 0 HCM Lane LOS B - F A HCWW195th %tile C{veh) 1.6 - 1.8 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delav exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined ' All rnaiar volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: l_ako Street 2024 PM WO 10Pf2019 t 14/ Movement EBL BBT BER W$L WBT INER NOL NBT IBR SSL SBI SEAR Lane Canfiqurattons ) T "j I 1 + r 1 + ry Traffic Volume (vehlh) 133 32 50 65 41 203 39 792 67 190 922 179 Future Volume (vehfh) 133 32 50 65 41 203 39 792 67 190 922 179 Initial Q (Qb), veli 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1 00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1841 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1856 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 139 33 0 68 43 D 41 525 0 198 960 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 13.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Cap, vehlh 180 192 105 108 242 1037 343 1109 Arrive On Green 0,10 0.10 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.56 0.00 0.07 0.59 0.00 Set Flow, vehfh 1753 1670 0 1781 1526 0 1767 1856 1565 1767 1670 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 139 33 0 68 43 0 41 825 0 198 960 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1670 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.6 1.4 0.0 3.2 2.0 0.0 0.8 30.4 0.0 4.0 37.0 0.0 Cycle Q CEear(g c), s 6.6 1.4 0.0 3 2 2.0 0.0 0.8 30,4 0.0 4.0 37,0 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0,00 100 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 180 192 105 103 242 1037 343 1109 WC Ratio(X) 0 77 0.17 0.65 0.40 017 0.80 0.58 0.87 Avail Cep(ow,a), vehfh 367 391 373 382 281 1037 389 1109 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1,00 0.00 1 00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 37 6 35.3 0.0 39.6 39 0 0.0 14.5 15.1 0.0 14 4 14 7 0.0 Inor Delay (d2), s/veh 6.8 0.4 0.0 6.5 2.4 0.0 0.3 6.3 0.0 1.6 9.1 0.0 Initial 0 Dela+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0,0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le BackOf0(50%),vehlln 3.1 0.6 0.0 1 6 0.9 0.0 0.3 13.2 0.0 1 8 16.3 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 44.5 35,7 0.0 46.1 41,4 0.0 14.8 21.4 0.0 18.0 23.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D D D D B C B C Approach Vol, vehih 172 A 111 A 866 A 1150 A Approach Delay, sfveh 42.8 44.3 21.1 22.5 Approach LOS D D 0 0 Turner - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+(#Ro), s 10.5 52.6 13.3 7.6 55.5 9.6 Change Period (Y{Rc), s 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.3 47.7 18.0 5.0 51.0 16.0 Max Cr Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 6.0 32.4 8.6 2.8 39.0 5.2 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 0.1 5,5 0.3 0.0 5.9 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HDIV 6th LOS 24.5 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for IN BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 pro Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si nalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM WO 8. Kameliameha 111 Road) & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 10/29(2019 20'-r t Movement EEL EBT eeR ini_ VAT WER NEL NBT NBR S91. SBI SSR Lane CanfiquraUons 4 if 4. 'I t 1 Traffic Volume (vehlh) 305 12 55 7 12 19 67 524) 12 18 537 298 Future Volume (vehlh) 305 12 55 7 12 19 67 520 12 18 537 298 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.Q0 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1767 1767 1811 1870 1870 1875 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1970 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 321 13 0 7 13 20 71 547 13 19 585 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 9 9 6 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cap,vehlh 379 15 11 21 32 91 849 20 39 1566 Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.47 0.47 0.02 0 44 0.00 Sat Flow, veh)h 1520 66 1535 298 553 851 1757 1805 43 1781 3647 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 334 0 0 40 0 0 71 0 560 19 565 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlh In 1686 0 1535 1702 0 0 1767 0 1848 1781 1777 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 14.4 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 17.5 0.8 6.0 0.0 Cycle Q CIear(g_o), s 14.4 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 17.5 0 8 8 0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.96 1 00 0 17 0.50 1.00 0.02 1 00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 394 0 64 0 0 91 0 869 39 1566 WC Retic (X) 0.85 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.40 0 78 0.00 0.64 0.49 0.36 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehlh 574 0 671 0 0 165 0 869 119 1566 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 100 0 00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 27 8 0.0 0.0 36.1 0.0 0.0 35.6 0.0 15.3 36.8 14 1 0 0 Incl. Delay (d2), s/veh 7.9 0.0 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 13.4 0.0 3.7 9.3 0.6 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 5.4 0.0 0,0 0.9 0.0 0.0 1 6 0,0 7 0 0.4 2 9 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 35.7 0.0 0.0 45 7 0,0 0.0 49.0 0.0 19.0 46.1 14.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A D A A 0 A 8 D B Approach Vol, vehlh 334 A 40 631 584 A Approach Delay, sfveh 35.7 45.7 22.4 15.8 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 22.3 8.4 38.0 7.4 6.2 40.3 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4 5 4.5 25.9 7.1 33.5 25,5 5.1 35.5 16.4 5.0 10.0 3.8 2.8 19.5 1,4 0.0 3.5 0,1 0.0 3.0 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 5th LOS 23.3 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR1 is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 Appendix E Analysis Reports — Future With Project Conditions (2024) HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM W 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahl+lmanu Hwy 10/29/2019 - 7 Movement SPL EBT EBR WEIL VAT WER NE3L NOT NOR SOL SOT SBR Lane Canfiqurataons 11) +1 r vi) 9 r '3) tt r vi tt r Traffic Volume (vehlh) r 484 229 172 734 29 255 202 116 21 337 186 Future Volume (veh/ti) 75 434 229 172 734 29 255 202 116 21 337 186 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh!hlln 1737 1767 1737 1841 1811 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 77 494 0 176 749 D 260 206 0 21 344 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 098 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0,98 Percent Heavy Veh, 917 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cap, vehlh 164 1549 259 1834 355 807 41 518 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.45 0.00 0.08 0.47 0.00 0.10 0.23 5.00 0.02 0.15 0.00 tFlow vehfh 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1560 3401 3554 1572 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 77 494 0 176 749 0 260 206 0 21 344 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1685 0 Serve(g_s), s 1.9 7.6 0.0 4.1 11.8 0.0 6.0 3.8 0.0 0.9 7.4 0.0 Cycle Q Ctear(g_c), s 1.9 7.6 0.0 4.1 11.8 0.0 6.0 3.8 0.0 0.9 7.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 164 1509 259 1634 355 807 41 518 WC Retic (X) 0 47 0.33 0.68 0.46 0 73 0.26 0.51 0.66 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 247 1509 440 1634 605 2081 122 1692 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1..00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 37 1 14.3 0.0 36.2 14.2 0.0 24 9 25.5 0.0 38.8 32 5 0,0 Incr Deiay (d2), s/veh 2.1 0.6 0.0 3.1 0.9 0.0 2.9 0.2 0.0 9.2 1.5 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 0.8 2 8 0.0 1 7 4 3 0.0 2 6 1.6 0,0 0 5 3.2 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},siveh 39.2 14.9 0.0 39.3 15.1 0.0 37.8 25.7 0.0 43.1 34.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS D 8 D 8 0 C 0 C Approach Vol, vehlh 571 A 925 A 466 A 365 A Approach Delay, sfveh '18.1 19.7 32.5 34.8 Approach LOS 8 B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ' 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 6.4 22.8 10.6 40.7 12.9 15.2 8.6 42.7 Change Period (Y{Rc), s 4,5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 4,5 Max Green Seting (Gmax), s 5.5 47.1 10,4 34.0 14.3 38.3 6.2 38.2 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 2.9 5.8 6.1 9.6 8.0 9.4 3.9 13.8 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 1,4 0.2 3.3 0,5 2.4 0.0 5.4 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 14.2 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [NBR, EBR, WOR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 pin Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2024 AM W 10/29/2019 Movement BBL EBT EBR 4VBL WRY W8R NQL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBI Lane Configurations IA 114 if )1 9 if 1 4t jY 1 4 Traffic Volume (vph) 112 382 130 57 658 512 153 354 45 385 3513 130 Future Volume (vph) 112 392 130 57 658 512 153 354 45 385 356 130 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0.97 0.95 1,00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 091 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1 00 1,00 0.85 1 00 1,00 0,85 1.00 1,00 0.85 100 0 97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 095 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Fft Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 1.100 1.00 0 95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 115 394 134 59 678 528 158 365 46 397 367 134 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 91 0 0 373 0 0 37 0 21 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 115 394 43 59 678 155 142 381 9 298 579 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl Bikes. ( hr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 13% 109 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 3% 7% 3% 4% 5% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.8 30.5 30.5 4A 28.0 28.0 18.1 18.1 18.1 241 24.7 Effective Green, g (S) 6.6 30.5 30.5 4.1 28.0 28.0 18.1 18.1 18.1 24.7 24.7 Actuated ofC Ratio 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.04 0,29 0.29 0.19 0,19 0.19 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 311 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 214 1049 484 141 999 454 296 635 282 412 821 v/s Ratio Prot x0.04 0.12 0.02 cO.20 0.09 00.11 a0.19 0.18 Os Ratio Perm 0.03 0.10 0.01 vie Ratio 0.54 0.38 0.09 0 42 0.68 0.34 0.48 0.60 0.03 0.72 0.70 Uniform Delay, di 42.9 25.1 22.7 44.5 29.7 26.5 34.5 35.3 31.5 32.2 32.0 Progres ion Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 2.6 1,0 0,4 2.0 3.7 2.0 1 2 15 0.0 6.2 2.8 Delay (s) 45.5 26.1 23.1 46.5 33.4 28.5 355.1 36.9 31.5 38.4 34.8 Level of Service D C C D C C D 0 0 D 0 Approach Decay (s) 29.0 32 0 36 1 36.0 Approach LOS C C 0 0 Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Controi Delay 33.2 KC i 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,66 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 95.4 Intersection Capacity utilization 70 1'.,, Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cr itical Lane Group HCM 2000 Level of Service Sum of lost Line (s) ICU Levet of Service 18.0 0 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2024 AM W 10?2019 tritersection Int Delay, slveh 17 7 Movetneht to_ EBR t BL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations j + + ft Traffic Vol, vehfh 46 51 180 1186 827 32 Future Vol, veh/h 46 51 180 1086 827 32 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Cttannelized - Free - None Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - 700 Veh in Median Storage: # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 Mvrnt Flow 49 55 194 1168 889 34 M orlMinor Minor2 M= +;1 Ma'cor2 Conflicting Fleur Ali Stage 1 Stage 2 Crltiod Hdwy Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 Critical ftdwy+ Sig 2 Follow-up Hein)? Pot Cap -1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked. % 2446 890 1556 6.42 - 412 5.42 5.42 - - 3.518 - 2.218 -34 0 761 401 0 191 0 - 890 Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 25 - 760 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 25 Stage 1 298 Stage 2 191 0 Approach EB NB SB HOW Control Delay, 8$ 789 5 1 6 0 HCM LOS F Mlnor LnneJhflajar 4lunrt NOL NET EBL n 1 FELn2 SBT SER Capacity (vehih) 7611 - 25 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.255 - 1.978 - tfCM Cantel Delay {s} 11 3 -S 789.5 0 HCM Lane LOS B - F A, HCM 95th %tile 0{veh) 1 - 6-1 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delav exceeds 300s -: Comeutation Not Defined • All major volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 2024 AM W 10? (2019 intersection Int Daley, slveh Movement Lane Configurations Traffic Val, vehfh Future Vol, vehlh Conflicting Pads. #Jhr Sign Control RT Channelized 4.5 WOL 1011BR NOT NOR SOL SOT v 9 147 1117 16 77 7 9 147 1117 18 77 798 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stop Stop Free Fraa Free Fraa Stop - Yield - None 0 0 - 0 - - 0 93 93 93 93 93 93 2 2 2 13 5 5 10 158 1201 17 83 658 Storage Length 0 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade. % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvrnt Flaw MajorfMinor Minora Majo 1 Maj Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Fldwy Sig 2 Follow-up Hein)? Pot Cap -1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon btocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 2234 1210 0 0 1201 1210 1024 6.42 622 - 416 5.42 - 5.42 - - - 3.518 3.318 - 2 254 47 223 - 567 282 - - 347 - 40 223 - - 567 40 282 296 Approach WE HOW Control Delay, s 56 8 HCM LOS F NB 0 SB 11 Minor Lane/Major Mvnrt NET °NBl WBLn1WWBLr12 SBL SET Capacity (velalh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCM Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 40 223 567 - 0.242 0.709 0.148 - 121.6 52.8 12.4 - F F B - 0.8 4.6 0.5 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM W 5: Puapuaanui St 10/29/2019 { - t Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SET Lane Configurations r t + Traffic Volume (vehlh) 92 194 957 27 45 757 Future Volume (veh/h) 92 194 957 27 45 767 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No ND Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1970 1870 1856 1870 1870 1826 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 98 4 1018 0 48 816 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 3 2 2 5 Cap, vehlh 126 1403 66 1531 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.04 0.84 Sat Flow, vehfh 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 98 0 1018 0 48 816 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh,4n 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 0 Serve(g_s), s 5.4 0.0 29.4 0.0 2.6 12.9 Cycle Q Clear(c,_o), s 5.4 0.0 29.4 0.0 2.6 12.9 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 CO t 00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vet* 126 1443 66 1531 VPC Retic (X) 0 78 0.73 0.73 0.53 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehfh 324 1403 117 1531 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 0.60 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 45.2 0.0 6.5 0.0 47 2 2.3 Incr Delay (d2), slush 9.9 0.0 3.3 0.0 14.2 1.3 Initial Q Dela+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %le BackOfQ(5O%),vehlln 2.7 0.0 9.9 0 0 1 4 2.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),sfveh 55.1 0.0 9.8 0.0 661.3 3.7 LrGrp LOS E A E A Approach Vol, vehlh 98 A 1018 A 864 Approach Delay, sfveh 55.1 9.8 6.9 Approach LOS E A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 8.2 79.3 87.5 11.5 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 72.0 83.0 18.0 Max C Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 4.6 31.4 14.9 7,4 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 11,4 7.9 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HDIV 5th LOS 10.13 B Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [1,1BR, WBR[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TSC 6: Kuakini Street 2024 AM W 10/29/2019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 11 4 Wtdvetnent. to_ EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations jer Traffic Val, vehfh 7 178 543 856 797 66 Future Vol, veh/h 7 178 543 856 797 66 Conflicting Pads. #hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 70O Veh in Median Storage, # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 Mvrnt Flaw 8 191 584 920 857 71 MSjor/Mlnor Minor.? Majc l Major2 Conflicting Row All 2945 - 857 0 - Stage 1 857 Stage 2 2088 Critiod Hdwy 6.42 - 412 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 0.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 16 0 783 Stage 1 416 0 Stage 2 104 0 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver - 4 - 763 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 4 Stage 1 106 Stage 2 104 Approach EB k9 SB H W Control Delay, 19'98 6 8 5 0 HCM LOS F Minor LaneJhflajar Mvrirt ria P'<ET B'„n 1 FBLn2 SET SBF Capacity (veh/h) 783 • 4 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.746 - 1.882 - HCtv1 Cental Delay {s} 221 6 S 1998.6 0 HCM Lane LOS C - F A, HCM 95th %tile C7{veh) 6.9 - 1.9 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delay exceeds 300s ': Computation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: Lako Street 2024 AM W 10/2912019 4\ t Movement EEL EBT EER WEL WBT WEIR NOL NBT NRR SOL SBI SRR Lane Canfiquratlons ) T 11 I ill t r vi + r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 267 50 73 73 38 284 35 841 58 152 699 135 Future Volume (veh/h) 267 50 73 73 38 284 35 841 58 152 699 135 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1070 1841 1811 1856 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 284 53 0 78 40 D 37 895 0 162 744 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cep,vehlh 316 332 115 122 298 952 218 1002 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.51 0.00 0.06 0.54 0.00 Sat Flaw, vahih 1781 1870 Q 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1586 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 284 53 0 78 44 0 37 895 D 162 744 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1850 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 15.2 2.3 0.0 4.2 2.0 0.0 0.9 43.9 0.0 4.3 30.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(c,_c), s 15.2 2.3 0.0 4.2 2.0 0.0 0.9 43,9 0.0 4.3 30.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1 00 0.00 1 00 0,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vel* 315 332 115 122 298 952 218 1002 WC Relic (X) 0 90 0.16 0.68 0.33 012 0.94 0 74 0.74 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 329 346 326 345 331 962 222 1002 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 10[} 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 39.2 33.9 0.0 44.5 43 5 0.0 14 4 22 6 0.0 21.9 17 2 0 0 Inor Deiey (d2), s/veh 25.3 0.2 0.0 6 7 1.5 0.0 0.2 17.9 0.0 12.3 5.0 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),slveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 8 8 1.1 0.0 2 0 10 0.0 0 4 22.6 0,0 2 5 13.3 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 64.5 34.1 0.0 51 3 45,1 0.0 14.6 40.4 0.0 34.2 222 0.0 LnGrp LOS E C D D 0 0 0 0 Approach Vol, vehih 337 A 118 A 932 A 906 Approach Delay, sfveh 59.7 49.2 39.4 24.3 Approach LOS E D D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 10.7 54.1 21.8 71 57.1 10.9 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.4 49.6 18.0 5.0 51.0 16.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 6.3 45.9 17.2 2.9 32.0 6.2 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 2.1 0.1 0.0 5.3 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 36.9 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and interseetton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si nalized Intersection Summery 2024 AM W 8. Kame lameha 111 Road & Queen Keahumanu F vv)' 1012912019 Movement EEL EBT EER V L WEIT WEIR NEL NBA' NBR Sal SBT SBR Lane Canfiquratlons 4 r 4 'I I 'I I'T. Traffic Volume (vehlh) 167 5 27 17 13 16 80 505 16 15 449 307 Future Volume (vehTh) 167 5 27 17 13 15 80 505 16 15 44 307 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1722 1781 1781 1781 1752 1811 1811 1870 1811 1811 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 180 5 0 18 14 17 86 543 17 16 483 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, 917 2 2 12 8 8 8 10 6 6 2 6 6 Cap, vehlh 243 7 27 21 25 168 922 29 34 1661 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.53 0.53 0.02 0.48 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1735 46 1459 595 462 561 1668 1745 55 1781 3532 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 185 0 0 49 0 0 86 0 560 16 483 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1784 0 1459 1618 0 0 1668 0 1800 1781 1721 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.7 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 14.3 0.6 5.7 0.0 Cycle Q Cl r(c,_o), s 6.7 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 6.0 3.4 0,0 14.3 0.6 5.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 97 1 00 0 37 0.35 1.00 0.03 100 0 00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 250 0 72 0 0 108 0 951 34 1661 WC Relic (X) 0 74 0.00 0.68 0 00 600 0 79 0.00 0.59 0 47 0.29 Avail Cep(ow,a), vehfh 688 0 614 0 0 226 0 951 135 1661 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Falter(I) 1 00 000 0.00 1 00 0.60 0.00 1,00 0.00 1,06 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 27 7 0.0 0.0 31.6 0.0 0.0 31.0 0.0 10.8 32.6 10 5 0.0 In Delay (d2), slveh 4.3 0.0 0.0 10.6 0.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 2.7 9.5 0.4 0.0 Initial 0 Dela+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0,0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 3 0 0.0 0,0 1 0 0.0 0.0 1 6 0 0 5,0 0.3 1 8 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 32.0 0.0 0.0 42 2 0.0 0.0 43 1 0.0 13.5 42.2 10.9 0.0 LnGrp LOS 0 A D A A D A 5 D B Approach Vol, vehfh 185 A 49 646 499 A Approach Delay, sfveh 32.0 42.2 17.5 11.9 Approach LOS C D B B Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting 6 ax) s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Time (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 2 3 4 6 7 8 13.9 8.9 36.9 7.5 5.8 40.0 4.5 4.5 45 45 45 4.5 25.9 9.1 31.5 25,5 5.1 35.5 8,7 5.4 7.7 4.6 2.6 163 0.9 0.0 2.9 0.2 0.0 3.2 Fl CM 8th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 18.3 9 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 HCM 6th TWSC 9: Kona VLsta Roadway 2024 AM W 10?2019 intersection Int Delays, slveh Movement 2 WB L Lane Configurations Traffic Val, vehfh Future Vol, veh/ti Conflicting Pads. #Jhr Sign Control RT Cttanneiized 29 29 0 Stop Storage Length 0 Veh in Median Storage. # 0 Grade. % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvrnt Flaw WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT r + r 61 849 14 13 846 81 849 14 13 846 0 0 0 0 0 Slap Free Free Free Free Yield - Yield - None 0 585 695 - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 92 92 92 92 92 92 2 2 2 2 2 2 32 66 923 15 14 920 Major/Minor Whorl Ma r1 Majrsr2 Conflicting Flew All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdi y Stg 1 Critical Ftdwy Sig 2 Follow-up Hein)? Pot Cap -1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 1871 923 948 6.42 5.42 5.42 3.518 79 387 377 923 0 0 923 622 - 4.12 3.318 - - 2.218 327 - 740 77 327 - - 740 77 - 387 370 - Approach WB NB SB HOW Control Delay, s 38 8 0 HCM LOS F Minor LnneJhflajar 'vlunrt Capacity (vehih) HCM Lane WC Ratio FfCtul Cdnlrol Delay {s} HCM Lane LDS F1CW 95th %tile € {veh) 02 NBT NBROBLnileiBlra SBL - 77 327 740 - 0.409 0.203 0.019 - 81 18.8 10 - FC t6 0.7 0.1 ser 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 14 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM W 1: Valent Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 1110112019 *-- t Movement EEL EBT EBR WEL WV WER NIL NBT NER 591x. SBrt SB0 Lane Configurations )11 ++ r vi) r tt j 1 tt r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 273 941 525 235 654 48 239 297 265 55 329 112 Future Volume (vehfh) 273 941 529 235 654 48 235 297 265 55 329 112 Initial Q (Qb), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1 04 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No Na No Na Adj Sat Flow, vehlhlln 1856 1856 1870 1870 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 279 960 0 240 667 0 244 303 0 56 336 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 098 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, vehlh 369 1552 326 1493 330 715 78 530 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.44 0.00 0.09 0.43 0.00 010 0.20 0.00 0.04 0.15 0.00 Set Flow, vahlh 3428 3526 1585 3455 3497 1585 3428 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 279 960 0 240 667 0 244 303 0 56 336 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhlln 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.5 17.1 0.0 5.5 11.0 0.0 5.7 6.1 0.0 2.5 7.3 0.0 Cycle Q Cl er(c,_c), s 6.5 17.1 0.0 5.5 11.0 0.0 5.7 6,1 0.0 2 5 7.3 0.13 Prop In Lane 100 1 O0 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 369 1552. 326 1493 330 715 78 530 WC Ratio(X) 0 76 0.62 0.74 0.45 0 74 0.42 0.71 0.63 Avail 0ap(cw,al, vehlh 524 1552 444 1493 440 1808 194 1738 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1 00 100 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 35 4 17.6 0.0 36.0 16 6 0.0 36.0 28 5 0.0 38.6 32 7 0 0 lncr Delay (d2), slush 3.9 1.9 0.0 4.2 1.0 0.0 4.5 0.4 0.0 11.4 1.3 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 9 Ie BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 2.8 6 7 0.0 2 4 4.3 0.0 2 5 2.6 0,0 1.3 3.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s&veh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 39.3 19.5 0.0 40.2 17.6 0.0 40.5 28 9 0.0 50.0 34 0 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B 0 0 D C Approach Vol, vehlh 1239 A 907 A 547 A 392 A Approach Delay, shah 23.9 23.6 34.1 36.2 Approach LOS 0 0 0 D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 8.1 21.0 12.2 40.5 12.4 16.7 13.3 39.4 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.9 41.6 10.5 36.0 10.5 40.0 12.5 34.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 4.5 8.1 7.5 19.1 7.7 9.3 8 5 13.0 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 2.1 0.2 6.2 0.2 2.3 0 4 4.4 Intersection Summary HGM 61h Ctrl Delay HCM 5th LOS 27.2 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and interseetton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 2024 PM W 1110112019 4 41 Movement FBI_ BBT EBR INK VAT WBR NBL NBT NBR SRL SST SBP Lane Configurations Vi ft if 14 if vi 414 fir ii 41 Traffic Volume (vph) 200 722 306 79 596 341 132 334 37 379 359 200 Future Volume (vph) 200 722 306 79 596 341 132 334 37 379 359 200 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0.97 0.95 1,00 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 091 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.96 1.00 0.99 Flpb, pedfbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 1,00 0.85 1 00 1,00 0,85 1.00 1,00 0.85 100 0 95 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 3193 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 3193 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.96 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 204 737 312 81 608 348 135 341 38 387 366 204 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 209 0 0 249 0 0 31 0 44 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 204 737 103 81 608 99 121 355 7 321 592 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 1 1 4 7 7 4 Confl Bikes. ( hr) 1 1 1 Heavy Vehicles (95) 5% 2% 2% 2% 4% 2.% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 5 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.6 32.2 322 3.9 27.5 27.5 17.4 17.4 117.4 25.6 25.6 Effective Green, g (8) 8.6 32.2 32.2 3.9 27.5 27.5 17.4 17.4 17.4 25.6 25.6 Actuated c/C Ratio 0.09 0.33 0,33 0,04 0,28 0.28 0.18 0,18 0.15 0.26 026 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 295 1173 524 137 983 442 285 606 275 424 841 vls Ratio Prot x0.06 c0.21 0.02 0.18 0.08 00.10 c0.20 0.19 Os Ratio Perm 0.07 0.06 0.00 vic Ratio 0.69 0.63 0,20 0.59 0.62 0.22 0.42 0.59 0,02 0.76 0.70 Uniform Delay, di 43.0 27.4 23.2 45.8 30.2 26.5 35.4 36.5 32.9 32.9 32.3 Prrxt„resron Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 6 8 2.6 0.8 6 7 2.9 1,2 1 0 15 0,0 7.5 2.7 Delay (s) 49.8 30.0 24.1 52.5 33.2 27.8 38.4 38.0 32.9 40.4 35.0 Level of Service ❑ C C D C C D 0 C t7 0 Approach Decay (s) 31.7 32.9 37 2 36.8 Approach LOS C 0 0 D Intersection ammo HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service 0 HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,69 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 97.1 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 74.3"°. 1CL! Leve! of Service 0 Analysis Period (min) 15 c Ci itical Lane Group 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2024 PM W 1110112019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 1 3 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations j r + } Traffic Vnl, vehfh 11 77 91 1004 1096 18 Future Vol, vehlh 11 77 91 1004 1095 18 Conflicting Pads. #Jhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Free Free RT Cttanneiized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 4 2 6 Mvrnt Flow 11 79 94 1035 1130 19 Maj rIMlnot Minor2 Maier! Major2 Conflicting Flew All 2353 - 1130 0 Stage 1 1130 - Stage 2 1223 Critioai Hdwy 5.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical 5tdwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 39 0 618 Stage 1 308 0 Stage 2 278 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 33 - 618 Mery Cap -2 Maneuver 33 Stage 1 261 Stage 2 278 Approach EB NB SB HOW Control Delay_ , s 163 1 1 0 HCM LOS F Minor Lair-ie./14;K Munrt NBL IRT EBL 1 FBLn2 38T SRR Capacity (vetalh) 618 - 33 - HCM Lane WC Ratio 0.152 - 0.344 - HCW1 Control Delay {s} 119 - 153.1 0 HCM Lane LDS 8 - F A, FHCW 95th %file € {veh) 0.5 1.1 - 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 2024 PM W 4: Hualalai Rd (South) 1110112019 Intersection Int Delay, slveh 7 2 Movement WOL. WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Larne Configurations 11 if i iri it Traffic Vol. vehfh 15 76 1025 4 64 1110 Future Vol, veh/h 15 75 1025 4 64 1110 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Frau Free Frea RT Channelized - Stop - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 0 7 Mvrnt Flow 15 77 1057 4 66 1144 M&jorIMlriolr Minora mom Mkr2 Conflicting Row All 2335 1059 0 0 1057 Stage 1 1059 Stage 2 1276 Critical Hdwy 6.47 6,22 - - 4.18 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.47 Critical 5tdwy Sig 2 5.87 - - - - Follow-up Hein)? 3.563 3.318 - - 2.272 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 39 273 - 636 Stage 1 326 Stage 2 256 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 35 273 - - 635 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 35 Stage 1 326 Stage 2 229 Approach WB NB SB HOW Control Delay, s 48 2 HCM LOS F a 05 MinorrLottelrvlajar'vlunrt NIT NNBRWSLn1WOLn2 SBL SEit Capacity (vehih) HCM Lane WC Ratio IfCfu1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICW 951h %tile € {veh) - 35 273 630 - 0.442 0.283 0.104 - 172.6 23.3 11 3 - F C B t5 1.1 0.3 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM W 5: Puapuaanui St 1110112019 t Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR S$L S87 Lane Ccnliquratlons vir t r 1 + Traffic Volume (vehlh) 38 112 904 52 139 995 Future Volume (vehfh) 38 112 904 52 139 995 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1826 1856 1841 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 39 0 932 0 143 1025 Peak Hour Factor 0_97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent He vy Veh, % 2 5 3 4 2 2 Cap, vehlh 60 1347 176 1630 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.10 0.97 Sat Flow, veh)h 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 39 0 932 0 143 1025 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhiln 1781 1547 1855 1560 1781 1870 0 Serve(g_s), s 2.1 0.0 26.4 0.0 7.5 14.9 Cycle Q Cl ar(c,_c), s 2.1 0.0 26.4 0.0 7.5 14.8 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 CO 1,00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 60 1347 176 1630 VPC Ratin(X) 0 65 0.69 0.81 0.63 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 337 1347 253 1630 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 000 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 45 4 0.0 7,2 0.0 42.1 1.7 Incr Deiay (d2), slush 11.1 0.0 2.9 0.0 12.5 1.9 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %le BackOt (50%),vehlln 1.1 0.0 9.3 0 0 3.9 2.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Dulay(d),slveh 56.5 0.0 10.1 0.0 54 5 3.6 LnGrp LOS E B D A Approach Vol, vehlh 39 A 932 A 1169 Approach Delay, sfveh 56.5 10.1 9.8 Approach LOS E B A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G-- -Ro), s 13.9 73.6 87.5 7.7 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 115 65.0 83.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.5 28.4 16.8 4.1 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.1 9.4 12.5 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 10.13 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [1,IBR, WBR[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2024 PM W 1110112019 intersection Int Delay, shah 3 7 Movetnent EBL EBR NEL l' . SET SBR Larne Configurations 11 + i( Traffic Val, vehfh 14 391 255 939 944 38 Future Vol, veh/h 14 391 256 939 944 38 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Central Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 2 2 3 2 6 Mvrnt Flaw 14 399 260 958 963 39 MlorIMlnor Minar2 Major! Major2 . . Conflicting Row Ali 2441 963 0 - 0 Stage 1 963 Stage 2 1478 Critical Hdwy 6.48 - 4 12 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.48 Critical Fldwy Sig 2 5.48 - Follow-up Hdw-y 3 572 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 33 0 715 Stage 1 361 0 Stage 2 203 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 21 - 715 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 21 Stage 1 230 Stage 2 203 Approach EB k9 SB H CW Control Delay 8$ 344 6 2 8 0 HCM LOS F Minor LnneJfvlajar Mvnr1 NEL 1tST EOI..n 1 SSLn2 SET SER Capacity (veh/h) 715 • 21 . HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.364 - 0.68 11CM Control Delay {s} 12.9 -S 344 6 HCM Lane LDS B F A HCM 95th %tile Civet') 1.7 1.9 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delay exceeds 30Os ': Computation Not Defined All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: l_ako Street 2024 PM W 1110112019 1 t oft Jr Movement EBL BBT EER W$L WWI' WeR N6L NBA' NBR $BI: SST 56R Lane Configurations ) T4 I I at rf 1 + r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 138 32 50 65 41 210 39 821 67 192 930 181 Future Volume (vehTh) 138 32 50 65 41 210 39 821 67 192 930 161 Initial Q (Qb), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Dike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.07 1.00 1.70 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1,0D 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, velalhlln 1841 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1856 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 144 33 0 68 43 D 41 855 0 200 969 8 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 13.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Cap, vehlh 185 198 105 108 234 1032 322 1105 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.56 0.00 0.07 0.59 0.00 Set Flow, vehlh 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 144 33 0 68 43 0 41 855 0 200 909 D Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlh3ln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.9 1.4 0.0 3.2 2.0 0.0 0.8 32.8 0.0 4.0 38.0 0.0 Cycle Q Ctear(g c), s 6.9 1.4 0.0 3 2 2.0 0.0 0.8 32.8 0.0 4.0 38.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0.00 100 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 185 198 105 108 234 1032 322 1105 WC Ratin(X) 078 0.17 0.65 0.40 018 0.83 0.62 0.88 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehlh 365 390 371 381 272 1032 366 1105 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 100 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 37 6 35.2 0.0 39.7 39.1 0.0 15.0 15 8 0.0 15.9 15.0 0.0 In Delay (d2), s/veh 6.9 0.4 0.0 5.5 2.4 0.0 0.4 7.7 0.0 2.6 9.9 0.0 Initial 0 Dela+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °!idle Back0t0(50%),vehlln 3.3 0.6 0.0 1 6 0 9 0.0 0 3 14,5 0.0 21 17 0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Dalay(d),slveh 44.5 35.5 0.0 46.2 41.5 0.0 15.3 23.5 0.0 18,5 24.9 0.0 LnGrp LOS D D D D B 0 B C Approach Vol, vehlh 177 A 111 A 895 A 1169 A Approach Delay, slveh 42.8 44.4 23.1 23.8 Approach LOS D D 0 0 Turner - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 S Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 10.6 52.5 13.6 7.6 55.5 9.6 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s B.3 47.7 18.0 5.0 51.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 6.0 34.8 8.9 2.8 40.0 52 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.1 5,3 0.3 0.0 5.6 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 15.9 Notes linsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM W 8. Kamehameha 111 Road & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 11101(2019 t 4 41 Movement EBL EBT EBR WEL VAT WEIR NEL NBA' NBR SBA. SBT SBO Lane Configurations 4 if 4., 11 I+ 11 +I Traffic Volume (vehlh) 315 12 55 7 12 20 67 538 12 18 542 301 Future Volume (vehfh) 315 12 55 7 12 20 67 538 12 18 542 301 Initial Q (01b), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.010 1.Q0 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No Na Adj Sat Flow, veh!hlln 1767 1767 1811 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 332 13 0 7 13 21 71 566 13 19 571 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.966 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, 91) 9 9 6 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cep,vehlh 389 15 11 20 33 91 842 19 39 1551 Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.47 0.47 0.02 0.44 0.00 Sat Flow, vehlh 1622 64 1535 290 539 870 1767 1807 41 1781 3647 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 345 0 0 41 0 0 71 0 579 19 571 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1686 0 1535 1699 0 0 1767 0 1848 1781 1111 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 15.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 18.7 0.8 8.3 0.0 Cycle Q Cl r(g_0), s 15.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 3.0 0,0 18,7 0.8 8.3 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 96 1.00 0 17 0.51 1.00 0.02 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 404 0 65 0 0 91 0 862 39 1551 WC Ratin(X) 0 85 0.00 0.64 0 00 0.00 0 78 0.00 0.67 0.49 0.37 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehlh 569 0 564 0 0 163 0 862 116 1551 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.04 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 27 9 0.0 0.0 364 0.0 0.0 36,0 0.0 15.9 37 1 14 5 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), slush 8.8 0.0 0.0 9 9 0.0 0.0 13.4 0.0 4.2 9.3 0.7 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 6.8 0.0 0,0 0 9 0.0 0.0 1 6 0,0 7..6 0,4 3.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 3&7 0.0 0.0 46 3 0,0 0.0 49.3 0.0 20.1 46.5 15.2 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A. D A A D A C D B Approach Vol, vehlh 345 A 41 650 590 A Approach Delay, slveh 36.7 4i.3 23.3 16.2 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 6 Phs Duration (G+y+Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max o Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), 5 Intersection Summary 22.9 8.5 38.0 7.4 6.2 40.3 4.5 4,5 45 4,5 45 45 25.9 7.1 33.5 25.5 5.1 35.5 17.0 5.0 10.3 3.0 2.8 20.7 1,4 0.0 3.5 0.1 0.0 3.0 Fl CM 61h Ctrl Delay HCM 5th LOS 241 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 HCM 6th TWSC 9: Kona VLsta Roadway 2024 PM W 1110112019 lritersection Int Delay, slveh 1 2 Movement ViBL Larne Configurations Traffic Vol, vehfh 12 Future Vol, veh/h 12 Conflicting Pads. #Jhr 0 Sign Control Stop RT Cttanneiized - Storage Length 0 Veh in Median Sierage, # 0 Grade. % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvrnt Flaw 0 92 2 13 WEIR r 39 39 0 Slap Yield 0 92 2 42 NBT NBR SBL SBT r 912 41 45 988 912 41 45 988 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free Yield - None 585 695 - 0 - - 0 92 92 92 92 2 2 2 2 991 45 49 1074 M&jorIMInot Minor/ Ma r1 Conflicting Flow All 2163 991 0 Stage 1 991 Stage 2 1172 - Critical Hdwy 6.42 622 Critical Hdi y Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Fldwy Sig 2 5.42 - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 33 318 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 52 299 Stage 1 359 Stage 2 294 - Platoon blocked. % MovCap-1 Maneuver 48 299 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 48 Stage 1 359 Stage 2 273 Maj r2 0 991 - 4.12 - 2 218 - 695 - 695 Approach WB NB SB HOW Control Delay, s 39 4 HCM LOS F a 0.5 Minor Lane/Major 'vlunrt NBT °NE WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SET Capacity (vetalh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCM Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 48 299 698 - 0.272 0.142 0.07 - 105.9 19 10.5 - F C B - 0.9 4.5 02 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 14 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Class Speed Time Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS III vi 94.3c. .6 ' 0.l9 28.3 n Arterial Level of Service 2024AMW 04,+28f2020 Arterial Level of Service, NB Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Gress Sonet Class Speed Time Delayv Time (a) (Ail Speed LOS Lako Street 111 30 41.2 75.9 117.1 0.32 10.0 F Puapuaanui St III 30 1071i 15.5 123.1 0.90 26.2 8 Total 111 148.8 91.4 240.2 122 18.3 C Arterial Level of Service: SB Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Cross Street Prison JAAtu L8kc' Street 111 30 107.6 31.9 13$ 5 0 90 23.1 v Tatai 111 2019 37.5 239,4 1,55 25.3 B 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 1 Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Class Speed Time Delay Time (a) (mi) Speed LOS III 30 04.3 5.9 900.2 0. 9 28.2 B Arterial Level of Service 2024 PM W 04128/2020 Arterial Level of Service: NB Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Arterial: F%w Running: Signal Travel 'Dist; Arteinal Arkial Cross Sheet Ctrs Sp r1 Time' Datey. Time (s) . _� �rfli) .S ed LO Lako Street 111 30 41.2 46.5 87.7 0.32 13.3 E Puapuaanui St 111 30 107.6 17.1 124.7 0.90 25.9 B Total 111 148.8 63.6 212.4 122 201 C Arterial Level cf Service: SB Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Cross Street Paj n !LRAM11 Lala Street 111 30 107.6 38.1 1215 7 0 90 22.1 Taal 111 201 9 44.0 245,g 1.68 24.8 B 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 1 Appendix F Analysis Reports — Future Without Project Conditions (2029) HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2029 AM WO 10128/2019 t Movement BBL EBT Feta VL VORT ArBR NEJL NBT N8R SOL SBT SBR Lane Canfiqurataons VI ,t+ r vi) 9 r vs) tik j i `"' ` r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 78 505 241 180 749 25 268 212 120 22 355 196 Future Volume (veh1h) 78 505 241 180 749 25 268 212 120 22 355 196 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh!hlln 1737 1767 1737 1841 1811 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1070 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 80 515 0 184 764 D 273 216 0 22 382 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0,98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cap, vehlh 165 1481 267 1612 367 836 43 538 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.44 0.00 0.08 0.47 000 0.11 0.24 0.00 0.02 0.15 0.00 Sat Flow, vahih 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1580 3401 3554 1572 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 80 515 0 184 764 0 273 216 0 22 362 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhiln 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1685 0 Serve(g_s), s 2.0 8.3 0.0 4.3 12.4 0.0 6.3 4.0 0.0 1.0 7.8 0.0 Cycle Q 01tear(gA, s 2.0 8.3 0.0 4.3 12,4 0.0 6.3 4.0 0141 1.0 7.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 165 1481 267 1612 367 836 43 538 WC Ratin(X) 0 49 0.35 0.69 0.47 0 74 0.26 0.51 0.67 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 244 1481 434 1612 597 2053 120 1669 HCl P atooi' Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 100 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 37 6 15.0 0.0 36.6 14.8 0.0 35.3 25.4 0.0 39.3 32 7 0 0 Incl. Delay (d2), s/veh 2.2 0.6 0.0 3.2 1.0 0.0 3.0 0.2 0.0 9.2 1.5 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0,0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 0.8 3.0 0.0 1 8 4.6 0.0 2.7 1.7 0.0 0.5 3.4 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh 39 8 15.7 0.0 39.8 15,8 0.0 38.3 25.5 0.0 48,5 34.2 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B 0 C D C Approach Vol, vehlh 595 A 948 A 489 A 384 A Approach Delay, sfveh 18.9 20.5 32.6 35.0 Approach LOS B C C 0 Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+'#Ro), s 6.5 23.7 10.9 40.5 13.3 16.8 8.7 42.7 Change Period (Y{Rc), s 4 5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4 5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 47.1 10.4 34.0 14.3 38.3 6.2 38.2 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 6.0 6.3 10.3 8.3 9.8 4.0 14.4 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0 0 1,5 0.2 3.4 0,5 25 0.0 5.4 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 14.9 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 2029 AM WO 10(2872019 t \ Movement EBL EBT EBR VL WW1 WBR NBL NBT N8R selL sB T SBR Lane Configurations Vi ff if 1i ft. r ) 414 jf 'I 410 Traffic Volume (vph) 118 397 137 57 633 516 161 372 46 400 374 137 Future Volume (vph) 118 397 137 57 633 515 181 372 46 400 374 137 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Ut 1. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0 97 0.95 1,00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 091 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1 00 1,00 0 85 1 00 1,00 0,85 1.00 1.00 0.85 100 0 97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 095 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1545 1564 3347 1487 1595 3174 Fft Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 1.170 1.00 0 95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 t564 3347 1487 1595 3174 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 122 409 141 59 653 532 166 384 47 412 386 141 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 97 0 0 379 0 0 3B 0 22 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 122 409 44 59 653 153 149 401 9 313 604 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl Bikes ( trhr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 13% 13% 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 3% 7% 3% 4% 5% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 B 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 6 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.5 30.4 30.4 4.i 27.9 27.9 18.9 18.9 18.9 25.,5 25.5 Effective Green, g (s) 6.6 30.4 30.4 4.1 27.9 27.9 18.9 18.9 18.9 25.5 25.5 Actuated gTC Ratio 0.07 0,31 0.31 0.04 029 0.29 0,20 0,20 0.20 0.26 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 211 1029 475 139 980 445 305 652 290 419 835 Os Ratio Prot x0.04 0.12 0.02 cO.19 0.10 00.12 c0.20 0.19 vIs Ratio Perm. 0.03 0.10 0.01 yip Ratio 0.58 0.40 0.09 0 42 0.67 0.34 0.49 0.62 0,03 0.75 0 72 Uniform Delay, di 43.8 26.1 23.5 45.2 30.4 27.3 34.7 35.7 31.6 32.7 32.5 Prrxt„resron Factor 1 00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 3 8 T 1 0,4 21 3,6 2.1 1.2 1.7 0.0 71 3 1 Delay (s) 47.6 27.2 23.9 47.3 34.0 29.4 35.9 37.4 31.6 39.9 35.6 Level of Service D C r D C C D D C D D Approach Decay (s) 30.2 32.6 36.6 37.0 Approach LOS C 0 ID ID Intersection Surnmary HCM 2000 Control Delay 34,0 HCM 2000 Level of Service 0 HMO 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,£7 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 96.9 Sum of lost time (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 71.2% ICU Leve! of Service 0 Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cr itical Lane Group 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2029 AM WO 10/2812019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 20 8 Movetnent teL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations j er + + r Traffic Vol, v&afh 49 53 181 1088 857 33 Future Vol, veh/h 49 53 181 1088 857 33 Conflicting Peds, #Jhr 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - 70O Veh in Median Storage. # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 Mvrnt Flow 53 57 195 1170 922 35 MajorlMincr Minor2 mom Majtlr2 Conflicting ROW All 7483 - 923 0 - Strage 1 923 - Stage 2 1550 Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 412 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver -33 0 740 Stage 1 387 0 Stage 2 190 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver - 24 - 739 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 24 Stage 1 284 Stage 2 190 Approach EB 1+k9 SB HOW Control Delay, s$ 393 5 1 7 0 HCM LOS F Minor LnnelMajar 4tunrt NBL NET EOL n 1 FSLn2 SET SRR Capacity (veh/h) 739 - 24 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.263 - 2.195 - l�Cfu1 Conti1 Delay {s} 116 -$ 893.5 0 HCM Lane LOS B - F A, HCM 95th %tile C {veh) 1.1 - 6.6 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delav exceeds 300s +: Comeutation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 2029 AM WO 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 10/2812019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 5 1 Wtovetnent 11'1 L WBR NET NBR SBL SOT Lane Configurations j r Traffic Vol, vehfh 10 155 1111 17 81 825 Future Vol, vehJh 10 155 1111 17 81 826 Conflicting Peds, #s hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Fraa Free Free RT Ctaannelized Stop - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 0 — Veh in Median Storage, # Q 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 13 5 5 Mvrnt Flow 11 167 1195 18 87 688 MajorIMlnor WW1_ Major1 Ma cor 2 Conflicting Flow All 2266 1204 0 0 1195 Stage 1 1204 - Stage 2 1062 - - Critiod Hdvuy 6.42 622 - 4.16 Critical Hduuy Stg 1 5.42 Critical 5tdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - — Follow-up Hdlivy 3.518 3 318 - 2.254 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 45 224 - 570 Stage 1 284 — Stage 2 332 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 38 224 - 570 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 38 Stage 1 284 Stage 2 281 Approach WB 146 SB HC1'u1 Control Delay s 61 4 L 1 1 HCM LOS F MinorrLnneJhflajar'vlunrt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SET Capacity (ve#alh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCW1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS HCW 95th %tile € {veh) - 38 224 570 - 0.283 0.744 0.153 - 133.6 56.7 12.5 - F F B - 0.9 5-1 0.5 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 6 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2029 AM WO 5: Puapueanui St 1012812019 { f ,� Movement WEIL WEIR Nei' t~t8R SRL SITT Lane Ccnfiquratlons 'Pi r t ri i t Traffic Volume (vehlh) 95 204 942 27 47 793 Future Volume (vehfh) 95 204 942 27 47 793 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1825 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 102 0 1002 0 50 844 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 2 2 3 2 2 5 Cap, vehlh 131 1397 67 1527 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.04 0.84 Sat Flow, vahfh 1781 1585 1858 1585 1781 1825 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 102 0 1002 0 50 844 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh In 1781 15855 1856 1585 1781 1826 0 Serve(g_s), s 5.6 0.0 28.8 0.0 2.8 14.0 Cycle Q Cl ar(c,_c), s 5.6 0.0 28.8 0.0 2.8 14.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 131 1397 67 1527 VPC Retic (X) 0 78 0.72 0.74 0.55 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 323 1397 117 1527 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 45.2 0.0 6.6 0.0 47.3 2.5 Incr Delay (d2), slush 9.7 0.0 3.2 0.0 15.0 1.4 Initial Q bale+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 2.8 0.0 9.8 0 0 1.5 3.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Dulay(d),slveh 54 9 0.0 9 6 0 0 62.3 3.9 LnGrp LOS D !s E A Approach Vol, vehlh 102 A 1002 A 894 Approach Delay, sfveh 54.9 9.8 7.2 Approach LOS 0 A A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G-- -Ro), s 8.2 79.3 87.5 11.8 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.5 72.0 83.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 4.8 30.8 15.0 i'.6 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 11,1 8.4 0.2 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 5th LOS 10.9 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [NBR, WBR[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2029 AM WO 10t2812019 iriterseclinn Int Delay, slveh 16 1 Movement. 1=131.. EBR NBL NBT SST SBR Larne Configurations vt r ' + + i( Traffic Vol, v<ehfh 8 187 571 885 810 67 Future Vol, vehlh 8 187 571 885 810 67 Conflicting Peds, #hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Fraa Free Free RT Cttanneiized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # Q 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 7 Mvrnt Flow 9 201 614 952 871 72 MiI r/ 11r1'ot Mft ort Mori Maielr2 Conflicting Flow All 3051 - 871 0 Stage 1 871 Stage 2 2180 Critioat Hdwy 5.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdiuy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Fldipo Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 14 0 774 Stage 1 410 0 Stage 2 93 0 - Platoon blocked. % MMv Cap -1 Maneuver - 3 - 774 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 3 Stage 1 85 Stage 2 93 Approach EB NB SS HOW Control Delay 62938 5 9 8 Ci HCM LOS F MInot LnneJhflajar Munn N L NBT EOL n 1 FFSLn2 SOT SRR Capacity (ve#rlh) 774 - 3 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.793 - 2.867 l�Cfu1 Control Delay {s} 25 S 2938.5 0 HCM Lane LOS C - F A, HCM 95th %tile C7{veh) 8.2 - 2.2 - Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Dela/ exceeds 30Os -: Computation Not Defined All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: l_ako Street 2029 AM WO 'C'/28f2019 1 t 1, 41 Movement ESL EBT EER W$L WBT WEIR NOL NST NBR $RL SBT 39R Lane Canfiquratlons ) T kj 1 11 4' r yi + rr Traffic Volume (vehlh) 277 53 76 76 40 295 36 875 61 156 715 136 Future Volume (vehTh) 277 53 76 76 40 295 36 875 61 t56 7,5 136 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 1811 1656 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 295 56 0 81 43 D 38 931 0 166 761 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cep,vehlh 325 341 119 126 281 941 191 993 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.50 0.00 0.06 0.53 0.00 Sat Flow, vah)h 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 295 56 0 81 43 0 38 931 0 166 761 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhiln 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 16.0 2.5 0.0 4.4 2.2 0.0 1.0 48.6 0.0 4.8 31.9 0.0 Cycle Q CIear(c,_c), s 16.0 2.5 0.0 4.4 2.2 0.0 1.0 48.6 CO 4.8 31.9 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0.00 1 CO 0.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 325 341 119 126 281 941 191 9133 VPC Retic (X) 0 91 0.18 0 68 0.34 01 1 0.59 0 87 0 77 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 325 341 323 341 313 941 191 993 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 39.5 34.0 0.0 45.0 43.9 0.0 15.3 24 3 0.0 24.3 18.1 0.0 Ince Delay (d2), slush 27.8 0.2 0.0 6.7 1.6 0.0 0_2 27.0 0.0 32.3 5.7 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le BackO#Q(50%),veMn 9.4 1,1 0.0 21 1.1 0.0 0 4 27.0 0.0 3 6 14 3 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, &eh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh 67 3 34.2 0.00 51 7 45.5 0.0 15.5 513 0.0 56.6 23.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS E C D D 13 0 E C Approach Vol, vehlh 351 A 124 A 969 A 927 A Approach Delay, sfveh 62.0 49.5 49.9 29.6 Approach LOS E D D 0 Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 10.9 54.1 22.5 7.7 57.3 11.1 Change Period (Y{Re), s 4,5 4,5 4 5 4.5 4,5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.4 49.6 18.0 5.0 51.0 16.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 6.8 50.6 18.0 3.0 33.9 6.4 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 5.2 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 417 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and interseetton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si nelized Intersection Summary 2029 AM WO 8. Kameliameha 111 Road & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 10/2812019 20'-r t to. I .1 Movement BBL EBT EBR MI_ War W6 Nal_ klBT INBR SilL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 if 4 ) I. vi ft+ Traffic Volume (vehlh) 173 6 29 18 13 17 84 525 17 15 461 315 Future Volume (vehlh) 173 6 29 18 13 17 84 525 17 15 461 315 Initial Q (Qb), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 t00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1722 1781 1781 1781 1752 1811 1811 1870 1811 1811 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 185 5 0 19 14 18 90 565 18 16 496 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 12 8 8 8 10 6 6 2 6 6 Cap,vehlh 249 8 27 20 26 114 915 29 34 1638 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.52 0.52 0.02 0 48 0.00 Set Flow, vehfh 1728 56 1459 602 444 570 1668 1744 56 1781 3532 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 192 0 0 51 0 0 90 0 583 16 496 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh In 1784 0 1459 1016 0 0 1668 0 1800 1781 1721 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 7.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 15.4 0.6 6.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_0), s 7 0 0.0 0.0 2.1 0,0 0.0 3.6 0.0 15.4 0.6 6.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 97 1.00 0 37 0.35 1.00 0.03 1 00 0 00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 258 0 74 0 0 114 0 944 34 1638 WC Retic (X) 0 75 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.00 0 79 0.00 0.62 0 47 0.30 Avail Cep(cw,al, vehfh 683 0 609 0 0 224 0 944 134 1638 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.010 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.011 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1 00 000 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.0) Uniform Delay (d). slveh 27 7 0.0 0.0 31.8 0.0 0.0 31 1 0.0 11.3 32.8 1019 0.0 In Deiay (d2), s/veh 4.3 0.0 0.0 11.0 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 3.0 9.6 0.5 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 3 1 0.0 0,0 1 0 0.0 0.0 1 7 0 0 5.4 0.3 1,9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 32 0 0.0 0.0 42 8 0,0 0.0 42.7 0.0 14.3 42.5 11.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS 0 A D A A 0 A B 0 B Approach Vol, vehlh 192 A 51 673 512 A Approach Delay, sfveh 32.0 42.8 18.1 12.3 Approach LOS 0 D B B Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max o Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), 5 Intersection Summary 2 3 4 6 7 8 14.3 9.1 36.7 7.6 5.8 40.0 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 45 45 25.9 9.1 31.5 25.5 5.1 35.5 9.0 6.6 8.0 4.1 2.6 17.4 0.9 0.1 3.0 0.2 0.0 3.3 FILM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 18.8 B flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2029 PM WO 10/2812019 t Movement R9L EBT BRR Will VAT WER NE3L NBT NBR SRL SBT sail Lane Ccnfiqurataons Vi +" if ) t+ r '3) tik r ) ++ r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 287 969 556 246 673 45 251 313 273 55 3415 118 Future Volume (vehTh) 287 969 556 246 673 45 251 313 273 56 346 118 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1 00 1.00 1.Q0 100 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No Na Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1856 1856 1870 1870 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 293 989 0 251 687 0 256 319 0 57 353 0 Peak Hour Factor 098 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, vehlh 381 1527 336 1466 340 743 78 548 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.43 0.00 0.10 0.42 0.00 0.10 0.21 0.00 0.04 0.15 0.00 Sat Flow, vehih 3428 35526 1585 3456 3497 1585 3428 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 293 989 0 251 687 0 256 319 0 57 353 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.9 18.4 0.0 5.9 11.8 0.0 6.0 6.5 0.0 2.6 7.8 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(c,_c), s 6.9 18.4 0.0 5.9 11.8 0.0 6.0 6.5 0.0 2.6 7.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1,00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 381 1527 336 1466 340 743 78 548 WC Relic (X) 0 77 0.65 0.75 0.47 0 75 0.43 0 73 0.64 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 516 1527 437 1466 433 1779 191 1710 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 35.9 18.6 0.0 36.5 17 5 0.0 36.5 28 6 0.0 39 2 33.4 0 0 Ince DeJey (d2), slush 4.8 2.1 0.0 5.1 1.1 0.0 5.5 0.4 0.0 12.0 1.3 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 00 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °!idle Back0t0(50%),vehlln 3.0 7.3 0.0 2 6 4 6 0.0 2 7 2 7 0,0 1.4 3.4 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 40.7 20.7 0.0 41.6 18.5 0.0 42.0 28 9 0.0 51 3 34 3 0.0 LnGrp LOS D C D 8 0 C D C Approach Vol, vehlh 1282 A 938 A 575 A 410 A Approach Delay, slush 25.3 24.7 34.8 36.7 Approach LOS C C C D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S Phs Duration (G-- -Ro), s 8.2 21.9 12.6 40.5 12.7 17.3 13.7 39.3 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4 5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Seting (Gmax), s 8.9 41.6 10.5 36.0 10.5 40.0 12,5 34.0 Max Cr Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.5 8.5 7.9 20.4 8.0 9.8 8.9 13.8 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 0.0 2,2 0.2 6.2 0.2 2.5 0.3 4.5 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 28.3 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2029 PM WO 10/2812019 - 41 Movement ESL EBT EBR WEL VAT WER NBL NBT NBR SPL SBT SPP Lane Configurations Vi ft. if vi) tt r vi 4t r "j 41 Traffic Volume (vph) 210 732 321 80 605 347 139 351 38 384 378 210 Future Volume (vph) 210 732 321 80 605 347 139 351 35 384 378 210 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (8) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0 97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0 91 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Flpb, pedlbike8 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.04) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.09 Fri 1.00 1,00 0 85 1 00 1,00 085 1.00 1,00 9.85 100 0 95 Fit Protected 03.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prof) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3383 1537 1610 3193 Fit Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,01) 1,00 0.95 1.90 1.00 01.95 1.09 Satd. Flow (perm) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3383 1537 1610 3193 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vp1) 2c4 747 328 82 617 354 142 358 39 392 386 214 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 221 0 0 255 0 0 32 0 45 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 214 747 107 82 617 99 128 372 7 333 614 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 1 1 4 7 7 4 Confl Bikes. (;atrhr) 1 1 1 Henry Vehicles (95) 5% 2% 2% 2% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 B 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 5 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.5 32.2 322 3.9 27.5 27.5 18.1 18.1 18.1 26,2 25.2 Effective Green, g (8) 8.6 32.2 32.2 3.9 27.5 27.5 18.1 18.1 18.1 26.2 26.2 Actuated ofC Ratio 0,09 033 0,33 0,04 0,28 0.28 0.18 0,18 0,18 0.27 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vp4l) 291 1158 518 136 970 436 293 622 282 428 850 Os Ratio Prot cO_06 00.21 0.02 0.18 0.08 00.11 c0.21 0.19 Os Ratio Perm 0.07 0.06 0.00 yip Ratio 0.74 0 65 0.21 0 60 0.64 0.23 0.44 0.60 0.03 0.78 0,72 Uniform Delay, di 43.8 28.2 23.9 46.5 31.1 27.3 35.6 36.8 32.9 33.4 32.8 Progre8gon Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 9 3 2.8 0.9 7 3 3.2 1 2 1 0 16 0.0 8.7 3.0 Delay (s) 53.1 31.0 24.8 53.8 34.2 28.5 35.7 38.4 33.0 42.1 35.8 Level of Service D C C D C C 0 0 C t3 0 Approach Decay (s) 33.1 33.8 37 6 37.9 Approach LOS C (.0 0 D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control' Delay 35.2 HMO 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,71 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 98.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.6% Analysis Period (min) 15 c Ci itical Lane Group HCM 2000 Level of Service D Sum of lost Lint (s) ICU Levet of Service 18.0 D 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2029 PM WO 10/28,2019 intersection Int Delay, slveh 1 4 Movement EBL Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, vetti(h 11 Future Vol, veh/h 11 Conflicting Pads. #Jhr 0 Sign Control Stop RT Channelized - Storage Length 140 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade. % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvrnt Flaw 0 97 2 11 EBR 77 77 0 Slop Free 0 97 2 79 t BL NBT SBT SBR 93 1020 1110 19 93 1020 1110 19 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free None - Yield 650 - - 700 97 2 96 0 0 97 4 1052 0 97 97 2 6 1144 20 Mier/Minor Miror2 Mori Maj r2 Conflicting Flew All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Fldwy Sig 2 Follow-up Hein)? Pot Cap -1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 2388 1144 1244 6.42 5.42 5.42 3.518 37 304 272 31 31 256 272 Approach EB - 1144 0 - 4.12 - 2.218 0 611 0 0 - 511 HOW Control Delay s 177 1 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvrilt Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCM Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICJM95th %tile € {veh) NBL 611 0.157 12 B 0.6 NB 1 SB 1 NET ,B1„n1 F9Ln2 SET SRR C 3d6 - 171 1 F A 1.2 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 2029 PM WO 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 10/2812019 Iriterceclinn Int Delay, Jveh 2 3 Movetnent WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL BBT Lane Configurations 1 er It Traffic Val, vehfh 15 78 1038 4 67 1121 Future Vol, veh/h 15 78 1038 4 67 1121 Conflicting Pads. 41ir 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Fraa Free Free RT Cttanneiized - Stop - Yietd - None Storage Length 0 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehictas, % 7 2 3 2 8 2 Mvmt Flow 15 80 1070 4 69 1158 Mier/Minor 1ti ft or1 Major1 Majcr2 Conflicting Flow All 2366 1072 0 0 1070 Stage 1 1072 Stage 2 1294 - - Critiod Hdwy 6.47 6,22 - - 4.18 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.47 Critical kidwy Sig 2 5.87 Follow-up Hein)? 3.563 3.318 - 2.272 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 37 268 - 629 Stage 1 322 - - Stage 2 251 Platoon blocked. % Mev Cap -1 Maneuver 33 268 - - 629 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 33 Stage 1 322 Stage 2 223 Approach WB t+k9 SB HOW Control Delay, s 50 5 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major 'v1 un, t Capacity (vehih) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCM Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LDS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) a 06 NBT N6RWBL<n11/11BLn2 SBL. 33 268 629 - 0.469 0.3 0.11 - 187.7 24.1 11.4 - F C B t6 1.2 0.4 SET 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2029 PM WO 5: Puapueanui St 10/2812019 Movement WEIL *BR Nal' NBR SRL SBT Lane Configurations 'Pi r t r 1 t Traffic Volume (vehlh) 38 118 911 53 146 1001 Future Volume (vehfh) 38 116 911 53 146 1001 Initial Q (Ob), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1826 1856 1841 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 39 0 939 0 151 1032 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 2 5 3 4 2 2 Cap, vehlh 60 1338 184 1630 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.10 0.87 Sat Flow, vah)11 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 39 0 939 0 151 1032 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhiln 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 0 Serve(g_s), s 2.1 0.0 27.2 0.0 7.9 15.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 0.0 27.2 0.0 7.9 15.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 t OO Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 60 1338 184 1630 VPC Retic (X) 0 65 0.70 0.82 0.63 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 337 1339 253 1630 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 45 4 0.0 7 5 0.0 418 1 7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.1 0.0 3.1 0.0 14 0 1.9 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(5O%),veMn 1.1 0.0 9.7 0 0 4.2 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 56.5 0.0 10.6 0.0 55.9 3.6 Lr Grp LOS B E A Approach Vol, vehlh 39 A 939 A 1163 Approach Delay, sfveh 56.5 10.6 10.3 Approach LOS E B 0 Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 14.3 73.2 875 7.7 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.5 65.0 83.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.9 29.2 17.0 4.1 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.1 9.4 12.7 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 11.3 B flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [NBR, WOR[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2029 PM WO 10/2812019 tritersectinn Int Delay, slveh 4.3 Wfdvetnent. 1=BL EBR NBL NBT SOT SBR Lane Configurations + re Traffic Vol, vehfh 14 411 268 943 980 40 Future Vol, veh/h 14 411 268 943 980 40 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stmt Free Free Free Fraa RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 70O Veh in Median Storage, # t] - 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 2 2 3 2 6 Mvrnt Flow 14 419 273 962 1000 41 r19j i1Mli�i'bl` Mk ort Major 1 Maio Conflicting Flow All 2508 1000 0 Stage 1 1000 Stage 2 1508 Critical Hdwy 6.48 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.48 Critical Fldwy Sig 2 5.48 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.572 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 30 0 692 Stage 1 347 0 Stage 2 196 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 18 - 692 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 18 Stage 1 210 Stage 2 196 Approach EB 1~k9 SB H CM Control Delay, s$ 429 8 3 0 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvnrt NEIL ....NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 692 - 18 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.395 - 0.794 - 11CM Cdnfol Delay {s} 13 6 -S 429 8 0 HCM Lane LOS B - F A, HCM 95th %tile C{veh) 1.9 - 2.1 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: Lako Street 2029 Ptill WO 1012812019 k. I Movement SBL EBT EBR wit. WBT WBR NOL Nle" NBR S>3L sr SER Lane Ccnfiqurataons 1 t li I 11 t rf 1 1' rir Traffic Volume (vehlh) 140 33 53 68 43 213 41 833 71 200 969 188 Future Volume (veh/h) 140 33 53 68 43 213 41 833 71 200 969 188 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.Q0 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1,00 1.00 1 00 1 00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1841 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1856 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 146 34 0 71 45 4 43 868 0 208 1009 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.06 13.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Cap, vehlh 187 200 109 112 206 1024 312 1099 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.04 0.55 0.00 0.07 0.59 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1757 1856 1555 1767 1870 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 146 34 0 71 45 0 43 868 0 208 1009 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhlln 1753 1670 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 7.0 1.4 0.0 3 4 2.1 0.0 0.9 34.2 0.0 4.3 41.9 0.0 Cycle Q 0llear(c,_0), s 7 0 1.4 0.0 3.4 2,1 0.0 0.9 34.2 0.0 4.3 41.9 0.0 Prop In Lane 1 00 0.00 1 00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 187 200 109 112 206 1024 312 1099 VPC Ratin(X) 0 78 0 17 0.65 0.40 0.21 0.85 0.67 0.92 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehfh 364 388 369 379 243 1024 352 1099 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1 00 100 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1,00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 37 8 35.3 0.0 39.8 39.2 0.0 16.9 16.4 0.0 16.9 16.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.9 0.4 0.0 6.4 2.3 0.0 0.5 8.7 0.0 4.1 13.5 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 O.D 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %Ile Back01Q(50%),vehlln 3.3 0.7 0.0 1 7 10 0.D 0 4 15,4 0.0 2 5 19.6 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 444.7 35.7 0.0 46.3 41.6 0.0 17.4 25.1 0.0 21 0 29.5 0.0 LnGrp LOS D D D D B C C C Approach Vol, vehih 180 A 116 A 911 A 1217 A Approach Delay, sfveh 43.0 44.4 24.7 28.1 Approach LOS D D 0 0 Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 6 Phs Duration (G-- -Ro), s 10.8 52.4 13.8 7.7 55.5 9.8 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4 5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.3 47.7 16.0 5.0 51.0 16.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 6.3 36.2 5.0 2.9 43.9 5.4 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 0 1 5.0 0 3 0.0 4.2 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 28.7 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2029 PM WO 8. Kamehameha 111 Road & Queen Kaaiiumanu Hwy 1012812019 t 4, movement EBL EBT EBR vvEL VAT Wet NFL NOT NOR SBL SOT Mw= p Lane CcnfiquraUons 4 ri 4., 11 t, ' 11; Traffic Volume (vehlh) 320 12 57 8 12 20 71 547 12 19 564 314 Future Volume (vehTh) 320 12 57 8 12 2D 71 547 12 19 564 314 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1767 1767 1811 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 337 13 0 8 13 21 75 576 13 20 594 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, 917 9 9 6 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cep,vehlh 393 15 12 20 33 96 840 19 40 1537 Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.46 0.46 0.02 0.43 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1623 63 1535 324 527 851 1767 1807 41 1781 3647 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 350 0 0 42 0 D 75 0 589 20 594 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1685 0 1535 1701 4 0 1767 0 1848 1781 1777 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 15.4 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 19.4 0.9 8.8 0.0 Cycle Q Cl l.(g_0), s 15.4 0.0 0.0 1 9 0,0 0.0 12 0,0 19.4 0.9 8.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 96 1.00 0 19 0.50 1.00 4.02 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 408 0 65 0 0 96 0 859 40 1537 WC Relic (X) 0 86 0.00 0 64 0 00 4100 0 78 0.00 0.69 0.50 0.39 Avail Cep(o .a), vehfh 564 0 660 0 0 162 0 859 117 1537 HOW Plabnn Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.40 0.00 1 00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 28.1 0.0 0.0 36.7 0.0 0.0 361 0.0 16.3 37.4 15.0 0.0 Incl. Deiay (d2), slveh 9.4 0.0 0.0 10.1 0.0 0.0 12.7 0.0 4.4 9.2 0.7 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 1 7 0.0 7.9 0.5 3.2 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 37 5 0.0 0.0 46.8 0.0 0.0 48.8 0.0 20.7 45.6 15.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A D .4 A 0 A 0 D B Approach Vol, vehlh 350 A 42 664 614 A Approach Delay, sfveh 37.5 46.8 23.9 16.7 Approach LOS D D 0 B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 S Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max C Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), 5 Intersection Summary 23.2 8.7 38.0 7.5 6.2 40.5 4.5 4,5 45 4,5 4.5 4 25.9 7.1 33.5 25,5 5.1 35.5 17.4 5.2 10.8 3.9 2.9 21.4 1.4 Q.I) 3 7 0.1 0.0 3.0 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 24.7 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 Appendix G Analysis Reports — Future With Project Conditions (2029) HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2029 AM W project 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy --�► 03(1312020 Movement 9L EBT EER WEIL WBT WBR NEL NBT NBR SEL SBT SBI Lane Canfiqurattons lili ++ r vi) 1t- rf v) tt r i `t r Traffic Volume (vehlh) I8 512 241 181: 787 34 268 212 122 22 355 196 Future Volume (vehlhj 78 512 241 181 787 34 268 212 122 22 355 196 Initial Q (0b), vel? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh!hlln 1/37 1767 1737 1841 1811 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1070 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 80 522 0 185 803 D 273 216 0 22 382 0 Peak Hour Factor 098 0.98 0.98 098 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cap, vehlh 165 1480 268 1612 367 836 43 538 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.44 0.00 0.08 0.47 0.00 0.11 0.24 0.00 0.02 0.15 0.00 Set Flow, vehfh 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1580 3401 3554 1572 1781 355.4 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 80 522 0 185 803 0 273 216 0 22 362 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1685 0 Serve(g_s), s 2.0 8.4 0.0 4.3 13.2 0.0 6.3 4.0 0.0 1.0 7.8 0.0 Cycle 0 Cl ar(c,_c), s 2.0 8.4 0.0 4.3 13.2 0.0 6.3 4.0 0.0 1.0 7.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 165 1480 268 1612 367 836 43 538 WC Retic (X) 0 49 0.35 0.69 0.50 0 74 0.26 0.51 0.67 Avail 0ap(cw,al, vehfh 244 1480 434 1612 597 2053 120 1659 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 37 6 15.1 0.0 36.6 15 0 0.0 35.3 25.4 0.0 39.3 32 7 0 0 Incl. Deiey (d2), slveh 2.2 0.7 0.0 3.2 1.1 0.0 3.0 0.2 0.0 9.2 1.5 0.0 Initial 0 bale+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 9. Ie Back0fQ(50%),vehlln 0.8 3.1 0.0 1.9 4.9 0.0 2.7 1.7 0,0 0.5 3.4 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh 39 8 15.7 0.0 39 7 16,1 0.9 38.3 25.5 0.0 48,5 34.2 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B 0 C D C Approach Vol, vehlh 602 A 988 A 489 A 384 A Approach Delay, sfveh 18.9 20.5 32.6 35.0 Approach LOS B C 0 0 Turner - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 ' 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.5 23.7 10.9 40.5 13.3 16.8 8.7 42.7 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4 5 4,5 4,5 4 5 4.5 4.5 4 5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 47.1 10.4 34.0 14.3 38.3 5,2 382 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 6.0 6.3 10.4 8.3 as 4.0 15.2 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0 0 1,5 0.2 3.5 0,5 2,5 0.0 5.7 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 14.3 fides Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and interseetton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 2029 AM W project 03/1312020 t 41 MOvernant EU EBT EBR W0L WOT WeR N8L NBT Ii8R SBL SBI Sail Lane Configurations 1919 14 if 191 14 F 19 4t j 1 413 Traffic Volume (vph) 118 406 137 61 711 554 161 372 47 409 374 137 Future Volume (vph) 118 406 137 61 711 554 161 372 47 409 374 137 Weal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Chit. Factor 0.97 0,95 1.00 0 97 0.995 1,00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 091 Frpb, pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.041 Fri 1 00 1,00 0 85 1 00 1,00 0,85 1.00 1.00 0.85 100 0 97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.010 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1545 1564 3347 1487 1595 3174 FR Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,047 1,00 0.95 1.100 1.00 0 95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1.564 3347 1487 1595 3174 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vp1) 122 419 141 63 733 571 166 384 48 422 386 141 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 97 0 0 407 0 0 39 0 21 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 122 419 44 63 733 164 149 401 9 316 612 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl Bikes. ( trhr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (9'D) 13% 13% 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 3% 7% 3% 4% 5% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 B 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 B 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.6 30.4 30.4 4.1 27.9 27.9 18.9 18.9 18.9 25.7 25.7 Effective Green, g (s) 6.6 30.4 30.4 4.1 27.9 27.9 18.9 18.9 18.9 25.7 25.7 Actuated TC Ratio 0.07 0,31 0.31 0.04 0,29 0.29 0.19 0,19 0.19 0.28 0.26 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 210 1027 474 139 978 444 304 651 289 422 840 Os Ratio Prot x0.04 0.13 0.02 c0.22 0.10 00.12 cO_20 0.19 vIs Fain Perm 0.03 0.11 0.01 yip Ratio 0.58 0.41 0,09 045 015 0.37 0.49 0.62 0,03 0.75 0.73 Uniform Delay, di 43.9 26.3 23.6 45.4 31.4 27.6 34.8 35.8 31.7 32.7 32.5 Prrxt„resron Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.0 1.2 0,4 23 5.3 2.4 1 2 1,7 0,0 7,1 3.2 Delay (s) 48.0 27.5 24.0 47.7 36.7 29.9 36A 37.5 31.7 39.9 35.7 Level of Service D C C D D C D D C 1.7 D Approach Decay (s) 30.4 34,4 36.7 37.1 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C KM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,70 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 97.1 Sum of lost Lint (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 71.4% ICL! Leve! of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cr itical Lane Group 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2029 AM W project 03!1312020 Intersection Int Delay, shah 28.5 Wtdvetnenll teL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations j er 4' 4 jV Traffic Vol, vetVh 49 54 156 1178 876 35 Future Vol, vehlti 49 54 196 1178 876 33 Conflicting Peds, #Jhr 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Cttannetized - Free - None Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 Mvrnt Flow 53 58 211 1267 942 35 MajorlMincr Minor2 mom Maj r2 Conflicting ROW All 2632 - 943 0 - Stage 1 943 Stage 2 1689 Ceitioat Hdwy 5.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.42 Critical 5tdwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3,518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver -26 0 727 Stage 1 379 0 Stage 2 164 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 18 - 726 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 18 Stage i 268 Stage 2 164 Approach EB k9 SB HCtM Control Delay, 1310 5 1 7 0 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvrirt NSBL IkkST E,ELn 1 FSLn2 SBT SER Capacity (vehih) 720 - 18 - HCM Lane VAC Ratio 0.29 - 2.927 - tfCM Corbel Delay {s} 12 S 1310.5 0 HCM Lane LOS B - F A HCM 95th %tile l {veh) 1.2 7.1 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delay exceeds 300s : Commutation Not Defined All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 2029 AM W project 03/1312020 Intersection Int Delay, WO Movement 58 WBL WBR NOT NBR SBL SOT Larne Configurations Traffic Vol, vehfh Future Vol, vehlh Conflicting Peds. trrhr Sign Control RT Channelized r 10 155 10 155 0 0 Stop Slop Stop 0 1216 17 81. 846 1216 17 81 S46 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 13 5 5 Mvrnt Flaw 11 167 1305 18 87 910 M&jor1M1nor WOO M8pr1 Maps r2 Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 Follow-up Hdiiry Pot Cap -1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 2401 1317 0 0 1308 1317 1084 5.42 6.22 - 4.16 5.42 - - 5,42 - - - - 3.518 3318 - 2254 37 193 - 516 250 - 324 31 193 - - 515 31 - 250 269 Approach WB NB SB HOW Control Delay s 89 HCM LOS F Minor Loftelhflalar Mvnrt N T 0 12 NBRWSI,..n1W5Ln2 S8_ SOT Capacity (vetalh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCfu1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LDS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 31 193 516 - 0.347 0.864 0.169 - 173.5 33.5 13.4 -F F !3 - 1.1 6.4 0.6 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2029 AM W project 5: Puapueanui St 03!13/2020 Movement Wl3L *BR Nat NER SRL S8T Lane Configurations 'Pi r t r 1 + Traffic Volume (vehlh) 98 204 1047 30 47 813 Future Volume (vehfh) 98 204 1647 30 47 813 Initial Q (Ob), yen 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 100 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1825 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 104 0 1114 0 50 865 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 3 2 2 5 Cap, vehlh 130 1446 64 1557 Arrive On Green 0.07 4.00 0.79 0.00 0.04 0.95 Set Flow, vehfh 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 104 0 1114 0 50 865 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhiln 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 0 Serve(g_s), s 6.9 0.0 40.1 0.0 3.4 16.0 Cycle Q Ct r(c,_c), s 6.9 0.0 40.1 0.0 3.4 16.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 130 1446 64 1557 WC Ratic(X) 0.80 0.77 0.78 0.56 Avail Cap(cw.a i, vehlh 265 1446 96 1557 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 55 1 0.0 7 4 0 0 57 7 2.5 Ince DeJey (d2), slush 10.7 0.0 4.0 0.0 20.2 1.4 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 °l�le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 3.5 0.0 14.2 0 0 1.9 4.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, stveh LnGrp Dalay( dl, sIveh 65 9 0.0 11.4 0.0 78.0 3.9 Lr Grp LOS L B E A Approach Vol, vehlh 104 A 1114 A 915 Approach Delay, sfveh 65.9 11.4 8.0 Approach LOS E 13 A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 8.9 98.6 107.5 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4 5 4,5 4,5 Max Green Seting (Gmax), s 6.5 92.0 103.0 hr1ex 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 5.4 42.1 18.0 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 0.0 14.6 8,6 Intersection Summary 13.3 4,5 18.0 8.9 0.1 HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 12.6 8 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [Nl3R, W8R[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TVVSC 6: Kuakini Street 2029 AM W project 03!1312020 lritersectinn Int Delay, slveh 21 8 Movetnen1 Eel_ EBR NBL NU- SST SBR Lane Configurations j 1 Traffic Val, vehfh 8 187 574 910 837 89 Future Vol, veh/h 8 187 574 910 837 69 Conflicting Pads. #hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Slap Stip Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 Mvrnt Flow 9 201 617 978 900 74 Mlor1Mlnor Minor.? M c 1 Major2 Conflicting ROW Ali 3112 - 900 0 - Stage 1 900 Stage 2 2212 Critical Hdwy f.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Stdwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 13 0 755 Stage 1 397 0 Stage 2 89 0 Platoon blocked. % MMv Cap -1 Maneuver ~ 2 - 755 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 2 Stage i 73 Stage 2 89 Approach EB k9 SB H CW1 Control Delay, $ 45543 6 10 6 0 HCM LOS F Mltor LntreJMajar Mvrat NOL 1:48T L78Ln 1 FBLn2 SB'T SB1R Capacity (veh/h) 755 - 2 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.817 - 4.301 tfC 1 Conhral Delay {s} 27.4 S 4556.6 0 HCM Lane LDS D - F A HCM 95th %tile C7{veh) 8.9 - 2.3 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delav exceeds 30Os -: Corncutation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: Lako Street 2929 AM W project 03!1312020 ./-- t r 414 movement EBL EBT EBR WU WBT weR NOL NBT NBR S91 SBT SBFT Lane Ccnfiquratlons ) t 11 T ) + r i `' r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 282 53 76 92 43 303 36 890 61 160 734 142 Future Volume (vehlh) 282 53 76 92 43 303 36 890 61 160 734 142 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No Na Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 1811 1856 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 300 56 0 98 46 D 38 947 0 170 781 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cap, vehlh 313 329 131 139 291 1008 202 1055 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.54 0.00 0.06 0.5? 0.00 Sat Flaw, vahih 1781 1a70 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 300 56 0 98 46 0 38 947 0 170 781 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh,4n 1781 1670 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 19.9 3.0 0.0 6.5 2.8 0.0 1.1 56.3 0.0 5.1 3T3 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_0), s 19.9 3.0 0.0 6.5 2.8 0.0 11 56,3 0,.0 51 37.3 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0.00 1 CO 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 313 329 131 139 291 1008 202 1055 WC Ratin(X) 096 0.17 0.75 0.33 0.13 0.94 0 84 0.74 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 313 329 275 291 312 1008 221 1066 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 1,00 0.00 100 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 48 6 4/ 7 0.0 54.0 52 3 0.0 16 4 25.6 0.0 27.1 19 1 0 0 Ince Deiey (d2), slush 39.8 0.2 0.0 8.1 1.4 0.0 0.2 17.1 0.0 23.0 4.7 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 °!idle BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 12.2 1.4 0.0 3 2 1.4 0.0 0 5 28.6 0,0 3 9 16 7 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},siveh 88 4 41.9 0.0 82 1. 53.6 0.0 16.6 42 8 0.0 50.2 23.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS F D E 0 B 0 0 C Approach Vol, vehlh 356 A 144 A 985 A 951 A Approach Delay, sfveh 81.1 59.4 41.7 28.5 Approach LOS F E 0 0 Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 11.6 68.6 25.4 8.1 72.2 13.3 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s B.5 64.1 20.9 5.0 67.6 16.5 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 7.1 58.3 219 3.1 39.3 8.5 Green Ext Time (p 0), $ 0.1 3,3 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 4'J.4 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si nalized Intersection Summary 2029 AM W project 8. Kamehameha 111 Road Queen Kaahumaru Fin 03(1312020 20'-r t oft. I .1 Movement EOL EBT EER WPI- WBT WER NOL NBT NBR SOL SBT SBk Lane CanfiquraUons 4 if 4., if ! +I Traffic Volume (vehlh) 177 6 29 18 13 17 84 536 17 16 481 329 Future Volume (vehfh) 177 6 29 18 13 17 84 536 17 16 481 329 Initial Q (Qb), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 Parking Bars, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1,00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1722 1781 1781 1781 1752 1811 1811 1070 1811 1811 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 190 5 0 19 14 18 90 576 1B 17 517 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 2 2 12 8 8 8 10 6 6 2 6 6 Cap, vehlh 240 8 24 18 23 114 1052 33 34 1905 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.07 0.60 0.60 0.02 0.55 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1729 55 1459 500 442 568 1668 1745 55 1781 3532 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 196 0 0 51 0 0 90 0 594 17 517 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1784 0 1459 1610 0 0 1668 0 1800 1781 1721 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 9.6 0.0 0.9 2.8 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0 17.7 0.9 7.1 0.0 Cycle Q C;laar(g o), s 9.6 0,0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0 17.7 0.9 7.1 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 97 1.00 0 37 0.35 1.00 003 1 00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 248 0 65 0 0 114 0 1085 34 1905 WC Relic (X) 0 79 0.00 0.79 0.00 0.00 0 79 0.00 0.55 0.50 027 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehfh 527 0 454 0 0 266 0 1085 104 1905 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0,00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.06 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 37 7 0.0 0.0 43.0 0.0 0.0 41.5 0.0 10.6 43.9 10 6 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), slush 5.6 0.0 0.0 18.8 0.0 0.0 11.4 0.0 2.0 101 0.4 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 4.5 0.0 0.0 1 5 0.0 0.0 2 2 0.0 6 3 0.5 2 4 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 43 3 0.0 0.0 61 8 0.0 0.0 52.9 0.0 12.6 54.6 11.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A E A A 0 A 8 D B Approach Vol, vehlh 196 A 51 684 534 A Approach Delay, shah 43.3 61.8 17.9 t2.3 Approach LOS D 1= 8 B Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 2 3 4 6 7 8 17.0 10.7 54.8 8.1 6.2 59.0 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4 5 4.5 26.7 14.4 45.4 25.5 5.3 54.5 11.6 6.8 9.1 4.8 2.9 197 0.9 0.1 3.4 0.2 0.0 3.9 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 20.8 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 13 HCM 6th TWSC 9: Kona VLsta Roadway 2029 AM W project 03/1312020 intersection Int Delay, slveh 3 t Movement WBL WEIR NBT NBR SBL SOT Lane Configurations fir et r + Traffic Vol, vehfh 29 108 918 25 22 911 Future Vol, veh/h 29 108 918 25 22 911 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 G 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Yield Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 585 695 - Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - 9 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvrnt Flow 32 117 998 27 24 990 MejnrIMli or Minari Majorl Major2 Conflicting Row All 2036 998 0 0 99,B Stage 1 998 Stage 2 1038 - Critical Hdwy 5.42 622 - - 4 12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - - - - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 3 318 - 2 216 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 62 296 - 693 Stage 1 357 - Stage 2 341 - Platoon blocked. % MMv Cap -1 Maneuver 50 296 - 693 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 60 - - Stage 1 357 Stage 2 329 - - Approach WB 1+k9 SB H W Control Delay, s 44 6 HCM LOS F 0 02 IlttorLntteJrvlajar'vlunrt NIT" tlBRWSLn1WFSLn2 SBL ,SET Capacity (vehoh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCfu1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 60 296 593 - 0.525 0-397 0.035 - 118.2 24.9 10.4 - F C B - 2.1 1.8 0.1 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 14 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2029 PM W project 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 03!13/2020 Moment Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vehlh) Future Volume (vehfh) Initial Q (Ob), van Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zane On Approach Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln Adj Flow Rate, vehlh Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, vehlh Arrive On Green Sat Flow, vah)h Grp Volurne(v), vehlh Grp Sat Flow(s).vehlhlln 0 Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Cl ar(c,_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh VPC Ratic(X) Avail Cep(ow,a), vehlh HOW Platoon Ratio Upstream Filter(I) Uniform Delay (d). slveh Incr Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Dula+y(d3),s/veh %He Back0t0(50%),vehlln Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh LnGrp LOS Approach Vol, vehlh Approach Delay, sfveh Approach LOS Timer - Assigned Phs SPL 287 287 0 1.00 1 00 1856 293 0.9'8 3 38't 0.11 3428 293 1714 6.9 6.9 100 381 0 77 515 1.00 1.00 35.9 4.9 00 3.0 40.8 D 4 t 4 ELT FSR WBL WEST WBR NE3L NBT tJBR SRL 897 SER 1003 556 248 697 54 251 313 283 58 3461 118 1003 556 248 697 54 251 313 283 58 346 118 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.010 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 No No No Na 18566 1870 1870 16.41 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1023 0 253 711 0 256 319 0 59 353 0 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 1526 337 1466 340 741 80 547 0.43 0.00 0.10 0.42 0.00 0.10 0.21 0.00 0.04 0.15 0.00 3526 1585 3456 3497 1585 3428 3554 1685 1781 3554 1585 1023 0 253 711 0 256 319 0 59 353 0 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 19.3 0.0 5.9 12.3 0.0 6.0 6.5 0.0 2.7 7.8 0.0 19.3 0.0 5.9 12.3 0.0 6.0 6,5 0.0 2.7 7.8 0.0 1.00 1 40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1526 337 1466 340 741 80 547 0.67 0.75 0.48 0 75 0.43 0.74 0.84 1525 436 1466 433 1777 191 1709 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 100 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 18.8 0.0 2.6.5 17 6 0.0 36.5 28 6 0.0 39 2 33.4 0, 0 2.4 0.0 5.2 1.1 0.0 5.6 0.4 0.0 12.6 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 7.7 0.0 27 4.8 0.0 2.7 2,7 0,0 1.4 3.4 0,0 21.2 C 1316 A 25.6 C 0.0 41.8 D Phs Duration (G+y+Rc), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 4. Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), 5 Intersection Summary 8.2 45 8.9 4.7 0.0 2 21.8 4,5 41.6 8.5 2,2 3 12.6 4,5 10.5 7,9 0.2 4 40.5 4.5 36.0 21.3 6.2 18,a 0.0 42.0 29.0 0.0 51.8 34.3 0.0 B 0 C 0 C 964 A 575 A 412 A 24.8 34.8 36.8 0 0 D 5 12.7 4.5 10.5 8.0 0,2 6 '7 1 17.3 13.7 39.4 4,5 4.5 4,5 40.0 12.5 34.0 9.8 8.9 14.3 2.5 0.3 4.7 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 28.4 !dotes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2029 PM W project 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 03/1312020 t+rnent F-i3L Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) 210 Future Volume (vph) 210 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 Total Lost time (8) 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0,97 Frpb, pedlbikes 1.00 Flpb, pedlbikes 1.00 Fri 1.00 Fit Protected 0.95 Satd. Flow (prof) 3335 FR Permitted 0.95 Satd. Flow (perm) 3335 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 214 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 214 Condi. Peds (Mir) 1 Confl Bikes. (t/hr) Heavy Vehicles (%) 5% Turn Type Prot Protected Phases 7 Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) 8.8 Effective Green, g (s) 8.6 Actuated g1C Ratio 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.4 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 289 Os Ratio Prot x0.06 Os Ratio Perm. yip Ratio 0 74 Uniform Delay, di 44.1 PrOgre88bn Factor 1 00 Incremental Delay, d2 9 8 Delay (s) 53.9 Level of Service D Approach Decay (s) Approach LOS EBT FB14 W0L WBT NBL NBT NBR SRL SBT SBI 777 321 85 640 367 139 777 321 85 840 357 139 1900 1900. 1900 1900 1900 1900 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 0.95 1.00 0 97 0.95 1,00 0.91 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 0.85 1 00 1,00 085 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 793 328 87 853 374 142 0 221 0 0 270 0 793 107 87 653 104 128 1 4 1 2% 2% 2% 4% 2% 3% NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split 4 3 8 2 4 6 32.2 322 3.9 27.5 27.5 18.1 32.2 32.2 3.9 27.5 27.5 18.1 0.33 0,33 0,04 0,28 0,28 0.18 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 1151 514 135 964 433 291 c0.22 0.03 0.19 0.08 0.69 29.0 1,00 3,4 32.4 G 34.1 0.07 1121 24.2 1.00 0,9 25.1 064 46.9 1 00 101 57.0 E 0.68 31.8 100 3.8 35.6 D 35,1 D 1107 0.24 27.7 1.00 13 29.0 c 0.44 35.9 1.00 11 37.0 I3 35114 351 1900 4,5 0.91 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 3383 1.00 3383 0.98 358 0 372 2% NA 2 18.1 18.1 0,18 4.5 3.0 618 cO.11 0.60 37.1 1.00 17 38.8 D 38.0 D 40 40 1903 4.5 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.85 1.00 1537 1.00 1537 0.98 41 34 7 7 1 3% Perm 2 18.1 18.1 0,18 4.5 3_b 281 0.00 0.03 33.2 1.00 0.0 33.3 C 48 408 1900 4.5 0.91 1.00 1.00 100 0.95 1610 0 95 1610 0.98 416 0 341 7 2% Split 6 26,8 26.8 0.27 4.5 3.0 435 c0.21 0.78 33.4 1.00 9.0 42.4 D 414 378 378 1900 4.5 0.91 0.99 1.00 0,95 0.9'9 3194 0.99 3194 0.98 388 42 633 2% NA 6 26.8 26.8 0.27 4.5 3.0 864 0.20 0.73 32.8 1 00 32 36.1 D 38.2 210 210 1900 0.98 214 0 0 4 1 2% Intersection Sulnmary+ HCM 2000 Control' Delay HCi 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio Actuated Cycle Length (s) Intersection Capacity utilization Analysis Period (min) c Ci itical Lane Grcup 35,9 0.73 99.0 75.00 15 HCM 2000 Level of Service Surn of lost time (s) ICU Levet of Service D 18.0 ID 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2029 PM W project 03/1312020 intersection Int Delay, slveh 1 6 Mtnenr EBL Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, vet* 11 Future Vol, vehlh 11 Conflicting Pads. #Jhr 0 Sign Control Stop RT Channelized - Storage Length 140 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 Grade. % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvrnt Flaw 0 97 2 11 EBR 82 82 0 Slop Free 0 97 2 85 kBL NBT SBT SBR f 98 1079 1181 19 98 1079 1181 19 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free None - Yield 650 - - 700 97 2 101 0 0 97 4 1112 0 0 97 97 2 6 1218 20 M&jor1M blot Mlr►or2 Ma r1 Majcr2 Conflicting Flew All 2532 Stage 1 1213 Stage 2 1314 Critical Hdwy 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 Follow-up Hdw-y 3.518 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 30 Stage 1 280 Stage 2 251 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver 25 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 25 Stage 1 230 Stage 2 251 Approach EB - 1218 0 - 4.12 - 2.218 0 572 0 0 - 572 HOW Conical Delay 8 237 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major .i1vr t Capacity (vehlh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCtv1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LDS FHCW 951h %tile € {veh) NBL 572 0.177 12.6 B 0.6 NB 11 SB 0 l ET 7.,0rn 1 FBLn2 SET SBF - 25 - 0.454 - - 237 0 - F A - 1.4 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 2029 PM W project 4: Hualalai Rd (South) 03!1312020 Intersection Int Delay, sJweh 2 7 klovetrient 1WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Larne Configurations 1 er i 11 it Traffic Vol, vehfh 15 78 1103 4 67 1197 Future Vol, veh/h 15 78 1103 4 67 1197 Conflicting Pads. lihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Fraa Free Free RT Channelized - Stop Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 8 2 Mvrnt Flaw 15 80 1137 4 69 1234 Maj€rIMlior Minrxl Plajorl Major2 Conflicting ROW All 2511 1139 0 0 1 ' S7 Stage 1 1139 Stage 2 1372 - Ceitiod Hdwy f.47 6,22 - - 4 13 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.47 - Critical kidwy Sig 2 5.47 - - - Follow-up HdiAry 3.563 3.318 - - 2.272 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 30 245 - 593 Stage 1 298 - Stage 2 230 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 27 245 - - 593 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 27 Stage 1 298 Stage 2 203 - - Approach W18 1~k9 SB H CM Control Delay, s 62 9 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvrilt Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCfu1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LDS HCW 95th %tile € {veh) a a.5 NBT °N NBLniWBLn2 SBL - 27 245 593 - 0.573 0.328 0.116 - 251 26.7 119 - F D B - 1.8 t4 0.4 ser 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2029 PM W project 5: Puapueanui St 03!13/2020 Movement WBL WBR Hf3R SBL aBT Lane CaniiquratGons vi r 1 r 11 Traffic Volume (vehlh) 41 118 976 57 146 1077 Future Volume (vehfh) 41 118 976 57 146 1077 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1826 1856 1841 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 42 0 1006 0 151 1110 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent He vy Veh, % 2 5 3 4 2 2 Cap, vehlh 57 1392 180 1665 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.10 0.89 Sat Flow, veh)h 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 42 0 1006 0 151 1110 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhiln 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 0 Serve(g_s), s 2.7 0.0 34.2 0.0 9.6 18.5 Cycle Q Ctaar(g_c), s 2.7 0.0 34.2 0.0 9.6 18.5 Prop In Lane 1 00 1.00 1 CO 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 57 1392 180 1665 VPC Relic (X) 0 74 0.72 0.84 0.67 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 277 1392 239 1665 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 0 00 1.00 0 00 100 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 55.5 0.0 7 9 0 0 51.1 1. 7 Incr DeJey (d2), slush 16.7 0.0 3.3 0.0 17.9 2.1 Initial Q Dula+y(d4sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 %le Back04Q(50%),vetrtln 1.5 0.0 12 6 0 0 6.2 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, stveh LnGrp Delay(d},slvrih 72.2 0.0 11 E 0.0 669.0 3.6 Lr Grp LOS 8 L A Approach Vol, vehlh 42 A 1006 A 1261 Approach Delay, sfveh 72.2 11.1 11.7 Approach LOS E B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 16.2 91.3 107.5 82 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4,5 4.5 4,55 4.5 Max Green Seting (Gmax), s 15.5 83.0 103.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Tme (g_c+11), s 11.5 36.2 20.5 4.7 Green Ext Time (p 0), $ 0.1 11,4 15.5 0.0 Intersection Summary FI CM 6th CirI Delay HCM 6th LOS 12.5 B Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [1,19R, W9R1 is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TVVSC 6: Kuakini Street 2029 PM W project 0311312020 intersection Int Delay, slveh 4 6 Movetnent. 1=BL EBR NBL NBT SST SBR Lane Configurations + + jV Traffic Vol, vehfh 14 411 269 11117 992 40 Future Vol, veh/h 14 411 269 1017 992 40 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Slap Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 70O Veh in Median Storage. # t] - 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 2 2 3 2 6 Mvrnt Flow 14 419 274 1938 1012 41 Mior/Mlnot Mft ort Mori Majcor2 Conflicting Row All 2598 - 1012 0 Stage 1 1012 Stage 2 1586 Critical Hdwy 6.48 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.48 Critical 5tdwy Sig 2 5.48 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.572 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 26 0 685 Stage 1 342 0 Stage 2 179 0 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver 16 - 685 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 16 - Stage 1 205 Stage 2 179 Approach EB NB SB HOW Control Delay, s$ 507 5 2 9 0 HCM LOS F Minor LnneJhflajar 4lunrt NOL NBT EOLn 1 FSLn2 SET SRR Capacity (vehih) 685 - 16 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.401 - 0.893 11CM Conlral Delay {s} 13.7 -8 507 6 0 HCM Lane LOS 8 - F A HCM 95th %tile t1{veh) 1.9 - 2.2 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delay exceeds 300s ': Computation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2929 PM W project 7: Lako Street 0311312020 r 4\ Movement EBL EBT EBR Wi3L., WBT WER NOL NBT NBR S>3L SBT SBR Lane Canfiqura0ons ) T I I II t ri li t r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 149 33 53 75 44 228 41 885 71 202 977 190 Future Volume (vehfh) 149 33 53 75 44 228 41 885 71 202 977 190 Initial Q (Qb), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.00 100 1.00 1,00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1 00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1841 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1856 1866 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 155 34 0 78 46 D 43 922 0 210 1018 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.06 13.96 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, 91) 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Cep, vehlh 187 200 110 113 234 1125 307 1191 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.61 0.00 0.06 0.64 0.00 Sat Flow, vahfh 1753 1670 0 1781 1826 0 1757 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 Grp Volurne(u), vehlh 155 34 0 78 46 0 43 922 0 210 1018 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh3ln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 9.7 1.8 0.0 4.8 2.7 0.0 1.0 43.4 0.0 4.8 48.4 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_0), s 9.7 1.8 0.0 4.8 2.7 0.0 1.0 43,4 0,.0 4.8 48.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0.00 100 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 187 200 110 113 234 1125 307 1191 WC Ratio(X) 0.83 0.17 0.71 0.41 018 0.82 0.68 0.85 Avail Cep(cw,a), vehfh 283 302 288 295 255 1125 374 1191 HOW Platoon Patio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 100 0.00 1..00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 48.8 45.3 0.0 51.3 50 3 0.0 17.3 17 2 0.0 20.1 15 1 0 0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.5 0.4 0.0 8.0 2.3 0.0 0 4 6.7 0.0 3.8 7.9 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0,0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 91211e BackO#Q(50%),vehlln 4.8 0.9 0.0 2.4 1 3 0.0 0 5 19,1 0,0 3 4 21 3 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sNveh LnGrp Dulay(d},sIveh 60.4 45,7 0.13 59 3 52.7 0.0 17.7 23.9 0.0 23,9 24.1 0.0 Lr Grp LOS E D E D B C C C Approach Vol, vehlh 189 A 124 A 965 A 1228 A Approach Delay, shah 57.8 56,8 23.6 24.0 Approach LOS E E C 0 Turner - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 11.6 72.1 16.4 8.2 75.5 11.4 Change Period (Y{Re), s 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s '11.3 64.7 18.0 5.0 71.0 16.0 Max Cr Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.8 45.4 11.7 3.0 50.4 6.8 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 02 7,3 0.3 0.0 8.8 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 5th LOS 28.0 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for IN BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si nolized Intersection Summary 2029 PM W project 8; Kamehameha III Road & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 03(1312020 -r •- k. 4\t Movement EBL EBT RR WPI- VAT vveR Net_ NBT UR SRL ABT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r 4., 'I I 1 ' rr Traffic Volume (vehlh) 339 12 57 8 12 21 71 579 12 19 574 319 Future Volume (vehlh) 339 12 57 8 12 21 71 579 12 19 574 319 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1.04 1 OQ 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1767 1767 1811 1870 1870 1870 1856 1056 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 357 13 0 8 13 22 75 5€79 13 20 604 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 6 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cep,vehlh 406 15 11 18 31 96 915 20 38 1680 Arrive On Green 0/6 0.25 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.61 0.51 0.02 0.47 0.00 sat Flow, veh)h 1626 59 1535 316 513 869 1767 1810 39 1781 3647 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 370 0 0 43 4 0 75 0 622 20 604 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh,4n 1685 0 1535 1698 0 0 1767 0 1849 1781 1777 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 20.2 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 24.0 1.1 10.4 0.0 Cycle Q CEear(g c), s 20 2 0.0 0.0 2.4 0,0 0.0 4.0 0.0 24.0 1.1 10.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 96 1.00 0 19 0.51 1.00 4.02 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 421 0 60 0 0 96 0 935 38 1680 WC Retic (X) 0.88 0.00 0.71 0 00 0.00 0 78 0.00 0.67 0.52 0.36 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehlh 578 0 452 0 0 164 0 935 95 1680 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0,00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 44 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 34 6 0.0 0.0 45.8 0.0 0.0 44.8 0.0 17.7 46 4 16.1 0 0 Incl. Delay (d2), s/veh 11.3 0.0 0.0 14.4 O.0 0.0 12.6 0.0 3.7 10.5 0.6 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 9.4 0.0 0,0 1.2 0.0 0.0 2 0 0.0 10.0 0.6 3.9 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 45.9 0.0 0.0 60.1 0,0 0.0 57.3 Q.0 21.4 57.0 16.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A E A A E A C E B Approach Vol, vehlh 379 A 43 697 624 A Approach Delay, sfveh 45.9 60.1 25.3 18.0 Approach LOS D E C B Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 2 3 4 6 7 S 28.4 9.7 49.8 7.9 6.6 53.0 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4 5 4 5 32.9 8.9 44.7 25.5 5..1 48.5 22.2 6.0 12.4 4.4 3.1 26.0 1.7 0.0 4.0 0.1 0.0 3.8 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 27.9 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 HCM 6th TWSC 9: Kona Vista Roadway 2029 PM W project 03/1312020 intersection Int Delay, slveh 2 3 Movement 1VI1BL WBR NBT NBR SBL SOT Lane Configurations II r + r } Traffic Val, vehfh 12 88 1031 74 74 1118 Future Vol, vehlh 12 88 1031 74 79 1118 Conflicting Pads, Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Free Frail RT Channelized - Yield Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 585 695 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvrnt Flow 13 74 1121 80 86 1215 Maj€ r1Mli or Mft or1 Ma r1 Majrsr2 Conflicting Flow All 2508 1121 0 0 1121 0 Stage 1 1121 - Stage 2 1357 - - - Ceitic Hdwy 5.42 622 - 4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 3 318 - 2 216 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 31 251 - 623 Stage 1 311 - - Stage 2 232 - Platoon blocked. % - Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 27 251 - - 623 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 27 - Stage 1 311 Stage 2 200 - Approach WB NB SB HOW Control Delay s 55 7 0 0 8 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major Mvrilt NBT 1VR .6ti'S1,-n1lArB8Ln2 SC', 313T Capacity (vetalh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCtv1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICJM951h %tile € {veh) - 27 251 623 - 0.483 0.294 0.138 - 228.2 25.2 11 7 - F D B t5 1.2 0.5 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 14 Arterial Level of Service 2029 AM W project 04/2812020 Arterial Level of Service: NB Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist. Arterial Arterial Gress Sheet Class Seed Tire De* Time Vis) {rni) Speed LOS Lako Street III 30 41.2 71.0 112.2 0.32 10.4 E Puapueanui St III 30 107.6 16.7 124.3 0.90 26.0 B Total 111 148.8 87.7 236.5 1.22 18.6 C Arterial Level of Service: SB Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Cross Street Prison JAAtiiu nh Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Class Speed Tine Delay Time Os) (mi) Speed LOS u ! :An ae 1 r, R5.8 105.1 0. r 9 28.2 Lake Street 111 30 107.6 32.4 1.10.0 0 96 23.6 Taal 111 201 9 38.2 240,1 1,6B 25.2 B 5:00 pro Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 1 Signal Travel mist Arterial Arterial Delay Time (s) (mi) Speed LOS 6.2 100.5 0.79 28.1 B Arterial Level of Service 2029 PM W project 04/28/2020 Arterial Level of Service: NB Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Arterial Row Running Signal Travel bill Arterial Arterial Cross Sti eet Class Speed Time Del'; ' Time (s) (mi) SIVO LOS Lako Street 111 30 41.2 48.8 90.0 0.32 13.0 E Puapuaanui St III 30 107.6 18.1 125.7 0.90 25.7 B Total 111 148.8 65.9 215.7 1.22 20.4 C Arterial Level cf Service: SB Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Cross Street Prison JAAtu ,h Arterial Flow Running Class Speed T'1rr€e 111 '411 01 Lala Street 111 30 107.6 39.2 146.8 0 96 22.0 Total 111 22019 45.4 247.3 1.88 24.5 B 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 1 Appendix H Analysis Reports — Future Without Project Conditions (2039) HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2039 AM WO ,1101f2019 t 1, 41 Movement H3L EBT eBR W9L VAT WER NeL NOT Id8R SOL SST SEAR Lane Canfiqurataons Vi +" r VI tf HA r ) ++ ry Traffic Volume (vehlh) 87 558 266 199 827 28 297 234 133 24 392 216 Future Volume (vehfh) 87 558 266 199 827 26 297 234 133 24 392 216 Initial Q (Qb), ven 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1737 1767 1737 1841 1811 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 89 569 0 203 844 0 303 239 0 24 400 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, % 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cap,vehlh 187 1420 285 1565 394 900 45 579 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.42 0.00 0.08 0.45 0.00 0.12 0.25 0.00 0.03 0.16 0.00 Sat Flow, vahih 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1560 3401 3554 1572 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 89 569 0 203 844 0 303 239 0 24 4017 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh,4n 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1685 0 Serve(g_s), s 2.3 9.9 0.0 4.9 14.9 0.0 7.3 4.5 0.0 1.1 8.9 0.0 Cycle Q CEear(g c), s 2.3 9.9 0.0 4.9 14.9 0.0 7.3 4.5 0.0 1.1 8.9 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 167 1420 285 1565 394 900 45 579 WC Relic (X) 0.53 0.40 0.71 0.54 0 77 0.27 0.53 0.69 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 237 1420 421 1665 579 1993 117 1620 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 1.04 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 38.8 16.8 0.0 37.5 16.5 0.0 36,0 25.1 0.0 40 4 33.2 0 0 Incl. Delay (d2), s/veh 2.6 0.8 0.0 3.3 1.3 0.0 3.7 0.2 0.0 9.2 1.5 0.0 Initial 0 Dela+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0,0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 9 Ie Back01Q(60%),vehiln 0 9 3.7 0.0 2 1 5.7 0.0 3 2 1.9 0,0 0.6 3.9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 41.4 17,7 0.0 40.8 17.9 0.0 39.7 25.3 0.0 49.6 34.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D 8 0 C D C Approach Vol, vehlh 658 A 1047 A 542 A 424 A Approach Delay, sfveh 20.9 22.3 33.3 35.5 Approach LOS C C C D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 6.6 25.8 11.5 40.0 14.2 18.2 8.9 42.7 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 47 1 10,4 34.0 14.3 38.3 6.2 38.2 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 3.1 6.5 6.9 11.9 9.3 10.9 4.3 16.9 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 1.7 0.2 3.8 0,5 2,6 0.0 5.9 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 26.3 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 2039 AM WO 1110112019 Movement EBL. EBT EBR WSL WEIT WEIR NQL NBT NBR SBL 687 Stip' Lane Configurations Vi 1+ if vi) 14 r vi 414 tf 1 414 Traffic Volume (vph) 131 438 151 53 732 570 178 411 51 442 414 151 Future Volume (vph) 13'1 433 151 63 732 570 178 411 51 442 414 151 ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0.97 0.95 1,00 0,97 0.95 1,00 0.91 0.91 1,00 0,91 0.91 Frpb, pedWbikes 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, pad/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1 00 1,00 0,85 1 00 1,00 085 1.00 1,00 0.85 100 0 97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1545 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Fft Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1.00 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 135 452 156 65 755 588 184 424 53 456 427 156 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 109 0 0 405 0 0 42 0 22 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 135 452 47 65 755 180 166 442 11 347 670 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl (likes. (tlhr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 13% 13% 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 3% 7% 3% 4% 5% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.6 30.4 30.4 4.1 27.9 27.9 20.5 20.5 20.5 27.6 27.6 Effective Green, g (s) 6.6 30.4 30.4 4.1 27.9 27.9 20.5 20.5 20.5 27.6 27.6 Actuated WC Ratio 0.07 0.30 0.30 0,04 028 0.28 0,20 0,20 020 0.27 0.27 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Gap (vph) 203 991 458 134 944 429 318 682 303 437 870 Os Ratio Prat 04.04 0.14 0.02 c0.22 0.11 c0.13 00.22 0.21 Os Ratio Perm. 0.03 0.12 0.01 vic Ratio 0.67 0.45 0.10 0,49 0.80 0,42 0.52 0.65 0,04 0.79 0 77 Uniform Delay, di 45.9 28.4 25.3 47.2 33.8 29.7 35.7 36.7 32.1 33.9 33.6 Pregres ion Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1 00 Incremental Delay, d2 8.0 1.5 0,5 2 8 7,1 3,0 1 5 2.1 0.0 9,6 4.3 Delay (s) 53.9 29.9 25.7 54.0 40.8 32.7 37.2 38.9 32.2 43.4 37.8 Level of Service ❑ C C D D C 0 0 0 l3 0 Approach Decay (s) 33.4 37.9 37 9 39.7 Approach LOS C D 0 D Intersection Surnmary HCM 2000 Control Delay 37.5 14C i 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,74 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.6 Intersection Capacity utilization 73.8% Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cr iiia! Lane Group HCM 2000 Level of Service D Surri of lost Gme (s) ICU Level of Service 18.0 ❑ 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2039 AM WO 11/01(2019 iriterseci n Int Delay, slveh 41 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SIBT SBR Lane Configurations j r } + i( Traffic Vol, vehfh 54 59 200 1202 947 37 Future Vol, veh/h 54 59 200 1202 947 37 Conflicting Peds, hr 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stmt Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 Mvrnt Flow 58 63 215 1292 1018 40 M'ajorJMincr Nilinor2 Major1 Maj .. . Conflicting Flow All 2741 - 1019 0 - 0 Stage 1 1019 Stage 2 r22 Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 412 Critical Hdi y Stg 1 5.42 Critical Fldiro Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver - 22 0 681 Stage 1 348 0 Stage 2 158 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver T5 - 680 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 15 Stage 1 238 Stage 2 158 Approach EB 1+k9 SB H W Control Delay, 1804 9 1 8 0 HCM LOS F i tnor LafteJhflajar vlunrt NL NET EELn 1 FSLn2 SET SER Capacity (vett/h) 680 - 15 HCM Lane VAC Ratio 0.31E - 3.871 11CM Control Delay {s} 12 7 S 1804.9 HCM Lane LOS B - F A HCM 95th %tile t:l{veh) 1.4 8.1 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delay exceeds 300s ': Comeutation Not Defined All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 2039 AM WO 11'01f2019 intersection Int Delay, WO Wlovetncnr Larne Configurations Traffic Val, vehfh Future Vol, vehlh Conflicting Pads. #Jhr Sign Control RT Channelized 92 WBL 11 11 0 Stop Storage Length 0 Veh in Median Storage, # Q Grade. % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvrnt Flaw 4VBR 171 171 0 Slap Stop 0 NBT NBR SBL SBT 1228 18 89 913 1228 18 89 913 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free - Yield - None 0 0 0 93 982 0 - - 0 - 0 - - 93 93 93 93 93 2 2 2 13 5 12 184 1320 19 96 M&jorIMlnor Whorl M Major2 Conflicting Flow All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Fldwy Sig 2 Follow-up Hdwy Pot Cap -1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 2504 1330 0 0 1320 1330 1174 5.42 622 - 4.16 5.42 - - 5.42 - - - 3.518 3.318 - 2 254 32 189 - 511 247 294 26 189 - - 511 26 - - 247 239 - Approach WB NB SB H w Control Delay, s 11€ 7 0 1 2 HCM LOS F Minor LnfteJhflalar'vlvrat NBT 1Jf3RVIIBLn1WN0Ln2 SBL. SBT Capacity (vetalh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCfu1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 25 189 511 - 0.455 0.973 0.187 - 229.1 109.5 13.7 - F F B - 1-4 8 0.7 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 5; Puapueanui St 2039 AM WO 1110112019 Movement W13L VI/BR WI' NEP SRL SST Lane Configurations 11 r 1 tir 1 t Traffic Volume (vehlh) 105 226 1041 29 52 876 Future Volume (vehTh) 106 226 1041 29 52 875 Initial Q (Ob), vats 0 0 0 0 0 D Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1 00 1,00 1,00 1 00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hlln 1870 1870 1856 1070 1870 1826 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 113 0 1107 0 55 932 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent He vy Veh, 90 2 2 3 2 2 5 Cap, veh/h 143 1382 71 1515 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.04 0.93 Sat Flow, vah/h 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 113 0 1107 0 55 932 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlh/ln 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.2 0.0 37.7 0.0 3.1 17.8 Cycle Q Ctear(c,_c), s 6.2 0.0 37.7 0 0 3.1 17.8 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 t 00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vel* 143 1382 71 1515 VPC Relic (X) 0 79 0.80 0.78 0.62 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh 321 1382 116 1515 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 45.2 0.0 8.1 0.0 47 6 3.0 Incr DeJey (d2), s/veh 9.3 0.0 5.00 0.0 16.5 1.9 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 3.1 0.0 13.5 0 0 1.7 4,3 Unsig. Movement Delay, slveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 54.5 0.0 13.0 0.0 64 1 4.8 LnGrp LOS D B L A Approach Vol, veh/h 113 A 1107 A 987 Approach Delay, sfveh 54.5 13.0 8.1 Approach LOS D B A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 8.5 79.0 87.5 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 Max Green Seting (Gmax), s 6.5 72.0 83.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 5.1 39,7 19.8 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 12,5 10,1 Intersection Summary 8 12.5 45 18.0 8.2 0.2 HCM 6th CirI Delay HCM 5th LOS 13.0 9 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [NBR, WBR[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2039 AM WO 1110112019 lritersecik n Int Deiey, slveh 11 3 Wfdvetnent. EBL EBR t BL NBT SOT SBR Lane Configurations vi r + + F Traffic Vol, vet* 9 206 631 977 894 74 Future Vol, veh/h 9 206 631 977 894 74 Conflicting Pads. #hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - 700 Veh in Median Storage, # t] 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 7 Mvrnt Flow 10 222 678 1 051 961 80 Mirr/Mlnor Mirior2 ROM Maj r2 Conflicting Flow All 3368 - 961 0 Stage 1 961 Stage 2 2407 Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Fltio Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 9 0 716 Stage 1 371 0 Stage 2 71 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 0 - 716 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 0 Stage 1 20 Stage 2 71 Approach EB PJB SB HOW Conlrc..1 Delay s HCM LOS 18 1 0 Minor LnneJhflajar 'vlunrt Nal_ NOT El3Ln 1 FaLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (vehih) 716 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.918 tfCful Control Delay {s} 46 HCM Lane LOS E r~ HCM 95th %tile C{veh) 13.8 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delav exceeds 30Os -: Comeutation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: l_ako Street 2035 AM WO 11/01{2019 t Movement EBL BBT BER W$L WBT WEIR NOL NBT IBR SBL BBT SBR Lane Ccnfiqurattons ) T I ) III r 1 + r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 305 59 84 84 44 326 40 9015 67 172 789 153 Future Volume (veh/h) 306 59 84 84 44 326 40 966 67 472 789 153 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 1811 1856 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 326 63 0 89 47 D 43 1028 0 183 832 0 Peak Hour Factor 07.94 0.94 0.94 094 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, 917 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cap, vehlh 323 339 128 135 228 935 184 983 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.50 0.00 0.06 0.53 0.00 Set Flow, vah)h 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 326 63 0 89 47 0 43 1028 0 183 839 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlh/ln 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 18.0 2.8 0.0 4.9 2.4 0.0 1.1 49.6 0.0 6.3 38.6 0.0 Cycle Q CEaat(g_c), s 18.0 2.8 0.0 4.9 2.4 0.0 1 1 49.6 0,.0 6 3 38.5 0.0 Prop In Lane 1 00 0.00 1 00 0 OO 1 00 1.00 1,00 1 00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 323 339 128 135 228 935 184 983 VPC Retic (X) 1.01 0.10 0.70 0.35 019 1.10 0 99 0.85 Avail Cap(cw.a., vehlh 323 339 321 339 255 935 184 983 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 100 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 40 6 34.4 0.0 44.9 43.8 0.0 17.8 24 8 0.0 28.1 20 0 0 0 In Delay (d2), slveh 52.2 0.3 0.0 6.7 1.5 0.0 0.4 60.3 0.0 64.8 9.4 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °!idle BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 12 5 1.3 0.0 2.4 1.2 0.0 0 5 36.0 0,0 7 8 18.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Dalay(d),sIvrih 92 7 34.6 0.0 51.6 45,3 0.0 18,2 85.1 0.0 93,0 29.4 0.0 LnC,rp LOS F C D D B F F C Approach Vol, veh/h 389 A 136 A 1071 A 1022 A Approach Delay, sfveh 83.3 49.4 82.4 40.8 Approach LOS F D F [3 Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 10.9 54.1 22.5 8.0 57.0 11.7 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.4 49.6 18.0 5.0 51.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 8.3 51.6 20.0 3.1 40.5 6.9 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 4,5 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay I-1CM 6th LOS 64.4 E !dotes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si nalized Intersection Summary 2039 AM WO 8. Kamehameha 111 Road & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 11/0112019 20'-r Movement EBI_ EBT 0ER WEll, war WER NOL klBT INBR SRL Sr SBI Lane Canfiqura0ons 4 r vi +1 Traffic Volume (vehlh) 192 6 32 20 15 13 93 580 13 17 509 343 Future Volume (vehlh) 192 6 32 20 15 15 93 580 13 17 509 348 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.9a 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1722 1781 1781 1781 1752 1811 1811 1870 1811 1811 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 206 5 0 22 16 19 100 624 19 18 547 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 2 2 12 8 8 8 10 6 6 2 6 6 Cap, vehlh 271 a 30 22 26 126 897 27 38 1580 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.16 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.51 0.51 0.02 0.46 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1733 50 1459 626 455 540 1668 1747 53 1781 3532 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 212 0 0 57 0 0 100 0 643 18 547 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhlln 1784 0 1459 1621 0 0 1668 0 1800 1781 1721 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 7.9 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 18.7 0.7 7.1 0.0 Cycle Q Cl r(g_c), s 7.9 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 18.7 0.7 7,1 0,0 Prop In Lane 0.97 1.00 039 0.33 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 279 0 78 0 0 126 0 925 38 1580 WC Retic (X) 0 76 0.00 0.73 0 00 0.00 0 79 0.00 0.70 0.48 0.35 Avail Cap(ow,a), vehfh 669 0 598 0 0 220 0 925 131 1580 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 4O0 1 00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 0 00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 27 9 0.0 0.0 32.4 0,0 0 0 31 4 0 0 12.7 33.4 12 0 0 0 Incr DeJey (d2), slush 4.2 0.0 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.13 10.6 0.0 4.3 9.1 0.6 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 %le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 3.5 0.0 0,0 1 2 0.0 0.0 1 9 0 0 6,9 0.4 2 3 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s&veh LnGrp Delay(d1,slveh 32.1 0.0 0.0 44 7 0.0 0.0 42.0 0.0 17.0 42 5 12 6 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A D A A 0 A 8 D 8 Approach Vol, vehlh 212 A 57 743 565 A Approach Delay, sfveh 32.1 44.7 20.4 13.6 Approach LOS C D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 15.3 9.7 36.2 7.8 6.0 40.0 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4 5 4.5 25.9 9.1 31.5 25,5 5.1 35.5 9.9 6.1 9.1 4,4 2.7 20/ 1,0 0.1 3.3 0,2 0.0 3.5 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 5th LOS 20.4 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 2039 PM WO 10/2812019 t Movement SPL EBT EER WEIL WST WER NOL NBT Ni3R SRL SBI SSS' Lane Ccnfiqurataons Vi ++ r 11) tf r Vi ft r 1 ft lir Traffic Volume (vehlh) 317 1070 614 272 743 50 277 345 301 62 382 131 Future Volume (vehfh) 317 1070 614 272 743 56 277 345 361 62 382 131 Initial Q (0b), van 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.60 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 18513 1856 1870 1870 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 323 1092 0 278 758 D 283 352 0 63 390 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 Cep,vehlh 406 1472 358 1409 362 798 81 585 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.42 0.00 0.10 0.40 0.00 0.11 0.22 0.00 0.05 0.16 0.00 Set Flow, vehfh 3428 3528 15.85 3456 3497 1585 3428 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 323 1092 0 278 758 0 283 352 0 63 390 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhlln 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 7.9 22.5 0.0 6.8 14.2 0.0 6.9 7.4 0.0 3.0 8.9 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(c,_c), s 7.9 22.5 0.0 6.8 14.2 0.0 6.9 7.4 0.0 3.0 8.9 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 406 1472 358 1409 362 708 81 585 WC Ratin(X) 0.80 0.74 0.78 0.54 0 78 0.44 0.78 0.67 Avail Cep(ow,a), vehlh 497 1472 421 1409 418 1716 184 1649 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 37 0 21.2 0.0 37.7 19.6 0.0 37.6 28.8 0.0 40.7 33 8 0, 0 In Delay (d2), s/veh 7.2 3.4 0.0 7.6 1.5 0.0 8.2 0.4 0.0 14.5 1.3 0.0 Initial 0 Dela+y(d3),slveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOf0(50%),vehlln 3.6 9 3 0.0 3.2 5.7 0,0 3 3 3,1 0,0 1.6 3.9 00 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh 44.2 24.6 0.0 45 3 21.1 0.0 45.8 29.2 0.0 566.2 35.1 0.0 LnGrp LOS 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 Approach Vol, vehlh 1415 A 1036 A 835 A 453 A Approach Delay, sfveh 29.1 27.6 36.6 37.9 Approach LOS C C D D Turner - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G-- -Ro), s 8.4 23.9 13.4 40.5 13.6 18.7 14.7 39.2 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4 5 4,5 4,5 4 5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 8.9 41.6 10.5 36.0 10.5 40.0 12.5 34.0 Max Cr Clear Time (g_c+11), s 5.0 9.4 8.8 24.5 8.9 10.9 9.9 16.2 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 0.0 2,5 0.2 5 7 0.2 2,7 0 3 4.8 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS '31. Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersertton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2039 PM WO 2: Henry St & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 10/2812019 Movement EBL EBT ERR W13L WBT WEIR NBL NBT NBR SRL SB T 3138 Lane Configurations 111 14 if ) 14 if ) 4 F 1 414 Traffic Volume (vph) 232 809 355 88 669 383 154 388 41 425 417 232 Future Volume (vph) 232 809 355 88 669 383 154 388 41 425 417 232 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 45 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 45 4.5 Lane Ut 1. Factor 0,97 0.95 1.00 0,97 0.995 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0 91 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Flpb, pad/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 1,00 0,85 1 00 1,00 085 1.00 1,00 0.85 1 00 0 95 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prof) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 3193 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 a 95 1.00 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 3193 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 237 825 362 90 683 391 157 396 42 434 426 237 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 24B 0 0 285 0 0 34 0 45 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 237 826 114 90 683 105 141 412 8 369 683 0 Condi. Peds (Mir) 1 1 4 7 7 4 Confl Bikes. (Whr) 1 1 1 Henry Vehicles (95) 5% 2% 2% 2% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 B 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 8.6 32.0 32.0 3.9 27.3 27.3 19.5 195 19.5 28.3 28.3 Effective Green, g (S) 8_6 32.0 32.0 3.9 27.3 27.3 19.5 19.5 195 28.3 28.3 Actuated ofC Ratio 0.08 0,31 0,31 0,04 0,27 027 0.19 0,19 0.19 0.28 028 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 45 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Gap (vp4l) 282 1113 498 131 931 419 305 648 294 448 888 Os Ratio Prot a0.07 c0.23 0.03 020 0.09 00.12 c0.23 0.21 Os Ratio Perm. 0 07 9.07 0.01 v!c Ratio 0 84 0 74 0 23 0 69 0.73 0.25 0.46 0.64 0,03 0.82 0 77 Uniform Delay, di 45.9 31.2 25.7 48.3 33.9 29.2 36.5 37.8 33.4 34.4 33.7 Progression Factor 1 00 1.00 1 00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 19 6 45 '1 1 13 9 5,1 1,4 1 1 2.0 0,0 11 7 4.1 Delay (s) 65.5 35.6 26.8 62.2 39.0 30.6 37.6 39,9 33.4 46.0 37.8 Level of Service E D C E D C 3 D C D D Approach Decay (s) 38 4 38.0 38.9 40,5 Approach LOS D D D D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 38.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service D KC i 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,78 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 101.7 Surri of lost tint (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 78.7% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Ci itical Lane Group 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2039 PM WO 10/2812019 intersection Int Deiey, slveh 2 t Mdvelment. EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations re' Traffic Val, vehfh 12 B5 102 1128 1226 21 Future Vol, veh/h 12 85 102 1126 1226 21 Conflicting Rads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - Nene Yield Storage Length 140 0 550 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 4 2 6 Mvrnt Flow 12 88 105 1161 1264 22 M'ejorJMinor Minor2 Majrur1 Major2 Conflicting Fleur All 2635 1s25� Stage 1 1264 Stage 2 1371 Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 412 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 26 0 550 Stage 1 266 0 Stage 2 236 0 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver 21 - 556 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 21 - Stage 1 215 Stage 2 236 Approach EB NB SB H CW Control Delay 8$ 31E 3 1 1 HCM LOS F Manor Lane/Major Munrt NBL kl3T E,OILn 1 F5Ln2 SBT SRR Capacity (vela/h) 550 - 21 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.191 - 0.589 tfCtvl Control Delay {s} 13.1 -8 316.3 0 HCM Lane LDS B - F A HCM 95th %tile C7{veh) 0.7 1.7 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delav exceeds 300s ': Computation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 2039 PM WO 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 10/2812019 triterseclian Int Delay, shell 3.7 Movement WOL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Larne Configurations 1 r T irsi + Traffic Val, vehfh 17 87 1147 5 74 1238 Future Vol, vehlh 17 87 1147 5 74 1238 Conflicting Pads. 41ir 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Slap Slap Free Frau Fr€i Frea RT Channelized Stop - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 0 2 Mvmt Flow 18 90 1182 5 76 1276 MlorrfVllnor Minor! Mapr1 Majtr2 Conflicting Flow All 2613 1185 0 0 1182 Stage 1 1185 Stage 2 1428 - - Critioa Hdwy 5.47 6,22 - - 4.18 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.47 - Critical Fldwy Sig 2 5.47 - - - - Follow-up Hdiiry 3.563 3.318 - 2 272 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 26 230 - 570 Stage 1 284 - - Stage 2 216 Platoon blocked. % Mev Cap -1 Maneuver 23 230 570 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 23 Stage 1 284 Stage 2 187 Approach WB NB SB HOW Control Delay, s 81 9 HCM LOS F a 87 Minor Lane/Major Mvnrt NBT Ni3RWBLn11/BLn2 SBL SET Capacity (vehih) - 23 230 570 HCM Lane VIC Ratio - 0.762 0.39 0.134 FfCfu1 Conlral Delay {s} -S 345 7 34.3 12.3 HCM Lane LOS - F D B FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 2.2 1.7 0.5 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2039 PM WO 5: Puapueanui St 10/2812019 Moment WEL *BR WI' NER SRL Si'P Lane Canfiqurations 'Pi r t r 1 + Traffic Volume (vehJh) 41 131 1007 59 161 1105 Future Volume (vehlh) 41 131 1007 59 161 1105 Initial Q (Ob), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 1 00 1,00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach Na No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/hlln 1870 1826 1856 1841 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehJh 42 0 1036 0 166 1139 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent He vy Veh, % 2 5 3 4 2 2 Cap, vehJh 63 1320 200 1628 Arrive On Green 0.04 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.11 0.87 Sat Flow, vehJh 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 Grp Volurne(v), vehJh 42 0 1038 0 168 1139 Grp Sat Flow(s)yeh/h/ln 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 0 Serve(g_s), s 2.2 0.6 35.0 0.0 8.7 19.2 Cycle Q Ct r(c,_c), s 2.2 0.0 35.0 0.0 8.7 19.2 Prop In Lane 1 00 1.00 1 CO 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 63 1320 200 1628 V/C Retic (X) 0 67 0.79 0.83 0.7D Avail Cep(cw,a), veh/h 336 1320 252 1628 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 45.5 0.0 9.0 0.0 41 5 2.D Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 11.7 0.0 4.8 0.0 16.9 2.5 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 %le BackOlQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 0.0 13.0 0 0 4 7 2.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh 57.1 0.0 13.8 0.0 58 4.5 LnGrp LOS E B E A Approach Vol, veh/h 42 A 1038 A 1305 Approach Delay, s/veh 57,1 13.8 11.4 Approach LOS E B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 15.2 72.3 875 7.9 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.5 65.0 83.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.7 37.0 21.2 4,2 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.1 10,5 16.1 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 13.3 ?'lutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [1,1BR, WBR[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TWSC 6: Kuakini Street 2039 PM WO 10/2812019 tntersectinn Int Delay, slveh 8 6 Movetnent. 1=BL EBR NEL NBT SET SBR Lane Configurations j + re Traffic Vol, vehfh 16 454 297 11142 102 44 Future Vol, veh/h 16 454 297 1042 1082 44 Conflicting Pads, Iiihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Frea Free Fraa RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 70O Veh in Median Storage, # t] - 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 2 2 3 2 6 Mvrnt Flow 16 463 303 1063 1104 45 MeiorIMlnot Miror2 liilajorl Majr r2 Conflicting Row Ali 2773 - 1104 0 - 0 Stage 1 1104 - Stage 2 1669 - - - Celtio Hdwy 6.48 - 4.12 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.48 - Critical Htdwy Sig 2 5.48 - - - - Follow-up Hein)? 3.572 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 20 0 632 Stage 1 309 0 - Stage 2 163 0 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver - 10 - 632 - - - Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 10 - - Stage 1 161 Stage 2 163 - - Approach EB NB SB H Control Delay s$ 1041 3 5 0 HCM LOS F Mlnor•LaneJhflajar'vlunrl NBL NETE,Bl,,m1 FSLn2 SET SRR Capacity (veh/h) 632 - 10 HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.48 - 1 133 HICM Cental Delay {s} 15.6 - S 10.11 HCM Lane LOS G F A HCM 95th %tile C7{veh) 2.6 2.9 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Dela/ exceeds 300s ': Computation Not Defined All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: l_eko Street 2039 Ptill WO 1012812019 4- t 1 Movement EBL EST EBR WBL WBT MR NOL NBA" NBR SRL SRI SEAR Lane Canfiqurataons I li I 11 t r ) + r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 155 37 59 76 48 235 45 920 78 221 1070 207 Future Volume (vehfh) 155 37 59 76 48 235 45 920 78 221 1070 207 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.90 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh!hlln 1841 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1856 1856 1870 1856 1070 1070 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 161 39 0 79 50 0 47 9580 230 1115 0 Peak 958Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Cap, vehlh 202 215 118 121 147 979 256 1087 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.04 0.53 0.00 0.09 0.58 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1753 1670 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 161 39 0 79 50 0 47 958 0 230 1115 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 81 1.7 0.0 3.9 2.4 0.0 1.1 45.5 0.0 6.8 52.5 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(c,_c), s 8.1 1.7 0.0 3.9 2.4 0.0 1.1 45.5 0.0 6.8 52.5 0,0 Prop In Lane 100 0.00 1 00 0 00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 202 215 118 121 147 979 256 1067 WC Relic (X) 0.80 0.18 0 67 0.41 0.32 0.98 0.90 1.03 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 349 373 355 364 177 979 256 1087 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 100 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1..00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 39.0 36.1 0.0 41.2_ 40 5 0.0 21.3 20.8 0.0 26,7 18.9 0.0 Ince Delay (d2), s/veh 7.1 0.4 0.0 6.4 2.3 0.0 1.2 23.9 0.0 31.2 34.0 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 °!idle BackOt (50%),vehlln 3 8 0.8 0.0 1,9 1.1 0.0 0 5 24,3 0,0 4 7 30.1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh 46 1 36.5 0.0 47 7 42.8 0.9 22.6 44 8 0.0 57.0 52.9 0.0 LnGrp LOS D 0 0 0 C 0 E F Approach Vol, vehih 200 A 129 A 1005 A 1345 A Approach Delay, sfveh 44.2 45.8 43.7 53.6 Approach LOS D D 0 ID Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 12.6 52.2 14.9 8.0 57.0 10.5 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 6.3 47.7 18.0 5.0 51.0 16.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), s 8.8 47.5 10.1 3.1 54.5 5.9 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 0,1 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.3 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay 41.8 HCM 6th LOS D !Motes Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si neiized Intersection Summary 2039 PM WO 8. Kameliameha 111 Road & Queen Kaaiiumaru Hvvy 10128(2019 t to - Movement EEC EBT EBR WPI- VuBT WBR Net_ NBT INBR SBL ABT SBR Lane Canfiqurataons 4 r 40 11 I 1 4 Traffic Volume (vehlh) 354 13 63 9 13 22 78 6014 13 21 624 347 Future Volume (vehlh) 354 13 63 9 13 22 78 604 13 21 624 347 Initial Q (Qb), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1767 1767 1511 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1070 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 373 14 0 9 14 23 82 636 14 22 657 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 9 9 6 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cap,vehlh 423 16 13 21 34 105 817 18 43 1479 Arrive On Green 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.45 0.45 0.02 0.42 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1624 61 1535 333 518 850 1767 1809 40 1781 3647 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 387 0 0 46 0 0 82 0 650 22 657 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhlln 1685 0 1535 1701 0 0 1767 0 1848 1781 1777 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 17.7 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 23.9 1.0 10.7 0.0 Cycle Q Claar(c,_c), s 17.7 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.0 3.7 0,0 23.9 1.0 10.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.96 1.00 0.20 0.50 1 00 0.02 1,00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 439 0 68 0 0 105 0 835 43 1479 WC Retic (X) 0.88 0.00 0.68 0.00 0.0D 0 78 0.00 078 0.51 0.44 Avail Cep(cw,al, vehfh 542 0 539 0 0 156. 0 835 113 1479 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0,00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Lfniform Delay (d). shah 28.6 0.0 0.0 38.1 0.0 0.0 37.3 0.0 18 7 38.8 16 8 0.0 In Delay (d2), slveh 114 0.0 0.0 11.2 OM 0.0 13.7 0.0 7.1 9.1 1.0 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0,0 0,0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 %le Back0t0(50%),vehlln 8.5 0.0 0.0 1 1 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 10.4 0 5 4.0 0,0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 41.9 0.0 0.0 49.3 0,0 0.0 51 0 0.0 25,7 47.9 17.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A D A A 0 !'S C D B Approach Vol, vehlh 387 A 46 732 679 A Approach Delay, sfveh 41.9 49.3 28.0 18.8 Approach LOS D D C B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+y+Re), S Change Period (Y{Rc), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max o Clear lime (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 25.5 9.3 38.0 7.7 5.4 40.8 4,5 4,5 4 5 4,5 4 5 4 0 25.9 7.1 33.5 25.5 5.1 35.5 19,7 5.7 12.7 4.1 3.0 25.9 1,2 0.0 4.0 0.2 0.0 2.8 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 28.3 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synctlra 10 Report Paga 13 Appendix 1 Analysis Reports — Future With Project Conditions (2039) HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2039 AM W project 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 03/13/2020 Movement Lane CanfiquratIons Traffic Volume (vehlh) Future Volume (vehfh) Initial Q (Qb), van Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zane On Approach Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln Adj Flow Rate, vehlh Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, vehlh Arrive On Green Sat Flow, vehfh Grp Volurne(v), vehlh Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/hlln 0 Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh VPC Ratin(X) Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh HOW Platoon Ratio Upstream Ptter(I) Uniform Delay (d). shah Incl. Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Dela+y(d3),s/veh %He Back0fQ(50%),vehlln Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh LnG,rp LOS Approach Vol, vehih Approach Delay, sfveh Approach LOS Timer - Assigned Phs HPL 87 87 0 1.00 1.04 1737 89 0.98 11 167 0.05 3209 89 1605 2.3 2.3 1 00 167 0.53 237 1.00 1.00 388 2.6 00 0,9 ELT 565 565 0 1.00 No 1767 577 0.98 9 1419 0.42 3357 57-7 1678 10.1 10.1 1419 0.41 1419 1.00 1,00 16.9 0.9 0.0 3,8 t PR W0L. VAT WER f t3L NBT N3R SRL SST SBR r tt 266 200 865 37 297 234 135 24 392 216 266 200 865 37 297 234 135 24 392 216 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 No No No 1737 1841 1811 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 0 204 883 0 303 239 0 24 400 0 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 286 1585 394 900 45 579 0.00 0.08 0.45 0.00 0.12 0.25 0.00 0.03 0.16 0.00 1472 3401 3441 1560 3401 3554 1572 1781 3554 1585 0 204 883 0 303 239 0 24 400 0 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1685 0.0 4.9 15.8 0.0 7.3 4.5 0.0 1.1 8.9 0.0 0.0 4.9 15.8 0.0 7.3 4.5 0.0 1.1 8.9 0.0 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 286 1565 394 900 45 579 0.71 0.56 0 77 0.27 0.53 0.69 421 1565 579 1993 117 1620 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1..00 1.1X] 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.0 37.5 16.8 0.0 36,0 25.1 0.0 40 4 33.2 0 0 0.0 3.3 1.5 0.0 3.7 0.2 0.0 9.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 21 6.0 0.0 3 2 1.9 0,0 0.6 3.9 0.0 41.4 17.8 0.0 40.8 18.3 0.0 39.7 0 B 0 B 0 666 A 1087 A 20.9 22.5 C 0 Phs Duration (G+y+Rc), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 1 6.6 4,5 5.5 3.1 0.0 2 25.8 4,5 47 1 6.5 1.7 3 11.6 4,5 10, 4 6.9 0.2 4 40.0 4.5 34.0 12.1 3.8 5 14.2 4,5 14.3 9.3 0,5 6 18.2 4, 5 38.3 10.9 2.6 7 8.9 45 6.2 4.3 0.0 25.3 0.0 49.6 34.6 0.0 C D C 542 A 424 A 33.3 35,5 C D 8 42.7 4.5 38.2 17.8 6.1 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 26.3 ?ides Unsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2039 AM W project 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 03/1312020 Movement RBI_ EBT EBR W9 WW1 WBR NBL NBT NBR SRL SB T S8 Lane Configurations Vi t+ if i 14 if iii4 rf lj 41 Traffic Volume (vph) 131 447 151 67 780 6013 178 411 52 451 414 151 Future Volume (vph) 13' 447 151 67 780 608 178 411 52 451 414 151 Weal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0 97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 091 Frpb, pedibikes 1.00 1.00 8.99 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1 00 1,00 0 85 1 00 1,00 0,85 1.00 1.00 0.85 100 0 97 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1545 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 FR Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow (vph) 135 461 156 69 804 627 184 424 54 465 427 156 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 109 0 0 408 0 0 43 0 21 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 135 461 47 69 804 215 166 442 11 349 678 0 Condi. Peds (#'hr) 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl Bikes. (tlhr) 1 Heavy Vehicles (%) 13% 10 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 3% 7% 3% 4% 5% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permrtted Phases 4 5 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 6.5 30,3 30.3 4.1 27.8 278 20.5 20.5 20.5 27.7 27.7 Effective Green, g (s) 6.6 30.3 30.3 4.1 27.8 27.8 20.5 20.5 20.5 27.7 27.7 Actuated ofC Ratio 0.07 0.30 0..30 0,04 028 028 0.20 0,20 0.20 0.28 0.28 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vp4l) 203 988 456 134 941 427 318 682 303 439 873 Os Ratio Prot x0.04 0.14 0.02 c0.24 0.11 c0.13 x,0.22 0.21 vIs Ratio Perm. 0 03 0.14 0.01 yip Ratio 0.67 0.47 0.10 0.51 0.85 0.51 0.52 0,65 0,04 0.79 0.78 Uniform Delay, di 45.9 28.6 25.3 47.3 34.5 30.7 35.7 36.7 32.1 33.8 33.6 Prngre88lon Factor 1 00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 8 0 7.6 0.5 3 3 9.8 4.3 1 5 2.1 0.0 9,5 4.4 Delay (s) 53.9 30.2 25.8 50.6 44.3 35.0 37.2 38.9 32.2 43.4 38.0 Level of Service 0 rC r 0 D 0 ❑ 0 C ❑ 0 Approach Decay (s) 33.5 40.7 37,9 39.8 Approach LOS C D 0 0 Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay 38.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service D HMO 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.76 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 100.6 Surri of lost tint (s) 18.0 Intersection Capacity utilization 74 0% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 c Cr itical Lane Group 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2039 AM W project 03/1312020 Intersection Int Delay, WO 50.6 Movetnenll EBL EBR NBL 441Yr SBT SBR Larne Configurations j i0 + et ft Traffic Vol, vehfh 54 215 1292 966 37 Future Vol, veh/h 64 60 215 1292 965 37 Conflicting Pads. lihr 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - Nene - Yield Storage Length 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage. # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 Mvrnt Flow 58 65 231 1389 1039 40 Mlorifil Iiol Mirior2 Major Maio Conflicting Flow All 2891 - 1040 0 Stage 1 1040 Stage 2 1851 Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver - 18 0 669 Stage 1 341 0 Stage 2 136 0 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver - 12 - 668 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 12 Stage 1 223 Stage 2 136 Approach EB 1+k9 SB HOW Control Delay, 6 2351 5 1 9 0 HCM LOS F Minor LnReJMajar'vlunrt NBL r,tST5TLn1 FT3Ln2 SBT SER Capacity (veh/h) 668 - 12 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.316 - 4.839 - HCtul Cdnfol Delay {s} 13.2 S2351.6 0 HCM Lane LOS B - F A HCM 95t11 %tile C7{veh) 1.5 - 8.4 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delav exceeds 300s ': Corncutation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 4: Hualalali Rd (South) 2039 AM W project 03/1312020 lntersectinn Int Delay, slveh 13 1 Movement WOL. WOR NBT NOR SOL SOT Larne Configurations 11 if Traffic Vnl, vehfh 11 171 1333 18 89 933 Future Vol, vehlh 11 171 1333 18 89 933 Conflicting Peds, #Jhr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Frea RT Channelized Stop - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 13 5 5 Mvrnt Flaw 12 184 1433 19 96 1003 M&jor1Mlnolr Minor t M Maj Conflicting Flow All 2638 1443 0 0 1433 Stage 1 1443 Stage 2 1195 Critiod Hdwy 5.42 622 - 4.16 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - - - - Follow-up Hein)? 3.516 3.318 - 2.254 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 26 - 162 - 462 Stage 1 217 Stage 2 287 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 21 - 182 - - 462 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 21 Stage 1 217 Stage 2 227 Approach WB NEI SB HOW Control Delay, s 171 9 0 1 3 HCM LOS F Mlmr•LnneJhflajar'vlunrt NBT °NBfBLn1WBLn2 SBL SET Capacity (veh/h) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCful Control Daley {s} HCM Lane LOS HCM 951h %tile C7{veh) - 21 162 462 - 0.563 1 135 0207 308.5 168.4 14.8 - F F B 1.6 9.8 0.8 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delav exceeds 300s ': Computation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in olatoan 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 6 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2039 AM W project 5: Puapueanui St 03!13/2020 { f ,� Movement WEIL WBR NBT H8R SBL, SaT Lane Ccnfiquratlons 11 r t iii 1 t Traffic Volume (vehlh) 108 226 1149 32 52 896 Future Volume (vehTh) 108 226 1146 32 52 899 Initial Q (Qb), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No tic Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1856 '1870 1570 1829 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 115 0 1219 0 55 953 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, 91) 2 2 3 2 2 5 Cap, vehJh 142 1428 71 1546 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.00 0.77 0.00 0.04 0.85 Sat Flow, vehJh 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 115 0 1219 0 55 953 Grp Sat F1ow(s),vehlhiln 1781 15855 1856 1585 1781 1826 0 Serve(g_s), s 71 0.0 53.6 0.0 3.7 20.4 Cycle Q Claar(c,_c), s 73 0.0 53.6 0.0 3.7 20.4 Prop In Lane 1 00 1.04 1 00 t 00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 142 1428 71 1546 VPC Retic (X) 0 81 0.85 0.78 0.62 Avail Cap(o.a), vehfh 264 1428 81 1546 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 55.1 0.0 9.4 0.0 57.9 3.0 lncr Delay (d2), slush 10.5 0.0 6.7 0.0 38.5 1.9 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOIQ(50%),vehlln 3.9 0.0 20.1 0 0 2.3 5.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, sNveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 65.6 0.0 16.1 0.0 91,4 4,9 LnGrp LOS E B F A Approach Vol, vehJh 115 A 1219 A 1008 Approach Delay, sfveh 65.6 16.1 9.6 Approach LOS E 9 A Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.3 98.2 107.5 142 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.5 93.0 103.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 51 55.6 22.4 9.7 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 16.4 10.8 0.2 Intersection Summary Fl CM 6th CirI Delay HCM 6th LOS 15.7 9 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [IJOR, W8R[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TVVSC 6: Kuakini Street 2039 AM W project 03!1312020 Intersection Int Daley, Weih 12 7 Movement EBL EBR NBL 1dr SBT SBR Larne Configurations r + + i Traffic Val, vehfh 9 206 634 1102 921 76 Future Vol, veh/h 9 206 634 1002 921 76 Conflicting Pads. Iiihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stmt Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage, # t] 0 0 Grade. % 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 7 Mvrnt Flow 10 222 682 1077 990 82 Major/Minor Mir ort ROM Maiof2 Conflicting Flow All 3431 - 990 0 Stage 1 990 - Stage 2 2441 Critical Hdwy 6.42 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.42 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver - 8 0 698 Stage 1 360 0 Stage 2 68 0 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver 0 - 698 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 0 Stage i - 8 Stage 2 68 Approach EB NB SB HOW Control Delay_ , s HCM LOS 215 0 Minor LntteJhflajar Mvril N8L NBT F QLn 1 FBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 02.8 HCM Lane VIC Ratio C.L'? HCtul Control Delay {s} 52 8 HCM Lane LOS F HCM 95th %tile C {veh) 15 Dotes Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 30Os +: Computation Not Defined All major volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summery 7: Lako Street 2039 AM W project 03/1312020 Movement EBL EBT EBR VEL VT WER NOL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Canfiquratlons ) if iii 1 ) t rf j + r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 311 59 84 100 47 334 40 981 67 175 808 157 Future Volume (vehfh) 311 59 84 100 47 334 40 981 67 176 808 157 Initial Q (Qb), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 1811 1856 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 331 63 0 106 50 0 43 1044 0 187 860 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cap, vehJh 319 335 140 148 232 990 168 1039 Arrive On Green 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.53 0.00 0.06 0.56 0.00 Sat Flow, vehJh 1781 1670 0 1767 1870 0 1181 1870 1560 1725 1856 1185 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 331 63 0 106 54 0 43 1044 0 187 860 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yeh/h/ln 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 21.5 3.4 0.0 7.1 3.0 0.0 1.3 63.5 0.0 7.5 45.6 0.0 Cycle Q CIear(g c), s 21.5 3.4 0.0 7.1 3.0 0.0 1.3 63.5 �0 7.5 456 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0.00 1 00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 319 335 140 148 232 990 168 1039 VC Ratio(X) 1.04 0.19 0.76 0.34 019 1.05 1 11 0.83 Avail Cep(cw,a), vehfh 319 335 287 304 250 990 168 1039 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slush 49.2 41.8 0.0 54.1 52.3 0 0 19.7 28 2 0.0 37.8 21 7 0.0 Incl. Delay (d2), s/veh 60.3 0.3 0.0 8.1 1.3 0.0 0.4 44.2 0.0 103.4 7.6 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),sfveh 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 °!idle BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 14 9 1.6 0,0 3 4 1.6 0.0 0 5 39 1 0,0 9 9 21 1 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sNveh LnGrp Delay(d},sIveh 109.6 42.1 0.0 62 3 53.6 0.0 20 1 72.4 0.0 141,3 29.2 0.0 LnGrp LOS F 0 E 0 0 F F 0 Approach Vol, veh/h 394 A 158 A 1087 A 1047 A Approach Delay, s/veh 98.8 59.5 70.4 49.2 Approach LOS F 1 E D Turner - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 12.0 68.0 26.0 8.3 71.7 Change Period (Y{Rc), s 4.5 4,5 4 5 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.5 63.5 21.5 5.0 66.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.5 65.5 23.5 3.3 47.6 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 6.4 Intersection Summary 14.0 4,5 19.6 9.1 0.3 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 65.7 E= Notes Elnsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and interseetton delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Syr;chro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si nolized Intersection Summary 2039 AM W project 8. Kamehameha rii Road & Queen Keahumaru Fin 03(1312020 20'-r 1 Movement ESC- EBT EBR WEL WEIT WER NOL NBT IBR SRL SBT SRR Lane Configurations 4 if 4., vi ) 'Ft Traffic Volume (vehlh) 195 5 32 20 15 18 93 591 18 18 529 362 Future Volume (vehfh) 196 6 32 20 15 18 93 591 18 18 529 362 Initial Q (01b), vats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 Parking Bars, Adj 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1,00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1870 1722 1781 1781 1781 1752 1811 1811 1870 1811 1811 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 211 5 0 22 16 19 100 635 19 19 569 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 093 0.93 0.93 0.93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent He vy Veh, 90 2 2 12 8 8 8 10 6 6 2 6 6 Cap,vehlh 260 7 28 21 24 125 1035 31 37 1850 Arrive On Green 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.59 0.59 0.02 0.54 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1734 49 1459 623 453 538 1668 1748 52 1781 3532 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 217 0 0 57 0 0 100 0 654 19 569 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1784 0 1459 1615 0 0 1668 0 1800 1781 1721 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 11.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 21.8 1.0 8.6 0.0 Cycle Q Claar(c,_o), s 11.0 0.0 0.0 3 3 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 21.8 1.0 8.6 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 97 1 00 0 39 0.33 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 267 0 73 0 0 125 0 1086 37 1850 WC Ratin(X) 0.81 0.00 0.78 0 00 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.61 0.51 0.31 Avail Cep(ow,a), vehfh 493 0 439 0 0 222 0 1066 97 1850 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1 00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.017 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 38 6 0.0 0.0 44 3 0.0 0.0 42.6 0.0 12.2 46.4 12 0 0.0 In Deiay (d2), slveh 5.9 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 10.9 0.0 2.6 10.5 0.4 0.0 Initial 0 Dula+y(d3),s/veh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %le BackOtG(60%),vehlln 5.2 0.0 0,0 1 6 0.0 0.0 2 6 0,0 8.0 0.5 3.0 00 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 44.4 0.0 0.0 60.4 0,0 0.0 53,6 0.0 14.9 55,9 12.4 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A E A A 0 A 8 E B Approach Vol, vehfh 217 A 57 754 588 A Approach Delay, sfveh 44.4 60.4 20.0 13.8 Approach LOS D E C B Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), $ Intersection Summary 2 3 4 6 7 8 18.5 11.5 54.9 81 6.5 60.0 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4 5 4.5 25.9 125 48.1 25.5 5.1 55.5 13.0 7.5 10.6 5.3 3.0 23.8 0.9 0.1 3.8 0.2 0.0 4.4 Fl CM 6th CirI Delay 22.5 HCM 5th LOS flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 13 HCM 6th TWSC 9: Kona VLsta Roadway 2039 AM W project 03/1312020 intersection Int Delay, slveh 4 1 Movetnent WOL WOR NBT NOR SOL SOT Lane Configurations] t Traffic Val, vehfh 29 108 1011 25 22 1004 Future Vol, vehlh 29 108 1011 25 22 1004 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Yield Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 585 695 - Veh in Median Storage. # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvrnt Flow 32 117 1099 27 24 1091 M'ejorIMinor Minors M!ajorl Major2 4111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Conflicting Flout All 2238 1099 0 0 1099 0 Stage 1 1099 Stage 2 1139 Critical Hdwy 6.42 622 - 4.12 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Fldiro Sig 2 5.42 - - - Follow-up Hein)? 3.518 3 318 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 47 258 - 635 Stage 1 319 - - Stage 2 305 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver 45 258 - - 635 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 45 Stage 1 319 Stage 2 293 Approach WB NB SB HOW Control Delay s 64 0 0.2 HCM LOS F Minor LnfteJhflalar'vlunrt NBT °NeRW'Si..n1WFFLn2 SB„ S07 Capacity (vehoh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCfu1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 45 258 635 - 0.7 0.455 0.038 - 190.1 30.1 10.9 - F D B - 2.7 2.2 0.1 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 14 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2039 PM W project 1: Palani Rd & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 03(1312020 Movement Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vehlh) Future Volume (vehfh) Initial Q (Qb), van Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) Parking Bus, Adj Work Zane On Approach Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln Adj Flow Rate, vehlh Peak Hour Factor Percent Heavy Veh, Cap, vehlh Arrive On Green Set Flow, vehfh Grp VDlurne(v), vehlh Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhlln 0 Serve(g_s), s Cycle Q Cl ar(c,_c), s Prop In Lane Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh VPC Ralic(X) Avail Cap(cw,a), vehlh HOW Platoon Ratio Upstream Ftlter(I) Uniform Delay (d). slveh Incl. Delay (d2), s/veh Initial Q Dula+y(d4slveh %He Back0fQ{50%),vehlln Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d),slveh LnG,rp LOS Approach Vol, vehlh Approach Delay, sfveh Approach LOS Turner - Assigned Phs EBL EBT EBR WEL WBT WER NOL NBT 'I ++ r 1` r vs) 1? 317 1104 614 274 767 59 277 345 317 1104 614 274 767 59 277 345 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 11:00 1.00 1 00 oda No No 1856 1856 1870 1870 1841 1870 1856 1870 323 1127 0 280 783 0 283 352 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 406 1471 359 1409 362 792 0.12 0.42 0.00 0.10 0.40 0.00 0.11 0.22 3428 3526 1585 3456 3497 1585 3428 3554 323 1127 0 280 783 0 283 352 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714. 1777 7.9 23.6 0.0 6.8 14.9 0.0 6.9 7.4 7.9 23.6 0.0 6.8 14.9 0..0 6.9 7.4 100 1.00 100 1.00 1.00 406 1471 359 1409 362 702 0 80 0.77 0.78 0.56 0 78 0.44 497 1471 421 1409 417 1714 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 370 21.5 0.0 37.7 198 0.0 37.6 289 7.2 3.9 0.0 7.8 1.6 0.0 8.2 0.4 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 36 9.8 0,0 32 6.0 0.0 33 3.1 44.3 25.4 0.0 45.5 21,4 0.0 D C D C 1450 A 1063 A 29.6 27.7 C 4� Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setting (Gmax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p 0), 5 Intersection Summary 1 85 4.5 B.9 5.1 0.0 2 23.7 4,5 41.6 9.4 2,5 3 13.5 4,5 10.5 8.8 0.2 4 40.5 45 36.0 25.6 5.5 45.8 D 5 6 13.6 18.7 4.5 4,5 10.5 40.0 8.9 10.9 0.2 2.7 7 14.7 4.5 12,5 9.9 0.3 NeR SRL RBI SBP 1+ft 311 64 382 131 311 64 382 131 o o o 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 No 1870 1870 1870 1870 O 65 390 0 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 2 2 2 2 84 585 0.00 0.05 0.16 0.00 1585 1781 3554 1585 O 65 390 0 1585 1781 1777 1585 0.0 3.1 8.9 0.0 0.0 31' 8.9 0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 84 585 0.77 0.67 184 1648 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.40 0.0 40.7 338 0.0 0.0 14.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0,0 1.7 3.9 0.0 29.3 0.0 54.7 35.1 0.0 C D D 635 A 455 A 36.7 37.9 D [ 8 39.3 45 34.0 16.9 4.9 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HDIV 6th LOS 31.3 Notes Unsrgnalized Delay for IN BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2039 PM W project 2: Henry St & Queer Kaahumanu Hwy 03!1312020 -.c t 41 MOverthent RBI_ EBT 81= WBL Val WBR NBL NBT N8P SRL 387 SBA Lane Configurations Vi ++ if VI fs. if ) 4t 11 .1 4t Traffic Volume (vph) 232 854 355 93 704 403 154 388 43 449 417 232 Future Volume (vph) 232 854 355 93 704 403 154 388 43 449 417 232 Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tail. Factor 0.97 095 1.00 0,97 0.95 1.00 0.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0 91 Frpb, pedibikes '1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1,00 0.98 1.00 0.99 Flpb, pedlbikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fri 1.00 1,00 0.85 1 00 1,00 0,55 1.00 1,00 0.85 1 00 0 95 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow (prof) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 3194 FR Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0 95 1,00 1,00 0.95 1.d0 1.00 0 95 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm) 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1610 3194 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Adj. Flow (vph) 237 871 362 95 718 411 157 396 44 458 425 237 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 0 255 0 0 305 0 0 36 0 42 0 Lane Group Flow (vph) 237 871 107 95 718 106 141 412 8 376 703 0 Conk. Peds (Mir) 1 1 4 7 7 4 Conti Bikes. (tlhr) 1 1 1 Henry Vehicles (%) 5% 2% 2% 2% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm Split NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 B 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green, G (s) 9.6 29.6 29.8 5.0 26.2 26.2 19.5 19.5 19.5 28.9 28.9 Effective Green, g (S) 8.6 29.8 29.8 5.0 26.2 201.2 19.5 19.5 195 28.9 28.9 Actuated ofC Ratio 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.05 0,26 0.26 0.19 0,19 0.19 0.29 029 Clearance Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehicle Extension (8) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Gap (vp4i) 283 1042 466 169 898 404 307 651 296 459 912 Os Ratio Prot x0.07 c025 0.03 0.21 0.09 00.12 c0.23 0.22 v1s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.07 0.01 vic Ratio 0.84 0,84 0.23 0.56 0.80 0.26 0 46 0,63 0.03 082 0 77 Uniform Delay, di 45.6 33.4 27.0 47.0 35.0 29.8 36.2 37.6 33.2 33.7 33.1 Prrxt„resron Factor 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 18.9 7.9 1.1 4 2 7.4 1 6 1 1 2.0 0.0 10.9 4.1 Delay (s) 64.6 41.4 28.1 51.3 42.4 31.4 37.3 39.6 33.2 44.6 37.2 Level of Sarvice E D C D D C D D C 13 D Approach Decay (s) 41.8 39.4 38 6 39.7 Approach LOS D D 0 D Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control' Delay 40.2 KC i 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0,80 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 101.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 79 1% Analysis Period (min) 15 c Ci itical Lane Group HCM 2000 Level of Service D Surra of lost tint (s) 1CU Level of Service 18.0 D 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: Hualalai Rd (North) 2039 PM W project 03/1312020 intersection Int Daley, slveh 2 5 Movement EBL Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, vehfh 12 Future Vol, vehlh 12 Conflicting Pads. #Jhr 0 Sign Control Stop RT Channelized - Storage Length 140 Veh in Median Sthrage; # 0 Grade. % Peak Hour Factor Heavy Vehicles, % Mvrnt Flaw 0 97 2 12 EBR 90 911 0 Slop Free 0 97 2 93 NBL NBT SBT SBR 107 1185 1297 21 107 1185 12.97 21 0 0 0 0 Free Free Free Free None - Yield 650 - - 700 97 2 110 0 0 0 0 97 97 4 2 1222 1337 97 22 Major/Minor Minor2 Ma r1 Maj r2 Conflicting Flew All Stage 1 Stage 2 Critical Hdwy Critical Hdwy Stg 1 Critical Fldwry Sig 2 Follow-up Hein)? Pot Cap -1 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver Mov Cap -2 Maneuver Stage 1 Stage 2 2779 1337 1442 5.42 5.42 5, 42 3.518 21 245 218 17 17 193 218 Approach EB 1337 0 - 0 - 4.12 - 2.218 0 516 0 0 - 516 NB SB HOW Control Delay, s$ 425 9 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major 4lunrt Capacity (vehlh) HCM Lane VIC Ratio HCtv1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LDS HCM 95th %tile C7{veh) 11 0 NBL NBTEBLn1 EBLn2 5BT SW 516 - 17 - 0.214 - 0.728 - 13.9 -$ 425 9 0 B - F A 0.8 1.9 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Dela/ exceeds 300s +: Corncutation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 5 HCM 6th TWSC 2039 PM W project 4: Hualalai Rd (South) 03!1312020 Interseclian Int Delay, slveh 4 6 Movement. WBL. WBR NBT HER SOL SOT Lane Configurations 1 et + Traffic Val, vehfh 17 87 1212 5 74 1314 Future Vol, veh/h 17 87 1212 5 74 1314 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slap Free Free FreE Frea RT Channelized Stop - Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 0 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 - - 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 0 2 Mvrnt Flow 18 90 1249 5 76 1355 MElorllln'or Miror1 Majorl Maj Conflicting Row All 2759 1252 0 0 1249 Stage 1 1252 Stage 2 1507 - - Critical Hdwy 5.47 6,22 - - 418 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.47 - Critical Hdwy Sig 2 5.47 - - - - Follow-up Hein)? 3.563 3.318 - - 2.272 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 21 210 - 537 Stage 1 263 - Stage 2 197 Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 1B 210 - - 537 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 18 Stage 1 263 Stage 2 169 Approach WE NB SB HOW Control Delay, s 1f9 6 a 0 7 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/malar Mvrilt NBT 'NERWEILtilWELn2 SBL SET Capacity (vehoh) HCM Lane WC Ratio HClv1 Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS FICW 95th %tile € {veh) - 18 210 537 - 0.971 0.427 0.112 -$ 495 2 34.3 12.8 - F D B - 2.5 2 0.5 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 6 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2039 PM W project 5: Puapuaanui St 03!13/2020 t Movement WEIL WISR fueT HBR SBL S87 Lane Configurations el t r 1 + Traffic Volume (vehlh) 44 131 1072 63 161 1181 Future Volume (vehlh) 44 131 1072 63 161 1181 Initial Q (Ob), vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach Na No Nc Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1870 1826 1856 1841 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 45 4 1105 0 166 1218 Peak Hour Factor 0_97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent He vy Veh, % 2 5 3 4 2 2 Cap, vehlh 58 1412 191 1888 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.11 0.90 Set Flow, vehfh 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 Grp Vnlurne(v), vehlh 45 0 1105 0 166 1218 Grp Sat Flow(s),vehlhiln 1781 1547 1856 1560 1781 1870 0 Serve(g_s), s 3.4 0.0 48.0 0.0 12.5 25.2 Cycle Q ctear(g_0), s 3.4 0.0 48.0 0.0 12.5 25.2 Prop In Lane 100 1.00 1 00 1,00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 58 1412 191 1686 WC Ratin(X) 077 0.78 0.87 0.72 Avail Cep(cw.a i, vehfh 235 1412 241 1688 HOW Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fatter(I) 1 00 0.00 1,00 0 00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 65 5 0.0 9.6 0.0 60.0 1.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 18.8 0.0 4.4 0.0 22.9 2.7 Initial Q Dula+y(d3),siveh 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 °l�le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 1.9 0.0 18.6 0 0 6 9 4,3 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 843 0.0 14 0 0.0 82.9 4.6 LnGrp LOS = 6 F A Approach Vol, vehlh 45 A 1 105 A 1384 Approach Delay, sfveh 84.3 1.4.:;:i 14.0 Approach LOS F B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 15.1 108.4 127.5 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 4,55 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 16.5 100.0 123.0 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 14.5 50.0 27.2 Green Ext Tirne (p 0), s 02 14,3 20.6 Intersection Summary 9.0 4,5 18.0 5.4 0.1 Fl CM 6th CirI Delay HCM 6th LOS 15.3 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [1,1BR, W8R[ is excluded from calculations al the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 HCM 6th TVVSC 6: Kuakini Street 2039 PM W project 0311312020 tritersectinn Int Delay, slveh 9 3 Movement. teL EBR NBL NBT SST SBR Lane Configurations j Traffic Val, vehfh 16 454 298 1116 1094 44 Future Vol, veh/h 16 454 298 1116 1094 44 Conflicting Pads. Iihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Slap Slap Free Free Free Fres RT Channelized - Free - None - Yield Storage Length 160 0 630 - - 70O Veh in Median Storage, # t] - 0 0 - Grade. % 0 - 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 98 98 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 8 2 2 3 2 6 Mvrnt Flow 16 463 304 1139 1116 45 Mirr/Mlnolr Mft ort Mori Maio.r2 Conflicting Row All 2863 - 1116 0 Stage 1 1116 Stage 2 1747 Critical Hdwy 6.48 - 4 12 Critical Hdvuy Stg 1 5.48 - Critical Fldwy Sig 2 5.48 - Follow-up Hein)? 3.572 - 2.218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 18 0 626 Stage 1 305 0 Stage 2 149 0 Platoon blocked. % Mcv Cap -1 Maneuver - 9 - 626 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver - 9 Stage 1 157 Stage 2 149 Approach EB N9 SB H W Control Delay. 1188 2 3 4 0 HCM LOS F Minor LnneJhflajar Mvr t NEL NET ERLn 1 ET3Ln2 SRT SRR Capacity (veh/h) 628 • 9 - HCM Lane VIC Ratio 0.486 - 1.811 - HCtvl Cental Delay {s} 16.1 S 1188.2 0 HCM Lane LOS C F A, HCM 95th %tile C1{veh) 2.7 3 Motes --• Volume exceeds capacity S: Delay exceeds 300s -: Computation Not Defined • All rnaior volume in platoon 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 9 HGM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 7: Lako Street 2039 PM W project 03(13(2020 4 Movement EBI EBT EBR W/31.. WI3T WER Nal_ NBT IBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Canfiqurataons vi I li I 11 + r vi r Traffic Volume (vehlh) 164 37 59 83 49 250 45 972 78 223 1078 209 Future Volume (vehfh) 164 37 59 83 49 256 45 972 76 223 1078 209 Initial Q (Qb), ven 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1,00 1,00 1 00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1841 1870 1870 1870 1826 1826 1856 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, vehlh 171 39 0 86 51 D 47 1012 0 232 1123 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.06 0.96 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Cep,vehlh 196 209 114 116 184 1172 256 1240 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.63 0.00 0.06 0.66 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1757 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 171 39 0 86 51 0 47 1012 0 232 1123 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlh3ln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve(g_s), s 13.2 2.6 0.0 6.5 3.7 0.0 t3 60.7 0.0 6.1 69.5 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g. ), s 132 2.6 0.0 6.5 3.7 00.1 1.3 60,7 0.0 61 69.5 0.0 Prop In Lane 100 0.00 1 00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1 00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 196 209 114 116 184 1172 266 1240 WC Relic (X) 0.87 0.19 0.76 0.44 0.26 0.86 0 87 0.91 Avail Cap(cw,a), vehfh 230 245 234 239 195 1172 352 1240 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.04 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 60.0 65.3 0.0 63.2 61 9 0.0 25 2 205 0.0 29.5 19 5 0 0 Inor Delay (d2), slush 25.9 0.4 0.0 9.8 2.6 0.0 0.7 8.5 0.0 16.6 11.1 0.0 Initial 0 bale+y(d3),sfveh 0,0 0,0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %Ile BackOfQ(50%),veMn 7.3 1,3 0.0 3 3 1.8 0.0 0 8 27.6 0.0 6.3 31.8 0 0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Dulay(d),slveh 85..9 55,7 0.0 73.0 64.5 0.0 25,9 29.0 0.0 46.1 30.6 0.0 LnGrp LOS F E E E C 0 D C Approach Vol, vehlh 210 A 137 A 1059 A 1355 A Approach Delay, sfveh 80.3 69.8 28.9 33.2 Approach LOS F E 0 Cr Turner - Assigned Phs 1 2 Phs Duration (G+Y+Ro), s 13.0 91.2 Change Period (Y -L -Re), s 4.5 4,5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.1 80.9 Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ 8.1 62,7 Green Ext Time (p 0), s 0.4 8,2 Intersection Summary 19.9 4.5 18.0 15,2 0.2 5 6 8.7 95.5 4,5 4,5 5.0 91.0 3.3 71.5 0.0 10,0 8 13.3 45 16.0 8.5 0.3 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 3;1.0 llvtes linsrgnalized Delay for [N BR, EBR, WBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 pro Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 11 HGM 6th Si nolized Intersection Summary 2039 PM W project 8; Kamehameha rii Road & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 03(1312020 - -r •- k. 4\t 4I Movement Et3L EBT EBR WEIL WBT Wet Net_ NBT NBR S9L SBT SBR Lane Ccnfiqura0ons 4 r I I f T, Traffic Volume (vehlh) 373 13 63 9 13 23 78 536 13 21 634 352 Future Volume (vehTh) 373 13 63 9 13 23 78 636 13 21 634 352 Initial Q (01b), van 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped -Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, vehfhlln 1767 1767 1811 1870 1870 1870 1856 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Row Rate, vehlh 393 14 0 9 14 24 82 669 14 22 667 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.955 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.915 Percent Heavy Veh, 90 9 9 6 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 Cap,vehlh 437 16 12 18 31 104 936 20 39 1708 Arrive On Green 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.52 0.52 0.02 0.48 0.00 Sat Flow, vehfh 1627 58 1535 325 506 867 1767 1811 38 1781 3647 0 Grp Volurne(v), vehlh 407 0 0 47 0 0 82 0 683 22 667 0 Grp Sat Flow(s)yehlhlln 1685 0 1535 1698 0 0 1767 0 1849 1781 1777 0 0 Serve(g_s), s 26.8 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 32,6 1.4 13.8 0.0 Cycle Q Claar(g_oli, s 26 8 0.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 32.6 1.4 13.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 0 97 1.00 0 19 0.51 1.00 0.02 1.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), vehlh 453 0 61 0 0 104 0 956 39 1706 WC Ratin(X) 0 90 0.00 0.77 0.00 0.00 0 79 0.00 0.71 0.56 0.39 Avail Cep(ow,a), vehfh 614 0 376 0 0 160 0 956 79 1706 HCl Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d). slveh 40 6 0.0 0.0 55.0 0.0 0.0 53 4 0 0 211 3 55.7 19 2 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), slush 13.0 0.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 13.4 0.0 4.6 12.1 0.7 0.0 Initial 0 bale+y(d3),s/veh 0,0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 til le BackOfQ(50%),vehlln 12 6 0 D 0.0 1 7 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 14.1 0 7 5.6 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, sfveh LnGrp Delay(d},slveh 53 5 0.0 0.0 73.2 0,0 0.0 66.8 0.0 25 8 67,6 19.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D A E A A E A C E B Approach Vol, vehlh 407 A 47 765 689 A Approach Delay, sfveh 53.5 73.2 30.2 21.4 Approach LOS D E C 0 Timer - Assigned Phs Phs Duration (G+1 -1 -Re), S Change Period (Y -L -Re), s Max Green Setttn9 Grnax), s Max 0 Clear Time (g_c+11), $ Green Ext Tirne (p o), $ Intersection Summary 2 3 4 6 7 8 35.4 11.3 59. I 8.6 7.0 64.0 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 41.9 10.4 54.2 25,5 5.1 59.5 28.8 7.3 15.6 5.2 3.4 34.6 2,1 0.0 4.6 0,2 0.0 4,5 Fl CM 6th Ctrl Delay HCM 6th LOS 33.1 flutes Unsrgnalized Delay for [EBR, SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 13 HCM 6th TWSC 2039 PM W project 9: Kona Vista Roadway 03!1312020 Intersection Int Delay, sJweh 7.9 Movetnent. WBL WBR NBT NOR SOL SOT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, vehfh 12 88 1132 74 79 1225 Future Vol, veh/h 12 68 1132 74 79 1225 Conflicting Pads. lihr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Slop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Yield Yield - None Storage Length 0 0 585 695 - Veh in Median Storage, # 0 0 Grade. % 0 - 0 - 0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvrnt Flow 13 74 1230 80 86 1332 Mlrrifillnor Mtri:otr1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 2734 1230 0 0 1230 Stage 1 1230 Stage 2 1504 - Critical Hdwy f.42 622 - 412 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - Follow-up HdiAry 3.518 3.318 - 2 218 Pot Cap -1 Maneuver 22 217 - 567 Stage 1 276 - Stage 2 203 - Platoon blocked. % Mov Cap -1 Maneuver 19 217 - 567 Mov Cap -2 Maneuver 19 - Stage 1 276 Stage 2 172 - Approach WE tB SB HOW Control Delay s 81.8 a 0 8 HCM LOS F Minor Lane/Major .i1vr t NBT 1dBRWSLn1WNBLn2 S9! SET Capacity (vehih) HCM Lane WC Ratio HCW Control Delay {s} HCM Lane LOS HCW 95th %tile € {veh) • 19 217 567 - 0.686 0.341 0.151 -5 375 9 29.9 12.5 - F D B t9 1.4 0.5 5:00 prn Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page t4 Arterial Level of Service 2039 AM WV project 04128;2020 Arterial Level of Service: NB Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Arterial Flow Running Signal Travel Dist. Arterial Arterial Gress Sheet glees Speed Time Delay TIrne (s) (mi) Speed LOS Lako Street 111 30 412 111.1 152.3 0.32 7.7 F Puapunenui Street 111 30 107.6 21.2 128.8 0.90 25.0 B Total 111 1488 132.3 281.1 1.22 15.6 D Arterial Level cf Service: SB Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Arterial Flow Running Gres Street Class Speed 'Time Signal Travel Dist Arterial Arterial Delay Time Vis} (mi) Speed LOS 7n 101.3 0.;0 27.9 Pr lAn I JAAtu h- .1 111 Gd Lako Sheer 111 30 107.6 41.7 1.19,3 0 9D 2t.6 Total 111 22019 48.7 250.6 1,68 24.2 B 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 1 Arterial LOS B Arterial Level of Service 2039 PM W project 04/28/2020 Arterial Level of Service: NB Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Arterial Fioww Running. Signal Travel bill Aral Arterial Gress Sheet ,ctaas Spee Time De1ay Tlrne (s) (rei) SPeld LOS Lako Street 111 30 412 65.6 106.8 0.32 10.9 E Peep uaanui St 111 30 107.6 21.8 129.4 0.90 24.0 B Total 111 148.8 87.4 236.2 1_22 18.6 C Arterial Level of Service: SB Queen Kaahurnanu Hwy Cross Street Prison JAAtu ,h Arterial Flow Running Class Speed T'1rr€e 111 '411 01 Signal Travel Dist Arterial Delay Time s) (rrti) Speed 7.3 1n1 R G.70 27.8 Lala Sheer 111 30 107.6 47.5 155.1 0 9D 20.8 Total 111 22019 54.8 256.7 1.38 23.6 G 5:00 prn Baseline Synchra 10 Report Page 1 Appendix J Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor) (COMMUN1TY LESSTHAN 110,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET) 400 MINOR STREET 300 HIGHER- VOLUM E APPROACH - 200 VPH 100 iii 2CRMORE LANES &2ORMO�E LAMES 2 CR MORE LANES & 1 LANE. LANE d.1LANE 1017' 75' 300 .100 500 i ou 700 ROO 300 1000 1 100 1200 1 300 mAJon STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROA-CI- ES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VP1-I) At an inter�cctron 0.1th .t high,Y•I�i ,+ ° ". I, +t drn rr:tliw tram Uw major street the Starr: nl artalys.K may he performed in a man e+t r .. +I1 - : 14 l:< ~r r of the major -street ieir-ttirn volumes as the —minor -street" ti^rsluttte .dnc1 the +1.4re'TOME „ t , 1 11 :. r -iii „t I. fx 1,4111t: traffic: cwn rhe maj+-a° .street ;Is tate "major -..trees"' ••elloa xe For all unsignalized intersections, minor approach is QK left turn onto minor street For all unsignalized intersections, major approach is QK opposing thru Use 1 Lane & 1 Lane Existing Peak Flour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (N)776 164 YES 1005 84 ND _ Hualalai (S) 1006 73 NO 940 61 NO Kuakini 733 517 YES 887 243 YES 2024 WithoutPeak Project Hour Warrant A PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (N} 816 172 YES 1056 88 YES Hualalai (S) 1057 77 YES 988 64 NO Kuakini 842 543 YES 932 255 VEs 2024 With Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (N) 827 180 YES 2096 91 YES Hualalai (5) 1117 77 YES 1025 64 NO KV Roadway 819 13 NO 912 45 NO Kuakini 856 543 YES 944 255 YES 2029 Without Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (N} 857 181 YES 1110 93 YES Hualalai (S) 1111 81 YES 1038 61 NO Kuakini 885 571 YES 980 268 YES 2029 With Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor V1+ar'rarit? Hualalai (N) 876 196 YE5 1181 98 ''r'..5 Hualalai (5) 1216 81 YES 1103 67 NO Kuakini 810 579 YES 980 271 YES 2039 Without Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (N) 947 200 YES 1226 102 YES Hualalai: (5) 1228 89 YES 1147 74 NO Kuakini 894 631 YES 1082 297 YES 2039 With Project Peak Hour Warrant AM PM Major Minor Warrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai (N) 956 215 YES 1297 107 YE5 Hualalai (5) 1333 89 YE5 1212 74 NO Kuakini 894 639 YES 1082 300 YCS Figure 4C-2. Warrant 2, Four -Hour Vehicular Volume (70% Factor) (COMMUNITY LESSTHAN 10,000 POPULATION OR AE EVE .10 MPH ON MAJOR STPEET) MINOR STREET l'iIGHEFi- VOl..UME APPF OACI-I - VPH 400 — _-2 OR MORE LANES 8 2 OR MORE LANES 2 OR MORE LANES 8 t LANE 1 LANE & 1 LANE 1 'Ay) 300 MAJOR STREET—TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES— VEHICLES PER HOUR (VPH) 93 Ai HiZcr,ecl^+Oh ..1 IYI?;F! v I,ipiic+,I Iti rl•1+1rn Iront Irk in41or sire-cr. ilia signal tk.lrTI.l]r axial}'!+4r ma Iaz ptli,rn1r. 4i in 111.4nnt F h • vt the nlitiji"1r-stre---"1 !ell -Awn me:s 8w ate 1m1inor-Mr. ex . volume and Ike: l4.4 AI;Ett.iii 1.'•4r :1. 1ti : rtf.Yit'll k 1101 ht tiT.! T .kith-niotyor-gretr' volume Use 1 lane g 1 Lane Existing. - l-Iualalai (N) el Hour Warrant Major Minor Warrant? 6:45-7:45 AM 776 154 YES 7:4.5-8:45 AM 692 145 YES 3:00-4:00 PM 1005 84 YES 4:00-5:00 PM 926 74 YES 5:00-6:00 PM 986 58 NO Existing - Iualalai (5) 4 -ill' Warrant Major Minor Warrant? 6:45-7:45 AM 1006 70 YES 7:45-8:45 AM 1030 26 NO 3:00-4:00 PM 940 59 NO 4:00-5:00 PM 864 64 NO 5:00-6:00 PM 765 56 NG Existing - Kuakini —•-„•----- 4 Major o, -Hour Warrant Minor inc;r ��arrant?.„_wo.._. 6:457:4:5 AFV1 776 , -i5 YES 7:45-3.45 AM 683 467 YES 3:00.1:L PM 881 872 224 254 YES YES 4:00-5:00 PM 5:00-6:00 PM 870 217 YES APPENDIX 3: Biological Survey Results Botanical .Sarver and Vertebrate Fauna Assessment T MK 3-7-6-21: parcels 16, 17, 18 & 19 (78.324 acres) North Kona District, Elland of Hawai `i By Ron Terry, Ph.D. Geometrician Associates, LLC September 2017 introduction This biological survey was prepared for Richard Wheelock, Member, KV3 LLC, to inventory the existing biological environment, assess the potential for biological impacts from proposed development in the survey area, and devise mitigation measures to avoid or minimize any impacts. The land in question `-the Aur vey area") consists of four parcels situated mauka of Queen Ku`ahurrnanu I I a%.„. !loath of the Lake Street intersection, as drown in Figure 1, Two of the parcel. ,:rt crvncd h3 I..l_C }nd are planned for residential and associated uses. Tlie o parcels are linear drainage ditches owned by the County of 1awai'i. The objectives of the botanical sur, .'v c'r ii ionent of this ,,tirvev were to 1) describe the vegetation; 2) list all species encountered: 3) determine the likelihood of the presence of rare, threatened or endangered (RTE) plant species., and 4) identify the locations of any RTE individuals found. The area was surveyed by Ron Terry in September 2017. Plant species were identified in the field and, as necessary, collected and keyed out in the laboratory. Special attention was given to the possible presence of any federally listed (USFWS 2017) threatened or endangered plant species, although the habitat did not indicate a high potential for their presence. The work also included a faunal survey restricted to a tally of birds and introduced mammals, reptiles, or amphibians observed during the botanical fieldwork, as well as one additional one-hour bird observation. The field survey also assessed the general value of the habitat areas for native birds. Although there were no radar or ultrasound observations conducted that might have detected the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, the general value of the habitat for the Hawaiian hoary bat was evaluated. [generally not included in the survey was assessment of invertebrates, but the area was searched for the principal plant species in the area known to support the larvae and pupae of the endangered l3lack.bum's sphinx moth { ariduccr hiackhurnii), the one listed endangered insect that is potentially present. 1/ elcriion: influences and Previous Studies The geologic substrate for most of the survey area is soil -covered pahoehoe lava flows from Huai Alai dated between 5,000 and 10,000 years ago (Wolfe and Morris 1996). The soil here is classified as Waiaha medial silt loam, 2-10 or 10 to 20 percent slopes, depending on location. This soil forms on ash -cowered pahoehoe flew.. -5 and has a 10 -25 - inch depth to bedrock. Et well drained but also has a high runoff potential {Sato et al 1973). The survey area varies in elevation from 330 to 690 feet above sea level, and receives an average annual rainfall of about 35-38 inches, irtcrcasina in the niauka direction (Giambel.luea et al 2013). The pre -human vegetation was likely Lowland Dry/Mesio Forest (per Gagne and Cuddihy 1990). This consisted of an open canopy forest dominated by a wide variety of trees, shrubs, herbs, vines and ferns, It likely had a diverse cover of native dry -forest trees and shntbs including lama (L)ioSpvros sandrs aceaasi,w) and alahe'e (Psyab-ax odoralum), with a number of other species perhaps including now rare trees such as vw ifivv iii (ErythrinasanciwieensiS•), halapepe (Pleontele S'aa wiCeflSI.$) and uhnuhi (tL4e onetrron kavaiense). However, the general landscape of the Kailua-Kona area has been radically altered by centuries of settlements, over a century of grazing, and particularly by the development since 1960 of hotels, condominiums, resort homes, commercial facilities and associated infrastructure, Even on properties that experienced no development, introduced plants. an iniak and pests profoundly altered the biota. Prominent species in the survey area's devotional zone now include the aliens haole koa (Leucaena lencrrcephalcrj, /`ithecellrilrirltrr clrrlc'e), and guinea grass Oriegatlayrsrrs maxima), Although the survey area never underwent modern development except on its margins, archaeological studies (SCS 201 6) indicate that it was used prior to Western contact for a variety of activities, leaving features associated with agriculture, habitation, burial, and transportation. In more recent limes, the survey area was part ofa large former cattle ranch and agricultural area started in the early 1900s. "f he lower portion of the project area as still used to pasture cattle, and extensive fencing, cattle walls, several corrals and cattle chutes are present_ The project area and surrounding lands were bulldozed ;an7'time between the. 1940s and 1970s. Evidence of bulldozing is visible in aerial Fa-wale-au/111s as alternating bands of cleared bulldozer tracks and bands of push piles, 1r e':rr4i31ogists confirmed that the linear bands evident in aerial imagery are bulldozer - cleaved laths and linear piles of bulldozed rock along the cleared bulldozer paths. RTE plants are well known from certain areas at this elevational zone in Kona, but. with few exceptions. they are generally found further to the north in slightly drier areas with more recent lava (Geometrician Associates 2004. 2005, 2007, 2009a, 2009b. 2014a, 2014b: Ger rich 2006, 2007a, 2007b, 200.. 2009). RTE plants noted in the surveys above in the Kealakehe to Palama Nui area include the endangered plants uhiuhi. ko`oko'o1au. (Widens rrricrantha ssp. cxerrr phvlla), halapepe (Elcumtele )2c aiielnis), Wahine noho kola (iseu/ ncfi noir jsvrifo/hrm — now extinct in the wild) and Fir bristy/is hawitir'erasi.s; the rare plants 'olio: makai (I'r lyv'i:Jcr,ti ,vfrirdii•rcerr.sis and rnaiapilo (Capparis sandwrchicma) (both of which we also bund to the south on the most recent lava in Kahalu`u): and the increasingly uncommon wiliwili. No surveys that we have conducted rauka of Kuakini Highway between Palani Road and Honalo - an area with abundant soil that has led to intensive farming, ranching and settlement - have found any RTE plants, In terms ofRTE fauna, the most likely candidate would be the endangered Hawaiian hawk (flaafaro .s. 7{ircrriar,$). This wide-ranging raptor nests in large trees and forages in forests, farms and even residential neighborhoods. and is seen throughout forested areas of the island. Klavitter (2000) and Gorresen et al. (2000 summarized hawk sightings Biological Survey, MK 3-7-6-2/ parcels 16, 1.7, 18 et, 19 Page 2 around the island, finding instances in this area or Kona, but at generally low densities. According to one study: "Both native and exotic trees are used for =Mina, but the majority of nests are built in mature "chi `a trees. Other nest trees include larva, koa, kolea, eucalyptus, common ironwood. Christmas berry, coconut,macadamia nut. and mango" (l'DA-NRCS 2007), A number of other RTE birds are fairly unlikely to be found .in the survey area. The Hawaiian goose or nene (Broilla.5andvicerr. i. ) is an endemic. federally listed endangered species that is only occasionally observed in urban Kona. although it is more abundant at Big Island Country Club in the Kekaha region of Kona. Some endangered Hawaiian petrels (1'rerodrorrrc : andivicherrsis or 'rra'ti) and band-rumped storm -petrels (L)cec.incnlronta ca.stro), ars well as threatened Newell's shearwaters (1'uffifnis cnrricrrlirris- rrewe1li), may overfly the: area between llie rinonths of June and October. All three of these pelagic seabird species hest high in the mountains in burrows. There is no suitable nesting habitat for any of these seabird species within or near the survey area, The primary cause of mortality in all these seabird species in Hawaii is thought to be predation by alien mamll.alian species at the nesting colonies_ Collision with pian -made structures is another significant cause. Nocturnally flying seabirds, especially fledglings on their way to sea in the summer and fall, can become disoriented by exterior lighting. When disoriented, seabirds may collide with manmade structures, lfthcy are not killed outright, the dazed or injured birds are easy targets for feral mammals (Ban.ko 1980; Day et al 2003). Although not an RTE species, the Hawaiian endemic sub -species of the short - eared owl or pueo (As o lainineus satrdwichextsis), a protected migratory bird, nests and hunts in tall grasslands and shntblands and could conceivably be occasionally present on the survey area. The endangered Hawaiian hoary bat (Lcrsiatrris einer•eus sertrotus), the only native Hawaiian land mammal, is found in most areas on the island of Hawaii and has been observed in the thorny forests of Kona. Hawaiian hoary bats are vulnerable to disturbance during the summer pupping season. Finally, the one endangered insect found in many parts of Kona is the Blackburn's sphinx moth (r1r1anauca 1,1:rckhrrrwi ). It is generally associated with drier environments and `a`a substrates. The native host plant aiea (Moth/vest/win spp.) is extremely rare, but a substitute host, the prolific weed tree tobacco (Nicotiaf glatica), quickly colonizes dry, disturbed, lava flows. Neither host was considered likely to be within the survey area. In general, we concluded that the probability of encountering. RT[ plant or animal species in the survey area was low, because of substrate, topography, elevation. history of grazing and evidence of prior surveys. fregetcrr+ion: Results Our survey found two vegetation types that were distinguished primarily by management regimes (see Figure 2 for photos). The upper half of the survey area contains very few cattle and is intensely overgrown with guinea grass ( Figure 2a). The area could be described as a scattered forest or thick savanna, dominated by koa haole, opiuma and Biological Survey, MK 3-7-6-2/: parcels 16, 17, 18 ct 19 Page 3 mnnkcypod (.`f'crnrarrecx sarrran). These four plants compose most of the biomass and cover in ih is area, The lower half is moderately grazed and has a very similar but slightly more diverse tree flora, with kiawe (/) sr.q ispaiiicd r), klu (•4cacra famesiana), and several other non-native trees (Figure 2c). The understory contains a great diversity of non-native grasses, herbs, shrubs and vines, along with a very few natives, including `uhaloa (Fcilther•io indica) and `ilitna (Sida fallax). Although a highly intermittent stream traverses the property. no aquatic or true riparian vegetation is present (Figure 2b). Flora and Rare. Threatened or Endangered Plants All plant species found in the survey area during the survey are listed in Table 1. Of the 65 species detected. five were indigenous Cnative to the ttawaiian Islands and elsewhere) and none were endemic (found only in the 1 lawttiian Islands), All native plants found are very common throughout the island of Hasp ai °i and the Stale. and no rare. threatened or endangered plant species were present. No tree tobacco,for its role as a potential host for an endangered moth, was found in the up: area. Online maps from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (IJSE=WS) depict no critical habitat on or near the survey area(lt.tlp:J.'ecos.fws.govlecp!reportitable/critical-habitat.html accessed September 2017). B3irds The 15 species of birds detected during the survey crc all non-native and typical of those found in similar areas of lowland disturbed habitat in Kona {Table 2). Most comment were spotted dove (,Sirepinj. Iia c'hii I si.5), northern cardinal (Gardinalis car•dincrli.$), cattle egret (Brrhrricr s ibis) and parakeet (4ralinga sp.), Japanese white -eye (T_nsrerop.•, aportkro) and house finch (Garp aces irrcaxac nn,$). No native birds were detected; and it is generally poor habitat for most native birds. The short -eared owl may utilize the survey area for foraging. The trees in the survey area are genet -ally too short to serve as typical Hawaiian hawk nests, but it probably forages at least occasionally in the area. Hawaiians Hoary Bat Hawaiian hoary hats may very well utilize the survey area, as they have been observed in surrounding and similar areas_ This survey took place in daylight, did riot use any detection equipment, and was not designed to detect bats. However, the Hawaiian hoary bat should be presumed to be present. Bats may forage for hying insects over portions of the survey area on a seasonal basis. and they may find some of the larger shrubs and trees suitable nesting habitat. Biological Survey, MK 3-7-6-2/ parcels 16, 17, 18 ct 19 Page 4 httroduced Mammals, Reptiles, and Amphibians The only live mammals seen during the survey were cattle (Hos knolls), feral pigs (,Sirs scrcfer which were abundant in the survey area), and small Indian mongooses (Herpe_yle.s a. a rrrOlrrrrrctarrxs).. It is Iikcly that feral cats (,'alis ca(us), mice (,filar.,- sm.), rats (Ralrus spp.) and domestic dogs, (C a i_s f: /&nriliarr.N) are occasionally present,. There are no native terrestrial reptiles or amphibians in Hawai`h The only reptile observed during the survey was the day gecko (Phelsrrma sp.). It is likely that other species of gecko as well as anoles and skinks are present. No amphibians were seen or heard. None of these alien mammals or reptiles have conservation value and all are deleterious to native flora and fauna. Impacts and Mitigation. e ,sly- s As discussed above, no threatened or endangered plant species as listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2017) appear to be present in the survey area, nor are there uniquely valuable habitats. No csistina or proposed federally designated critical plant (or animal) habitat is present in the survey area. There appears to be no potential to adversely affect RTE plant species. lithe project incorporates additional outdoor lighting, it may trtrirct threatened and endangered Hawaiian seabirds, which may become disoriented by the lighting, resulting in birds being downed, To avoid the potential downing of these threatened and endangered seabirds due to interaction with outdoor lighting, no construction using unshielded equipment maintenance lighting should be permitted after dark between the months of April and October, All additional permanent lighting should conform to the l lawai` i County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (1 lawai `i County Code Chapter 9. Article 14), which requires shielding of exterior lights so as to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting, The endangered Hawaiian hoary bat is vulnerable to disturbance while roosting with its juveniles in the pupping season. To minimize impacts, it is recommended that woody plants taller than 15 Leet should not be removed or trimmed during the bat birthing and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15). No tree tobacco, the principal current host for the endangered Blackburn's sphinx moth, was observed during our surveys. Because of the weedy, extremely last -growing and spreading nature of the plant alter Iandclearing and the difficult process necessary to determine if pupae are present in the ground under the plant after larvae have finished their life cycle, it is recommended that the landowner/developer prevent any infestations from growins . Although it is advisable to consult DLNR and or 1JSFWS before removing any plants, juvenile plants less than two feet tall are not generally utilized by the larvae and may be safely removed, subject to discussions with these agencies. Biological Survey, MK 3-7-6-2/ parcels 16, 17, 18 cit 19 Page 5 Report Limitations No biological survey of a Iargc area can claim to have detected every species present. Some plant species are cryptic in juvenile or even mature stages of their life cycle Dry conditions can render almost undetectable plants that extended rainfall may later invigorate and make obvious, Thick brush can obscu re even Targe. healthy specimens. Birds utilize different patches of habitat during different times of the day and seasons, and only long-term study can determine the exact species composition. The findings of this survey must therefore be interpreted with proper caution: in particular. there is no warranty as to the absence of any particular species. Biological Survey, MK 3-7-6-2/ parcels 16, 17, 18 et, 19 Page 6 Literature Cited Banko, W. E. 1980. Population Histories - Species Accounts Seabirds: Newell:s S'bear water (A '4)), Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit. University of Hawaii at fvfanoa, Department of Botany, Technical Report #5A. Day, R. H. B. Cooper, and T, C. Tcif'ct.. 2003. "Decline of Townsend's (Newell's Shearwaters (Pttffinus auricularis newelli) on Kauai, Hawaii." /he Auk 124: 669- 679. Gagne. W.. and L. Cuddihy. 1990. "Vegetation." pp. 45-114 in W.L. \A/ LL D.R. Herbst. and S.H. Sohnier, eds., Manual of the Flowering Plants rij Halo err °r. 2 vols. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Geometrician Associates, I.I.C. 2004. Botanical Survey, , Keaultou Maruti Lands, Kea rborr, Kona, Island of Hcnvar `i. Prep. for Karchameha Investment Corporation (K[C) and Tsukazaki Yeh & Moore. On tile at K.1C, . 2005. Botanical S'rrr i,eV, Makaler Lands, North Kona, island of Hcn ai `i. Prep. for PBR Hawaii. . 2007. Botanical Survey TMK 7-2-5:01 (poi .) Proposed111akalei Fire Statist Site Kau, North Kona, Island of Hcn cti 'i. Prep. for PBR Hawaii. . 2009a. _Final Enironmental Assessment, Kafoko HousmgProgram_ Prep. for Hawaii County (like of Housing and Community Development, . 2009b. Bo!LrreiL'ed Survey of 1 -acre ( .") Storage Yard, IMK 7-4-20:03 (por ). Prep, for Maryl Development, 2014a. Flora and Fauna Survey, Proposed Kealakehe Regional Park .Site, North Kona District, island of'Hawar'i. Prep. for Hawaii County DPW. . 2014b. Biological Recrxe i uissance Report, it akalei Mauka Lands, North Kona District, Island ofHalved `i. Prep. for .lames McCully and RLH. Gerrish, G. 2006. lore Plant and Botanical Survey of La'i apnea Village 5 and Arrpoka Preserve. Prep. for 1 lawai."i State Department of Hawaiian Homelands. 2007a. Final Report: Rare Plant and Botanical Survey of La'i'opraa Village 1. Prep, for Hawai' i State Department of Hawaiian Homelands. . 2007b. 1?are Plant and Botanical Survey of l a't'opuct Village 4 and Park. Prep. for Hawaii. State Department of I itis (-dial' homelands. Biological Survey, MK 3-7-6-21: parcels 16, 17, 18 ct, 19 Page 7 . 2008. Bokwical Survey of Temporary Haul Road J illage.s [}f La'i rpua. Iracluiling Portion. of 71111[ '-4-21.1. 2, 3 and 20. Prep, for Hawai'i State Department of l Iawaiian Homelands. .2009. Rare Plant and Botanical Survey oldie Archaeological Preserve, 1',Pages cif is `i 'c7iataa. Prep. for Hawai'i State Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Giambelluca, T.W., Q. Chen, A.G. Frazier, J.P. Price, Y. -L. Chen, P. -S. Chu. J.K. Eiseheid, and D.M. Delparte, 2013: Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawai`i. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 94, 313-316, doi: 10.1175'BAMS-D-l1-00228.1. Crorresen. P.M., R,J. Camp, J.L. Klavitter arid T.K. Pratt. 2005. Abundance, Distribution and Population Trend of the Hawaiian Hawk. 1998-2007. Technical Report 1 ICSU-0009 I lawai'i Cooperative Studies Unit, University of Hawai'i at llilo PAC"RC:, K l ae i tier JI.. 2t)fl l.Survey methodology, abundance, and de mogral by of `the endangered Hawaiian hawk: is delisting warranted? MS Thesis, Seattle: University of Wash asli i ngton. 4� Sato, H. H., W. Ikeda, R. Paeth, R. Smythe, and M. Takehiro, Jr. 1973. Soll Survey of Island ofHawai'i, State of Hal ai'1. U.S. Department of Agriculture -Soil Conservation Service and University of Hawai'i Agriculture Experiment Station. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Scientific Consultant Services (SCS). 2016, Archaeological Sites Inspection Later Rcport. lirr 20 Previously Recorded Archaeological Saes Located on 66.039 Acres ofland Land i,r Hniva/oa 1st Ihrrprra 'a, Kaihia Kona, Noah Kona District,, H +'ai 'l Markt ji'rrr lion rrf TAM.. (3) 745-021:016 and 017j. Prep. for Richard Wheelock, Fast - West Realty. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2017. USFWS Threatened and Endangered .species System (TESS). hup:lfecos,fws.govltess_+ublici. LS. Department ofA iculture, Natural Resources Conset ation Service Pacific ,islands Area (USDA-NRCS). 2007. Hawaiian Hawk Hcrhaacar 1_ithranceme nr and Management. Biology Technical Note No, 17 University of l'awai`i at Hilo. Dept, of Geography. 1998. Alas of"Haw#ari. 3rd ed. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Wolfe. F.W.. and J. Morris. 1996. Geologic Map of'the Island of Hawaii. USGS Misc Investigations Series Map i -2524-A. Washington, RC.: U.S. Geological Survey. Biological Survey, MK 3-7-6-21: parcels 16, 17, 18 ct 19 Page 8 LIMIREALNik #411.1 01" # ;I: 0 0 Survey Area Map 5 0 6 z 0 0 DATE: 5,01g)702D Figure 2. Survey Area Maths 2a. Dense guinea grass}opiuma vegetation of rnauka half ■ V 2b. Natural draina_cwa Biological Survey. AK 3-7-6-21: parcels 16. 17, 18 c 19 Page 10 Flail 2. Sure Area Photos yam. it aw. , J7 " Pfe 2c. Semi -open vegetation ofinakai half A. T 2d. Corral and surrounding vegetation Biological Survey, AK 3-7-6-21: parcels 16. 17, 18 c 19 Page 11 Table 1. Plant Species Observed in Survey Area Scientific Name Family- Common Name Lire Foam Status* FERNS: Nephro1epi.s arauifrf?orca Nephrolepidacc:ac Sword Fcrrl 1ILrb I'hmcarr[tci nis gross -1.c Poly'podialcc:ac Made Scanted Ferny 1lerlx A Prcris crerivu Pteridaceao `Gall Fern FLOWERING PLANTS; Ah. tiloq rcrrreii}alhaim MaIvaceae Hairy Abutilun Herb A Acac'tcr Crrr?L'.siCiliar F.lb icc,lL K Iii Shrub A Alcauaite,s rnohwcano Eu -.thorbtaceae Kukiii 1®roe F' An7carfrr7fhfa.M' 1'friLfi.4' .AmarantlInceae Slender Amaranth I led, A B.idens alba A.5ter;iceac Herb ,A Ilieler-tv criajiiilblica Asteraceae Blue Bidens Herb f Mien v ariava ; ti1L'raaceae Riu?'elrerra asicrfiea Scrcrplurlaritic eae Budd [cid Shrub 1 f'Lres.ii/ Jiifc i(L'capeIiifi.i Fahaceait Wi il-a-bll ' Vine i (14-1Th areerr.sfir ralc'faulJr.s FabGaeeae Pfattridse Pea Pea A if rrI{rm ac.syce hrrtc Fuphorbiaceaae Cjarc en Spurge Ilerb A t'homae.r_i ccs lrrl errcif -Phcf 1.. uphorbiaceae Graceful Spurge Herb A C'irlw is i ctrbcrtca Poaceae Swollen I• irigi•n, oris I lab A CoCctnicr grandis / CucurbitLieti:ae Ivy Gourd Viiie ('malaria sp. Fabaee ie it i a l elxr\ Herb (`arrodon(lcaern/on Poaccite Bermuda Grass 1ier-h A nesmanthus virgcaral.r F:rbirecaie Slender Mimosa Shrub DeSillrxlrrrrn f”CCar'vnn Falbaee lee Elvs niadiurla Vine A I.ifgitaa•ica cilrcaris Poac :ae Crabgrass I led) Digiiaria rrrsrr}alas Pc iccnc Sour'grass 1ILrb A f.trgrrcaricasc'1igera Peaccae C'rabg*rass herb A Dvsphcani .i car not°. OIL -El opLldifrceac C7vsplran1a I lerb Lku,s'rrae indrec7 Poatceac C;uesc Crass Herb A ,a ra rosris teareflcr Poaceae Lovegrass Herb A "Avis fedi t[7ra 1_.imiaceae Fabaceaat 4'.omb WON [rldi�yo Shrub Shrub Indf afercr surlrrafrrc)sa Ipomoea obvc'trrer Convolvu[ace.ae Obscure \'3i,i ulna Calor Vint Israfcaaachoe pirrnatcr Craassulaccac Air Punt Herb :1 I iliitario Cara ora Verhelaaceae Lantana Shrub r .Le°Irons neperr.inlia Lamiaccac Lion's Lar Herb A I.eiwOL'Il a lcrwoc'cpholca ]-alaaceare I- [tole Koa Shrub A Maims rill) i c oat fr!Cande lie arrrM f rikaccaae False Mallow Shrub A ML' +Cafhl r.cit.l' maxiliru. Podecae C1t1.in a Grass Herb Arfelin Y rep las Poaccae Nara] Red Top 1 ]erb A i7fie''rrern a rrrhe.'rtrsa Convolvarlir.ceae 1 oodrosc Vine A Mimosa pru ic° )<'.ii,acedc Sensiti,ve Plant Herb A Morrrordica ChCrrararra CILe1Irbitalccae Bi tier Gourd Ville A Biological Survey, 1M 3-7-6-21: parcels 16. 17, 18 c 19 }'age 12 Table 1.. continued Scientific Name Family Common Name Life Form Status* Paecderia rfo f:da RIJNaceae Mai Pilau Vine A lycarrlac!l rn hl'S• t7,,,:r;rr,r'2i.5' A teraccae Santa Maria i Icrh ('arpollocit me_ffaccrnus f a., flora earuhs Passifloraccac Liiikoi Vine - PJn J . ,rrlarr.y de),.,:', Elmhorbraceae N[]'tll•I 1-Ic] h Red -billed I.Liothrix rni?//cccil !r'i.• ..• :Lv Fabaceae I)ii]ce Tree Paddlia myzivom i11111}ri11r, [} ar:. ''L'''/..i'L P1 OMNI 11111tir:14 .2 4 1-tLid 't 111 ! Shrub Alien Resident 1'harrnkrfzo ay./..,.,,....4..: P[unibaginaceac `ILie'e 1 Herb I Porrr,',r, er T.,.:).-., Porlutaeaceae Hairy Pit;weed Herb sterol y iaponico. 1'rra.,•, ;.I I •:r r.. Fabaceae Kiawe Tree A l'.yir,r,r;rr, r;.r,!:,,•;r Myrtaceae CorninuiZ t.ivava Tree A l61•,rfrr hlrr.r,i/r, 1'hvtolaccaceae Coral Belly' herb A Rich . '. r.•{;;;;,,liar.' Lttphorhiaceae Castor Bean Shrub A Schuss tere,,inthifo/ius Anmcardiae-eae C'hristilias Berry Shrub A S711rC.irre:ar 5i.i»lann Fabaceae Monkevpod Tree A . i'rirr/l we/do-Valls Fabaceae Coffee Senna Shrub A Suit/ fcri r.X: - t rlalvc`aceae !lima Shrub I Sia/11 r•lackrrrhirr.lia f4tklt4ace;le Sidli IIe!'h . "icki spn oxct •h I\ aceat Sida I lcrh Sonorms ()kith CIA A 0.21":lc,2:k4 Sow Thistle L I-icrh :t .,Vokimon ctPttc'I'ic'unistra , Solanaceae Popo] Herb .k)lcrrtnmseafirr/hit umm Solanaceae V'ininu Solanum Herb A Spa rlioc ea vaaaap2crrr;a/afar Bignoniaceac African Tulip Tree :1 lhc've#iaper/Mc/m.7 Apoc:vmweac Be -Still Tree Tree A fhrenher'm ff•ugrans Acanthaceae White Thunbergia Vin, r 7'r•irarla Ener r°lron.6014ker Tiliaceae Bur Bush Shrub A .1,Volikerica rra</rcct StercuIiaceae `Uhaloa Shrub I A -Alien 17 Fnileinic I InL1i4�c11uus Pt= Polynesian END -Federal and Swie Listed fndali ,crLd (none) Table 2. Bird Speries Observed in Survey Arra Scientific name Common name Status Acrulotheres test's C`ornnion Myna Alien Resident Ar/m//go .ji, Parakeet Alien Resident Brrfrrrlcu3 this Cattle Erect Alien Resident ( .crrEJilacrlis cart-lt rlis Northern Cardinal Alien Resident ('arpollocit me_ffaccrnus Hciusc Finch Alien ResidcnI Frrrnueriimr.w• pr>nareceriarrrt.s Rlack Francolin Alien Resident (feu/,alta Srr•7Crrca Zebra Dave Alien Rcs cienl. Leirrihri_k laafea Red -billed I.Liothrix Alien Resident Lorrc•lrrartip///aL:rrr/crtrr Niitmeit Ni<Eniiikin Alien Rcsidcni Paddlia myzivom Java '.....ipirrow Allen Resident Passer d ne.sracrrc [lou e Sparrow Alien Resident .S'crrnn:v Inn -CC fOnhrclos \I'ellov,-1 rot}ted Canary ,hien Resident Sicali,s ///?1,c.rrla Sat -Iron Finch Alien Resident Sireptopeliefc'hiircnviv Spi]ttcd Dove .heti Resident sterol y iaponico. ,1,ipLin White -eye Alien Resident Biological Survey, 1M 3-7-6-21: parcels 16. 17, 18 c 19 Page 13 APPENDIX 4: Cultural Impact Assessment SCS 42400 C LA -1 A CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR A 78.122 -ACRE PROPERTY 1N H DLUALOA 1` AU1.PUA`A, NORTH KONA DISTRICT, HAWAII ISLAND, HAWAII I T M 1K: (3) 7-6-021:016-0191 Prepare(' 3y. Glenn G. Escutt, M.A. Thomas Dols, M.A. JUNE 2020 DRAFT Prepared for: Kona Three, 101 Htmlalai Street Hilo, 111 96720 Sf\ 111 1C CONS1 1.1'N1 S fI( I , t 11{- 1347 1347 Kapi-olani Boulevard. Suite 408 Honolulu. HI %S14 Havvai`1 Island Office: PC) BO\ 155 ItL 1 1LL III 96749 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES 11 INTRODUCTION 1 METHODOLOGY 7 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH ...........................8 INTERVIEW METHODOLOGY 8 PROJECT AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ...... .............. ... .. .... „ . .... 10 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 11 PRE -CONTACT ERA ......... ....... ..... ...... 13 THE KONA FIELD SYSTEM 14 POST -CONTACT ERA 15 THE MAI-IELE 17 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES. 21 REGIONAL PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES . .......... - .. .. .... 24 CURRENT PROJECT AREA SPECIFIC PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY.... 29 CULTURAL INFORMANT INTERVIEWS 38 GREGG KASHIWA coNsuLTATioN 38 SUMMARY 39 CIA INQUIRY RESPONSE 40 CULTURAL ASSESSMEMNT 41 REFERENCES CITED 42 APPENDIX A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND AFFIDAVITS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: 5,500 K -Series Map ofHTawai`i Showing I..tacation of Project Area (National Geographic Topo!, 2003_ Data Sources: Naiional Geographic Society_ USGSI 2 Figure 2: 7,5-Miniitc Scrics USGS Topographic Map Showing the Location of Project Areas and TMK Parcels (Kealakekua Quadrangle ESRI, 2011 Data Sources: National Geographic and County ref Hawaii Planning Department, 2019). 3 Figure 3: Aerial Photograph Showing Project Area, Helualoa, HI, Zone 5 North, 189445 rn E, 2171790 m N. (ESR1, 2013 Image, Data Sources: Digital Globe, GeoEye, Earthstar, USDA, and USGS)„.. ....... ..... ................................... ....... ..... ....... 4 Figure 4: Aerial Photograph. Close -Up Showing Project Area, Halualoa, HI, "cone 5 North, 189445 m E:, 2171790 rn N. (ESRI, 2013 Image. Data Sources: Digital Globe, GeoEye, Earthstar, USDA, and USG) 5 Figure 5: Map of Holualoa 1' and 22nd Ahupua' a Showing Location of Project Area in Red Border (Alexander 1855)..., 12 Figure 6: Portion of 15 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Railroad and Project Area (USGS 1928).........,........ ...... ..,..................... .....................,......,.,16 Figure 7: Portion of Kai lata Section, 'North Kona C iap Showing Location of LCA 7713 and Project Arca in Red Border (Aki 1952), 18 Figure 8: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Land Commission Awards, Land Grants, and the Project Area (NauionaI Geographic Topal. 2003, Kailua Quad. Data Sources: National Geographic Society. USGS). 19 Figure 9: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Previous Archaeological Studies and Project Area (Kealakekua Quad, ESRI, 2013. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS) 23 Figure 10: 7,5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Northern Portion of Hammatt et al. (199 2) Sites and Current Project Area (ESRI, 201 1. Sources: National Geographic Society. USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle). . 30 Figure 11: 7.5 -Minute Series USES Topographic Map Showing Locations of Escott and Escott (2018) AIS Project Arca Archaeological Sites (ESRI, 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society. USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle). 35 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 • Land Commission Awards Recorded in Iiolualoa i'` and 2nd Ahupua`a. »,.».....,,»».,.».,,, 20 T;ihlc 2: In\ciitory of Previous Archaeological Investigations 21 Inventory of Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites (Hamman et al. 1992; Hammett and Shideler 2007). 31 Fable 4: Inventory of Archaeological Sites Identified on the AIS Project Area (Escott and Escott 2018). 34 .[able 5: Inventory of Escott & Escott (2020) Archaeological Sites. 37 Il INTRODUCTION At the request of property owner Kona Three, LLC, Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. (SCS) conducted a Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) of a 76.121 acres of land TMK: (3) 7-6- 021:016, 017, 01 S. and 019 located in Holualoa 14 Ahupua'a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii, Hawaii (Figure 1 through Figure 4). The owner is proposing to develop the property and contracted the CIA as part of an Environmental Assessment (FA) as required for County of Har.+ai'i Planning Department permit applications. The point of contact (owner) for the project i Mr. Richard Wheelock. The owner's mailing address is 101 Ilualalai Street Hilo, I-II 9672.0, Mr. Wheelock can also be contacted by email at richard': i.eastwcstrealty.org or by phone at 808- 753-3167. The Constitution of the State ofHawai° i clearly states the duty of the State and its agencies is 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 ahrrprra'a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian. Islands prior to 1778" (2000)_ 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 eoatfirmcd the traditional access rights to native Hawaiian aharpua `a tenants to gather specific natural resources for customary uses from undeveloped private property and waterways under the Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) 7-1. In 1992, the State of Hawaii Supreme Court, reaffirmed 1 -IRS 7-1 and expanded it to include, "native Hawaiian rights. - _ may extend beyond the cxhrrpua `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). 1 Figure 1: 5.500 K -Series Map of Viawai'i Showing Location of Project .Area (National (licognIphic Toppi!, 2003. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS). 2 Figure 2: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Sho%i- 11.: ..'.;irn ofPrujci Areas and TMK Pa rul •;11<calakckua Quadrangle. ESRI, 2013. Daia Sources: National Geographic and C o. r. Hawai-i Planning Department. 2019). 3 A • • Figure 3; Aerial Photograph Showing ProNet Are. I-10Iuktioa. HI, /..one 5 North. 19445 in E. 21717911 in N. (hS 1. 21113 Imago. Data Sources: Digital Globe. GeoEye, Earthstar. USDA. and USGS 1. 4 figure 4. ••,cri.il = . �,, ' i1i, (11)we.l'Il Shoring Project Area, I-Talualoa, I fl, Zcme 5 North, 189445 m E, 2171790 m N. (ESR.I, 2013 Image. Dam Sources: D : is I GIohi , GcoEyc. Eartlistar, USDA. and USGS). Act 50, enacted by the Legislature of the State of Hawaii (20)0) with House Bill 2895, relating to Environmental Impact Statements, proposes that: ...there is a need to clarify that the preparation of environmental assessments or enviromnental impact statements should identify and address effects on Hawai'i's culture, and traditional and customary rights-., [ail NO. 28951_ Act 50 requires state agencies and other developer to assess the effects of proposed land use or shoreline developments on the "cultural practices of the community and State" as part of the HRS Chapter 343 environmental review process (2001). Its purpose has broadened, "to promote and protect cultural beliefs, practices and resources of native Hawaiians [ands other ethnic groups, and it also amends the definition of `significant effect' to be re -defined as "the sum of effects on the quality of the environment including actions that are --.contrary to the State's environmental policies...or adversely affect the economic welfare, social welfare, or cultural practices of the community and State" (11.13. 2895. Act 50. 2000). Thus, Act 50 requires an assessment of cultural practices to be included in the Environmental Assessments and the Fnyironrnental Impact Statements, and to be taken into consideration during the planning process. The concept of geographical expansion is recognized by using, as an example, "the broad geographical area, e.g district or aimpet a `a" (OEQC 1997). It was decided that the process should identify `anthropological' cultural practices, rather than 'social' cultural practices. For example, haw (edible seaweed) gathering would be considered an anthropological cultural practice, while a modem -day marathon would be considered a social cultural practice. According to the Guidelines For Assessing Cultural ltnpacts established by the Hawaii State Office of Environmental Quality Control: The types of cultural practices and beliefs subject to assessrnen.t may include subsistence, conzmercirii. residential, agricultural, access -related, recreational, and religious and spiritual. customs. The types of cultural resources subject to assessment may include traditional cultural properties or other types of historic sites, both manmade and natural, which support such cultural beliefs (OEQC 1997). 6 This Cultural Impact Assessment involves evaluating 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 (H,B.. 2895, Act 50, 2000). METHODOLOGY This Cultural Impact Assessmnent was prepared in accordance with the methodology and content protocol pro‘. tiled in the Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts (OEQC 1997). In outlining the "Cultural Impact Assessment Methodology", the OEQC states, ...information may be obtained through scoping, community meetings, ethnographic interviews and oral histories,.. (1997). The report contains archival and documentary research, as well as communication with organizations having knowledge of the project area, its cultural resources, and its practices and beliefs. This Cultural Impact Assessment was prepared in accordance with the methodology and content protocol provided in the Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts ((}EQC 1997). The assessment concerning cultural impacts should address, but not be limited to, the following matters: (1) a discussion of the methods applied and results of consultation with individuals and organizations identified by the preparer as being familiar with cultural. practices and features associated with the project area, including any constraints of limitations With might have affected the quality of the information obtained; (2) a description of methods adopted by the prepalrcr to identify.. locate, and select the persons interviewed. including a discussion of the level of effort undertaken; (3) ethnographic and oral history interview procedures, including the circumstances under which the interviews were conducted, and any constraints or limitations which might have affected the quality of the information obtained; (4) biographical information concerning the individuals and organizations consulted, their particular expertise, and their historical and enealugical relationship to the project area, as well as information concerning the persons submitting information or interviewed.. their particular know ledgc and cultural expertise, if any. and their historical and genealogical relationship to the project area: 453 a discussion concerning historical and cultural source materials consulted, the institutions and repositories searched, and the level of effort undertaken, as well as the particular perspective of the authors. if appropriate, any opposing views, 7 and any other relevant constrwnts, Iiinitation.s or biases; (6) a discussion concerning the cultural resources, practices and beliefs identified, and for the resources and practices, their location within. the broad geographical area in which the proposed action is located, as well as their direct or indirect fican L.c or connection to the. project site; (7) <i discussion concerning the nature of the cultural practices and beliefs, and the significance of clic culatrral resources within the project arca, affected directly or indirectly by the proposed project; (8) an explanation of confidential inf'orm,ation that. has been. withheld from public disclosure in the assessment; (9) a discussion concerning any conflicting information in regard to identified cultural resources, practices and beliefs; (10) an analysis of the potential effect of any proposed physical alteration on cultural resources, practices or beliefs; the potential of the proposed action to isolate cultural resources, practices or beliefs from their setting; and the potential of the proposed action to introduce elements which may alter the setting in a hich cultural practiccs take place, and; (11) the inclusion of bibliography of references, and attached records of interviews, Which were allowed to be disclosed. Based on the inclusion of the above information, assessments of the potential effects on cultural resources in the project area and recommendations for mitigation of these effects can be proposed. ARCHIVAL RESEARCH Archival research focused on a historical documentary study involving both published and unpublished sources. These included legendary accounts of native and early foreign writers;early historical journals and narratives; historic maps and land records such as Land Commission Awards, Royal Patent Grants, and Boundary Commission records; historic accounts, and previous archaeological project reports. INTERVIEW METIIODOLOGY Interviews are conducted in accordance with applicable state laws and guidelines.. Individuals and/or groups who have knowledge of traditional practices and beliefs associated with a project area or who know of historical properties within a project area are sought for consultation. Individuals who have particular knowledge of traditions 8 passed down from preceding generations and a personal familiarity with the project -urea are invited to share their relevant inforntati,on. Often people are recommended for their expertise, and indeed, organizations,. such as Hawaiian Civic Clubs, the Island Branch cel Office of Hawaiian Affairs (011A), historical societies, Island Trail clubs, and Planning Commissions are depended upon for their recommendations of suitable informants. These groups are invited to contribute their input, and suggest further avenues of inquiry, as well as specific individuals to interview. If knowledgeable individuals are identified, personal interviews are sometimes taped and then transcribed. These draft. transcripts are returned to each of the participants f€r their review and comment;_ After corrections are made, each individual signs a release form, making the information available for this study. When telephone interviews occur, a summary of the information is often sent for correction and approval, or dictated by the informant and then incorporated into the document. Key topics discussed with the interviewees vary from project to project, but usually include: personal association to the aitripa 'u_ land use in the project's vicinity; knowledge of traditional trails. gathering areas, water sources, religious sites; place names and their meanings; stories that were handed down concerning special places or events in the vicinity of the project area: evidence of previous activities identified while in the project vicinity. In this case, letters with maps and descriptions of the project area were sent to individual' and organizati oils whose jurisdiction includes knowledge of the arca with an invitation for consultation. Consultation was sought from Jordan [lea Calpito, SHPT) Burial Sites Specialist; Kamakana Ferreira, OHA Compliance Officer; Nicole Lui, cultural descendant, Sean Naleimaile, State Historic Preservation Division (S1-IPD) Ham°ai`i Island Archaeologist, Kekoa Nezara, Kona Hawaiian Civic Club President; Shane Nelson. OHA West Hawaii Representative; and J, Curtis Tyler 111, cultural descendant, Consultation was also conducted via telephone with Gregg Kashiwa who served as the project property manager for parcels 016 and 017 in the early 19$0s. Public notices (Appendix A) were placed in the December 2019 issue of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (01IA) Ka Wai Ola Newspaper. Public notices were also published in the Honolulu Star -Advertiser, and the West Hawaii Today on November 17`t', 2011and 21m. 9 If cultural resources are identified based on the information received from these organizations andfor additional informants, an assessment of the potential effects on the identified cultural resources in the project area and recommendations for mitigation of these effects can be proposed. Public notices were not published in local ,.and/or regional publications. PROJECT AREA NATURAL ENVIRONMENT The current project area consists of undeveloped land used as cattle pasture for several decades. Prior to that, coffee was grown in the northeast quadrant of the project arca. The project area is situated on fairly steeply sloping land with level areas in between elevation breaks. The project area is between 360 and 660 feet (1 10 to 201 meters) above mean sea level (amsl). The project area lands are part of a large former cattle ranch and agricultural area that was started in the early 1900s. The project area is still used to pasture cattle. The project area lands were bulldozed sometime between the 1940s and 1970s. Evidence of bulldozing is visible in aerial photographs as alternating bands of cleared bulldozer tracks and bands of push pile (see Figure 4), Pedestrian survey confirmed the linear bands in the aerial photographs are bulldozer -cleared paths and linear piles of bulldozed rock along the cleared bulldozer paths. The former Kona Sugar Company railroad bed is present along the eastern edge of the project area, The project area ground surface is a Ilual alai lava flow dating between 5,000 and 10,000 years before present (ybp) (Wolfe and Morris 1996). Soil in the project arca is Punalu`u Series (rPYD series) extremely rocky peat with six to twenty percent slopes (Sato 1973:48)• The majority of the project arca has been bulldozed in the past and the present ground surface is rocky soil. Rainfall in the project area is very low. less than thirty inches per year. Parcel 018 and Parcel 019 are seasonal gulches that drain rainfall down slope to the west. This region is extremely dry, hot, and somewhat barren except for thick California grass (U'rochloa mutica). Guinea grass (4egarlryrisus rrra imus), and some kora haoke} (Peucaeria learcocep/nla), kim.e (Prosopis pailida), and kukvi nut (Aleurites rnolruceanrr) trees (Starr Environmental 2016). l0 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL. CONTEXTS Kona is divided into two sections: North Kona or Kona "akrtu. and; South Kona, or Kona henry (Maly 1996), Kona 'akar,' was further subdivided into north (called Kekaha-wai- `ole -o -ora -Kona) and south (called Konakai "cij uu) areas, with the division between the two at the crhupuua'a ofKeahuolu. The project area is in Holualoa 1 st Ahuputea (Figure 5) within the area of Koraa kcal `/j mra in Kona `akau. Holualoa means (literally) "long sled course" (Pukui et al. 1974:48). Holualoa l'` is a traditional cr/raapuua'a stretching from the oceans to the foot ofHualalai in the uplands. The coastline ofHalualoa I"` Ahupua`ais primarily lcw rack cliffs. Very little is recorded of FRRlualoa Ahupua`a in traditional oral accounts. The Heart Stirring Legend of Ka-.Miki, published in the Hawaiian language newspaper Ko Homo o HuMuii and translated by Maly (1993) contains the only description of Holualoa. The legend is set in the 13`h century but also reflects more recent inlliicnces (Maly and Maly 2002:17). According to the narrative, Tlie lands of Holualoa were named for the chief of that name; both Holualoa and Puapua'a were high chiefs, who controlled the lands from mountain to sea which hear their names--- Kaluaokalani served as a priest ofl-1olualoa at the temple of l'a.kiha, This Mau was near the contest field of Holualoa... The lands of this region are named for various rafi `i, all of whom were related. When the chief1l:5lualoa took up the challenge against Kepaka'ili'ula on behalf of the Kona chiefs, Holualoa called upon his god Katal ciJw a to assist him in his battle... Fitilualoa was the first chief to call upon the god KKlaipahoa, and this was the beginning of this god's use by the chiefs ofHHawai4i [Maly 1993:208-209]. 11 r 1111'.41 1'! 4X] 4 Figure ure 5: Map of• 136Iualoa 1" and 2" Ahupua a Showing Location of Project Area in Red Border (AleK nder 1855 ). 1? PRE -CONTACT ERA H6lualoa, Kona, and much of the leeward side of ilawai`i Island, while well populated at the time of European Contact, were settled later than the windward side. This in part may be due to the fertile land, numerous streams, and abundant rainfall an the windward side (Maly 1996:3). Many archaeologists believe that Hawaii Island was first settled around A.D. 1,000 by people sailing from the Marquesas (Athens et al. 2014; Dye 2011; Kahn et al. 2014; Kirch 2011; Kirch and McCoy 2007; McCoy 2005 and 2007: Mulrooney et al. 2011; Reith et al. 2011; W ilmhurst et al. 2011a and 2011b). During early settlement oldie leeward side permanent habitations were established in Kona concentrated along the shoreline and lowland slopes (Cordy 1981, 1995; Schilt 1984), Informal fields were cleared at higher elevations where rainfall was higher. Between AD 1201) and 14[)0, habitation and agriculture expanded across the slopes and coastal area ofI-Iualalai (13urtchard 1995; Cordy 1995). The initial construction of the Kona Field System { KES) began approximately between AD 14(10 to 1600 (Schilt 1984). The development of these extensive formal walled fields coincides with a dramatic population increase and with the development of the stratified chiefdom structure which is reflected through large residential complexes and haat' (Burtchard 1995: Cordy 1981: ilaun et al. 1998: lion -inion 1986; Schilt 1984). Thus, there was a need to expand the previously limited agricultural base. The royal centers and larger heiau were in place by AD 1 600 to 1800 which reflect the growth in power of the rulers and chiefs in the region (Barrcra 1971; Hammatt and Folk 1980). Royal centers arc located at Kailua, Halualoa, Kahalu`tt, Kealakekua, and tiOnaunau (Cordy 199S)• The region ofHolualoa developed into a royal center in the late 1.600s to early 1700s under the reigns of Keakamahana (reigned 1680- l 700) and Keakealaniwahine (reigned 1700-1720) (Cordy 2000:244). Many 'a11 `i and konohiki residences and numerous religious sites are known to have existed here. The majority of the heiau and royal residences were constructed along or near the coast. most notably at Kamoa Point south of the project area. The royal center at HoluaIoa was eclipsed in the second half of the 1700s by the royal center in the Kahalu`u and Keauhcnu rc.tiion. 13 THE: KONA FIELD SYSTEM The Kong Field System extends north at least to Kau Ahupua`a and south to Honaunau, west from the coastline and east to the forested slopes ofHualalai (Cordy 1995). During his travels in 1823. William Ellis noted the extensive field system divided with "low stone walls, made of fragments of lava", producing "bananas, sweet potatoes, mountain taro, tapa trees, melons and sugar carte" and "flourishing luxuriantly in every direction" (Handy and Handy 1940:114 and 162). Many of the archaeological projects conducted within Kona deal with components of the Kona Field System (Cordy 1995; Newman 1970; Schili 1984). The kr:la zone of the Kona Field System is from sea level to 150 m amsl. This zone is associated with habitations along the shoreline and cultivation of sweet potatoes (uala), paper mulberry (u'auke), and gourds (ipii). Clearing mounds, planting depressions, planting mounds, planting terraces, and modified outcrops are common agricultural features in the kula zone Mammal and Clark 1980; Hammatt and Folk 1980: Haun et rel. 1998; Schilt 1984). Permanent habitation including royal and high chiefly centers as well as non-agricultural activities such as fishing, ceremonies and burial. practices were usually concentrated along the shoreline zone portion of the kula zone. The higher elevation zones are the kiln 'urlrr zone, `crpa'a zone and the 'arra zone. The current project area i in the kalir `rriu one This wetter region is above 150 m anis] where bread fruit, sweet potatoes (lpoinoecr (Cor'diline fruticrmi) tniuke (Brous.sorretia pr pyr-i f ra), karo (Colocasia esenienta), sugar cane (Saccharum sp. ), and other arboreal crops were grown (Kelly 1983, Menzies 1920). The 'aper`a zone is above the kcsht `,,/u zone. Hawaiians cultivated melons, sweet potatoes. ti, bananas, taro, wauke and sugar cane in fields with lou stone walls. The highest zone, the `ama'rj zone, was used to grow bananas and plantains in walled fields. The "apar a zone and the `a ncr'tr zone were also used to collect timber and catch birds therefore temporary habitations were constructed, 14 POST -CONTACT ERA During the post -contact era, the Kona Field System was exploited and the planting of coffee, sugar, sisal, citrus, and cotton took over original Hawaiian crops until eventually the land was used for cattle pasture. The first cattle and sheep were brought to the island by Vancouver in 1793 and 1794 (Vancouver 1967). Horses, mules, oxen, goats, and donkeys were brought shortly after. Feral cattle, sheep, and goats overran agricultural fields by 1813 to 1815 (Ellis 1963: 291; Wilkes 1970: 204). 13y 1848,. in the Kona District, a Great Wall (the Kuakini Wall) was constructed from Lanihau to `Onouli to keep them away from homes and agricultural areas (Maly and Maly ?001;286). Formal cattle ranching began in the Kona region in the mid- l 8005. The Kona landscape evolved rapidly with the turn of the century. The rapid. growth of the sugar industry produced the Kona Sugar Company in 1899. A railroad was built in 1901 to help sustain this influx in produce. It was later used to haul lumber and freight along with the sugarcane. The rail line was seven miles long and extended from. H6lualea to Ka`awaloa (Figure 6). Cotton. tobacco, and sisal were grown in the dryer lands below the railroad (Kelly 1983), The changing subsistence Lind trade regimes developed by incoming rttropean and American settlers, as well :Is other historical factors, caused a depopulation ClI'the coastal areas of Kona. Randle: were established at middle and upper elevations, and farms were established in the uplands where rainfall was higher and the temperatures were cooler. Cattle ranching and clearing for sugar cane and coffee removed many of the endemic species of plants. The suite of vegetation that existed prior to the pre -Contact era were replaced by Oa fmcrole (Lcrtcaena leucocephala). ia,te (f i-osopispallicia), and other newly introduced invasive plant species. 15 ' Ii4.1Ivy '',0tAmk. tio, IA 0 g !-; 14. FN. .0 Figure 6: Portion of 15 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Railroad and Project Area (USGS 1928). 16 Schools, churches, stores, and other businesses were also established in the uplands. During the late 1800s and early I gOQs, coastal Kona was no Longer the densely populated sociopolitical center it once was. It became a small cluster of houses along the trail from Kailua Bay to Kenuhou (Tottonari-Tuggle 1993:15). Homesteads, ranches, and plantations developed in the uplands during, this period as reflected in the pattern of Land Commission Awards (LCA) and Land Grants (LG) recorded during the Mahele (Escott and Escott 2018). The project area is just makai (west) of most of the land commission awards and is at the same elevation as portions of the land grants in the region. Based on historic documents. the project area and surrounding lands were likely being used for subsistence and commercial agriculture, as well as for cattle pasture from the mid to late 1100s. The project area might have been used later than surrounding lands because of its steep slopes and very rocky soil, but based on aerial photographs. the project area was bulldozed sometime around the 1950s through the 1970s in preparation for commercial agriculture, THE MAHELE The Land Commission al,vardcd the majority ofHc lualoa 1 ` and 2' Ahupua`a to Victoria Kam ma1u Ka`ahurnanu IV, Kit ring 14 'tri ofHawai`i Island and Crown Princess ofHawai`i as Land Commission Award (LCA) Number 7713, `Agana 43 (FiE,uure 7). Several smaller LCA and LG properties were also recorded in the upland region of E-lalualoa l ' and 2" Ahupua`a (Figure 8). Twenty four Land Commission awards were recorded in IT lualoa 1 ` Ahupua`a, the ahupua`a where the project area is located (Table 1). A portion of I .( 1:,1660 to John G. Munn makes up a thin strip of land located through the center °Crh current project area. With the notable exception of LCA #3660 and a few other large• I .(. As, the average award was 2,8 acres. most (n=16) were for less than 3.0 acres. Three Land Grants (LG #1592, 1602, and 3630) were also recorded in H451ualoa 1" and 2" Ahupua`a. LG 41592 was a 25.0 -acre parcel sold to Kealalio and LG #3630 was a 38.2 -acre parcel sold to W.H. Cromwell. Almost all of the awards and grants were used as subsistence and commercial farm land, and some were used to pasture cattle (Escott and Escott 2018), 17 F-ij iti r 7: Po :min ,i1 K:iiwat:l SLYIiOn, NI WI i h t io:; €.l 11 Showii 1suc;ition of LCA 771:3 and Project Area in Rk-'d E utxler (Aki 1952). 18 1 I in I 0110.14.14.14Pr - rigli re 8 7:5-twin-nov. Scrius LS(iS Topogropiiic Mop Showing 1..orLition of Land Commission Awarcis, Lula ()rows... nd 1ie Projw Area (National Geographic Topo!, 2003, Kailua Quad. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS). 19 Table 1: Land {:cnunissicm Awards Recorded in Holu.Loa I' and 2°6 Ahupua'a. LCA# AWARDED TO AHUPUA°A ACRES 36611 John G. Munn Holualoa 1s' I 1 1.5 4395 Kckoi Holualoa 1°; 1.7 55.52 Kauila llolualoa 1" 1.9 554 Keawckolol L4• I-14711 uaIoa r' 11.27 5795 Keliilkunakaok H?rlualoa 1" ) 7 58]0 KaopakaLiIla I],2,IIitt'7a 1' 1.74 5993 l.-t:ipa1a"Jala 1 l5l.l::lti1a ,,,n ? i} 6061 Raba H 1u.(0 1' 2.9 6107 Naai I10Iu:11oa 1`t 3,94 7339 Ki ;,anat Hi'1ii!kM 1'" 4.15 7340 k:Si-7.1 2 1 l,- Iua o:i i'' 2.5 73-01:N I , ni,I 1 I Ii:,lua.•. a I_.3 74-'1.3 kal;ne::..-, , 11olua.Oa l'' 1,94 7713 ]:,t,na�xri]u 1 i lualca7 1''„ HioluaIoa 2 Large. 7746 Karnahalo H I1.ialcl:a 1'' 5.0 7794 Kauakini Holualoa 1 " 1.8 7990 Pupuka Holualoa. I " 1.1 5015 Aij o 1l5IuaIIo i 2"a 1.4 8151 Heheiia Holualoa. 1-' -.3 8223 Ikaiaka Holualoa I" 3.5 9915 Litnahaiia 11:51ualoa 1" 2,4? 9932 Lurnaawe I-1n1uaIoa l" 25 8 10770 Puuone Ilalualoa 1" 3.06 10400 Naaimakaohi llolualOa l"' Holualoa 1" 3-' 20 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES There are at least 26 previous archaeological reports for lands near the current project area, including studies in Puapua`a 2" and Hclualoa 1-', 2°d, and 3`d Ahupua`a (Table 4 and Figure 9). The studies were conducted from the coat to roughly 1,460 ft arnsi and encompass the kala region (0-500 fl), the ka/u'rrlrr region (500-1,000 ft), and the lower portions of the 'ipnx'a region (1,000-2,500 ft). Results of the previous archaeological studies are summarised below by elevation: studies numbered 1 through 15 iri I abic 2 and Figure 9 are situated from the coast to Queen Ka'alhumanu Highway {0-360 ft amsl), studies 16 -through 21 are located from above the Queen Ka`ahumar�u Highway to just below Hualalai Road (306-760 11 anis1), and studies 22 through 24 are above T lual 51 ai Road to just above MRmalahoa Highway (1,100-1,460 f amsl). Table 2: Inventory of Previous Archaeological Investigations. Project Number (Figure 81 Reference Type of Study Arca in Acres Results 1 I.and,rum et al. 1990 Archaeological Inventory Survey N;'A 46 Sita 1 Cabs et al. 20(}.1 Archaeological Data Recovery N _ 10 Sites -1l)t)I1 Carlson & Roserid.ThI Archaeological 1a moor} Survey ('l f, 4 Sites 3 I-laun et al. 1998rc}taei�}ltgtcal Inventors- Survey 15 31 Sites 4 ITanm-naii & Folk 1981 Arehaeologii.11 Survey 20 20 Sirs, 4 Hallman et al. 1986 Archaeologit:iI Sir-, r,v - & rxtJ... a of , 20 21 Sites 5 Haun & Henry 2001 Arch;1,......: )ll:LL,eal Data Re f}Very 1 ;9 1 Site 6 Escott 2013 Archaeotogical inventory Survey 1 _ }r;_ 2 ,. Sites 7 Sinn}te 1979 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey 6 Rock Walls 8 Manorial' 197911 Archaeological Survey 22 3. Sites 9 Harrniiatt 1979c Archaeological Survey 2; 39 Sites 10 Cilnolly' & (innncsti 1979 Arc11aeoli}�?IQa1 Rcconr}aissance Survey 46. i 80 Sites 10 'Hannan 1979a 1lr ltae��ll,l lc;il inventory Survey 415.8 11 Sites 10 Hatlurati 1980 i.rcliiicolugica] Survey & Excavation 10.1 88 Sites 11 Nelson et al. 2(75 Arc l7atc�l; s=real Inventory Survey 1t 13 Sites 12 TRLi i.11l.il 197f 1rc I1,3Li1I;r`,vL;,l Reconnaissance Survey c 1 Site 21 Project !Number (Figure R) Reference T Type of Study Area in Acres Results 12 SLlellrcn 1980a Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey lira 7 Sites 12 Wolforth et al- 2000 Archaeological lrlvta tory Survey 8 7 Sites 13 Barren 1415 r' rc1iaeoLogical Recortil.`a ksannce Su % ek 1 r 3 F several au. mounds 13 Haut' & Henry 200{l Ara ln�cc�lc} icatl Inventor!,5ui tcv 17R2 12 (1.04 Features, of Which Were Agricultural) Rosendahl1989 Archaeological Field Inspection 5 Modified Utuclops 15 Schilt 1984 Archaeological Study 17 134 Sita 16 W'ailkcr & Ruscudathl 1988 l Archaeological Rc;:o tttaissanec Survey I i74 67 Sites 16Grave;3 & Good[e11cm 1993 ,\i-claaeolvrrca 1. Data Recovery 104 1; Sites l 6 Maly & Rosendahl 2006 Ar,Aaeul,igical Preservation Plan 104 ly7 Sires 17 Hait mitt et al, 1992 .\tLlucc}10 iiea1 Survey 174 71 Sites 18 Soehren 19130b Arc lat;c�+It7g;cGtl Reeonriai,,:i1rcc. Suck ey 16 1 Site 19 Rechtman 2(I()6 Arc liLit't vital iin.enior� Sur\ev 1.005 2 Sites 20 Rosendahl 1988 Archr,tcoltaicrtl l&etcl.lEiaiilcc Survey 17 17 Sires 20 falter & Grave 1993 Archacult v iw +l Inventor., Stir\cv 17 17 Sites 21 Dircks rt al. 2013 Archaeological larweiiiiq. Some}, 10_166 1 Site (149 1-hsinric to Mltjtkt 3 Firimlog Features) 22 Desilcts et al. 20()4 Archaeological Inventory Surveyl'calurL; 11,':/ 111 i ial� slcai1 23 Rcchtrnan 2013 29 24 Sites 24 Clark & Rechtman 2006 Archaeological inventory Survey .1 , 6 Historic Era Sites 25 Escott & Escott 20 IN -11117 nti?la}��ii 11 env iitory Sunc . 5.0 2 Y Pre-C'rnaitact and Historic Era Sites 26 Escott & Escott 2020 .rch,�ealkalgio.l1 Ilnlentor' Survey 71122 I8 Pre-Contact and Historic Era Sites I Isolated Find (Petroglyph) 22 IMOWan +0' ploor 'Arbil II 2 llLn '" • A-- --- Ir 2 h. V. 0 mom' 'NAL% 0 1‘11i OIIL,FI*111.1 1 (;) r-Roarri rrrol r 7 • NPR 4.0 bas 15-11.11,i, I &MN PANS • • rap... 41. t, rigure lopograpitio map hilim n g Location uC ire LOU ArciiiieatorcaJ studLe.A luta vroic—ct (Kcatakekua Quiad. 1.7SRI. 2613. Data Souri,.2!s-. ltiational (i.00gruphic Socieyy. 1.j.S(":6), 11,110Itim I , 23 REGIONAL PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES 1. Landrum et al 1990, and Calls et al. 2004. PHRI, Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory survey (Landrum et a1. 1990) and SCS, Inc. conducted data recovery investigations (Calls et al. 2004) at the Kahakai development project. The project area is located within the lower elevations of Puapua'a 2" Ahupua`a_ Pre -Contact era to early post -Contact era cave shelters, agricultural rock clearing mounds, burials, shrines, and a possible heiau were identi lied during the AIS study. A heiau complex, several burials, and five permanent habitation sites were recommended for prescrvation. All of the preservation sites are near the coast. 2. Carleson and Rosendahl 1990. PH RI, Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 65 acres between Kuakini and Queen Ka`ahutnanu highways in Puapua'a 2°d Ahupua`a_ Their study recorded 64 archaeological sites including pre -Contact era habitation, agricultural, and burial sites. Seven sites were assessed as significant and recommended for preservation (Carlsson and Rosendahl 1990: 34). 3. Haim cit al. 1998. PHR.I. Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the proposed Alii Drive corridor through several ahupua`a. Numerous pre -Contact era site complexes were recorded in Puapua`a 2" and HoIualoa 1" through 4th Ahupua'a, The site complexes included a large number of aigriculttiral features. as well as habitation. burial, and ceremonial features. 4. Hanunatt and Hill: 1981, and Hamrnatt et al. 1986..Two archaeological surveys were conducted on a 20 -acre parcel of below Kuakini Highway. The first study recorded 20 sires, and [lir second recorded 21 sites. None of the sites were recommended for preservation (Hammatt and Folk 1981: ii, and Hammatt et al. 1986: 87), The report also recommended that the single documented burial be relocated. 5. Haun & Henry 2001. Haun and Associates conducted an archaeological data recovery study al a c -shaped enclosure located on 1.59 acres of land below Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway 6. Escott 2013..SCS conducted an archaeological study on 1.962 acres of land near the intersection of Kuakini and Queen Ka'ahumanu highways. Two historic era ranch walls were recorded during the study. 24 7. Sinoto 1979. Aki Sinoto recorded several Historic era ranch rock walls on a six acre parcel of laud just mauka of Alii Drive. S. Hammatt 1979b. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 22 acres just south of Kuakini Highway. Three archaeological sues were recorded during the study. None of the sites were recommended for preservation (Harriman 1 979b: ii, and 10). 9. Hammitt 1979c. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 23 acres located in the near coastal portion of Halualoa. I t and 2°`! Ahupua°a. Thiry nine archaeological sites were recorded during the study, The report recommended that all burials. including a known cemetery site be relocated ( Haminatt 1 979a: 5). None of the remaining sites (pre -Contact era habitation and agriculture sites) were recommended for preservation in place. 10. Cunally and Gunnels 1979, and Hammalt 1979a and 1980. The Archaeological Research Center. Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 103 acres within the near coastal portions of Holualoa l''through 4`11 Altupua'a. (Hammitt 1980) One hundred and thirty six archaeological sites were recorded on the project arca. They included pre - Contact era habitation, agriculture. burial. and a ceremonial sites. The Hamman report recommended that a heiau (Site 6661) was significant and should be preserved in place Hamman 1980: 4), The report also recommended that the single documented burial be relocated to the perimeter of heiau (Site 6661) and preserved. No other sites were recommended for preservation. 11. Nelson et al. 2005. An archaeological inventory survey was conducted by Rechtman Consulting on 28.0 acres located in the near coastal portion of Holualoa 2ILd Ahupua`a. A total of 22 sites containing 150 features were recorded. The sites were primarily pre - Contact era agricultural and habitation sites, though five burial sites, a possible heiau, and a trail were also documented within the project area, 12. Rosendahl 1978, Soehren 1980a, \%rolforth et al. 2000. PHRI conducted an archaeological inventory survey of eight acres of coastal Holualoa 3rd Ahupua'a and recorded seven archaeological sites including three Ilistoric era rock walls, three residential sites, and Hi.kapaia Heiau. 2i 13. Barrerrt 1995, Hann & Henry 2000. Barrer-a (1996) recorded a possible burial platform, two habitation site, agricultural rock clearing mounds and modified outcrops during a reconnaissance survey of 17 acres in near coastal Holualoa 2"`' Ahupua`a. Haun and Associates conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the property and recorded 12 sites with 104 features (Haun and Henry 2000:14). The majority of features (n=82) were pre -Contact era agricultural rock clearing mounds. Eleven permanent habitation and one temporary habitation feature were also recorded during the study. 14. Rosendahl 1989. PURI conducted an archaeological field inspection of 6.0 acres of land just below Queen Ka`ahurnanu Highway in Holualoa 2°a Ahupua`a, Several modified outcrops were recorded in the letter report. There were no other archaeological features identified on the project area. 15. Schilt 1984. The Bishop Museum conducted an archaeological study of'the Kuakini Highway Realignment Project located roughly along present day Queen Ka' altunianti Highway and recorded 39 sites Puapua'a 2°d and Holualoa l and 2nd Ahupua-a. Twenty two of the sites were pre -Contact to early post -Contact era agricultural gardens and modified outcrops (rock clearing). There were also traditional habitation platforms and trails, as well as Historic era roads and walls recorded during the study. 16. Walker and Rosendahl 1988, Graves and Goodfellow 1993, and Maly and Rosendahl 2006. An archaeological rcconr aissance survey (Walker and Rosendahl 1988), an archaeological data recovery study (Graves and Goodfellow 1993), and an archaeological preservation plan (Maly and Rosendahl 2006) were conducted by PH RI. Inc. for 104 acres in the upland region of Puapua'a 2'1 Ahupua'a. A total of 67 sites were documented within the project area, including traditional (KFS) sites, temporary habitation sites. three burials, and a heiatr. The archaeological preservation plan recommended that the three burials be relocated to the heiau site, and that the heiuu be preserved as a formal historic preservation area (Maly and Rosendahl 2006). 17. Harnmalt et al. 1992. An archaeological survey was conducted by Cultural Sur.cys Hawaii on 174 acres of land in the upland region of Holualoa 1 `, 211d. and 3'd Ahupua-a. The project area lands had been heavily bulldozed during the modem era for ranching and agricultural purposes. Despite the bulldozing. seventy one sites were recorded during the study, including temporary habitation features, rock walls, agricultural features, and 26 three burial sites. Many of the sites were determined to be associated with Historic era ranching and agriculture. 18. Soehren 19806. Soehren conducted an archaeological reconnaissance survey of 16.0 acres above Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway in the inland region of Holualoa l" Ahupua'a (Soehren 1980b). A single enclosure was identified during the survey. 19. Reehtman 2006. An archaeological inventory survey was conducted by Rechtman Consulting. I..LC on a roughly one -acre pared located mokcii of Queen Ka"ahurnanu Highway in Hcilualoa 2nd Ahupua`a. 'Two rock wails were recorded on the project area. The report recommended no further work at the wall sites. 20. M. Rosendalll 1988, Fager & Graves 1993. Faker and Graves (1993) conducted an a rchaeolliLFic.a] inventory survey of 17.0 acres just mauka of Queen Ka`alturrtanu Highway in Ht5lualoa 3' Ahupua.`a. Seventeen sites containing 27 pre -Contact to early post -Contact era agricultural features, including rock mounds, modified outcrops, C- shaped enclosures, terraces, walls, and rock enclosures, were recorded. 21. Dircks et al. 2013. Rechtman Cortsultin.L conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 10.266 acres of land located between 840 and 920 ft amsl in Holttaloa 1 and 2` Ahupua'a. One historic era to modern era homestead/agriculture site (Miyose Farm) containing 149 features was recorded during the survey.. 22. Desilets et al. 2004. Desilets et al. (2004) conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 11.7 acres of land in the "apa'a region ofHolualaa 1°r Ahupua`a_ A single site associated with Historic era and modem era homesteads, commercial agriculture (coffee), and ranching was recorded. Features included rock walls, roads, coffee terraces, and buildings. 23. Rechtnian 2013. Rechtman Consulting conducted and archaeological inventory survey of 29 acres of land located in the 'i-rpa `u region of HOIualoa I'' Ahupua`a. Twenty four sites were recorded. The majority of the sites were associated 4°ith Historic era and modern era homesteads, commercial agriculture. Features included rock walls, roads, and remnants of structures. A single pre -Contact era to earl} pot -Contact era residential and agricultural site was also recorded. '7 24. Clark & Reehtman 2006. Rec;htman Consulting conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 2.7 acres of land located in the `aper a region of H€alual ria 151 Ahupua`.a_ Six sites were recorded, including five ranch walls and an area of coffee terraces. A number of conclusions can be made from the previous archaeological studies. A primary conclusion is that the majority of habitation features, especially permanent habitation features, are located from the coast to about 360 h amsl, below the present day Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway. The same is true of ceremonial features, burials. and, to a lesser extent, agricultural features. The density of agricultural features and habitation features, mostly temporary habitation features, in the upland regions between 360 fl amsl and 700 ft amsl is much lower than the site density in the coastal kula and lower kcihr ` he regions of the KFS. The pre -Contact traditional Hawaiian settlement and agricultural patterns are strongly oriented to the kula and lower kali 'ulu regions. Even though cattle ranching and commercial agriculture may have removed some archaeological sites from the ground surface in the kalif 'tilt: region. there appear to be fewer sites than at lower elevations. The majority rity of sites in the kalu VI/ region are KFS agricultural sites including rock clearing mounds, modified outcrops, garden enclosures, and low garden walls. Within the lands of the current project. it is clear that ranching and commercial agricultural practices have removed and damaged „many of the pre -Contact cra sites from the ground surface (see the llammatt c9 al. 1992 summary below). Moreover, many of the sites identified near the current project area are associated with Historic era ranching and commercial agriculture. A second conclusion is that the establishment of Historic era homesteads, ranches, and commercial agriculture seems to have removed. or obscured, the majority of pre - Contact era sites in the upper kohl- `IA and lower i a `a regions. It alight he that pre - Contact uses in these regions did not involve the construction of large or permanent Col ures, as in the lower regions of Kona. It is also likely that Historic era ranching and commercial agriculture in the lower `ipa ci region have caused large scale land alterations through the use of bulldozers for pasture and garden. It is possible that traditional features were disassembled to build rock walls and coffee terraces. CURRENT PROJECT AREA SPECIFIC PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY 26. Hammatt el al. 1992. Lands of the current AIS study were subject to an A1S study conducted by Hamman et al. (1992). That study encompassed 66.039 acres of land within the current project area located between 320 to 690 feet (98 to 210 meters) arnsl [TM ]k.: (3) 7-6-021:016 and 017] (see Figure 9, Project #17). The current project area is located within the northern portion of the 11ammatt et al, (1992) project area. Twenty one archaeological sites and two areas of bulldozed modern planting "terraces" were recorded in the AIS report (Figure 10 and Table 3). Eight of the 21 archaeological sites (SIHP #50-10-37-10015, #50-10-37-10017, #5D-10-37-10018, #50- 10-37-10020, #50-10-37-10031, #50-10-37-10033, #50-10-37-10034, and #50-10-37- 10049, hereafter abbreviated to the last five digits) were recorded by CSH in tabular forrnat only. Written descriptions of the remaining 13 site; are in the CSH AIS report. Excavations were conducted at ten of the 13 sites. The AIS report included plan view figures for four of the 13 sites. At the request of SHPD, additional site documentation for Sites 10011, 10012, 10031, 10049, and 10071 was submitted to SHPD in a letter report (Hammatt and Shideler 2007). Six of the sites were determined to be pre -Contact era, tour associated with habitation, one with agriculture, and one sin.ic feature site (Site 10012) contained two burials. Fifteen of the sites were determined to be Historic cra, sites, the majority associated with coffee agriculture and cattle ranching. Two Historic era habitation sites were also documented in the AIS study. The burials at Site 10012 were removed and reinterred off -project prior to 1983. The site was further excavated to ensure that all had been removed. The site was then back-filled and leveled by bulldozer. The AIS recommended no further work at al] 21 sites documented in the current project area. The Hamrnatt and Shideler (2007) letter report repeated the AIS recommendation that "aII surface sites in the area were documented" in the AIS report and that "significant material from the study area has been recovered and that further investigation would be of minimum productivity„ (HHammatt and Shideler 2007:11). However, the authors recommended that the sites should be located to document their current conditions and to document the sites to prevailing SHPD AIS standards. 29 KEN iii11 1'R1111 II 1 41 ,4F.' kill Yki+,b Hi 1.51 46 14111 1411 d .4r t1111.4Q 01 11117 0 111W1111111 b ure In: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Northern Portion of IIantmatt et al. (1992) Sites and Current Project Area (SSRI, 201 l- Sources= National Geographic Society, USCG- Kcalakekua Quadrangle). 30 Table 3: Inventory of Prcv [push? HeLordled Archaeological Si es (Hunirnatt et al. 1992; Harriman and Shide ler 2007 SIHP # 1 CSH SI rE# TYPE FINCTION ACE EXCAVATION CULTURAL MATERIAL 9 Kai form A8_ Ulcaririrj Prehssioric. 13 m [ii.ri:;.. crench 3 cowrie 5d1.21IS 01111 10 Platform X: Wn11 purial Pfchistoric 1 Eno r,:. l'eoilife aurlal reimerrod off -project 10013 1] Loclosiiro & L....o.4t .1114:: FlabicalLon Prehistoric 4.5 in s',quare total fire fcaiures & Prehistoric artifacts 10015 „ „. 10117 . I:3 15 Terracc . ........ _ Platici ill Road Bed Historic ............ . . . .., .. Caulk:, Romp Himiiric . 10111 1 FicILKIlre 14.3hi cation Fikiiiiic 10111 1 7 0 Rock '.1.11iii1it1s Ay: Clearing I 115itiric 3 1.0111 .....icle Irenciies \1iL File 11111111 I Platform Az_ Clcarin.L., Historic 100.31 1 U 1Hnclosure W;LI 1 Agriculture Historic 101133 1 l'IniLimi,... Coitipk:x C'offee AQ llivtaric 101134 113 Plail'unil ALL ('Ic:Avir,g. Historic 10040 216 Terraces Agriculture Historic .10067 232 Terraces 11 Ali calion Prehistnric 1.0 X t .0111 I Vti & a "..rnal I. an io um of midden &I. -ire reature 1006N 233 1...ncl1iNure I labi tation Prtiiistorit: 0.5 X (1.25 n .,:triall amount iirriutkitit 1006') 234 Modified Blutr.PlatiOrrn Ilabiiation Historic 0.31 0.5 iri I VG & a triza 1 1 amount of midden 1,:/n70 235 t :-Sliapc En[-.kre \tztivultury ' Hil4ori,.: 1.0 X 0.5 m Nu artifacts 1011-1 2.17 Mai furril liabitirlion PftInslori‘; 7' 23:' Modified Blurt- Au. Ccarini2 HiNtoric 7.11 iri squan! total No arts Small amuni of MS in 11-2 11)111 2N I'Lli forms Rawl -1111g Ag, Fii A Uric 1, 11r4 2411 1.nclos are CofTee Work Shed Historic ' 1..23 m square foul ;. 1 VC, Little M. liiioric artifacts 100'5 24I Enclosure Pig Pcn Historic 31 In a letter to the County of Hawaii.' Department of Planning dated July 30, 2018, (Log_ No. 2018.00878 Doc. No. 18078N01), SHPD requested a new pedestrian survey to identify all archaeological historic properties present on the project area, and to update previous archaeological documentation to include site plans for each site with site boundaries and areas impacted by bulldozing, photographs of all sites and features, an assessment of their integrity. and site stgnilicancc,. 25. Escott & Escott 2018. SCS conducted an archaeological inventory survey on a 5.0 - acre portion of Parcel 017 in the southeast portion cif the cutTent project area (Escott and. Escott 2018) and recorded twenty-two new archaeological sites wvithin the project area (Table 4 and Figure 11). Fifteen of the sites are single -feature sites. The remaining seven agricultural sites contained two to seven features_ A majority of the sites are agricultural terraces and complexes dating to the pre -Contact era to the Historic era. The agricultural complexes are located in the lower tarter 'arty zone, between 600 and 700 feet (182 to 213 meters) amsl. Three of the ranch walls (Site 30595, 30601. and 3065) are the primary dividers of the five -acre project area. These Historic era walls have typical characteristics of ranch walls including cobble core fill and bi-faced inward sloping walls toward the top. They are approximately 1.0 meter tall. Site 30602 and Site 30603 are Historic era ranching and agricultural enclosures constructed along wall. Site 30595 and wall Site 30601. These two wall sites are constructed onto the west edge or'the Site 3092 railroad berm and post-date the railroad berm. The northern third of the project area only has two sites (Site 30591 and 30956). Site 30591 is an agricultural complex with six terraces. Portions of the sites were bulldozed in the early Modern era. Both sites date to pre -Contact to early Historic era. The terraces reflect Kona Field System features but are roughly constructed that more closely resemble Historic era commercial agriculture. Site 30956 is a rectangular Historic style hearth. The middle one third of the project area between wall sites 30595 and 30605 is within the bulldozed "terraces" portion of the project area Site 30593 is a pre -Contact era to early post -Contact era lava tube burial. The burial will be preserved in place in accordance with a Burial Site Component of a Prescr ation Plan. Site 30594 is an 32 agricultural terrace complex that resembles the Kona Field System but is more roughly constructed. Artifacts recovered from subsurface testing at Site 30604 suggest it is a Historic era agricultural terrace. The southern third of the project area, south of wall Site 30605, contained six primarily agricultural sites (Site 30598. 30600. 30606. 30607, 30610, and 30611) and four Historic era sites (Site 30599, 30608, 30609, and 30612) with functions other than agriculture. The agricultural features included rock walls (Site 30598 and30606), terraces (Site 30600 and 30610), and agricultural complexes with terraces (Site 30607 and 306 H)), The non-agricultural features included three enclosures (Site 30599, 30608. and 30609), and a refuse di posa1 area larva blister (Site 30612). The cluster of these sites indicates their use for 1 Iistoric crti car,merwial agriculture. Twenty-nine shovel probes and two excavation units tested the sites. Marine shell fragments. a basalt flake and volcanic -glass flakes recovered during testing indicate that Hawaiians likely used the area for limited agricultural purposes. However, the agriculturalterraces more closely resemble the remains of Historic era commercial agriculture. All 22 sites identified during the current AIS study were' assessed significant under criterion "d" as they are likely to yield information important to history. The railroad berm is also siniticant under criteria "a" and "c" as it is associated with events that have made a significant c or7ribution to the broad patterns of our history and it embodies distinctive characteristics of the type, period, and method c}f" railroad bed construction. The railroad berm was recommended for preservation with preservation measures outlined in an archaeological preservation plan (Escott and Mello 2019b). The rest of the sites require no further work. The burial is also significant under criterion "e" as it has important value to Hawaiian people and people of other ethnic backgrounds in the state. The burial was recommended for preservation in place with preservation treatments outlined in a Burial Site Component of a Preservation Plan (Escott and Mello 2019a). 33 Table 4: Inventory of Archaeological Situ Identified on the A1S Project Arca l l_Scotl and EscLstL 2018). Site N Site Type Features Site Function Age Testing 30591 Agricultural (1fmple3 6 A i uliure Pre -Comic) w Historic Errs SP -l. 2, 1 30592 Railroad Bed and B&rn1 I Transportation Historic Era 30593 30594 L1rt,t 'hale I3tiri;d Agricultural Complex 1 6 Burial Pre -Contact Io EarlyPcsst-Coniaat Era Agriculture Pre -Contact to Historic Era SP -1. & 2 30595 Rock WL111 1 Ranching Historic Era 30596 Hearth I Fc od Preluaralinn Historic Era 'CU -I 30597 Ruck Wall 1 Ran ping Historic Era 30598 Rock Wall 1 A ;cicul lure•'Itariching Ranchint; A gricuiture -Contact to FI eri la SP -.1 & 3- TU -.l 30599 Platform & Enclosure Historic Era 30600 Tcrraoc 1 Azricullure Historic Era SP -1 30601 Reek Fall I Ranching Historic Era 30642 ErcluSuae 1 RanchingAgriculture Historic Era SP -1. 2.3 Sr 4 30603 Enclosure 4 Rmtclu lr-' .\:'r1culture Historic Era SP -1 & 2 30604 Agricultural Complex 4 :1, r,t iIllur. Pre -Contact to Historic Era SP -1 30605 Rock Wnll 1 Ii.uich III/ :\riou1ture Histone Era :0606 Rack Fall I R;II1.°I1i;r2.,1!r :tI1rore Pre-Ca'1x1,1ct to Historic FI'II i061-17 :\,Lr:tu.11urul Corrip1t'x 7 Arricu Itura Pr:: Cor.tucL to Historic Eru SP -I to SP -117 ±UP):!5 30611'1 1.1.R.,1{1e11I- I.nelosure 111"fIl'ilI!: Sink...kin:. LpJ41(}CYI Era Li; i.uric Erl 41I611.r Terrace i Agriculture Pro-CirntacLto Historic 1'. RI SP -1 iilfll i Agricultural (.. wriplex 3 ±1rricullt]rL Pro,CoR1iicL in I ios)rit I'm SP -I. ti,, 1 11161: I.;K;L Illis rl Nc.iii,e Diirili1 Ii)-I,.+riff I'r;I is SITr 3o$41 SITF. 3II596 N-I1k:311h .3 KEY ®• ROJECT AREA yl t 1 1 - SITE SITE ROIIitiI)AR RAILROAD RFD ROCK WALL h S P' TIti MP SO El II !dM v4 C fl: 3d It I NLIF 1 .4[Wd?T ti Figure 11: 7.5-Minuic Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Locations of Escott and. Escott (2018).AIS Project Area Archaeological Sites (ESR, 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle). 35 26. Escutt & Eseutt 2020. SCS conducted an archaeological inventory survey on a 73. 122 -acre portion ol'the current project arca in. Parcel 016, 017 (Fur.), 018, Bund 019 to identify all archaeological historic properties present on the project area, and to update previous archaeological documentation (sec Figure 10). Seventeen of the twenty-one sites previously identified in Hammatt et al. (1992) were located during the course of the archaeological inventory survey study (Figure 10 and Table 5). Two ofthe previously documented sites (Site 10020 and Site 10034) relocated by SCS are natural bedrock outcrops and one site former burial site (Site 10012), The burials at Site 10012 were reinterred off -project in 1981 The four remaining previously documented sites (Sites 10017, 10033, 10049. and 10071) were bulldozed prior to the SCS fieldwork and the remains of the sites are no longer present on the ground surface. Three previously undocumented sites were also recorded, including a portion of the railroad berm (Site 30592), a small coffee shed enclosure (31 L 81). and several ranch walls (31182). A single petroglyph on a loose cobble was recorded as Isolated Find 1 (IF -1). A total of 21 sites, 17 previously documented and four newly documented, were identified on the project area and are documented in this report. Two ofthe sites (Site 10020 and Si Le 10034) were determined to be natural geological features. Six of the sites were determined to bc 17rc-Contact era, three associated with (habitation, one with agriculture, a single petroglyph site, and one single feature site (Site 10012) formerly contained two burials. Twelve of the sites were determined to be Historic era sites. the majority associated with coffee agriculture and cattle ranching. Two Historic era habitation sites were also documented in the ALS study. One site (Site 10015) was determined to be a short segment of modern bulldozer road. The burials at Site 10012 were removed and reinterred off -project prior to 1983. The site was further excavated to ensure that all iwi had been removed. The site was then back -tilled and leveled by bulldozer. 36 Table 5: In entnra of Escott & Escott (2020'1 Archaeological Sites, SI Fl P# TYPE FUNCTION AGE 101)1 1 Platform Ag, Clearing Pre -Contact 10012 Platform & Wall Burial Prehistoric 10013 Enclosure & Lava Tube Habitation Pre -Contact 10015 Bulldozer Road Transportation Modern 10017 Platform Cattle Ramp Historic 10018 Lite Iotitirc :luricultural Historic 10019 6 Rock Mounds A. Clearing , Historic 10020 Bedrock Outcrop Geological Feature Natural 10031 Enclosure Wall Agriculture Historic 10033 Planting Complex Coffee Ag Historic �w 10034 114Llrock OutLrop Geological Feat ir Naliira1 I004L) Terraces Agriculture Historic 10067 Terraces Habitation Prehistoric 10068 Enclosure Habitation Prehistoric 10069 Modified BIuff'Plat:form Habitation Historic 10070 li-Sixipe Enclosure Agriculture. I1istoric 14071 Platform Ilaabitation Prehistoric 10072 Mclilieci Bluff A. Charing Pre -Contact 10073 Platforms Ranching!Aa. Historic 10074 Enclosure Coffee Work Shed Historic: I 007 Enclosure Pig Pcn Historic 3{)592 Railroad Berle 1. uitil c}natio i 11i;i&iris 11-1 Petroglyph Marker Pieloi,turic 31181 Enclosure Coffee Work Shed 1Iistoric 31182 Rock Walls Ranching & Agri Historic * Site iiumbe •s ire preceded by the prefix 50-10-37-, 37 CULTURAL. INFORMANT INTFRVIF`WS Consultation was sought from Jordan Kea Calpito, SHPD Burial. Sites Specialist; Kainakana Ferreira, OHA Compliance Officer; Nicole Lui, cultural descendant, Seats Naleiniailc, State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) Hawai`i Island Archaeologist; Kekoa Nezara, Kona Hawaiian Civic Club President; Shane Nelson, OHA West Hawaii Representative, and J, Curtis Tyler III, cultural descendant (Table 4). Consultation was also conducted via telephone with Gregg Kashiwa who served as project property manager for parcels 016 and 017 in the early 1980s. Table 4: Rcsponscs to CIA Consultation Request. Name Affiliation Responded Has Knowledge Cultural Practices _Iorcl..111 KL<i Ca'pito SHPD Burial Siics Spe i tli;l No - - E•:. ulial;tttl l Ferreira 0I1A t ompIlLiiice. ()lttcet No (in.LLT Kashi tint Former Prt1p 'I'ty MariLvt )"titi Yes No N icloe Ltti C'tuttur,1l II:scendcnai '1'c '1'es No ..a Sean Na1eini t114 SLIM Aal'll;tceli.l;4tsi No - - Kekoa Nazara Kona Hawaiian Civic Club YesSome No Shane Nelson OHA West Hawaii Rep. No - - J. Curtis Tyler III Cultural Descend Yes Yes No GREGG KASHIWA CONSULTATION Gregg Kashiwa was interviewed by phone on April 19, 2016. Mr. Kashiwa was the project property manager for parcels 016 and 017 in the early 1980s and was present during Ala work documented in the Hammatt et al, ( 1992). He is originally from Oahu but lived in Kona for several decades. Mr. Kashiwa remembered that the 5 -acre portion of Parcel 017 in the southeast portion of -the project area was excluded tion the original AIS because the property owners were planning to give the five acres to a group to use as an agricultural preserve. The ti%re acres and the property below (to the west) had already been bulldozed for agricultural use. Mr. Kashiwa knew that there were ranch walls and 11 istt3ric era agricultural features on the project area, but did not know how they were used, as they were no longer in use during his time in Kona. He also remembered the old railroad bed and berm and that there was a small railroad stop along the track just south of the project area. 38 SUM M ARY The "level of effort undertaken" to ideitti fv potential effect by a project to cultural resources, places or beliefs (OEQC 1997).has not been officially defined and is left up to the investigator. A good faith effort can mean contacting agencies by letter, interviewing people who may be affected by the project or who know its history, research identifying sensitive areas and previous land use, holding meetings in which the public is invited to testify, notifying rhe community through the media, and other appropriate strategies based on the type ofpro.jccr being proposed and its impact potential. In the case of the present parcel, consultation was sought from Jordan Kea Calpito, SHI'D Burial Sites Specialist; Kamakana Ferreira, OHA Compliance Officer: Nicole Lui, cultural descendant, Sean Naleimaile, State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) Hawaii Island Archaeologist; Kekoa Nezara. Kona Hawaiian Civic Club President; Shane Nelson. OHA West Hawaii Representative; and J, Curtis Trier 111, cultural descendant Consultation was also conducted via telephone with Gregg Kashiwa who served as prujL•Lt property manager for parcels 016 and 017 in the early 1980s. Public notices (see Appendix A) were placed in the December 2019 issue of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) Ka Wai Ola Newspaper. Public notices were also published in the Honolulu Star -Advertiser, and the West Hawai `i Today on November 17th, 20th and 21''. Historical and cultural source. micriais were extensively used and can he found listed in the References Cited portion of the report. Such scholars as 11, Kaniakau, C17 inen, Kameeleihiwa, Fornander, Kuykendall, Kelly, Handy and Handy, Pukui and Elbert, Thrum, and Cordy have contributed, and continue to contribute to our knowledge and understanding of Hawaii, pass and present. The works of these and other authors were consulted and .incorporated in the report where appropriate. Land use document research was supplied by the Waihona Aina 2007 Data Base. 39 CIA INQUIRY RESPONSE As suggested in the "Guidelines for Accessing Cultural. Impacts'" (Gag 1997), CJAs incorporating personal interviews should include ethnographic and oral history interview procedures, circumstances attending the interviews, as well as the results of this consultation. It is also permissible to include organi/.:1nens with individuals familiar with cultural practices and features associated with the project area. As stated above, consultation was sought from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the SHPD Burial Sites Branch. the SHPD Archaeology Branch, families associated with Kaloa 5`}' Ahupua'a, and long-time Kona residents. There were no responses to the public notices published in the OHA Ka Wai Ola, West Flawai`i Today or the 1-loioEulu Star -Advertiser newspapers, J. Curtis Tyler Ill, Nicole Lui and Greg Kashiwa did provide information concerning lands of H€rtualoa 1'` Ahupaaa`a. There were no past or ongoing cultural practices identified with lands of the current project area. An analysis of the potential effect of the proposed construction of residences on cultural resources, practices or beliefs, its potential to isolate cultural resources, practices or beliefs from their setting, and the potential of the project to introduce elements which may alter the setting in which cultural practices take place is a requirement of the OEQC (No. 10, 1997). Based on historical research and responses from the above listed contacts, it is reasonable to conclude that, there will be no traditional cultural practices affected and there will be no direct adverse effect upon cultural practices or beliefs in the broader project area region. 40 CULTURAL ASSESSMEMNT Based on the results of an Archaeological Assessment of the project arca. the results of previous archaeological studies, as well as organizational response, individual cultural informant responses, and archival research, it is reasonable to conclude that. pursuant to Act 50, the exercise of native Hawaiian rights, or any ethnic group, related to gathering, access or other custornary activities will not be affected by development activities on this parcel, The proposed project is not a location for past or ongoing cultural practices. The proposed undertaking will not produce adverse effects to anv native Hawaiian cultural practices within the project arca or in the broader region. 41 REFERENCES CITED A_k.i, H. 1952 Map of Kailua Section, North Kona„ Hawaii, Land Titles, Survey and Map by J. S. Emerson. Hawaii Territory Survey Map, Registered Map No. 1280. Alexander, J, 1855 Map of Holualoa 1 & 2, Kona Hawaii. Hawaii Territory Survey Map. Registered Map No, 1450. Athens, J., T. Reith, and T. Dye 2014 A paleoenvironmental and archaeological model -based age estimate for the colonization of I-Iawai'i. American Antiquity, 79(4):144-55. Bergin, Dr. B. 2004 Loyal to the Land:The Legendw:v Parker ranch, 750-1950. University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu. Barrera, W. Jr. 1971 -] rcIrorralrg ic•rri 1=.t cul.rrrrorr.s- and Surer at Keauhou, North Kona, Hawaii. Bishop 1 frr.�a rrrrt f eperrljrrorrral Report Series 71-10. Submitted to Kamehameha. Development Corporation. B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. 1995 North Kona, Hawaii Island: Archaeological Reconnaissance of Seven Parcels. Prepared for County of Hawaii Planning Department_ Burichard, G. C. 1995 Population and Land -use on the Is:tauhou Coast, the ;tlorrku Lands Inventory Survey, Keturhou, North Kona. Haat& `t Mind. the :1'crr-rative, part I. Submitted to Belt, Collins and Associates and Kameliamcha hivo tnnrent Corporation. IAR.IL Honolulu. Calis, L. M.T. Carson, M. Dega and R.L. Spear 2004 Data Recover' at the Phase 1 and 11 Portions of the Kahakai Development Project A 'eco T (3) 7-5-20:1. SCS Report 209-1. Prepared for Stanford Carr Development, LLC. SCS, Honolulu. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Carlson, A.K., and P.1-1. Rosendahl 1990 Archaeolrrgkal Inventory Survey, Piralani Development - Phase 11, Lands of Prruprraa 1'` and 2'd, North Kona District, Island of Bonsai. PHRJ, Inc. report prepared for Pualani Development Company. Report on file at the SHPD Library. Kapolei. 42 Chinen, J.J. 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawa "i. Clark, M., and R. Recluman 2006 en _Archaeological Inventor ' Safn'ev of TAIK:3-7-6-00-1:003, Hollralua 1-2 Ahrapffa'a, North Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. Redly -Ilan Consulting Report RC -0360 prepared for Mr, Phil Tinguely, Holualot \''illagc Partners, LLC, Kailua-Kona, Hawa.l'i. Conolly III, R.D.. and J.L. fiuttness 1979 Archac,010,0cal Reconnaissance Survey 01 the Komohona Kai Subdivion (Unit 1) Site (TAN: N:.; -7 -(i -I3:3/). Report prepared by Science Applications Inc., Honolulu for G.C. Development Co., Inc. Report onfile at the SHPD Library, Kapolci. Cordy, R. 1981 _4 Stuck' of Prehistoric Social Change: The Development of Complex Societies in the Hawaiian Islandw. Academic Press, New York, 1995 Central Kona. 4rchac olr giro/ .Settlement Partr}rrts. Department of Land and Natural Resources, State l {,toric Preservation Division, Honolulu, 2000 Eaerlted Sits the Chief: Mutual Publishing. Honolulu. Daws, G. 1968 Shoat of Time: A History of the Hawaiian Island. Macmillan, New York. Hesilets, M., and R. Rechtman 2004 Archaeological Irrrentor-t Sun'i'r of a Grant Increment Ruud Remnant Property (TMK:.3- 7-6-08:005 por.), H 3/ Tloa 1-2 Ahuprta 'cr, MVO Kona District, Island er' H m ui'i. Rechtman Consulting Report RC -0244 prepared for Curt A. Cottrell, Na Ala Hele Program Manager, Honolulu, Hawaii and Ramon Perez de Ayala, Pua`anui Partnership, Honolulu, I-{awai`i. Dircks, A., L. Zcuobi, and R. Rcchtiiran 2013 Archaeological fne'cwtot:v Survey of the Powlrrr,rel :LID O\e Farm ,ti'rriulivision (Tkli< : 3-7-6-t 01:003, 009, and (119), Ifulufrir.Cr 1-2 A/z,q..ma'a Yori1r Kona District, Island ofHawai'i. Rechtmmn Consulting Report RC -0856 prepared for Edward Rapoza, Kailua-Kona. Dye, T. 2011 A model -based age estimate for Polynesian colonization of Hawai°i. Archaeology in Oceania, 46:130-38 43 Ellis. W. 1963 Narrative oleo Tour of Hawaii, or• Owhvhee. Advertiser Publishing, Honolulu. Escott_, G. 2013 .4n.huerahr'gical Inventor -e• .5ur•vo' Report Mr the Proposed AT&T T Fireless Telecommunications Tower (HAW 3011) Site Located in flolualoct t' Ahrrpita `ct. North Kona District, Huwai 'r l.slcarxf Hcnvai 'i [MK; (3) 7-6-024:032] . SCS Report #1340-2 prepared for Awe Fnvironmcntal. 1.as Vegas. Escott, G., and S. Escott 2018 Archaeological Inventory Survey Report pr 5.0 Acres Located in hrohtaloca 1yr Ahuptra'a, North Kona District, IHawcai 'i Aland, Hawaii [MIK: (3)7-6-021:017 Per.]. Prepared for East West Realty. SCS Report 1871, Honolulu. 2020 Archaeological Inventors- Survey Rtwort fir 76.121 Acres Loaned in HHolrralvca 1st Ahup rya, North Kona District, Hawcai'1 island, Hcrwui'i [TI.1K: (3)7-6-021:016- 019]. Prepared for Kona Three, LLC. SCS Report 2330, Honolulu. Escott, G. and N. Mello 2019a Burial Site Crrrrrixrrrriar rr/ rr Burial Treatment Plow jcar I3rrr rrr{ Sire #50-10-57- 30593 Located in IfOlualo a J't Ahup ia'ct, North Kona District, flcni ar'i Islcaxrc Hawaii I /M : (3)7-6-021:0171. Prepared for Kona Three, LLG. SCS Report 2137, Honolulu. 2019b An Archaeological Preservation Plan for Site #50-10-57-30592 Located in 1 "uhaaaloa 1 `+ _ lhrrpua 'a, .Forth Kona District, Hawai 'i Islcarui Hawai '1 [T1: (3)7-6-021:016-019]. Prepared for Kona Three, LLC. SCS Report 2137, Honolulu. ESRI 2013 Arc GIS Explorer, Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, Ca, Fager, M., and D. Graves 1993 Archaeological Ir3i"crrnoi:v .Sitav :r, Holuahra .3rd De clfrpmenr Parcel, Cel, Land of Holtacthkf 3 , North Korn District, Islarrd r fIlcr+, rrr "r (TT4f .3 7-t14: 351. PHR1 Report 1231-073092 prepared for Dillingham Partners. Google Earth 2013 Google Earth Imagery. Google Earth. Mountain View, Ca. 44 Graves, D,K., and S.T. Goodfellow 1993 The Gardens of`Kona Revisited: Pualani Residential CnFa7FrFad77FFe' Phu. e Archaeological Data Recover -v, LantA of uapliaa 1" and ?' North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (T IK.3-7-5-17. por. 2rS, 29). Pl I RI, Inc. report Prepared for Pualani Estates, Inc. Report on File at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Han, T. L., S. L. Collins, S. D. Clark. and A. Garland 1986 elle )4' Kau a l•{r} `ailri_ Hawaiian t•frirtrrar , Practices ar Keopi, Kona, Haivai'I. Chapter VII. Artifacts and Ma.nuports from the Keopu Burial Site. Bishop Museum Departmental Report Series 86-1. Submitted to Department of Transportation, Honolulu. Handy, E.S. 1940 The Hawaiian Planter, Volume I. B.P. Bishop Museum bulletin 161. B.P. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Hamman, H.H. 979a Archaeological Survey" of a 22 Acro Parcel al Hohaaloa Alrrrpi a `a, Hawaii. Report prepared by the Archaeological Research Center 1 Iar•aii, Inc. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 1 979b Archaeological Survey of a 22 Acre Parcel al Hr5lraalo Alvei. to `cr, J once, cnr"ar "r island, Report prepared lh\ the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii. Inc. for Kalani Sunset Corporation. Report on file at the SHPD Library. Kapolei. 1 979c Archaeological Survey and Excavation at the Proposed KcrlraOili:aina Kai Subdivision, Holualoa, Kona, Nawar "r Island. Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc. Manuscript. Prepared for G.C. Development Co., Inc. 1980 Archaeological Survey and Excavation at the Proposed ed Komohana Kai Subdivision Holiaaalcra, Knauer, Hawaii Island. Report prepared by the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii,. Inc. for G.C. Development Company, Inc. Report on isle at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Hammat, H.H., D. Borthwick, and D. Shideler 1986 Archaeological Survey and Exccab°crrion.,' carr a 2O-Acr4e Parcel Hohra!acr, Kona, Henvai'i Island. Report prepared by Cultural Surveys Hawaii for Maryl Investments, Inc. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Hammatt, H. H., and S. D. Clark 1980 Arc17i reolfrt, L /l TL.,srimrrx trrrci tale rFw Excavations of a 155 Acre (Ginter) Parcel iaa Na Lthur rc.r'ca I'a{art{ hoe, 1. if crl,ca, carrd Ia akir `a/aea, Kona, Mita, 'I island ARC"11 Report 14-152 111. Submitted to Pacific Basin Resorts, Inc, 45 Hantnatt, H.H., and W.H. Folk 1980 Arc huc atogicc 1 Survey. Phase 1: Portions o fKeauhou-Kona Resort, Keaauhou and KaIndu "it. Iona, Hawar'i Island} ARCH Report 14-177 RI, Submitted to Krunehamcha Investment Corporation. 1981 ,-1 rehaeo!ogica1.S'urvek of a 20 Acre Parcel, H Iualoa, Kona, i-'crwai `r Island, Report prepared by the Archaeological Research Center l lawaii. Inc. for Kalani Sunset Corporation. Report on file cat the SHPT) Library, Kapolei. Hammatt, H.H., W,H, Folk, and D.W. Shideler 1992 ,4rchaeolo ico1 Survey Testing and .Excavation of a 174 -Acre Pared, .Hol:raloa, North Kona, &mai'i. Report prepared by Cultural Surveys Hawaii For the (=►anion Corporation. Report on file at the SHPT) Library, Kapolei. 2007 Letter Report Documenting Archaeological Study Conducted„ Finds, and Their Treatment at a Proposed Multi -Family Res rJenrial Development. HoIualoa Ahupua'a, North Kona, Hai+jai `I, TMK: (3) 7.6-021:016 016 (por.). Report prepared by Cultural Surveys 12.50 Oceanside Partners, LLC. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei Hammatt, H, H., and V, W. Mocker 1979 Archaeological Excavations. and Heiara Stabilization at Kahalrr 'rr. Kona, Hawaii Island. ARCH Report 14-172(11). Submitted to Gerald Park, Urban Planner, Haun, A.E., and D. Henry 2000 Archaeological fnveiitor-v Survey TLiK:.7-7-04:56, Hilrra 10 a 3, North Kona, Island of Hadun. & Associates report prepared for Mr. Sidney Fuke, Hilo, Hawaii. Report on the attire SHPD Library, Kapolei. 0101 , f who lo, rrc,a/ Dora RWovery Site 14130 MK: : (3 ) 7-5-17: Por. 1. Prepared 1'vr Inaba Enszineerin€a_ 1 laun & Associates, Kea'au. Report on file at the SHPT! Library, Kapolei. Haan. A. E., J. D. Henry, J. A. Jimenez, M. A. Kirkendall, K. Maly, and T. R. Wolforth 1998 Alii Highway PhasedMitigation Program Phase 1 - Archaeological Intensive Survey, Summary, vol. 1. PHR1 Report 1320-052798. Submitted to County of Hawaii. FHRJ, Hila. Hommon, R. J. 1986 Social Evolution in Ancient Hawaii. In Island Societies. Archaeological Approaches to Evolution and Transformation, edited by P.V. Kirch, pp. 55-88. University Press, Cambridge, 46 Kahn, J., Rieth. P. Kirch, J. Athens, and G. Murakami 2014 Re -dating of the Kuli`ota`oi1 rockshelter, Oahu, Hawai`i: Location of the first radiocarbon date from the Pacific Islands. Journal of the Palvm siarr Society, 123(1):67-90, Kanmeeleihiwa, L. 1992 Native Landes icc foreign Desires: Peh to La E Pono Al? Bishop Museum Press. Honolulu. Kelly, M. 1983 Niiala o Kona: Gardens of Kona Dept. of Anthropology Report Series 83-2. Bishop Museum. Honolulu. Kirch, P.V. 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Intrciduetion to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. University ol` Ilawaii Press, Honolulu 2011 When did the Polynesians settle Hawaii? A re -view of 150 years of scholarly inquiry and a tentative answer. Hawaiian Archaeology, 12:3-26, Kirch, P.V. and M. McCoy 2007 Reconfiguring the Hawaiian Cultural Sequence: Results of re -dating the Halawa dune site (MO -Al -3). Molokai Island. Journal of the Poirncsicm Society, 1.16:385-406. Kirch, P.V. and M. Sahlins 1992 Anablittf. Vol. 1 and 2. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Kuykendall, R.S. 1938 The Hawaiian Kingdom. Vol. 1. University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu. Landrum, J., A.F. Haen, P.H, Rosendahl, and K. Delirnont 19901 Archaeological Inventes' . rr..','i ]° nil Test Excavations Kahakai Development Project Area, PHRI Report i 57-070 l 85. Prepared for Wilson Okamoto & Associates. PHRI, Hilo. Report. on lilt at the SHPD Library. Kapolei. Maly, K 1993 Ka `ao Ho 'onitia Pu 'ufwai No Ka-Miki. The Heart Stolt' Sion' o;l'Ka-Miki. Published in Hawaiian, in the newspaper "Ka Ha3kfi o Ha'rai'1(Hilo) January 8, 1914 through December 6, 1917. Translated by Kept Maly for Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph,D,, Inc. 1996 Historical Documentary Research. In Archaeological Inventory Survey Proposed Henry Street Extension Road C »-ridrar•. by WttlZen, W., T.R. Wolfarth, and L.J. Franklin. pp. 9-19. PR.1-1I Report. 1465-092696. Prepared for Mary! Development, Kai lua-Kona. PHRI_ Hilo. 47 Maly. K. and 0. Maly 2001 He Wahl. Alco `olelo No Na 'Aran A Me No Ala Tele I Hehi la, _Alai kanahota A I .Kealcakekrau, Alcr Kona, Hrnvai `i 14 Hi torical C +'ervi w ref the Land . And Trails Traveled, Between Keaulron and Kc/ukeku a, Kona. Hawai `i. Kunio Pono and Associates report prepared f'or Na Ala fide Pro rain Manager (Ilawai`i island). Stale Division of Forestry and Wildlife. 1lilo_ 2.002 He Wahl Mo `olelo Aro Ka Arora A Me W `O/mna 0 Wa iki `I tLfia Waike5lno aCalaraa 0 Waimea, Kolaalcr). A Me Ka Ai,rctMauna; A Collection q/ Traditions and Hi. arrricc7l Accounts of tik' f.aiiciS and Families or Walk`l at Waik3loa (Waimea caimceea # e; irrra, South iCrrlacilo, and the Mountain Lands, Islando/11awai'i (/ IA Overview ,Street 6-7-61). [(mutt ['ono Associates. Hilo. Maly, K., and P.1-1. Rosendahl 2006 Phase 111 Archaeological Site Preser•uatian Plant, Pualani Residential C'ommrrniti' .4 -litigation Program, Lands of Parapaaaa 1" and r North on District, Island of Haw al 't 0NX:3-7-5-17:2N. 29). I'fIRJ. Inc. report prepared for Schuler 1 look~_ Report on file at the S1IPD Library. Kapolci. McCoy, M. 2005 The development of the Kalaupapa Feld system, Koloka`i Island, Hawaii. Journal of the Polynesian Society , 116:339-58, 2007 Revised late Holocene culture history for Molokai Island_ Hawaii. Radiocarbon, 49(3):1273-1322. Menzies, A. 1920 Howai'i Nei 128 Years Ago. Edited by W.F. Wilson.. Nev,. Freedom Press. Honolulu. Mules:nncvN, M, S. Bicklcr. M. Allen. and T. I.adcloged 2011 High -precision dating of colonization and settlement in Fast Polynesia. Proceedings of'the National Academy of Sciences, 108:E192 -E194. National Geographic, Topa! 2003 ,SE-crmfe..v. L/SGS 7 opographic• Maps on CD-ROM, Htavai `i. National Geographic Holdings. Inc, Washington, D.C. Nelson, D., L. Bulgrin, and R. Rechtman 2005 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK:3- 7-6-013:008, Holuafoa 1st & 2nd Ahrtptta'a, North Kona District, Island ofHcrwai `i. Rechtrnan Consulting Report RC -0251. Prepared for Nearon Enterprises, LLC, Danville, California. (Revised 2006). 48 Newman, T. S. 1970 Hawaiian Fishing and Farming on the Island of Hawaii A.D. 1778. Department of Land and Natural Resources, Honolulu. Pukui, M.K., S. Elbert and E. Mookini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii, University of Hawaii Press_ 1 lonolulu. Rechtman, R,B. 2006 An Archaeological Inventor. Survey of Ti :3-7-013:0 17, Halualoci 1-2 Ahuprra `a, North Kona District. Wand r f"Hawai `i, Report Prepared by Rechtman Consulting, LLC for Geometrician Associates, LLC. Report on File at the SHPD Library. Kapolei. Rieth, Timothy M, Terry L. Hunt. Carl Lipo, and Janet M. Wiirrishursi 2011 The 13th Century Polynesian Colonization ofHawai`i Island. Jorrrrral crf Archaeological Science 38:2740-2749. Rosendahl, M. 1988 Archaeological Reconnaissance Suri'er°. IIolualoa 3rd Development Parcel. Land rrf H ilrraIoa 3`tf North Kona, Alandnf Flaws & `i (TA1K_ 3-7-04: 35). PH RI. Report 400-127257 prepared for Dillingham Trnrst, Report on tilc at the :S1--JPD Library, Kapolei. Rosendahl, P. 1978 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the 2- L•irir Development Site (TMK:3- 7-6-14:3 and 3-7-7-04:22,23,27,47) Kailua-1 ria Island of Pluwar'a. PHRI Report 5-122078. Prepared for Gray, Rhee and Associates. 1989 Archaeological Field ispection. Kolraohana Kai Subdivision Parcels, Land of H aluaIoa I`5° and 2"a, North krrrux, lslutrcl of Huu ar'i (MIA:3- 7-6-22:49. '4), PE -1R [ Letter Report 44-121181 prepared fear Clyde Coatney, Ort file at the S1IPD Library, Kapolei, Sato. H.. W. Ikeda. R Paeth, R Smythe, and M. Takehiro Jr. 1973 Son Sur veYof'Islam( ofHawaii, State of Hawaii. United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Washington I.C. Schilt, R. 1984 Subsistence and Conflict in Kona, Hawaii: An Archaeological Study of the Kraakini Highway Realignment Corridor. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum., Honolulu. Report prepared for the H.awai'i Department of Transportation. On tilt at the Sl1PD Library, Kapolei. 49 Sinoto, A. 1979 Archaeological Reconnaissance wavey of Six Acres in the Ahrrpua `a of Holrraloa 1 and2, North Kona, Ha+••ai'i. Department of Anthropology. B,P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared iirr Brehm Construction Company. Soehren, L 1979a Letter Report: Parcels 10, 12, and 13 of TMK:7-6-14, in Hc3Irraloa, North Kona. Prepared for Mr. Hiroshi Kasamoto. 1.979b Letter Report; TMK:7-6-15:15, Ii5lualoa, North Kona. Prepared for Zuzak and Associates. 1980a Letter Report: ,4rchaeological and Historical Features on the Parcel Iderrti/fcd hi' Taxi flap Key 7-6-21:14, Situated at Halualoa ?, North Kona, Hawai 7. Prepared for Golden Triangle Real Estate. 1980b Letter Report: Archaeological and Historical Features an the Parcels Identified by Tax Illop Keys 7-6-14.•2.i at Hrilualoa 2, and 7-7-0-1:22,27,47 of Hvlrialoa 3, North Kema, Hawai V. Prepared I u r BA and M Corp. Starr Environmental 2016 Botanical and Faunal Surveys in the State of Hawaii Makawao. www.starrcnvironmental.com. Tainter, J. A. 1973 The Social Correlates of Mortuary Patterning at Kaiak°, North Kona, Hawaii. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 8(1):1-11. Tornonari-Tuggle, M. J. 1990 , lr°c•hoeolr,rg*al jrilk.ento):y Survey of Develrapme.i / Parcel 26 of the Kecrtthott Resort, Ahrrpita "a ofkahcrhr `u, North Kona. Island of 1-irt jai 'r. Prepared for 13e1t Collins and Associates. international Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. Honolulu. U.S. Geological Survey 1928 15 -Minute Series f }p agr•crpirrc: !-filo rrc:rc1 a?igle Mop. U SGS Print. Washington, DLA. URI.: help:ll geonanit'.w.to.tg.'.,gen".1..k:trri1 nncij ' . Vancouver, G. 1967 A Voyage ofDisecn er-v to the .North Pacific Ocean, and Around' rlrf 1S`rar lel_ Robinson and Edwards. London. 1984 A Vr uge nf Discoven'to the 'North Pacific Ocean, and Air and the ]Nark/. Robinson and Edwards. London_ 50 Waihona Aina 2014 Mthele online database. www svailiona.c€ern. Walker, A.T., and P11. Rosenclahi 1983 Archandog cul RL-t„rauar,ss nlee Survey, Praala,ri Subdivision. Lands of'Puapuaa 1'a and 'aa`, Mr.w112 Kano Di,trict. Islam/ v(f/irvciu. PIIR!, Inc. report prepared for Pualani Development Company, 'Report in file at the S11PD Library, Kapolei. Wilkes, C. 1845 .\`caa-a vrire r,t'the united States Exploring Expedition During the Years 1938-1842. Vols. 1-5 and Atlas. Lea & Blanchard Philadelphia. 1970 .Narr'cztive of the United States Exploring E ,peditrc n During the Year's 1938-1842. Vols. 1-5 and Atlas. Lea & Blanchard Philadelphia. Wilrnhurst, J., T. Hunt, C. Lipo, and A. Anderson 20l l.a High -precision radiocarbon dating shows recent and rapid colonization of East Polynesia. Proceedings oldie National Academy raf'Sti'aszr"c'-w. 108:1815-20, 2011b Reply to Mulrooney et al.: Accepting lower precision radiocarbon dates results in longer colonization chronologies for East Polynesia. Proceedings of'the J ationed Acaderni of'Sciences . 108:E1' 5. Wolfe, E.V., and J. Morris 1994 Geological Map of the island of Hawaii. U.S-G, S. Miscellaneous Investigations Series. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Wolforth, T., J. Henry, and R. Rechiman 2000 A,v/,aeolagrca1Inre,,tor•w Survey r?f Two Parcels in H3ltraloa 2nd and 3rd, North Kona District. t. Islami of !Mimi `i. PHRI Report 1941-080999 prepared for Mr. Ralph Berea.an. Report cm file at the SHPD Library,. Kapolei. 51 APPENDIX. A: PUBLIC NOTICES AND AFFIDAVITS A-1 HOL L'ALOA Mittman ors requested by Scientific t'on l- ta rt Sersices, Inc- oi' psr and ongoing cultural practices on 76.1 22 acres of lare as [{.61ualca 1st Ahupua'a. North Kona Urstric. Island of Hawai.'i, 'FMK: 017-6-02 ! "1.116,017.018 and 019_ Please rmtpond within :0 days to Glenn Escott at 113(8 938-00-0. -t_'H-i or .bt ggesenrt+ vahrsa.cerm. December 2019 Ka W'ai Ola Public Notice. A-2 At:11HOR"I 1Ji1.11.)YLICAt•k41N 01. ZilAt•L?t.t41t# C U1TULu_ASZES1314117 !«011CC- 'rw Itt: L('CIC. KALI x^CCMA1l srATE OF HAWAII etty sad Cataty of Ylianeiuir Olga. Dab: 4OV 11 # Peres; 1 Notary Nano: CGI:th C wilco to erNi-L kid IkICutt Doo, Deeoripton: P _saca.R . AtHirrvt ok (i; Lid e:t , • •-r •r Cl r1 • NfJTN r PLAIk M .V 21 2013 No bur i I I113 ICY r �v.cr va. 1V1X10¢4 R; .10 4117 r5it'- ik. 44, x410101,0 r�'aa• fl4iiPLa'PI 4I On.0 .t4fkiilff •.f Ire Iphti'Etn aI1 r ;.1 "ubac. tisS"r1II[e:ilk Wellltr#.•4u Irxtty, M+iIliNtir 14,Ni iI ;A1 rr,t ufd IEar..lptptrm rt ed^111aFq;td tornot4i o..0.1144,90 A!1W5 tit .d 1.+.1' a a. , WL 1'a LYi rt k:.'&M.1 I. 1:L gMlk11 taI'4W rLitteild of 1.1.4 ,11a ufl, SI 1r aaltrtiset '1'1r 116E,t-ez-imtq tLciLtce& 1:niz are t ICS 11f1 n "lues 4a I I I cy "MI llattill ati And tat aat°e&it u" cot t e15' num- ramwry 4tIcretted r Its 411Itt.e =Id 'd ria L Lr..1SIhliaeia 4xr+w 111^..1 m, 11-1 ,x•r,ri-.fi.,e."sr '4rs 21 11;r.1 *Vanier h. fI 11". 1A oeri"1. 1I 1G4 I'6= !MIA. �. Ad 1' 4.1k 1711i November 2919 Honolulu Star -Advertiser Public Notice. A-3 4Afl* WAti 1310900mi Idau ditlr4 "{+A't>•itd Fl 5-11,4111 Conediit 6444W. be *mg ati xocputla seilnprit Mtn aum d a h HAMM N #a!f•i 1Riaf 1 Ram Nut., *WV rd t» 3"1-471 M. ET, 4fiAdOtt r D4 dry GLIM l'I.44C 61 1704 Ilia.% pi aciallirskatat- r?'. Jt7# l 1117 re . Alf 11PANri iiiPl.:81.ft,',611+P. IMF Mid 11.1,1t en111.11kt- 1114P.5.: T.AesgE;m24.r Tra w11-6 1L)1._ )4A NJ 14 KkINA C.TATE C.F FTAWA 1 r 1 Are 1141'01E14 of kliubils D ce Date, r‘riiry 2 1 2019 t Papa: Notary NIBine:,;.-L..,.1.Lrit Fli;7-4telfibiCArell Dec. Description: 41 iitx F PL Nr 114vr tier.ntr,1ii arnri Mfi. r lbw dot 1 , HAMT11% Ur! hi1 It_VA • NnTARY NO / 2 1 2019/ 119 7 90,26.3 fire •••• or • .1." . 5r1r ri •• ....1-4.0m4 " • n • r 5. 1 . 1 II 5/1:. 51413 151511413115 • 1 irle IlanoLIL SL .41 - , • 1 PrIlinii 111.irrle11711111 0 tiIliti nv I 1Lh-L4r 0Lin;10.11. 'WO 5,7 I 4.wirrsir Iri.y •1-r1?, 1100. 91129401'9 1.-.0 15 r k'utlicariom ti rpm , 4411tv '1° a in any way 4D Nide st9.1-+T sil Man 'num 7L^Isioft,/if6e/ 4-" ; ,$) 4,614f .It NOVe147 tum.1.swno Iheot, Firts rir lni1 Cam Saran Plitl x- of Eke 1Foo blusc 4,:k".,:;,71.-Iri, .. : 4 tiy V1111h1413tSi 6Xplref. Xis -r-- L • Nli - . ARV r; A4I1 X 111.11;111.4SAT? - r KM' IC • . - : - 1 N • N. W. ,• "'. November 2019 West Hawai'i Today Public Notice. A-4 I r.SP NC ; PA,Irr; • , tr, .11N. 1 .1• • j•(CdAgal 111.1 - • ,)• .• W.;51.ttliroLt.Q.1 Pillk174m(/ 11'17 tin:An. 1121 A-5 APPENDIX 5: Archaeological Inventory Survey Reports SCS Project Number 1K71-2 ARCH NEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY REPORT FOR 5.0 ACRES LOCATED IN HC)LUALOA 1ST AHUPUA4A, NORTH KONA DISTRICT, HAWAPI ISLAND, HAWAPI ITMK: (3) 7-6-021:017 POR.1 Prepared 13y: Glenn G. Eseott, M.A. Suzan Escott,B.A. MAY 2018 FINAL Prepared for: East West Realty 700 Bishop St, Sung:. 1000 Honolulu, HI 96813-4112 1 -N -111111C- CON,,11 I\Nl IC I Inc 1347 kapi'aini Boulevard. Suite 401.t Honolulu, 1 -II 96S114 Hawai'i Island Office: PO Box 155 Kea`au_ HI 96749 ABSTRACT At the request of property owner )Cana Three, LLC, Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. (SCS) conducted an iwrcliaeoIogical inventory sunny (A15) of a 5.0 -acre portion of land TMK: (;3)-7-t5- 021:017 located in I Icalualoa i "` Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Ilawai'i. i lawai' i, The owner is proposing to develop the property and contracted the archaeological wtudv in anticipation ol'Coutnty ofHawai`i Planning Department application requirements. The owner's contact mailing address is 181 Kalanianaole Street filo, H1 96720-41703. Prior to fieldwork, a search of geological maps, aerial photos, historical maps, historical documents, and archaeological reports was conducted. A pedestrian survey and site recording were conducted in March and April 2016 by Joe Farrugia, B.A., Suzan Escott, B.A, Tarnasi Patolo, B.A.. and Glenn. Escott, M.A. A series of north/south transects spaced 2.0 to 4.0 meters apart were walked across the entire project area. Ground cover consisted of tall California and Guinea grass, koa !rake, kiawe, and several kurkwrr nut trees. Ground visibility was fair to poor. The project area lands were used for cattle ranching and commercial agriculture from the early 1 900s until the present. The majority of the project arca has been bulldozed_ Evidence of bulldozing is visible in aerial photographs as alternating bands of cleared bulldozer tracks and bands of push pile. Pedestrian survey confirmed the linear bands in the aerial photographs are bulldozer- cleared paths and linear piles of bulldozed rock along the cleared bulldozer paths. Twenty two newly identified archaeological situ: were recorded during the course of the archaeological inventory survey study. The sites are primarily agricultural terraces associated with pre -Contact era to Historic era atgriculture. Several rock walls and enclosures are associated with I historic era agriculture and ranching. A pre -Contact era to later post -Contact era lava tube burial and a portion of the old railroad berm were also recorded, All 22 sites identified during the current AIS study were assessed significant under criterion "d" as they are likely to yield information important to history. The railroad berm is also significant under criteria "a" and "c" as it is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history and it embodies distinctive characteristics oldie type, period, and method of railroad bed construction. The burial is also significant criterion "e" as it has important value to Hawaiian people and people of other ethnic backgrounds in the state. The burial is recommended for preservation in place with preservation treatments to be outlined in a Burial Site Component of a Preservation Plan ( BSC PP). Tlie railroad berm is recommended for preservation with preservation measures to be outlined in an archaeological preservation. Archaeological monitoring is recommended for initial grubbing within the five -acre project area and for any proposed ground d.istelrhance in the vicinity of Site 30592 and Site 30593 to ensure intern)) construction preservation mcasures are in place and to prevent disturbance ot'the two archaeological sites. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT LIST OF FIGURES iii LIST OF TABLES v INTRODUCTION METHODS .1 ARCHIVAL METHODS..............:..:....................................,......................,,,......,.............,,...... 1 FIELD METHODS.._ 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 7 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 8 PRE-CONTACT ERA 10 The Kona Field System ................................................... ...,...,..,.., 11 POST.CONTACT ERA 14 THEMAHELE........................................................................................................................ 15 EARLY POST-CONTACT ERA AND HISTORIC ERA 20 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES 23 REGIONAL PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES......................................... 26 CURRENT PROJECT AREA SPECIFIC PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY 31 EXPECTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL PATTERNS 40 RESULTS OF FIELDW'ORK...................................................t...............:.,....a..,41 SITE 30591 Agricultural Complex 41 SITE 30592 Railroad Bente 53 SITE 30593 Lava Tube 53 SITE 30594 Agricultural Complex 57 SITE 30595 Rack Wall 66 SITE 30596 Hctfrin ...._ 69 SITE 30597 Rock Wall 73 SITE 30598 Wall .................... .......................... ............ ......... ................ ,._77 SITE; 30599 Platform with Enclosure . 77 SITE 30600 Terrace 88 SITE 30601 Rock. Wall 90 SITE 30602 Enclosure 90 S1'L t 30603 Enclosure ,..,....................,..,.,. 96 SITE 30604 Agricultural Complex 105 SITE 50605 Rack Wall 113 SlTL 30606 Rock Wall 115 SITE 30607 Agricultural Complex 117 SITE 31I6O8 Enclosure 133 SITE 30609 Lnclo urc ............. 135 SITE 30610 Terrace 136 SI I L 30611 Agricultural Complex . 141 SITE 30612 Liv a Blister.......,..,........ ......... ...,..... ........ I47 CONCLUSION 152 DISCUSSION. 152 SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENTS 154 RECOMMENDATIONS 156 REFERENCES CITED 157 APPENDLX A: ARTIFACT INVENTORY 1 Li LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: 5.500 K -Series Map of Hawaii Island Showing Location of Project Area (National Geographic Topo!, 2003. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS).,...., — .. 2 Figure 2: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Project Area (Kealakekua Quad, ESRI, 2013, Data Sources: National Geographic Society. USES)........ 3 Figure 3: Aerial Photograph Showing Project Area (within Red Boundary), HuluaIoa, HI, Zone 5 North, 189445 m E, 2171790 m. N, (Google Earth. 2013 Image, Data Sottrccs: Digital Globe, GeoEye, Earthstar. USDA, and USGS), 4 Figure 4: Map of Wilualoa tic and 2"`1 AhtipUca'a Showing Location of Project Area in Red Border (Alexander 1855). 9 Figure 5: Portion of Kailua Section, North Kona Map Showing Location of LCA 7713 and Project Area in Red Border (Aki 1952). 17 Figure 6: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Land Commission Awards, Land Grants, and the Project Area (National Geographic Topo!, 2003, Kealakekua Quad, Data Sources: National Geographic Society. USGS)18 Figure 7: Portion of 15 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Railroad and Project Area (USES 1928), 22 Figure 8: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Previous Archaeological Studies and Project Area (Kealakekua Quad, SSRI, 2011 Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS) 25 Figure 9: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Northern Portion of Har matt et al. (1992) Sites and Current Project Area (ESRI, 2011,.Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS. Kealakekua Quadranngle). 32 Figure 10: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Locations of Project Area Archaeological Sites (ESRI, 2011. Sources: Naliurtai Geographic Society, USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle)....... ..... ....... ............. .. ...... ..... 43 Figure 11: Site 30591 Plan View Map. 44 Figure 12: Photograph of Site 30591 Feature I Looking Northeast 46 Figurc 13: Photograph of Site 30591 Feature 2 Looking North. 47 Figure 14: Photograph of Site 30591 Feature 3 Looking Northeast. 48 Figure 15: Photograph of Site 30591 Feature 4 Looking Southeast. 49 Figure 16: Photograph of Site 30591 Feature 5 Looking South. 50 Figure 17: Photograph of Site 30591 Feature 6 Looking North. 52 Figure 1 & Photograph of Site 30592 Looking East 54 Figure 19: Site 30593 Plan View Sketch Map...56 Figure 20: Site 30594 Plan View Map. 58 Figure 21: Photograph of Site 30594 Feature 1 on Let and Feature 2 on Right Looking South.60 Figure 22: Photograph of Site 30594 Feature 1 in Top Left, Feature 2 at Center, Feature 3 at Far Right, Looking South6 Figure 23: Photograph of Site 30594 Feature 2 on Left and Feature 3 on Right Looking South.62 Figure 24: Photograph of Site 30594 Feature 5 Looking Northeast. 64 Figure 25: Photograph of Site 30594 Feature 6 in Foreground and Feature 5 in Background. Looking Northeast.......................................................... 65 Figure 26: Photograph of Site 30595 Wall Looking North. 67 111 Figure 27: Photograph of Site 30595 Wall Collapse Showing Cobble Core Fill, Looking North. 68 Figure 28: Site 30596 Plan View Map 70 Figure 29: Photograph of Site 30596 Hearth Looking West. ...... ...... ..... 71 Figure 30: Site 30596 TU-1 North Profile. 72 Figure 31: Photograph of Site 30596 TU-1 Top of Layer II, Looking West. ....... 74 Figure 32: Photograph of Site 30596 1111-1 Base of Excavation, Looking West. .. .. 75 Figure 33: Photograph of Site 30597 Wall with Gulch in Background, Looking South 76 Figure 34: Photograph of Site 30598 Wall Overview Looking West.- ..... ... ........... 78 Figure 35: Site 30599 Plan View Map 80 Figure 36: Photograph of S itc 30599 Feature 1 Platform with Top Cleared of Debris Showing Stacked Stone Construdion, Looking West. 81 Figure 37: Photograph of Site 30599 Feature 1 Platform Showing West Side Collapse, Looking East 82 Figure 38: Photograph of Site 30599 Feature 2 Enclosure Looking East 83 Figure 39: Photograph of Surface Artifacts Collected at Site 30599 ...... .......... 84 Figure 40: Site 30599 TU-1 South Profile. 86 Figure 41: Photograph o f Site 30599 TU-I Base of Excavation Looking East, 87 Figure 42: Photograph o Site 30600 Looking Southeast 89 Figure 43: Site 30602 Plan View Map Showing Portions of Site 30592, Site 30595, and Site 30601 . 9 I Figure 44: Photograph of Site 30601 Rock Wall Looking North. 92 Figure 45: Photograph of Site 30602 West Wall (Lefi)and Site 30595 Wall (Right) Looking East 94 Figure 46: Photograph of Silt'. 30602 Enclosure Wall and Bottle 95 Figure 47: Site 30603 Plan Vkw Map 97 Figure 48: Photograph of Site 30603 Southwest Corner of Enclosure Feature 1, Looking Northwest, 98 Figure 49: Photograph of Site 30603 Western South Wall of Enclosure Feature 1, Looking Southwest, ./RT•P• ..... ..................... t 99 Figure 50: Photograph of Site 30603 Middle Corner of Enclosure Feature 1, Looking South. 100 Figure 51: Photograph of Site 30595 Wall Portion of Site 30603 Enclosure Feature 1, Looking North, 102 Figure 52: Photograph of Site 30603 Feature 2 Terrace Looking Southeast— ......... . . ....„103 Figure 53: Photograph of Site 30603 Feature 2 Terrace (Center) and Feature Retaining Wall (Left), Looking Southeast. 104 Figure 54: Site 30604 Plan View Map 106 Figure 55: Photograph of Site 30604 Feature 1 Looking Southwest. 107 Figure 56: Photograph of Site 30604 Feature 2 Looking Southeast. 108 Figure 57: Photograph of Site 30604 Feature 3 Looking Southeast.. ........ .......... ...... .„__. 110 Figure 58: Photograph of Artifacis Recovered front Site 30604, Feature 3, SP-1 111 'Figure 59: Photograph of Site 30604 Feature 4 Looking South. 112 Figure 60: Photograph of Site 30605 Wall Looking Northeast. 114 Figure 61: Photograph of Site 30606 Rock Wall Looking North. 116 Figure 62: Site 30607 Plan View Map ............. ..... ...... •et.114.1. .......... P• .1 el ...... lik1”.11 1 1 8 Figure 63: Photograph of Site 30607 Feature 1 Terrace Looking Southeast. ... . ....... .. . .. 119 iv Figure 64: Photograph of Site 30607 Feature 2 Terrace (Background) and Site 305956. Wall (Foreground), Looking West. 120 Figure 65: Photograph of Site Figure 66: Photograph of Site Figure 67: Photograph of Site Figure 68; Photograph of Site Figure 69: Photograph of Site Figure 70: Photograph of Site Figure 71: Photograph of Site 30607, Feature 2 30607, Feature 2 30607, Feature 3 30607 Feature 4 30607 Feature 4 30607 Feanire 5 30607 Feature 6 Figure 72: Photograph of Site 30607 Feature 7 Figure 73: Photograph of Site 30608 Enclosure Figure 74: Photograph of S ite 30609 Enclosure Figure 75: Photograph of Site 30609 Enclosure Western Area Looking East. 122 , Eastern Area Looking East._ ..... ...... 123 Looking South. 124 Eastern Arca Looking North. .. —„ ...... - 126 Western Area Looking Northwest.„.....„ 127 Looking South. 129 Looking South, „. ..... 130 Figure 76: Figure 77: Figure 78: Figure 79: Figure 80; Figure 81: Figure 82: Figure S3: Figure 84: Figure 85: 'Looking North. Looking Southeast. Looking East Looking Northeast. Site 30610 Plan View Map. Photograph of Site 30610 Terrace Looking Southwest Site 30611 Plan View Map Photograph of Site 30611 Feature 1 Looking Southeast Photograph of Site 30611 Feature 2 Looking South. Photograph of Site 30611 Feature 1 Looking Northeast.. Photograph of Site 3061.2 Blister Opening Looking North Photograph of Site 30612. Historic Era Bottles and Plateware..„. ... ....... Photograph of Site 30612 Soldered Cans 150 Photograph of Site 30612 Historic Era Bottles. 151 132 134 137 138 139 140 142 143 144 146 l 48 LUST OF TABLES Table 1: inventory of Subsurface Testi:12 5 , Table 2: Land Commission Awards Recordir ed lIblualoa 1'i2itd and A h upue a . ..... - ...... 19 Table 3: Inventory of Previous Archaeological Investigations 23 Table 4: _Inventory of Hammati et al. (1992) Archaeological Sites Inspection and Assessment Results. 33 Table 5: inventory of Archaeological Sites Identified on the AIS Project Area. 42 Table 6: Site 30591 Shovel Probe Results. 51 Table 7: Site 30594 Shovel Probe Results, 66 Table 8: Site 30599 Shovel Probe Results. 85 Table 9: Site 30602 Shovel Probe Results. 96 Table 10: Site 30603 Shovel Probe Results. ...... ... ............ ............... ......... ........ .. . ... ..... 101 Table 11: Site 30607 Feature 2 Shovel Probe Results. 121 Table 12: Site 30607 Feature 3 Shove] Probe Results. 125 Table 13: Site 30607 Feature 4 Shovel Probe Results, 128 Table 14: Inventory of Project Area Archaeological Sites, Significance Assessments and Site Rccommendations. 155 INTRODUCTION At the request of East West Realty, Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. (SCS) conducted an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) of a 5.0 -acre portion of MIK: (3)-7- 6-021:017 located in Holualoa 1'` Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii, Hawaii (Figure 1 and Eig=ure 2). The owner is proposing to develop the property and contracted the archaeological study as in anticipation of County of1Tawai`i Planning Department application requirements. The project area is bounded on the north and west by undeveloped cattle pasture, on the south by a seasonal gulch, and on the west by developed residential and farm land (Figure 3). The project area lands were used for cattle pasture and agriculture from the early 1900s to the present. The property is owned by Kona Three, LLC. The owner's mailing address is 181 Kalanianaole Street Hilo, HI 96720-4703. METHODS The archaeological inventory survey was undertaken in accordance with Hawaii Administrative Rules l3 13-284 and was performed in compliance with the Rules Governing Minimal Standards for Archaeological Inventory Surveys and Reports contained in Hawai`i Administrative Rules 13§13-276. ARCHIVAL METHODS In addition to referencing available resources at SCS, archival research was conducted in the State Historic Preservation Division (S1IPD) report database and library facility (Hilo, HI), the I lawai`i County land records office. the Waihonu " itra Mahele database website, Ulukau database website, the Papakila database website, the Hawaiian collections holdings at the University ofHawai`i-llilo Library, and the ilawaii State Library system. Archival work consisted of research on the history and archaeology of the project area, as well as specific searches of previous archaeological studies in and around the current project area. Historic land use data, land ownership, maps, and narrative information were obtained from the Hawaii County land records office, Hawaiian intemet sites, and the University ofHawai`i, Hilo. FIELD METIIODS Inventory survey field work was conducted March and April 2012 (140 Man- hours total) by Joe Farrugia, B.A.; Tommasi Pawl°, S.A.; Suzan Escott, B.A.; and Glenn Escott, M.A. Glenn Escott provided overall project direction and is the principal investigator for this study. Figure 1: 5.500 FC -Series Map oft awai`i Island Showing Location of Project Arca (National Geographic Topo!. 2003. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, 1JSGS). 2 KE 0 iMhlFltYh Yy laEOLONANINO VT MT I'I"u'w•u F i.17iui Figure 2: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Project Area (Kcalkkekua Quad. ESIU, : U13. Data Sources: National Ckographic Society, USGS). 3 I. rr : Aerial Photog r h Showing Project Are{ within Red Boundary). 11.51uoa. 111, Tore x North, i 89445 rn E. 2171790 rn N tt_ t5 Forth. 2013 Image. Dam Sources: Digital Globe, GeoEye. Earthstar, USDA, and USGS). 4 There were three main field components to the Inventory Survey prose: pedestrian survey of the entire project area, plotting located sites on a project area map with Global Position System (GPS) Universal Transverse Mercator (UT MM) Luaits (Zone 5 North) using WSGS84 datum, and individual site mapping and recording. A series of north/south transects spaced 2.0 to 4,.0 meters apart were walked across the entire project area. Ground cover consisted of tall California and Guinea grass, koa haole, kiawe, and a few kukui trees. Ground visibility was fair to poor. Site boundaries were determined by the aerial extent of features and by feature function and temporal association. Features that were in close proximity to each other and that appeared to have functional and temporal associations suggesting they were constructed and used as a functional set of features—those features were included together as a single site. Features that were beyond twenty to thirty meters away from each other, or that were constructed at very different times, or for different very purposes, were separated into individual sites. Age determinations were expressed in terms of recognized formal eras including pre -Contact era (before 1778), early post -Contact era (1778-1850), Historic era (1851-1965), and Modern era (post -1965), Age was interpreted an the bases of feature construction and artifacts recovered from excavations. Features at eleven of the twenty two sites were selected for test excavaIion to determine site function. construction method, and age. Two types of hand excavations, shovel probes (SP) and test units (TCI), were used depending on the size of features, percentage to be excavated. percentage of screening, and overall goals of excavation. A total of 29 shovel probes and two test -units were excavated at eleven sites (Table I ). Table 1: Inventory of Subsurface Testine. Site # Site Type Features Site Function Testing 30591 Agricii1LLLra1 Complex [l ,Agriculture SP -1. 2. 3 30594 krrieultura l Complex h Airicuiture SP -1 & 2 30;96 hearth 1 Food Preparation TCI -1 ;05f:. ) 1}1.L1forF1 & Enclosure 3 1nrichinv, Ain-iciiltiirc' SP -1 & 2, TU-! 30(51}0 Terrace I Agriculture SP -1 30602 Diclosure 1 1 ncltiiigr`Agrieulturc SP -1, 2. 3& 4 30603 line losure 4 Ratteltin' A4ariculturc SP -1 & 2 30604 Agricultural Complex 4 Agriculture SP -1 30607 Agrieultural Complex 7 A4xric'LLlture SP -1 to SP -10 30610 Terrace I :1L<ricullure SP-! 30611 Agricllltural Complex 3 A LLCLL]Lurc S!' 1. 2. 3 Test -units were excavated as 0.5 x 1.0 meter or 1.0 x 1.0 meter units, dug in natural stratigraphic layers. These were excavated at features that were thought to have a high potential to yield functional and temporal diagnostic artifacts, and used where vertical control vvould contribute to this data. Shovel probes (SP) were units that were roughly 0.4 x 0.4 meters square, and were used to examine stratigraphy. and assess the presence or absence olcultural deposits. Test -unit and shovel probe excavations were screened for cultural material through 118th inch mesh. Stratigraphie profiles were drawn for test -units. Disarticulated human skeletal remains were identified within a lava tube during the field survey. The skeletal elements were partially covered in shallow sedimenr_ Sediment was cleared in small increments frr nl a partkilly covered pelvis to aid in identification. SHPD was notified and approved of the clearing of sediment from the pelvis. Cultural material was recorded by type on standard SCS excavation forms and collected. Soil colors were recorded using r Iunsell color charts, soil composition was recorded with the aid of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Survey Manual on standard soil stratigraphy forms, and profiles were drawn. Overview photographs were taken of individual site features, sites. excavations, and the project area using a l.0 meter measuring tape. LABORATORY METHODS Inventory of midden and artifacts collected from the test excavations were weighed and analyzed by layer of provenience within each excavation unit. Appendix A contains a tabular inventory of all artifacts collected during archaeological excavation. Volcanic -glass and basalt debitage was counted and described in terms of core, primary, secondary, interior, exterior, or non-diagnostic flakes. For all other artifacts, dimensions, weight, count, and diagnostic characteristics were recorded. All artifact data were tabulated. Field notes, maps, cultural material., and photographs pertaining to this project are currently being curated at the SCS facilities on the island ofMawai'i. 6 ORAL, INTERVIEW Gregg Kashiwa was interviewed by phone on April 19, 2016. Mr. Kashiwa was the project property manager for parcels 016 and 017 in the early 1980s.and was present during MS work documented in the Hantmatt et al, (1992). He is originally from (Yahu but lived in Kona for several decades. Mr. Kishawa remembered that the current 5 -acre project area was excluded from the original AIS because the property owners were planning to give the five acres to a group to use as an agricultural preserve. The five acres and the property below (to the west) had already been bulldozed for agricultural use. Mr. Kishawa knew that there were ranch walls and Historic era agricultural features on the project area, but did not know how they were used, as they were no longer in use during his time in Kona. He also remembered the old railroad bed and bean and that there was a small railroad stop along the track just south of the project arca_ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The current project area consists of an undeveloped 5.0 -acre portion ofTMK: (3) 7- 64)21:017, The project area is situated on fairly steeply sloping land with level areas in between elevation breaks. The project area is between 600 to 680 feet (183 to 207 meters) above mean sea level (ams]). The project area lands are part ofa large former cattle ranch and agricultural area that was started in the early 1900s. The lower portion of the project area is still used to pasture cattle. The project area and surrounding lands were bulldozed sometime between the 1940s and 1970s, Evidence of hulldoring is visible in aerial photographs as alternating bands of cleared bulldozer tracks and bands of push pile (see Figure 3). Pedestrian survey confirmed the linear bands in the aerial photographs are bulldozer -cleared paths and linear piles of bulldozed rock along the cleared bulldozer paths. The former Kona Sugar Company railroad bed is present along the western edge of the project area, The project area ground surface is a Hualalai lava flow dating between 5,000 and 10,000 years before present (ybp) (Wolfe and Morris 1996). Soil in the project area is Punalu`u Series (rPYD series) extremely rocky peat with six to twenty percent slopes (Sato I973:48). The majority of the project area has been bulldozed in the past and the present ground. surface is rocky soil. Rainfall in the project area is very low, less than thirty inches per year. There is a seasonal gulch along the southern edge of the project area. This region is extremely dry, 7 hot, and somewhat barren except for thick California grass (L•i•mc~hh.' ryr ttrc'a), Guinea grass (. 4egath rsus rtzaii;rafts), and some kora haole (Lerrcaena leueoceplarafttl,,,nitre ( /'n)xr?pr`s pallidi), and lruhui nut (.-flefiritcs rnoluccana) trees (St iff r [Pv iron mental. 2016). HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS Kona is divided into two sections: North Kona or Kona `akar. and: South Kona, or Kofra /wawa (Maly 1996). Kona 'awn was further subdivided into north walled Kekaha) and south (called Korrakai'r5pita) areas, with the division between the two at the ahtrpna'a ofKeahuolu, The project area is in Hcrlualoa 1st Ahupua'a (Figure 4) within the area ofKonakcri'nprra in Kouaa 'akaar. Holualoa means (literally) "long sled course" (Pukui et al. 1974:48). Ht lualoa the is a traditional erhrrprra cr stretching from the ocean to the foot of Hualalai in the uplands, The coastline of"HOlualoa Ahupua'a is prirnarily low rock cliffs. Very little is recorded of Hclualoa Ahupua`a in traditional oral accounts. The Heart Stirring Legend of Ku-Miki, published in the Hawaiian language newspaper Ka rfolau ca Hawaii and translated by Maly (1993) contains the only description ofHOlualoa. The legend is set in the 13`f' century but also reflects more recent influences (Maly and Maly 2002: 17). According to the narrative, The lands of HEolualoa were named for the chief of that name; both Holualoa and Puapua'a were high chiefs, who controlled the lands from mountain to sea, which bear their names... Kaluaokalani served as a priest otHo1ualoa at the temple ofPakiha. This heiarr was near the contest field of Holualoa... The lands of this region are named for various all's, all of whom were related. When the chief Holualoa took up the challenge against Kepaka`ili`ula on behalf of the Kona chiefs, 1—I 1ualoa called upon his god Kalaipahoa to assist hint in his battle.. , Holualoa was the first chief to call upon the god Kaimp ho a, and this was the be innin,L FEhis gods' use by the chiefs ofHawai`i [Maly 1993:208-209]. 8 +til IdY4 1 nil'.5 Figure 4: Mals of Holualc 1" and 2" Aliupua' a Showing ration of Project Area in Red Border (Alexander 1855), 9 PRE -CONTACT ERA H6lualoa, Kona, and much of the leeward side of I lawai`i Island, while well populated at the time of European Contact. were settled later than the windward side. Many archaeologists believe that Hawaii Island was first settled around A.D. 1,000 by people sailing from the Marquesas (Athens et al. 2014; Dye 2011; Kahn et al. 2014; Kirch 2011;.Kirch and McCoy 2007, McCoy 2005 and 2007, Mulrooney et al. 2011; Reith et al. 2011; Wilrnhurst et al. 201 I a and 2011h). An article published in the Journal of Archaeological Science reviewing radiocarbon dates recovered at archaeological sites on the island of Hawai `i suggests that, by relying on only carbon samples from short-lived plant remains, the most reliable dates point to initial Polynesian colonization of Hawai' Island occurring between A.D..1220 and 1261 (Rieth et al. 2011:2747). Early settlers founded settlements on the windward shores in Iikcly places such as Waipi`o, Waimanu, and Hilo Bay. The windward, or ko"okm' shores receive abundant rainfall and have numerous streams such as the Wailulcu, Waiolarna, `Alenaio, and VlWailoa that facilitated agricultural and fishpond production (Maly 1996:3). The windward shores also provide rich benthic and pelagic marine resources, The dry leeward shores of Itawai`i Island presented a very different environment requiring a modified set of subsistence strategies. Archaeologists and historians are uncertain about the exact motives that lead to the establishment and spread of settlements on the leeward side ofHawai i, but some suggest population pressure, dwindling fertile land, growing socio-political stratification. or simply the opportunity for a new start might have lead to new communities developing on the dryer west side of the island (Cordy 2000:1.30). The process was likely tindcrway soon after initial settlement of Hawai°i Island (Cordy 2000). During this period. areas of permanent habitation were established in Kona (Curdy 1981, 1995; Schill 1984), Habitation was concentrated along the shoreline and lowland slopes, and informal fields were cleared at higher elevations where rainfall was higher. Agricultural fields and habitation areas expanded across the slopes and coastal area of ttua]alai during the period between AD 1200 and 1400 (Burtclaard 1995: Cordy 1995), LO The development of extensive formal walled fields likely began sometime around AD 1400 to 1600. This period marks the initial construction ofthe Kona Field System (KFS) (Schilt 1984). The development of the k.ES may be, in part, a by-product ofthe need to extract more subsistence resources from an increasingly limited agricultural base. The population in Kona increased dramatically during this period, as reflected in the abundant radiocarbon dates from habitation stnietures, shelter caves, and agricultural soils of this period (Burtchard 1995; Haun of al. 1998; Schilt 1984). During this period, the stratified chiefdom structure becomes clearly developed in the archaeological record. Large residential complexes and herau reflect the segregation of places and power for the growing hierarchy of high and lower chiefs, and ceremonial stewards (Cordy 1981; Haun 0 al, 1998; Hammon 1986). The produce from the formal walled fields were distributed to higher chiefs through a hierarchy of lower chief; responsible for management and collection of the cultivated and wild resources. By the time of the Competition .Period (AD 1600 to 1800), the royal centers and larger heiau were in place, reflecting the growth in power of the rulers and chiefs in the region (Barrera 1971; Hamrnatt and Folk 1980). Resources may have reached their maximum carrying capacity, resulting in social stress between neighboring groups. Hostility between grows is reflected archaeologically with the development of refuge caves during this period (Schilt 1984). This volatile period was probably accompanied by internal rebellion Lind territorial annexation (Hornmon 1986; Kirch 1985). Royal centers are located at Kai lua, Hclualoa, Kahalu`u, Kealakekua, and Honaunau (Cordy 1995). The region ofHolualoa developed into a royal center in the late 1600s to early 1700s under the reigns of Keakantahana (reigned 161'0-1700) and Keakealaniwali inc (reigned 1700-1720) (Cordy 2000:244). Many 'trlI `i and ke nohiki residences and numerous religious sites are known to have existed here. The majority of the hekw and royal residences were constructed along or near the coast, most notably at Kainoa Point south of the project area. The royal center at E•lblualoa was eclipsed in the second half of the 1700s by the royal center in the Kahalu'u and Keatthou region. The Kona Field System During his travels in the region in 1S23 William Ellis noted that the area above and south of Kailua was: quite a garden compared with that through which they had passed on first leaving the town. 11 was generally divided into small fields, about fifteen rods siltlare, fenced with Tow stone v,alls, made of fragments of lava which had been gathered from the surface of the enclosures. These fields were planted with bananas, sweet potatoes, mountain taro, tapa trees, melons and sugar cane, flourishing luxuriantly in every direction [Handy 1940:114 and 162]. Rocky lands in the olden days were walled up all around with big and small stones of the patch until there was a wall about 2 feet high and in the enclosure were but weeds of every kind, ama`u tree ferns and so on, and then topped well with soil taken from the patch itself to enrich it [Handy 1940:147]. These gardens have been studied in some detail, and are often referred to as the "Kona Field System Many of the archaeological projects conducted within Kona deal with components of the Kona Field System Wordy 1995; Newman 1970; Schilt 1984),. This arca extends north at least to Ka`u Ahupua`a and south to Honaunau, west from the coastline and east to the forested slopes of Hualalai (Cordy 1995). A Targe portion of this area is designated in the fTawai'i ST1-TP (State Inventory of Historic Places) as Site *0- l i - 37-6601, The basic characteristics and general locations of the zones within the system as presented in Newman (1970) have been confirmed and elaborated on by more intensive and extensive ethnoliistorical investigations (Kelly 1983). The kala zone of the Kona Field System is the area from sea level to 150 m arnsl. This lower elevation zone is traditionally associated with habitation and the cultivation of sweet potatoes (uafa), paper mulberry (wauke), and gourds (rpu). Agricultural features, such as clearing mounds, planting mounds, planting depressions, modified outcrops, and planting terraces, are common throughout much of this zone (Hamman and Clark 1980: Hammitt and Folk 1980; Haun ter (1l. 1998; Sr hilt 1984). Dwelling are often scattered throughout the agricultural portion of the kirdcr, but they are commonly concentrated along the shoreline subdivision of the tufa zone (Cordy 1981). The shoreline zone, extending inland approximately 200 m, was used primarily 12 for permanent habitation and other non-agricultural activities. such as canoe storage, ceremonial :incl burial practices, recreation, and fisline-related activity. Royal centers and high chiefly centers were also situated within the shoreline of the kola. These complexes include dwellings for rulers, chiefs. and the supporting populace_ places of refuge, and other structures. Single, or clustered, burials are also situated in the shoreline, and near -shore krula (Han et al. 1986 Harnmatt and Clark 1980; Hammett and Meeker 1979). Burials occur in caves, within finely built platforms, cruder rock mounds. and houses in the shoreline. and are more often in the near -shorn lark; (Cordy 1995: l lark cit al. 1986; Schilt 1984: Tainter 1973; T rnonari-Toggle 1993), The large, and densely populated, royal centers were situated at several locations along the shoreline between Kailua and H naunau (Cordy 1995; Totrtonari-Tuggle 1993). The residential areas, Targe and small heiwt, sporting areas, and burial clusters, are present continuously farther inland than the usual 200 meters for the shoreline habitation portion of the koala. Consequently, a variety of non-agricultural features are present in the kulu near royal centers. The kallr'uh? zone above 150 m amsl is a wetter region above the karla where bread fruit and other arboreal crops were cultivated (Kelly 1983). Sweet potatoes (ipmeoea batata ). ti. (Cordy/i ne, r` utico 'a) wauke (Brvussottetia paj. t rifera). tam t ( olocasia e cufetita), and sugar cane (Scrc•f•lreeto sp. ), planted among the arboreal crops, were mulched with grass (Menziesl920;75-76). The current project area is in the kahi'tafrt zone, Above the hilt, 'Wu zone, in the 'apca'a zoiac, tields IoW stone walls were cultivated with bananas, sweet potatoes, taro, wauke, melons. ti and sugar cane. The `apa "a zone was notable for fresh water springs. Above the `cepa "a zone was the "ma `u zone where walled fields were created to grow plantains and bananas. Timber from various tree species was collected from the 'ape 'a zone and thea a'at zone. Bird catching and other forest resources extraction activities were conducted in these upper two zones. Temporary habitations were constructed to be used seasonally when working in the uplands. In the region, people initially moved into coastal settings and more upland settings (e.g., the 'cpa "a agronomic zone) at the same time. essentially ignoring the drier intermediate zone (except. of course, as a throughway between their gardens and the sea). in this way, the first settlers could immediately plant seedlings in the wetter uplands, l3 knowing the cropswould succeed. Permanent settlement would have first been restricted to the coast, but the same people would have also been occupying the uplands (at least temporarily) as well. It is only later that the 'intermediate zone°(and the kala `utu agronornic zone), would have been utilized for planting. POST -CONTACT ERA The extensive features of the Kona Field System were exploited and altered during the post -contact era. Walls, kna Vivi, springs, and pathways created generations earlier were used and planted with alien cultigens (coffee, cotton, sugar, citrus, and sisal) and ultimately used as pastures for cattle. Ranching has its roots in the first cattle and sheep brought to the island in 1793 and 1794 by Vancouver. Two cows, three bulls, five ewes, and five rams were released to prosper in the region of Kealakekua in 1794 (Vancouver 1967:(3)1 ] ). Kamehameha placed a ten-year ka#err on the killing of cattle so than they would have the oppartunitr to multiply. A 486 -acre stone corral was built in the uplands of Lehu'ula-l-lonua`ino, above Kdinaliu where they were raised (Bowser 1880, cited in Maly and Maly 2001:285). Two American captains. William Stealer and Richard Cleveland presented two horses to John Young in 1803. Cleveland later returned with more than 200 horses brought from California. Donkeys, mules and oxen were also imported for transportation and hauling. Goats were also brought to the island and lel to multiply in the wild. By 1813 to 1815 cows began overrunning agricultural fields and became a danger to travelers and residents (Ellis 1963: 291; Wilkes 1970: 204). A number of walls were commissioned to keep feral sheep, goats, and cattle out of agricultural areas and away from homes. By 1848. in Kona District a Great Wall (the Kua.kini Wall) was constructed from Lauihau to 'Onuuli (Maly and Maly 2001:286). In 1830 Governor Kuakini moved to oversee and improve government can le by constructing corrals. Liholiho visited the same year to witness strides made in the nascent cattle ranching industry, It was hoped that the exportation of tallow, hides. and salted hoof would supplant the cle.f'unct Sandalwood trade as a major source of income. Several ventures related to ranching, including tallow making, tanning, saddle making, and blackssniing were initiated (Bergin 2004: 156). Cowhide was tanned using th.e astringent bark of local trees (Wilkes 1970: 218). The lion's share of commercial 14 enterprises on the island involved supplying whaling ships and the local market with beet, The changing subsistence and trade regimes developed by incoming European and American settlers, as well as other historical factors, caused a depopulation of the coastal areas of Kona. ranches were established at middle and upper elevations, and farms were established iii the uplands where rainfall was higher and the temperatures were cooler. Cattle ranching and clearing for sugar cane and coffee removed many of the endemic species or plants. The suite of vegetation that existed prior to the pre -Contact era were replaced by kr.'u hoole• (l.c':rcaae}na letwoc-phola), kiawe (Prosopis palliidr ), and other newly introduced invasive plant species. Schools, churches, stores, and other businesses were also established in the uplands. During the late 180(ls and early I 900s. coastal Kona was no longer the densely populated sociopolitical center it once was. It became a small cluster of houses along the trail from Kailua Bay to Kcauhou (Tomonari-Tuggle, 1993:15). Homesteads, ranches, and plantations developed in the uplands during this period as reflected in the pattern of Land Commission Awards (LCA) and Land Grants (LG) recorded during the Mahele_ THE MAHELE With the coming of the Great Mahele (1848). the Alien Land Ownership Act (1850) and the Kulcana Act (1850). the traditional Hawaiian archetype of land -use was essentially deconstructed and replaced with the European concept of fee -simple land ownership. Article IV of the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles was passed in December 1845 and began the legal process of private land ownership. Through the Mahele of 184748 the Alien Land Ownership Act of 1850 and the Kuleana Act of 1850, land was made available for private ownership. The Mahele established a board of five commissioners to oversee land claims and to issue patents and leases for valid claims. Kauikeaouli (Karnehameha 111) established and ratified laws to protect Hawaiian crown lands as foreigners began claiming ownership of land they were granted permission to use for homes and business interests (Daws 1968,1 1 l; KarneeIeihiwa 1992: 169-70, 176: Kelly 1983:. 45; Kuykendall 1938(1): 145 footnote 47. 152. 165-6. 174;), Among, other things, foreigners were demanding private ownership of land to secure their island investments (Kame.eleihiwa 1992:. 178: Ktaykendal l 1938(1): 138, 145, 178. 184, 202. 206, 271). 15 Under the M Bele and subsequent acts (the Kuleana Act of 1850 and the Alien. Land Ownership Act of 1850), the lands of the kin4dorn of Hawaii were divided among the king (crown lands), the ali'i and kunoii/Ai-i, and the government. Once lands were thus divided and private ownership was instituted, the mak-a'ciincan r (commoners), if they had been made aware of the procedures, were able to claim the plots on which they had been cultivating and living as stipulated in the Kuleana Act (1 850). These claims, however, could not include any previously cultivated or presently fallow land. rrkipu'rr, stream fisheries, or rnany other resources traditionally necessary for survival (Karneeleihiwa 1992:295; Kelly 1983:45-76; Kirch and Sahlins 1992 vo1,1:3. 135-137, andvo1,2;2). The right of claimants to land was based on the written testimony of at least two witnesses who could corroborate the claimant's long-standing occupation and use of the parcel(s) in question. The claimant might have been awarded a patent for the property, subsequently called Land C`ornmission Awards (LCA' (Chines 1961:16). The Land Commission awarded the majority ofH€tlualoa l'' and 2nd Ahupua'a t€} Victoria Kamamalu Ka`ahumanu IV, Kahina Nui of Hawaii Island and Crown Princess ofHawai`i as Land Commission Award (LCA) Number 7713, `Apana 43 (Figure 5). Several smaller LCA and Land Grant (LG) properties were also recorded in the upland region of Hulualoa 1." and 2"`i Allupi a`a (1' i ui e 6). Twenty four Land Commission awards were recorded in Ilcilualoa 1" Ahupua'a, the ahupua`a where the Project area is located (see Figure ti and Table 2), All but two of the LC awards (LCA #3660to Munn and LCA #7713 to Kamamalu) were monk(' (east) of the current project area. With the exception of these LC awards, the average award was 2.8 acres, most (n=16) were for less than 3.0 acres. Three Lancs Grants (LG 41592, 1602, and 3630) were also recorded in Hoivaloa 14 and 2nd Ahupua'a, LO #1592 was a 25.0 -acre parcel sold to Kealalio and LC 43630 was a 38,2 -acre parcel sold to W.H. Cromwell, Almost all of the awards and grants were used as subsistence and commercial farm land, and some were used to pasture cattle. 16 'Os Figure 5: Portion of Kai nia SecEion. Norrh Kona Map Slinwing Location of LCA 7713 and Project Area in Red Soder (Aki 1952), 17 Figure 6; 7.5-Minute Series USGS Toporaphic Map Showing L Ocat1011 of 1.2mcl w: rd . 1 and Cirri ;End the Project Area (National Geographic Tupol, 2403. Kealakekua Quad. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS), 18 Table 2: Land {:cnunissicm Awards Recorded in Holualoa Is` and -unci Ahupua.'a. LCA# AWARDED TO AHUPUA°A ACRES 36611 John G. Munn Holualoa Is' 1 1 1.5 4395 Kckoi IIc>Iualoa 1-' 1.7 55.52 Kaurla 11c ]u iIo 1' 1.9 5554 Keawc..kolulu: F-147}1ii tloa 1" 11.27 5795 Keliilkunakaok H?rlualoa 1" ) 7 58]0 Kaopukauila I],iIII:L'i7a 1' 1.74 5993 I--LipaIa"JlIa 1l5l.l::]ti1a ,,,n ?i} 6061 Haria H 1u.(0 I ' 2.9 6107 Naai IIoIuaioa 1`1. 3,94 7339 Ki ;lanai 1-1 Iii !k n 1'" 4.15 7340 k:i1-7.1 2 1l Iua o:i i'' 2.5 73-1,11tIr Is: -H-1.1 1 I blot.•. a I_.3 74-'1.3 KaIine_..-, , 11olLLLO I' 1,94 7713 ]:<t,namxri]u H lua]ca7 l' „ HioluaIoa 2 Large. 7746 Karnahalo H )1.ialcl:a 1'' 5.0 7794 Kauakini Halaialo.-r 1 " 1.ig 7910 Pupuka Holualoa. I ' 1.1 5015 Aij o 1loTuaIo i 2"a 1.4 815 I Heheiia Halualoa. I-' ?.3 8223 Ikaiaka Ho]ualoa I" 3.5 9915 Litnahaiia 1i 1ualoa 1" 2,4? 9932 Carta{ awe 1-1n1uaIoa. I" 25 8 10770 Puuone Ilalualoa 1'' 3.06 10400 Naaimakaohi llo]ualaa I'I Hotualoa1rul 3-5 19 EARLY POST -CONTACT ERA AND HISTORIC ERA Formal cattle ranching began in the Kona region in the olid -1800s, but wild cattle may have been in the area as early as the late 1700s. The pct `aina (`walls of the land'), native tenants' wall enclosures, were prevalent in the area. as indicated by their inclusion in many local \'lahele testimonies. These were used to mark the boundary of properties and to keep livestock out of crop areas (Kuykendall 1957.318 note 76). Later. cattle ranchers built wails to control their cattle. In the early 1840s, cattle were said to be "maintained on the kufcr," a mile from the c -oast where the ground was "covered with herbage" (Wilkes 1845:4, 95). Cattle, introduced lc, Kona by Vancouver in 1794, became a nuisance Tater, when their numbers increased. They fed on the grass of the kula and from time to time on the thatch of Hawaiians' homes and on vegetables in their gardens. The open upland fields, bounded only by low earth and stone walls, were in full cultivation in the 1850s [Kelly 1983:761 Ranchers leased land below the railroad to graze cattle that they owned (Kelly 1983: 1 1 1). Higher walls were built in the 192Os and 1930s to control animals. According to Joe Gomes, a longtime rancher in the area, Walls about 3 ft high can keep donkeys penned, The usual wall is about 4 V ft high and keeps cattle in. For goats you need a u•'a11 6 to 8 ft high. For wild pigs you need a 6 to 8 fthigh waif. They climb over lower walls easily. They come down from the mountains for macadamia nuts and also in mango season for mangoes [Kelly 1983:1121. Sugar was a major crop in Hawaii siening of the Reciprocity Treaty in 1 876 (Kelly 1983:90). The sugar industry grev rapidly, and by 1899 the only sugar mill in the Kona area was built by the Kona Sugar Company. Many Chinese worked on the sugar plantations (Kelly 1983:111). They built a railroad in 1901 to haul cane from the fields to their mill site a9ong the Wai`aha stream, north of the current project area, The stream did not provide enough water to mill cane year round and company failed in 1.903. The Kona Sugar Company was bought by James Castel in 1906 and was later purchased by Japanese investors. The Kona Sugar (1 onipmt continued to operate until 1926. 2t? The railroad was bought by Kona Development Company, and was used for fici�ght, sugarcane and by the Ilawaiian Lumber Company. Sugar was grown above the railroad line. The cui sugar was delivered to the tracks with the assistance of gravity, by wire cables and flumes. The rail line was seven miles long and extended from II 1ualoa to Keopuka (Figure 7). Cotton was grown on lands below the railroad tracks (Kelly 1983:1 1 1 ). Cotton gins were located south of the project area. Cotton was being picked as late as the 1930s, Other flint, grown below the tracks in the dryer lands were sisal and tobacco (Kelly 1983:1 ] 2 i. Traditional Hawaiian subsistence practices, including the rights to collect resources from all ecological zones of one's ahupzra `a, were challenged, restricted, or prevented. As private land owners considered their property off limits to others, cultivation and collection of resources on priatc land diminished. Individual Hawaiian. cultural beliefs, specialized kno wledge, and practices associated with the use of the different ecological resource zones ail ,o diminished. The development of cattle ranching and commercial crops, such as sugar cane and coffee, removed traditional cultigens and resources from large swaths of the lands of Kana. The changing subsistence and trade regimes developed by incoming European and American settlers, as well as other historical factors, caused a depopulation ()lithe coastal areas of Kona. Ranches were established at lower elevations and farms were established in the uplands where rainfall was higher and the temperatures were cooler. Schools, churches, stores, and other businesses were also established in the uplands. During the late 1800s and early IOOs, Holualoa was no longer the densely populated sociopolitical center it once was. The coastal area ofilolualoa had become a small cluster of houses along the trail from Kailua Bay to Keauhou. The project area is just markui (west) of the majority of land commission awards and is at the same elevation as portions of the land grants in the region. Based on historic documents, the project area and surrounding lands were likely being used for subsistence and commercial agriculture, as well as for cattle pasture from the mid to late 1800s, The project area might have heeu used later than surrounding lands because of its steep sleazes and very rocky soil, but based on aerial photographs. the project area was bulldozed sometime around the 1950s in preparation for commercial agriculture. '1 i Figure 7: Portion of 15 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Locanion of Railroad and Project Area (USES 1928). 22 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOL 1(4(`.\1. S1t'DlES There are at least 33 previous archils olw.jicol r.p4}rts for lands near the current project area, including studies in Puapua'a 2'14 and UOlualoa 1 `, 2'', and 3`d Ahupua`a (Table 4 and Figure 8). The studies were conducted from the coast to roughly 1,460 ft amsl and encompass the kulu region (0-500 ft), the ka/ a `tdrr region (500-1,000 ft), and the lower portions of the 'c a'a region (1,000-2,50014 Results of the previous archaeological studies are summarized below by elevation: studies numbered 1 through 15 in Table 2 and Figure 8 are situated from the coast to Queen Ka'abunianu Highway (0- 360 ft amsl), studies 16 through 2 I are located from above the Queen .Ka`ahunianu Highway to just below Hualalai Road (306-769 ft amsl), and studies 22 through 24 are above Huaiatla.i Road to just above Mamalahoa Highway (1,100-1,460 ft amsl). Table 3: inventory of Pr vious Archaeological Investigations. Project Number (Figure 8) Reference True of Study Area in Acres Results 1 Landrum .,:t al. 1990 alt I1 itL71t1� 9� 11 llrk't;l,I l?C. Sin", :> N ;1 4( Si ICS: 1 Calis et a1. 2004 Archacologwal Data Rei n� c� ' N•;1 10 Sites Carlson & kk>st rldih] 1990 Ar 11oei3lc] iertl Inventory Su9'Vev ;; 64 Sites Haun et al. 199 Arc h teoll}il al 197ve 9itory Survey 1 31 Sites -1 Hadi nria91 & Folk 19<1 'Ai'cha1Lolo,0al SLlr>•'L:V 9tt 20 Sites 4 1i'ainm;191 11111 VAC', Archaeolot;ica1 Sur, t 4' 1:.xcavattiurT 11} 21 Sites Haim �L Hem). 2A)01Arcliaeolovuical Data Recovery 1.59 1 Site 6 1' ruil[r _013 Arrhaco[ogical Inventt,rw Fluty I . }f; _ 2 Sites 7 Sinoto 197{ lrt Il;1ci31i]irFL 11 ReconnaJn-.Ince Stu -v 'k' C> Rock Walls g Hammon 197911 r' 1'l ll:lc[1]trf?ii`:il SIAM ON in 1 Siieti, 9 Hmilmalll 19794: :1ri•liak4`c.31o,zl.c1I s1.11'1.L'V 2.3 39 Sirt•ti 10 ('• nc]l!v' &. (hi ni.N5 1979 .Arti'I1 iti3log.!cal lti° eCitiliiti l ii.otia Suri. y 4ft, 8.0 Sites 10 Harnnmit 1979a +l h je�3lt}g,C,ll Inventor,. SL47t+~ti 46,,E 11 Sites 10 H:i]1,i77Lkir 19 10 t i'Cllait'L1lU'lc i1 Sur- & F ca4atioll 11/3 88 Sites 11 Nelson cl 111, 21M ,Irch�lcc,It,Lit:al Inventory Survey , 22 Sire' 12 Rosenclhal 1978 Ark hacul�t rlcll Rcee>inrlais7;ancc Survey ,, ; 1 Site 12 Sk oilrk:n I9980a Ars.•11ac„k gic'riiI 11.A 7 Sites 23 s. Project Number (Figure 8) Reference Type of Study Area in Acres Results l' we(:a,ll1nak,anci Sincy 12 Wolfortlt ct al. 2000 llch,,e„ {.}ir:L ill [rr Liltory Suncv ri 7 Sites 13 Bartvra 199 Ai- iiucolkgicul Reconnaissance Survey 17 3 + several ag. mounds 13 Haun & Henry 2000 Archaeological Inventory Sur' c y 1 12 CI 04 Features, R22 of Which Were Agricultural) 14 Rc7senda.hl 1989Archaeoloi�icel Field ntipeetion 6 Modified Outcrops 15 Sc1iilf 1984 Archacolottical Stud 17 134 Sites ] , Walker & Ruscndahl 191.1 Arc11aCOlogical Rcconnaitisanee Survey 111 67 Sites 16 Craves & Goodfellow 1993 Archaeological Data Recuti cry, 104 58Sires 16 Maly & Rosenda171 2006 Archacillt 111CLIi Preset :Hon 1 1,111 04 67 Sires 17 Htsmmatt d al. 1092 re:l itsiloi2;.,11 "'1 1 i......- 174 71 Sires 18 {1L'hS l7 l tJ Ub Arc hac logical Rect nnan .ante Sur-vcy 16 1 Site 19 Rechtnman 2000 ArcI1 cc7Logical Inventory Inee•ntor r Survey. 1.i)(J y Sites - 20 RosendahI 1988 Archaeological Reconnaisaance Survey 17 17 Sites 20 Eager & Graves 1993 Arch aec7l{�gical Inventor) Survey 17 17 Situs 21 Y}irGkS E[ 31.21113 Archacolozical Inventory Survey lt1_.�{a 4y I 1 Site (149 Historic to Modem Farming Features) 22 Desilets et al. 2004 r rc:haeo[t} rival 1nvclntorl, Sur�ey� 11.7 1 Homestead 1'calures 23 Rcchlnian 2013 2.P 24 Sires 14Clark & 1(cchitnan 201}0 Are ha col oglcal inventory` Surve (r Itisioric Era 4.;i1�•s 24 i Figure 8: 1.5-MVlinutc Serie USGS Topographic Map Showing location of ?iv,doufi Arrha ok gicai StudIL, :hii I I`i°Jo.L \2t, (Kealakekua Quad. ESRL 2013. Data Sources: National Geographic Society. USGS ), 2s REGIONAL PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES 1. Landrum et aL 1990, and Calls et al. 2004. PHRI, Inc. conducted au archaeological inventory survey (Landrum et al. 1990) and SCS, Inc. conducted data recovery investigations (Calis et al. 21)04) at the Knhakai development project. The project area is located within the lower elevations of Puapua`a 2" Ahupua`a. Pre -Contact era to early post -Contact era cave shelters, agricultural rock clearing mounds, burials. shrines, and a possible heiau were identified during the AN study. A heiau complex, several burials, and five permanent habitation sinks 3k c -. recommended for preservation. All or -the preservation sites are near the coast. 2. Carleson and Rasendahl 1990. PHRI, Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 65 acres between Kuakini and Quem Ka;ahunianu highways in Puapua`a 2nd Ahupua`a. Their study recorded 64 archaeological sites including pre -Contact era habitation, agricultural, and burial sites. Seven sites were assessed as significant and recommended for preservation (Carleson and Rosendahl 1990: 34). 3. Haun et al. 1998. PHRI, Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the proposed Ali`i Drive corridor through several ahupua`a_ Numerous pre -Contact era site complexes were recorded in Puapua'a 2nd and HOlualaa 1" through 4th Ahupua`a. The site complexes included a large number of agricultural features. as well as habitation, burial, and ceremonial features. 4. Hammatt and Folly 1981, and Hammat et al. 1986. Two archaeological surveys were conducted on a 20 -acre parcel of below Kuakini Highway. The first study recorded 20 sites. and the second recorded 21 sites. None of the sites were recommended for preservation (Harman and Folk 1981: ii, and Hainmatt et al. 1986: 87). The report also recommended that the single documented burial be relocated. 5. Haun & Henry 2001. Haun and Associates conducted an archaeological data recovery study at a c -shaped enclosure located on 1.59 acres of land below Queen Ka` churn anu Highway 6. Escott 2413. SCS conducted an archaeological study on 1.962 acres of land near the intersection of Kuakini and Queen Ka`ahunianu highways, Two historic era ranch walls were recorded during the study. 26 7. Sinoto 1979. Aki Sinoto recorded several Historic era ranch. rock walls on a six acre parcel of land just mauka of Alii Drive. S. Hammatt 1979b. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 22 acres just south of Kuakini Highway. Three archaeological sites were recorded during the study. None of the sites were recommended for Preservation (Harriman 1979b: ii, and 10). 9. Hammitt itt 1979c. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 23 acres located in the near coastal portion ofHaualoa l' and 2"tAhupua°a. Thirty nine archaeological sites were recorded during the study. The report recommended that all burials. including a known cemetery site he relocated ( Ilaminatt 1.979a: 5). None of the remaining sites (pre -Contact era habitation and agriculture sites) were recommended for preservation in place. 10. ConfIly and Gunnels 1979, and Hammalt 1979a and 1980. The Archaeological Research Center. Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 103 acres within the near coastal portions of Halualoa 1'' through 4`11 Ahrtpua`a (Hammatt 1980). One hundred and thirty six archaeological sites were recnrdcd on the project area. They included pre - Contact era habitation, agriculture. burial. and a ceremonial sites. The Hammatt report recommended that a lieiau (Site 6661) was wigniflcant and should be preserved in place Hamman 1980: 4), The report also recommended that the single documented burial be relocated to the perimeter of heiau (Site 6661) and preserved. No other sites were recommended for preservation. 11. Nelson et al. 2005. An archaeological inventory survey was conducted by Rechtman Consulting on 28.0 acres located in the near coastal portion of Holualoa 2" Alhupua`a. A total of 22 sites containing 150 features were recorded. The sites were primarily pre - Contact era agricultural and habitation sites, though five burial sites, a possible heiau, and a trail were also documented within the project area, 12. Rosendahl 1978, Soehren 1980a, Wolforth et al. 2000. P'HRI conducted an archaeological inventory survey of eight acres of coastal Holualoa 3"J Ahupua.a and recorded seven archaeological sites including three Iistoric era rock walls, three residential sites, and Hikapaia Heiau. 27 13. Barrcra 1995, Hann & Henry 2000. Barrera (1995) recorded a possible burial platform. two habitation site, agricultural rock clearing mounds and modified outcrops. during a reconnaissance survey of 17 acres in near coastal Holualoa 211" Ahupua`a, Haun and Associates conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the property and recorded 12 sites with 104 features (Hann and Henry 2000:14). The majority of features (n=82) were pre -Contact era agricultural rock clearing mounds. Eleven permanent habitation and one temporary habitation feature were also recorded during the study. 14. Rosendahl 1989. PURI conducted an archaeological field inspection of 6.0 acres of land just below Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway in Holualoa 2nd Ahupua`a Several modified outcrops were recorded in the letter report. There were no other archaeological features identified on the project area. 15. Sehiilt 1984. The Bishop Museum conducted an archaeological study of the Kuakini Highway Realignment Project located roughly along present day Queen Ka'ahurnanu Highway and recorded 39 sites Puapua'a 2°d and. Holualoa l and 2"d Ahupua-a. Twenty two of the sites were pre -Contact to early post -Contact era agricultural gardcils and modified outcrops (rock clearing). There were also traditional habitation platforms and trails, as well as Historic era roads and walls recorded during the study, 16. Walker and Rosendahl 1988, Graves and Goodfellow 1993, and Maly and Rosendahl 2006. An archaeological recon ria issancc survey (Walker and Rosendahl 1988), 88), an archaeological data recovery study (Graves and Goodfellow 1993), and an archaeological preservation plan (Maly and Rosendahl 2006) were conducted by PHRI, Inc. for W4 acres in the upland region cif Puapua'a 2"`' Ahupua'a. A total of 67 sites were documented within the project area, including traditional (KFS) sites, temporary habitation sites, three burials, and a heiau, The archaeological preservation plan recommended that the three burials be relocated to the heiau site, and that the heiuu be preserved as a formal historic preservation area (Maly and Rosendahl 2006). 17. ilarrrniatt et al. 1992. An archaeological survey was conducted by Cultural Su«eys l Ia ai' i ori 174 acres of land in the upland region of Holualoa 1 `, 2"`r, and 3'd Ahupua-a. The project area lands had been heavily bulldozed during the modern era for ranching and agricultural purposes, Despite the bulldozing. seventy one sites were recorded during the study, including. temporary habitation features, rock walls, agricultural features, and 28 three burial sites. Many of the sites were determined to be associated with Historic era ranching and agriculture. 18. Soehren 1980b. Soehren conducted an archaeological rec onnaissatice survey of 16.0 acres above Queen Ka`ahunianu Highway in the inland region ofHalualoa 1` .Ahupua`a (Soehren 19S0b) A single enclosure was identified during the survey. 19. Rechtrnan 2006. An archaeological inventory survey was conducted by Rechtman Consulting, LLC on a roughly one -acre parcel located inakai of Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway in Halualoa 2°u Ahupua`a. Two rock walls were recorded on the project arta_ The report recommended no further work at the wall site. 20. M. Rosendahl 1988, Fager & Graves 1991 Fager and Graves (1993) conducted an archaeological inventory survey of l 7.4 acres just niauka of Queen Ka`ahurnanu Highway in. Hlualoa 3`d Ahupua'a. Seventeen sites containing 27 pre -Contact to early post -Contact era agricultural features. including rock mounds, modified outcrops, C- shaped enclosures, terraces, walls, and rock enclosures, were recorded. 21. Dircks et al. 2013. Rechtrnan Consulting conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 10.266 ages of l an d located between 840 and 920 ft amtsl in Holualoa 1 ` and 2" Ahupua'a_ One Historic era to modern era homesteadlagriculture site (Miyose Farm) containing 149 features was recorded during the survey. 22. Desilets et al. 2004. Dcsilets et al. (2004) conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 11.7 acres of land in the 'apa'o region of Halualoa 1'` Ahupua'a. A single site associated with Historic era and modem era hornesteads, commercial agriculture (coffee), and ranching was recorded. Features included rock walls, roads, coffee terraces, and buildings. 23. Rechtrnan 2013. Rechiman Consulting conducted and archaeological inventory survey of 29 acres of land located in the 'apa'a region of.Holualoa I `Ahupua`a, Twenty four sites were recorded. The majority cat"the sites were associated with Historic era and modern era homesteads, commercial agriculture. Features included rock walls, roads, and remnants ofstructures. A single pre -Contact era to early post -Contact era residential and agricultural site was also recorded. 29 24. Clark & Reehtman 2006. Rec;htman Consulting conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 2.7 acres of land located in the 'am 'cr region of l Ialual pa 1' Ahupua`.a_ Six sites were recorded, including five ranch walls and an area of coffee terraces. A number of conclusions can be made from the previous archaeological studies. A primary conclusion is that the majority of habitation features, especially permanent habitation features, are located from the coast to about 360 ft amsl, below the present day Queen Ka'ahumana I Ii .hv.iy, The same is true of ceremonial features, burial& and, to a lesser extent, agricultural features_ The density of agricultural features and habitation features, mostly temporary habitation features, in the upland regions between 360 t amsl and 700 ft amsl is much lower than the site density in the coastal kola and lower WI 'ails regions of the KFS. The pre -Contact traditional Hawaiian settlement and agricultural patterns are strongly oriented to the kzrla and lower kali 'urlu regions. Even though cattle ranching and commercial agriculture may have removed some archaeological sites from the ground surface in the kalif 'tilt: region, there appear to be fewer sites than at lower elevations. The majority of sites in the kohl',du region are KFS agricultural sites including rock clearing mounds, matitficd outcrops, garden enclosures, and low garden walls. Within the lands of the current project, it is clear that ranching and commercial agricultural practices have removed and damaged „any of the pre -Contact era sites from the ground surface (see the llanmmatt c9 al. 1992 summary below). Moreover, many of the sites identified near the current project area are associated with Historic era ranching and commercial agriculture. A second conclusion is that the establishment of Historic gra homesteads, ranches, and commercial agriculture seems to have removed. or obscured, the majority of pre - Contact era sites in the upper kala `fila and lower r x1'a regions, is might he that pre - Contact uses in these regions did not involve the construction of large or permanent r'c `7tturss, as in the lower regions of Kona. It is also likely that Historic era ranching and commercial agriculture in the lower `eipa ci region have caused large settle land alterations through the use of bulldozers for pasture and garden. It is possible that traditional features were disassembled to build rock walls and coffee terraces. 30 CURRENT PROJECT AREA SPECIFIC PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY Lands of the current AIS study are most closely related to sites identified in the northern portion of the archaeological study conducted by EhITIlmatt et al. (1992). The northern portion of that study encompassed 66.03<3 acres of land located between 320 to 690 feet (98 to 210 meters) amsl [TMK: (3) 7-6-021:016 and 0171 (Figure 9). The current project area is located at the southeastern corner of the northern portion of the ilammatt et al. (1992) project area. In August of 2016 SCS conducted an archaeological sites inspection ( Escott 2016) of r he 20 previously recorded archaeological sites and the remains of two modern agricultural areas (Table 4) identified in the northern portion of the Harriman et al. (1992) project arca, The project area and surrounding lands were bulldozed sometime between the 1940s and 1970s. Evidence of bulldozing is visible in aerial photographs as ;ILlteinating bands of cleared bulldozer tracks and bands of push pile. Pedestrian survey confirmed that the linear hands in the aerial photographs are bulldozer -cleared paths and linear piles of bulldozed rock along the cleared bulldozer paths. Seven of the 20 archaeological sites (SIHP #50-10-37--10015, #50-10-37-10017, #50-10-37-10018, #50-10-37-10020, #50-10-37-10033, #50-10-37-10034, and #50-10- 37-10049, hereafter abbreviated to the last five digits) were recorded by CSH in tabular format only (Table 2). These are sites identified during the pedestrian survey that were determined to be associated with modem clearing and ai ricultural activities, or were natural geological features, and no written description or plan maps were generated. Written descriptions of the remaining 13 sites are in the CSH AIS report. Excavations were conducted at ten of the 13 sites. There are plan view figures for four of the 13 sites. SIHP #10011 (CSH She 9) Site 10011 is a rectangular platform on slightly sloping bulldozed pasture land. As described by CSH. the feature has formal construction elements suggesting possible use other than agricultural rock clearing, including larger rocks (small boulders) forming an outer perimeter with smaller rocs (cobbles) forming the interior top surf Ece, The outer perimeter is stacked one to two courses high and is roughly faced along the south side. The top surface of the platform is a slightly uneven and level rock paving. 31 Figure 9: 7.5 -Minute Series USES Topoempltic Map Showing Lok .:1'.113. of Northern Portion of Hatnmati et I. (1992) Sites and Current Project Area. (ESR, 2011. Source: Naii)nal (o.owraphic SuLiy, USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle). 32 Table 4: [mimicry el"H rarntltl i:L al_ (1992) Archaeologic al Sites litsrec LIur] and Aascssntent 11;e.ulis. SW Pit CSH Site* TPe Function Age Esc® ation Level of AIS Recording Site Assessrntui .:Io 1 9 Phiifortri Ag. Clearing I"rehimuric Tema] DesL-ripiion hL'Stk. IJc,,LT: ,iiII4.oneci h1 .2 10 PIiilorm dt W'aI] 13urinl 1'n:16sioric Esciv:i'ti.*J L)e_,eripli{,a_ I'hiiivicu, 1'ro111,, , AL4 wii.c 1Jtintir oboe ( orreci 1114)13 11 Eric iced I a S I..a,ai 111171 Ei:lbitdtt47m,m Prchist.irie E\C'itLir,tI De-erip;ll+n & Plaid Lew ALS Sift. (Description Correct •ItI < 16{l1 7 I ; 15 ern..., felalf{ICa1 good Red ill -tone 1. :lli1L" R1a111 I IiwLL3e it: No TH[1:1.iii AN 'II,. 1}1.7wriptio11 9'orreiii NO Tab ,L1r Bulldozed — No Lugger Present 100I 16 Endo -ion: Aariculttl;aI f1, tanc No Tahs71ar Natural Bedrock C7tstcrop 1114119 17 6 ROLL .Mounds Ag. CILariiij Ili -tone Tested f7eseniltitin AIS Site Docription Correct 10020 1.^t Platform Ag. Clearing LILite::,_ No T3hular Natural Bedrock 0ideragr molt 10.I34 111 113 17l:usioll,.4'ompIsn 1`.iii,rio 4.'11ft'2�• kg hist[+r}�: No T:ah,i1:ir Bulklaz d— No Lougee Present A .L1L'iiiiiw Historic Ni 1ahular AISSite Description Coarct 100.19 216 T..r,iw�; Agrii i i here historic No Tabular Rulidozed —No Longer Present 111067 232 1,i r,l,:=, Habitation Pirelli snirir Tamed 9Nt APS Site Docription Correct )".lrlS 7, ? L:iw.:...ru:� Habitation Prehistoric Tested Description & Plainview A15 Site DescripLiun Correct . IiI(, ==a 11•.1011.L.,1 Mull 1'!.1I11,1 111 Habitation HLctor,c Tested Description AIS Sire Description Correct 111010 .135 1-,,°,h7,0I n, 1«11:,. AgriLulture historic Tested Description 'OS Sue 1k^serptii1nComer' 1U071 237 PLir:oriii Habitation Prehistoric No Description RzLociiied. B uI1.dozed 104172 2114 410Jilled Bluff A. Clearing, iliattrie Tested DL cripliun A35 SiIL Dcsrunnimi Likely t t'n:eut 1[]9173 2311 Plat rotios Ranelsin Ag. Histofl No Descri1m Relocated - Bulldozed 1411174 2411 Elie lnlurc Co Work Shed Hiistoric Tested fhiscr._7;u m Ar witr Description 1 ikely Correct 10075 241 Enclosure Pig Pen 1iistoric N4] Deseii1,Liin, Planview, ere. Profile AIS Sire Description Likely Correct Hisitnic Flouting Ttirru,:c AD iculture Niodc}TL No On Project M i AIS Site. Description Likely C.rreat Rlitl'f l"crriee- Agriculture Modern Na t)n Project Man A, ISDcscnpiionCorrect 33 CTS1-1 excavated a 1.5 m wide trench through the platform and recovered three cowrie shells, suggesting the platform is a rock clearing mound. The location of the trench r t•ithin the feature, the length of the trench, and the methods used to recover cultural material are not described in the CSI -1 AIS. While the form. construction method, location of the feature suggest it is a temporary habitation feature or a feature used for activities associated with agriculture, the small amount of cultural material recovered from subsurface excavation suggest it is a rock clearing mound. The platform appears to be unaltered and is in good condition. SJHP 41(101 (CSH Site 10) Site 10012 is a rectangular burial platform (mound) and rock wall segment on slightly sloping bulldozed pasture land. The platform was excavated by CSH and the i1,i4 were reinterred at Pu`uhonua o Hnnaunau National Historic Park (NHP). The platform has been bulldozed and only the base of the feature remains. SCS excavated a 1.0 rn by l .0 m test -unit in the center of the feature during the sites inspection and assessment work (Escott 2016) to determine the presence or absence of Pal. The lest -unit was excavated to bedrock and all material was screened through lie' inch mesh screen. There were no fragments and no other cultural material recovered from the excavation. The platform has been bulldozed and is in poor condition. The L -shape rock wall segment k. aw located approximately 95.0 aiicicrs southwest ol`the burial platform. Jt is roughly 23.0 m Yong (NE/SW) by 1.0 m wide and between 0.5 and 0.9 m in height. The wall is constructed of angular and subangular cobbles and small boulders, It is cobble core filled and bi-faced. The wall is partially collapsed in places and is in good condition. SIHP 410013 (CSH Site 11) Site 10013 is a roughly square habitation enclosure and a small modified lava tube. The enclosure appears to have been partially bulldozed after the CSf-1 A1S fieldwork was completed. as the wall heights are touch lower than those described in the AIS report. Rocks from the bulldozed walls are piled along the edges of the enclosure. The base of the enclosure walls is still evident on the ground surface. The CSH AIS lava lube description was assessed to be correct. The interior of the short lava tube is not modified. Site 10013 has been altered by bulldozing and is in fair to poor condition. 34 SHIP #10015 (CSH Site 13) Site 10015 is a modern dirt road bed. SHIP #10017 (CSH Site 15) Site 10017 is described in the CSH pedestrian survey summary table as a cattle loading ramp. The area where Site 10017 was plotted on the project map is an area of bulldozed pasture with numerous large bulldozer push piles. CSH determined through consultation with SHPU and Hawaii County Planning that the feature did not warrant a written description in the CSI1 AIS report. Et is possible thdl the feature was determined. to be a bulldozer pile after CSH first identified it, or it might have been bulldozed later. The possible cattle loading ramp (Site 1 0017) appears to have been bulldozed or was originally a bulldozer push pile. SIHP #I001S (CSH Site 161 Site 10018 is described in the CSH pedestrian survey summary table as an enclosure. The area where Site 10018 was platted on the project map is anarea o1"natural bedrock outcrop surrounding a Large tamarind tree. The bare bedrock outcrop encloses a roughly level area of soil. There are no modifications to the outcrop. CSH did not include a site description or map of the enclosure in the AIS report, likely because it was determined to be natural. 'I laere are no other archaeological feature la the area around the bedrock outcrop. A final possibility is that the Site 1001R teauur4 )v as bulldozed after the CSH ALS work was completed. SIHP #10019 (CSH Site 17) Site 1 0019 is six rock clearing mounds located along the southeast edge of a seasonal gulch. The presence of a metal file recovered during excavation or one of the mounds suggests the mounds are modern. The rock mounds, appear to have been impacted by flood events, they are partially collapsed, and are in fair to poor condition. SIHP #10020 (CSH Site 18) Site 120 is described in the CS1i pedestrian survey summary table as a platform. The area where Site 10020 was plotted on the project map is an area of bulldozed pasture with natural bedrock outcrops and loose rocks. A roughly rectangular pile of natural bedrock boulders was identified at the location of Site 10020. The boulders are naturally occurring bedrock small boulders and cobbles, There is a portion along the west side of the pile that appears to contain bulldozer push from a nearby wall 35 breach. The top of the rock pile is uneven but somewhat level. There is no stacking or facing apparent on the rock pile. The pile is natural, but its roughly rectangular shape Enid somewhat lel, el top surface make it appear to be a possible archaeological feature. It is likely that CSI I added the Mature to their pedestrian survey summary table for these reasons. CSH did not include a site description or map of the feature in the ALS report, likely because it was determined to be natural. SIHI' #10033 ICSH Site l 12) Site 10033 is described in the CSH pedestrian survey summary table as a planting complex associated with modem coffee agriculture. There were coffee trees in the area. when CSH conducted their ALS fieldwork. The area where Site 10033 was plotted on the project map is an area of bulldozed pasture along the southeast edge of a seasonal gulch. During the current sites inspection, it was apparent that the ground surface in this area has been impacted by i1tir ?d events and bulldozing. There are no longer coffee trees and there is only a single short wall segment in the area where Site 10033 was previously identified. The planting features are no longer present. The L -shape wall segment is roughly 5.0 m long (NUS) by 1.0 in wide and is 1.0 m in maximum height. The wall is constructed of angular and subangular cobbles and small boulders. Et c.ohblc core filled ilncl bi-faced. The wall has been bulldozed on both ends and is its Fair condition. S1HP #10034 (CSH Site 113) Site 10034 was described in the CSH pedestrian survey summary table as a platform (rock mound). 11 was determined through consultation with SHPD and. Hawai`i County Planning that the features did not warrant a written description in the CSH AIS report. During the current site inspection. the feature was identified along the north edge of a seasonal gulch. The platform appears to have been bulldozed. Currently, the Feature is a roughly 2.5 m long (E/W) by 1.8 m wide by 0.35 m high concentration of rock. The base of the platfortrt appears to be intact in the ground surface. It is possible that the feature was in this state when CSH first identified it, or it might have been bulldozed later. The feature is most likely a rock clearing mound. It has been impacted by bulldozing and is in poor condition. 36 SIHP 410049 (CSH Site 216) Site 10049 is described in the CSH pedestrian survey summary table as two linear agricultural terraces. The area where Site 10049 was plotted on the project map is along the bulldozed north bank of a seasonal gulch. During the current sites inspection, it was apparent that the ground surface in this area has been impacted by flood events and bulldozing. Site 10049 has been bulldozed and is no longer present. SIHP #l0067 (CSH Site 232) Site 10067 i4 a rock wall and several soil retaining terraces constructed on the sloping north bank ol-a seasonal gulch, Cultural material recovered from excavations suggests the site is Prehistoric and is likely associated with temporary habitation and agriculture, The site appears to be unaltered and is in good condition. SIHP 410068 (CSH Site 233) Site 10068 is a small rectangular enclosure. Cultural material recovered from excavations suggests the site is Prehistoric and is likely associated with temporary habitation. The site has been bulldozed and only the base of the enclosure walls remain, with the exception of the southeast corner which is still intact. SIHP #10069 (CSH Site 234) Site 10069 is a modified bluft'platfc nn. Cultural material recovered from excavations suggests that the site is a Prehistoric volcanic -glass tool working site associated with nearby agriculture. The site had been bulldozed prior to the CSH MMS. 1t is in poor condition. SIHP #'10070 (CSH Site 235) Site 10070 is U-shaped enclosure, The feature construction, the lack of cultural material recovered from test excavation, and the enclosure's proximity to Historic era agricultural rock clearing mounds all suggest the enclosure is related to Historic era agriculture, most likely coffee growing. The site had been partially bulldozed prior to the USI -1 AIS. Itis in poor condition.. S1HP #10071 (CSH Site 237) Site 10071 was described in the CSI1 pedestrian survey summary table as a rectangular platform. The feature was relocated along the north edge ofa seasonal gulch during the current site inspection and appears to have been bulldozed after the CSH AIS 37 fieldwork. The feature is now a roughly 5.8 m long (ENV) by 5.0 m wide concentration of loose rocks on the bulldozed level ground surface. There are bulldozer track marks on the loose rocks and on surrounding exposed bedrock. The foal ore is in Moor condition. SIHP #14072 (CSH Site 238) Site 10072 includes two large modified outcrops, terraces. rock clearing mounds, and level soil areas. Test excavation of the largest rnocii rid of flcrop did not contain cultural material. A small amount or sea urchin shell was recovc1-._.tl (rein additional testing of one of the rock mounds. The CSH AIS interpreted the ; i a .i;sociated with Historic era agriculture. it is possible that based on the feature types and construction method that the site is associated with pre -Contact era agriculture, though the limited subsurface test excavations to date do not support this interpretation. The site appears to be unaltered and is in good condition. SIHP #10073 (CSH Site 239) Site 10073 was described in the CSH AIS report as two platforms or cattle loading chutes or ramps. During the current site inspection, the features were identified along the edge of a mauka-rawl;ai ranch road and appear to be bulldozer push piles, It is possible that the features were in this state Wien CSH first identified them, or they might (Rave been bulldozed later. iThe two i:oimires Ort Site 10073 appear to be bulldozer push pilws. SIHP #100741CSH Site 240) Site 10074 is a roughly square rock enclosure likely used as a foundation for an Historic era structure associated with conurtercial agriculture. Cultural material recorded at the site included both Prehistoric and Historic era artifacts. The site was bulldozed at some point subsequent to the CSH ,AIS study, All that remains is the partially collapsed portion of what appears to be the southeast corner of the enclosure wall. The site is in poor condition, IIIPP ?' 10075 (CSH Site 241) Site 10075 is a roughly square rock enclosure interpreted as an Historic era pig pen. The site appears to have been partially bulldozed at some point subsequent to the CSH AIS study. Portions of the wall comers remain although the walls are no longer as high as they were described in the CSH AES report. The site is in poor condition. 38 Historic Planting Terraces The CSH AIS identified an arca containing Historic era planting terraces within the northeast portion of Parcel 016. The features were relocated exactly where they were plotted on the CSH AIS project map. The features included rock mounds, linear rack alignments, terraces, modified outcrops, and level soil areas. The features were not subjected to subsurface testing during the CSH AIS. It was likely determined through consultation with SHPD and Hawaii County Planning that the features diad not warrant testing or written descriptions. The features might be Historic in age. Bluff Terraces The CSH AIS identified an area containing bluff terraces within the southeast portion of Parcel 017. The features were relocated exactly where they were plotted on the CSH ALS project map. The features were not described in the CSH study because it was determined that the features were modem bulldozer push piles. Pedestrian survey of the area during the current sites inspection confirmed that they are bulldozer push piles. All but three (Site 10017, 10033, and 10049) of the 20 archaeological sites recorded in the CSH AIS are still present on the project area. Two sites (Site 10071 and 10073) were present but bulldozed to the point that a precise assessment was not possible. Although the CSH AIS site descriptions for Site 10071 and 10073 appear likely correct. Two sites (Site 10018 and 10020) were determined to be natural geological features. Of the 13 sites that were not impacted beyond recognition by bulldozing, ten were determined to be correctly recorded in the CSH ALS report, and three were determined to be likely correctly recorded in the CSH AIS report. The Historic planting terraces recorded in the northeast portion of Parcel 016 were determined to be likely correctly recorded, and the bluff terraces recorded in the south east portion of Parcel 017 was determined to be correctly recorded in the CSH AIS report. Based on the CSH A1S report and a February 8, 1993 (:iamrex. Inc. tetter to SHPD, CSU recorded 20 archaeological sites and two Historic/Modern era agricultural arts during their initial pedestrian survey. These sites were described in tabular format and a pedestrian survey summary was given to SHPD and Hawaii County Planning for 39 review. SHPD and County Planning then made a site visit to consult with CSH on the preliminary site interpretations and the appropriate level of documentation for each site. CSH then returned to selected sites and recorded written descriptions and created site and feature plan neaps for sites at which they were required to do so. The remaining sites were either determined to be natural or associated with Historic/Modern era commercial apiculture and no further documentation was required in the AIS report. Overall, based on the SCS sites inspection and assessment (Escott 2016), the CSH. AIS report correctly identified project area archaeological sites and tested, recorded, and interpreted them correctly. All of the Parcel 016 and Parcel 017 archaeological sites documented in the CSH AIS report were recommended for no further work (Ha.mmatt et al. 1984:38). The recommendation was made as "the significant material from the study area has been recovered and further investigation would he of minimum productivity" (1 [unimatt et al. 1984:3f1). The majority of sites (n=14) documented in the northern portion oi'the Hamman et al. (1992) project area were interpreted as Historic era ranching and commercial agriculture features. Only six sites were interpreted as pre -Contact era to early post - Contact era, four of them were associated with temporary liabitation, one with agricultural rock clearing, and one with burial practices. EXPECTED ARCHEOLOGICAL PATTERNS Based on previous archaeological studies. geological studies, historical research, interviews, and County Planning Department records it is expected that any archaeological sites remaining, 1111 the current project area will be related to traditional pre -Contact era agriculture. temporary habitation. burial practices, and to early post - Contact era and Historic era ranching and agrir:trltural activities, h is likely that many of the pre -Contact to early post -Contact era sites have been removed or disturbed by Historic era and modem ranching and commercial agriculture. This is especially true because the area around the current project era was used as cattle pasture from the Historic era to the present_ Additionally, the project area is in a location that was bulldozed sometime between. the 1940s and the 1970s in preparation for a commercial agricultural project, most likely coffee growing. Aerial photos clearly show that bulldozer transects were cut north/south across the entire five -:acre project area, 40 Archaeological site and ieatures that are likely to remain on the project area will likely include pre -Contact era to early post -Contact era rock clearing mounds, terraces, small enclosures, and burials. It is also likely that Historic era and modem features related to ranching and agriculture will also be identified on the project area. These include pr.irnaril.y rock walls constructed to confine cattle. RESULTS OF FIELDWORK Twenty two newly identified archaeological situ; were recorded during the course of the archaeological inventory survey study (Table 5 and. Figure 10). The sites are primarily agricultural complexes and terraces associated with pre -Contact era, through early post -Contact era to Historic era agriculture. Several rock walls and enclosures are associated with Historic cra agriculture and ranching. A pre -Contact era to later post - Contact era single lava tube burial was also recorded. A portion of the old railroad berm was also recordedalong the eastern edge of the project area. All site numbers are preceded by the prefix #50-10-37-. SITE 30591 Agricultural Complex FUNCTION: Agriculture AGE: Pre -Contact to Early Post -Contact Era DIMENSIONS: 20.0 rn (N/S) by 9.0 m by 0.95 m in max. height CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Possesses Inteuity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: Shovel Probe Testing (SP -I, SP -2. SP -3) DESCRIPTION: Site 30591 is an agricultural complex located within the northern portion of the project area, immediately south of the north project area boundary (see Figure I0). The site is situated at 650 f`t amsl on a west facing slope, among koo haole trees and Guinea grass ground cover, The complex is six terraces and planting features (Features 1 through 6) constructed on a level area along a west facing slope (Figure 11). The site is approximately 20.0 min length (N/"S) and 9,0 in widle, with a maximum height of 0.95 rn. There is a nuntkaimakai rock alignment at the center of the site and level terraces extending north and south from the rock alignment. Feature l through. Feature 4 are south of the alignment and Feature 5 and Feature 6 are north. There are threehcho 41 Table 5: Inventory of Arehawlegical Silts ldrntilikcl on the ALS Project Area. Site # Site Type Features Site Function Age Testing 30591 Agril:ulL1LrL1 Complex 6 Agriculture f re-C'nniiict to Historic Eru SP -l. ? KEY - PROJECT ARE 1 Figure 10: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Locations of Project Area Archaeological Sites (ESal, 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle). 43 rt r! - 114ti4ITum-10 4 J 41f.It:HT INelm 8110%1-'l PAH1)F 4OE 4Lk13 tiHO IJ.I PI1uu 1t. p yr -1 - Figure ( F Figure 1 1: Flw` .:(i -til ['Lay: Il 1' D F 1 1 1 1 RI. • 1 1 N 1 1 141'.• Sr et • Vl itt to • .81' or tr■, I %.4 . 1P ffis f) r tial r • I. , J4, r of l l� 4 , I- V ei i $1 . 111,_Z4:1* '� (Ia :o *IP,—I'I I I I) Ii AO 000.1iirrii s lirfl it Ia SOOht kl l Ill a* m ogres rteitte tire 9.30 1 .+{ iJ114'.1 III<,11 4.-4411 WSJ. 1114.'-1 4-4 slabs along the south side of the central rock alignment that were placed with their longest axis oriented vertically. Feature 1 is an oval planting feature constructed along the central rock alignment and along the east side of the site (Figure 12). It is constructed of a single course of small basalt boulders and cobbles and is approximately 2.0 m in length (N/S) by 0.70 m wide. with a maximurn height of 0.59 m. The feature is collapsed in some areas and is in fair condition. Feature 2 is a rectangular soil filled terrace located immediately west of Feature 1 (Figure 13). It is constructed along the south side of the central rock alignment. The terrace is approximately 5.5 m in length (N/S) by 2.50 m wide, with a maximum height of 0.68 rn. It is constructed ofangular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders ranging in size from 0.20 to 0.50 m. The feature is collapsed in some areas and is in fair condition. Feature 3 is a small rectangular soil filled terrace located immediately south of Feature 1 (Figure 14). The terrace is approximately 3.50 m in length (N!S) and 1.40 rn wide, with a maximum height of 0,70 in. it is constructed of angular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders ranging in size from 0.20 to 0.70 rn. The feature is collapsed in some areas and is in fair condition. Feature 4 is a roughly rectangular terrace located immediately south of Feature 2 and Feature 4 (Figure 15), The terrace is approximately 5.0 m in length (NW/SE) by 3.40 m wide, narrowing slightly at the southern terminus, with a maximum height of 0.50 m. It is constricted of angular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders ranging in size from 0.25 to 0.50 m. The feature is collapsed in some areas and is in fair condition. Feature 5 is a roughly rectangular terrace located in the northwest corner of the site (Figure 16). The terrace is constructed along the northwest side of'the. central rock alignment. The terrace is approximately 8.0 in in length (MS) by 4.0 111 wide, with a maximum height of 0.70 tn. it is constructed of cannular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders ranging in size from 0.25 to 0.70 m, The feature is collapsed in some areas. generally where smaller rocks have been utilized, and is in fair condition, 45 Eigure 12: PIi n griph {,1'Sue {)59I Ecaturw 1 Lo kung NtII117L'usL. 4(, Eiiii 13: I'l•oi.,:!nt,,-01 it.: `7,L? ! 41 er AM& • _ ;migl Figure 14: Photograph of Site 3059 [ Feature 3 Looking Northeast. 48 Ii-igurG 15: PIitrt{r r:31ih „1'4iti 74{}501 hh:9ture 4 I.tiikiri SiriItlaeavt. 49 Figure 16: Photograph d' Site 30591 Feature 5 Looking South. 50 Feature 6 is a roughly rectangular terrace located in the northeast corner of the site (Figure I7). The terrace is constructed along the northeast side of the central rock alignment. The terrace is approximately 6.1 m in lciigth (N/'S) by 3.2 m wide, with a maxiinum height of 0,55 m. It is constructed of angular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders, some as Targe as 0.50 m. The feature is collapsed in some areas and is in fair condition. All of the terrace and planting features at Site 30591 are constructed of roughly piled rock, There is no formal stacking or facing evident in the feature construction. There were no cultural remains identified on the ground surface at the site. There is a fair amount of bulldozer pushed rock piled along the nrauka (east) side of the site. Shovel Probe Testing Three shovel probes (SP) were excavated at Site 30591. The shovel probes were excavated within the soil area of Feature 2, Feature 4 and Feature 5 terraces. The shovel probes were dug to depths ranging from 6.0 to 32.0 curbs, and terminated on bedrock or large basalt rocks (Table 5). Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of Layer I (0-13 cmbs) loose (1 OYR312) dark brown fine sandy silt loam overlying Layer II (13-32 cmbs) soft (1OYR •4) dark yellowish brown line sandy silt. A single fragment of sea urchin spine was identified in SP -1 and was not collected. SP -2 and SP -3 did not contain cultural material, 1 able 6: Site 30591 Shovel Probe Results. Feature SIM Depth tend Layers BOE ,artifacts 1 1 0 - 32 cin l & 11 Basalt Itcnck Urchin Spine Fra rnent 0 - 6 cm 1 Basalt Rock - 5 3 0 - 15 cru I & II Basalt Rock The piled rock construction crl'the site and the form ot'the terrace features suggest the site was constructed to retain soil for agricultural purposes, The lack of cultural material On the ground surface and the small amount of cultural material recovered from the shovel probes at Site 30591 supports the inteTretation that the site consists of agricultural planting. terraces and a small planting feature. Site 30591 has been slightly impacted by modern bulldozing, is partially collapsed in places. and is in fair to good condition. No farther work is recommended at the site. 51 Figure 17: Photograph of Site 3059t feature 6 Looking North. 5? SITE 30592 Railroad Berm FUNCTION: Transportation AGE: Historic Era. DIMENSIONS: 265.0 m (SE/NW) by 2.50 nt by 1.5 rn max. height CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: Modern Trash Debris EXCAVATION: None DESCR IPTION: Site 30592 is an Historic era railroad berm located along the eastern boundary of the project area (sec Figur: 10). The railroad benn is approximately 265.0 rn in length (SEN/W) and 2.5 rn wide within the project area, continuing north and south beyond the project area limits, The railroad bed is a level dirt and rock surface, and the berm is located along the west side of the railroad bed. The berm is a retaininu wall constructed of small boulders and large cobbles stacked up to nine courses high (Figure 18). The berm is well faced with fairly tightly fitted natural rock. The rock has riot been worked prior to stacking. The berm face slopes slightly toward the east as it approaches the top to prevent collapse. "fix- surf ice of the railroad bed has been bulldozed in the fairly recent past. likely cl«rir�t con - truction of the homes along the east edge of the project area property. Portions of the berm are partially collapsed, There is a fair amount of modern construction debris and refuse along the course of the railroad bed. The railroad bears is in good condition. SITE 30593 Lava Tube FUNCTION: Burial AGE: Pre -Contact to Early Post -Contact Era DIMENSIONS: 60.0 n7 (E/W) by 9.0 m by 0.95 m in max. height CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30593 is a Lava tube located at 610 11 amsl along the central western portion of the project area. immediately east of the project area bouridary (see Figure 10). The site is situated on a western facing slope, among koa Jtaole and tree!-, with Guinea grass round cover. 53 Figure 1X: Photograph of Sire 10 92 Looking Enaa. The skeletal remains of a single individual were identified in a lava tube near the makcri (west) boundary of the project area. The lava tube can be accessed through two openings, one at the inukui end of the lava tub,: .:yid a second, larger opening approximately 20.0 meters marnka (east) of the nrnikai opening (Figure 19). The lava tube continues east 15.0 meters and east-southeast 25.0 to 30.0 meters from the mariku opening. A second tube, connecting to the east-southeast tube, continues west-southwest 30.0 meters. The in kai entrance is an approximately 0.9 in long (F/W) by 0,7 to wide hole in the exposed jkthoeho' ground surface. The floor of the lava tube is 0.5 to 0.9 cin below the opening and is primarily bare lava with deposits of natural pebbles, small cobbles, and fine sediment washed into the tube from the opening and a second point in the tube approximately 6.0 m east of the opening. The tube slopes gently upward in an easterly direction. Sediment from a collapsed point 6.0 meters into the tube covers the lava tube floor in thicker deposits nearer to the point of collapse. The distal end of a human femur, talus, metatarsal. and phalange were identified an the surface of the lava tube floor below the makai opening. The skeletal elements were small in size and were deteriorated, making positive identification difficult, The ilium of a small human pelvis was identified protruding from the sediment along the south mall of the lava tube, approximately 5.0 n1 auk of' the aur4-ai opening. Sediment was cleared in small increments to expose one half of a pelvis_ Half of the ilium had deteriorated and was no longer present on the pelvis. More sediment (4.0 to 8.0 cin in thickness) was removed to expose additional human skeletal elements Located within close proximity to the pelvis. These included lumbar. thoracic. and cervical vertebrae; ribs; both clavicles and shoulder blades: the Icii ulna and radius; several phalanges; and two incisors and a molar. The other half of the pelvis: cranium, mandible,. other long bones. and remaining skeletal elements were not located in the limited removal of sediment. if these skeletal elements are buried beneath the sediment oi'i the floor of the lava tube. they 'nay no longer be articulated with the identified skeletal elemnents. It is possible that they have moved dov,Ti slope Or tlic 171 .mar burial, This is likely, as a calcaneus. tarsals. and metatarsals were identified during a second, more thorough inspection of the lava. tube floor under the makui opening—a distance of 5.0 m down slope of the burial location. At 5 K E l . • - In Situ Birriitl p - Tubi. (paving (till) - Height (cm) - Skeletal EI4mints Roof Fu11 A - Slope II 3 Ii '1 12 1-I N mete r. Figure 19: Site 311593 Plan View Sketch Map. 56 least a portion of the femur and several foot bones have moved down slope of the original burial location. Raised on the limited removal of sediment from the skeletal elements, the burial is of a single individual in a supine position, arms at sides, with head located mauka (east) and feet makai. The size of the skeletal elements indicates a young adult of small stature or a subadult. The skeletal elements were fairly deteriorated so that ser and age could not be definitively ascertained. The burial appears to be only slightly altered by rainwater runoff flowing through the lava tube and is in good condition. Site 30593 is recommended For preservation. SITE 30594 FUNCTION: AGE: D IMEN S IONS: CONDITION: INTEGRITY: SURFACE ARTIFACTS: EXCAVATION: Agricultural Complex Agri cult ure°. Historic Era 20.0 rn (E/W) by 17.0 m by 0.70 rn in max. height Good Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials Heavy gauge wire, golf balls Shovel Probe Tcstirg (SP -I. SP -2) I)ESCKIPI lt:)N: Site 30594 is an agricultural complex located at 600 ft a.rnsl approximately l 6,0 meters northwest of Site 30593, along the western project area boundary (see Figure 10). The site is situated on a west facing slope, among ! oa hat* and trees with Guinea grass ground cover. The site is in an area of broken bedrock suggestive of an large outcrop or collapsed lava lube. The rock is mostly angular and slabby. though there are also subangular rocks at the site. The complex is six narrow terraces (Features 1 through 6) constructed on a moderately steep west facing slope (Figure 20). The site is approximately 20.0 rn in length (EV) by 17.0 rn wide, with a maximum height of 0.70 m. Features 1 through 4 are roughly parallel and are situated with their long axis oriented northisauth. Feature 1 is the uPpenriost terrace along the east side of the site. Feature 5 and Feature 6 are smaller terraces oriented northwest/southeast and are down slope of Features 1 through 4. along the west side of the site. 57 r• FEslI lir yid A TI... 040 •111111, 'FP Phi - 1 411:Mt a• a*17. ro�� la 01 SII MY I, 10 lio • % . Mi AC). 4r4.�r IL 111Nm 11110-7e K.. Wei,*r dr S • ' . 4. R • r I. i *gib INC ir- R Y 1: III 17_471 Ikl 1 IR 10 a• 4 L I k(1114110 '4 5 I I IC!){ 'II Fki. n;krll RAI IIIR LL►I:i{ Figure 20: Site 0594 Plan Viers Map. Feature I is a roughly rectangular soil killed terrace on the east side of the site (Figure 21). It is approximately 10.0 rn long by 1. m 1.vide, with a maximum Height of 0.81 m. There is a retaining wall constructed of piled and stacked angular and subangular small boulders and cobbles along the west side of the level soil terrace. There is no formal facing evident in the retaining wall construction. There is another pile of rock muuka (east) of the soil filled terrace of Feature 1, constructed of piled angular and sub angular basalt cobbles and boulders, 'There is no formal facing evident in the rock pile. Tlie retaining wall to the west and the rock pile to the east are partially collapsed in some areas. It looks as though Feature I has been impacted by bulldozing, especially along the north side of the feature. Feature 1 is in fair condition. Feature 2 is a linear soil filled terrace located west of Feature 1 (Figure 22). The terrace retaining wall trends NUS, curving down slope at its northern terminus. 11 is approximately 14.0 m in length by 1.20 m wide, with a maximum (height of 0.70 in. The retaining wall of the terrace is constructed of piled angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders ranging in size from 0.40 to 0.75 m. There is no formal facing evidertt in the terrace construction, It looks as though. Feature 1 has been impacted by bulldozing. esp, i tll alon4 1E7e north side of the feature. The retaining wall is collapsed in some areas Lind is in fair condition. Feature 3 is a linear soil filled terrace situated down slope, to the west, of Feature 2 (Figure 23). The terrace retaining wall trends N/S. It is approximately 14.0 min length and 1.40 m wide, with Ei maximum height of 0.70 m. It is constructed of piled angular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders, which range in size from 0.40 to 0.75 m. There is no formal facing evident in the terrace construction. The retaining wall is collapsed in some areas and is in fair condition. Feature 4 is a rectangular rock and soil filled terrace located on the south end of Feature 3. The terrace retaining wall trends NS and is approximately 7.0 m in length by 2.90 m wide. with a maximum height of 0.70 rn. It is constructed of piled angular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders, which range in size from 0.40 to 0.75 rn throu€ihout the southern portion of the feature, The northern portion is composed of larger rock, incorporating what are likely in sitar boulders that continue south to form portions of the soil filled terrace. The level soil filled terrace at the south 59 Fi21: of Site 30594 F ature 1 on La and 1 t atur4 2 on Right Looking South_ (k0 i'YrllIT 22: I}lupi,,:'i.;1,h.. of Sire 31594 Feature 1 in Top LA. Feature 2 at Center, Feiiture 3 at Fur Right.. Looking South. G1 l i urr 2:1: Photograph of Site ?{)594 Feature 2 ei I.tiit :s:id Feature 3 on Hight Looking South. fs� end of the feature is approximately 5.0 min lenizth and 4.0 m wide, with a maximum height of0.82 ni. and contains rock. There is no formal facing evident in the terrace construction. The feature is collapsed in some areas and is in fair condition. Feature 5 is a soil filled terracelenclosure situated down slope, to the west, of Feature 4 (Figure 24). .lt trends NW/SE, and is roughly oval. 1t is approximately 5.5 m in length by 3.40171 wide, with a maximum height of 0.60 m, It is constructed of piled and stacked angular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders. The rock is stacked up to four courses high on bedrock along the westernmost perimeter of the feature. The eastern and southeastern portions of the feature incorporate naturally occurring small boulders into the construction. There is no formal facing evident in the terrace construction, Feature 5 is collapsed in some areas and is in fair condition. Feature 6 is a level soil filled terracc situated clown slope, to the west, of Feature 5 (Figure 25). The terrace retaining wall trends NW/SE curving up slope at either end. It is approximately 4.5 m in length by 1.0 m wide, with a maximum height of 0.R0 m. It is constructed of angular and sub angular basalt cobbles and small boulders, which are stacked up to three courses high along the westernmost perimeter. There is some very rough facing evident in the terrace construction. The retaining wall is collapsed in some {ireilw kind is in fair condition. A strand of heavy gauge wire and two golf balls were encountered on the ground surface at the site. Shovel Probe Testing A total of two shovel probes were excavated within Site 30594 to determine site function and age, The shovel probes were excavated approximately 11.0 m from one another within the soil area of Feature 2 terrace (SP -1) and Feature 6 terrane (SP -2). The shovel probes were dug to depths ranging from 26.0 to 55.0 ctnbs and terminated on bedrock or large basalt rocks (Table 6). Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of three natural strati;raphic layers: Layer i (0-12 crabs) loose dark brown (10YR3'2) fine sandy silt loam, Layer 11(12-38 cmbs) soft brown (10YR413) sandy silt, and Layer I1I (38-55 curbs) soft dark yellowish brown ( IOYR4i4) fine sandy silt. There were no cultural materials recovered from the shovel probes. 63 Figure. 24: Photograph 1.71-1' Site 30594 Fcaturc 5 Lookrr.2. ri (.4 figure 25: J'liuttypd ,d ul Sae 3U"1; : ] %.'.1.1.1..114 r.i ] ,n .L1JUILJ int] Fetaute 5 in l3rxc;kgruutaJL Loukaug Northeast, G5 Table 7: Site 30594 Shovel Prole Results. SP# Depth (cm) Layers BOE Artifacts 1 0 -55 cin I, II. III Basalt Dock - 2 0 - 26 cm I & II Basalt Rock - The terraces at Site 30594 are fairly crudely constructed and were not constructed with much formal stacking or facing. The Feature 1 through Feature 4 retaining walls resemble linear piles of rock left along the outside edges of a bulldozer transect. The rock appears to be from a large c oatcentration o1"naturally occurring bedrock on the ground surface, possibly the remains of a collapsed lava tube. However, the features also appear as though they could Have leen constructed as agricultural terraces, especially Feature 5 and Feature 6. Subsurface testing did not recover any cultural material. Site 30594 is interpreted as a pre --Contact era to Historic era agricultural site. The site has been slightly altered by cattle ranching and agricultural actin itics. is in fair condition and no further work is recommended. SITE 30595 Rock Wall FUNCTION: Cattle Ranching AGE: Historic Era DIM ENSIONS: 900 rn (EJW) by I.10 rn by 1.31m in max. height CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Possesses ]ntegrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: Norte EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30595 is the remains of an Historic era wall located between 630 and 690 ft arnsl within the northern portion of the project area (see Figure 10), The wall trends maukaimakai and is located on west sloping land with kukui nut and koa haole trees and Guinea grass ground cover. The wall has been breach by bulldozing in several places and portions ofthc wall continue to the east, beyond the project area. The wall is constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders, incorporating boulders as large as 0.60 m at the base (Figure 26). It is biifaced and cobble core filled (Figure 27). The wall is approximately 90.0 m in length (ENV) 'within the project {area. by 1.10 m wide, with a maximum height of 1.31 m. The wall bisects the property cast to west, terminating to the cast at the Site 30592 railroad berm. where it is attached to the south face of the berm. continuing to the west beyond the 66 Figure 26; Photograph of Site :1)595 Wall Looking North. 67 Figure 27: Photograph of Site 20-395 Wall Collapse Slim., irig Coh111.2 Coro 1 11. Looking North_ property boundary. A portion of the eastern wall segment, approximately 18.0 m, constitutes the southern boundary of Site 30602 enclosure. There is a 1.0 in breach in the wall for access to the enclosure. There was no cultural material on the ground surface at the site. Site 30595 is a Historic era wall that has been altered by bulldozing, is partially collapsed in places, and is in fair condition. No further work is recommended at Site 30595. SITE 30596 Hearth FUNCTION: Possible Cooking AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 2.50 m (FAV) by 2.10 m by 0.85 m in max. height CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: Test Unit (TU -1) DESCRIPTION: Site 30596 is a hearth located within the northwestern comer of the project area (see Figure 10). The hearth is situated on an exposed bedrock outcrop in a level area, approximately 10.0 east of the top ot'ti shallow west facing slope. I -here are kvu huoie and kukut nut trees with Guinea grass ground cover throughout [he area. The hearth is constructed on a narrow finger of hollow p hoeh e. The top of the small pW e "tube" is broken open in places. The hearth is constructed within an opening in the top of the small "tube." 1t is constructed of cobble and small boulder size hoi hoe slabs positioned in a roughly rectangular configuration around the opening (Figure 28 and Figure 29). The hearth is approximately 2.50 m in length (EiNV) and 2.10 m wide, with a maximum height of 0.85 m. There was no cultural material identified on the ground surface at the site. A 1.0 TY! by 0.5 ni test -unit (TV -1) was excavated in the hearth to determine feature function and age. TU -1 was excavated as two stratifraphic layers (Layer I and Layer 1I) and terminated on bedrock at 28 crribs (Figure 30)_ 69 11 kr ii NI 11.B K 11 1 (Di It -4AiIi FLAT PAHOEHOE SLAB 020 41 4 In ,ri 44i11 \ 1 0 1#1 - ROC - CM ABOVE 1,10 0111ND }F.%CL - 11%110E110F SLABS PLACED 0\ ENDS Figure 28: Si.te 30596 Man icv 70 I1giere 29: !'hoto =nips of Sit< 30596 looking W!.1_ 71 I`I(I�III F'.I1t}Ellt1F= 641.'4111 U 211 .10 60 k Nil - R0( h 111 - IAN I k 11 - VERY DARK CHM iw11 I1I ) (NA.k -t!.IIi' I N1I,1 - 11411,19 1:11- HF F)ROf K Figure 30: Site 30596 TL -1 North Profile. 7? Layer I (0-20 crnbs) was loose angular and subangular cobbles and small boulders removed from the center of the hearth. The base of Layer 1 was roughly even with the top of Layer 11 (Figure 31). Layer 11 (20-40 cmbs) was loose (10YR312) very dark grayish brown fine sandy silt with less than 5% gravels and cobbles, and roughly 1% fine rootlets. Layer 11 terminated on bedrock (Figure 32). A small amount of midden (marine shell, bird bone, rodent bone, and burnt kukui nut shell) and charred material was recovered from TU -1, Layer] (see Appendix A ), Based on the formal construction of the hearth, it is interpreted as a Historic era fire feature. The hearth appears to be unaltered, is in good condition and no further work is recommended at Site 305%. SITE 30597 Rock Wall FUNCTION: Cattle Ranching AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 145.0 [11 (EiW) by 0.90 m by L30 m in max.. height CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30597 is an historic era rock wall located between 590 and 690 ams] alone the southern boundary of the project area (see Figure 10). The rrrarrkrlmakai wall is constructed along the north side of a seasonal gulch and marks the property boundary. There are koa haole and kukui nut trees with Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. The wall is constructed of stacked angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders, incorporating small boulders as large as 0.50 rte at the base (Figure 33). It is bifaced and cobble core filled. The rock wall is approximately 145.0 m long (E/W) where it crosses the project area. by 0.90 m wide, with a maximum height of 1.30 rn. The east terminus of the wall is at the east end of the project area. The wall continues downhill beyond the west property boundary. Portions of the wall are no longer present, and may have been removed by flood events. Site 30597 is an Historic era ranch wall, and although it has collapsed in some areas. it is generally in fair condition. There were no cultural remains encountered on the ground surface at the site. Site 30597 appears to be slightly altered, is in fair condition and no further work is recommended, 73 Fit;un-g: 31: PliriLagraph of Site 1}596 TU -I Top of Layer 11. Looking; West. 74 Figure 32: Photograph of Site 30596 TU -1 Raw of Excavation, I .k)oki rig West. 75 Figure 33: Pliotogmph or Site 30597 Wall with CiuIch in Background. Looking South. SITE 30598 Wall FUNCTION: Agriculture( Ranching AGE: Pre -Contact Era to Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 110.0 m (N.S) by L30 m by 0.80 rn in max. height CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None F XCAVATION: None DI.Sc RIPTION: Site 30598 is a segment ora rock wall located between 600 and 6190 [lams} in the southern portion of the project area (see Figure 10). There are koa haole and lailaii nut trees with Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. The wall is constructed of piled and stacked angular and subangular basalt small boulders, incorporating= small boulders as large as 0.50 m throughout (Figure 34). The wall is roughly faced and is not cobble core filled. The rock wall is approximately 110.0 m long (E!W) where it crosses the project area, by 0.90 in wide, with a maximum height of 1.30 m. The east terminus of the wall is along the east property boundary. The wall continues west beyond the west property boundary. The Well} has been impacted by bulldozing and portions of the wall are rio lon{qer present. Site 30598 is a pit -Contact era agricultural wall or an Historic era ranch wall. and although it is collapsed in some areas, it is generally in fair condition, There were no cultural remains encountered an the ground surface. at the site. Ne., fur her work is recommended at Site 30598, SITE 30599 Platform with Enclosure FUNCTION: Agricultural AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 8.0 m (NW/SE) by 6.50 m by L40 m in max, height CONDITION: Fair, Tightly Altered INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: Historic glass and metal EXCAVATION: Shovel Probe Testing (SP- t , SP -2); Test Unit (TU -1) DESCRIPTION: Site 30599 is an enclosed platform located at 670 ft ams} within the central eastern portion of the project urea (see Figure 10). 1t is situated on a gentle west facing slope 20 meters west of Site 30592 railroad benn, There are koa haale trees and Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. 77 Iiire.4! of Site 3059810,-allOverviiw Lotikllpz\\c L. 78 Site 30599 is a platform (Feature 1) and a roughly rectangular enclosure (Feature 2.) measuring 8.0 rn long (NW/SE) by 6.50 m wide (Figure 35). The Feature I plathrm is located at the north end of the site and the Feature 2 enclosure extend.: south from the platform. The Feature 1 platform is approximately 2.0 m long (MS) and 1.8 m wide, with a maximum height of 1.40 m. it is constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders stacked three to four courses high (Figure 36). The outer perimeter of the platform is constructed with larger rocks (small boulder slabs) stacked on their flat sides with their longest edge facing the outer edge of the platform. The interior of the platform is constructed of smaller subangular rocks placed inside the larger perimeter rocks. The north and east sides of the platform are well faced. The west side of the platform is collapsed (Figure 37). The feature construction is similar to Historic era rock clearing mounds and platforms documented in Kona and other places on Hawai'i Island. A large water worn cobble, corrugated metal roofing, and bottle glass fragments were identified on the Feature 1 plat f wri. The Feature 2 enclosure is rectangular and measured 5.10 m long (NW/SE) by 4.81 m wide, with a maximum height of 0,35 m. The enclosure walls are constructed of piled small boulders and cobbles, with some roughly stacked, one to two courses wide and one to three course high (Figure 38). The enclosure opens to the. south. The interior or the enclosure is level soil. A screw top jar, a Bakelite pot, bottle glass fragments, and two pieces of sheet metal were encountered on the surface at the site (Figure 39). Two shovel probes and a test -unit (TU -1) were excavated at Site 30599 to determine the function and the age of the two features. Shovel Probe Testing Two shovel probes were excavated in the level soil interior of Feature 2. The shovel probes were excavated approximately 4.2 m from one another within the enclosure. They were excavated to depths ranging from 34.0 to 37.0 cribs and terminating on bedrock or large basalt rocks (Table 7). 79 "1k till HI hi 1 ;l r Figure 35: Sits ;ft)( P]wi Vie 'Map. go Figure 36: Photograph of Site 305991 Feature 1 Platform with Top Cleared of Debris Showing Stacked Stone Construction. Looking West_ 81 Figure 37: Photograph of Site 10599 Feature 1 Platform Showing We t Side 0/1lapsc. Looking UN - 82 Figure 38.T. Photo, Situ )0599 Few.Lin:2 Nriclosuri2 Look ir:g. 83 Figure 39_ Photograph of Surface Artifacts 0011.2 [gid _r. ti ite 30599_ 84 Table 8: Site 30599 Shovel Probe Results. SP* Depth (cm) Layers BOL Artifacts 0 - 34 cin I 84 II Basalt Rink Glass and metal fragments 2 0 - 37 cm I & II Basalt Rack Donkey shoe. Mass, metal and plastic fragments Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of Layer 1 (0-14 cmbs) loose dark brown (I0YR3/2) fine sandy silt loam overlying Layer 11 (14-37 crabs) soft dark yellowish brown (10YR4i4) fine sandy silt. SP -1 contained a single bottle glass fragment, three pane Mass fragments. and four rusted metal fragments. SP -2 contained a donkey shoe, a single piece amethyst bottle glass, a piece of plastic. and ten rusted metal fragments, tree of which are nail fragments. Artifacts recovered from SP -1 and SP -2 were not collected, TU -1 TU -1 was a 1.0 m by 1.0 ret test -unit excavated in the center of the platform (ROC Figure 35). TU -1 was excavated as two natural stratigraaphic layers to a maximum depth of I.45 crn below the top surface of the platform and terminated on bedrock (F iPiii-c 40). Layer 1 (0-90 curbs) was loose cobbles and small boulders mixed with "0" Horizon organic detritus. A small amount of rusted metal fragments and modern bottle glass were recovered from Layer 1. Layer 11(90-145 cinbs) was loose 10YR3/4 dark yellowish brown sandy silt, cobbles and small boulders, and loose bedrock slabs. A small amount of rusted metal fragments, a metal twist top bottle cap, a wire nail, and modern brown and dear bottle glass were recovered from Layer [1 (see Appendix A). Slabs o1 bedrock were also removed from the base of TU -1. TU -1 terminated on bedrock (Figure 41). Site 30599 is interpreted as an Historic era to Modern era commercial a-iculture and ranching work area. Base on the platform construction, surface artifacts at the site, and the metal and glass recovered From TU -1. the site l as likely constructed in the mid 1900s and was likely used for ranching and•or comnllcrci,ii agricultural activities through the 1960s. Site 30599 is slightly altered (Feature 1 partial collapse) and is in fair condition, No further work is recommended at Site 30599. 0 20 nil 80 C 11 - ROCK LAVER 11 - IMkK YELLOWISH BRIAN q 1 f4 3,41I BILI" BI'lIDROCK. Figure 40: Site 30599 TU -I South Profile. 86 Figure 41: Photograph of Site 30599 TU -I Base of Excavation Looking East. 87 SITE 30600 FUNCTION: AGE: DIMENSIONS: CONDITION: INTEGRITY: SURFACE ARTIFACTS: EXCAVATION: DESCRIPTION: Terrace Agricultural. Historic Era. 4.0 m (E!W) by 4.30 m by 0.35m in max. height Good Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials None Shovel Probe Testing (SP -1) Site 30600 is a three -sided terrace located at 660 ft amsl approximately 35.0 meters south of Site 30599 (see Figure 10). It is situated on a gentle west facing slope with koa J tole trees and Guinea grass ground cover. The enclosure is constructed of angular and subangular basalt small boulders piled one to two courses high. and wide on the ground surface (Figure 42). It is approximately 4.0 rn in length (EI) and 3.30 m wide, with a maximum height of 0.35 m. There were no arlifa is idcntilied on the ground surface at the site. Shovel Probe Testing A single shovel probe (SP -I) was excavated within the level soil interior of Site 30100 to determine the Function and age attic terrace. The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of30.0 cmbs and terminated on hcdii ck or ,r large basalt rock. The shovel probe matrix did not contain cultural material. Based on the simple construction of the terrace, its size, and the proportionally large number of Historic era sites recorded on the project area, it is likely that Site 30600 is also an Historic era agricultural terrace. possibly associated with coffee growing. Site 30600 appears to be unaltered arid is in good condition. No further work is recommended at Site 30600. 88 Figure 42: PIi.'i,Traph of 3l}(00 Looking Sositthca,i 89 SITE 30601 FUNCTION: AGE: D IM EN S IONS: CONDITION: INTEGRITY: SURFACE ARTIFACTS: EXCAVATION: DESCRIPTION: Rock Wall REM citing Historic Era. 80.0 m (NWiSE) by L20 m by 1.50 m in max. height Good Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials None None Site 30601 is an 1 listoric era wall located between 635 and 685 tl anis] within the northern portion of the project area (see Figure 10). The wall is oriented nacaurkalmakai and is situated 10 meters north of and parallel to the Site 30595 wall (Figure 43). There are kukui nut and 'coo haole trees, and Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. The wall bisects the property east to west, and is attached to the Site F2 railroad berms to the east. The wall continues west beyond the west project area boundary (see Figure 10). The wall is approximately 80.0 m its long CE/W) where it crosses the project area by 1.20 m wide, with a maximum height of 1.50 m. 11. is constructed of stacked angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders (Figure 44). The wall is bifaced and cobble core filled and is stacked tip to seven courses high in some areas. A portion of the wall to the east, approximately 12.0 m, constitutes the northern boundary of the Site 30602 enclosure. There are sections of the wall which are reinforced with pi�-' and barbed wire fencing attached to T posts. Site 30601 is an Historic era ranch wall, appears to be unaltered, and is in good condition. No further work is recommended at Site 30601. SITE 30602 FUNCTION: AGE: DIMENSIONS: CONDITION: INTEGRITY: SURFACE ARTIFACTS: EXCAVATION: DESCRIPTION: Enclosure Ran citing. Agricultural Historic Era 23.0 m (E/W) by 16.0 m by 2.10 m in max. height Fair Possesses Integrity of Locution and Materials l listuric era bottle Shovel Probe Testing (SP -I. SP -2. SP -3, SP -4) Site 30602 is an enclosure located between 680 and 685 ft amsl within the northeastern portion of the project area (see Figure 10). It is situated on a 90 Figure 43: Site 30602 Platy View map Showing Portions of Site 30592. Site 3[1595. mid Site 30601. Hort 44 PhuLograph of SILL' Ruck Wail Lucking 92 gentle maarlkalmaakar slope, within close proxirnity to the eastern project area boundary. There are koa haute trees with Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. The enclosure is formed by utilizing and modifying several existing walls (see Figure 43). 1.1 is bounded to the east by a 16.0 in section of Site 30592 railroad berm, to the north by a 21.0 m section of Site 30601 wall, to the south by a 23.0 m section of Site 30595 wall (Figure 45) and to the west by a wall which spans the distance between Site 30601 and Site 30595. aipproximately 10.0 tn. The Site 30602 wall is constructed of stacked angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders. The western boundary wall of the enclosure varies in condition from good to almost nonexistent, with only the southernmost portion of the wall remaining. The intact wall segment is approximately 3.30 rn in length and 0.90 m wide, with a maximum height of L30 rn. There is a aqua colored bottle at the top of the wall segment (Figure 46). All other portions of the Site 30602 west wall have been altered to varying degrees. The mid section is completely gone with the exception of a few rocks, two of which remain in place. A section of Site 30595 wall has been removed to create an entrance to Site 30602 enclosure interior. Exposed bedrock is visible within in the northeastern portion of the enclosure interior, encompassing approximately one third of the total area. There is a section ofgalvanized pipe near the base of Site 30592 railroad berrtt. l here is loose rock from collapsed portions of wall. which lie within the interior, The Site 30592 railroad berm portion of the enclosure to the cast predates the other walls that forth the enclosure and the western enclosure boundary wall is the most recently constructed, Shovel Probe Testing A line of four shovel probes spaced roughly 3.0 meters apart were excavated within the level soil interior of the enclosure. The shovel probe line extended from the southwest corner, toward the northeast corner, terminating midw ay al a bedrock outcrop. The shovel probes were excavated to depths ranging from 27.0 to 60.0 crabs and terminated on bedrock or Targe basalt rocks (Table 9). 93 I lit of Site 30602 West Wall (Left)and Site 30595 Wall (Right) Looking East. 94 Figure 46: Pholoeraph of Site 30602 Enclosure Wall and Bottle. 95 Table 9. Site 30602 Shuvei Probe Results. SPti Depth (cm) Layers BOE Artifacts 1 0 - 60 cm 1. I1. 111 Basalt Rock Kukfti Nus Shell 2 0 - 60 ern 1. 11, 11.1 Basalt Rock Aukrir Nut Shell 3 0 - 47 cm L I1, AI Basalt Rock - 4 0 - 27 cm 1 & 1I Basalt Bedrock - Two of the four shovel probes contained unburned kukrrr nut shell. No other cultural material was recovered from the shovel probes. There were no cultural remains encountered on the ground surface at the site, with the exception of the bottle and the section al'galvanircc3 pilar_ Based on the construction style and the fact that the feature is constructed onto the Site 30592 railroad berm, Site 30602 is interpreted as an Historic era enclosure associated with ranching and commercial agriculture. The feature wall is partially collapsed and is in fair condition. No further work is recuntmcncicd at Site 30602. SITE 30603 Enclosure FUNCTION: Ranching/Agricultural AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 35.0 m (NE/SW) by 24.0 m by 1.45 m m max. height CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: Shovel Probe Testing (SP -1, SP -2) DESCRIPTION: Site 30603 is an L -shape enclosure (fTcaturc I 1 and three linear terraces (Feature 2, 3. and 4) located between 680 and ('5 11 :titisl immediately west of Site 30602 (see Figure 10). It is situated on a gentle west facing slope among kat wale trees with Guinea grass ground cover. The L -shape enclosure is eonstnrc•ted onto the south side of the Site 30595 rock wall and is approximately 35,0 nn long (NE/SW) by 24.0 m wide (Figure 47), The enclosure walls are roughly 66.0 in long by LO m wide with at maximum height of 1.45 tn. The walls are constructed of stacked angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders and is bifaced and cobble core filled (Figures 48.49. and 50). 96 SITE 3054)5 WALL Pal" 0 HOUK _ 'MILL - 111;1CW (ROI NI) I'. C' Figure 47: Site }(1,03 Plan View Map. 97 Fi}!urr 48: Plioitio-Lp!i i,i SRC .41101.; 4 rtirliu LtiL Comer or i':n.:lc,;uri I— acture 1. Looking NoriI vcs . 9X Hi}!urr 49: Phutazrap!i ofSue 30603 Western South Wall of1711C +Auer Feature 1, Looking Souihwe t_ 99 Figure 50: Photograph of Site 30603 Middle Corner of Enclosure Feature I , Looking South.. 100 A roughly 35.0 m segment, of the Site 30595 rock wall forms the north boundary of the enclosure ( Figure 511. The eastern enclosure wall segment is approximately 24.0 m long (NW SW) and is mostly collapsed. Portions of the southern and western wall segments have also collapsed.. although the easternmost segment of the southern wall is still intact. There are three linear agricultural terraces (Features 2. 3, and 4) within the southeast corner of the enclosure (Figure 52 and Figure 53). The terraces are oriented N WISE within the rocky soil interior of the enclosure, Feature 2 is furthest makui (west) and Feature 4 is furthest mania (east),. The Feature 2 retaining wall is approximately 4.0 m in length and 1.0 rn wide, with a maximum height of 0.60 m. The Feature 3 retaining wall is approximately 6.0 nn in length and 0.50 rn wide, with a maximum height of 0.61) m. The Feature 4 retaining wall is a more substantial construct than the others. It is approximately 7,0 m in length and 1.0 m wide, with a maximum height /40.90 m. No cultural material was identified on the ground surface at the site. Shovel Probe Testing, Two shovel probes were excavated within the level soil surfaces of terraces Feature 2 (SP -1) and Feature 3 (SP -2) ro determine ftinetion and age. The shovel probes were excavated approximately 4.0 in apart, were dug to depths ranging from 30.0 to 36.0 curbs, and terminated on bedrock or large basalt rocks (Table 9). Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of Layer 1 (0-13 cmbs) loose dark brown (IOYR3/2) fine sandy silt loam overlying Layer ll (13-36 cmbs) soft dark yellowish brown (10YR414) fine sandy silt. A small amount of unburned kukul nut shell was recovered from SP -2. Table 10: Site 30603 Shovel Probe Results. SPO Depth (cm) Lavers BOE Artifacts 1 0 - 30 cin 1 NI 11 Basalt Rock - ? {1 - >ti em I & [1 Basalt Rock l ukrui'Ntot Shell 101 Figure 51 : Phi F<.p-,717 1 +ii tiiiw 3115'i5 \Vail Pori ion «1 Site 30603 Enclosure Feature 1, Looking North. 102 I.r'uro.2: Photograph ofSite3O'J31'caLiirwcrr1L4 Ls,;,l.;ii_ 4t,t,Gkcatii. Figure 53: Photograph of Site 30603 Feature 2 Tern -Ice (Center} and Feature Retaining Wall (Left), Looking Southeast 104 Based on (he construction style of the enclosure and the fact that the enclosure walls are constructed onto the Site 30595 wall, and the Site 30595 wall is constructed onto the Site 30592 railroad berm, Site 30603 is interpreted as an Historic era enclosure associated with agriculture and ranching. Site 30003 has been impacted by modern land clearing activities and is in fair condition. No further work is recommended at Site 30603. SITE 30604 Agricultural Complex FUNCTION: Agricultural AGE: Pre -Contact Era to Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 12.0 m (NW/SE) by 5.0 m CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: Shovel Probe Testing (SP -1) DESCRIPTION: Site 30604 is an agicultural complex located at 675 ft amsl 2.0 meters south of Site 30602 (see Figure 10). It is situated on a gentle west facing slope with /wry haote trees and Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. Site 30604 is a planting feature (Feature 1) and three terraces (Features 2, 3, and Feature 4) (Figure 54). Feature 1 is a possible oval planting feature located in the southeast comer of the site. It is constructed cif angular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled one to two courses high and two to three courses wide on the ground surface (Figure 55). The feature is approximately 2.50 m in length (E/W) and 2.10 m wide, with a maximum height of 0.60 m. There were no cultural remains on the ground surface at Feature 1, Future 2 is a small two-sided terrace located along the northwest edge of Feature 1. The terrace is 2.70 long (NWiSE) by 1.5 m wide. The terrace retaining wall is 2.70 m long by 0.60 m wide and is 0.62 m in maximum height above the ground surface to the southwest. It is constructed of basalt cobbles and small boulders piled up to three courses high on the ground surface (Figure 56). There were no cultural remains ort the ground surface at Feature 2. 105 Ft• hit iil)( h - 4i.['), Figure 54: Site 30604 Plaii View Map. 106 Figure 55: Photograph of Site 30504 Feature 1 Looking Southwest. 107 Figure 56: Phottkgiipii if Site 30644 Feature 2 Looking Southeast. 103 Feature 3 is a linear ferrate located along the northwest side of Feature 2. The terrace is 4.80 long {NW/SE) by 3.0 m wide. The terrace retaining wall is 2.70 m long by 1.0 m k•ide and is 0.85 m in maximum height above the ground surface to the southwest. It is constructed of basalt cobbles and small boulders piled up to three courses high on the ground surface (Figure 57). A section of galvanized pipe is situated along the easternmost portion of the terrace. There were no cultural remains identified at Feature 3. Shoved Probe Testing A shovel probe (SP -1) was excavated within the level soil of the Feature 3 terrace to determine I?ueaction and age. SP -1 was excavated to a depth of 50.0 crnbs and. terminated on bedrock or a large basalt rock. Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of three natural stratigraphic layers: Layer 1(0-14 crabs) loose dark brown (10YR3/2) fine sandy silt loam, Layer [1 (14-41 cribs) soft brown (1OYR4/3) sandy silt, and Layer III (41-50 crnbs) soft dark yellowish brawn (10YR4/4) fine sandy silt. A railroad spike, a wire nail, and a volcanic -glass flake were recovered from SP -1 (Figure 58). The volcanic -glass flake was collected and the other artifacts were left at the site. Feature 4 is a two-sided terrace located along the north edge of Feature 1. The terrace is approximately 2.25 m long (NE/SW) by 2.0 m wide, and is 0.80 m to maximum height. It is constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders plied oii the ground surface (Figure 59),. There is single strand wire within the western portion of the site. It is possible that Site 30604 is a pre -Contact to early post -Contact era agricultural site. The single volcanic -glass flake suggests that area might have been used for agricultural and resource gathering. However, the proximity of Site 30604 to Site 30602 and the presence of the railroad spike and wirc nail suggest that Site 30604 was definitely used during the Historic era. It is very likely that Site 30604 was an Historic era agricultural site associated with sugarcane or coffee growing. 109 Figure 57: Photograph of Site 3O&4 Feature 3 Looking Southeast. 110 Figure 58: Photograph or Anti#'acts Recovered from Site 30(304, Feature 3. SP -I. 111 11...±arc 59: Etholograph of I I 1 L. SITE 30605 Rock Wall FUNCTION: REM citing AGE: Historic Era. DIMENSIONS: 90. m (E!W) by 0.75 m by 1.0 m in max. height CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30605 is an Historic era wall located between 600 and 685 ti amsl through the center of the project area (sec Figure I 0). The wall trends maukalmakai across the west facing slope. There are kukari nut and kora haoie trees with Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. The will bisects the property east to west, terminating to the east near the Site 30592 railroad berth and continuing to the west beyond the project area boundary. The wall is constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders, incorporating some as large as 0.50 m (Figure 60). The wall is approximately 90.0 m long (E/W) where it crosses the project area by 0.75 m wide, with a maximum height of 1.0 tn. It is a bifaced, cobble core filled wall and is stacked up to five courses in height. The condition of the wall diminishes near its western terminus where it has collapsed.. There were no cultural rcrnaimi encountered within the area of the site, Site 30605 has been impacted by modern land clearing activities. is partially collapsed in places. and is in good condition. No further work is recommended for Site 30603. 113 Figure 60: Photograph of Site. 1{}6t15 \\ L 111.E oking Northeast, 114 SITE 30606 Rack Wall FUNCTION: RLunching.Agricultural AGE: Pre -Contact to Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 37.0 rn iNW/SE) by 1.90 m by 1.30 m in max. height CONDITION: Poor INTEGRITY: Possesses integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30606 is an 1 listoric era wall segment located at 620 'ft anisl within the southwestern portion of the project arca (see Figure 10). The wall trends northwest/southeast and is situated in an area with koa haole trees and Guinea grass ground cover. The Site 30606 rock wall segment is located between the Site 300505 wall and the Site 30597 wall, and is less formally constructed than either of the two (Figure 61). The wall is approximately 37.0 rn in length (NW/SE) and 1.90 m wide, with a maximum height of 1.30 m. Site 30606 is presently a rubble wall consisting of angular and sub angular basalt cobbles piled three to six courses high uid three to four courses wide on the ground surface. There is no formal stacking or lacing cvident in the wall construction, though it eight have been a slacked ,, E I;iced wall that has been disturbed by modern land clearing activities. The majority of the western (doxvnhill) portions of tltc wall have collapsed, with an increase in collapse in low lying areas. There were no cultural remains identified on the ground surface at the site. Site 30606 is an Historic era rock wall associated with ranching. It has been altered by modern land clearing, is mostly collapsed, and is in poor condition. 115 Figure 6l: Photograph of Site 3+1.606 Rock Wall. Looking North. 116 SITE 30607 Agricultural Complex FUNCTION: Agriculture AGE: Pre -Contact Era to Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 55.0 m (N ISE) by 27.5 CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: Shovel Probe Testing (51'-1 through SP -10) DESCRIPTION: Site 30607 is an agricultural complex located between 620 and 630 fl amsl within the southwestern portion of the project area, on a steep west facing slope (see Figure 10). There are kora 'mole trees with Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. The Site 30607 agricultural complex includes seven terraces (Feature I through Feature 7) located north of wall Site 30597, south of wall Site 30605, west of wall Site 30595 and on both sides of wall Site 30606 (Figure 62). Feature 1 is a three -sided terrace located in the northeast comer of the site. The terrace retaining wall is constructed primarily of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled up to four courses in high (Figure 63), it is approNimately 3.70 rn in length (NIS) by 1,40 m wide, with a maximum height of 1.05 m. There is no formal stacking or facing in the feature construction. There were no cultural remains on the ground surface at Feature 1. Shovel Probe Testing A shovel probe (SP -1) was excavated within the sloping soil interior of Feature 1 to determine function and age. The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of 37.0 crabs and terminated an bedrock or a large basalt rock. SP -1 stratigraphy was Layer 1(0-16 curbs) loose dark brown (10YR312) fine sandy silt loam overlying Layer 11(16-37 curbs) soft dark yellowish brown (10YR414) fine sandy silt. SP -1 contained a total of five volcanic -glass fragments and several charcoal fragments. Feature 2 is a three -sided terrace located within the central western portion of Site 30607. The terrace is situated on a west facing slope and is constructed along the west side of wall Site 30606. The northwest and southwest cornets of the terrace are curved and the terrace retaining walls are constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled on the ground surface (Figure 64). There is no fortna.l stacking 117 L.L1 LIE} -I F6' .kT1l°11f .} • .ITF3116111. "ki'IflF 11 •'. 11 1#1 -2 FF.hTI RI 1' IC511RL i s 1 I' 14ih.!H. Lt %I 1 w1 11 11H Hr 1; %I I. w111' 1041.1 C1 1.C-11 It - 11t'•111 IIrK Its. Figure 62: Site 30607 Plan View Map. 118 Figute 63: Photograph of Site )0607 l'eaLurc 1 1 LioL: I L..ist. Hort 64: Photograph of Site 30607 Feature 2 Terrace tBackgroundt and Site 305956 Wall iForegcttnd) Looking West. 120 or lacing evident in the feature construction. The terrace is approximately 10.0 min length (E \' ) and 6.0111 wide, with a maximum height of 1.10 m. There are large quantities of rock within the soil arca of the terrace. Piled rock combined with rock which has collapsed from surrounding areas (Site 30606 rubble wall and elsewhere) is approximately l .10 m in height and 2.10 m wide, dividing the surface of the terrace to form two areas. The westernmost arca is approximately 7.5 m in length (E/W) and 5.5 m wide (Figure 65). The easternmost area is an inclosed area formed by rock piled on the surface of the terrace where it abuts Site 30(06 (Figure 66). The enclosed area is approximately 5_0 m in length (NMS) and 2.5 m wide. There were no cultural remains at Feature 2. Shovel. Probe Testing Two shovel probes (SP -2 and SP -3) were excavated within the level soil interior of Feature 2 to determine feature function and age. The shovel probes were excavated approximately 4.5 m from one another, within the western area (SP -2) and the eastern area (SP -3). The shovel probes were excavated to depths ranging from 34.0 to 43.0 cmbs and terminated on bedrock or Targe basalt rocks (Table 10). Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted or three natural stratigraphic layers: Layer i (0-16 curbs) loose dark brown (10YR312) fine sandy silt loam, Layer Hi 16-37 cmbs) soft brown ( I OYR413) sandy silt, and Layer 11l (37-43 curbs) soli dark yellowish brown ( I OYR4.°4) rine sandy silt. The shovel probes did not contain cultural material. Table 11: Site 30607 Feature 2 Shovel Probe Results. SP# Depth (ern) Layers BOE Artifacts 2 0 - 43 cm 1. 11.111 Basalt Rock - 3 0 - 34 cm IS, 11 Basalt Rock - Feature 3 is three -sided terrace located north of Feature 2. The terrace is situated on a west facing slope and is constructed along the west side of wall Site 30606. The northwest and southwest corners of the terrace are curved and the terrace retaining walls arc constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled on the ground surface. (Figure 67L There is no formal stacking or facing evident in the feature construction. Feature 3 is approximately 7.5 m in length (NIS) and 7.0 m wide, with a maximum height of (1.60 tn. The western portion of the terrace retaining wall is costly collapsed. There were no cultural remains at Feature 3. 121 - _01 T( Ilk At fe. Figurt 65: Photograph of Site 30607. 1..2a Leir: 2. V IT 12 HDJI-i:h s: 1'Inuc r.q .; ; tia4 .'.,Ir i'r 1 _sl,uu '_ 1 is rir aru:: C.u:.I ii r_ I iwl. I2; Figure 67_ Photograph of Site 30607, Feature 3 Looking South_ 124 Shovel Probe Testing Two shovel probes (SP -4 and SP -5) were excavated within the level soil interior of Feature 3. The shovel probes were exca4 ited approximately 2.5 m from one another. The shovel probes were excavated to depths ranging from 48.0 to 54.0 cmbs and terminated on bedrock or large basalt rocks (Table 11). Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of three natural stratigraphic layers: Layer 1(0-14 cmbs) loose dark brown (1 DYR3i2) fine sandy silt loam, Layer 11(14-38 cmbs) soft brown (I OYR4I3) sandy silt, and Layer 111 (38-54 crabs) soft dark yellowish brown (I OYR414) fine sandy silt. SP -4 contained two volcanic glass flakes recovered between 0-15 cmbs, and small charcoal fragments recovered between 15-30 crabs. SP -5 contained several very small charcoal fragments that were not collected. Table 12: Site 30107 Failure 3 Shovel Probe Results. SP# Depth (cm) Layers BOE Artifacts 4 0 - 54 cm 1. I1, 111 R:i:s:ii1 Rock Volcanic glass, Charcoal Fra iuenr; 5 ii - 48 ci], 1, 1i, 111 RZLi1111 Rt,ck Charcoal Fragments Feature 4 is a two-sided terrace located along the south edge of Feature 2. The terrace abuts the west edge of wall Site 30606. It is approximately 10.0 rn in length (EJW) and 6.5 m wide, with a maximum height of 0.94 m. The terrace retaining wall is constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled on the ground surface (see Figure 62). `I here is no formal stacking or facing evident in the feature construction. There is piled rock near the center of the terrace that divides the surface of the terrace into two areas. The easternmost area is enclosed by rock piled near the center of the terrace and by wall Site 30606 (Figure 68). The enclosed area is approximately 5.5 in in length (NUS) and 2.5 m wide. The westernmost portion is approximately 7.5 m in Length (EV) and 5,0 m wide (Figure 69). The south edge of the terrace is partially collapsed. There were no cultural remains at Feature 4. Shovel Probe Testing Two shovel probe, (SP -6 and SP -7) were excavated I ithin Site 30607 Feature 4 to determine feature function and age. The shovel probes were excavated approximately 4.5 m from one another within the eastern area (SP -6) and the western area (SP -7). The shovel probes were excavated to depths ranging from 32.0 to 55.0 cmbs and terminated. on bedrock or large basalt rocks (Table 12). 125 Figure 68: Photograph of Site 30607 Feature 4 Eastern Area Looking North_ 12(, Figure 69: Photograph or Site 30607 Feature 4 W sten Area Looking Northwest. 127 Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of three natural :;tratigraphic layers: Layer 1 (0-12 crnbs) loose dark brown (IOYR3:'2) tine sandy silt loam, Layer 11(12-3S curbs) soft. brown (1.OYR4/3) sandy silt. and Layer 111 (38-55 crabs) soft dark yellowish brawn (10YR4/4) fine sandy silt. SP -7 contained :r single fragment of dense crystalline basalt, possibly an unpolished exterior flake. Table 13: Site 30607 Feature 4 Shovel Probe Results. SP# Depth (em) Layers ROE Artifacts 6 ti - 35 em f, 11, Ill Basalt Rock 7 0 -32 cm 1 & II lizsa]i Rack L3asali ()chi[agc Feature 5 is a three -sided terrace located in the southeast corner of Site 30607 (see Figure 62). The terrace is approximately 7.5 m in length (N/S) and 3.0 rn wide, with a maximum height of 1,20 m, The terrace retaining wall is constructed of angular and. subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled on the ground surface (Figure 70), There is no formal stacking or facing evident in rhe: feature construction. The west terrace retaining wall is collapsed. potentially brought about by koa hook tree growth, as well as the steepness of the slope. There were no cultural remains on the ground surface at Feature 5. Shovel Probe Testing A shovel probe (SP -8) was excavated within the level soil interior of Feature 5. The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of 30.0 crabs and terminated on bedrock or a large basalt rock. SP -8 contained several very small charcoal fragments which were not collected. Feature 6 is a three -sided terrace located east of Feature 2 and Feature 4 (see Figure 62). The terrace retaining wall is angled, situated cross -slope and constructed of angular and subangular basalt boulders piled o11 the ground surface (Figure 71). The terrace is approximately 7.6 m in length (NW/SE) by 3.5 rn wide, with a maximum height of 1.20 nt. Portions of the retaining wall to the east ere collapsed. There were no cultural remains identified on the ground surface at Feature 6. 128 Figure 70: Photograph of Site 30607 Feature 5 Looking South. 129 4"� H"igurfi 71; Phatpgrflph ,if ti+.I�' ;I r i:,_ `,.iliir : ±; 1 II.iii<.r tis,iilli Shovel Probe Testing. A single s]lo\ el probe (SP -9) was excavated within the level soil interior of Feature 6. The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of 33.0 curbs and terminated on bedrock or a large basalt rock. Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of Layer I (0-13 dubs) loose dark brown (IOYR3l2) fine sandy silt loam overlying Layer 11 (13-33 autos) soft dark yellowish brown (10YR4{4) fine sandy silt. SP -9 did not contain cultural. material. Site 30607 Feature 7 is a three -sided torr; cc located west of Feature I (see Figure 62). The terrace is situated cross -slope and is constructed of piled angular and subangular basalt boulders piled on the ground surface (Figure 72). There is no formal stacking or facing evident in feature construction. The terrace is 8.60 min length (NW. SE) by 2.90 m wide, with a maximum height of 0.60 m. There were no cultural remains on the ground surface within the area of Feature 7. Shovel Probe Testing A single shovel probe (SP -10) was excavated within the level soil interior of Feature 10. The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of 37.0 cmbs and terminated an bedrock or a large basalt rock, Shovel probe stratigraphy ccrosisted of Layer 1 (0-14 clubs) loose dark brown (I OY R312) line sandy silt loam overlying Layer 11(14-37 curbs) soft dark yellowish brown i I OYR4!4) fine sandy silt. SP -10 contained a single volcanic glass flake and Five marine shell fragments which were recovered from 0-15 clubs. Site 30607 Summary Sites 30598 (low piled wall), 30606, (low piled wall), and 30607 (agricultural complex) are all likely components of a single agricultural complex. This interpretation is based on their proximity to each other, their feature construction technique. and the fact that three of the Site 30607 terraces are constructed along the west side of the Site 30606 wall. In addition, it is very likely that the Site 306012 lava blister is also associated with these three sites. The small amount of traditional cultural material recovered from subsurface testing at Site 30607 is typical of traditional pre -Contact to early post -Contact era agricultural features. However, it might be that the artifacts are not directly associated with these features, and that they are related to resource collection prior to the construction of the features, 131 Figrc72: Photograph of i:.• ;: r r 7 Looking North. 132 The terrace features themselves are somewhat similar to Kona field System features recorded at projects in the general area of the current project. They differ in that they are more roughly constructed. This night be a function of the available rock in this location—the rock is much larger than that found in other places. However, it seems just as likely, or more likely, that the features were constructed in the Historic era for commercial agriculture. Their somewhat rough and hasty construction is similar to other Historic era agricultural features, most notably coffee terraces, documented at nearby project area. In addition, the presence of the Historic era refuse dump at nearby Site 30612 further suggests the agricultural complex is an I listoric era site. Site 30607 has been altered by ground clearing activities, the features are partially collapsed in places, and the site is in fair condition. No further work is recomrnended at Site 30607. SITE 30608 Enclosure FUNCTION: Temporary Dwelling and Storage AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 7.5 m (NIS) by 3.3 m by 1.20 m in max. height CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30608 is a rectangular enclosure located at 670 ft amsl within the southeastern portion of the project area, roughly 15,0 m west of the Site 30592 railroad berm (see Figure 10). It is situated on a moderate west facing slope in an area of koa haolc• trees and Guinea grass ground cover. The enclosure is rectangular and is constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders, some of which are as large as 0.80 m (Figure 73). The wall is bifaced and cobble core tilled, It is approximately 7,50 m in length (NIS) acrd 3.30 m wide, with a maximum height 01' 1,20 m. Portions of the walls to the north and southwest have collapsed, suggesting that the enclosure might have been impacted by heavy equipment. 133 Figure 73: PI1otQg i h e F Site 30608 l .i,closusc i• of loin Sons v1. 134 Itis passible that the enclosure was constructed by modifying a wall segment just west of the Site 30592 railroad berm wall. Rocks might have been removed from the ends of the well iu construct two walls (north and south walls) between the wall segment and the railroad berm to the east. The east wall of the enclosure is the railroad berm wall. There is single strand heavy gauge fencing wire withiEl the interior of the feature. Based on construction method and proximity to the railroad berm., it is most likely that Site 30608is the remains of an Historic era structure. The enclosure has been altered by modern land clearing activities and is in fhir condition. SITE 30609 Enclosure FUNCTION: Temporary Dwelling and Storage AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 6.6m (N/S) by 4.5 m by L20 m in max. height CNDITION: {rood INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30609 is a rectangular enclosure located :Et 680 ft amsl approximately 14.0 meters northeast of Site 30609 (see Figure 1 0). It is situated on a moderate west facing slope close to the eastern project area boundary and just west of the Site 30592 railroad berm. There are koa haole trees and Guinea grass ground corer throughout the area. The enclosure is rectangular and is constructed of angular and subangular basalt boulders. some of which are as large as 1.05 m (Figure 74 and Figure 75). The wall is bifaced and cobble care filled. It is approximately 6.60 na in length (NIS) and 4.5 m wide. with a maximum height of 1.20 m. It is possible that the enclosure was constructed by modifying a wall segment just west of the Site 30592 railroad berm wall. Rocks might have been removed from the ends of the wall to construct two walls (north and south walls) between the wall segment and the railroad berm to the east. The east wall of the enclosure is the railroad berm wail. Portions of the walls to the east have collapsed, indicating that this structure may have been impacted by heavy equipment. Site 30609 is approximately 14.0 m northeast of Site 30608, and is similar in construction. A single strand of heavy gauge fencing wire 135 was found in the interior of this feature also. Based on construction method and proximity to the railroad berm, it is most likely that Site 30609is the remains of an Historic era structure. The enclosure has been altered by modern land clearing activities and is in fair condition_ SITE 30618 Terrace FUNCTION: Agricultural AGE: Pre -Contact Era Historic Era DIM l;N S IONS: 6.75 m (NWIS E) by 3.0 rn by 0.40 m in max, height CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: Shovel Probe Testing (SP-E) DESCRIPTION: Site 30610 is at three -sided terrace located at 675 ft arnsl within the southeastern portion of the project area (see Figure 10). The site is situated on a west facing slope, to the southwest and down slope of Site 30608, within close proximity to the eastern project area boundary. There are kou haole trees and Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. The terrace is approximately 6.75 m long (NW/SE) by 3.4 n7 wide, with a maximum height of 0.40 m (Figure: 76). The interior soil surface of the terrace slopes slightly to the west. The terrace retaining wall is constructed of piled angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders, some as large as 0.45 m (Figure 77). Portions of the retaining wall to the southwest may have been removed lay modern land clearing activities. There were no cultural remains encountered on the surface in the area of the terrace. Shovel Probe Testing A single shovel probe (SF -1) was excavated within the soil tilled interior of Site 30610. The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of 22.0 curbs and terminated on bedrock or a large basalt rock. Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of Layer i i 0-13 ctnbs) loose dark brown (10YR3/2) fine sandy silt loam overlying Layer Ii (13-22 cnnbs) soft dark yellowish brown (10YIt414) fine sandy silt.. SP -1 contained several very small fragments of charcoal which were not collected. 136 #: Photograph +Ji Sib.; 341609 Lu.1ustire Looking Latii. 137 Fiµnre 75; Photograph of Site 3111509 Enclosure Looking Northeast. 138 U F.{J 100 15111 'lirl t-rn KEY Ihrj - RAS L..I k4 kN - 'I'l• MULE - SLOPE - BEDROCK �- FALLEN TREE - HEIGHT IN cm ABOVE SURFACE - SUON 1 ['ROBE. Figure 76: Site 41} IO Nan View Map. 139 Figure 77: Photo! pli of Site 306 1 ti -I crracc l.tirtsl, iro �11«t114,44t- I4 1 SITE 30611 Agricultural Complex FUNCTION: Agriculture AGE: }-Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 10.0 nn (NS) by 7.0 in CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: Shovel Probe Testing (SP -1, SP -2, and SP -3) DESCRIPTION: Site 30611 is an agricultural complex located at 670 ft antsl in the southeast portion of the project area (see Figure 10). 'The site is three terraces (Features, 1.2, and 3) situated on a west facing slope in an area of kroa hanle and kar.ui nut trees with Guinea grass ground cover. Feature I is located at the northeast end of the site and is a roughly rectangular sail Iillcd terrace approximately. C .5 in long (NW/SE) by 2.0111 wide, with a maximum height of 1.0 m along southwest edge (Figure 75). The terrace retaining ara11 is constructed of piled angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders, some as large as 0.90 m (Figure 79). There is no formal stacking or facing evident in the feature construction, The northern portion of the terrace has collapsed in several areas. The southern portion is better preserved, where several large somewhat tabular boulders have been incorporated into the construction. There were no cultural remains identified at Feature L Shovel Probe Testing A shovel probe (SP -1) was excavated within the level soil interior of Feature 1. The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of 29 .0 curls and terminated on bedrock or a large basalt rock. Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of Layer I (0-13 cmbs) loose dark brown (IOYR312) fine sandy silt loam overlying Layer II (13-29 curbs) soft dark yellowish brown (IOYR4f4) fine sandy silt. SP -1 contained a single fragment of rusted metal, Feature 2 is a two-sided terrace located at the south end of the site. The terrace rct.rininu wall is constrticted of piled angular and subangular basalt boulders, some as large as 0.75 rn (Figure 80), There is no formal stacking or facing evident in the feature construction.. The terrace is approximately 3.5 in in length (NW/SE) and 2.5 n wide, 141. 1 @,) t 1 1 II Fal 111-3 aF' Figure 78: Site 3061 1 Plan View Map. 142 Figure 79: Photograph of Site 30611 Feature 1 Looking Southeast_ 143 Figure 80: Photograph of Site 30611 Feature 2 Looking South. 144 with a maximum height of 0.35 m. the surface of which slopes to the west. There were no cultural remains on the ground stir -Face at Feature 2. Shovel Probe Testing A single shovel probe (SP -2) was excavated within the level soil interior of Feature 2. The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of 20.E crnbs and terminated an bedrock or a large basalt rock. Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of Layer 1(0-12 curbs) loose dark brown (10YR312) fine sandy silt loam overlying Layer 11 (12-20 cmbs) soft dark yellowish brown (1 0YR4!4) fine sandy silt, SP -2 did trot contain cultural material. Feature 3 is a roughly rectangular terrace located between Feature 1 and Feature (see Figure 78). The terrace is approximately 3.40 min length (NW/SE) by 2.25 m wide, with a maximum height of 0.52 rn. The terrace retaining wall is constructed of piled angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders, some as large as 0.75 m (Figure li 1). A partial wall along the southeastern boruxdary of the Feature 3 terrace separates it from the Feature 2 terrace, which is situated to the immediate south. The intact portion of wall is 1.50 m, although it likely formerly continued southwest the entire length of the terrace, forming two separate terraces. Thea were no cultural remains on the ground surface al Feature 3. Shovel Probe Testing A single shovel probe (SP -3) was excavated in the level soil interior of Feature 3 The shovel probe was excavated to a depth of ILO curbs and terminated on bedrock or a large basalt rock. Shovel probe stratigraphy consisted of Layer 1(0-11 crnbs) loose dark brown (1 UYEZ3�7.} fine sandy silt loam. SP -3 did not contain cultural material. Site 30611 Summary The terrace features at Site 30611 are somewhat similar to Kona field System features recorded at projects in the general area of the current project. They differ in that they are more roughly constructed. This might be a function of the available ruck in this location—the rock is much .larger than that found in other places. However, it seems just as likely, or more likely, that the features were constructed in the 1 Iititctric L:ra for commercial agriculture. Their somewhat rough and hasty construction is similar to other Historic era agricultural features, most notably coffee terraces, documented at nearby project area. Site 30611 has been slightly altered by ground clearing activities, the 145 More acre 81 : i'lloto i.ap t11 aI :;li+>i 1 1 Looking Northeast.. 146 features are partially collapsed in places. and the site is in fair condition. No further work is recommended ended at Site 3061 1. SITE 30612 Lava Blister FUNCTION: Refuse Disposal Area AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 3.40 m (NFISW) by 3.40 m by I.15 m max. height INTEGRITY: Possesses Integrity of Location and Materials CONDITION: Good SURFACE ARTIFACTS: Nine EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30612 is a small open lava blister located within the central southern portion of the project arca (see Figure 10). The site is situated on a west facing slope approximately 10.0 meters east of Will Site 30598 (see Figure 37). There are koa haohe trees with Guinea grass ground cover throughout the area. The lava blister is opening is directly above the blister and measures l .0 in long (NIS) by 0.65 in wide (Figure 82). The blister is approximately 3.40 m in length (NE SW) and 3.40 rn wide. with a maximum ceiling height of 1.15 m, A fair amount of Historic era refuse is scattered on the floor of the blister. Some of the items collected and photographed included glass bottles, fragments of ceramic and stoneware bowls and plates, rusted solder top cans, a section of corrugated roofing material, cow bones, and various glass and metal fragments (Figures 83. 84, and 85). Site 30612 is an Historic era refuse disposal area. It is unaltered and in good condition. No further work is recommended for Site 30612. 147 Figure 7i2: Fliurugr,ipli t,i'sift. 74}(12 1Bli0.2r Opening Looking. !curt. 14.8 1. Figure 83: PhuLogr►ph or Site 30612 Historic Era Bottles and Plateware. 149 Figure 84: PhoLoLgI :ph of Site 30612 Soldered Cans. 150 Figure 135: Photograph of Site 30612 Historic Lra Bottles:, 151 CONCLUSION DISCUSSI ON Twenty two newly identified archaeological sites were recorded during the course of the archaeological inventory survey study. The sites are primarily agricultural terraces associated with pre -Contact era to Historic era agriculture and rock walls and enclosures associated with Historic era agriculture and ranching. A pre -Contact era to later post -Contact era lava tube burial and a portion of the old railroad berm were documented along the western and eastern edge of the project area. respectively. The five acre project area has three primary divisions created by ranch walls (Site 30595, 30601, and 3065). All three of the walls are Historic era ranch walls and have typical formal characteristics of ranch walls; they are bi-faced, cobble core filled, and their sides slope inward towards the tops of the walls. They are all approximately 1.0 meter in height. Site 30597, located along the south boundary of the property and along the north side ofa seasonal gulch, is similarly constructed. Site 30602 and Site 30603 are enclosures constructed along wall Site 30595 and wall Site 30601. The latter two wall sites are constructed onto the west edge of the Site 30592 railroad berm and post-date the railroad berm. Sites 30602 and 30603 enclosures, as well as the wall sites, appcdr to be associated with both Historic era ranching and agriculture, The northern portion of the project area, north of wall Site 30601 is north of the bulldozed "terraces" (see Figure3). It is mostly open grassland that appears to have been bulldozed during the Historic era to early Modern era. There were only two sites (Site 30591 and 30956) recorded in this northL2rn third of the project area. Site 30591 is an agricultural complex with six terraces, : i L .;0956 is a hearth. It is possible that the two sites are pre -Contact era to early post -Contact era in age. The terrace features are somewhat similar to Kona field System features recorded at projects in the general area of the current project, They differ in that they are more roughly constructed. This might be a function oft the available rock in this location—the rock is much larger than that found In other places. However, it Teems just as likely, or more likely, that the features were constructed in the Historic era for commercial agriculture. Their somewhat rough and hasty construction is similar to other Historic era agricultural features, most notably coffee terraces, 152 documented at nearby project area. The hearth at Site 30596 is similar to other Historic era rectangular hearths receded at sites on Hawaii island. The middle one third of the project area between wall Site 30595 and 30605 is entirely within the bulldozed "terraces" portion of the project area (see Figure 3). There are three small sites (Site 30593, 30594. and 30604) within the middle third ofthe project area. Site 30593 is a pre -Contact era to early post -Contact era lava tube burial. Site 30594 is an agricultural terrace complex. The agricultural terraces at Site 30594 are somewhat similar to Kona field System features, but are much more rouLlily constructed than the formal cross -slope terraces and maarka:makai kawfiwi walls documented in the KFS_ Site 30604, based on artifacts recovered from subsurface testing and the site's proximity to Site 30602 and 30603, is an Historic era agricultural terrace site. it is interesting to note that there is a lower site density in the northern Iwo divisions of the project area compared to the site density in the southern one third of the project. The northern two thirds likely were used primarily for cattle pasture. 11 is also likely that the two wall sites 30595 and 30601 formed a cattle chute or road leading to and from the two enclosures (Site 30602 and Site 30603) and the railroad bed. The southern third ofthe project area, south of wall Site 30605, contained six primarily agricultural sites (Site 30598, 30600, 30606, 30607, 30610, and 30610 and tour Historic era sites (Site 30599, 30608, 30609, and 30612) with functions other than primarily agricultural growing (see Figure 1[0). The nonagricultural sites are located closer to the railroad bed. The cluster of all of these sites together in this area seems to suggest that they are part of a Historic era commercial agricultural field. The proximity of this area to the seasonal gulch to the south might have influenced the decision to construct the agricultural features in this area. All of the agricultural complexes documented in the project area are located between 600 and 700 feet (182 to 213 meters) amsl, within the lowerkalu'rrltr zone. The region was traditionally used by Hawaiians for growing bread fruit and other arboreal crops, sweet potatoes, t/, wauke dryland taro, and sugarcane. Volcanic -glass flakes, a basalt flake, and marine shell fragments were recovered in small amounts from subsurt ce testing, indicating that Hawaiians did pass through and use the project area lands. The lack of temporary habitation features and the fact that there aren't more formally constructed agricultural terraces and rock clearing mounds suggests that they might not have 153 used the area for extensive cultivation. If so, the agricultural terraces documented during the current study are most likely the remains cif l lisloric era commercial agriculture. SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENTS Sites identified during this project were assessed for their significance as outlined in Hawaii Administrative Rules §13-284-6. To be assessed as siYTni l leant a site shall possess integrity of location, design, setting, .materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and shall meet one or more of the following five criteria: (a) It must be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history, or be considered a traditional cultural property, (b) It must be associated with the lives of persons significant in the past, (c) It must embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of constriuction, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. (d) It must have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (e) Have important value to native Hawaiian people or other ethnicities in the state, due to associations with cultural practices and traditional beliefs that were, or still are, carried out. All of the archaeological sites documented in this report were evaluated for their significance (Table 14).. All 22 sites identified during the current AIS study possess integrity of location and materials and were assessed significant under criterion "d" as they are likely to yield infornriation important to prehistory andJor history. All of the sites, with the exception of the railroad berry, Site 30592 and the burial Site 30593 provide information important to agricultural pursuits and cattle ranching. They provide data on pre -Contact era through post -Contact era and the l Iistoric era features constructed to grow subsistence crops. 1 hey also provide data important to changing land -use as some farmers began to use land for cattle pasture in response to exposure to external trade routes and expanding markets on llay,ai-i Island and Oahu. 154 1.tlale 14: hi L einory of Project Area Archaeological Sites, Significance Assessments and Site RecainIliendiilILm- Silt, k Silt, Type Site Fdluuikm Na Signil"tcxnce Criteria Rrconimcnitation 3115',7L Agricultural Complex i Agriculture Pre -Contact to Historic Era 3 No, 1tlnhcr'ti4orb: 31,592 Railroad Bed and Rem 1 Transportation Historic Ertl a. c. d licher.;iiion 30593 Lava I ube Huila! Pre -Contact to Early post -L t,ntait Era LI, C Presertiwtt,7n 30594 Agricultural Complex Agriculture Pre -Contact to Historic Era Ll Nu Further Work 30595 Rock Wall Ranching 11i idcric I'm LI L Nil t iiriller Vi`iii k 1.L „ : ih.. .. _ Work 305%J�urthcr Possible Hearth Food Preparation HLsioric Era 30597 Rock Wall Ranching Historic l:rt LI NO I'tariher W rk 3059 Rock Wail Agriculture'Ranching Pre-ConLael to Historic Era d No 1 -umber Work 30599 Platform & Enclosure RanchingAgriculturc Historic Lni ti Nu Further Work 31lt,wu) fetrare Agriculture ll'vooric 1.1....1 11 So Further 4t{trk 3060L Rock Wall. Ranching Llistnric Lill LJ No Further Work 30602 Enclosure Ranching/Agriculture Ht,Iorie Ent LI No Further Work 30603 Enclosure Ranching/Agriculture /1k writ.. 1-:r:l LI 10 1 !II1her % I+Ik 30604 Agricultural Complex Agriculture Cie-Cunt,LLL t,o L 1i tornL Lid LI 1u 1'iLr1[] r Work 31.605 Rock Wall Ranching/Agriculture 111,1,r1c 11'., LI ,........., d _ ............... 11, 1:IrI1,21 V.nik 111 I drier A urk 30606 Rock 'Nall RanmhingrAg'iculture Pre•l"rr,7LLcr I,, ILichcric I'Irt 311607 Agricultural Complex Agriculture Pre-Cuntacl lo I -Biotic Era d No I Iriher Work 30605 Enclosure Dwelling and Storage lliFAoric Fro d 1,1 1 Itriher l Work 30609 Enclosure D. L:'Lin72 and Storage L iitiork Lr,i d Nu Further Work, 306117 Terrace j :..71!'HIRIIL' I'r.-S. L111I,L.! 1,, I II4il Lr IL 11,1 Pre -L Immo i,, I Lictoric I:r,! I1 LJ No I'ari:110i 141,11.. 111 I unhcr '0.. urk 3061 1 Agricultural Complex k Tr_ctl Imre 3(1612 Lava Bli ier 'C.:rt.4 1}Imp I1{,icri 1.r,1 LI Nu Farther 11{,rk 155 Ranch wall sites (30592, 30595, 30597. 30598. 30601.30605 and 30606) and Historic era enclosure sites (30608 and 30609) provide information on how the land was altered and the types of features that were necessary to farming and ranching. Even the historic era refuse dump (Site 30612) provides data on the types of items were available, useful and necessary to Farmers and ranchers. The railroad berm. Site 30592 is also significant under criteria "a" and "c" as it is associated VC Oh c ents that have made a significant contribution i0 the broad patterns of our history and it embodies distinctive characteristics of the type, period. and method of railroad bed construction. The burial Site 30593 is also significant criterion "e" as it has important value to Hawaiian people and people of other ethnic backgrounds in the state_ SCS consulted with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) Komi representative Shane Nelson to ask for any input regarding Site 30592. RECOMMENDATIONS The burial Site 30593 is recommended for preservation in place with preservation. treatments to be outlined in a Burial Site Component ofa Preservation Plan (BSCPP). The railroad berm Site 30592 is recommended for pre ei-vation with preservation measures to be outlined in an archaeological presi,,rxolio!' pinrt. No further work is recommended ['or the remaining 20 archaeological sites (Sites 30591and 30594 through 30612). information recorded for 31122 archaeological sites during the current study has adequately ascertained their function and age. Archaeological monitoring is recommended for initial grubbing within the five -acre project area and for any proposed ground disturbance in the vicinity of Site 30592 and Site 30593 to ensure interim construction preservation measures arc in place and to prevent disturbance of the two archaeological sites. 156 Aki, H. REFERENCES CITED 1952 Map of Kailua Section, North Kona. 11awaici. Land Titles. Survey and Map by J. S. Emerson. Hawai`i Territory Surrey Flap, Registered Map No. 1280 Alexander, J, 1855 Athens, J., T. 2014 Bergin, Dr. B 2004 Map of Holualoa 1 & 2, Kona Hawaii. Hawaii Territory Survey Map. Registered Map No, 1450. Reith, and T. Dye A paleoenvironmental and archaeological model -based age estimate for the colonization of I-Iawai'i. American Antiquity, 79(4):144-55. Loyal to the Land:The LegendwT Parker ranch, 750-1950. University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu. Barrera, W. Jr. 1971 -] r'r lroroirrOs r.rl /_.YL .'i anions lrr / trrVer rrr Keatehou. North Kona, Hawaii. Bishop htcl'rrrrr k eperrrl+re+urrl Report .Sc'r iPs 71-10. Submitted to Kamehauneha. Development Corporation. B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. 1995 North Kona, Hawaii Island: Archaeological Reconnaissance of Seven Parcels. Prepared for County of Hawaii Planning Department_ Burichard, G. C. 1995 Population and Land -use on the Ktauhou Coast, the ;tlorrku Lands Inventory Sur'r'ey}, Kearrhou, North Kona. Haat& `t Mind. the :•`1'crrThjtiVe, part .1. Submitted to Belt, Collins and Associates and Kamehamcha hive to ient Corporation. Honolulu. Calis, 1„ M.T. Carson. M. Dcga and R.I.. Spear 2004 Data Recovers' at the Phase, 1 and 11 Portions of the Keahakai Development Project Area TAX (3) 7-5-20:1. SCS R.cport 209-1. Prepared for Stanford Carr Development, LLC. SCS, Honolulu. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Carlson, A.K.. and P.H. Rosendahl 1990 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Prralani Development - Phase 11, Lands of Praapa,raa 1' and ? Arorrh Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI, Inc. report prepared for Pualani Development Company. Report on file at the SHPD Library. Kapolei. 157 Chinen, J.J. 1961 Original Land Titles in Ha14 ai "i. Clark, M., and R. Rcchllnan 2006 :in _Archaeological r haeological Inventor ' Survey of T K:3-7-6-010-1: 003. Holrralua 1-2 Airrpffa'a, North Kona District, Island of ilawai'i. Redly -min Consulting Report RC -0360 prepared for Mr, Phil Tinguely, Holualoa \'•illar2c Partners, LLC, Kailua-Kona, Hawa.i`i. Conolly III, R.D.. and J.L. Guttness 1979 . rc'hctecrltagi<.u1 Reconnaissance Survey 01 the Komohona Kai Subdivion (Unit 1) Site (MIK: 3-7-6-13:31). Report prepared by Science Applications Inc., Honolulu for GC. Development Co., Inc. Report onfile at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Cordy, R. 1981. Stuck' of Prehistoric Social Change: The Development of Complex- Societies in the Hawaiian brands.. Academic Press, New York. 1995 Central Kona .4r~cha soh ii'u1.Settlement Partr}ms. Department of Land and Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Division, Honolulu, 2000 Exalted Sits the Chief: Mutual Publishing. Honolulu. Daws, G. 1968 Shoat of Time: A History of the Hawaiian Island. Macmillan, New York. Hesilets, M., and R. Rechtman 2004 Archaeological Inventory Sun'i'r of a Grant Increment Ruud Remnant Property (T K:3-7-6-08:005Iror.), 11r3hnralrxcr 1-2 Alrrrprt°'cr, North Kona District, Islander H m ui'i. Rechtman Consulting Report RC -0244 prepared for Curt A. Cottrell, Na Ala Hele Program Manager, Honolulu, Hawaii and Ramon Perez de Ayala, Pita`anui Partnership, Honolulu, l-{aw'a . Dircks, A., L. Zcuobi, and R. Rcchttiian 2013 Archaeological Inventur•v Survey of;/ie Powlrrr.,<'cl :L1I7'r.r.kc 1 'ta, ,�r ,ti'rri�cli� istvrt (7'MK,w: 3-7-6-t 01:003, 009, and (119), IIuhf rlr.Cr 1-2 Almprfa'a, Yon* Kona District, Island ofHawai'i. Rechtmmn ConsultiReport RC -0856 prepared for Edward Rapoza, Kailua-Kona. Dye, T. 2011 A model -based age estimate for Polynesian colonization of Hawai°i. Archaeology in Oceania, 46:130-38, 158 Ellis. W. 1963 Escott, G 2013 ESRI Narrative oft, Tour ofHawaii, or Dwhvhee. Advertiser Publishing, Honolulu. 4r hucaahr<t,ieal Inventors Sur•vo' Report fhi the Proposed ATr T Wireless 'Telecommunications Tower er• (HAW 3(11) Site Located in flolualoct t' Ahuprra `ct, North Kona District, Huwai `r I..tilcarrd . Hawai `i 17hvfK; (3) 7-6-024:032j. SCS Report #1340-2 prepared for Awe Environmental. Las Vegas, 2013 Arc GIS Explorer. Environmental Systems Research Institute. Redlands, Ca. Fager, M., and D. Graves 1993 Archaeological Inventory y Survey, Holualoa 3rd Development Parcel, el, Lrand of. Hrrluulcxr 3'`r, North Kona District, Island o f Huwui "i (MK: 3-7-7-04:35). PHRI Report 1231-073092 prepared for Dillingham Partners. Google Earth 2013. Graves. D.K., 1993 Gargle Earth Imagery. Google Earth. Mountain View. Ca, and S.T. Goodfellow The Gardens of•Konu Revisited: Prralani Residential Community Phase 11 - Archaeologic hrae ologi al Data Recovery, y, Lands o/'Puapuuu 1 `r and 21d, 1Vorth Kona District, Island (?,e Hawaii (T.41K•3-7-5-i 7. por. 28, 29). PHRI, Inc. report prepared for PLralani Estates, Inc. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Han, T. L., S. L. Cotlias. S. D. Clark, and A. Garland 1986 Aloe Kau a Ho'oilo: Hawaiian Mortuary Practices at Ker lm, Kona, Hcnvai'i. Chapter VII. Artifacts and Manuports from the Kebpu Burial Site. Bishop Museum Departmental Report Series 6-1. Submitted to (Department of Transportation, Honolulu, Handy, E.S. 1940 TheHcauaiicrrr 1'01wrrc' 1. H.P. Bishop Museum bulletin 161. H.P. Bishop Museum Press, Horiolulti. Harnmatt, H.H. 1979a .4 r-c•l aeologizeol Survey of a 2 Acre Parcel at Holr.raio a Aimptrcr `i r. Hail.cri Report prepared by the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc.. Report on tile at the SIIPD Library, Kapolei. 1979b Archaeological Survey of a 22 Acre Parcel at 1*i/ualoa Ahupria a, Kona, Hawar'r Island, Report prepared by the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc. for Kalani Sunset Corporation. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 159 1979c Ar-c•haecicxgical .4rr+ t e cmdExcavation at the ProposedKomohona Kiri Suhdir'i.sion, Hcalaruloa, Kona, Ha+i. ai °1 Island. Archaeological Research Center Hawaii. Inc. Manuscript. Prepared for C.C. Development Co., inc. 1980 Archaeological Survey and Excavation at the Proposed Korrarafaana Keri Suhdinsirara H luulraa, Kona. Island. Report prepared by the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii. int. for G.C. Development Company, Inc. Report on file at the SHPD Libra .- Hammat, H.H.. D. Borthwick, and D. Shideler 1986 Archaeological haeological Sura>ev and Excavatio):, r:;: ; 'r)- 1 .rc Parcel Hnitraloa, Kona, llrau car''i Island. Report prepared by Cultural Sun t'ys Hawaii for Maryl Investments, Enc. Report on file at the SHPI) Library, Kapolei. Hammatt, H. H., and S. D. Clark 1980 Archaeological Testing and Salvage Ercorations of'a 155 Acre (Ginter) Parcel in Na ahupna °a Pahoehoe, La 'arra, orad Kapalct 'alaea, Kona, Hawaii °i Islcrrrcl ARCH Report 14-152 III. Submitted to Pacific Basin Resorts, Inc. Hammatt, H,H., and W,H. Folk 1980 Archaeological Sarr•ver, Phase 1: Portions r?j-Kecaarhaa-Koran Resort, Keauhwa and Kahniu'rt. Kona, hlawai'i Island ARCH Report 14-177 II.i. Submitted to Kamehameha Investment Corporation. 1981 Archaeological Survey rrl or 20 Acre Parcel, lloInulvcr, Kano, fkorai 't Island. Report prepared by tlic Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc. for Kalani. Sunset Corporation. Report on file at the SH1'L) Library„ Kapolei. Hammatt, H.H., W.H. Folk, and D.W. Shideler 1992 Archaeological Survey Testing and Excavation ()fa l74 -Acre Pas4..1. 1lralualoa, North Kona, Hawaii `i. Report prepared by Cultural Surveys Hawaii for the Camlon Corporation. Report on tile at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Hammatt, H. H, and V. W. Meeker 1979 Archaeological Execrations. and Heim, Stabilization at Kabala 'rt, Korra, filar aii Wand. ARCH Report 14-172(11), Submitted to Gerald Park, Urban Planner. Haun, A.E., and D. Henry 2000 Archaeological Invcutory Surrey MIK: 7-7-04:56, h+calnaloa 3, North Kona, Island of Hall ui L F rums & Associates repent prepared for Mr, Sidney Fuke, Hila, Hawaii. Report on fila at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 2001 Archaeological L7atu Recovery Site 14130 TMK: (3) 7-5-17_•Por_ 1. Prepared for Inaba Engineering. Haun & Associates, Kea`au. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 160 Haim. A. E., J. D. Henry, J. A. Jimenez, M. A. Kirkendall, K. Maly, and T. R. Woltbrth 1998 Ali "i Highway Phased Mitigation Program Phase 1 - Archaeological Intensive Sur vv , Srrrnman , vol. 1. PHRI Report 1320-052798. Submitted to County of Hawaii. P11R1, 1 -Hilo. I lornmon, R. J. 1986 Social Evolution in Ancient Hawaii In Island Societies: Archaeological Appr'rrtrr h,'ti rrr E .'ohviion rind Tr(rrr.ti"frrrrrrraricrrt, edited by P,' . Kirch, pp. 55--88, University Press. Cambridge. Kahn, J., Rieth, P. Kirch. •1, Athens, and G. Murakami 2014 Re -dating of the Kuli`ou`Ou rockshelter, O`ahu, Hawai'i: Location of the first radiocarbon date from the Pacific Islands. Journal of the Polynesian Society, 123(11:67-90. Kamc`cleihiwa, L. 1992 Native Land and Foreign Desires: Pehea La E Pon0 Ai? Bishop Museum Press. Honolulu. Kelly, M. 1983 Na Mita o Kona: Gardens of Kona. Dept. of Anthropology Report Series 83-2. Bishop Museum. Honolulu. Kirch, P.V. 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks; ; .4tr Irrrrothri liar to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu 201 1 When did the Polynesians settle Hawaii? A re -view of' 150 years of scholarly inquiry and a tentative answer. Haivaiian Archaeology, 12:3-26.. Kirch, F.V. and M. McCoy 2007 Reconfiguring the Hawaiian Cultural Sequence: Results of re -dating the Haiawa dune site t M O -A 1-3), Moloka`i Island. Journal of the Polynesia?? Society, 116:385-406. Kirch, P.V. and M. Sr hlins 1992 Anahuhr. Vol. I and 2. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Kuykendall, ft. S. 1938 The Hcrivraiiurr Kingdom. Vol_ 1. University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu. Landrum, J.. A.E. Ilan n.. P.11. Rosendahl. and K. Delitnont 1990 Archaeological trirwrraryt' SurrVey and Test Excavations Kahakai Development Pro/ect ,Area. PH R I Report 157-070185. Prepared for Wilson Okamoto & Associate.;. PI IRI. 11 ilo_ RLI1o7't on Me at the SH PI) Library. Kapolei. 161 Maly, K 1993 Ka 'ao Ho 'oniva Pu `rrwai No Ka-Miki, The Heart Story Storyo f Ka-Miki. Published in Hawaiian, in the newspaper "Ka Hakai o Ha i ai '1 (Hilo) January 8, 1914 through December 6, 1917. Translated by Kcpa Maly for Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. 1996 I1istarical Documentary Research, In Archaeological Inventory Survey Proposed Henry Street Extension Road Corridor, by Wulzen, W., T.R. Wol forth, and L.J. Franklin. pp. 9-19. PRHI Report 1465-992696. Prepared for Mary! Development, Kailua-Kona. PHRI, Hilo. Maly, K. and 0. Maly 2001 He Wuhi Mo'cil? to A Ale Na ,41a Henle 1 Hehi la, Mai Keatrhort .4 I Kealcrkekt,a. Ma Kona, Hawai'I (A Historical Overview of the Lands, And Trails Raveled, led, Bet+ c e n Kear.,hor, and Kealakehiw, Kona, Hawai `i. Kurnu Pono and Associates report prepared for Na Ala Hole Program Manager (Hawaii Island), State Division of Forestry and Wildlife, Hilo. 2002 He Wahl A190 `oI to .No Ka 'Ai,ra A Me Nu ' liana 0 H'ailci 'i Ala Waikaloa (Kalarra f) 11 aPniea, Kohala). ,1 Ife Ka 'Mara A/fauna: A (...'ollection of Traditions anci Hi.wicr, iec7l Accounts cif the Lands and Families. of Walk 'i at Waikr5loa (Waimea Regio t, Sor„th Kohala), and the Mountain Lands, Island qf !larval */ TMA Clv .n eki Sheet 6-7-01), Kumu Ponta Associates. Hilo.. Maly, K.. and P.H. Rosendahl 2006 Phase III Archaeological Site Preservation Plan, Pualani Residential Community Mitigation Program.. Lcmds of Puapraaa J `f and 1'11 North Kolrcr District, Island of Hcnrai'i (11.1K.•3-7- 5-17: 7S, 29). P1.1R1, inc. report prepared for Schuler Homes. Report on file at the S1 -[PD Library, Kapolei. McCoy, M. 2005 The development of the Kalaupapa field system, Kolokai Island, Hawaii, Journal of the Polynesian Society, 116:339-58. 2007 Revised late Holocene culture history for Molokai Island, Hawaii, Radiocarbon, 49( 3):1273-1322. Menzies, A. 1920 Bawai'1 Nei 128 Years Ago. Edited by W.F. Wilson. New Freedom Press. Honolulu. Mulrooncy, M. S. Bickler. M. Allen, and T. Ladefogcd 2011 lila-precision dating of colonization and settlement in East Polynesia. Proceedings o/ the National Academy of Sciences, 108: E192 -E194. 162 National Geographic, Topo! 2003 Seamless USGS Topographic Alaps on cD-ROM, Bawd, '1. National Geographic Holdings, Inc, Wahitaeon, D.C. Nelson, D., L, Bu[grin.., and R. Rechtman 2005 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of `T' :3-7-6-013:00N. Holual.o a Isi & 2nd Ahaaptra 'a, North Kona District, Island of Hcna cti 'i, Rechtman Consulting Report RC -0251. Prepared for Nearon Enterprises. LLC, Danville, California. rnia. (Revised 2006). Newman, T. S. 1970 Hawaiian Fishing and farming on the Island ofHawaii A.D. 1778. Department of Land and Natural Resources. Honolulu. Pukui, M.K., S. Elbert and E. Mookini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii_ University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu. Rechtman, R.B. 2006 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of TA -X:3-7-013:017, Hrxlualo a 1-2 Aimpua'a, North Kona District. Island ofHawai 'I. Report Prepared by Rechtman Consulting, LLC for Geometrician Associates, LLC. Report on file at the SHPD Library. Kapolei. Rieth, Timothy M., Terry L. Haan, Carl Lipo. and Janet M. Wilmshurst 2011 The 13th Century Polynesian Colonization ofHawai'i Island_ Journal of. Archaeological Science 38:2740-2749. Rosendahl, M. 1988 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Ifolualoa 3rd Development Parcel, Land rof Hohhicaluca 3``, North Kona, Aland of ("I'rLM:3-7-04: 35). PHRT Report 400-122287 prepared for Dillingham Trust. Report on tile at the SHPD Library. Kapol ei Rosendahl, P. 1978 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the 72 -Unit Development Site (TGt1K:3- 7-6-14: 3 and 3-7-7-04:22,23,27,47) Kcrihaa-Kona Island of'Hawai'i. ?HR.! Report 5-122078. Prepared for Gray, Rhee and Associates. 1989 Archaeological Field Inspection. Korraohana Kai Subdivision Parcels, Land of Hcalaacrlcxa Isr and 2':`a North Kona, Island ofHawai'I 1i I :3-7-6-22:49.84i. PHRI Letter Report 44-121181 prepared for Clyde Coatney. On file at the SHPD Libra . Kapolei. [1.. R Neal. R Smythe, and M. Takehiro Jr. r1.R/44.nd of Hawaii. Slate of Hawaii. United States Department of . Soil Conservation Service. Washington D.C. 163 Schilt, R. 1984 Subsistence and Conflict in Kona, &Mai `i: An Archaeological Study of the Krrcrkirri Highway Realignment Corridor. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Report prepared for the Hawaii Department of Transportation. On file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Sinoto, A. 1979 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Six Acres in the Ahupua `a crf hrolrrcrlocr 1 and 2, North Kona, Haifa, 'i. Department of Anthropology, B,P, Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for Brehm Construction Company. Soehren, L 1979a Letters Report; Parcels 10. 12. and 13 of T K: -6-14, itrH'alualr , North Kona. Prepared for Mr. Hiroshi K.asarnoto. 1979b Letter Report: T : T-6-15:15, Huluafva, North Komi. Prepared for Z.uzak and Associates. 1980a Letter Report: Archaeological and Historical Features On the Parcel Identified lav Tax Map Ker 7-6-21:14, Situated at Hnlrraloa 2. North Kura. Hcrwai `i. Prepared for Golden Triangle Real Estate. 1.980b Letter Report: Archaeological and Historical Features on the Parcels identified by Talc Map Keys 7-6-14:2.3 at Hirlualoa 2, (ural 7-7-04 :22.27.47 of Holualoa 3, North Kona, Hawaii. Prepared for 13A and M Corp. Starr Environmental 2016 Botanical and Faunal Surveys in the State of Hawai'i. Makawao_ www.starrenvironmenta.l.earn. Tainter, J. A. 1973 The Social Correlates of Mortuary Patterning at K.aloko, North Kona, Hawaii, Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 8(1):1-11. ToInonari-Tuggle, M„1, 1.99[1 Archaeological lniaentor • Survey of Development Parcel 26 of"the Keacrlxvu Resort, Ahrrprra'o v/'Kahalu'u, North Kona, island ofHawaii. Prepared for Belt Collins and Assodates. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. Honolulu. U.S. Geological Survey 1928 15 -Minute Series Topogi-aphic Hilo Quadrangle Map. USGS Print. Washington, DC. URL: iitrp. //geone hies_ usg.s_ govpplsitopomapsl. 164 Vancouver, G. 1967 A Voyage of Discovery to the North Pacific Ocean, and Around the World. Robinson and Edwards. London. 1984 A Voyage r / Discovery to the .forth I'crc°if c. Ocean, and Around the World. Robinson and Edwards. London.. Waihona `1i 2014 Walker. A.T. 198 Wilkes, C. 1845 rxa Malhele online database. www.waibona,com. and F.H. Roscradahl Archaeolo kcal Reconnaissance Sriri eti'. f'trulonr Subdivision. Lands a/'Prraparaa r. is' and 2", North Ktwa District, rrfIlcrtii 41ii. 11-1R I, Inc. report prepared for Pualani Development Company. Report on lilt at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Narrative of the United States Exploring Expedition During the Years 1938-1842. Linc! 4tlas, Lea & Blanchard Philadelphia. 1970 Narrative of !he United Stcrlc>, E. gfrrrirrg F.rpedition During the Years 1938-1842. Vols, 1-_5 (of,/ Atlas, Lea & Blanchr.rrd, Philadelphia, Wilrnhurst, J., T, Hunt, C. Lipo, and A. Anderson 2011. a High -precision radiocarbon dating shows recent and rapid colonization of East Polynesia. Proceedings Of the National Academy of Sciences, l08:1815-20. 2011 b Reply to Mulrooney et aL: Accepting lower precision radiocarbon dates results in longer colonization chronologies for East Polynesia. Proceedings of the National Atadeinv of'Sciences, 108:E195. Wolfe. E.W., and J. Morris 1994 Geological Map of the Island of l-Jawai`i, C.T.S.G,S, Miscellaneous Investigations Series. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C, Wolforth, T., J. Henry, and R. Rechtnian 2000 Archaeological hiventoty Survey cif 7iio Parcels. irr , frluu/oa 2nd and 3rd North Kona District, Island irfHawai `i. PHRI Report 1941-080999 prepared for Mr. Ralph Berezan. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 165 APPENDIX A: ARTIFACT INVENTORY A-1 Site FE h EMI Laryer& Levet depth 1detntifcrr.Ilon Weight Caasi Reritan k9 30596 1 TU-1 1.1 0-28, combs Marione la ertn. brute 3-566 I1 Craalrupottu:Cyprarahp. 305% 1 1'114 11 O-'_S curbs Marine Itrvcriabratc 1.17 0S 4 Gastrapukia Nerils3 Sp. 30590 I 11 "-1 11 0 2llaanbs Marine [ Iri'er1:3 halite 4-05 E 81 I:°:tilr'unclear Nu,-liiugntulie 305% 11.-I I I ti-211 crnbi Bone 3.89 g 1 Hind 30595 1 a.- I 11 0-2S clmhs Bate i1_og g 4 Redeem'. 30596 1 "11'-1 II 0-2s•embs Dalai LIt3 9 Charred 19591 I T'I 1.1 11 0-214 glib& Carbon 4.142 1d 1?3 3059 I 1"1-'•1 11 90.145 crab 6atic Glans Fragment 901 g 1 C'Ik:ir 30599 I li:•I 11 90.145 curbs Jar[ilass Ragmen! 2.1-17' _g 1 Brawn 30599 1 l l -I II 90-145 curbs Niel Fragnecnts 1_H/l.g Wire Cul 30597 I TU- I 11 910-145 anis Bonk Cap 3.17 g 1 Rustcd Metal 30599 1 TU-1 11 90-145 curbs Jar lid 7.3.6 g 3 Rusted Metal 30599 1 TU-1 11 90-145 cabs MeoU Frturneitls 48.69 21 Rusted 30599 1 TU-1 I I 90-145 ettibl, Carbon 0.38. g 3 301104 3 SP-I Ik:I1 0-511 conk- V olcanic Cilm9s Flake 1?..[14g 1 A-2 A-3 F 4 at er" Levet Depth hJ Awn 'Weight £_■ Rolando 346.11,7 1 S,� 1 &11. 0-7m6 Volcanic Cilass E bi . 303 g 5 awR 1 a 1&11 0-37 cul rb_ - , w 30607 7 S,1. 1 »R mils Coral Fen _, 0J) ! mer T S6 1 0-3 cribs VoIcanit liiws +b »!a 2 wP , ¥n 11 11-30aw C'arhori &r 7 101)07 4 SP -7 1 & 11 wl,=mw » Flab w,! 1 A-3 SCS Project Number MO -1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY REPORT FOR 76.121 ACRES LOCATED IN H LUALOIA 1ST u LIPLIA`A, NORTH KONA DISTRICT, HAWAII ISLAND HANN API MIK: (3) 7-6-021:016-019] Prepared 13y: Glenn G. Ewalt, M.A. & Suzan Escott, B.A. MAY 2020 DRAFT Prepared for: Kona Three, LLC 101 Hualalai Street Hilo, HI 96720 S[ 11:Nrirk- COMM i ihti'l" Silt‘11( IN Inc 1347 Kapi'olaui Book~ {trd... 408 Hotiotutu. HI 9( 14 i aviti"i Island Office: PO Be\ 155 Kea -au. 11196749 ABSTRACT At the request of property owner Komi Three, LLC, Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. (SCS) conducted m15 tii-chtteological inventory survey (AIS) of a 76,121 acres of land -FMK: (3) 7-f- 02 1:016, 017 (por-), 018, and 019 located in Tidlualoa 1}t Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. Hawaii, The owner is proposing, to develop the property and contracted the archaeological study required for an Environmental Assessment (EA) as required for County of Hawai`i Planning Department permit applications. The point of contact (owner) for the project is Mr. Richard Wheelock. The owner's mailing address is 101 Hualalai Street Hilo, HI 96720. Mr. Wheelock can also be contacted by email at richard@eastwestrealty.org or by phone at 808- 753-3167. Prior to fieldwork-, a search of geological maps. aerial photos, historical maps, historical documents, and archaeological reports was conducted. Pedestrian survey and site recording were conducted throughout 2020 by Joe Farrugia, B.A., Suzan Escott, B.A, Tomasi Patolo, B.A., Nicole Mello, B.A., and Glenn Escott, M.A. The project area lands were used for cattle ranching and commercial agriculture from the early 1900s until the present. The majority of the project arca has been bulldozed- Evidence of bulldozing is visible in aerial photographs as alternating bands of cleared bulldozer tracks and bands of push pile. Pedestrian survey confirmed the linear bands in the aerial photographs are bulldozer- cleared paths and linear piles of bulldozed rock along the cleared bulldozer paths. Sixteen archaeological sites were identified and recorded in the project. Fifteen of the sites were previously documented and two sites were previously undocumented (a small coffee shed enclosure Site #50-1G-37-31181; ranch walls Site #50-10-37-311S2). Five ot-thc si.tcs were determined to be pre -Contact era habitation and agriculture sites. A single petroglyph (Isolate Find 1) was also recorded. Eleven of the sites were determined to be l listorie era sites.. the majority associated with cattle ranching and coffee and sugarcane agriculture. All of the archaeological sites were assessed significant under criterion "d" as they are likely to yield inforrnation important to prehistory andr'or history. The railroad berm Site 30592 is also significant under criteria "a" and "c" as it is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns o1 our history and it embodies distinctive characteristics of the type, period, and method of railroad bed construction. A petroglyph (Isolat.ed Find -1) is also significant criterion "e" as it has important value to Hawaiian people and people of other ethnic backgrounds in the state. The railroad berm Site 30592 and the petroglyph are recommended for preservation with preservation measures to be outlined in an archaeological preservation. No further work is recommended at the remaining fifteen sites. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i LIST OF FIGURES iii LIST OF TABLES v INTRODUCTION METHODS . I ARCHIVAL METHODS-- ............. .. ...... - ...... ...... ...................,,,......,.............,,...... 1 FIELD METHODS.._ 6 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 9 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS 10 PRE -CONTACT ERA 11 The Kona Field System ................................................... ...,...,..,..• 14 POST.CONTACT ERA 16 THEMAHELE........................................................................................................................ 18 EARLY POST -CONTACT ERA AND HISTORIC ERA 22 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES 25 REGIONAL PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES ......................................... 28 CURRENT PROJECT AREA SPECIFIC PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY 37 EXPECTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL PATTERNS 40 RESULTS OF FIELDW'ORK..............................................................-....:.,....0..,41 S11 -.P 10011 Platform ........ ,..,....... .,...... 44 SIHP 10012 Former Burial Platform 55 SIHP 10013 Enclosure & Platforms 60 SII]P 10015 Bulldozer Road Segment 66 SIHP 10018 Enclosure Remnant 66 S1HP 10019 Rock Clearing Mounds 67 SIHP 10020 Bedrock Outcrop__-..,.,, 70 SIHP 10031 Enclosure Remnant__ ........ ........ ...... . . ... . ...—,.. .. . . . . . .. .... 71 SHIP 10034 Bedrock Outcrop.. 73 S1HP 10067 Terraces 73 SIHP 10068 Enclosure 76 S11 -NP 10069 Modified Bluff 78 SIHP 10070 Enclosure Remnant ............ ............................. ,.................. ......... ...,......,....,81 SIHP 10072 Complex 85 SIHP 10073 Complex 91 SIHP 10074 Enclosure Remnant 105 SIHP 10075 Enclosure Remnant 108 SIHP 30592 Railroad 13cs-iia 109 SHIP 31 181 Enclosure Remnant-- ...... 111.1-1!..1 ..... ....... ............ ....... •MiYFE.41411....41.1A+V“116 SIHP 31182 Ranch Walls _.............. 120 IF -1 Isolated Pei roglyph 130 CONCLUSION... 133 SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENTS 136 RECOMMENIDAT[ONS. 138 REFERENCES CITED 139 APPENDIX ,k REINTERMENT DOCUMENTATION LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: 5,500 K -Series Map of Hawai`i Island Showing Location of Project Area (National Geographic Topo!. 2003. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS) 2 Figure 2: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Project Area (Kealakcktla Quad, ESRI. 2013, Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS)3 Figure 3: Aerial Photograph Showing Project Area, Holualoa, 111, Zone 5 North, 189445 m E, 2171790 rn N. (le'SR1. 2013 Image. Data Sources: Digital Globe, GeoEye, Eartltstar,. USDA, and USGS). 4 Figure 4: Aerial Photograph C1ose-Uip Showing Project Area, Halualoa, HI, Zone 5 North, 189445 ni E, 2171790 rn N. (ESRI, 2013 Image, Data Sources: Digital Globe, GeoEye, Eartlistar, USDA, and USGS) 5 Figure 5: Map of Holualoa and 2oc1 Ahupua' a Showing Location of Project Area in Yellow (Alexander 1855). ,. 12 Figure 6: Portion of Kailua Section, North Kona Map Showing Location of LCA 7713 and Project Area in Red Border (Aki 1952). 19 Figure 7: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic: Map Showing Location of Land Commission Awards, Land Grants, and the Project Arca (National Geographic Topor, 2003. Kcaltakckua Quad. Data Sources: National Geographic Society. USES) 21 H figure N: Portion of 15 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Railroad and Project Arca (USGS 1928) 24 FiYure 9: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Previous Archaeological Studies and Project Area (Kealakekua Quad, ESRI, 2013. Data Sources: National. Geographic Society, USES) 27 Figure 10: 7.5 -.Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Locations of Escott and Escott (2018) AIS Project Area Archaeological Sites (ESR1, 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society, USES. Kealakekua Quadrangle). . 35 Figure 11: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location ofNorthcrn Portion of Hammatt et al. (1992) Sites and Current Project Area (LSRI, 2011, National Geographic Society. USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle). 38 Figure 12: 7,5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Archaeological Sites and Project Area r ESR1, 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS. Kealakckua Quadrangle) 42 Figure 13: Site 10011 Plan View Map. 45 Figure 14: Photograph of Site 10011, Looking Nasi 46 Figure 15: Photograph of Site 10011 Top Surface, Looking Southwest. 47 Figure 16: Photograph of Site 10011 South Edge Construction, Looking North 48 Figure 17: Photograph of Site 10011 West Edge Construction and Collapse, Looking Northeast. 49 Figure 1: Site 10011 Test Unit 1 West Profile,.... 5I Figure 19: Photograph ot'Site 10011 Test Unit 1 West Profile Looking West._ .. ........ . 52 Figure 20: Photograph of Site 10011 Test Unit 1 Overy ievw Looking Northeast......... 53 Figure 21: Site 10012 (CSH Site 10) Pian View Map and Excavation Profiles (Hammatt et al. 1992:65)........ ............................................ 56 Figure 22: Photograph of Ground Surface at Former Site 10012, Looking Northwest..„...... 59 Figure 23: Site 10013 flan View Map Showing Test Units (Hamman et al. 1992:69). 61 Figure 24: Photograph of Site 10013 Enclosure South Corner and West Wall, Looking Northwest. 62 Figure 25: Photograph of Site 10013 Enclosure South Comer and West Wall, Looking North63 Figure 26: Photograph of Site 10013 Northeast Platform (Left Top Corner) and Tube Opening (Foreground), Looking Northeast. 64 Figure 27: Site 10018 Remnant Enclosure Wall Plan View Figure 28: Photograph of Site 10018 Enclosure Wall and Site 31181 Feature 3 Ranch Wall Corner Looking Southeast. 69 Figure 29; Photograph of Site 10031 Remnant Enclosure Wall, Looking Southeast 72 Figure 30: Site 10067 (CSH Site 232) Plan View Map (Hammatt et al. 1992:49) 74 Figure 31: Photograph of Site 10067, North View. 75 Figure 32: Site 10068 (CSH Site 233) Plan View Map Showing Test Trench (Hammatt et al. 1992:50). 77 Figure 33: Photograph of Site 10068 Bulldozed Remnant Enclosure Wall, Looking Northwest 79 Figure 34: Photograph of Site 10069 Remains Looking Northwest • 80 Figure 35: Photograph of Site 10069 Remains Showing Bulldozer Disturbance, Looking Northwest 82 Figure 36: Site 10070 (CSH 235) Plan View Map, 83 Figure 37: Photograph of Site 10070 Enclosure, Looking West. 84 Figure 38; Site 10072 (CSH Site 238) Plan View Map (Harriman et al. 1992;53) ...... 86 Figure 39: Photograph 1 of Site 10072 Feature 3 South Corner of Bluff, Looking Northeast. 87 Figure 40: Photograph 2 of Site 10072 Feature 3 Southeast Edge Corner of Bluff, Looking North. 88 Figure 41: Photograph 3 of Site 10072 Feature 3 East Comer of Bluff, Looking North. .. 89 Figure 42: Site 10073 Plan View Map 92 Figure 43: Photograph of Site 10073 Feature 1 Plutform Looking South 93 Figure 44: Photograph of Site 10073 Feature 2 Pia Lforin Looking East 94 Figure 45: Photograph of Site 10073 Feature 3 Enclosure Showing Interior Level Bedrock Outcrop. Looking Southeast. 96 Figure 46: Site 10073, Feature 1. TU -1 Southwest Profile. 97 Figure 47: Photograph of Site 10073. Feature 1, TU -1 Southwest Proflle...... ...... ,,,,,, 98 Figure 48: Photograph of Site 10073, Feature 1, TU -1 Northeast and Northwest Profiles. 99 Figure 49: Site 10073, Feature 3„ TU -2 Northeast and Southeast Profiles 101 Figure 50: Photograph of Site 10073, Feature 3, TU -2 Southeast Profile Showing Base of Architecture. 102 Figure 51: Photograph of Site 10073, Feature 3, TU -2 Northeast Profile. ............... ..... 103 Figure 52: Photograph or site 10073. Feature 3, TU -Bas of Excavation Looking Southeast._ 104 Figure 53: Site 10074 Plan View Map (Adapted from Hammatt et al. 1992:9). 106 Figure 54: Photograph of Site 10074 Rock Wall, Looking South 107 Figure 55: Site 10075 Plan View Map 110 Figure 56: Photograph of Site 10075 Enclosure, Looking West, 111 Figure 57: Photograph of Site 10075 Enclosure Southwest Wall, Looking Southwest. 11? Figure 58: Photograph of Site 30592 Railroad Berm Rail Bed, Looking South. 113 Figure 59: Photograph 01' Site 30592 Railroad Berm Retaining Wall, Looking Southeast, 114 Figure 60: Site 30592 Railroad Berm Retaining Wall Profile. .. . .. 115 iv Figure 61: Site 31 181 Plan View Map ................. ...,..... ........ 117 Figure 62: Photograph of Site 31 181 Enclosure Remnant, Looking Northwest. ....... ............ 118 Figure 63: Photograph of Coral Abrader Fragment at Site 31181 119 Figure 64: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Site 31182 Ranch Wall Feature; and Project Area {SSRI, 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle}. ................ ..... ............ 121 Figure 65: Photograph of Site 31 182 Feature 4 Pin Pen Looking Southeast. ........ ...... 122 Figure 66: Photograph of Site 31182 Feature 4 South End Showing Wall Construction, Looking North. 123 Figure 67: Photograph of Site 31182 Feature 4 South End Showing Wall Construction, Looking North. 124 Figure 68: Photograph of Site 31182 Feature 4 Showing Top of Wall Construction, Looking Northeast.. 125 Figure 69: Photograph of Site 31182 Feature 2 South End Showing Top of Wall Construction, Looking Northeast..... 126 Figure 70: Photograph of Site 31182 Feature 2 South End Showing Wall Construction, Looking Southeast. 117 Figure 71: Photograph ofSite 31182 Feature 11 Showing Wall Construction, Looking East128 Figure 72: Photograph of Site 31182 Feature 11 North End Showing Top of Wall Construction. Looking North. 129 Figure 73: Photograph of Site 31 181 Petroglyph131 Figure 74: Site 31 181 Petroglyph Plan View Drawing, 132. Figure 75: 7.5 -Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Archaeological Sites and Project Area (ESRI, 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS. Kealakektia Quadrangle) 134 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Inventory of Subsurface I "est Excavations. 7 Table 2: Land Commission Awards Recorded in l -i 1ualoa I'" and 2nd Ahupua`a. 20 Table 3: Inventory of Previous Archaeological Investigations 25 Table 4: Inventory of Archaeological Sites Identified on the AIS Project. Area (Escott and Escott 2018).34 Table 5: Inventory of Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites (Harnmatt et al. 1992;1-larrrrnatt and Shideler 2007), ................. 39 Table 6: Inventory of Uamniatt et al. (1992).Archaeological Sites and Current AIS Results 43 Table 7: Inventory of Archaeological Sites in the Current AI.S Project Area. .......................... 133 Table 8: Inventory of Archaeological Sites in the Current AIS Project. Area. 137 v INTRODUCTION At the request of property owner Kona Three, LLC, Scientific Con�ult����t Services. Inc. (SCS) conducted an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) of a 76.121 acres of land TMK: (3) 7-6-021:016, 017 (par.), 018, and 019 located in Hnlualoa 1 Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii, Hawaii (Figure 1 through Figure 4). The owner is proposing to develop the property and contracted the archaeological study required for an Environmental Assessment (EA) as required for County of Hawaii Planning Department permit applications. The point or -contact (owner) for the project is Mr. Richard Wheelock. The owner's mailing address is 101 Hualalai Street Hilo, HI 96720. Mr. Wheelock can also be contacted by email at richardeastwestrealty.org or by phone at 808-753-3167. METHODS The archaeological inventory survey was undertaken in accordance with Hawaii Administrative Rules 13§13-284 and was performed in compliance with the Rules Governing Minimal Standards for Archaeological Inventory Surveys and. Reports contained in Hawai`i Administrative Rules 13§13-276. ARCHIVAL METHODS In addition to referencing available resources at SCS, archival research was conducted in the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) report database and library facility (Hilo. 11i), the 1lawai`i County land records office, the Waihuna "Aim Halide database website, IJlukau database website, the Papakilo database website, the Flawaiian collections holdings at the University of Hawaii -Hilo Library, and the Hawaii State Library system. Archival work consisted of research on the history and archaeology of the project area, as well as specific searches of previous archaeological studies in and around the current project area. Historic land use data. land ownership, maps. and narrative information were obtained from the Hawai`i County land records office, Hawaiian internet sites, and the University of Hawaii, Hilo. Figure 1: 5,500 K -Series Map of Hawaii Island Showing Location of Project Area (National Geographic Topol, 2003. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS). 2 '-'+1,21 1.1411114 1111 Lii 111sic% I• 1,1441 F'i 1 7.11 11141 4111 .4144. IN 4 4221619 14 • 14 Figure 2; 7.5-M intik: SVILic'S US6S Topographic Map Showing Location of Project A F::1 K c;.1.31.0.4,,ua Quad. ESRI. 20] 3. Maui Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS). 3 IV Obigni 1.91LIMa F 11`01.1,10 Lw LfrIl L KEY -F11161F.C1 411Y.% !__tl 'MK ROI %Dx05 1, 11 4CNi 11t''. TIMI 1511 10141 lou Win+ Elwin' 3: Aerial Phaatog ap.h Showing Projecl Arm. Hi 1i. icr1, HI, ZA.ine 5 North, 1R9445 9445 m E, 2171790 ni N. (ESR 21l11 11nc��e. 1 SilRLrces: Digital GeoI ye, Earthsiar, USDA. and USES ). 4 K FY - Plararc--F glf MN DAVI I S, _$ ACRE EN C L la -10‘ 541 Ile 150 MI, [often, 4,0 gat\ .4•••14, Figure 4 Arial 11 ShowirT: lkojeo, Area, Holui, HI, Zone 5 North. 1:044 5 in F, :II 71 VA' MI N. (ESRI. 2013 imago, Dahl Sours: 11 (ii.OhC, i011 1-.11.11war. USDA. and USCS), 5 FIELD N'1ETHODS The archaeological pedestrian survey included: 1 O0°•' pedestrian survey of the project area, Global Position System (GPS) plotting archaeological sites on USES and 'FMK Imps; individual site mapping, photographing and recording; and subsurface excavation and recording. Pedestrian survey and site recording were conducted in throughout 2020 by Joe Farrugia, B.A., Suzan Escott, B.A, Tomasi Paiolo, B.A., Nicole Mello. B.A., and Glenn Escott, M.A. A series of north/south transects spaced 2.0 to 4.0 meters apart were walked across the entire project area. Ground cover consisted of tall Cali ft rnia and Guinea grass, koa haole. kiawe, and several krrku/ nut trees. Ground visibility was good. The fieldwork totaled 208 person -Hours. Glenn Escott was the Principal Investigator and Project Director. GPS points for sites were plotted in the field using a Gamin GPSmap 62 hand- held. GPS unit. Site, points were plotted in AreG1S using Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) units (Zone 5 North) and NAD83t VSGS84 datum. Site boundaries were determined by the aerial extent offeatures and by feature function and temporal associations. Features that were in close proximity to each other and that appeared to have functional and temporal associations suggesting they were constructed and used as a functional set of features --those features were included together as a single site. Features that were beyond twenty to thirty meters away from each other, or that were constructed at very different times, or for different very purposes, were separated into individual sites. Photographs were taken of sites and features using a 25 cm north arrow scale with 5 cm black and white increments. Representative plan view maps shoving the location and morphology of identified sites and features were drafted using tape -and compass mapping techniques. Site documentation included site and feature type, function, construction method, and age. Feature type, function, and age were determined by observing environmental context and topographic location, feature size and shape, construction material, construLtion methods, and associated artifacts irpresent. Table 1: IrivCnterrr of Subsrzrfact Test EXenv 1iort't. SILIIII* TYPE FUNCTION AGE C SII EXCAVATIONS ;C'S EXE.;'+.}TIONS 11)1)11 Platform Ag -,Temp 11:Lbriation Pre-Coritaci 1.5 lir I011u french 1' -I 1'.-1 .\ I ' Inl 10512• Platform & ' Va11 Burial Pre -Contact CLLlite Feature .1 -c \r ' ..0 ... 'icsent Ifn113 Enclosure & Lava Tube Habitation Pre.0 lnLae1 .1,5 rnsq. WWI 4.1.. NIs1,1) I1s::I,Isi]Cd 111017 Platform C'attle Ramp Historic - 1L".0 1\L' L..mi cr 1}TEiCl1t 1170 Il; En:los/u 4 Agricultural historic 4ii, lvlsl.:01v Bulk-la/cc! 1171714 6 Rock Mounds Ag. Clearing historic 3 1.11 ms. 1 -it -.1 1'.1111; trRII :lie-, Slit` \lasili. Thilhloied I1tIb31 Eiiclimre Wall .ri.git:0111k Historic - Site Mostly Bulldozed 11:Is11 Pl;iuingCnnlplex C'tifr'eeAg Historic Sue No LongerPresem. I ItI.p-19 Terraces A iriLialiiire Historic Site No Lj n+er Present 11710617 Terraces Iiahita[iun Prc,Contact 1.0 X 1.0 tet - 10068 Enclosure Habitiiii.iii Pre-C....road 0.5 X11.25 ret 'Site NiFit,ily B011614 0:1 11[1760 Modified Bluffil latfurLrl Hard'ilsion Iiii,torie 0.5 X0.3 m .;. i I,r iIy Bulldozed 1117170 1.I.S1iip: Enclosure AgricuIJLire I1isionc 1.11 N 1i.5 Tn ' 1. '+1s1,Itk I3rsl1,10.,. si 111071 I'lillornr Habitation ]'rc-t 41ILLaci - i..L. No I oii ,:r:'n:.cnl 1771772 \ludillcei Bluff Ag. Clearing Prc•Contact 7,17 en squoro total Site M0,1'.. 13r.. i,1uA..1 1[11)73 Complex F1,ullc11111L" L'. Historic - 1 TI. -1. I2-3 X [.2 m1. TU -"':1 .\I rtfl 111137.1 I ncFissure Coffee tl„ 4 :.-i he,' 111,1."rl, 1,' m s [ Loin! Siie klostlt, flitllsiiiicil 111075 i-nclosure 1 1'.,11 lit,:;'rig, 111:101ir - ',lc Nlu,rv, Hr.;IJstfr'I 311592 Railroad Berri Trua.•1}r•r1L11011 311E1 Enclosure C61'ICLe Work Slicd Historic Site On BedL'ostk: 3] 182 Rock Walls Ranching & Ag. ]i[sturie - - *Site nun bora are preceded by the Prefix 50-111~37, Orange Shading - Si[e no longer presLnt. • Burial S Fe 1 601[_2 reintcrrrd oiTprajcr_-t prior to [983_ Feature types and function; N •ere :elected from a set of recognized formal archaeological types arid functions developed within Hawaiian archaeology over many decades of research. Age determinations are expressed in terms of recognized formal eras including pre -Contact era (before 1778), early post -Contact era (1778-1850), Historic era (1851-1965). and Modem era (post -1965). Age was interpreted on the basis of feature dimensions, type, construction. and artifacts recovered from excavations. Many of the sites identified during the current AIS survey were bulldozed in the past (Table 1). In addition, many sites were previously excavated during the previous Cultural surveys Hawai`i (CSH) AIS study (Hammad et al. 1990. Sites that were mostly bulldozed or that did not have sediment deposits, or at which CSH had conducted adequate subsurface excavations to accurately interpret site function and age were not excavated during the current AIS study. SCS conducted test excavations at two sites (Site #50-10-37-10011 and 50-10- 37- 10073, hereafter site numbers are abbreviated to their last five digits) to better determine site function, construction method, and age. Test units (TU) were excavated in features at both sites. A total of 2.88 square meters were excavated in Site 10011 Feature I. A total of 3,76 square meters Test -units were excavated at features that had a high potential to yield functional and temporal diagnostic artifacts, and where vertical control would contribute to this data. Test units were placed to expose the base of feature architecture. Test -units were excavated in natural stratigraphic layers and arbitrary 10 cm levels when natural stratigraphic layers were thicker than 10 cm. Sediment excavated from all units was screened for cultural material through 118`h inch mesh. Swat graphic profiles were drawn for test units and post -excavation photographs were ta,kczr._ Cultural material was recorded by type on standard SCS excavation farms and collected. Soil colors were recorded using Munsell color charts, soil composition was recorded with the aid of the 1J.S. Department of A rriculiure Soil Survey Manual on standard soil stratigraphy forms, and profiles were drawn. 8 LABORATORY METHODS Inventory of midden and artifacts colleted from the test excavations were weighed and analyzed by layer c'f provenience within each excavation unit. Weight, count and diagnostic characteristics were recorded for all artifacts. Field notes, wraps, cultural material_ and photogr,',Illrs pertaining to this project are currently being curated at the SCS facilities on the Island r.51 Iia a;'i. ORAL INTERVIEW ANDCONSULTATION Gregg Kashiwa was interviewed by phone on April 19. 2016. Mr. Kashiwa was the project property manager for parcels 016 and 017 in the early 1980s and was present during ATS work documented in the Hamntatt et al, (1994 He is originally from Oahu but lived in Kona for several decades. Mr. Kashiwa remembered that five acres in the northeast comer of the project area were excluded from the original AIS because the property owners were planning to give the live acres to a group to use as an agricultural preserve, The five acres and much of the current project area had already been bulldozed for agricultural use and for cattle ranching. Mr. Kashiwa knew that there were ranch walls and Historic era agricultural features on the project area, but did not know how they were used, as they were no longer in use during his time in Kona. He also remembered the old railroad bed and berm and that there was a small railroad stop along the track just south of the project area. Mr. Shane Nelson, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) West Hawaii Representative was contacted to consult on the disposition and preservation of Railroad Berm Site 30592. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The current project area consists of undeveloped land used as cattle pasture for several decades, Prior to that. coffee was grown in the northeast quadrant of the project area. The project area is situated on fairly steeply shaping land with level areas in between elevation breaks. The project area k between 360 and 7000 feet (1 10 to 213 meters) above mean sea level (amsl). The project area lands are part of a large former cattle ranch and agricultural area that was warted iii the early 1900s. The project area is still used to pasture cattle. The project area lands were bulldozed sometime between the 1940s and 1970s. Evidence of bulldozing is visible in aerial photographs as alternating bands of cleared bulldozer tracks and bands of push pile (see Figure 4). Pedestrian 9 SILrvey ccrnfimied the linear bands in the aerial photogmphs are bit]I doze r-cicared paths and linear Files of bulldozed rock alorig the cleared bulldozer paths. The farmer Kona Sugar Company railroad bed is present along the eastern edge of the project area. The project area ground surface is a Hualalai lava flow dating between 5,000 and 10,000 years before present(ybp) (Wolfe and Morris 1996). Soil in the project area is Pllnal►r`u Series (rPYD series) extrernely rocky Feat with six to twenty percent slopes ('Sato 1.973.48). The majority of the project area has been bulldozed in the past and the present ground surface is rocky sail. Rainfall in the project area is very low., less than thirty inches per year. Parcel 018 and Parcel 019 are, seasonal gulches that drain rainfall dawn slope to the west. This project area region is dry, trot. and somewhat barren except for thick California grass (Urochlacr inutic a), G utlle"I grass (Megathvrs7rs m animus),l oa haole(Leircaeno leucocepheilu), and scattered kukui(Aleur°rtes rr ohiccana)trees (Starr Environmental 2016). A fairly large number ref introduced tree species associated with Historic era ranching and fanning arc present in the project area, including kicAve(Pr osopis pallida), monkey pod (Scam area sarrr(rrr), opiurna (Piihecellobium didee), tamarind (Tamcar-indus indica), coffee(C gffieca orcahica). and bamboo(Hambasa,sta.). HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS Kona is div1ded into two sections: North Bona or Kona 'akcau, and, South Iona, or Kona hento (Maly 1996). iti oua 'akau was further subdivided into north(called Kekcahca) and south(called Kvrrcfka 'i-gnta�areas. with the division between the two at the ahaqraa'ca of Keahuolu, The project area is in H61ualoa l" Ahupua`a (see Figure 1 and RL,urc 2) within the area ofKun a&cri'617ua in Kona 'akatr. H61ualoa means(literally) "long sled course" (Pukui et al. 1974AS), H61ualoa l"t is a trraditlonal cahaptica ca stretching from the ocean to the foot ofHualalai in the uplands. The coastline of Hbluafoa I"Ahupua'a is primarily low rock- cliff`s. Very little is recorded of H61ualoa Ahupua`a in traditional oral accounts. The Hee;r7 Stirring Legend cif' a-Miki, published in the Iiawallan language newspaper Ka Hodtr o Hawaii and translated by Maly(1993) contains the only description ofHblualoa, The legend is,set in the 13"' century but also reflects more recent influences (Maly and Maly 2002: 17). According to the narrative, to The lands of Holualoa were named for the chief of that name; both R61ualoa and Pwpua`a were high chiefs, who controlled the lands from mountain to sea, which bear their Tianies--- Kaluaokalani served as a priest ofH6lualoa at the temple of Paikiha. This heirau was near the contest field oC H&ualoa..- The lands of this region are named for various ali'i, all of whom were related. When the chief Hblualoa took up the challenge against Kepaka'ili'ula on behalf of the Kona chiefs, Tiolualoa called upon his gad KJk ij)i7 (xa to assist him in his battle... H61tial0a )Aas the first chief to call upon the god Kdlaipahaa, and this was the beginning ol'this gods' use by the chiefs of Hawaii [Daly 1991208-209]- PRE-CONTACT ERA H61ualoa, Kona, and much of the Ieek�,and side ofHawai'r Island, while well populated at the time: 01'ELu-Opeftn C'unUict. �xere settled later than the windward side. Many archaeologists believe that Hawaii Island was first settled around A.D. I,00 l by people sailing from the Marquesas (Athons et al_ 2014, Dye 101 1; Kahn et al. 2014, Kirch 2011;Kirch and McCoy 2007; McCoy 2005 and 2007; Mulrooney et al. 2011; Reith et al. 2011: 1Wilmhurst et al. 2011a and 2011 b). An article published in the Journal of Archaeological Science reviewing radiocarbon dates recovercd at archaeological sites ort the Island of flawai`i suggests that, by rclying on only carbon saniples from short-lived plant remains, the most reliable dates point to initial Polynesian colonization ofHawaii`i .1sland occurring between A_D- 1220 and 1261 (Rietlt et al. 2011:2747). Earl�-settlers founded settlements on the windward shores in likely places, such as Waipi`o, \ aimanu, and Hilo Bay. The windward. or kv'alcw shores receive abundant rainfall and have numerous streams such as the,Wailuku,Waiolarna, `Alenaio, and Wailoa that facilitated agricultural and fishpond production (Maly 1996:3). The windward shores.also provide rich benthic and pelagic marine resources. 1l. a.,y Y I y f a ' 1 I. Figure 5: Mnp ofHnlunIt n 1"and 2"1 Ahupua`a Shm,-in,g Location ofProjecl Area in Yellow{Alexander 1855). 12 The dry leeward shores of Hawaii Island presented a eery different environment requiring a modified set of subsistence strategies. Archaeologists and lustoi-121nti Lire uncertain about the exact motives that lead to the establishment and ,pnr a€1 ot'sculaments on the leeward side of I-Iawa.i`i, but some suggest population pressure, dwindling fertile land, growing socio-political stratification, or simply the opportunity for a new sLGrt might have lead to new communities developing on the dryer west side of the island (Curdy 2000:130). The process was likely underway soon aftcr initial settlement Of Hawaii Island (Wordy 2Q00). During this perirrd, areas of permanent habitation were established in Kona (Cards+ 1981, 1995; S€:hilt 1984). Habitation was concentrated along the shoreline and lowland slopes, and informal fields were cleared at higher elevations where rainfall was higher. Agricultural fields and habitation areas expanded across the slopes and coastal am-a ofHualalai during the period between.AD 1200 and 1400 (Burtchard 1995; Cordy 1995). The development of extensive formal walled fields likcly began sometime around AD 1400 to 1600. This period inarks the initial construction of the Kona Field System (KFS) (SchiIt 1984). The development of the KFS may be, in part, a by-product of the need to €'Nunn wore sub,,iwionee resources from an increasingly limited agricultural base. The population in Kona increased dramatically during this period. as reflected in the abundant radlk)Lcarbon dates frorn habitation structures. shelter caves, and agricultural soils of this period ('Burtchard 1995:Haun et al. 1998; chill 1984). During this period, the stratified chiefdoni structure becomes clearly developed in the archaeological record, Large residential complexes and heirrrd reflect the segregation of places and power for the growing hierarchy of high and lower chiefs, and ceremonial stewards(Gordy 1481; Houn et al. 1998; Hommon 1€86), The produce from the formal walled fields were distributed to higher chiefs through a hierarchy of lower chiefs responsible for management and collection of the cultivated and wild resources. By the time of the CompatiOnra Period (AD 1600 to 1800), the royal centers and larger heiau were in place, refIccGng the: grm,Lh in power of the rulers and chiefs .in the region (Barrera 1971, Haininatt and F o I k 11)90). Resources inay have reached their maximum carrying capacity. resulting in social stress bctwccn neighboring groups. Hostility between groups is reflected archaeologically with the development of refuge 13 caves during this period (5chilt 1984), This v0136le period was probably accompanied mpanied by internal rebellion wid territorial annexation(floinmon 1986.86. Kirc:h 1985), Royal centers are located at Kailua, 1461tialoa. Kahalu'u, Kealakekua. and Honaunau (Wordy 1995).. The region of'Holualoa developed into a royal center in the late 1600s to early 1700S under the reigns of K:eakamahana (reigned 1680,1700) and Keakealaniwahine (reigned 1700-1720)(Cord_v 2000:244). Many WO and konohiki residences and ntinterarts reli�Pous sites are known to have existed here. The majority of the 6reiarr and royal resideTi ccs werc constructed along or near the coast, most notably at. Kamoa P lint south of the project area. The royal center at 1-16lualoa was eclipsed in the second half of the 1700s by the royal center in the Kahalu`u and Keauhou r4on. The Kona Field System Dunn, his travels in the region in 1923 William Ellis nowd that the area above and notith of Kailua was: gLlite a garden compared with that througli which they had passed on first leaving the town. It was generally divided into small fields, about fifteen rods square, fenced with low stone walls; made of ti,agments of lava which had becti gathered ti•orrl the surface of the eaclo,,ures. These fields were planted with bananas, sweet patatOcs. ttiOuntain taro, tapa trees, melons and sugar cane, flourishing luxuriantly in c,,cry direction [Handy 1940:114 and 162]. Rocky binds in the olden clays were walled up all around with big and small stono:s of tlic patch until there was a wall about ' feet high and in the enclosure were but weeds of every kind, atr,a`u tree ferns and so on, and. then topped well with sail taken from the patch itself to enrich it [Handy 1940:147], These garden have been studied in some detail, and are often referred to as the "Kona Field System Many of the archaeological projects conducted within Kona deal with components of the Kona Field System (Cordy 1995: Newman 1970: Schilt 1984). This area extends north at lust to Kau Ahupua`a and south to Honaunau, west from the coastline and east to the forested slopes ofHualdlai (Gordy 1.995). A large portion of this 14 area is designated in the Hawaii SIHP (Mate Inventory of Historic Places) as Site 50-10- 37--660I. The basic characteristics and general locations of the zones within the system. as presented in Newman (1970) have been confirmed and elaborated on by more intensive and extensive ethnohistorical investigations (Kelly 1983). The kola zone of the Kona Field Systern is the area from sea level to 150 rn amsl. This lmver elevation lone is traditionally associated with habitation and the cultivation of sweet poinioes (gala),paper mulberry(Y aiike), and gourds (ipu). Aocultural features, such as clearing mounds, planting mounds. planting depressic cis, niodifi4d outcrops, and planting terraces, are common throughout much of this zone(Harnmatt and Clark 1980; Hammau and Folk 1990; Haun et al. 1998; Schilt 1984). Dwellings are often scattered throughout the agricultural lacartinn of the kilo, but they are commonly concentrated alon- the shoreline subdivision of the kula crane (Cordy 1981). The shoreline zone, extending inland approximately 2.00 m, was used primarily for permanent habitation and ether non-agric:u ILUral Whvities, such as canoe s[urage, ceremonial and burial practices, recreation, and fishing-related activity. Royal centers and high chiefly centers were also situated within the shoreline of [lie kola. These complexes include dwellings for rulers, chiefs, and the supporting populace, places of refuge, and other structures. Single, or clustered, burials are also situated in the shoreline, and near-shore kula(Han et al,. 1986; Hamrnatt and,Clark. 1980-. Harriman and Meeker 1979). Burials occur in eaves, within finely built platfonns, cruder rack mourds, and houses in the shoreline, and are more often in the near-shore kola (Curdy 1995: Han et al. 1986 Schilt 1984;Tainter 1973; Tornonari-Tuggle 1993). The large,. and densely populated, royal centers were situated at several locations z1ong the shoreline between Kailua and Honaunau (Gordy 1995; Tomonari-Tuggle 1993). The residential areas, large and small heiair, sporting areas, and burial clusters, are present continucausly farther inland than the usual 200 meters for the shoreline habitation portion of the kola. Consequently, a variety of nonagricultural features are present in the kola near royal centers, The kida'ula cane above 150 m amsl is a welter region above t11e kirk, where bread tiuit and other arboreal crops were cultivated(Kelly 1983). Sweei Potatoes (lpomoea batalas), lr, (C'rxrdrlinefi-titrcosa) rt-a key(Broussoner a perpy),Ji}ra),turr) Walocasia esculen1a), and sugar cane(Sarchar-urpa sp.),planted among the arboreal 15, crops, were mulched with grass(Menzies 1920,75-76). The current project area is in the kedu'aht zone. Above the hahi lfhr zone, in the 'trpa'a zone, fields with low stone walls were cultivated with bananas, sweet potatoes, turd, Yvc uA'e, melons, 1i and sugar cane. The 'apa'a zone was notable for fresh water springs. Above the 'apa a zone was the 't-tnla'n zone where walled fields were created to grow plantains and bananas. Timber f-om various tree sl#ccies was collected from the 'apa"a zone and the 'ama'tx zone. Bird catching and other forest resources extraction activities were conducted in these upper two zones. Temporary habitations were constructed to be used seasonally when working in the uplands. In the region, people initlally moved into coastal seuiri"s f0hlmore upland settings (e.g-, the 'apa a agronomic zone.) at the saone time, csscntially ignoring the drier intermediate zone (except, of course, as a thrDughway Ind een their gardens and the seal. In this way, the first settlers could immediately plant seedlings in the wetter uplands, knowing the craps would succeed. Permanent settlement would have first been restricted to the coast, bUt the same people would have also been oCCup_ying the uplands (at least. tollporarily)as well. It is only later that the 'intcrinediatc 7.one'(and the kaln'uhi agronomic zone), would have been utilized for planting. POST-CONTACT EPA The extensive fealffes of the Dana Field System were exploited and altered during the po5t-cotltact cra. Walls. A a'iwi, springs, and pathways created generations curlier were used and planted with alien cultigens (collce. cotton. sugar, citrus. and sisal) and ultimately used as pastures for cattle. Ranching has its roots in the first cattle and sheep brought to the island in 1793 and 1794 by Vancouver. Two cows, tlxree bulls, five ewes, and five rams were released to prosper in the region of Kealakekua in 1744 (Vancouver 1967.(3)11). Kamehameha placed a ten-year kalm on the killing of cattle so that they would have the opportunity to multiply. A 486-acre stone cotTal was built in the uplands ofLehu`ula-Honua'ino, above K5inal a where they wart) raised (Bowser 1880, uited. in Maly and Maly 2001=28.5). Two American captains, William Shafer and Richard Cleveland presented two horses to loan Young in l 803, Cleveland l ater returned with more than 200 horses 16 brought from California. Donkeys, mules and oxen were also imported for transportation and hauling. Goats were also brought to the island and left to multiply in the wild. By 1813 to 1815 caws began overrunning agricultural fields and btcarne a danger to travelers and residents (Ellis 1963: 291; Wilkes 1970: 204). A number of walls were commissioned to keep feral sheep,goats, and cattle out of agricultural areas and away rroin incomes. By 1848, in Kona District a Great Wall (the Kuakini Wall) was constructed from Lanihau to `Onouli (Maly and Maly 2001-286). In 1830 Governor Kuakini moved to oversee and improve government cattle by constructing corrals. Liholiho visited the saute year to witness strides made in the nascent cattle ranching industry. It was hoped that the exportation of tallow, hides, and satted beef would supplant the defunct Sandalwood trade as a major source of income. Several ventures related to ranching, including tallowy making, uinning, saddle making, and blacksinithing were initiated (Bergin.2004: 156). Cowhide was tanned using the astringent bark of local trees(Wilkes 1970, 218). The lion"s share. Lrfconinrnc;rcial enterprises on the island involved supplying whaling ships and the local market with beef_ The changing sAsititence and trade regimes developed by Incoming h.urOpeaaa and American settl4rs, as well a� o her historical factors, caused a depopulation nl'the coastal areas of Kona. Rancllca were established at rniddlc and upper elevations, and farms were established in the uplands where rainfall was higher and the ternperatruues were cooler. Cattle ranching and clearing for sugar cane and cofFee removed many of the endemic species of plants. The suite of vegetation that existed prior to the pre-Contact era were replaced by koa h aolc (Leucaena leucocephala), kiawe (}'rosopis pallida), and other newly introduced invF,`asivc plant species. Schools,churches, stores, and other businesses were also established in the uplands. During the late 1800s and early 1900s. coastal Kona was no longer the densely pcnpulaled saciopolitical center it once was. I became a small cluster of houses along the trail from Kailua Bay to Kcauhou (Totnonari-Tuggle 1993:I5). Homesteads, ranc lies, and plantations d3vlolred I file LIPlLE3iLls during this period as reflected in the pattern of Land. Commission Awards (I CA) and i.and Grants(LG) recorded during the Mahele. 17 THE MA,HELE Witli the cunning ofthe Great Wiliele ( 1848),the Alien Land Owncrship Act (1850) and the Kuleana Act (1850), the traditional Hawaiian archetype of land-use .vas essentially deconstructed and replaced with the European concept of fee-simple land ownership. Article 1V of the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles was passed in December 1845 and began the legal process of private land ownership. Through the Whele of 1847-49 the Alien Land 0wriership Act of 1850 and the Kuleana Act: of 1850, land was made available for private ownership. The Iwlahele established a board of five commissioners to oversee land claims and to issue patents and leases for valid claims. Kauikeaouli (Kamehameha III) established and ratified laws to protect Hawaiian crown lands as foreigners began claiming ownership ofland they were granted permission to use for homes and business interests (Daws 1968:1 11, Karne`eleihiwa 1992: 169-70, 176; Kelly 1981, 45; Kuykendall 19380): 145 footnote 47, 152, 165-6. 170;). Among other things, foreigners were denianding private ownership of land to wure their island investments (Kame-eleihiwa 19921: 178; Kuykendall 1.938(l). 138, 145, 179, 184, 022. 206, 271). Under the MAhcic and subsequent acts (the Kuleana Act of 1850 and the Ahcn Lend 0-wnership Act of 18s(t), the lands of the kingdom ofHawai'i were divided arnong the king (c:rowu lands),the ah`i and konobihi, and the government„ Once lands were rhUll divided and private ownership was instituted, the maka"aincpw(commoners), if they had been made aware of the procedures, were able to claim the plots on which they had been cultivating and living as stipulated in the Kuleana Act(1850). These claims, he wQvcr. could not include any previously cultivated or presently fallow land,okipu`u, stream fisheries, or many other resources traditionally necessary for survival (Karne`eleihiwa 1992:295; Kelly 1983:45-76. Kirch and. Sahlins 1992 vol.1:3. 135-137, and vo1.2:2). The right of claimants to land was based on the written testimony of at least two witnesses who could corroborate the claimaWs long-standing occupation and use of the parcc](s) in question. The claimant might have been awarded a patent for the property, subsequently called Land Commission Awards (LCAs) (Chinen 1961:16). The Land Commission awarded the majority ofH6lualoa I" and 2,d Ahupua`a to Victoria Kam&maIu Ka`ahumanu 1V, Kahina Nui of Hawaii IsIajid and Crown Princess of Flawai"i as Land Commission Award(LCA) Number 7713, `Agana 43 (Figure 6). 18 I k r .. Y' O f '� r 111 _ u l �r t J Figure 6: Portion ofKailva.Section,North Kona Map Showing Location of LCA 7713 and Project,Area in Red Border(Aki 1952)- I9 Several smaller LCA and Land Grant (L( )properties were also recorded in the upland region of 1I6lualoa 1?" and 2`1 Ahupua`a (Figure, 7). Twenty four Land Commission awards were recorded in Mlualoa I"' Ahupuwa, the ahupua'a where the project area is located(sec Figure 7 and Table 2). 'rabte 2. Land Commission Awards kecorded in Mualoa I" and 2"�Ahupua'a, LC.A# AWARDED TO A11UPUAIA ACRES �061) John (I. Nltinn 1-161tialca 1" 1 1 1.5 43(): Kekoi I161LK-110a V 1.7 5552 Kautla 1*lualoa l" 1_9 555 1 Kealy kolohc I iolLtaloa 1" 11.27 5795 Kcliikanakaole FfMualoa 2"', 2.2 5810 KaopLtkai"il.i 1,74 5993 Lvi.aila ala Hutri:Joa 2"` 2.0 6063 Haifa 1`` 2.9 6107 N aai Hi,lii.i;, :i i`` 3.94 7339 Kwia"ix 11,_1I LM !'1 4.15 7340 Kania 2 11,11 u't •,":1 1 w` 2.5 7340:B Kamm ] 1-1011..t_oa 1.3 7443 Kaltina na I is—'I .a_, 'I 4 ' t.94 7713 Kaniania]ti I IoILI-,loa I''& Large H�lualoa 7m� $ 7746 K.atT1Ea11Mo Mtialoa I" � t] 7794 Kauakini Holtialca 1" 1.8 7990 Pu aak.i Wl[ialm 1'' 1.1 8015 Ai po T—Wiialoa 2"` 1.4 8151 11c1lena 11611,iarloa 1" 2.3 8223 lkaiaka 116lualoa 1" 3.5 9915 L€in ahaiia I WILial()a I 2.42 9932 Lumaawe Ii6luatloa 1 2.98 10770 l'uuiano IWILK110a 1" 3,06 10400 Naainiakaulii 1--lolualoa V& 3.5 Mlualoa 2 A portion of LC ##3660 to .10 in C. I\lunn makes up a thin strip of land Iocated through the center of the current pru.j":(:. ;7r. i. With the notable exception of LC'A #3660 and a few other large LCA.s, the avcmQL7 .i•.t:trd was 2.8 acres, most(n=16) were for lass than.3.0 acres. Thrce Land Grants (LO ;�1 S92, 1602, and 3 63 0) were also recorded in Holualca I " and 2"`i AhUpUa'a. LG#1592 was a 25.0-acre parcel scald to Kea laIio and LG #3630 was a 38,2-aerc parcel scald to W.H. Cromkvell. Almost all of the awards and grants were used as subsistence and commercial farm laid, and scarce were used to pasture cattle(Esco(t and Escott 2018), 20 r r w . M } F�a �F �. , s� . r'_�"',�5'�' � wt I ri,�d 1r .�,fIM r •'`M I t It Figure 7: 7.5-Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Shoti4 ing Location of Land('0111111k,1011 A%k L,ftk- 1_.ti)d Grams,and the Project Area(National Geographic Topa!,21H13„K.ealakekua Quad. Dam Sources; National Geographic Stu i,�La.USES). 21 EARLY POST-CONTACT ERA AND "IISTORIC ERA Fonital cattle ranching began in the Kona region in the mid-I800s, but wild cattle may have been In the area as early as the late 1700s. The pro `ding ('walls of the land'), native tenants' wall enclosures, were prevalent in the ,area, as indicated by their inclusion in many local ffhele testimonies. "These were used to mark the boundary of properties and to keep livestock out of crop areas (Kuykendall 1957.318 note '76). Later. cattle ranchers built walls to control their cattle. In the early 1840s, cattle were said to be"maintained on the kula," a mile from the coast where the ground was"covered with herbage" (V4WiLkes 1845:4, 955 . Cattle, introduced to Kona by Vancouver in 1794,became a nuisance later, when their numbers increased. They fed on the grass of the kula and from time to time on the thatch of Hawaiians' horttes and on vegetables in their ga_trderrs. The open upland fields,bounded only by lmv earth and stone walls, were in full cultivation in the 1850s [Kelly 1983:761. Ranchers leased land below the railroad to graze cattle that they owned (Kelly 1983:1 1 1). Higher walls Acre built in the 020s wid 1930s to control animals. According to Jae Gomes, a longtime rancher in the area, Walls about 3 ft high can keep donkcy°s pcTineti. The usual wall is about 4 11z ft high and keeps cattle in. For goats you need a wall 6 to 811 high. For wild pigs you need a 6 to 81i-high walf. They climb over lower walls easily. They come down from the mountains for macadamia nuts and also in mango season for rttangoes [Kelly 1993,1121. Sugar was a major crop in Hawaii tr', 1 rLLI V as signing of the Reciprocity Treaty to 1876(Kelly 1983:' 0). The sugar industry grew rapidly. and by 1899 the only sugar trill in the Kona area was built by the Kona Sugar Company. Many Chinese worked on the sugar plantations(Kelly 1983:111). They built a railroad in 1901 to haul cane from the fields to their mill site along the Wai`aha stream, north of the current project area, The strearn did not provide enough water to mil l cane year round and company failed in 1903. The Kona Sugar Company was bought by James Castel in 1906 and was later purchased by Japanese investors. The Kona Sugar C omp�in% continued to operate until 1926. 2 2 The railroad was bought by Kona Development Company. and was used ic)r lrei�4ht, sups anc� and by the Hawaiian Ltinzber Company. Sugar was grown above the railroad l ine. The cui sugar was delivered to the tracks with the assistance Orgrac ity, by wire cables and flurnes. The rail line was seven miles long and extcnde'd from I16lualoa to Keopuka (Figure 8). Cotton was grown on lands below the railroad tracks (Kelly 1983.1 1 1 ). Cottou gins were located south of the project area. Cotton was being picked as late as the 19-10,S. Other pIcint, gr{awn below the tracks in the dryer lands were sisal and tobacco (Kelly I L)8 3:1 1 ,). Traditional Hawaiian subsistence practices, including the rights to collect resources from all ecological zones of one's ahnInr€r`cr, were challenged, restricted,or prevented. As private land owners considered their properly of hints to Others, cultivation and collection of resources on private land diminished. Individual Hawaiian. cultural beliefs, specialized kiioledge, and practices associated with the use of the different ecological resource zones also diminished. The development of cattle ranching and commercial craps, such as sugar cane and coffee. removed traditionM cultigens and resources from large swaths of the lands of Kona. The changing subsistence and trade regimes developed by incoming Luropean and American settlers, as well as rather historical factors, caused a depopulation of the coastal areas of bona. Ranches were established at loner elevations and farms were established in the uplands where rainfall was higher and the temperatures were cooler. SCII0015, churches, stores, and nthcr businesses were also established in the uplands. Curing the late I800s and early 11300s, H61ualoa was no longer the densely populated scaciopolitiictal center it once was. The coastal area ofilolualoa had become a small cluster-of houses along the trail from Kaillta Bay tea Keauhou. The Project area is just maakcfi (west)of the majority of land commission awards and is at the same elevation as portions of the land grants in the region. Based on historic documents, the project area and surrounding lands were likely bJng used 1`vr SLIbSi5te1lce and commercial agriculture, as well as for cattle pasture from the raid to late 1800s, The project.area right have been u;ed later than surrounding lands because of its steep slopes and very rocky soil, but based on aerial photographs.the project area was bulldcared sometime around the 1950s in preparation for corrrmercial agriculture. i3 s. i Yw w x . w _ +•b.W.wIU1wY � ry � JW*.Wi.irAfY.11��, w 7 le7� .M.M"'"• tit f t+t- ..., Iw Yi'i» A P t Figure S. Portion of 15-Minute Series USES Topographic Map Showing Location of Railroad and Project Area (USGS t928). 24 PREVIOUS ARCH.AECl1.(1GICAI. STt'DlFS There are at least 33 previous archswolw-,ik:ol .ports for lands near the current project area, including studies in Puapua'a 2'111 and Holualoa l", 2i1c1, and P Ahupua`a (Table 4,and Figure 9). The:studies were conducted ti•om the coast to roughly 1,460 ft amsl and encompass the kilo region (0-500 ft), the > aln`idu region (500-1,000 ft), and the lower portions of the 'C wa region (1,000-2,5M fit), Results of the previous archaeological studies are Summarized below by elevation: studies numbered 1 through 15 in Table 3 and Figure 9 are situated from the coast to Queen Ka'abumanu Highway(U- 360 Ft amst), studies 16 through 21 are located from above the Queen .Ka`ahumanu Highway to just below Hualalai Road(306-760 ft amst), and studies 22 through 24 are above Hualarlai road to just above l Rmalahoa Highway (1,100-1,460 ft ams)). Table 3: Inventory of Previous Arcllacologie.al Investigations. 1'ro�E°ct \ut711Ser Reference True of Study Area i9a,Acres Results (Figure 8) I Lamclrun7 ti f t[I. 1 COO AFCI1Lrcolt),-rrca1 N ;1 46 Si9cs Clrkc771c1r} tiultcv AxLhacolog al Data I Calls et al. ?Ot}4 RCCO� ry N ;1 ttl Sites 2 Carlson&RoscT)dai sl rclraco10gicrtl 65 64 Sites 1990 111VOI10ty Su9`4ev Archaeological Haun eta]. 199� 13 31 Sites t971'�;lit41 ��L19'�'CV' 4 Hainmail &Futk 19XI Aich.avolo,,,rcal SLrr�'cV 9fa 20 Sites Archaeological SLw-�44 1-l'd917fT1",i91 �`9 ;91 G,)�h - 11} 21 Slft' & Lxc aY'a9iUnt Fl.lirn& I Cc[orti 201 1 Ar haeolopuical Data ],5[7 t Site l�c�covcry 6ArchLicological 1. {�" 2 Sites f:k�'[n[ _411.3 Inve31to Surve-v _ A L-11:3e 7logn';d 7 4inoto 1971) C> Rock Walls lei Lt?17nnlJn .117t�SLrr4'Cv 9 Himirnaii I979i- SLfr,4'1" 9",11CS 10 C onolly&Clinnc�,ti Arti I i,o[ g,icLi1 Ko Site 1979 fiL:L',r1 uai,sattcc survey 1f1 Hatttmatt t979a Archaeological 4ti,!S 11 Sites Invenlor y Survey l0 H:iimi1Li19 1980 Aicliacologxal SLkr-VCY 103 88 slecs� C xc'av'f'atiOlt. rchaco[ogica1 l I Nelson�1 crl 'tip ?K ''' sire tit1elII 7r Surw'e __ Arw htic: Io ic,af ]2 1�oscnclbal 1978 R04 e011[rnlIti.iilcC.SLrrve t Site 12 Soohrm 1980ii Aa:h;woI,i,-,i41i1 Ilia 7 Sites 25 Project Number Reference Type of Study Area in Acres Results (Figure 8 Rei�o,1 a1—,,,.ii1cu Sm-%c Art11 icoI0g; sl1 4�12 olforth ct al. 2000 81 7 Sites 11wentory Suave 13 Barrera 1995 Arrhac010111citl 17 3+several ag. Reconnaissance Survey mounds Archaeological 13 Haun&Henry 2flf,}tl Inverrtury survey 1 12 110�Features, K2 ofWhich Were Agricultural) 14 Rc�senda.Lil lB#i9 Arrhfoolo.,�icel Field 6 \Iodii ed Inti eetion 011tcro s 1 seltill 191K4 Archawlu Teal Stadv 17 ],4 Silo ] , Walker& Rowndahl Archaeuto0cal 104 67 Sitc.r It)]t� Rccortnaissance Sur�cv ii-ves& Uoodiellow Archaeological Data l fi 104 Sri Sirc,ti 1993 Rccuw cr, Maly& Rosenrlahl Arcli acoloiricLsl lb - 1.'4 fi? sIlcti 20016 PreSci',:i'itm J'I,iii 17 Haammattclal. [09-1 1rt`.`}i4si1+;; i.,il 1 �4 site; 1N snelu-011 lYgob Arch c o Iagrca 10 l Site Ituc;onnai—arnce Suri'cv` 1m- 19 Rechtnian 2Ut1C� Arclvcclogical l.ilU , w`ntcrr r Surve ` - flux Archaeological 20 Pwscndahl 19813 J± 17 Sites kccorortaiS;arlcs:Stln cv 20 Fagrer& Grs vos 1001 Archaeclt�uwal !7 17 Sites hivL nlory Sur�c y 1 Site{149 21 T3i1xles et al.2013. Archacctevic:al 10 y{a4y Historic to Inventory survey Modem Farming Feattares) Arc:1nicv10�icirl 1 Hoir stead 22 Desilets et al.2004 � 11.7 lark°eatitr�r'Sur' ey I'cal 11rcs, 23 Rcchlnian 2013 29 24 SUCS, 24 Clark& Pcchtrnan Arehaeclovical 2 7 6 1lisixic Era 2Ow) Inwnto Survey Archaeological "Pre-c Dill.►4t 25 Escort& Escort 2019 Inventory 5urve 5.0 and Hi oork Fra .4itc 26 � a P V f • .., M ,N u « 1A L ✓:.X' l" a .. KPI r� � • ^ r Y 7 q ORW 111M lN,l ti{�,494 rA; .Y w;� •—�+y'" ��� ! dr s a fY••e��� IY"illrinl Y�F I.IlWi.l Figurc 9: '.wAl i little Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of rrevicLis Archaeological SLUdies and Project Area (Kr;tl:ikwk«;1 Quad. l.'.',1t1. 201�1, [)tIw SoLlrec%:Notional(kI,)graphic S vioty, USGS), 27 REGIONAL PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES 1. Landrum et aL 1990, and Calis et al. 2004. PHRI, Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory Survcy (LandrUttt et al. 1990) and SCS, Inc. conducted data recovery itivesii ations(Calls et al. 2004) at the Kaihakai development project. Thc� project area is located within the lower elevations of Proapua`a 2"t Ahupua`a. Pre-Contact era to early post-Contact era cave shelters, {agricultural rock clearing mounds, burials. shrines, and a passible hciau were identified dunrg the AIS study. A heiau complex, several burials, and Five pennarient habitation sites were recommended for preservation. All of the preservation sites are near the coast. 2. Carleson and Rosendahl 1990. PHRI, Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 65 acres between Kuakini and Queen Ka;ahurnanu highways in Puapua`a 2" Ahupua`a. Their study recorded 64 archaeological siLn including pre-Contact era habitation, agricultural, and burial sites. Seven sites were assessed as significant and recommended for preservation (Carleson and Rosendahl 1990: 34). 3. Haun et al. 1998. PHRI, Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory Sul-Vey of the proposed Ali`i Drive corridor through several ahupua`a_ Numerous pre-Contact era site complexes were recorded irn Puapua`a 2"d and Mualoa 1" through 4`r' Ahupua`a. The site complexes included a large number of agricuittiral featLires. as well as habitation, burial, and ceremonial features. 4. Hammatt and Folk 1981, and Hammatt et aL 1986. Two archaeological surveys were conducted on a 210-acre parcel of below Kuakiili Highway. The first study recorded 20 sites, and the second recorded 21 sites. Mane of tltt sites were recommended for preservation(Harnmatt and Folk 199 l: it, and Han7ma(t et al. 1986- 87). The report also recommended that the single documented burial k relocated. 5. Haun & Henry 2M. Haun and Associates conducted an archaeological data recovery study at a c-shaped enclosure located on 1.59 acres of land below Queen Kai`ahurnanu Highway 6. Escott 2013. SCS conducted an archaeological study onl.962 acres of land near the intersection of Kuakini and Queen Ka`abumanu I,ighwa.ys. Two historic era ranch walls were recorded during the study. i S� 7. Sinoto 1979. Aki 5inuto recorded several Historic era ranch rock walls can a six acre parcel ofIand just mauka of Ali`i Drive. S. H,ammatt 1979b. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 22 acres just south of Kuakini Highway. Three archaeological sites were recorded during the study. None of the sites were recommended for preservation (Harnmatt 1979b. ii, and 10). 9. 1lammatt 1979c. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 23 acres located in the near coastal portion of Holualoa. I" and 2"' Ahupua°a. Thirty nine archaeological sites Were recorded during the study. The report recommended that all burials. incl Lid Ing a known cemetery site he relocated, ( ilummatt 1.979a: 5). None of the reniaining sites (pre-Contact era habitation and �1"FiCILItUrO Sites)Were recommended for pTL`'tiL'T_Yati011 in place. 10. Conully and Gunness 1979, and Flammalt 1979ii and 1980. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 103 acres within the near coastal portions of HBlualoa I"through 4"' Ahupua`a (Hammatt 1980). One hundred and thirty six archaeological si tcs were recorded on the projQct area, including prc-C ontact ern habitation, agriculture, burial, and ceremonial sites. The Hammatt report recorn nencled that a heiau (Site 6661) was significant and should be preserved in place (Harninatt 19M 4). The report also recommended that the single documented burial be relocated to the perimeter of be au (Site 6661) and preserved. No other sites were reconirriended for preservation. 11. Nelson et al. 2005. An archaeological inventory survey was condU ted by Rechtman Consulting on 28.0 acres located in the Hear coastal portion of Mluatoa 2"" Ahupua`a. A total of 22 sites containing 150 features were recorded. The sites were primarily pre- Contact era agricultural and habitation sites, though five burial sites, a possible heiau,and a trail were also documented within the project area.. 12. Rosendahl 1978, Soehren 1980a, '4 olforth et al, 2000. P'HRI conducted an archaeological invemory survey of eight acres of coastal Hots}alua_3rd Ahupua'a and recorded seven archaeological sites including three Historic era.rock "walls, ihrt:c residential sites, and Hikapaia Heiau. 29 13. Barrera 1995, Harm & Henry 2001). Bari-era (1995) recorded a possible burial platforni. two habitation site, agriculturai rock cicaring mounds and modified outcrops. during a reconnaissance SUI ti ey of 17 acres in near coastal. Holualoak 2'0 Ahupua`a, Haun and Associates conducted an archaeological inventory Sur-vCy of the property and recorded 12 sites with 1.04 features (Ha un and Henry 2(M0:14). The majority of features (n=82) were pre-Contact era agricultural rock clearing mounds. Eleven permanent habitation and one temporary habitation feature were also recorded during the study. 14. Rusendahl 1989, PHRl conducted an archaeological field inspection of6.0 acres of land just below Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway in Halualoa 2°d Ahupua`a Several modified outemps were recorded in the letter report. There were no other archaeological features identified on the project area. 1S. Rhilt 1984. The Bishop Nluseurn conducted an archaeological study of the Kuakini Highway Realignment project located roughly along present day Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway and recorded 39 sites Puapua'a 2"d eared. H61ualoa I'and 2nd Ahupua-a. Twenty two of the sites were pre-Contact to early past-Contact era agricultural gardcas and modified outcrops (rock clearing). There were also imditional habitation platforms and trails, a,� well as Histone era roads and walls recorded during the srtcdy, 16. NVaIker and Rosertdahl 1988, Graves and Goodfellow 1993,and Maly and Rosendah11 2006. An archaeological survey (Walker and Rosendahl 1988), an archaeological data recovery study (Graves and Goodfellow 1993), and an archaeological preservation plan (Male and Roseudahl 2006) were conducted by PHRi. Inc. for 104 acres in the upland region of I'uapua'a 2"`° Ahupua'a. A total of 67 sites were doc:uinented within the project area, including traditional (KFS) sites, temporary habitation sites, three burials, and a heiew. The archaeological preservation plan recommended that the three burials be relocated to the heiau site, and that the heiau be preserved as a formal historic preservation area (Maly and Rosendahl 2006). 17. ilarrimatt vl al. 1992. An archaeological survey was conducted by Cultural Su«eys Fkw,•ai'i ctn 174 acres of land in the upland region ofHolualoa 1", 2", and 3" AltupcIa-a. The project circa lands had been heavily bulldozed during the modern era l-,or ranching; and agricultural purposes. Despite the bulldozing. seventy one sites were recorded during the study, including temporary habitation features, ruck walls, agricultural features, and 30 three burial sites. Many of the sites were determined to be associated with Historic era ratichin�g and agriculture. 18. Soehren 1980b. Soehren conducted an archaeological reconnaissance survey of 16.0 acres above (queen 1Ca`ahumanu Highway in the inland region of Holualoa V4 Ahupua`a (Soehren 1980b). A single enclosure was identified during the survey. 19. Rechtman 2006. An archaeological inventory survey was conducted by Rechtman Cnnskilt 11g. I..1:.0 on a roughly cane-acre parcel located inakai of Queen Ka'ahumatlu Highway in H&Iualoa 2'd Ahupua`a. Two rack walls were recorded on the project area. The report recommended no further work at the wall sites. 20. M. Rosendahl 1988, Fager& Graves 1993. Fager and Graves (1993) coaductc:d an archaeological ins eritory survey of 17.0 acres just mauka of Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway in HC51ualoa P Ahupua`a. Seventeen sites containing 27 pre-Contact to early post-Contact era agricultural features, including rock mounds, modified outerops, C- shaped enclosures, terraces, walls, and rack enclosures, were recorded. 21. Dircks cat al. 2013. Rcchtman C onsultirg, conducted an ambacologica.l inventory .,wwev of 10.266 acres of land located between 840 and 920ft atrtsl in H61ualoa I" and 2`ti`1 Ahupua`a. One Historic cra to modern era honieste:aci.agriculturc site (Miyose F'ami) containing 149 lcarures was rccorrICd &ITing the survey- 22. Uesilets et al. 2004. Desticts ct al. (2004) conductcd an archacological inventory survey of 11.7 acres of land in the Wpa a region cfH61ualoa. 1" Ahupua`a_ A single site associated with Historic era and modern era homesteads, commercial agriculture (coffee), and ranching was recorded. Features included rock walls,roads, coffee terraces. and buildings. 23. Rechtman 2013. Rechiman ConsultitiL, conducted md archaeological inventory survey of29 acres of land located in the 'ci7rc w region of Halualua 1" Ahupua`a, Twenty four sites were recorded.. The majority of the sites were associated with Historic era and hood m era homesteads, commercial agriculture. Features inclL11-b2 l rock walls, reads, and remnants of'structures. A sin.glc pre-Contact era to early posi-C Comet era residential and agricultural site was also recarcic I 31 24. Clark & Rechtman 2006. Rec;lltman Consultin-1 c011ducted are archaeological inventory survey of2.7 acres ofland located in the `lipa'a region ofH€aluarlua I" Ahupua`a_ Six sites were recorded, including five ranch wails and an area of coffee terraces. A number of conclusions can be made from the previous archaeological studies. A primary conclusion is that the majority ofhabitatifln features, especially peniianent habitation ieatures, are located from the coast to about 360 ft amst, below the present day Queen Ka'athumanu I IiVLd way, The same is trite of ceremonial features, burials„ and, to a lesser extent, agricultural I-CAtures. The density of agricultural features and habitation features,mostly temporary habitation features, in the upland regions between 360 ft amsl and 700 ft amsl is much lower than the site density in the coastal kula and lower kahi'ilhe regions of the KFS. The pre-Contact traditional Havvaiian settlement and agricultural patterns are strongly oriented to the kola and lower kahi Whi regions. Even though cattle ranching and commercial agriculture may have removed some archaeological sites from the ground surface in the kalu'idu region, there appear to be fewer sites than at lower elevations. The inajarity of sites in the kolri)du region are KFS agricultural sites including rock clearing mcuri&, 1110dificcl outcrops, garden errclosures, and low garden walls. Within the lands of the current project, it is clear that ranch ng and commercial agricultural practices have removed and damaged iiiar,y of the }arc-C olitact era sites from [lie ground surface (see the l aiiinlatt c9 al, 1992 '�ur11mary bC1w' ). Moreover,many of the sites identified near the current project area are associated with Historic era ranching*and commercial agriculture. A second conclusion is that the establishment of Historic era homesteads, ranches, and commercial.agriculture seems to have removed. or obscured. the majority of pre- Contact era sites in the upper kt lu'uhi and lower Wl)a'a regions. It »light he that pre- Contact uses in these regions did not involve the construction of large or pertnanctit r',:,i r s, as in the lower regions of Kona. It is also likely that Historic era ranching,and cominercial agriculture in the lower `dipa n region have caused large settle land alterations through the use of bulldozers for pasture and garden. It is possible that traditional features were disassernblod to build rock walls. and coffee terraces. 32 25. Escott & Escott 2019. SC S conducted an archaeological inventory survey on a 5.0- acre portion of Parcel 017 (Escott and Escott 2018) and recorded twenty-twee new archaeological sites within the project area (`l`ableW 4 and Figure 10). Fittee n of1he sites are single-featture sites. The remaitiing seven agricultural sites contained two to seven features. A majority of the sites are agricultural terraces and complexes dating to the pre- Contact era to the Historic era. The agricultural complexes are located in the lower kcrltr die zone,between 600 and 700 feet(182 to 213 meters) arnsl. Three of the ranch walls (Site#50-10-37-30595,#50-10-37-30601, and 450-10- 37-3065) are the primary dividers ofthe five-acre project area. All site numbers in OiN report are preceded by the numerical prefix#50-10-37, and hereafter only the last five digits of the site number is rased. The historic era walls have typical characleristics of`ranch walls including cobble care fill and hi-faced inward sloping walls toward the top. Whey are approximately 1.0 meter tall. Site 30602 and 30603 are Historic era ranching and agricultural enclosures constructed along wall Site 30595 and wall Site 30601. These two wall sites are constructed onto the west edge of the Site .30592 railroad berm and post-date the railroad berm. The northern third of the project aTea only has two sites (Site 30591 and 30956). Site 30591 is art agricultural complex with six terraces. Portions of the sites were bulldozed in the early Modern era. Both sites date to pre-Contact to early Historic era. The terraces reflect Kona Field System features but are roughly constructed that more closely me mble Historic era commercial agriculture. Site 30956 is a rectangular Historic style hearth. The middle one third of the project area between wall sites 30595 and is within the bulldozed "terraces" portion of the project area. Site is a pre-Contact era to early post-Con taut era 18va tube burial. The burial wlII be preserved in place in accordance with a Burial Site Component of Preservation Plan. Site 30594 is an agricultural terrace coniplex diat resembles the Kona Field System but is more roughly constructed. .Artifac€s recovered from subsurface testing at Sitt 0604 suggest it is a Historic era agricultural terrace. 33 Table 4: Inventory of ArohAwlegical Sitrs ldrnl 5cd on the A.14 Project area(L:scott and Eseatt 2019). Site#* Site Type Features Site Function Age Testing ,3031)1 Agri L:Ldhffal Co1T plox; +5 Agrirulive f m-Comtrcl to Hip edc Sru 30592 RaiJrocLLl Berl uncl Bcrm I Tawsportatiun Historic Era 3059; I..;ie;l I ube Liurlal 1 l3vriul Pre-[:edict to Early Pea-Cintatct Era 30594 Agricultural Complex 6 Agriculture Pre-Contact to Historic Liu Sp-I 30595 Rcvk W'E111 I R,tmehing Histatic Em 30590 11mrth I FixxiPremmlicm Historic Era 'IU-1 30597 Rock WalI I Ram2liing Historic Era 30599 Rock Wall I Al;c COUre.'Kanehing Pm-C:cmta!:t to iiistmio bra 30599 Plafform&Enclosure ? Ranching Agriculture Historic Era SP-J &2_TU-1 30600 Tcrracc I Am k:11l i urc Historic Errs 5P-1 30601 Jtnr1.'4kall I Ranidliug Himorit:Era 30602 Uilt'b.,L o I Ranch in L-AL,riculture Historic Era 5P-1.2.3&4 30603 Lw.;lcaure 4 FZ>liwhlli:A:2nctllture Hitaoric Era SP-1&2 3NT14 Agricultural Complex 4 A-r,Li1hL1rc Pre—Contact to Historic Ea Sp-I 30605 Rock W rilI I 1t,Lm hm.L::I. ricultLire Histavic Em ,00)6 kWk Wall I I�:IIl.°11i;1-,1:5r illru8e T`rc t;'a�lxt,ict to Hi�tol7c F'rli 3W11)^, :l2riculLL,u. Complex ? A41i,:Lllu13t Pr.: CorIucLtu Historic L-ru Sp-I is Sp ID 4lJPit?ti haltlur llrv. �'!JHriur: iIi4,I ric Em .51,1i'I!'I 1._ll:6,life Sini,iur. tJ: I.tCIC ERi ,IIt51i1 Tcrrati. A.Li wu,01Urc Pro-ContkwLto Hi6w1'11'I.f'.i SP-1 ;ilfil Qriildwrtl t',-mplc,. i ,"5;i. cnIiiirL! in 11 i0olic I I:I Sp-I.21. ztll+l: I a%a 131i ivi Dilmi, IJ1-I ,1 ii I::rii IL IIIIII IIJ3:rrcI%: JtLtbey[Ile prrGx5i}_Ldi_'' a KEY SIT r NK91 PRCUF(-T AREA SITE SJI'V WHINDAR) RAILROAD BED ROCK WALL TNJ mo W ,0 1 V 31 1111 jam, -4"4 r1F % sI I m L.W3 'nEmNAN % t-M 34 Itj V-1 L I V Yxc'r '01!1 % A %tT%3" iJjl 44,11 211 Figure 10: 7-5-Minutc Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Locations of Escutt and B,cott (2018) AIS Project Area Archaeological Sites (ESR17 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS. Kealakekua Quadrangle). 35 The southern third ol'the pro}jest area, south of wall Site 30605, contained six primarily a uric uCturtl sites (Site 30598, 30600„30606. 30607.30610,and 30611) and [bur h istoric era sites (Site 30599, 30608, 30609,and 30612) with functions other than agriculture. The a6llicultural features included rack walls (Site 30598 and306O6), terraces (Site 30600 and 30610),and agricultural complexes with terraces (Site 30607 and 30610). The non-agricultural features included three enclosures (Site 30599, 30608. and 30(A)9), and a refuse disposal area lava glister(Site 30612). The cluster of these sites indicates their use for Historic era commercial agriculture. Twenty--nine shovel probes and two excavation units tested the sites. Marine shell fragments,a basalt flake and volcanic-glass flakes recovered during testing indicate that Hawaiians likely used the area for limited agricultural pcirfroses. However, the agricultural terraces more closely resemble (lie remains of Historic era commercial a riculture. All 22 sUcs identified during; the current AlS study were assessed sismiticant under criterion Lod" as they are likely to yield information. important to history. The railroad berm is also sivnific:ant under criteria"a" and"c" as it is associated with events that have made a signi fieant contribution to the broad patterns of our history and it embodies distinctive ekaracteristics of the type, period, and method of railroad lied construction The railroad berm was recol-nmended for preservation with preservation nt4asures outlined in an archaeological preservation plan (Rcott and Mello 2019b). The rest of the sites require no further work, The burial is also significant under criterion"e" as it has important value to Hawaiian people and people ofother eihnic backgrounds in Ate state. The burial was recommended for preservation in place with preservation treat»>ent5 outlined its a Burial Site Component of a Preservai ion Plan (Lseou and Mello 2019a). 36 CURRENT PROJECT ARF-1 SPFC.."I FIC PREVIOUS ARCH AF,t]LOGY Lands of the current AIS study were subject to an AIS study conducted by Hammatt et al. (l 992). That study encompassed 66.039 acres of land within the current project area located between '3 0 to 690 feet (99 to 210 meters) antst [TMK, (3) 7-6- 021:016 and 017) (see Figure 9, Prgject #17). The current project area is located within the northern portion of the Hammatt et al. (1992) project area. Twenty one archaeological sites and two areas Of bUlldozed modern planting "terraces" were recorded in the A1S report(Figure 1 I and Table 5). Eight of the 21 archaeological sites (51HP 450-10-37-100 t 5, #50-10 37-10017, #50-10-37-100Is,#50- 10-37-10020, 950-10-37-10031,#50-10-37-10033, #50-10-37-10034, and #50-10-37- 10049, hereafter abbreviated to the last five digits) were recorded by CSH in tabular format only. Written descriptions of the remaining 13 sites are in the CSH AIS report. Excavations were conducted at ten of the 13 sites. The AIS report included plan view figures for four of the 13 sites. At the request of SHPD, additional -site documentation for Sites 10011, 10012, 10031, 10049, and 10071 was submitted to SHPD in a Ieticr report (Hamman and Shideler 2007). Six orthe sites Nverc dctennilwd to be pre-Contact tra. four associated with habitation. one with agriciiltLire. and one single feature site (Silo 10012) contained two burials. Fifteen of the dies were determined to be Historic era sites. the. majority associated with coffee agriculture and cattle ranching. Two Hisioiic era habitation sites were also documented in the AIS study. The burials at Site 10012 were removed and reinterred off-project prior to 1983 (see Appendix A Reintermem Documentation). The site was further excavated to ensure that all 1wi had been removcd. The site was then back-filled and leveled by bulldozer. The AIS recommended no further work at all 21 sites documented in the Current project area. The Hammatt and Shideler(2007) letter report repeated the AIS recommendation that "all surface sites in the area were documented" in the AIS report and that"significant material from the study area has been recovered and that further investigation would be ofmininium productivity'- (Hanirnatt and Shideler 2007.11). However, the authors recommended that the sites should be relocated to document their current conditions and to document the sites to prevailing SHPD AIS standards. 37 im 1 KIN wq ...a«- �.,� � ,1w yy��, »', '� I�14 .OmF��'Mp+IN1' x � ® .aAIFRF.FSfL.I-Efh gar,' '��„ a � � �. '� 3 :M 0 -.IM.H%F(M I M '41 41T1 Irfl133 w t. -- [; ` 01 1,1 llOO13 mol F � x 1"IN sit PF Ir 11,%I ti1H4.R m a }%. it 15 N 511 1#0 14D MA 1PQ �Ye1arF ,f IiMF7a �1 IiMYID fk,1h1:Iy •b1C „max _040 1 1A:4 Na-Wk�4!l*16 rye+ r � , t t]1N�If$ l 1piI1Is qt � OI1n1iW �'� �,." 1 s•r 1Yi'1 ea , 611l��41, wllrl'PtrvY� 1 111dL I c� F 1.Ik � I II' •le i 19f7131 Dlr I ti4'AIII. I341Im Figure 11. 7.5-MiTim Series USOS Topogntphic Map Skming[..ocalion of"Northc m Portion of H-niman 0 al,(1992-)Sit1*'s and Cu1Tent Project Area(ESRT,2011. Sources. National Geographic Society,USGS.Kealakekua Quadringie). 33 Table 5; 1 avenlory of Pre violimly Recorded Archneo I ogica I Siies I HOMITY.1111 0 II. 1992,Hammait and Sbideler 2()(07). Sillpf Cs" TYPE FUNcrION AGE 1143CUMENTA111ON EXCAVATION CULTURAL NMTERIAL SITEA IIlllI I J Flulkwil I iug.1 Icallm llztW,lhirw Ucsudpdom& 1.5 m I EIRE mmdl cc,WTlr ihdh. I kill 12 1(1 Mirform&I W'd] Burtul Vruhi�tom! Deampbm. Lnux Femur Bldnal r6nward off-pm.[ecr 1{1U 7 -1L E & in nchisarr L a Tube i bbmAtl Lill FriW,5ri Loc Urso-jlA rn ou& 4.5 hq x Fie taFie frahu-ch&plehisionc artifacts _ r I I 10015 13 Temom koaO t5cd limoriti 10117 1 Pwfoftll I.-arl,Fomp lii,lori, IM18 If, ridfl.qlily,, .. H.&i1mil.111 114i5lori,: I Im 19 17 0 Rock Mounds 1S.g climmmg Hwori,w DL rl Ir o i- 3 L.41 m wdr ti-rnolics Mcull Flic I W24.1 18 PlAlfouth A4.civarmIt I 11,11-1,1-k D-c npimi IOD31 110 bu1mure Wal I Ap-milikim 111,wrlti De-kripumi 1W33 112 pbli coftil 117clff�e Ag Itimirik; I 1+ I IR134 113 pirificiml AL.11cannu lliftric I IAJ49 -116 Teman AgricuLturr 1115miric D ,lljr or MIMI 232 Tema-, Hshitullon PreWsmiric 1.0 X 1.0 m V G&a vnffl ank i imili of iWLWL�n ti fire icium: I f&li 233 Enctoiurr 11-11.3himinn Nchiitxic De.,-.6plion& 0.5 X 025 ni SIFLAil OMW[ll Lft 1111LI(IM Mamie, I ffifig ',l 4 Midified Habimlioo Iliwric D4,-1111r,iWt (1.4;N 0 i Ilk V(!&a S311AII:llkkhlnT of 1njLJdV; Uilff Malform 1 '315 1 -M)HILL['1Gkl*jre Ap"rute llmorik; I n X o,S ilk NomliiJ,os 1U071 - 111,"%rMTm 111switkirgan Pffdd5T43riC Dnk-y"iau Jill)7.1 i3ls Will] ALL C1VlLri11_U ffkiofic Demupiluo 7.0 in swm wm[ Nm ims small itimwil of-MS ul'ILL_2 I 1H 1--7 234 Mmi i-rm,K FfitiI—iire Ftanehiihg Aq. Hi.,wric Ekercripsma H X H1 1111174 140 1 ndunsrf Coffee Ucrk 1111-inric Dncriptmll I—,S M..squue Ictill 1 43..I'I c M 1. 11,1•ri,: 1"1 11, S IM75 241 LmAusqirr P;g Pen Historic [:lescn piimj.111hinview. &ProMe Site Umbers arc preLvded Ity the prefix 50-10.37, 39 In a latter to the County ofHawai'i Department of Planning dated July 30, 2018, (Log. No. 2018.00878 Doc. No. 2018.00878), 511PD requested a new pedestrian survey to identify all archaeological historic properties present on the project area, and to update previous archaeolohlical documentation to include site plans for each site with site boundaries and areas impacted by bulldozing, photographs of all sites and features, an assessment of their integrity. and site significance. EXPECTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL PATTERNS Based on previous archaeological studies, geological studies, historical research, interviews, and County Planning Department records it is expected that any archaeological sites remaining on the current project area will be related to traditional pre-Contact era agriculture, temporary habitation., burial practices, and to early post- Contact era nrid Historic era ranching and agricultural activities. I is likely that many of the pre-Contact to early post-Contact era sites have been removed or disturbed by Historic era and modern ranching and commercial agriculture. This is especially tnie because the area around the current! project era was used as cattle pasture and coffee fanning from the Historic era to the present. Additionally, the project. area is in a location that wa-, bulldozed sometime between the 1940s and the 1970s in preparation for a conmicrcial agricultural project. most likely coffee �jrowing. Aerial photos clearly show that bulldn7er transccts wort cut ncrrthlscruth across the entire, five- acre project area. Archaeological sites and features that are likely to remain on the project area will likely include pre-Contact era to early past-Contact era rock clearing mounds, terraces, small enclostires. platforms. and burials. It is also likely that Historic era and modern features related to ranching and agriculture will also be identified on the project area. These include primarily rock walls constructed to confine cattle, 40 Rf:4i I.f4 OF FIELDWORK Seventeen of the twenty one previously identified archaeological sites were located during the course of the archaeological inventory survey study(Figure 12 and Table 6). All site numbers in this report are preceded by the numerical prefix#50-10-37, and are abbreviated to the last five digits. Two of the previously documented sites(Site 10020 and Site 10034) relocated by SCS are natural bedrock outcrops and one site former burial site (Site 10012). The burials at Site 10012 were reinterred off-project in 1.993. The four remaining previously documented sites (Sites 10017, 10033, 10049, and 10071) were bulldozed Prior to the SCS fieldwork and the remains of the sites are no longer present on the ground surface. Three previously undocumented sites were also TC—Corded, including a portion of the railroad beam (Sits; 30592), a small coffee shed enclosure (Site 31181), and several ranch walls (Site 31182). A single petroglyph on a loose cobble was recorded as Isolated Find I (IF-1). A total of 21 sites, 17 previously documented and four newly documented, were identified on the project area and are documented in this report. Two of the sites (Site 10020 and Site 10034) were dctcrmincd to be natural geological features. Six of the situ were determined to be pre-Contact era, three associated with habitation, one with agriculture. a single petroglyph site, and one slagle feature site (S ite 10012) formerly contained two burials. Twelve of the sites were determined to be Historic Ora sites, the majority associated with coffee agrictalture and cattle rmch.ing.Two Historic era habitation sites were also documented in the AIS study, One site (Site 10015) was determined to be a short segment of modern bulldozer road. The burials at Site 10012 were removed and reinterred off-project prior to 1993 with the approval of the Hawaiian Island Burial Council (HIBC) and SHPD. The site was further excavated to ensure that all i�O had been removed. The site was then back filled and leveled by bulldozer. The following site summaries include infortnation from the CSH archaeological studies(Harruttatt et al. 1992, llanirnatt and Shideltr 2007) and new information documented during the current AIS resurVcy used to updated site documentation. 41 i XOrrip w - 00,X rk,MIL 1 %K1,A II IYIi'1. .. fF a:.. Iw4Ti 0 ., 4f -OU I1Ul"Itim.H A1'w11 IWJ%l I '� m -Sul.#.nYxi�naYrr I r' )Irl§I! IN II tIY 11{PwR 4sIL ILtl.1I..t1LRt. ,�., ; F III %1word F 7. +.!YL SYI#:K1:\Ll+ C4 I+ 11 t V1 15 w„fi y ,I WY IIYIi 1A11 EOf1- IIIa � �- Sa Om I711 11b l 41 K:LU 7�E:kdld pls Iuol p C�IQW1 1,:AUI'Ii /� '� �I Iu111 r „/ rHmIt I kwP 14 0 I'IMYlI �i h,f � � 1u1171O . r I,nX.X11�# Figure 12: 7.5-Minull:5crirs USGS'lrrlaOLML1a11iu Map Slki"ino Location ofzVdiaeological Sites and Pmject "kICs L 1LSR1,2011. Sourcc -Natlon'Lil GoOgM+hie Society.l,SCjS,Y%C"t1 ikokua Qwlkhangle), 4 2? 'fable 6: LIVenfory of Hamiatt et al.(]992)Archaeological Site and C'urrela Al Results. SwJ)b- TYPE FUNCTION 10,L OCK 4 31 h.,l%f l ON EXCAVATIONS DI SPOSH ION WDL L Phnfram Ag.,TcnT HablUdoa Pir-CmUCL D"ri11puUn.PLn i PI I,,- 1.5 in lurk umch.It.'-L RCCUrded I GDL'_ Plivfwfn K%.III [lutial Ptt•f"1I111-Irr f k n.111iuu.P1iu1.1'1-'1!1: Finite Fearllre Renim-1-No L,mgeT Pte+eltr &Mims I tOD Lndmum&Lava I OX 11ahilanon I'Tr-Cmoacr Dmcnvuun.PInn&I'h-+,� 4 S m squam.iota Rccmded 10013 BLIIJtktaetl RoaA Traltsporral7al ITASld"'I rk-,c-Hpri-m Tyra 14NWri Rond Red 10017 Plu1RImA Cattle.Rmnip Ih,wiit S11hulur IN Bulldomd-NoLuagaPmk im 10018 Eochiwre Agrlcultura! IL."urit EeacriptumL 1,A Pariially Bulldwed 1400 6 Rock Mcwl3d& Ag.C leetulg i Li%wric DescHptinn 3 .0 11,x 1.0 m trrwhea Iltswded IODZO BCdWC70U%LW Oco,iiin,,11-FHTn[M ::Lilroll lk-riphiin N,A V]ITIIrd "tii kill Ai;'kamajngjC.R''STW TMI EndmireWaIT Agil kIjI Fill I., Il:wo:rliL f7r;,rr':rAI1,111 C Phof, h 1 r�C LSFi1ill I{ID31 PIa1111rigCOMPlea i'ul1eu hg I11swric lhsrnlsuom N,A BLIlldozcd-No LuugerPt%,S n1 10014 Nedmrk llui.r p Gailugi nd Feutura Natural 1M-mPtMIL N;A N utuml-Nal Lm A.rahu aLoOeLLL Sfiu 1f10441 Turrets +L�*UIILur I iwmiu 13escnntian NA Bulldozed-Nr'I.salxrPtrunt I fIfW,7 TWM4;'r Hahsir;Ads s 1'j,i'II_I.:r I>c rip4 m.PI411.&PhLrTA,s 1 fl X I.f1 m R4"s&'I IMiGh Lnrinsarc Itahitation Pro:-L'L'lilL' r Dc rint...R.PI,u1-&Photos 0.5 X 0.25m 47t.,i1V 111.11 11 WU 1 O(Jti`i,) Modified BIlIft"Phirfurm 1lebitm1io11 I L-W i is Do, .@ 1"huttAa 0.5 X 0.5 rti Lit'x o1d,:d 10070 U-Slinro Encra:ure Apieulturt Himmiu Dewriprion,P Tall&PI1,a.,. I.0 X[1.5 m Reewded I(071 Plmlfrmn1 Hahimtn 011 PTr-Cumact Oncripliim N A BL111dAeMI-ND I-OnEXr Prr;rnt I ooe2 Cn 2pier Alt.C'Ie nillg I't t.'uTlt osc De r ipcmm.P lan&PhiAON ?f l(II silumrr tiia Al IC< Lrrcltrl 111tPn Cor>splex RmwhiTWA.g• TI"One Drwnpnaan-Plus&PhLrLas TL`-1&TIT-2 Rfewded. 1007.4 Gncu,svre Coffee%r ofk SIA I liswriv DNCTiP6011.P lun&PhuIOu 1.25 m squire 101u1 ft&mkled 10073 Lnclul uw P I F,Peen [AkImic Description,P1LVA&Photos Rta-c,rded _W592 Rmilrout Bcrm Trimstv.rtulmn Nturiu Dc-.cnprium-Plum&PhLrias N A Rcewded IF-I PA:rrivyph MlLIO. Pre l'LIf11l4t ISextilicium.Plan&Photo, N,A Ft4sLridl24 311114L EnLInsmrc cvff�c Wark SW Hisixiv Dmscrip6am,Plan&Pho - Rtcurdcd. 31192 Kilck 14'4I lls Runch itig&Ag. I listoriv Dv."piium_RW&Phu WA Recwded Site rwmhers arc prm:Wcit lsy thr nTrfiN 50-II1-97-, Ormige 5hmding-Site no I nogm Par;cm PriNii Shrub rig-Nalurg gaol nl iral icstlurr. Not om Irrehae iludical site. 43 SIRP 10011 Platform FUNCTION: Agriculiurail Rock Clearing/Temporary I labitatiOn AGE: Pre-Contact era DIMENSIONS: 7.50 m in length by 5.0 ni wide by 0.86 rn in height(max) CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Altered: retains integrity of location, setting, materials, and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: CSIJ 1.5 ni trench, SCS TU-1 2.4 m by 1.2 rn DESCRIPTION: STHP 10011 is a pre Contact era rectangular Aoric plaillorm located at 405 ft amsl in the southern portion of the project area (see Figure 12)_ The platform is approximately 7.50 m by 5.0 rn wide, with a maximum height of 0.86 m (Figure 13). The platform is constructed of angular and subatigular cobbles and small boulders piled and stacked two to three Caurse� hi��l] aTong the perimeter ancl gilled with large pebbles, cobbles and small boulders (Figure 14 and Figure 15). Portions of the perimeter are very roughly faced (Figure I and Figure 17). The top surface of-the platform is slightly uneven and is paved witlh large pebbles, cobbles, and small boulders (see Figure 13 and Figure 15). Portions or the north and west sides have collapsed. The CSH AIS interpreted that the platform to be a prehistoric agricultural rock clearing mound,based on formal COnStructiOn acid sire, though they noted that Lhe feature has 1omial construction elcmcnt�, suggesting possible use other than an agricultural rock clearing. CSH EXCAVATION 12ESULTS: CSH excavated a 1.5 m wide trench throu-17 the platform (see Figure 13) and recovered three cowrie shell fragments. The form, construction method and location of the 1catUrc suggest that the feature could be a temporary habitation platform used periodically during agricultural activities. However, the near absence of cultural material recovered from the CSH excavation suggests the platform is a pre-Contact era rock clearing mound. 44 o o s o C9 Pm r Cp 0 Q �•46 VAl I N(. o I', off . o 1141 SH oar `i`l_y ° a n no O w O p qo 4 p O Q � 4 ��Iq ,1• ICI C.7 IP I ? d RI KEY L Jl-Wv..%E l f (will l Rt�s -ImPI!t ssloN to TREE �a--I -IIF IGHT.ABU16 E A RFA UL Figure 13: Site 10011 Plan View Map. 45 K jL 1 Y e t m = .a � w a „ Figure 14: Phitogmpli of Site 100It.Looking East. 46 x 111 F a t. t e r ' • M,wa„� a wu , • , 4 rx _ i", , , F �fr '"''��� 'J. 4f w4 'F f ,�•ae'4�'.4 A • y d ., yQ ,r T �� ro� �r�T. ur•. J-A � ink r ` Y� Y. A ww i X I .� n �, Yl�}Ip � • �� � rry. SCS EXCAVATION RESULTS. SCS excavated a 2.4 m long(N/S) by 1.2 m wide test unit(TU-1) in the southeast quadrant of the platform (see Fi iwre 13). TLC-1 was excavated as an architectural layer and three natural stratigraphic layers, and terminated on bedrock (Figure 18 through Figure.20). The natural strati graphic layers were excavated in arbitrary 14 cm levels. The Arehitedur3l Layer(45 can maximum thickness) coiislstcd of angular and subangular pebbles, cobbles and small boulders with a small amount of decomposing organic detritus. There were fio cultural deposits or s0surfacefeatures in the architectural layer. The top surlace of(lie architectural layer was a fairly level cobble paving. The architectural layer continual into Layer I and terminated on bedrock approximately 40 cin to 45 cm below the top surface of the feahrre. Layer I (0-10 curbs) was Clark brown (I OYR3f3) loose sanely silt loann with blocky pods and 40%cobbles, pebbles and small boulders. The rock excavated in Layer 1 was architectural roek_ The architectural layer continued into Laver 11 below. Layer I terminated on bedrock on the northern half and the southern end of the unit. In the south half of the unit, the base of Layer 1 terminated on Layer 11 sediment and was fairly level and clear, There were no artifacts in Layer 1, Layer li (10-26 cnih,;) was very dark grayish brawn ( I OYR3l2) soft sandy silt with 30°lo cobbles anal small boulders excavated from the south half of TU-1. The rock excavated in Layer 11 was architectural rock and fragments of exfoliated bedrock- Layer ll was excavated as a 10.0 cm Level I and a 6.0 cm Level 2. The bottom portion of Layer IL Level 1 05-20 cmbs) contained a small annount of charcoal flecking, five small pieces of burnt wood(0.48 grams), a small coral fragment (4.9 g) and two very small fragments of vana shell(0.17 g). Layer IL Lcvcl ,? (lid not contain artifacts. Small.thin d"sits of very line Pahala ash were identified in portions of the base of Layer 11, Layer II terminated on bedrock along the southern end of TLC-1 and terminated on Layer Ill sediment near the middle ofTU-1. The boundary between Layer I1 and Layer Ill was fairly level and clear. Layer 111 (26-90 crnnbs) was yellowish brawn (10YR.5.4) loose fine silt with 5011", bedrock cobbles excavated near the middle of TU-1, Layer ill slid not contain artifacts. 50 TL I ii ts]PRUI LL.E x IL14 u � 1 , .y MI 4 f I r tiI 10 I ijil I�I tii xM 511 6� 1 1h hS Yl 5^I II I udI. {II W. Spl' l;•' .l.II les Ig'I ;hq a,ll 135m wi Y -L.tLtR is G,491tr:gkUu r I la1w!}r x.a*IaA•Il..t 1.�1'4h I — -1 11T.R TL F.Rl FkAN w GRAII'M FIRriWN WI!i 1'7I%A%Pl 4$leT'NMI FTT GRA-1 Sfl ® s 14 IIII 1F1 5411 Ill ®-IMP I Iw W A FigaLc IS: Selo 10011 Tc,,t Unit I tiVi!tiL Pmfi1c. 5] w ti r � 1 41 Ir y 4y Figure 19. Photog"ph of Site I Of)I l Test Unit I West Profilo Looking 52 Al Al r r/ r �W- f � P s 1� Q 9 R e e Figure 20: Photogaph of Site 10011 Test Unit 1 Overview Looking Northeast. 53 Site 10011 was interpreted by CSH as a pre-Contact era agricultcu-al rack clearing mound(ACM)based an the 1iniiLed amount ot'cu.ltural material recovered from excavation. TU-1 artifacts reccw creel earring the current AIS study were similar in type and numbers. However, the size and c OnStruction of the platform suggest a temporary habitation component. It is possible that the feature was originally constructed by clearing rocks from surrounding agricultural fields and piIinti- tltem on an exposed bedrock outcrop. However. the completed platform is well constructed wl-(h a stacked rock perimeter and level cobble paved :surface. The platform ills similar to other temporary habitation platl'oniiw identi fled in forth Kona. The small number of artifacts recovered from test excavations suggests the platform had limited uSe, likely as a location For resting and while conducting seasonal gardening. It is also likely that the platform is a late pre-Contact era,or even early post- Contact era feature that was abandoned sc on alter completion and use. The area surrounding Site 10O11 has been impacted by grazing cattle and heavy equipment. The platforms h&,; been altered by pasture clearing, is partially collapsed and is in fair condition. No further work is recommended at Site 1001 l. 54 SIHP 10012 Former Burial Platform FUNCTION: Burial(RcinteiTed Elsewhere) AGE: Pre Contact era DIMENSIONS: 26 ft. in long; by 12 11. wide, with a rnaxini nt height of ft. CONDITION: No longer present INTEGRITY: Altered, does not retain integrity SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: Entire fec'IIII4 , �.nt: iw�.i DESCRIPTION: SIHP 10012 was an ,n:d �h.,w d platform located at 410 ft amsl approximately 50.0 m north of Site 1001 1 i.cc 11 figure 12). The following description is from Hammatt et at. (1992). The platform was ''?6 feet long by 12 feet wide with a maximum height of 4 feet (Figure 21). There was no clearly defined level upper surface, paved terrace or rack alignments. The surrounding area was been bulldozed ar3jacent to the site can all sides except the south side. The site appeared to have been disturbed by Allis grading and there were racks bulldozed onto the feature from the north side. CSH EXCAVATION RESULTS: The upper 2 to 3 feet ofrock fill was removed from the mound and a rectangulat alignment mcasuring 12 by 15 feet was cxpciscd. At the base of the rock fill and partially burying the stone aligninew was stratum 1 light brown silt loam containing organic debris containing volcanIc glass,borle and coral artifacts, and adze flakes. Oil the wakcar or west side of the site were two stone cLipl)oards with a Corbelled construction_ These cupboards measured 2 feet in diameter and the interior spaces were one foot high. They appeared to be contemporaneous with the construction of the rectangular aligniment.. After exposing the rectangular alignment and the cupboard, the interior of the rectangular alignment was excavated. Directly underlying Stratwn I in the alignment interior and under the cupboards was a second stratum,designated Stratum II. This was a light grey unconsolidated silt loam which contained wood ash and cultural material including stone, shell and bane artifacts and middert. As this stratum was excavated, a 3 foot wide by 5 foot long stone crypt was exposed. The crypt consisted of a rectangular arrangement of squared boulders. 5 r - - bedrOCK �..y�rgyq�y F } r I 1 PLAN � 0 1 2 0 � � sirr k r SEC17ON A CUpbcsard Cr;urial 'I Str. I f,.r tir 111�.I' lr SECTION $ Figure 21: Site 10012 ( SH Site 10) flan View Map and Excavation Profiles (Hammatt et al. 1992:65). 56 The;crypt lilt was removed (S(ratum 11) and the skeletal remains of two individuals was uncovered at a depth of'2 feet below the trap of the crypt and resting directly on bedrock. Two skulls were lying 1 inch apart at the northeast end of the crypt and in both cases were ar iculateyd to the vertebrae. The skull can the north sicic was of an adult female. [Hammatt et al. 1992:64] The unfused cranial sutures particularly the coronal suture also show a mature but young age. The skull was articulated to the vertebrae and the scapulae, the clavicles and the pelvis were all in articulated pnsition. An examinatior of the sacrutl7 and trip hone show characteristics of a female. All long banes were absent inducting tibia, fibulae ulna, radius and humerus. However, the articulated hands and feet had been placed on the pelvis with fingers and toes pointing upwards. The skeleton of the child iananediately to the south was completely articulated and semi flexed. All skeletal pains were present but were in a partially decomposed state. It is clear frorn the stratigraphic context that both skeletons were buried at the sane tirrte. It was not possible to determine the sex of the child. The first molar had partially emerged indicating a child between the age of 4 and 6. There were no anomalies observed in the skeletal parts, A summary ofthe stratigraphic events which occurred at the site are as follows: 1. An enclosure was constructed with roughly stacked boulders on 3 sides and a double alignment of vertical slabs on the other. ?. The enclosure was occupied and used for every clay work activities and food consumption. This resulted In the deposition of Stratum 11 which includes stone adze fragments and shell and hone artifacts. 3. A stone lined crypt was constructed at the base of the Site and intrusive into the occupation deposits of Stratum 11. 4. Two human skeletons were interred in the crypt, one child (6t--6 years) and one adult f'enaale (18-25 years). Before the adult female was interred and while she was still with musculature her long banes were removed and her separated hands and feet were placed can her pelvis, 57 5. Foilowing the internment cif the burial, the cry,pt was tilled and covered wl(h reworked deposits of Stratum II. The two cupboards were constructed on the wc kaj side of the crypt possibly for the purpose of narking the burial site. 6. Stones were piled on the crypt and on the cupboards to create a level living surface and the site was once again occupied resulting in the deposition of Stratum 1 which filtered thrOLIgh the rock fill. 7. During modcrn bulldozing of the area around the site rack,, w•cre piled all the top and sides giving what was a bevel platform a mound like apivarance. A radiocarbon sample collected 30-40 cmbs and associated with the burial returned a date ofA,D. 1830f50 (Harninatt et al. I992,107). The burial platform at Site 10012 was Crsrnpletely excavated and the rei-nains were reinterred off-project (see Appendix A Reinte-rrnent Documentation). The excavated site was backfilled and leveled with a bulldozer_ The site location was relocated by SCS during;the current AIS study. The present ground surface is 1�vel bulld07cd reek (Figure 22). Site 10012 is no longer present and no fiAher tiWork is icco mended. 58 ON, k " «P4 J ,w,4 sta 1 y # w r 41 lk �,(,�n y, , yy�7y! ^�, • i fat atu �Af � r wVn y��r y'`y +4F �v� q J! 1.` 5�� 'W�.y � ..s■ �J 3. .. �w 4Y, '�A r ' 444 M "nV 1G- kL d S� 1 • T 44 , Figurc 22. PlxIt«e=r.111� Ili [iTO"ImAl S111-stc.1l ForFncr Sil% 10012. 1 47c}a:kak!" ti,1�1ti;k��9. �,c) STRIP 10013 Enclosure& Platforms FUNCTION: Habitation AGE: Pre Contact eras DIMENSIONS: 15.3 m long (NWI-SF) by 18.3 in wide, 0.4 m max. height CONDITION: Poor INTEGRITY: Altered: retains integrity of location, setting, materials, and some workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: CSH excavated seven test-units totaling 4.5 square meters DESCRIPTION: SIHP 10013 is a roughly square pre-Contact era enclosure and a small modified lava tube located approximately 200 meters northeast of Site 1001 1 (see Figure 12). As indicated in the CSH AIS report and confirmed by SCS during the current AIS study, the enclosure is nearly square (60 feet long NW/SE by 50 feet wide, exterior dimensions) and is constructed.roughly level ground(Figrure 23). The enclosure walls range from five (5) feet wide can the maukca side to nearly Len (10)feet wide on the m akai side where the outside facing is three (3) feet high relative to the exterior ground surface on the mcakai side of the structure. The enclosure walls were probably higher originally but at present tliev app ar to hared been knocked down by prey iDus bulldozing operations. The are pritnarily 30 to 50 em in height above the mt]c eni ground surface (Figure 24 and Figure; 25:). The walls are constructed of angular and subangular basalt large cobbles and small boulders stacked and piled two to three courses high on the ground surface. They are roughly faced in places. The northwest corner of the enclosure has been bulldozed. The enclosure interior (measuring 35 feet nwakca-wukai by 45 i'cct north-south) was predominantly dirt with a rock platfiOrm about. 20 feet square situated near the center of the interior. Immediately ra anka 4 5 feet)of the northeast corner of the enclosure was a low, boulder platfonn about 15 feet by 20 feet (see Figure 23). The platform appears to havo been run over by a bulldozer and is no longer present. There is a one(1) foot square and one (1) feet deep opening in the east corner of the site(see Figure 23 and Trench 7 excavation description below). [Harnmalt et al. 1992:69]. 60 `- C7) Tj I " ET5tr—� — r_ .. Jay-�J� Y i —31 .TT BULLDOZED hhh y CD III i.l. I][ZEI) x•1' 4 Y;av aN 4,1M 1tiY�.1F t� I r-de cn pwad p°311cfm —T7 excoval ior ' iavIL rn tU� 9n tt Figure 23: Site 10013 Plan View Map Showing Test Units (Hanimatt et al. 1.992:69). 61 v °�, y/�. '+P °yam, ,4�r'..�. '1•�",� ^,.11F J a. -�._ ..f �� ' "Ir�n 8' + , � T • .n W r � a , • ■ � y5 u � r ! —+� •. � ""}` s � ��„. + &ate�� ,� �• ����M �'qw�" •r� to, n,r" ; N e � - w Y � � Y Y• ° r ; IIii " NAL AW Figure 26: Plk"grraph of Site 1M3:Northeast Platform{Left Top Comer)and Tube Opening(ForCgr0n1,'e). St. 64 CSH EXCAVATION RESULTS: Close inspection oFthe dirt surface in the interior of Site 10013 showed that the inakai area contained a dark grey to black dirt while in the Riurrka ponion the dirt layer was a reddish brown and generally shallow with exposed bedrock. The rnakrai portion of the site was chosen for the first excavation on the basis of sediment color(grey to black sediments in sites usually being a good indicator of human activity and potential depth. A total of4.5 square meters (Trenches 1,2, 3, 5 and 6) were excavated adjacent to the inak-ai wall.Trenches I and 6 established the presence of a single cultural layer tip to 30 cm. thick overlain by 1 t) cm. to 20 em_ of modern Al horizon. These two (2) trenches produced six (6) basaltic glass flakes, a polished adze [lake and two (2) coral file fragments. Trenches 2, 3 and 5 adjoin one another and are situated in the northwest comer of the site interior. They defined the limits of large rock lined hearth area with muhiple ash lens contained in it. A substantial aniount cif midden rnatorial was lir€:sent in the hearth (Refer to Table 8). A total of 33 itcins listed as artifacts included a €ne piece bone fish hook fragi-nent, a piece of worked manic al. bone, coral file„ saw and abrader fragments, wane file fragments, polished adze flakes and basaltic glass flakes. Trench 4 was excavated into the platform in the center ofthe structure. bedrock was present at a. depth of only 24 cm. below the rlatform surface. tliat being at the level of the dirt surface cif the site in the other trenches. Some rmidden was present in the gaps in the bedrock and one polished adze flake and one basaltic glass flake were also recovered li•om trench 4. [Hammatt et al. 1992:68] A final excavation (Trench 7) was excavated in the platform just mauka of the enclosure. This involved remor'al of rocks to a depth of two (2) meters where a capped calf entrance to a lava tube was Found. The lava tube five(5) feet wide was accessible For lificen 415) feet in a mauka direction.. It was fully explored and was found to exhibit no signs Ofhunlan use. A slight flow of cool air through the tube and the absence of cultural material within the tube suggest that its primary function i.nay have been a source of ventilation for the platform built over it. On the basis of size, thickness of the cultural layer, complexity of the structural remains and the variety of cultural items present Site 10013 is a goad example of a semi-permanent or permanent occupation site. The two (2) pla forms (one inside and one outside of the enclosure) suggest the former presence of pole and thatch structures. The excavations clearly show the primary work area in the site was along the makai edge of the enclosure. [Hammatt et al. 19 2:71] 65 Site 10013 has been impacted by heavy equipment prior to and following the CSH AIS study and is in poor condition. The majority of the walls of tlrc enclosure have been impacted by bulldozing although portions of the base of the enclosure �",aIIs are visible on the ground surface. No further work is recommended at Site 10013. SIHP 10015 Bulldozer Read Segment FUNCTION: Transportatiou AGE: Modem DIM I;N 5IONS: 12.0 m long(NIS) by 2.4 rn wide CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: None, not an archaeological site SURFACF ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: No DESCRIPTION: SIHP 10015 is a bulldozer mad edge located 560 1t amsl is the center of Parcel 017 (see Figure t 2). The site was recorded by CSH as a terrace. SCS relocated the future and alter clearing determined that it is the edge of a bulldozer road cut along a fairly steep slope. The earthen makai edge of the bulldozer road is similar in appearance to an earthen terrace. The feature is not an archaeological site and no further work is mcommcnded. SIHP 10018 Enclosure Remnant FUNCTIW Agriculture AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 5.0 m long (N/S) by 1.0 m wide by 1.0 rn height. CONDITION: Poor INTEGRITY: Altered: retains integrity of location, setting, materials, and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS: Norte EXCAVATION: No DESCRIPTION: SIHP l 018 is a the remains of an enclosure located at 580 ft amst 120 ni northeast ofSite 10015 (see Figure 12). The site was recorded by CSH as a rectangular enclosure with core-filled walls 0.6 tm(2 to 3 feet) high and 3.0 m by 6.0 m (10 by 20 feet) across the interior dimensions. The walls were I.8 to 2.4 rii. (b to g feet) thick and with much collapsed rubble, Based on the enclosure size and construction. and the presence of ntitnerous coffee trees surrounding the enclosure, CSH interpreted the site to be associated with coffee agriculture. 66 SCS relocated a remnant of the west wall of the enclosure where it is constructed to abut onto the west sine of the Site 31182 Feature 3 wall (Figure 27 and Figure 28). The a all segment is roughly 6.0 m long(N/S)by 1.3 m wide and is 1.4 m in maximum height. The wall is constructed of angular and subangular cobbles and Small boulders stacked on the ground surface. The wall is roughly bi-faced and is not core-filled. The north end of the wall has been bulldozed and the north and cast enclosure walls have been bulldozed and are no longer present. Site 10018 was likely an Historic era enclosure likely associated with agriculture or ranching. All but a small portion of the enclosure crest wall at Site 100[9 has been bulldozed_ The remaining,wall has been altered by ranching and bulldozing and is badly collapsed. The site is in poor condition, contains very little integrity and no further work is recommended. SIHP 10019 Dock Clearing Mounds FUNCTION: Agrlculrurc AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS: 5.0 to long (N/S) by 1.0 m wide by 1.0 to height CONDITION: Poor INTEGRITY: altered: retains integrity of location and setting SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None FXCAY,ATION: No DESCR-LP r`ION: SIRP 10019 is a complex of six rectangular and oval rack mounds (features A through F) located between 490 and 500 ft amsl 120 m northeast of Site 1 N 13 (see Figure 12). The rock mounds are located around a seasonal -gulch and the site is roughly '20.0 m in diameter. The rock mounds are 2.0 to 3.0 meters in diameter and mange in height from 0.6 to 0.9 rn. The rock mounds are constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled on the ground surface. Several of the rock mounds were constructed by construe ting an outside perimeter of slightly Larger rocks and then infilling them with slightly smaller rocks. This type of rock clearing mound construction was commonly used in Historic to modern era coffee and sugarcane Fields across Hawaii Island. 67 LI �tlP :DIY X'LY Intl[Yol kit LUM Ifl-11 Soo l_d yr c (� Il � hl C (AA.S% r X'1 psX I l qr#r, 11 4 ILI I 1�►I I NI') m- r41�x1 110" Iw Fil Hrdf iY.11 I +,Isl1`<r aM Ili ti( !.I�rXrs Figure 27: Srte 10019 Remnant Encl )SILLY W4 1111 Flan V ieW MELD, 68 , 1 .r r• r , s M CSH EXCAVATION RESULTS: Three of the mounds eA�ere cross sectioned by CSH with one ineter wide trenches oriented mauka-niakar. All of the trenches were excavated to bedrock with no midden material or artifacts occurring. However. in the excavation of feature B a rusted metal file was discovered under a large slab at the base of the inound. This find leaves little doubt that this feature is historic in age and this conclusion is applied to all other features in this complex. Site 10019 was relocated during the current study. The rock mounds are no Longer intact and all that remains are scattered concentrations of rocks where the inounds were once located. T w rock mounds were either altered by flooding or were knocked over by bulldozing. The location of the rock mounds adjacent to the strcann channel indicates that they are stone agricultur l clearing mounds likely constructed by col Coo planters (I-Iamllia(t et al. 1992:27). Site 10019 has been altered by flooding and bulldozing and is in poor condition. The type, Function and age of the rock clearing mounds was deten ine#d through feature construction and text excavations, and no further work is reconnmended for Site l 0019. SIHP 10020 Bedrock Outerap FUNCTION: Natural geological feature. not an archaeological site AGE: NIA DIMENSIONS- 2.4 rn long by 3.0 m wide CONDITION- N/A INTEGRITY": NIA SURFACE ARTIFACTS.- None EXCAVATION: No DESCRIPTION: SIHP l D020 is located at 450 l:t amsl approximately 70 in north of Site 10013 (see Figure 12). The site is described in the CSH A1S table as a platform. The area where Site 10020 was plotted on the project map is an area of bulldozed pasture with natural bedrock outcrops and loose rocks. A roughly rectangular pile of natural bedrock boulders was identified at the location of Site 10020. The boulders are naturally occurring bedrock small WLIlders and cobbles. There is a portion along the west side of the pile that appears to contain bulldozer push from a nearby wall. breach. The top of the ruck pile is uneven but somewhat level. 'there is no stacking or facing apparent oat the rock pile. 70 The rack pile is natural. but its roughly rectangular shape and somewhat level top surface make it appear to be a possible archaeological feature. It is likely ffial CSH added the feature to their pedestrian survey summary table for these reasons. CSI I did not include a site description or map of the feature in the AIS report, likely because it was determined to be natural, No further work is recommended at Site 10020. SIHP 10031 Enclosure Remnant FUNCTION: Agricultut°e AGE: Historic Era DIMENSIONS- 12.2 rn long (NE/SW) by 2.0 m wide by 0.8 m inax. height CONDITION: Poor INTEGRITY: Altered: retains integrity of location, settinLs, rnatcyrials, and workmanship SURFACE A l"1 AC'I.S: None EXCAVATION: No DESCRIPTION: S1HP 10031 is a the remains of an enclosure located between 380 ft.and 390 ft aznsl near the southeast boundary of the project area (see Figure 12). The site was recorded by CSH as a reninant enclosure wall 12.2 rr long (NE/SW"). The wall is L-shaped and is likely the northwest side and worth corner of an enclosure. Based on the enclosure si-r.c and.t:onstruction, and its location.CSFI interpreted the site to be associated ww•it.h1 kecliiini,g, catty; out of an agricultural field (Hammatt and Shideler 2007:10). SCS relocated the wall and confmned that the CSH documentation is correct. The L-shape wall segirnent is roughly 12.2 in long (NE/SW) by 0.6 to 1.0 m wide and is 0.8 m in maximum height. The wall is constructed of angular and subangular cobbles and small boulders }piled and slacked on the ground surface(Figure 29), It is cobble and small boulder core filled and roughly bi-faced. The wall has been bulldozed on both ands and the other three sides of the enclosure have all been removed by bulldozing. All but a small portion of the northwest enclosure wall at Site 10031 has been bulldozed. The site is in poor condition, contains very little integrity and no fu ther ufork is recommended. 71 ,� , ow 14. go Aj AW a, �� , "tti ",, I�"� �� � + 1 *;.• r y /L + YM 4 '' 41 e CIA i.: '41 llP y. p... � F,r s` �c t ';•r{� 'w `q�� w ��" m �� � ,� �u � Y � �� t F •~mom � %� u Y � ��/r��Y ���; y '�'� '"LL,P �'.,_ �„� - �~ �•v rY ,��..'T4f�`���9'T �A{��,m•a�,�°r'1��«. tiF i.RYLY W +r9.. u w [Agure29: Photogrdphol'4itc 10031 RL2mnan[ t.,1,10AIre Wall. LookinL Southeast. 7? SIRP 10034 Bedrock Outcrop FUNCTION: Natural geological future, not are archaeological sltc AGE: N/A DIMETrLSIGNS: 2.5 m long by I.S m wide CONDITION: N/A INTEGRITY: N/A SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: No DF,SC RTPTION: SIHP 117034 is located at 475 fI amsl approximately 55 m northeast of Site I0020 (see Figure I2). The site is described in the CSH AIS table as a platform. The feature was relocated along the north edge of a seasonal gulch during the current AIS fieldwork. The feature is a natural bedrock outcrop roughly 2.5 rn long (E W) by 1.9 m wide by 0.35 m high. The outcrop is a pile of exfoliated bedrock and is natural, but its shapc and somewhat level top surface make it :ppCLu- Lo be a possible archaeoLogical loalure. It is likely that CSH added the feature to their pedestrian survey summary table for these reasons. CSH did not include a site description or leap of the feature in the AIS report, likely because it waw detctmilned to be riaturaL No further work is recommended at Site 10034. S1 HP 10067 Terraces FUNCTION, Habitation AGE: Pre Contact era DIMENSIONS: 6.7 to long (L"W) by 5.8 m wide by 0.9 m max. height CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: altered: retains integrity of location, setting, materials, and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS; Basalt Flakes EXCAVATION: CSH 1 X I m test unit DE.SCR PTION: SIHP 10067 is three sail retaining terraces located at 440 f ainsl approximately 90 in southeast of Site 14013 (see Figure 12). The terraces are constructed can the south stoping bank Of seasoi:MI gulch. As indicated in the CSH A.IS and confirmed by SCS daring the cutretat study, the three small terraces are constructed of angular and subangular cobbles and small boulde-rs piled and stacked can the ground surface (Figure 30 and Figure 31). 73 kti F Hilt I h 1�I�l.ld h31 I r 9JLF�. ,coal `� I t DIRTTERRAUF TRFtiC'H 9 nWl 12DC�u 0 i r. I hdFa f Ep, ; DIHI I I F RA( F lick K E3h I}}{a H k Zt] MI1.1+.III I i4 ®P Ikl•klll I 1� 1 \1`01 IATFT) 1IFI)R{"1a;`K (R fw`"ROP ®-IAcINL E, III:rirlccm Figure 30; Site 10067 (C'S I l Sits. 2132} Plan VieNN Map (Ilammatt et al. 1942:49). 74 "�"}�'®`-'�W �" __i '��b°< :°�"q� M..,•.fig� .� � �`s„��r #�*A I � w rAA p r a uC I Y f Y 1714 � 1y •fir�{iP mro „ y � 'VAL. "d.. The terraces fonn three roughly level soil areas (0.9 m to 3.7 m across) along the south slope of a brick-a-black p0t (hill). Mualoa School stream runs along the south flank of the ptr't . The southernmost rock ranch wall (Feature 2) at Site 31182 at least sixty(60) feet in length,runs along the north bank of the stream and connects to the terraces. The inuuka(up slope)corner ofthe wall serves as the facing for a small black dirt covered terrace where basaltic glass flakes can be obserued on the dirt surface. CSH EXCAVA HON RESULTS: A one(1) meter square trench (Trench 1) was excavated in the Mack dirt covered terrace where basaltic glass flakes were observed. The tewt unit cOUtLIMC€3 [arg.e quantities of basaltic glass flakes(avg. 64 flakes/10 cm. level) to bedrock at a maximum depth of 30 cm. Midden material on the other hand was sparse consisting of some shell fragments and very few pieces of fish and mammal bone. A small hearth lens (30 cm. diameter by 20-30 cm. depth) was excavated in the northwest corner of th.c icst unit. This terrace was clearly used for volcanic glass teal production. Other terraces in the proximity were interpreted as agricultumal. [Haminatt et a[. 1991-:48] SIHP 10067 is a pre-Contact era site based on cultural material recovered from the excavation, and is likely associated with lithic too] prodLrctiOn, pOssible limited use iomporary habltation and agriculture. The site appears to be Tightly altered by grazing cattle and is in good condition. No further work is recommended at Sate 10067. S1 HP 10068 Enclosure FUNCTION, Habitation AGE: Pre-Contact era DI-MENSIONS: 4.3 to long(NE/SW) by 3.7 m wide by 0.3 m max. height CONDITION: Poor INTEGRITY Altered: retains integrity of location and setting SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: CSH, 0.5 m X 0,25 m test unit DESCRIPTION: SIHP 10068 was a rectangular enclosure located at 470 ft arms] approximately SO meters north of Site 10067 (see Figure 12). Site 10068 was documented in the CSH AIS study as a sinall rectangular enclosure 4.3 on long by 3.7 Ott wide with a maximum.height of 0.3 rn(Figure 32). The infernal dimensions were 2.4 arc by 1.5 m. The enclosure was constructed of angular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled and stacked on the ground SUrtace. The walls were core filled and portions of the enclosure walls were faced, 76 level pa%4r OA Ht LLDOZ D 0 o k� Q C12� U-5 +7 1 2 tt ` Figure 32: Site 10068 (CSH Site 233) Plan Viesk., flap Showing Test.Trench (HomF►l:m et al. 1992:50), 77 The walls of the enclosure were removed by bulldozing after the CSH fieldwork and prior to the SCS resurvey fieldwork. A roughly 2.0 in long portion of collapsed enclosure wall still remained on the ground surface during the current study (Figure 33). CSH EXCAVATION RESULTS: A one meter by 50 cm test trench was excavated in the center of the enclosure. The unit was excavated to bedrock at a depth of 35 cm. Although there was rio distinct cultural deposit, a small amount cif nnidden material was found ittcl ud III g 03 WdC,Piptpi, sea urchin and fragments of f shbone. Because of the scarcity of material and the disturbed nature of the deposits, tlic excavation was discontinuccl. However, the site probably functioned as a habitation enclosure. [HatrLmatt et a[. 1992,481 Site 10068 has been altered ley bulldozing, is mostly no longer present and is in poor condition. No lurther work is recommended at Site 10068. ST'HP 10069 Modified Bluff FUNCTION: Temporary Habitation Associated with Agriculture AGE: Pre-Contact era DIMENSIONS: 15.0 m long (NIS) by 6.0 m wide by 0.6 to max, lielghL CONDITION: Poor INTEGRITY: Altered: retains integrity oflocatioit and setting SURFACE ARTIFACTS. None EXCAVATION: CSH 0.5 m x 0. 5 to test unit DESCRIPTION: STHP 10069 is located at 460 ft ams] approximately 30 nt northeast of Site 10067 (see Figure 12). The site is described in the CH AIS report as a rack platform construcLed against the south edge of a bedrock bluff nortli of Holualoa School stream (Figure 34), The bluff top is roughly level with low linear bedrock outcrops. The site appears Lo have been scraped over during previous bulldozing leaving the rock platform and possible walls along the edge of the bluff collapsed, scattered and in a poor state of(reservation. There is also a sail deposit approximately 3.0 m long by 2.1 m wide on the tog of the bluff immediately north of the° plLatkirm that was tested by excavating a 50 cnz. square test unit. 78 s<. M a .r n*. �k r, �w v I , CSH TEST RESULTS: The 50 cm by 25 cm test unit was excavated as a single stratigraphic soil layer extending to a maximum depth of 22 cm below surface. Adden recovered from the excavation consisted of few shell fraginents and very small number of small animal barge fragments. Volcanic glass was relatively abundant(avg. 10 flakes/each in four 5 cm thick levels). A single basalt flake was the only other artifact recovered. The CSH report interpreted the site to be a temporary habitation feature used for toed production associated with nearby agriculture. [Hari natt et al. 1992:51] Site 10069 was relocated y SCS diiring the current AI.S study. The site has been badly disturbed by bulldozing. The terrace retaining walls consist of dislocated and scattered cobbles and small bouldors (Figure 35). Site 10069 was significantly altered by bulldozing,and i5 in poor condition. No further work is recommended at Site 10069. SIHP 10070 Enclosure Remnant FUNCTION: Agriculture AGE- Historic era DIMENSIONS: 2.6 m long(N/S') by 2.5 m wide by 1.2 m max. height CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY Altered: retains integrity Of location, sciting and materials and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: CSH 1.0 ni x 0.5 unit DESCRJPTION- SW 10070 is a U- shaped enclosure located at 500 ti amsl approximately 15 meters east of Site 10019(see Figure 12). As indicated in the CSH A1S study and confirmed by SCS during the current study. the enclosure is 2.6 long(N/S) by 2.5 m wide with maximum height of 1.2 m (Figure 36). The eastern side of the enclosure has been impacted by heavy equipment, although the remaining portions of the walls of the structure are well constructed and in good condition (Figure 37). CSH EXCAVATION RESULTS: A 1.0 rn by 0.5 m test unit(Trench 1)was excavated along the interior wall ofthe enclosure.. The unit was excavated to bedrock at a depth of 15 cm. No cultural material was recovered from the excavation. The comparatively new condition of the stonework at the site and its pro x-1i -1ty to other historic features (Site 10019) indicate that the enclosure is most likely of recent age and probably associated with historic agricultural activities such as coffee growing orgrazing. [Hammatl et al. 1992:51] 8l w 'r �wy �_. t e y I , i i c J !!r s Figure 35: Photo?gT-afrh of Site 10069 Remains ShLPAI ig Bind[❑zer Dis[urb.9n c:, Looking;`lorhwest. R? . 13R |44) BtLLUOLL LEVEL SOIL . BE11|x)ZEn 0 7| (34) MIA Rs KEN T\ o - H. 1.1 RAH & El 21R[ |]| | Figure 36: Site I0070 (CSH 235) Plan yip' Map, \3 '" 'err•*,,- w{ N �r ,. i M - 4 el M1 r Site 10070 was relocated by SCS during the current AI4 study. Based can feature type,dimensions,construction, lack of artifacts recovered during excavation, and the features association with rock 1110LInds at Site 10019, it is likely that the Site 10070 enclosure as,cacIated with I Iistoric era ranching and cotTee agriculture. Site IC070 has been altered by bulldozing and is in fair condition. No further work is recommended at Site 14070. S1HP 10072 Complex FUNCTION: Ag,riculiural AGE: Lace pre-Contact to Ilistoric era DIMENSIONS: 38.8 in long (!'ti;S) by 36.3 to wide by 1.3 max. height CONi MON: Poor TNTECRwIT'Y: Altered: retains integrity of location, setting, materials, and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS. None EXCAVATION: CSH TLC-I and TU-2. 7.0 m square total DESCRIPTION: SIHF 10072 was a modified bedrock outcrop bluff(Feature 1), a rock mound (Feature 2)and a series of level dirt terraces (Feature 3) Located between 490 ft and 490 ft atnsl along the central northwest boundary of the project area (see Figure I2 and Figure: 38). The site is bounded to the northeast by Size 31182 Feature 9 ranch rock wall (Figure 38). The features were constnicted on a fairly steep southerly slope. The Feature 3 terraces were bounded by linear rock MOUnds and Feature 1 was called a large bluff. Site 10072 was 38.8 in long(NE/SW) by 363 in wide with a maximum feature Height of 1.3 nl.. Feature I was a modified exfoliated large bedrock outcrop located at the center of Site. 1 tlfl72 (see Figure 38). The top of the outlrrupr was relatively level. The modified portion of Feature 3 was roughly 13.0 in long(NE/SW)by 8.7 in wide by 1.6 in in inaximum height. The: modified portions of Feat-Lire 3 were constructed by removing angular and wubangular basalt cobbles and small boulders from relatively level areas on, the slope of the feature and piling them above and below the level cleared ground surface (Figure 39 t.hrnrlgh Figure 41). Feature I was relocated by SCS during the current study. The CSH feature description and plan view map were correct. TUA was excavated by CSH on the level top surface of Feature 3 (see excavation summary below). 85 -------------- KEY •HL LILI"ZIL to =tit OPF' 1>—Sl t 1PP I ItR.4( F..t P•FIf1'PCI Q $ a a �m FF 5rt uF a I Mi tic I Is 'rF:P RM,F; il'•1 wrr y FF %Tt R1, 1 D I"i1Crlr► I tib SIIF iIIM2 C, Fiq;ure 38: SU 10072 (CSI1 Site 238) Flan View Maji OlammatI ct al. I992:5?h. Feature 2 was a rock, Ocaring mound located 3.3 ni north of F alurc 1. Tl c rack mound measured 3.7 in long(NE/SW) by 3.3 m wide. The rock mound was constructed of angular and subangular cobbles and small boulders piled and loosely stacked on exposed bedrock. There was no Facing evident in the feature construction. TU-2 was excavated by CSH through the north half of the rock mound (see excavation summary below). Feature ? was bulldozed and was no longer present during the current AIS UV%cv. 6 e 1 d iFY ,y e iW w � ;a' � �+ . - q �'�,•'w '`� sue' r + i y r �d Y at Y F 3s :v, PY� w f I 171 lk r } _ , M i p • � r ,��, •.4' tip � Y I r `fi *-0� ^+ ;,t� �,�r "'T .�� 'y1 _ a f rw f f _ Feature 3 was three level soil-filled terraces (Terrace A, 13 and C) located along the east side of'the site (see Figure 39). Feature was 20-0 m tang(NE!SW) by 13.8 in wide. Terrace A was bounded on the north by a linear(NW/SF.) bedrock outcrop and was bounded oil the southeast by a linear (NE/SW) rock inound. There was a roughly oval clearing rock mound (Feature 2) on the south eircl ofthe linear bedrock outcrop. Feature 3. Terrace R and Terrace C were two sail terraces south of Terrace A and along the cast side of Site 10072 (see Figure 38). The two terraces were bounded on the west by Feature I and by exposed bedrock outcrop to the south. The two terraces were approximately I T5 m long(N F?'SW) by 14.7 m wide. There was a low linear rack mound that divided the two terraces. The upper(easy) tier was approximately 1.0 m above the lower tier. The terraces and IOW liner rock mounds that formed the three terraces were constructed of angular and subangular cobbles and small boulders piled and loosely stacked on exposed bedrock. There was no Facini" evident in Feature 3 construction. C'S1 I EXCAVATION RESULTS, Test Unit 1 (1.5 meters by 2 meters) was excavated on llic nilddlc of the tap of Feature I to a depth of0.5 rttcters. The unit was excavated as a single stratigraphic layer of basalt cobbles acid small boulders, and less than 1 em of soil. The unit did riot contain artifacts or cultural deposits and wrininated on bedrock. Based on the structure of the bluff, limited modifications and lack of artifacts, CSH determined chat 1=eature I was an exposed bedrock outcrop with small areas of agricultural rock clearing mounds. [Hammatt et al, 199151] Test Unit 2(2.0 meters by 2.0 meters)was excavated through the middle of Feature 2. The unit was excavated to the base of the feature and contained an architectural layer of angular and subangular cobbles and small boulders and 40 cm of loose sedimtra. A few small fragments of cowrie and u:ana shell were recovered from the excavation. Therc were no other artifacts or cultural deposits in TU-2. The Feature was most likely an agricultural rock clearing mound. SCS relocated Site 10072 during the current AIS survey. The north and east portions of the site, including Feature 2 and Feature 3 and the Site 31182 Feature 9 ranch rock wall have been bulldozed and are no longer present. Feature I was the only feature remaining. Feature 1 is only slightly altered, is partially collapsed in places and is in fair condition. 90 Based on the types of features, their construction method and very limited amount of marine shell recovered frorn subsurface testing at Feature I and Feature 2, Site 10072 is Most likely a late pre-Contact to Historic era agricultural site- The site has been altered by bulldozing, is in poor coadition and no further work is recommended at Site 10071 SHIP 10073 Complex FU'NCTION: Agricultural AGL Historic Era D1 IM ENSION S: 15.0 111 long(-N'W/SE) by 14.0 rn wide CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY, Altered: retains some integrity of location, setting, materials, and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATIOM TU-I and TU-2 DESCRIPTION: STHP 10073 is two rock clearing mounds (Feature I and Feature 2) and an enclosure (Feature 3) located at 575 ft amst in the northeast quadrant of the project area (see Figure 12). CSH recorded two platforms, one (Feature 1) measuring eight feet high on the downhill (makai) side. CSI-I interpreted the features as historic cattle loading ramps (Harnmatt et a]. 1992.23). SCS Tclocatcd Site 10073 and recorded two rock clearing motuids. Feature I and Feature 2, and an enclosure, Feature 3 (Figure 42). The site is approximately 15.0 m long (NW/SE) by 14.0 m wide. Feature I is a platform shaped rock clearing mound constructed on a south slope along the southwest comer of the site (see Figure 42), The rock mound is 5.5 TU long (NE/SW) by 5.0 m wide, with a maximum height of 1.40 rn. It is constructed of angular and subangular large basalt cobbles and small boulders stacked and piled three to six courses on the ground surface (Figure 43). The top surface is partially paved with small cobbles. The walls are faced. Feature I appears to be unaltered and is in good eondition. Feature 2 is a linear rock mound located upslope to the northeast of Feature I (see Figure 42). The platibrm is approximately 6.5 m long(SE,,INW) by 3.0 m wide, with a maximum height 0.81 m. Feature 2 is constructed of large basalt cobbles and sinall boulders piled and stacked two courses high On the grOUrid surface(Figure 44). The southwest side oftho plail'Onn Is roughly faced. Feature 2 appears to be unaltered and is in good QondltloTi. 91 to F,, ►�I I III I v o ce 00 C� o D 190 1 LA I`L RE I a � y II 1 _', i A<ryl 0 1140 l KE cp BEDROCK ICJ I#I �NE:F[,li'E'A F![.IW 5lJ1tFA['f. IN cm Figure 42: Sitc 10073 Flan View Map. 92 1 � l s a' •, I a - N {I t: w .1 �. i Frig• '-jjI r a u•I �:•J}jam.- 1 � sY �, Y! w r Hgurc44: PlwUIL!1,111t1 01 "a(V IIHII`3l:c.W IIQ 2 I'latlorm Lo4ikiii•_! LI'l. 94 Feature 3 is an enclosure located southea,,L of`Feature 1 and Feature 2 (see Figure 42). The enclosure is approximately 11.0 m Long (N 1�.SW) by 5,0 in wide, with a maxittnurn height. of 97.0 m. The enclosure walls are constructed 7ular and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders piled and stacked one to three courses(0.9 m maximum height) on the ground surface(Figure 45). The interior of theenclosure is primarily pahoehoe bedrock outcrop with sediment built up along the interior of the enclosure walls. Feature 3 appears to be unaltered and is in good condition. SCS FXCAVATION RESULTS: SCS excavated a test excavation unit(TU-1) it FGaatilt-Q 1 and a test unit (TU-2) within Feature 3. The lest units were excavated to document feature construction and to determine feature function and age through diagnostic artifacts. TIJ-I was a 2.3 m long(Nam:SE) by 1.2 in wide test unit (TU-1) excavated in the southeast quadrant of the Feature 1 rock Clearing nataund (see Figure 42). TU-1 was excavated as an architectural layer and one natural stratigraphic layer. and terminated can bedrock at 97 cin below the top surface of thy: te,11tUre (Figure 46 through Figure 48). The natural stratigraphic layer(Layer 1) was not screened in arbitrary 10€Ira lcvels. The Architectural Layer 09 cm analxUmmi thickness) consisted of angular and subaaig,u.lar cobbles and small boulders witli a small anwLtnt of decomposing organic detritus. There were no artifacts, cultural deposits oa subsurfac:c features in the architectural layer. The toga surface of the architectural layer was fairly lcv wl col?blcs and small boulders, The architectural layer continued into Layer 1 and terminated on bedrock approximately 75 cm to 100 cm below the top surface of the feature.. Layer 1 (0-65 cnabs) was very dark grayish brawn (10YR312) loose sandy silt loam 95", cobbles and small bottldcrs. The rock excavated in Layer I was architectural rack. The architectural layer terntiiiaated on bedrock thrOlIghaut the entire unit. There were no artiffi is In Layer 1. Based on feature shape, dimensions, construction, and the absi mce of artifacts recovered from TU-1, it is likely that Feature 1 is a rock clearing mound. The shape and construction methad its similar to Historic eras sugarcane rock clearing mounds clOcurnented in ether pasts of Tlawai`i Island. 95 a ' Ja ';k �'i .',�.��ra .t�w* -r +�^�, dl � �"'41R.' yr"ny'M+..�:'4w .a. _ w �d x�_. _, �'"• . .y YTS r � "Y � .♦� � TSi �- �•^ *4 Figure 45. P[wturpmji'i ol'SiLe I(X)7i Feat Lire 3 EMAOS LTC SKCIVirtiU. [merior[xwel Bedrock 0iilcrop,Looking, 96 I, l ■I �t �, xil �tol - 401 tFiu }.il Mail Ian Iti1 �m kN ti �-t-S11141!6LK) P.a,bdhi ',III I'Iitil HANA1,I I[OCU. I BEDROCK rigurc 46: Site 10073. Feature 1.TU-1 Southwest Profile. 97 r i yy .J 5 t 4 . v .yN r W�rp N':M � u" � r �� a' yr ar „�� �t�y,• fig, v t K"'M"'k A 1 t . 1 Vigiin,48. llhimirT.njA oflu1L• liH1-;. 1'tluure i.TU-1 Norhe sa ln(1 Nonhk`cm Prufilw�. 99 _[ i 2 eras a 1.0 by 1.0 m test unit excavated within the southern portiun of the Feature 3 encloser,- Figure 42). TU-2 was excavated as four natural stratigral�hic Iay rs, and terrnin,cilcd on bedrock at 58 embs (Figure 49 through Figure 52). The natural straiigraphic Iaycr�, v,-en ,.-xc. -.Ltcd in arbitrary 10 cm levels. Layer 1 (0-10 cmbs) was very dark brown (7.5YR2.5/2) loose sandy loam with 1% pebbles and cobbles. Layer I ternninated on Layer iI sediment below. The boundary between Layer I and Layer It was fairly level and diffuse. There were no artifacts in Layer I. Layer It ( 10-29 cmbs) was very dark brown (7.5YR2.5/2) soft sandy barn with 5.0 cm of black (7.5YR2.511) sandy silt loam mottling at its base. Layer II contained 5% gravels. Layer I[ was excavated as a 10.0 cm Level. I and an 8.0 cm level 2. Layer 11, Level 2 contained a small amount oFcharcoal flecking;and a cowrie shell fragment. The base of the enclosure wall architecture was 20-28 cmbs in Layer I1, Level 2. Layer II terminated on Layer III sediment below. The boundary between Layer lI and Layer III was fairly level and clear. Layer 111 (28-40 clubs) was black(7.5YR2.511) soft sandy silt loath with 15%n pebbles and cobbles. Layer III did not contain artifacts. Layer IV Oo-59 cmbs) was dark yellowish brown(IOYR314) soft sandy silt with 5% bedrock cc bbics. Laycr IV was excavated as two lcvL4N, was terrninated on bedrock and did not contain artifacts, The C SH AIS report interpreted. Site 10073 to be a Historic era agricultural site. The dimensions. shape, and construction of Feature I and Feature 2 are similar to Historic era sugarcane ruck clearing mounds documented in other locations on Hawaii Island. The absence of artifacts in test excavation units also suggests Feature 1 and Feature 3 are associated with agricultural use. Site 10073 appears to be unaltered and is in good condition_ No further work is rccorntnended at.Site 10073. 100 HtrII1.A 4I MAI.•I. Tsoc III I.4"1 It tl I 1r �..._ IA ti F • HIP 1 ti1"ki 5L t1F11 — IL•II Diu 41 11 441 I.IY ml lillll lit I111 Ildl YRII :11Irm R 1,5}:WY D4.Rah IL R(AX%,'i1 R'1 21 6AMF)V 113,01 m•1 tl I k I1:5 1 R'Y 11 XRh 1IR4I%4 w .7{h N!{•2p1+thlw5 L 1IkM t`V(M•L.-S(h 175VR 61,,%',U1 L4)%%I ®-1 OVA lla:RV O k 1'7 cy it];mL l p%.%NDV[!7411 1.461 I It.J V:I)ARK 1 I;i..1.:11"MR RUM'N r I R1 It 1 41"%.NDI Sd1.1 R4t.tl I RY K K4 ®.1:s 1[ICI 141'Wki l WI1" S 141'1'pl��.li h Figure 49. Site 10073,Ficalure+.Tl. -2 Northeast and Southeast Profiles. 101 \ tit FAR 9 h, J I wtogm ph mal002. mu& I ml a 1'r0file mOW iDg B a 3 AcmLeC 102 ,yam^ a r s AV I )p Tit P a Fig11W 51! llh*togriph ofgite 111117.;, 1 cali3i-c ,?['-_' Iiiiilie:i t Proll1c. 101 m p., � _., —�-• a �r, � i a a t � � { • �,.N^ i tin Figurc 52: PhOLOM-alih ul'Sitc 10073.Featurc 3.TU-Bas nl'Excavatinn Laokim,Skimhca t. 104 SIHP 10074 Enclosure Remnant FUNCTION: Coffee Work Shed AGE: Historic: Era DIMENSIONS: 16.5 nY long (NE/SW) by 15.0 m wide CONDITION: Poor INTEGRITY Altered: retains minimal integrity of location, setting, materials, and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS: Coral abrader and corrugated metal roofing EXCAVATION: CSH TLl-1 and TU-2, 1.25 ni square total. DI"SCRIPTION: S I H P 10074 was a rectangular enclosure, a low rack wall and collapsed pig pen located at 640 ft ainsl roughly 50 meters east of Site 10073 (see Figure 12). The site is on roughly level ground above a seasonal gulch to the southeast. There are several old growth ironwood trees at the site.. The CSH ARS report site plan and description showed an 8.5 m long (NE/SW) by 82 in }vide by 1? m high enclosure along the northeast side of Site 10074 (Figure 53). The enclosure was constructed of angnihir and subangular basalt cobbles and small boulders stacked on the ground surface. 'l lic k�d 1, were bi-faced and pebble and cobble core-filled. The exteriors of the wall; were noally The interior of the enclosure was level rocky soil with a remnant low ruck wall 3.7 m long (7, 1� ` l ) chat divided the center of the enclosure. There was a cobble paving between the wcsi endot ure wall and the central dividing wall. The enclosure was likely used as a house foundation .jnd the flared area might have funclio ed as a lanai outside ofthe house structure. A coral abrader was located on the surface of the cobble paving. There is a Low rods wall along the,southeast and southwest sides of the house enclosure. There was also a C-shape enclosure at the northwest end of the terrace. The rock wall was 1.9.7 rn long total by 0.6 m wide and was constructed of a one to two courses(wide) of large cobbles and small boulders piled and stacked two to three courses high on the ground surface. There was a small rock mound on the southeast end of the wall. The collapsed C-shape enclosure (pig pert) was 4.0 m long(NE/SW) by 3.5 meters wide and opened to the north. The C-shape was constnicted of angular and subarlgular cobbles piled and stacked can the. ground surface. No heights were given for the terrace or C-shape. SCS relocated the site during the Current AIS fieldwork. All but a portion of the rock. wall (SE and SW segments) has been bulldozed(see Figure 53 and Figure 54). The rock wall matched the, CSI1 AIS description and was also partially collapsed. 105 pen * BULLDOZED ��,� BULMOZED @,yam d _...o a yr " ti^— 1� 11w;K.:1, � m i.l.m)ZI. 1) # s 110 wa81 x - U Y PLAN rr, i,tia,k•� tree 0 2 8 16 1 1 e • ,.II f titi~ -• • TJ t�� xW .'`'ti~~� Y •• •M a ..ry., " SEA` A Figure 53: Site 10074 Plan View Map(Adapted from Hammatt et aL 1992:9). 106 t' a • r , w. r n .. CSH EXCAVATION RESULTS: A 50 can square test unit(TU-1) was excavated in the Soil deposit in the center of the rectangular enclosure. The unit was excavated to sterile Pahala ash at a depth of 35 cm below, the nnodern gmUnd surface. The trench yielded a few fragments of cowrie shell and one volcanic glass flake. CSH suggested that the recovered artifacts were not consistent with what appeared to be the historic age of the foundation. CSH suggested that the artifacts might represent the scattered remains of prehistoric occupation. A second test unit (TU-') was excavated by CSH through the soLahwvest Fall cal'the rectangular enclosure. Artifacts recovered from the wall's architectural layer % er4 lragal-ients 01' bottle glass, glazed ceramic sherds, wire nails and fragments of red'o"o d. Sitc 10074 was interpreted as most likely a small dwelling or work shed associated with coffee farming. Coffee trees were identified along the seasonal gulch tothe south. [Hamrnari et a]. 199?:54 The: �;ite was bulldozed at some point after the CSH AIS study. When SCS relocated the, site, it was almost completely bulldozed and is in poor condition. All that rerna.ins is the partially collapsed portion of what appears to be the southeast corner of the enclosure real]. Site 10074 has been altered by bulldozing, is in poor condition and no further work is recornmended at the site. SI HP 10075 Enclosure Remnant FUNCTION: Pig Pen AGF; Historic Era DIMENSIONS, 9.0 m hang(NW;SL--) by 4.6 in wide by 1.8 m max. height CONDfTIW Poor INTEGRITY Altered: retains minimal integrity of location, setting, materials. and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: S1HP 10075 is a large rectangular enclosure remnant located at 630 ft amsl in the north corner of the project area (see Figure 12). The CSH AIS report describes the enclosure as measuring roughly 9.0 m long (NW/SE)by 4.6 m wide with wall height ranging from , long axis oriented north-south, with walls 1.5 rn to 1.8 m in height. The northwest vall had ra low (one fact higgh) stone slab "lintel" opening a few feet frorn the northeast corner of the structure 0lammatt et al, 1992:23). 108 When SC'S relocated Site 10075 during the current AIS study, the norlheast and northwest walls had been bulldozed and were no longer present. Only portions of the southeast and sotrthwest walls remainod itatact. The remaining wal Is have been impacted by bulldozing and were partially collapsed. The Site 10075 enclosure remnant is currently 4.75 m long (N- W1SE) by 4.6 m wide and has maximurn wall heights of 0.58 m (Figure 55). The enclosure walls range from 0,5 to 0.65 m in width. The walls are constructed of angular, subangular.and slabby basalt large cobbles and large boulders stacked three to tour courses high on the ground surfacc (Figure 56 and Figure 57). The walls were likely faced in places but are now collapsed. The interior of the enclosure is roughly level rocky soil. CASH interpreted the enclosure as a Historic era pig pen based on its size, feature construction, wall heights, and their similarities to ether Histuric era pig pens documented ae:ros-s Hawaii Island. Site 10075 has been altered by bulldozing, in. poor condition and no fia-ther work is recommended at the site SIHP 30592 Railroad Berm FUNCTION,: Transportation AGE: historic Era DIMENSIONS: 300.0 tnr long (NHS) by 4.0 m wide max. by 5.0 m max. lreighrt CONIC I T ION; Good INTEGRITY: Unaltered, retains integrity of location, setting,materials, and workmanship SUR-FACE ARTIFACTS: railroad Spike EXCAVATION, None DESCRIPTION: Site 30592 is a segment of the railroad berm located between 680 m and 690 ni amsl along the project area east boundary (see Figure 12). The railroad berm continues south off the current project area. The railroad berm is approximately 300.0 m in length (N/S) and between 2.5 rn and 4.0 in wide by 5.0 m in maximuni height. The railroad bed is a level dim and rack surface (Figure. 58), and the berm is located along the west side. orthe railroad bed. The bean is a west sloping retaining wall cotrostructed of small boulders and large cobbles stacked up to nine courses high(Figure 59 and Figure: 60). The beml is well faced with fairly tightly fitted natural rack. The rock has not been worked prior to stacking. Tlie Merril face slopes slightly toward the east as it approaches the top to prevent collapse. 109 00 (D p 0 () 000 C) 0 RI 1.1.114VI ) 1B 0 0 0 uOLLD 0) ®r) onyc c o C , &r ,1f C) CD oko 00 � C] KI.N � • HA ALT IW("X TREE ( } - NEF�GHTASUX'E(;K( ,l •,;F,i Figure 55: Site 10075 Plan View Map. 110 , Y , w . Y - y 11 M 1 .v t r v . r .k 4 f M rp` r n y y 1`a.�� � � � � :+� �.,,.•of �,�a:�. ' " p WWW f 4 µ b ^ f M V JM R rt +'"mow s "r "` 9.�'d�1+ ."9!i+r 'Sw. ��` �., •��:y�, _ s „ e, r k � . - +.. 'r a� „�:, --mow ,�r d�d,,,,,°r`• � Sr_ �'� ;a'-1: �� IrAWY Figiire 58 1'1iufugraph of Site 3{692 RaHmad Bmn RxI l3 I LM mg Am A. 1.l 3 earl ` i ,�� i' � •' ,� � — ��h u n o T� _ a w •a. q Y x. • t�. Y<e r IdklI R 0 k D H F t N f BOTTOM OF [11 I.C'N trr 1 7 i 4 r�x KFY - s, Figure 60: Site 30592 Railroad Benn Retaining Wall Profile. 115 The retaining wall is approximately 5.0 m high and is constructed of fifteen courses of large basalt cobbles and small boulders. The north end of the berm has been bulldozed roughly 60.0 in SOuth of the nonhea.st corner of the project area. Site 30592 appears to be Unaltered and is in good condition. Only the north end of the railroad berm has been altered by bulldozing. Site 30592 is in good condition and is recommended for preservation. SIHP 31181 Enclosure Remnant FUNCTION, Habitation A,GF: Pre Contact Era DIMENSIONS: 3.40 m long(NW/SE) by 1.24 m wide by 1.10 m max. height CONI EMON: Poor INTI" FRITY: Altered: retains minimal integrity of location, setting, materials, and workmanship SURFACE ARTIFACTS: Coral Abrader EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION Site 31181 is an enclosure remnant located at 645 fa atrnsl in the northeast corner of the project area(see Figure 12). The feature is constructed on a fairly level pahoehoe bedrock outcrop. The feature has been altered by bulldozing and only a portion of the southwestern wall rcivains intact. Tltc renira rit wall ati ti�-ell as the bedrock outcrop on which it rests, are situated in an area that has been lieii�fly dozed (Figure ure 61). The enclosure remnant is approximately 3.40 m long(NW/SE)by 1.24 m wide by 1.10 m in maximum height. The enclosure is constructed of angular basalt small boulders stacked three to four courses high on the bedrock outcrop (Figure 62). The walls are very roughly faced. The bedrock outcrop which Functions as the interior floor of the StrUCture appears to extend beyond the limits of what was once the original structure. A coral abrader iiagyment was located in the south corner of the enclosure (Figure 63). Based on the size and construction of the enclosure, it is passible that it was used for pre- Contact era temporary habitation. It will nett be passible to test excavate the feature as it is constructed on bedrock. Site 31181 has been altered by bulldozing, is in poor condition and no further work is recammended at the site, 116 9�- ; ()�F, C) a v4y xls, (1111 Ili PA 11 l lib, ItlU� a k n R � b fi m 5y Wry e..yt Hl4tlT ROC K7a �[ ql x1111)11 11 D(Omkl. 4 . ]IF If,IfT Rf)%1 •f Ri; I'I Ej BF 1,W h h Figure 61: Site 31191 Plan View Map. 117 ■• 0 d1n , F N'R. 4 I r • � r _ J _ C 4 r i f M , air Y P" �'' a x.i � •• � r�'pjy�,� Y Y . .� ° M R Y w At .40 1 .. A •`y , IN if yr •� '1 '^"4'w1 �VP � ! / i4 ♦ o h ti a 9 SIRP 31182 label Walls FUNCTION: Ranching and Agriculture AGE: Historic Era. DIMENSIONS: 900N 0 rn long(NE/SW) by 550.0 nt wide by 1.20 m max. heighi CONDITION: .Fair INTEGRITY: Altered: retairl!� i Hurnal integrity of location. tietticl��. materials, and workmanship SL;RI~ACE ARTIFACTS: I Iistoric to Modern era bottles and cans EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 31192 is the ranch rack walls (Features I through 14) that divide the entire project area into paddocks and agricultural fields (Figure 64). They are located between 3(-@ and 700 ft ranisl. The nia-iority of rack walls (n=l0)are oriented lrhrrf a-rnakui (NE/SW-) while a smaller number (11-6) Of`s110 ter northl'sGuth walls create divided spaces within the longer mauka-infiikaj walls. There is a small pen in the sowliww cst corner of the project area at the suuthwosi end of'wall. Feature 4 (Figure 65). The small pets at the southwest end of Feature 4 is either for calves or is a pig pen. The small pen has metal pipe gates to allow access and appears more modern than most of the walls. There are also three lager corals, or paddocks (Feature 12. 14, and between those features and wwfalI Feature 5) in the southwest corner of the project area(see Figure 64). Wall Features 1 and 5 are property boundary walls and der not follow LCA or LG boundaries. The northern cnd of Feature 2 wall and Feature 3 wall appear to bw constructed along the boundaries ofLCA#3630 to John G. Munn(see Figure 7). The rock walls are of a very similar constriction. They are constructed of angular, subangular and slabby basalt large cobbles and small boulders stacked tour to six courses high on the ground surface (Figures 66 through 72). The walls range from four to six courses wide. The outer rocks are placed so that their flattest edges are facing the outside of the wall- The walls are not nobble care tilled but are bi-faced. The outsides of the walls slope slightly inward from the base to the top of the walls for stability. There are openings in some of the w aIIs. and some with and rnetaI I-)ipe or wood gates it) aIIclw access through the walls, BarbQd wire fence has been installed along one side of some of the walls. 120 1,P 1..I r I 7 <1L'NI F'11 I 1•Fik'V I Q � -+1 kS nal ui 1e.1['tl wllk. � �` �� •�•.. S$ Q,.: • t41111ULl IF.ill NY _ 1,' RAI4 tti4 tip ■ IGlAN -+ILihtiLfr.tiu*~inlr 11 9U Jim Ift Zia W"� �'"" t a+w:., f!51F:.11i A>&i'�Yluf• L7 'i.♦ �,�,.a+"���y R~+ a p 4■"w iPT11 OL "M � t ,N�.ilFi.111■ {} Jll F Wk'li I'-kAdl.11I• CJ w I X'A!IRan 1 Fgurc 64: 7.5-Minute Series,USGS Topographic Map Shol><•ing Lucatiun of Site 31192 Ranch'Wall Features and Project Area (ESRI.2011. Sources:National Geographic Society,USGS.Kcalakektia Quadrangle). 1.21 �r o , F h y� w _ a fi y. k f ° ry + 'mob, 1�.'./,�...- ��'•�� r.,�,. � Y . - " !F �) .k wY S x + A r i w P p m 9 � T � o 1*7z T"�e� , " u v •� a' a. mo „ S,, Lp; Y W 4 ».. .. t 14- 111gure 68: Photograph of Site 31182 Feature 4 Showing Top of Wall Construction, Looking Northeast. 125 t . ° w �.w 7 r a - i , �d � yy d 'g • � w m , 0 tt , i r ,V r w , owl- oil r Site 31 l-�-' 1,iowre 11 Shot+kua Vvail Construction.Looking East. 1.29 ^ m" '�IMJ,t,� oor Ob e ay x a' ' .• '�, - gar � �+,� ,WLN k w T 4�w� *"� � 4a/, -�"",.. v�nByrr. ,_'"s' ►,. y � .., � N�d�I"��. 3 r w [ t u ,x �2 ' X ti N Many cif the walls have been altered and are either cc)l lapsed in places or have had their ends bulldozed or have bulldozer breaches through than, providing nems access. The remaining Site 31182 walls have not been altered,are in good condition and no further work is recommended for them. IF-1 Isolated Petroglyph FUNCTION: Marker AGE: Pre Contact Era D11MENSIONS: 0.90 m by 0�70 m CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Altered SURFACE. ARTIFACTS: None EXCAVATION: bone DESCRIPTIC)M Isolated Find-1 (IF-1) is a pet ropglyph located a( 410 It ainsl aloni- the southwest boundary of the pr€icct area (see Figure 11). The single petroglyph is an hnagc of a person etched onto a small basah boulder(Figure 73) in a bul[dozed disturbed area north ofa seasonal i ulch. The boulder is 0.90 rn in length, 0,70 to wide and is not:associated with any features (Figure 74). The petroglyph likely depicts a hrunan farm, although an interpretation of its significance is difficWt as the image has detedorata S C S contacted Shane NcIson, the Officc oi'lIa\%-.iIi'an Affairs We!c t IIawai`i Representative to woii,.,ult oil the can the final dis IN)'II1011 a I I d prescF-VaIioji treattnew, for the petroglyph. IF- I appears to be unaltered, is in fair condition and preservation at a nearby protected location on the property Is reconurlended. 130 x fyJ�f r a n y , A�. �, '^� _ r{r.. � -�,i r �.` *JI. n M1 .'r1 � y e Y - •. ;• ..1 - + a i e u u s Y , r - 1: rtF _ •w jo • n'II YYur Nk irlr 'r Y ^4'.41P ,x+' n� • w '� � � '.�� �f�k 'SAY, YAy *�i * n •Y`' w f v y , 9P ' �p ✓ a i r v. w � n � p P •., , r r r fi iR Figure 74: Site 31181 llorow lYph ["Ian View Drawing. 132 CONCLUSION Seventeen archaeological sites were identified and recorded in the project area (Table 7 and Figure 75). Fifteen of the sites were previously documented and two sites were previously undocumented (Site 31 181, a small coffee shed enclosure and Site 31182,ranch walls). The location of one of the 17 sites(Site 10012). was relocated, though the burials were reinterred off project and the archaeological features at Site 10012 are no longer present on the ground surface. An isolated petroglyph (IF-[) was also recorded during the current A1S study. Six of the sites and IF-1 were determined to be pre-Contact era sites, three associated with habitation, one with agriculture, one single feature site(Site 10012) formerly associated with burials, and a single petroglyph. The burials at Site 10012 were removed and reinterred off-project prier to 1983. Eleven of the sites were determined to be Historic era sites, the majority associated with cutTee agriculture and cattle ranching. Four of the Historic era sites likely had a habitation componciit. Table 7: Inventory of.Archaeological Sites in the Currcnt AIS Protect Area. SIIIIIW x I PE FUNCTION AGE ]iiUl l 1'Islf01111 AIL C:]raru1!,�IL:niP_ ILbIL ILVIII Prr-C 0111ALL 10012• & k4 ut[ Bunal l'r4-C UIIL.[eL 100 1* En&Kiiref €_;at Tl ik,v I];;bik;I1ion PL LB-(1,111;1C.l 1001 ti 1 nc l4nulti �iJii'!111111.11 Ilistoric I LJ h lice}; Nluunds A".f'itarin Il1sLor]' I0)a I I.1sdoI urc Wall !N'W LIII IIIE I IIS1+1:1, 10067 1Cr}':iM-5 IIuI}a.arLuI] P1c-C-u11LxeL 100ftX Enclosure I l;hir;lriol) PIV-Conttict I t 06L) Mrxiiticd Wuff P€atfoun I i:Ihi..ItL+}n Historic 10070 L:-Shape f nt'Iosurc. Ag icullurc Historic 10072 Complex _gip,Clearing l'rc C'uasl<Lel 10073 Complex Ranching dt.fig. I Iistoric 10074 F1}CIosurc 1'401'k 5llyd HIsmric 10075, I_nclwure Pi"Pell IlIS1061' 301492 RaIroad Uer111 lttonaC ;1 Ill I Enclosrure C'nllc4 �k't,rk Slink I lisu7ric 31 IK2 Rock Walls Ranrhini&A,, Historic 1F-1 Paraglyph Mal`Lr Pre-COOLUVI. Site numbers are preceded by the prefix 50-10-37-. Oranges Shading-Site no longt�r present. • Burial Site 10012 reinterred off project prior to 1983, 133 • .2LsaISk:.l,At31+14j\ � *Adf7. 1414%Fu Flr 6R I kttJf HL RI tiL 1+...4 H y\(NI\{ JIFF. r` 7'11�t3L1t17h.{} *' a 316IN61 _ t µ kill$AIJ4P%%F11 3 �^� e f 6k q111111111 1wN tilllr SfFF\L\Rtll IF � 'r S'T:II 01 IY 4151.1. 71x1 f4 .MR .f-iSl. 1'pplV � I v/ea1 + KkK i117-4-0rdlac 164Mdf 6A1 I Ff' t IAlll 13 dl I"Lffi"lF IUIII".O rwiWOa , ,� •IRNNh4 'w"1'!1T'Isla 1 N1 16 1, Ann r1 4AF.w 17017� . 1iN1;R N"tl.l. I IR'�6tWlr 1. f'"ivurr 75. +.; Nfi 11.1IC Solo,USGS Topog lrhic Map Showing Location of/51n hu t1rilgi-Lul Snit and Pru erl Arr�l i i'_SR L 2011, S4rur,rO: N+;611+m;Il Geographic Society.USGS.KcaLtkekua Quadrangle). 134 There is a concentration of Historic era agricultural and livestock situ (Site 10019 10018, L0070, 1g073, 100741 10075, and 31181) located in the: noilheast quadrant of the project area. The features include rock clearing mounds and enclosures. The sites are clustered along;a seasonal gulch. Sites include rock clearing mounds and small enclosures associated with coffee and sugarcane growing. There are a smaller number of pre-Contact era agricultural sites (Site 10011 and 10072) and temporary habitation sites associated with atixi•etilture (Site 10013, 10067, 10068, and 10069) near the south central portion of Pic project area. Three ofthe habitation sites are north of the Holualoa School stream located along the south boundary of the project area. Artifacts recovered from test excavations at these rites included a number of volcanic-glass flakes, indicating tool manufacture. The many I Ik[oric cra rock angle (Site 31 11Q)are associated with cattle ranching. There are ma:rka-raaakai walls divide the entire len-th of the project area into separate paddocks. There are north-south walls that further divide the paddocks into smaller pastures. There are also a series of large corrals in the southwest corner of the project and a small pen in the southeast corner ofthe project area. Ranchers often move cattle born paddock to paddock to prevent overgrazing. They also pasture yearlings separate from alder cattle. Corrals and sinaller pens are use for branding, inoculation and to gather cattle for transport to Market. Thcre is a dirt ranch road leading to corral Feature 12 that crosses the Mlualoa School stream, 61'vwm the wennsive [anti Historic era and modern land alteration in the project area. it is difficult to synthesize a clear picture of pre-Contact era site distribution and land use for the project area lands. It is clear that there were pre-Contact agricullural sites and associated temporary habitation sites in the lower and mid-elevation poi lions of the project arm especially along the strearn (seasonal gulch) to the south. Tile few remaIning sites do not provide a good sample to compare with site distribution patterns recorded at less disturbed projects of similar location in Dona. The project area does provide a fairly complete picture of Historic era cattle ranching and agricultural land use, including information on cattle pasturing;, management,care, and transport. 135 SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENTS iie identified during this project were assessed for their significance as outlined in. Hawaii Administrative Mules I 3-284-& To be assessed as significant a site shall possess integrity of location, design, wtting, materials, workmanship, feeling,and association and shall meet one or more of the following five criteria: (a) It must be associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history, or he considered a traditional cultural property, (b) It must be associated with the lives of persons significant in the past- (c) It must embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lank individual distinctiota. (d) It must have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. (e) Have important value to native Hawaiian people or other ethnicities in the state, due to associations with Cultural practices and traditional beliefs that were, or still are, carried out. All of the archaeological sates documented in this report were evaluated for their sign1licance (Table 8). All of the sites identified during the current AIS study possess inlet-3'ity i>f location and materials and u crc asse-ssed significant under criterion "d" as they have yicldcd or are likely to yield information I111portant to prehistory ancVor hislory. A]I of the sates, with tlic exception of the railroad berm Site 30592 and the burial Site 30593 provide inforiiiation Important to pre- Contact era and Historic era agricultural pursuits and catty ranching. They provide data on pre- Contact era through host-Contact era and the Historic era features constructed for growing subsistence and commercial crops and raising beef for commercial narkets. They :also provide data important to changing land-use as some farmers bgzn to use land for cattle pasture in response to developing local and external market on Hawaii Island and 0 ahu. The ranch walls.. paddocks and corral sites provide information on the ways land was altered and divided to accommodate bath farming and ranching. 136 Table S: Inventory of Arcbatolegical Sites in the C'wxent AIS Project,"Llea. 5tHl'llt' TYPE Ft.WTION 4GF SFr:.1IFICANCE C7g1TEMA RECONIMENDAI ION I(AI 1 Philfn&rn ha.k'ICMinc 111,2-C Ulluer. d No Further Wi&rL 10012• Flatfurrlt&.Fall Bohol PT4 hi'Lo1. No luggcA�Icni(icant NO FlITthir W jrk ICKlI3 Etu:l( rr&t-&uu Tube Hal'aulrnn lln!-L monrt d tits Furtlirr W1 irk 10018 Eticlowre hctICLLIlttr&rl Historic d No Further,Wurk I(MI19 ti Rock Nlaumi,, A9,Clewing HisloHC d No Further W,,rk 10031 EnclaNureW'u1l Agriculture 1h."lodc d NOFunhn %1,mL 10007 Tormo'* Hnbilatirtn Prehistoric d NO.luth.r W,rk 1(1W Em2lusure Httbrtution Irrrhi',toric d No Further ll,irk IllllH MadilicdB1u1"lailiu-&II Ih1sitatlolt Historic d No FurtherW1 ,ik ](4170 U-Shupe FnA)mmTc Agrieulturr Historic d No Further W,,rk 10(172 Iti'lndihed Htuff Ag,CIettring, Pm-Cisrllmrrt d No Further 41'i ri k I(K173 Camplea Rawhing*A& Historic d No Furih,r Woi k I(Al 74 Etn_lusurc C'upfee WoA 51ted Historic d Nu Further ll,irk I01173 Ealosurc Pie Pet& Historic' d No FuiOwi W1 -ik 30592 Railrimd Man Tmispartmfida llisloi+c ra e,d PT-4crVation In-l'h,,- 31181 E do.,wrc Co13ec.Warle Shod 1-i& nz d Ng Funlier k 311#12 Rock W'alas RRnching&Ag, Historic d Not Further Work 1F-1 Pevoglyph Msrkrr d,r Prtstrtuti�tn Site Itutttltt.rs aro pmeoded try the prefix 511-1t1-37, omngc Marling-S'4C no lo"VCT prccerat. •0uriul Site 10012 reinturrcd ofl'prnjaat prior to tt3k3_ 137 The pre-Contact era agricultural :and habitation sites (10011, 10€113, 10 67, 10€ 68, and 10072) and the petroglyph(IF-1)were assessed significant under critenon"d"as they have yielded or are likely to yield information important to pre-C-011MC] er,l :izriCLIlture and temporary habitation and tool production associated with aaicultural }pursuits in the region. The railroad berm Site 30592 is also significant Lander criteria"a" and"c" as it is associated with events that have made a significant contnbialon to the hroad patterns of our history and it embodies distinctive characteristics of thiY Type, period, and method of railroad bed construction. SC'S considled with the Office of T-lawal'13B AlTairs (01 IA) bona representative Shane Nehson to ask for any input regarding Site 30592, RECOMMENDATIONS The railroad berm Site, 30592 is recommended for preservation with preservation measures to be outlined in an archaeological preservation plan. The petroglyph (IF-1) is recommended for preservation in a safe location on the project area,preferably within the Site 30592 railroad berRi preservation area.. No further work is recommended for the remaining 16 archaeological sites. information rccorded for all 16 archaeological sites during the currelIt study leas adequately ascertained their fUlICtion and age. 138 REFERENCES CITED Aki, H. 1952 Flap ofKailua Section, North Kona: Hawai`i, Land Titles, Survey and Map by J.S. Emerson. Havwai'i Territory Survey Map, Registered I4+1,ap No. 1280. Alexander, J, 1855 Map ofHnlualoa 1 & 2, Kona Hawaii. Hawaii Territory Survey Map. Registcrecl Map No. 1450. Athens,J., T. Reith, and T. Dye 2014 A paleoenvironmental and archaeological model-based age estimate for the colonization of Hawaii. American Antiyrrrly, 79(4);144-55. Bergin, Dr. B. 2004 Lo"val to the Land-The Legeracicrr-t•Parker ranch, 750-1 0. Lrniversity ofHawti`i Press. Honolulu. Barrera,W. Jr. 1971 -]r� Evr•rrfvrlion,w arul Srrr-ivi (a Keauhou, North bona, Howadd. Bishop 1lrr.�a rrrrt � c�llccr cirri �ucrf Rcperrr. ,rr 7}-J11. Subtri-Wed to l(amehameha. Development Corporation. B.P. Bishop Museurn, Honolulu. 1995 .Nor(h Kona, Hawaii Island: .4rchaeoiogrcal Reconnaissance raf Seven Parcels. Prepared for County of Hawaii Planning Department_ Burtchard, G. C. 1995 Poparladon and Land--rise on the Kea itho r Coast, the ;tlorrka Lands Inventwy ,5ur vey}, Ketarhou, North R'ow. Hcnval`i Alcmd. Ilia :•`"arra it e,pnrl 1. Subrnitled to Belt, Collins and Associates and Kamehanielia 111VO-, ient Corporation. I.AR fL Honolulu. Calis, 1„ M1 T, Carson, M. Dega and R,L, Spear 2004 Data Recaverr,ar the Phase I and 11 Portions of the Kahakcal Development Project ,4r•ec1 T (3) 7-7-O.-J. SCS Report 2.09-1. Prepared for Stanford Carr Development, LLC. SCS, Honoluk. Deport on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Ciirlson. A.K.-and C fl. Rowndahi 1990 Areharer log ic-ul Inventor'''�Survev, Pualana DcrvelapmenlF-Phase II, Lairds of Pual.waa P and 2"`r, North Bona District; Island raf 1-lanwai. PH RI, Inc. report pn pared for Pualani Development Company, Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolm_. 139 Chinen, J.J. 1961 Orighml Lcmd Titles it?Hwvai'i. Clark, M., and R. Rcclitman 2006 .,Iaf_.tr c-lriie,rlogicallrrvetrtofi,Srfncv ot'Tel K.3-7-6-004.,003, H65huth.v 1-' Ahnpua'a, North Kona L7ivrricl. M and of Hcawai'i. Reclitman Consulting Report RC-0360 prepared for Mr, Phil Tinguely,):-Iolualoa Village Partners, LLC;, Kailua-Kona, Hawa.i`i. Conolly III, R.D., and 1. Curtness 1979 Reconnaissance Surve'v at the Komohona Kai Subdivion ("Unit 1) Sde(TA4K. 3-7-0-13:31). Report prepared by Science Applications Inc., Honolulu for G.C. Developmeni Co., Inc. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Cordy,R. 1991 A Studs,raf Pr~ehLvaric Social Change: The Developrrrem ofComplex Socieriee in the Hal,triran Wandv. Academic Press,New York. 1995 Central Kona Party*r'nv- f)cpmirrrettt of Land and Natural Resources, State Historic Prc,.,c.rvation Dlvrtirnn, Ilnnolulu, 2000 Exalted Sits the Cht'ef: Mutual Publishing. Honolulu. Laws, G. 1968 Shoal of Time: A History of the Hawaiian Island. Macmillan, New York. Hestlets, M., and R. Rechtman 2004 Archaeological hirer or-t S u)')vr-ra f a Grant Increment Roc:rd Rertrnanr Pr Opef•ol (7 AIK:3-7-fr-08,-005 por'.), Hf-V;r�rhta 1-2 Ahrrlart 7'a, North Kotw Di fr'ici, I icmcl c?f Henetfi'i. Rechtman Consulting Roport RC-0244 prepared for Curt A. Cottrell, Na Ala,Hele Program Manager, Hoticlulu, Hawaii and Ranson Percy de Ayala, Kla`a1111i Parmership, HonoWILL, Iiwvai`i. Dircks, A., L. Zcnobi. and R. Rcch(man 2013 ArchueulugiCal Inver or'v S�rrve'v of the 1='owjm),w� r. l Mivr. w Farm ,tiidulivision (7i'I�K.Y.-3-7-6-00/:003, 009, aml019), 1161 drw rr-2,�har{racer, .Vorlh Koiia District, Island of Harr-errs. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0856 prepared for Edward Rapoza, Kailua-Kona. []eye, T. 2011 A model-based age estimate for Polynesian colonization of Hawai°i. ArchrreoloKj.-in ()ceania, 46:130-38. 140 Ellis. W. 1963 Alar•rative of'a Tour t?f M s UH, rrr- kyhee. Advertiser Publishing, Honolulu, Escoll, G, 2013 tra lruc�ralart,ic�rl frairerttor e .5err rcat' Inca{�rrrt fErr,the SFr"opos'cdAT&T Wireless 1 t,leco rrrr unieaitotry Toii•car (HA W 301)Sire Located in Hr)hialoa I"Ahuprra`a. Aland Kota a District, Huufai 7 hda i&. Hcruw `i JT'4fIK; (3) 7-6-024:032]. SCS Report#1340-2 prepared for Ace Fnvironmental. Las Vegas, Escort, G., and S. Esc�)tt 2018 Archaeological Imenlor);Surivv Relmn1 for 1.0 Acres Lrxalerl it)HQlrraloa }yr AJrt�l�rrcr'cr, Nar�h Kcrru7l.�istricr, I•:1cr+4cri'i ltic7rrc� Ha►tcri'i fT,'1f,1�: {3}�-6-1}�}.•�)1? Por.]. Prepared for East rest Really. SCS Report 1871, Honolulu. Escott, G. and N. Mello 2019a Burial Site Carrtlronelrr of-a Burial Tr etmac is Plan, or Burial Siie#50-10-57- 30593 Locatud in lfulrralcxr f.f Aln el)rrcr'cr, _ or•rh Kona Dittr•ic•f, Hzm ai'i I.sk►rrc.1. Hairai'i ( )7-6-021:0!71. Prepared for Kona Three, LLC, SCS Report 2137, Honolulu. 2019b Arr.4rMc;,l biologic~ctl Preserti,rrrion Plan.1br Sire#50-10-57-30592 Locatecf in Hcilrrarkxr I" Ahulma'a, Nur•rfr Kopec Di,s'rr•ict, ffam,,ai'i Ishumi, He waj'i j. K: (3)7-6-021;016-019J. Prepared for Kona Three, LLC. SCS Report 2137. Honolulu. ESRI 2013 Arc GIS E•.rplor•er•. Environmental Systems Research. Institute, Redlartds, Ca, Falter, M., and D. Graves 1993 Archaeological Irr►enror v Sur i�e-v. Holualou :3r•d Development Parcel, Land of- Hbhjaloa Y"` North Kona Di.srric7, I.slcrrrd of I-Am,ai'i (TAK.,3-7-7-04:35). PH RI Report 1231-073092 prepared for Dillingham Partners. Google Earth 2013 Google Earth I nacrgeij% Google Earth. Mountain View. Ca. C�mves,D_K... and S.T. tioodfLllow 1993. The Gar•dons rrl'Kona Ret•rS11L-c{• Prrcrlemi Re�siclen iarl C'rrrrrrrranity Phase 11- Archcr�=crlf, ricul Dada f.er do 01TIrcrlrtrcrcr P crn ?''e Noah Kona District, I.slcrrrcf r�f iYcrsa<<crri(I 41K:3-7- -l:f:i?rrr_? . 3 Sr j. PH Rl, Inc. report prepared for Pualani Estates, Inc. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 141 Han, T. L. S. L. Collins, S. D. Clark.. and A. Garland 1986 Moe Karr ca Ho`odo:Hmrahan Alta-! arc 1'l-ac:lice's al K'4-3rrr7. Kona, Hcnv ai'i. Chapter 'V l-I- Artifacts and Manuports f ronr the Kebpir BL16,11 Site. Bishop Museum Departmental Report Serlos 86-1. SLrblarittect tci Dcp�irtrnent of Transportation, HonolLllu. Handy, C.S, 1940 The Hawaiian Planter, Volume L B,P. Bishop Museum bulletin 161. B.P. Bishop Museum Press. Honolulu. Haimnatt, H.H. 1979a Archaeological SurvvY cif a 22 Acre Parcel at Holualou Ahuptaa`a, Hmvaii. Report }prepared by the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc. Report on File at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 1979b Arclacrcrcalrr,rrccrl� rrr €y of a L?Aare Parcel cif Hohecdoca Ahup aca"c.r, Kona, Hmv at'i Island. Report prepared by the Archaeological Research Center Inc. for Kalani Sunset Corporatioxt. Report on file at tlrc: SIIPD Library- Kapole . 1979c Arch aenlogical Sit r•veY rarrdE re avration at the Pr•o used Korrtcahan a Kai ,Standivision. Holmdoca, Kona, HmrvaO Lilwa d. ArchacoloRloal Rcscarch C'cntcr Hawaii, Inc. Manuscript. Prepared for G.C. DevelOprrrcnt Co., liac. 1980. Archaeological Svrvev sand Exccavation at the Proposed Kc inohcana Kai Subdivision HCMt aloe, Kona, Hawai"i Islarad. Report prepared by the ArchacolokTical Resc�irc h Center Hawaii, Inc. for G.C. Development Company, Inc. Report can tilc at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Hammat, H.H., D. Borthwick. and D. 5hideler 1996 Archaeological Sin-vev egad E'xcmalions on a 20-Acre Parcel H6111 alcza, Kona, 1-1mr ai"i Island. Report prepared by Cultural Surveys I law•ai i for 1Vlaryl Investments, Inc. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. �.atnrjiatt, 1.1. 1-I,. and S. D. Clark. 1980 Archaeological Testing card S alvagoe lv'xccavatians af•cr 155 Acre (Ginter) Parcel in Na ahninta"a Pahoehoe, L a'alrxr, ctffcl Kalrcalca'alaea, Kona. Hmvai'i Island. ARCH Report 14-152 Ill. SUbinEtwd to Pacific Basin Resorts, Inc. Flummatt. H.H., and.W.H. Falk 1980 Archaera1Q&,icc.r1 Sar•vev. Phase I., Portions caf'Keauhon-Kona Resort, lac-aefhoii care{ Kahrtlrr'u. Karam, Hcnve i'i Islcard. ARCH Report 14-177 11.1, Subnutled to Kainehanicha Investment Corporation. 1981 Archaeologieal Szu-vec ,r?f`er 20 Acre-Perr rel, H'51tr dou, Kona, Henvai`i-1slraril. Report prepared by the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii., Inc_ for Kala.ni Sunset Corporation, Report an flic tit flic Sl1PD library, Kapolei. W Harnmatt, H.H., W.H. Folk, and D.W. Shidcler- 1992 Archaeological 5rrr°iv.v TeshneA cond L:xCuNIH017 Of a 174-Aere Poi-cel, Holualou,. North Kona, Hawai 4i. Report prepared by Cultural Surveys Hawaii for the Ganalon Corporation. Report can file ar the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 2007 Letter Report Documenting Arc'hcreohl i4h-id Stitch,- Crary h a.ted, Find,;. and Their Treatment ar u Proposed iWalta-Fain lY' Residential Developmeaar• Holtealoa Ahnpu a'a, North FCraraa, Hati+wai`l, TllA: 13r 7-6-021.016 R4pa,rt prepared by Cultural Surveys 1250 Oceanside Partliers, LLC. Report on rile nt the SHPD Library, Kapolei Harnmatt, H. H., and V. W. Meeker 1979 Archaeolt)gical I.�xccavatiom and l-tetatt Stcxbilr.-caiotr cxt K ahCalt!'rt, Kiiorra, Hcnrtiri Island. ARCH Report 14-172([1). Submitted to Crerald Park, Urban Planner. Haun. A.E., and D. Henry 2000 Archaeological Invenrory SurvLr TMK., 7-7-04.- tya, H51rralod 3, North Kona, Island of H awai'i. Haan & Associates report prepared for Mr, Sidney Fuke. Hilo, Hawaii. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei.. '1001 Archraeolagical Doi a Hecrruen,Sifts 14130 TitfK-- (3) 7-5-l 7,•.Por. 1. Prepared for Inaba Engineering_ Haun & Associates„ Kea`au. Report on file at the SHPD Library. Kapolei. Haun, A. E., J. D- Henry,J. A. Jimenez, M. A. Kirkendall- K. Maly, and T. R. Vlr•olibrth 1998 Ali'i High+ rayF Phasd ltgatiorr f'r nga airy 1'lrfrsc�I-Arc:lraerlrag�cal Irrrepa.�i �F Suri•c'v. Srarnm ai-v, vat. I. PHRI Report 1 31.0-052798. Submitted to COUMV Of Hawai-i. PHRI, Hilo. Hnn]rnon, R. J. 1986 Social Evolution to Ancient I lawaa`i. In Island Societies- Archaeological App rf)f!a It '.,� rr! 171 rlrrtiE#r7 crrrcl Ti-trarc{or•rrration,edrtccj by P.V. Kirch, pp, 55--88, University Press, Cambridge, Kahn,J., Rieth, P. Kirch.J. Athens, and G. Murakami 2014 Re--dating of the Kul i'ou ou rocl:shel ter, Oahu, Hawai-i: Location oC the first radiocarbon &te I'rom the Pacific Islands. ./QW-)701 rrf 12c l'olti m'sjan Socieh?, 123(1):67-90, Karne`eleihia, L. 1992. Native Land and Foreign Desires: Pehea La E Pono A i.' Bishop Museum Press. Honolulu. Kelly, M- 1983 tVc alca r}JCnrra: C trtd tr.s cif ltinrrcx. Dept. of Authropology Report Series 83-2, Bishop Museurn. Honolulu. 143 Kirch, P.V. 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks:An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeologi,and Prehistory!. University of lhtwaii Press, Hnrtolulti 2011 When did the Polynesians settle Hawai`i? A re-view of 150 years of scholarly inquiry and a tentative answer. Haivafian ArchaeaPn r,, 12:3-26. Kirch, P.V. arid M. McCoy 2007 Reconfiguring the Hawaiian Cultural. Sequence: Results of re-dating the H51awa dune sitc (MO-Al-3), Molokai Island. Journaloj'rhe Polynesia Socicrr. 1 10::385-406. Kirch, P.V. and M. Sahlins 1992 Anaf idn. Vol. 1 and 2. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Kuyken€iall, R.S. 19 ,S The, 1hio�uiian Kirrgcforn. Vol. I. University of Hawaii Press. !-lonolulu. Landrum. J., A-F- Hirkln, P.H. Roscndahl. and K. Dclirr ollL 1990 •1r•clrcwolrr(if-al hi - •artory Stervey ond Tc,,�r I:_ra ovatriarrs Kahakai Develoj. rmerrt Prr)ierr.4ry a. lil-1R1 Report 157-0i 0185. Prepared for Wilson Okamoto& Associltcs, PHRI, Hilo. R.epon on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Maly, K 1993 Ka`ao Ho'ornua Prr`rr4twi No Ka-Miki, The Heart Story Story.'Qf Ka-Miki. Published in Hawaiian, in the newspaper "Ka H6kil o HImrai'l(Hilo) J=uary 8, 1914 through December 6, 1917_ Trans1atcd by Kepd N,'b1y fr}r Paul H_ Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.. 1996 Historical Documentary Resc,Lirch, In Archaeological Inventorr Surre'r Proposed ffkwr_r�Str^o of Extension Road Crrrr•idor, by Wulzera, W., T-R, Wolf'orth. and L.J. Frattrklin, pp, 9-19. PRI II Ropon 1465-092696. Prepared liar Mary] Development, Kailr -Kona. PHRI, Hilo. Maly. K. and 0. Maly 2001 Ile Wahi A-fu`alelo M)NJ `Aina, A A4e Nd Alrr fluter f Hehi fa,Afen Keauhnaj A I Kealakekira, Ma.bona, Katw°cti`i(A Historical 0 ,ervieir of the Lwi s, Attcl Trails Tr'wele d, Be nvean Kecarrhou and Kealakek taa, Kona, Haivai`i. Kumu Iona and Associates report prepared for"-Na Ala 1-1cle Program Manager(Hawrai`i Island), State Divis4)11 of Forestry �izd Wildlife, Hilo. 144 2002 Ife & crhi Mv'c}c'1(J 1 'f) h ca'.!ur;r.3 , c�1Vcr '( ltcrrrir [ F€ail i'i,'I�lcl 't.7i1G[}CJA ( cdanct 0 l'l'almea, Kohalcr), A 1141e Ka 'Aina Mauna:A Collection ra_f TI-minions am flisroric•al Ac•c°ounts ol'the Lai ids crruf I amifies of Kriki'i at Waikolca (Gl•`cahnea Region, 1'mah ICahalc.F), and the Mountain LancA, IslcrndgfHawai'i (T1bfK Oven,ieii,.Sl eel 6-7-01). Kumu Pond Associates. Hilo. Maly, K., and P.H. Rosendahl 2006 Phase 111.4rch aeolo dear! Silo Preservatimi Plem. Prig-114rrri aR f.iekaii6d Co)ajrrrirriia- Mitigation Progrum. Lands of'Puapzraa P and Y)' Nor(h Kona Dish Ie-r, Islancl of. I rkr•ai•i (TMK..3-7-5-17.28, 29'). PHRL Inc. report prepared for Schuler Homes. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. McCoy, M. 2005 The development of the Kalaupapa fieldsystem, Koloka'i Island, Hawaii. Joirrrral ufthe Polrnesicm Soc fety, 1 16,339-58. 2007 Revised lateH€?locene culture history forMoloka`i Island, Hawal'l. Radiocarbon,49(3):1273-1322. Menzies, A. 1920 Hovvar'i Nei 128 Years Ago, Frlited by W.F. Wilson. New Fre.eedniii Pros, Honolulu. Mulrooney, 11tM, S. Bickler, M. Allen,and T. Ladefoged 2011 High-precision elating of colonia,ation and settlement in East Polynesia. Proceedings g1'the JVaticar a1AcademY(#Scicnces, 108:E192-E194. National Geographic, Top•o! 2003 Seamless DISCS Topographic Maps an CD-ROM, Hmvai'i. National Geographic Holdings, Inc. Washington, D.C, Nelson, D., L. Bulgrin, and R, Rechtman 2005 �Qrr a4r rhue#{ogicu{}n�entor► Sctrv�► rr '7' 11C.°3- -t-1}3.(](JA', Ntliitrlrx� }.si 2rrd Alirrpita'a, lVot-th otiaDirtricl, fslcnidc?f Hmia cri'i. Rechtman C OVSLilting Report RC-0251. Prepared for Nearon Enterprises, LLC. Danville. C'alilorma. (Revised 2006). Newman, T. S. 1,970 1lawaiian Fish ing and Far ming on the Island q f•ilawaii A.D. 177& Department of Land and Natural Resources, Honolulu. Puked. M.K., S. >µll<na and E. Mookin] 1974 Place Xarrres gfHmmii. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. 145 Rechtman, R.B. 2006 Art Archaeologic�gl lrrvelrton7 Saaan�e?ref TMK.3-7-013.017 l��)lllcrlrtcr 1-2 Ahnprra'a, North Kow Dist rid, lslanadvfHcawai'i. Report Prepared by Rechtrnlm Consu16ng, LLC for Geometrician Associates, LLC. Report on rile at the S1-1PD Library, Kapolei. Riede, Timothy M., Terry L. Hunt,Carl Lipo,and Janet M. Wilmshurst 2011 The 13th Century Polynesian Colonization ofHawai`i Island, Journal raf 4rchaeological Science 38:2740-2749. Rosendahl, M. 1988 Archuer)logi€•al Ret-onnaissance Sara= !, Holualoa 3rd Deuelopmenr Prarc•el. Land raf H61tialoa Y� North Kona, fa;land of Hmvai`i (TMK:3-7-04:35). PHRI Report 400-122.287 prepared for Dillingham Trust. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapole%. Rosi~ndahl, P. 1978 A1-c'hoec)letgicwt Reconrraiy'scance.Siinwv gfthe 72-1,7nii Develcalatne,rt.Sire (T1rlTK:3- 7-b-14:3 arrcf 3-7-7-04:22,23.27,47)Kt7ilita-1Kort[a lslctttd of.Huwai'i. P11 R1 Report 5-122078. Prepared for Gray. Rhee and Associates. 1989 4 rchaeo fr qxicaf Field Inspection. Komohana Kai Su division Parcels, Land nf. Holnctfiacr I" card.?" 1lforlh Korrct, fslcrard of Hrnvai'i (7i K:3-7-6-22:49.84). P H K I Lei ierReport 44-121.181 prepared for Clyde Coat ney. On file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Sato,H., W. Ikeda, R Paeth,R Smythe, and M. Takehiro Jr. 1973 Sail Svi—v r►'ofTslawl ql Hinvaii, State caf'HawaiL United States Department of Agric.uEture Soil Conservation Service. Washington D.C. SehilL R. 1984 Subsistence and C nrlffict in Kona, Hcavvai`i; A 1.11.1-h aeofogicalNouA,<rf the Kijokini Ifzghvvra_v Realignment Corridor, Deparrniont cif Anthropology, BY, Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Report prepared for the Hawaii Department of Tratis portal ion. On file at the SHPD Library, Kapold. Sinoto, A. 1979 Archaeologica Recvrtarcrissaracc Sanvy of,9x Aches in the Ahuptrcr'a of Nolaraloa I enact'?, Noath Komi, Hanv ai'i. Department of Anthropology, B,P. Bishop Museum, HnittalUILL Prepared for Brehm Construction Company. 146 Soehren, L 1979.a Leiter Report: Parcels 111. 12, and 13 ref Tt1 K. 7-6-14, hr Hofrrcrl6a, North Kona. Prepared for Mr. Hiroshi Kasamoto. 1979b Letter Report: TMK:7-6-15:15, H&ualcrcr, Alorth Kona. Prepared for Zuzak and Associates. 1980a I ewer" Repor"l.' .are wi,/I i,ctorical Features on the Parcel fdentijied kv Ten Map Kvv 7-6-'l:14, Silrrcr(e dr at Hrhrcrlmi?, North Kxra. Hcnvai`i. Prepared for Golden Triangle Real Estate. 1980b Leew andHisturical Features on 1Frc Parcels Identified bv I'O.r .Thip Kc11-,; 7-0-1-1:2,3 al 1101nahm 2, and 7-7-04:Z.Q'1,47 at H5111 slew 3, :1`r)r rlr Kc)1ra, flcr+Vcti'i. 1'reparrA for BA and M Corp. Mar Enuironmen(al 2016 Botanical and Faunal Survevs in the State ofHawai`i. Makawao. wivxv',starrenv1 ran nientaI.cor III . Tairrrer_ J. A. 1973 The Social Correlates of Mortuary Patterning at Kalokv, North Kuria, Hawaii_ Archaeolo t and Phl sical, w lyr opolo&w in Oceania 8(1):1-11. Tomonari-Tuggle, M_J. 1990 4rchrrularr`cal Ir7�cfrrrcrr v Stcr <'cJl crf 1ck1'i}If�prtt€yrfil 1'c�rcel61't,�rcf 1fc>urrJrcru 1~"ea�ar°t, Ittrprre�"a ] cxhtlrr"rr, ti�tf}t kcrrrct, I.dcarltd of Han,cri`i. Prepared for Belt Collins and Associates. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. Honolulu. U.S. Geological &imey 1928 15-Mirmle Series Tol"gvaphic Hilo Quadiwc azh, ,Wap. USGS Print, Washington, DC. U R1.: 147 Vancouver, G. 1967 A Voi-age ref'Discca7 eiy to the Nor-tlr Pac-fFc� Ocean, and.4mund the YVor fd. Robinson and Edwards. London. 1984 A i'rav (L e ol'Discaver-j`to the Nord? pia if lc Ocean, and.4m and the klrar•Id. Robillsoll and Ldwards. Lond4in.. Waihona `Aina 2014 V15hele online database. www.waihona.uorn. Walker. A.T., and F.H. Rosendahl 1988 .Arc haeo{u�foal Reconnaissance Sttrnve'v. ,f uttlani Srncelivi.+ion, Lands ttf Napuaa l"+ rtrtc! "` i t tli l ortu l rs tt ice, l,slctttci rrf tic{+ stir. PH RI. hic. report prepared for Pualani Development Company. Deport on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Wilkes, C. 1845 Narrative ref the Urrited Stat(r.s Ex#3lor•ing Expedition During the Years, 1938-I842. f-; Liildf'ldos. Lea & Blanchard, Philadell?ltia. 1970 Narrxivc of dw UnhedState> Fyploi1) g Frpedition During the Years 1938-1842. Vols. f--5 ,irrcf ettla,s, Lea & 13lam-h(wel, Pliladell)hia, Wilmhurst,J.,T, Hunt,C. Lipo,and A. Anderson 201 la High-precision radiocarbon dating shows recent and rapid colonization of East Polynesia. Pro eerlifWs c/'1hi,Nrltir rtcrl l4cacl p af'Scienres, 108:1815-20. 2011 b Reply to Mulrooney et aL: Accepting lower precision radiocarbon dates results in longer colonization chronologies for East Polynesia. Proceedings (#'Ihe ertictrrctl:lc'�tc�f�rtrs`cxf'.Sc'fc�r7c'csc. 10 :E 195. Wolfe. E.W., and J. Morris 1994 Geological M'.ap of the Island of i-lawai`i. U.S.G.S. Miscellaneous Investigations Series. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Wolforth, T., J. Hetvey, and R. Rechtnian 2000 Archac-oft)giccxl ltra°c�ittor)�,S'trrvey ref Two Parcels•tar , frltrcilrxi 2rrdcriui 3rd; North Kom l.W(ria }slated gfllaw a'i`r. PHRI Report 1941-080999 prepared for Mr. Ralph Berezan. Report on file at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. 148 APPENDIX A: REINTERMENT DOCUMENTATION A-1 -,U,41, AW RU, —V-a err sera AA*AW' farp -LAIC � .d-' [MV MA rdy 19, 1993 M r• Edma r d !I Ayinx State i#Istori.r Fib*5er `at).e{rn Urtvia jon Department of Land 4 AlatturAl Resounccq State of liarrall 33 South ling Street Gth FID*r Honolulu. "&well 96815 Re., Burl*13 Gamrex, rtxc. lrnna Vistas Subdjir j�V;j Val"aloa North Ken$ Ilaw-Atj Aerar Id, Pursuant tv our phone e~OrLrersativnq tQ4'A ' .r-rgQr-4Itrg the decision of the Burial Ca"nell mays I toriflrm a#�e #aYlafwring. The council of detrrlcd that the Site located in the South- acce come of the $k4bd4vIsion near Kllohana Street is s ccaPtab o for all three (3) burials. A six foot sleep hole will b8)e excavated4°Xd' 4' hnk of sufflcient $lze to asccoloodate a (of t1le type used for aloctr#cal connnctions) with no b*ttOm and a vuver. The remains will be buried ne ar about April 1, 1993, The hole will be backfilled over the cvwesr of the box to ground Ivve, aftex reburial.I have asked our contractor to leave a ladder jr, the hale for you so than you caaa get dnwn to the box oafely, Uomrcx author.lLas you to enter on site to the burial area for the servtres on April 1, 1g93� err to the burial Please contact ate with the exact tlm& and date �a ou to the ceremcny. Please ,xvte that ou y will he 2110wad on sate ax your solo ridsk�andur c that iGnarexers and or its contractors will not be held liable for any dsmages and/or injuries shOuld they occur. Thank you for your assist2nCe in the s�ttlemerst of this Matter, ""se contatct me when you have set the date for the reburials. Gregg a l�ltila CC, L+adlareit. Inc. Iscrcoto Contracting A-2 e V d falu W-a" mt9,LgJL GCPY'CN1 JG ..LCPTGMJ EOYL L Kk*A1r S #a..64LJ7G7e Wero '" PROWAV STATE OF HAWAII .taa..vc "Pum"MM►aeo DijyAi11Mji"9 LAF LA14`J A.Xi NA1LJRal.AV1%GjIKrF9 ALr rMN (anr+gaPM;M�MII M� ATArt ptarQMrr 4rXss7FF�i�V7k+sre * Y u■ UM KIWM FTRLCT.M FLOM tcrwrrr.�css Pw"m PPgW'xW&nCW WOOD. Xpri l 5, 1993 w0"MQOMAWW V1171"am .Iw3,}ilk M1.MN NM2i�? Gasrax, Inc 75-127 Lunavule Road, Saito 14 KaLlua, Kona, HawAl' i 967AO Re! FAJi�nterpeat of gavaLijan Skelatal Remains, Tekx Huns Key 7-i5- 9,. 1,6, a g North =11- MASMi' Dear Mr. Xashaaa: This 1.a to nobly you thaLt an the ovening tit April 1, 109J, the three Data cf Hawaiian ramainra recovered Iron the above r►entlonnJ prup®xty were raspouLfully r*Lntarxad. Thank y*u E*r your cooperation and asaiStgnaa t Moug1hc-AM thla iaportant. matter. if =sre are any guasCions, please cd:mtact raward Halealoha hyaw, Egq. at +SAT-401�l. sincere. , #! R , AdninLgtrakor 3 ote l{iat*ric Pre-sexvation Division c; Edward L.H. Kamhala, {Chair, Hawaii Burial coun_il A-3 APPENDIX 6: Archaeological Preservation Plan Scs I'Rt7J£er?�s2-1 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION PLAN FOR SITE # 0-I0-57-30592 LOCATED INHOLUALOA 1"1 AHUPUA`A, NORTH KONA DISTRICT, HAWAI`I ISLAND, HAWA161 ITMK: (3) 7-6-021:016-019I Prepared by: Glenn Escott, M.A. and Nicole A. Mello, M.A. MAY 2020 DRAFT Prepared ibr: Kola Three, LLC t I t Hu.alalat 5t. Hilo, TIT 96720 SCIE,NTIFTC +l_.CNSFI:I-ANT SI.f#410EN Inc -ram 1347 Kapi-okini Boulevard.Suite 408 Honolulu. HT 5)(,814 Havvai'i Wand OffiC�: PO Box 135 Kc:3`au. [it 96749 TABLE OF CONTENT TABLE OF CONTENTS.-...........-......... ........ ...... .........................,,, ,. ,. ................ LIST OF FIGURES .............................................. .................................-.......................................II LISTOF TABLES...................................,.....................................................................................III INTRODUCTION .............................................................,......,.,,...........,...........,..........,....,.,.........I ENVIRONMENTAL.SET I INCr............................:......................................... _..........,................l HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS.........__'_........__.......... ......I.................6 PRE-CONTACT ERA........................................................................................................8 TheKona Field. System.............................................................,._........................... 9 POST-CON I'ACT ERA.................................................................................................... 10 TFIE1 1AHELf:......,.................................................................................................,........ 12 PREVIOUS .ARC]1AF01- 6ICAL STUDWS.............................................................................16 REGIONAL PREIr 10US ARCI IAE LOGICAL STUDIES.....,....... .......... . ............ 19 CURRENT PROJECT AREA SPFCIFIC" PREVIOUS ARC14AE.OLOGY.................... 24 AIS SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSM LNTS .......................................................................................33 SITE 30592 RAILROAD BERM ................__............................................................ 34 SITES 50-10-57-30592 PRESERVATION TREATMENTS .....................................................37 REFERENCES CITED..................................................................................................................4I APPENDIX A: SHPD AIS APPROVAL LETTER......................................................................46 i LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: 5.500 K-Series Map of Hawai'i Island Showing Location of Site Project Area (National Gcographic Topo!, 2003. Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS)..............................I.......................................................I.................... ........ ........ 2 Figure 2: 75-Minute Series USES Topographic Map Showing the Location of Project Areas and TMK Parcels(Kealakekua Quadnanglc. ESRI, 2013. Data Sources-, National Geographic and County of Hawaii Planning Department, 2019) ................................. 3 Figure 3. Aerial Photograph Showing Project Area, Hblualoa, H1, Zone 5 forth, 189445 rn E, 2171790 in N. (ESRI, 2013 Iniage. Data Sources: Digital Globe, GeoEye. Earthstar. USDA, and USGS).......................__..........._........_..........__........ ......_...... 4 Figure 4: Aerial Photograph Close-Up Showing Project Area, Halualoa, Hl_ Zone 5 North, 189445 m L, 2171790 m N. (ESRI.. 2013 Image. Data Sources: Digital Glebe, GcoEye, Earihstar- USDA, and USGS)...................... .................................. ................ 5 Flpre 5- Map of 1401ualoa I" and 2`1 Ahupuwa Showing Loc"ation of-Project Area in Red Border(Alexander 18-55)................................................................................................ 7 Figure 6: Purtion of 15-Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Railroad and Project Area (US(.,S 1928)................... ............. I I Figure 7: Portion Lfl'Kailua Section, North Kcma Map Showing Location of LCA 7713 and Project Arca In Red Border (Aki 19524,__....... ...... ......____ 13 Figure 8: 7,5-M-Muto Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Land Com mission Awards, Land Grants, and the Project Area (National Geographic Topo% 2003, Kadua Quad. Data Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS)....,. 14 Figure 9: 7.5-Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Previous Archaeological Studies and Pro'ject Area (Keatakekua Quad, ESRI, 2013. Data Sources-National Geographic Society, USGS)............................................................ 18 Figure 10- 7.5-Minute Series USGS Topobrrapl;ic Map Showing Location of Northern Portion of Hairiniatt eL a]. (1992) Sites and Current Project Area (FSPH, 201 1. Sources. National Geographic Society, USGS, Kcallakektia QLIadtangle). ............... ... 25 Figure H. 7.5-Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Locations ol'Escott and Escott (20t8) AIS Project Area Archaeological Sites (ESRI. 2011. Sources: National Geographic Society, USGS_ KcnInkckua Quadrangle).,._......,,.,,.,,,......,........ 30 Figure 12: Photograph ol'Site 30592 Railroad Berm Rail Bed, Looking South (25 cril scale)_, 35 Figure 13: Photograph of Site 30592 Railroad Bean.Retaining Wall, Looking Southeast......... 36 Figure 14: 7.5-Minute Sorics USGS Topographic Map(Kauitioa and Puu. Pohakuloa Quads) Showing Location of Project Area, Archaeological Sites and Preservation Easements(ESRI 2013. Data Sources: NASA, NGS and USGS)....,........................... 38 Figure 15: Portion of TMK: (3) 7-6-021 Map Showing, the Locations of Site 30592., Preservation and Access Easements, and Access Breach............................................. 39 LIST OF TABLES Table I- Land Commission Awards Recorded in 145IUaloa I" and 2"'Ahupua`a. ..................... 15 Table 2: Imentory af`Previous Archaeological Invcstigatimis........----..................................., 36 Table 3: Inventory (3f Previously Recorded Archaeological Sites (Harrimatt et al. 1992; 11ammatt and Shideler 2007)........................................................................................ 26 Table 4: Inverntoryy of Archaeological Sites Identified on the AIS Projeet Area(Escott and Fsc:ott 2 018).................................................................................................................. 29 Table 5: Inventory of F.scoff& Escoit (1-020) Archaeological Sites. .........--............... 32 ]tl INTRODUCTION As requested by the Rawai`i State Historic Preservation Division (SH.PD) in a letter dated May 31,2018 (Log No. 01 S.U1 123, Doc No. 1805SN05) (Appendix A), Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. (SCS) produced this Archaeological Preservation Plan (PP) for Site 450-10-37- 30592 (hereafter referred to as Site 30592) located can a portion of TMK: (3) 7-6- 21: 016-019 in Ilblualoa I" Ahupua`a,North Kona District, island ofHawai`i, Iiawai'i (Figure I through Figure 4, and Figure 14 to Figure 15). The owner is proposing to develop the property and contracted SCS produce this PP as required for a County of Hawaii planning Department grubbing and grading permit application. Prior to writing the preservation plan, a search of geological inaps, aerial photos, historical maps, historical documents, land titles, land-use docaurients, and previous archaeological reports was conducted. A summary of the;research is included in this preservation plan. The preservation plan was prepared in accordance with Hawaii Administrative Rules(HAR) §13-277 r'Lxlts for ite archaeological preservation. The property is owned by Kona.Three, LLC. The contact person for Dona Three, LLC: is Mr. Richard Wheelock. Mr. Wheelock can be reached by phone at(908) 753-3167,and by email at richardCjeastwestrealty.org. His mailing address is 700 Bishop Street Honolulu, fil 96813-4112, ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Site 30592 is a portion of the Historic era Kona Sugar Company railroad bed and berm located along the eastern boundary of the project area of an undeveloped portion of'TMK: (3) 7- 6-021:016-019. The prinject area is located between 300 and 660 feet (1 10 to 201 meters) above mean sea level (ams.1) on fairly steep sloping land with level :areas in between elevation breaks. The land is a small portion al'a larger former cattl c ranch and agricultural area that was started in the early 1900s. The lower portion of the project area is still used to pasture cattle. The project area and surrounding lands were bulldozed sometime betwacii the 1940s and 1970s. Evidence of bulldozing is visible in aerial photographs as alternating bands of cleared bulldozer tracks and bands of push pile. Pedestrian surVCY c;onfirnted the linear bands in the aerial photographs are bulldozer-cleared paths and linear piles of bulldozed rock along the cleared hulldo7cr pallzs. 1 7, , ' d - c Tn 9y r N b Nk[1Ib-[ i AKF A -Myera „ Figure 1: 5,500 K-Scries NeTap of llawai'i Island Showing Location ofSite Project Area (National Gcographic Topo% 2003. Sources; National Geographic Society, USGS). 2 iL r�w L M �y .I I x. C4 i ' .. a Figure Z:7.3-NIimilc Series 1'SGS Topographic Map Sh,m mg lay Location aI'No.ivo Avoio oild T14K Parcels(Kealakckmt Qaadrange.ESF2I•2013 Data Sources:Nadioml Geckgr=I7hi,�211d CilUM.V Off 14M Li i 1' timing Depauntent,2019). 3 l il"'InYi lU MMlhw,l IMI I f o'x llXim I I�'n II 111M 4 I' P 1 r� r KEN, E1 I'NFp1I'4"f UI1'A 151h Wal tl+lHS 1� ti. u ?IH! iwn Man Hem nwIn figure I Aerial 1'lt010,',T'Aph ShOWhl l'roioct Area,I161ualoa,fE.Zone 5 Nolttlt 1894 45'30 1 .217171_�D in N. {I SR.1,2013 Image. Data Sotu%Qc-,: Digital(I [col.yc.I:anIistai. l SDA.and USGS). 4 KEY rRDJFc'r ARF-h n� 4 �4 11% till 3+MY outer, Figure 4: A,eria] Photograph Ci :11".linu ill Pmiec I Ar.a- I I }]u<il>a. I If-JODC; Norih- I x044; •ii 1'- '1 I 71AIll?N f rS[ 1201 Image. Data JI11Jrcc!C -- D1g1l3]G'ohe.G kA1I.%V. t-JRI%,i.lL I. %D:1-iHILI VS ti The project area ground surface is a Hualalai lava flow dating between 5,000 and lU,M) years before present (ybp) (Wolfe and Morris 1996). Sail in the project area is Punalu'u Series(rP"YD series)extremely rocky peat with six to twenty percent slopes (Sato 1973:48). The majority of the project area has been bulldozed in the past and the present ground surface is rocky soil. Rainfall in the project area is very low, less than thirty inches per year. There is a seasonal gulch <don-the southern edge of the project area. This region is extremely dry, hot. and somewhat barren except for thick Cali forrtiagrass (Urachloa rrrum-40. Guinea grass (Megalhvrxus ina_rirr us), and some koa haole(Leucaena leueocephola), rliavve (f r osopis pallida), and kukrri nut (Aleuritc.s woluccana) trees (Starr Environmental 2016). HISTORICAL AAD CULTURAL CONTEXTS Kona is divided into two sections: worth Kona or Kona 'ak4w, and, South bona, or Kona hema (Maly 1996). Marra ,akcm was further subdivided into north(called Kekaha) and south (called Konaktai'vpna)areas, with. the division between the two at the ahlipua'a of Kea huolu. The project area is in Holual oa l" Ahupua`a(Figure S) within the area ofKonakai'vprra in Marra `akan. H61ualoa means(literally)"long sled course" (1'ukui ei al. 1974:48). Halualoa l tit is a traditional c7hulm47`a stretching from the ocean to the moot of Hual�Ial in the uplands. The cow fine of Holualaa 1 se Ahupua"a.is prirtiarily low rock~ cliffs. Very little is recorded of Mlualoa Ahupua'a in traditional oral accounts. The Heart Stirring Legend oj'k'a-Miki, published in the Hawaiian language newspaper Ka IYolat o Rawar'i and translated by NTaly (1993)contains the only description of 116lualoa. The legend is set in the l P century bUt also reflects more recent influences (Maly and aly ?002: 17). 6 Y . i Figure'-;: Map of 1131uahm 1"and 2 `1 Ahupua`a S'howing Location of Project Area(Alexander 18551. 7 According to the narrative, The lands Of HNUaloa were narned foi' the chief of that name; both 116lualoa and Puapua`a were high chiefs, who controlled the lands from mountain to sea, which bear their names... Kaluaokalani served as a priest of Holualoa at the temple of Pakiha, This heiutr was near the contest field ofHolualca... The lands of this re ion are named for various call`i. all of whom were related. When the chiefHoivaloa took tap the challenge against Kepaka`iIi`ula can behalf of the Kona chiefs, 1*16lualoa called upon his gGd ie'd1dipdhex7 to assist h 1 m in bis battle... Holualoa was the first chief to call upon the god Kcrlrxy0hoa, and this was the beginning of this gads' use by the chiefs of Hawaii [Maly 1993:208-20 ]. PRE-CONTACT ERA Halualoa., Kona, and much of the leeward side of"Hawai`i Island, while well populated at the time of European Contact, were settled later than the windward side. This in part may be due to the fertile land, numerous streams,and abundant rainfall on the windward side (Maly 1996:3). Marty archaeologists believe that Hawaii Island was first settled around A.D. I,000 by people sailing from the Marquesas(Athens et al. 2014; Dye 2011, Kahn et al. 2014, Kirch 201 I Kirch and McCoy 2007; McCoy 2005 and 2007, Mul.rooney et al, 2011, Reith et al. 2011; Wilmhurst et al. 201.1a and 2011b).. During early settlement of the leeward side permanent habitations were established in Kona concentrated along the shoreline and lowland slopes (Curdy 1981, 1995, Schilt 1994). Informal fields were cleared at higher elevations where rainfall w-as higher. Between AD 1200 and 1400, habitation and agricultttre expanded across the slopes and coastal area ofllualalai (Burtchard 1995; Curdy 1995). The initial cons,ArLic110n of the Kona Hold System (KFS)began approximately between AL) 1400 and 16001Schilt 1984 The development of these extensive formal walled fields coincides with a dramatic population increase and with the development of the stratified chiefdom structure which is reflected through large residential complexes.and hei atr (Buitchard 1995; Curdy 1981; Haun cl al- 1999; Hommon 1986; Schilt 1984). Thus, there was a ticed to expand the previously limited agricultural base_ The royal centers and larger heiau were in place by A❑ 1600 to 1800 reflecting the gro-wili in grower of the rulers and chiefs in the rcgion (Barrera 1971; Haintnatt and Folk 1980). Royal centers were located at Kailua, H61ualoa, Kahalu`u, Kealakekua, and Honaunau (Cordy 1995). 8 The region ofHolualoa developed into a royal center in the late 1600s to early 1700s under the reigns of Keakamahaua (reigned 1680-1700)and Keakealaniwahine (reigned 1700-1720) (Gordy 2000:244). Many 'calr'i and kuvohik-t residences and numerous religious sites are known to have existed here. The majority of the lteiau and. royal residences were constructed along or near the coast, most notably at Kafnoa Point south of the project area. The royal center at Holualoa was eclipsed in the second half of the 1700s by the royal center in the Kahalu`u and Keauhou region. The Kona Field System The Kona Field System extends north at least to Ka`u Ahupua-a and south to Honaunau,west from the coastline and east to the forested slopes of Hualalai (Curdy 1995). During his travels in 1923, William Ellis noted the extensive field systcna divided with "low stone walls, made of fragments of lava", producing"bananas, sweet potatoes, mountain tare, tapa trces, mclons and sugar Cane- and-Hourishing luxuriantly in every direction" (Handy and Haiidy 1940:1 14 and 162). Many of the archaeological projects conducted within Kona deal with components or the Kona Field System(Curdy 1995„ Newman 1970; Schilt 1984). Tlic knla zone of the Kona Field :Sysum is fi-om. Sea level to 150 m ams]. This vane is <tssoc rated with habitations along the shoreline and cultivation of sweet potatoes (ualta), paper mulberry(vvauke). and gourds (ipu). Cleating mounds, planting dclircssiow, planting mounds, planting terraces, and modi bed outcrops are common agricultural features in the koala zone (Hammatt and Clark 1980, Hammatt and Folk 1980. Haun et gal. 1998; Schilt 1984). Pernmrient habitation including royal and high chiefly centers as well as non-aigicultural activities such as fishing, ceremonies and burial practices were usually concentrated along the shoreline zone portion of the kaala zone. The higher elevation zones are the kzdn'aalar zone, ialrc et zone and the 'am a`u zone. The currcnt projcet area is in the kalaWhr zone. This wetter region is above 150 m arnsl where bread fruit. sweet potatoes (lpamoea batutus), ti, (Coi-dWine ftnticoru) wauke (Broussanciira raro (C-cflrwasl a esc'ralcnta), sugar cane(Sac:charvin sp.), and other arboreal crops were grown (Kelly 1983, Menzies 1920). The 'aper'a zone is above the ka h `talu zone. Hawaiians cultivated melons, sweet putatoe.s, !i, bananas, tarn, wauke and sugar cane in fields with low stone walls. The highest zone.the `traatca'rr zone.was used to grew bananas and plantains in walled fields.. The "a, cr`a zone and the `earrra`u 9 zone were als« used to collect timber and catch birds therefore temporary habitations were constructed.. POST-CONTACT ERA. During the post-contact era,the Kona Field System was exploited and the planting of coffee, sugar, sisal, citrus, and cotton took over original Hawaiian crops until c�eni.ually the land was used for cattle pastuic. The first cattle and sheep were brought to the island by Vancouver in 1793 and 1794 (Vancouver 1967). Horses. mules,oxen, goats. and donkeys were brought shortly allcr. Feral cattle;, sheep. and goats overran agricUllus•al tields by 1813 to 1815 (Ellis 1963: 291; Wilkcs 1970: 204). By 1848, in the Kona District, a Great Wall (the Kuakini Wall)was constructed from Lanihau to `4 nouli to keep them away from homes and agricultural areas (Maly and Maly 2001:286). Formal cattle ranching began in the Kona region in the mid-1800s. The Dona landscape evoivcd rapidly with the hl.1-11 Of the century. The rapid growth of the sugar industry produced the Kona Sugar Company in 1899. A► railroad was built in 1901 to help sustain this influx in produce. It was later used to haul lumber and freight along with the sugarcane. The rail line was seven miles long and extended from liblualoa to Keapuka (Figure 6). Cotton, tobacco, and sisal were grown in the dryer lands below the railroad (Kelly 1983). The changing subsistence and tirade regimes developed by incoming European and American settlers, as well as other historical factors, caused a depopulation of the coastal areas of Kona. Ranches were established al nilddle grid upper elevations,and farms were established in the uplands where rainfall k%-as higher and the temperatures were cooler. Cattle ranching and clearing for sugar cane and coffee removed many of the endemic species of plants. The suite orvegctation that existed prior to the pre-Contact era were replaced by k-oa haole (Leircaena leitcac ph ala), kimve (Prosopis pallida), and other newly introduced invasive plant species. 10 4 ' r..��.r�,//* �.I" y +�'yy �N• y C+ ✓. .Tf...yrl.0 i^C + ',,� .vJ'- � II.I l7+l Y#L i�L •.� � I r7LIIFP(F ra v 1 4i\ 11 w 14 k y ' h,f.SIB.�.: � '�f� .� !�h• � �, .41L M41;l P4 i fit is ti�IMruAY i FFwnFI LII•+5 i ~�, ti� 1if IW. dC� ray 1, �i•- .�i.' 5 f - } a } FTC 1 � • � L� Ali { k . 150h4w IbyJ tl"v ^ � Z .., �.. .. _..._. T - _-Figure b: Portion of 15-Minute Series USGS Topographic Map Showing Location of Railroad and Project Area (USGS 1928). 11 Schools, churches, stores,and other businesses were also established in the uplands. During the late 1800s and early I900s, coastal Kona was no longer the densely populated sociopolitical center it once was. It became a small cluster ofhouses along the trail f oni Kailua Bay to Keauhou (TomonariJuggle 1993:15). Homesteads, ranches, aild plantations developed in the uplands daring this period as reflected in the pattern of Land Commission Awards(LCA) and Land Grants(LG)recorded during the Whele (Escott and Escott 2t118). The project area is just enakai(west)of most of the land comrrrissiou awards and is at the same elevation as portions of the land grants in the region. Based an historic documents, the project area and surrounding lands were likely being used for subsistence: and commercial agriculture, as well as for cattle pasture from the mid to late I SOO& The project area ought have been used later than surrounding lands because of its steep slopes and eery rocky soil, but based can aerial photographs, the project area was bulldozed sometime around the 1950s in lircparation for commercial agriculture. T11E M,-WELF, The Land Commission awarded the majority ofHolualoa I" and 2"a Ahupua`a to Victoria,Kamamalu Ka`ahumanu IV, Kuhima Nui ofHawai`i Island and Crown Princess of Hawaii as Land Commission Award(LCA) Number 771.3, `Apana 43 (Figure 7). Several smaller LCA and LG properties were also recorded in the upland region of l lNualoa 1" and 2n"Ahupua`a (Figure S). Twenty four Land Commission awards were recorded in H61ualoa I" Ahupua`a. the ahupua`a where the project area is located(Table A portion of LCA#3660 to John G. Mari i makes tip a chin strip of land 1 acated through (lie center of the current project area. With the notable exception of LCA #3660 and a few other large LCAs, the average award was 2.8 acres, most (n-=16) were for less than 3.0 acres. Three Land Grants (LG 41592, 1602, and 3630) were also recorded in. H61ualaa l" and 2"" Ahupua`a. LG##1.592 was a 25.0-acre parcel wld to Kealallo and LG #3630 was a 38.2-aerc parcel sold to W.H. Cromwell. Almost all of the awards and grants were used as subsis-tcnce and commercial 13rm land, and some were used to pasture cattle (Escott and Escatt 2018). 17 •y i 4 ,f�. r - O Y., • J,'}n ,c;,3,�._ter '`,•i �.. °i�. ` - ' _ =:14.. �-' - y �*Yam. _�._ to a _ lJ ey � r, Vigure 7: Portion ofKailua Sectiun,North €omi iisLl Location of LC'.A 771:3 and Project Area(Ak.i 1952). 13 4 r L A9`yi Y S—f lJ L, Jf ' .:.-r —f :q,l...rr .A";y: fa ::.: 9q:,91- Figare S: 7.3-h'1iRutC SCI-1C5 USES Topugrapa tic NLl p Shc,%%Ing Localioji ui Land t ontnuasion Awards.Lnnd Grants.and tltc Prt?jeci r'TV4 qNV ttiawl (_Icog tphic I( !,2003,K',LiIu.s Q13:3d. DZIL41 4arutti .w; 1latiotial Geogaphic S(Xdoty, UScAS), 14 Table 1. Land Comm i ssion Awards Recorded in HOlUaloa I" and 2`1 AhUpliaa- LCAO AWAR.!)ED TO A I I U P UVA -�CRFS 3660 %kntj 111-5 4395 Kckoi 114711 LQ as 1.7 5552 Kauila I 10]Ua�oa 1 1.9 5554 Keaweko[olie 110 1 L Q 71,1 5795 Kelhkanakaoic j joa 2.2 5910 Knopukauila I wl I I I'Ll.,0a 1.74 5993 Lei palapala I 1'5 1 J-c.la 2 -3.0 6063 H-,:11,1 K-Imal`oa 1" 19 6107 Na 111 1 h-)I UIL',Ift 3.94 Ku;jaEm K 2 -).5 arm 7340.b Ko L 744 1 1 161 LQ 0� 1.93 4 loltial(,;i "& 7713 Kamamalu Large H,-11.1,,jo,I 7746 KaTllakalo I WI I I ILL',1�1 7794 Knum im I': 799() PupA-i 111-1 1 t u.oa M 15 Aipo IA 8151 flehena T- I k,I Ala,Ca -),3 7 8223 lkaiaka I lo I t la Oa 5 9915 Limahana I jo t t I a oa 1" 142 99 321 Lumaawe 11<I I LM 1 2,98 10770 Pimone I I,)I LIl 0,1 106 10400 Naiilmnkiuhi 1"Itialo'4 I `& 3.5 H51u,don 2`1 15 PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES There are at teast 26 previous archaeological rcports fOr lands ncar the current project area, including studies in Puapual`a 2"f and Mualoa I", ` "d,and 3"d Ahupua`a (Table ? and Figure 9). The studies were conduclerl from the co as[ to roughly 1,460 ft atnsl and enccaipass the d-idu region (0-500 ft), the J alu'ulu region (500-1,000 ft), and the lover portions of the 'Zym a region (1,000-2,5CW ft). Results of the previous; < rcltacologica.l studies arc summarized below by elevation: studies numbered l through 1 s its I ablo 2 and Figure 9 sire situatod from the coast io[queen Ka`ahunlanu R Pzhwaw- 0-3t 0 ft amsl), studies 16 through 21 are located fi"om above the Queen Ka`ahumat`Iu HiZhwav to just below Hualalai road (306-760 It anisl), and studies 22 thrOLIg 1 24 ark4 above I lual al a Read to just above MamalAoa Highway [1,l 00-1.460 ft amsl). Tatble 2: inventory of Previous Archaeologic€I IIax,ecli Iiorzti. 1'rnject Number Reference Type of Study Area in Acres Resa ts. Fi ure 131 I Landrum et a[, 1990 Ar y ical lnvenro5.Sun c4 i 1;A 4b Sites Calk et al.2004 �r�1}I�citl�i!uJrl F7a1ar NIA 10 Sites R4'L'i}k L,J 4. Cal'wn 8, R,o,.,v3xI;j}1 :Arc h;J i)l;i4r2�aI - 19,40 lna4�Juur�.Suncv 65 64 Sites 3 I-li.r1J11 VI FiI. 199 4,l"�}:31i)y`„'JL.i1 15 31 Site, hlvolior� `LI1.%in d Hzlrl}r11all & I-011c l�)sl .ArchacoIo,-,ik-aI SrtJI CY 2f) 20 Sites ArchaeologicaJ Survey 4 l-lammatt et a1" 1'�li£� 'tl 21 Sites &Excavations Haun& Henry 2001 Ai-cliaeological Data 1_S9 1 Site A ILL"L'irtC]'1' �. Arc l};}ci)k4 illrl.;rl L,�c +tr 'tt1; '+ 1 y(1? v S;1cs rirvi Arc ILwological SI)o;o 0 6 Rock Walls,' .9 12cr:,,llntiibsance Sror�cv Har}aJitatt 1979b Archaeological Survev 22 3 Sites ' Ilamrttatt I9-11)c Archaeological Survq 23 39 Sites Conolly& l;l.rllutcss ArchaculogicM I I1 1979 Reconnaissance Survcv 4f.�i i�0 Sites f[a Archaeological lIl i}}r113tt J479a Invcnto Sun-ey 46,811 Sites Arcbmr oingica] Survey 1€1 I I:�ittitnari 1984,1 I03 liJ'?;Sites L Excavation ] I Nelson et al. 205 Arch aco[o ie 31 Invents .Survey ,S 2?Sites 12 Rosendhal 19-S Arcliaculogical 1 Site Roconnaissance Survey I(7 Project Number Reference i ype of Study .Area in Acres Results (Figure 9) 12 Suellren 1980a ANbacologii:al Lira 7Sites Reconnaissance Sura-cv 12 Woltorth et al-2000 rcl7,3col(wical 9 7 Sites 113ve iur SLLL'tiiv 13 Barre1a 14Q5 fVchacolugical 17 3 r sewral RLL-l7ilu•`LI�'tik]11CC�7LL1 k ek r110tL11�'1s Arclnoculogica1 12(104 Features, 13 Hatin&Htmry 20t}{} lii °cilttlr� 5u1 tcti 1 R?ofWrbich Were Agricultural) Arehac010gik!al Field %l€�ditied 14 Rnscndahl 1989 E, Inti ection. Oulcrta s 15 Schilt 19941 Atvhatological Study 17 1-14 Sites 16 'w ulkcr& RL wawa hl 104 67 Sites 1998 R"ooLlaissancc Survey 16 Graves& Goodrellu,6k AivIiacvly-ica;l Data li} Situ 1993 Recove1'y 16 Maly& Rosendahl .Ar-chacological 104 67 Site% 2006 Preserwanon P1all 17 Hawiattaatt et al, 1992 Archn,4ological Survey 174 71 Sites Archaeological1 8 SoeltreLi 191�(}b 16 l Site Reconnaissance Serve Archaeological19 Rechtman 20 ].t}[rIN 2 Sites InventOTY Survey N Rosendahl1989 Archacvlogical 17 17 Sites. [�c�.chair al,ce Survey 20 Falter&Grave 1993 Arehacuk.,-,];;: l 17 17 Sites lnvcnlor� )4I1-%CS 1 Site.('149 21 Dircks rt a].201:x Arehat'ulcttirul 10-260 HistoHe to laIae�Ikil,} NIL]%�,� ,Modem Farming Fe�i tures} Archaeological I Ilonle+teacl 22 C)esilcts et a1.20()4 g 1 l.7 InventorySurveyI catures 23 Rechtinan 2013 29 ?4 Sites r4 Clark&Rechtman Arrliacological , , 6 historic Era 2006 Invento ,sull-cv Sites 1tt1t tci?l }�ii 11 22 Prc-C oiltaul '> Escon & Escott 20IR .[1 and historic Era Inwiltory Survcy s i tcs R 11rc-Contact An hae€1logiL'al and historic Era 26 Escon& Escott 2020 In 73.122 sites ��ciltory Survey 11urlatcd Fiord (Petrogly ll) 17 If'�waw Y Irw.r.Y g�It.YXYAY Y I«A[+w"a [^Aral M. �r - .. 4d y, fi' a — .' I - KF;t P1afi7►:G 7'1Rli � `R II'i - � «A ,4 � � r � 0 1-7A YxK F,i.IAh . ; lo,l 1'W[Wff'T RR RfQ"h[7 Y MN dM MR AKIN ' +nwar EE w 110 ATV Y Ia"IaT�.I Ir1aYIWi 1 IF'a Mllln�Y IaaiMA��1 a n7alalY�1. . kigure 9: 7.5-Nikimc Series l:Sf PS`l orx)praphic Map Showing Local ion of Prtn ious Archaeological Studies and Project Area (Kealakekkia Quad, 1-SfC.:Ula'. Data Sources:Nat onttl Geographic Society,USCiS), 18 REGIONAL PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL STUDIES 1. Landrum et al. 1990,and Calls et al.2004. P14111, Inc. conducted an archaeological itventory survey(Landrum et al. 1990) and SCS, Inc. conducted data recovery investigations(Calis et al. 20 ) at the Kahakai development project. The project area is located within the lower elevations of Puapua'a 2`1 Ahupua`a_ Pre-Contact era to early post-Contact era cave shelters, agricultural rock clearing mounds, burials, shrines, and a. passible heiau were identified during the A1S sludy. A heiau complex, several burials, and five pci-mancnt habitation sites were recommended for preservation. All of the preservatioli sitcs are near the coast. 2. Carleson and Rasendahl 1990. PH RI, Inc. conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 65 acres between Kuakini and Queen Ka`aliumanu highways in Puapua°a 2°a Ahupua`a_ Their study recorded 64 archaeological sites including pre-Contact era habitation, agricultural, and burial sites. Seven sites were assessed as significant and recommended for preservation (Carleson and Rasendahl 1990: 34). 3. Haim cat al. 1998. PHRL laic. conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the propo cd Ali`i Drive corridor through several ahupua`a. Numerous pre-Contact era site complexes were recorded in Puapua`a 2"`' and HMualoa V ihrorigh 0' Ahupua'a, The site complexes included a large number of agricultural f•' aturcw, as well as habitation, burial, and ceremonial features. 4. Hanimatt:roil Hill: 1981, and Hammatt et al- 1986.. Two archaeological surveys were conducted osi a 20-acre parcel of below KuakirYi Highway. The first study recorded 20 sites, and [lie second recorded 21 sites. None of the sites were recommended for preservation Marnmatt and Falk 1981: ii,and iHammatt et al. 1986: 87), The report also recommended that the single documented burial be relocated. 5. Haun & Henr4,2001. Haun and Associates conducted an archaeological data recovery study tit a c-shaped enclosure located on 1.59 acres of land below (queen Ka'ahumanu Highway 6. Escott 2013.. SCS c onduc tcd an archaeological study on 1.962 acres of land near the intersection of Kuakini and Queen Ka'ahumanu highways. Two historic era ranch walls were recorded duri ng the study. 19 7. Sinoto 1979. Aki 5inuto recorded several Historic era ranch rock walls can a six acre parcel ofIand just mauka of Ali`i Drive. S. Hammatt 1979b. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 22 acres just south of Kuakini Highway. Three archaeological sites were recorded during the study. None of the sites were recommended for preservation (Harnmatt 1979b. ii, and 10). 9. 1larrrrnatt 1979c. The Archacological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 23 acres located in the near coastal portion of Mlualoa l"t and 2"' Ahupua`a_ Thirty nine archaeological sites were recorded during the study, The report recomrinanded that all burials. including a known cemetery site be relocated (I{ydnnnnatt 1979a: 5). None of the rcniaining sites (pre-Contact era habitation and agriculture sites) were reconilnended for preservation in place. 10. Conally and Gunness 1979, and Flarrtmalt 1979a and 1980. The Archaeological Research Center, Inc. conducted an archaeological survey of 103 acres within the near coastal portions of HBlualoa I"through 4"' Ahupua'a.(Harnmatt 1980)_ One hundred and thirty six archaeological sites were rq=rdcd on the project area. They included pre- Contact era habitation, agriculturC. burial. and a ceremonial sites. The Hammait report recommended that a beiau (Site 6661 ) was sigtnificant and should be preserved in place (Hanninatt 19M 4). The report also recommended that the single documented burial be relocated to the perimeter of he au (Site 6661) and preserved. No other sites were recommended for preservation. 11. Nelson et al. 2005. An archaeological inventory survey was condU ted by Rechlmnn Consulting on 28.0 acres located in the Hear coastal portion of Mlualoa 2"" Ahupua`a. A total of 22 sites containing 150 features were recorded. The sites were primarily pre- Contact era agricultural and habitation sites, though five burial sites, a possible Mau,and a trail were also documented within the project area, 12. Rosendahl 1978, Soehren 1980a, Wolforth et al. 2000. PHRI conducted an archaeological inventory survey of eight acres of coastal Holualoa 3`1 Ahupua'a and recorded seven archaeological sites including three Historic era.rock "walls, thrt: residential sites, and hlikapaia Heia€t. ?11 13. Barrera 1995, Rau & Renry 2001). Barrena (1995) recorded a possible burial platfori.-n, two habluiicin site, agricultural rock clearing niounds and modified outcrops during a rewtinaissance stavey of 17 acres in near coastal 1461ualoa 2"`' Ahupua`a. Haunt and Associates conducted an archaeological inventory surrey of the property and recorded 12 sites with 104 features (Haun and Henry 2000:14). The majority of features (n=82) were pre-Contact era agricultural rock clearing mounds. Eleven permanent habitation and one temporary habitation feature were also recorded during the study. 14. Rusendahl 1989. PHRl conductc d an archaeological field inspection of6.0 acres of land just below Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway in H51ualoa 2°a Ahupua`a Several modified outemps were recorded in the letter report. There were no other archaeological features identified on the project area. 1S. Sehilt 1984. The Bishop Museum conducted an archaeological hturly ol'the Kuakini Highway Realignment Project located roughly along present day Queen Ka-ahurrianu Highway and recorded 39 sites Puapua'a 2"d and Holualoa I'and i"a AIUI[)U�i'a. Twenty two of the sites were pre-Contact to early past-Contact era agricultural gardens and modified outcrops (rock clearing). There were also traditional habitation platforms and trails, a,� well as Histone era roads and walls recorded &ring the smidy. 16. Walker and Rosendahl 1988, Graves and Goodfellow 1993, and Maly and Rosendahl 2006. An archaeological rcconctaissancc slirVcy (Walker and Rosendahl 1988), an archaeological data recovery study (Graves and Goodfellow 1993), and an archaeological preservation plan (Maly and Rosendahl 2006) were conducted by ?I]R1. Inc. for 104 acres in the upland region of Puapua'a 2" Ahupua'a- A total of b7 sites were documented within the project area, including traditional (KF5) sites, temporary habitation sites, three burials, and a heiew. The archaeological preservation plan recommended that the three burials be relocated to the heiau site, and that the heiuu be preserved as a formal historic preservation area (Maly and Rosendahl 2006). 1.7. Hammalt et al. 1992. An archaeolo ical survey was conducted by Cultural Scarf eys Hawaii on 174 acres of land in the upland region ofHblualoa I"', 2"d, and 3"1 AhuPeIa-a. The prOjecL area lands had been heavily bulldozed during; the modern era l-,or ranching and agricultural purposes. Despite the bulldozing. seventy one sites were recorded during the study, inclutlirtg temporary habitation features•, ruck walls, agricultural features, and 21 three burial Sites. Many of the sites were determined to be associalecl with Historic era ranching and agriculture. 18. Soehren 1980b. Soehren conducted an archaeological reconnaissance survey of 16.0 acres above (queen lCa`ahumanu Highway in the inland region of H61ualoa 1�" Ahupua`a (Soehren 1980b). A single enclosure was identified during the survey. 19. Rechtman 2006. An archaeological I'M'e1310ry surVcy was conducted by Rechtman C0115ct1611g. I..1:.0 on a roughly erne-acre parcel located makui of{queen Ka'ahumanu Highway in Hcrlualoa 2'd Ahupua`a. 'Two rock wails were recorded on the project area. The report recommended no further work A the wall sites. 20. M. Rosendahl 1488, Fager& Graves 1993. Facer and Graves (1993) coaductc:d an archaeological inventory survey of 17.0 acres just mauka of Queen Ka`ahuirtanu Highway in HOIaaloa P Ahupua`a. Seventeen sites containing 27 pre-Contact to early post-Contact era agricultural features, including rock mounds, modified outcrops, C- shaped enclosures, terraces, walls, and rock enclosures, were recorded. 21. Dircks et al. 2013. Rechtman Consulting, conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 10.266 acres of land located between 840 and 920 ft amyl in 146lualoa I"and 2`d Ahupua'a. One Historic era to modern era homcstead/agrictrlture site( iyose Farm) containing 149 #calures was recorded during tliQ wur cy. 22. Desilets et al. 2004. Destlets et al. (2004) conducted an archaeological inventory survey of 11.7 acres of land in the "apa a region ofHolualoa I" Ahupua`a_ A single site associated with Historic era and modern era homesteads, commercial agriculture (coffee), and ranching was recorded. Features included rack walls,roads, coffee terraces,and buildings. 23. Rechtman 2013. Rechiman Con suI tin L, conducted and archaeological inventory survey of29 acres of lend located in the w rigion of 1iiolualoa I" Ahuptta`a, Twenty four sites were recorded. The majority of the sites were associated kvl li Historic era and nnod m era homesteads, commercial ai-icultur+e. Features irtcltttle.d rock "ills, roads, and remnants of'structures. A single pre-Contact era to early posi-C Comet cra residential and agricultural site was also recorded. 22 24. Clark & Rechtman 2006. Rec;lttman Consultin-' c011drrcted are archaeological inventory survey of2.7 acres ofland located in the `JI)a'a region ofIIaluarlQa I" All upua`a_ Six sites were recorded, ineIuding dive ranch walls and an area of coffee terraces. A number of conclusions can be made from the previous archaeological studies. A primary conclusion is that the majority of habitation features, especially permanent habitation ieatures, are located from the coast to about 360 h amsl, below the present day Queen Ka'ahumanu highway, The same is true of ceremonial features, burials. and, to a lesser extent, agricultural features. The density of agricultural features and habitabon features, mostly temporary habitation features, in the upland regions between 360 A amsl and 700 0 amsl is much IOWer than the site density in the coastal kola and lower kahr`aalaa regions of the. KFS. The pre-Contact traditional Hawaiian settlement and agricultural patterns are strongly oriented to the kola and lower kaki`taltr regions. Even though cattle ranching and commercial agriculture may have removed some archaeological sites from the ground surface in the kalu'idu region, there appear to be fewer sites than at lower elevations. The majority of sites in the kola )du region are KFS agricultural sites including rock clearing mminds, 1110ciif1ctl OLItcrops, garden c closures, and low garden walls. Within the lands of the current Project, it is clear thin ranching and commercial agricultural practices have removed and damaged nlariy of the }arc-C oiltact ira sites from [lie gramid surface [see the llaninlatt c9 al. 1992 '�ur11ntary belw' ). Moreover,many of the sites identified near the current project area are associated with Historic era ranching*and commercial agriculture. A second conclusion is that the establishment of Historic era homesteads, ranches, and conuncrcial agriculture seems to have removed. or obscured, the majority of pre- Contact era sites in the upper kcrlu'uhi and lower Wlv'a regions. lr »light he that pre- Contact uses in these regions did not involve the consmction of large or permanent r',:,i r s, as to the lower regions of Kona. It is also likely that Historic era ranching and cominercial agriculture in the lower `dpa n region have caused large scale land alterations through the use of bulldozers for pasture and garden. It is possible that traditional features were disassembled to build rock walls and coffee terraceti. 23 CURRENT PROJECT AREA SPECIFIC PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY 26. Rarnmatt et al. 1492. Lands of the current AIS study were sUblect to an AIS Study conducted by flarnmatt et al. (1992), That study encompassed 66.039 acres of land Nvithin the current project area located between 32+0 to 690 feet (98 to 210 meters) amsl [TM]k: (3)7-6-021:016 and 017] (see Figure 9. Project #17). 'rhe current project area is located within the northern portion of'the I Iarimatt et al, (1992) project area. Twenty one archaeological sites and two areas of bulldozed modern planting "terraces" were recorded in the AIS report(Figure 10 and Tabic 3). Eight of the 21 archaeological sites (SIHP 950-10-37-10015, #50-10-37-10017,#50-10-37-10018, #50- 10-3 7-10020, #50-10-3 7-10031,#50-1 0-37-1 0033, 950-10-3 7-10034, and##50-10-37- 10049, hereafter abbreviated to the last Five digits)were recorded by C5H in tabular format only. Written descriptions of the remaining 13 site are in the CSH AIS report. Excavations were conducted at ten of the 13 sites. The AIS report included plan view ligures for four of the 13 sites. At the request of SHPD, additional site documentation for Sites 10011, 10012, 10031, 10049, and 10071 was submitted to SHPD in a letter report (Hammatt and Shideler 2007). Six of the sites were determined to be pre-Contact era, four associated with habitation, one with agriculture.and one single feature Site (Site 10012) contained two burials. Fifteen of the sites were determined to be Historic era,sites, the majority associated with coffee agriculture and cattle ranching. T".o Historic era habitation sites were also documented in the AIS study. The burials at Site 10012 were removed and reinterred off-praiect prior to 1983. The site was further excavated to ensure that all iwl had been removed. The site was then back-filled and leveled by bulldozer. The AIS recotnnietided no further work at all 21 sites documented in the current project area. The Hainmatt and ShIdeler(2007) letter report repeated the AIS recotnrnendadon that "all surface sites in the area were doeuntenred" in the AIS report and that"sinit�cHnt material from the study'area has been recovered and that further investigation would be of minimum productivity„ (Hatnmatt and Shideler 2007:l 1). However, the authors recommended that the sites should be located to document their current conditions and to document the sites to prevailing SffPD AIS standards, 24 twnM.t . ,- - s KJE 1 6, -174,.11d1 {KFA ILIA III I a1,1I41 "kt to I.1 lFkYti ,�"' 11EdY:� 'qa 9d r, ,I ki Vv a1*04.N hl NPM g11t113 " .� D nl lixu}.el•[ik � a al{R:tiI.II I..i'4l.11l p4 r III RM 126'JOl III l � ;ryIS tilk lJY7�+171�IM1 �� 09 PIr ..� •� � yam/ .r. 1�614q K1!1'Ii III Itl#I. r' �COTT.a,zw Ilitll{'I kWh ' �' E3 s. INEA i --I.l+:i F�LiM1 I{nsl 1511--1 /rt C4 T IIN17�4t �w t71MYMMl�. Figure tfl. . 5-N-inUte Series USGS T°opogn,phis Map Showing Location of Northern Portion of lfammatt et al.(1492)Sites and Current Projeel Area{ESRI,2011_ Source-Nat loml Geographic 5lociety,U55(35_Kealakekua Quadrangle)_ 25 'fable 3: 1nvenlC1rk 51'PreV13U&ly ki C +rcled ArchAcolooint Sues 4 Fhown3ll ct al_ 1992:I-lanimatt and Shideler 2007}_ SIHP E' 11 TYPE FUNCTION AGE FWAVATION CUIJURAL.MAT F,'RIAL # xrt l: 101"11 1 1'laifnrn, Ag,Clearing I'm+istwic t.i m tong trench 3 cowrie shells l(io1 11) l'latifurm k%�all Burial Prehistoric Laire Feature Donal reinterrral off-project Irrlll I 1 1.nrlt+silrc&- Lava Tubc Hahitation Prchistarie 4.5 rnsquare total Firr t<Httorc:i&Prehiswric Lid i Jac ls Iolll; I. Tice Roud Bed Hi tcuic 1 ri111- 1 Platform C ketch k.Irnp Hi Lioric I.H11 1 r} L-uelostare 11t7 ty16 rtkVrl I Sl yltir;t' irtlli'i t" ( E{ocICMOLr71dw A.,,.Ocaring lil,101:c ? I.0111%%itle Metal file I Cnchrs Irtll�(4 14 E'1.17'.iirll', g.Clearing 111,1i r;w' Iriil:+l I fl 1.r141:k.irt L4;111 1' riculter€ Fiiti rl� 15111 1 PI,II_lii1 C'clrrtpltx [.'t?1'ee A I.fll.l I ..' I'lat#nrnr t..Oe:,rin~ I ii4,i,rlL Irllr�+ _ fi llrr£1LCti 1i!1!t1:".IwO lil,!m 14i11(r 212 Terra'ci-, H.1hilmioll � l'r h }Ii r:,.' I fl\ I.P I11 1'c; k ,i tijn.-1 l atniounr sof mldden& lire feature I011(r;t ')33 f:nclniure Hr,bi..,1i"I1 PrL�Jl:NIL II-v. I1_`\Ii_';iY. ;nuk onlciunt❑fmiddclt 1(061) _'IN `icKlifie't H.1hir.t ion I ii�s,Ir!, 0.,X 0,5 ni t n�171:11l awount ofmitiLlen liltlr't.1'latiforrn 101170 235 U-Shaer E ricErgurc Agriculture Historic 1.0 X 0.5 m No 3rtifnts I SI117 1 23 7 Ptatfilml Habilation Prehistoric 1e072 2 3 x Waffled F LIff 4b.Clearing lii-tnric 7.D m square t-owI No arts Small amm int of N1S in Tl.i-2 10073 219 Platforms Rarnchi%Ag. IListnrie 10074 240 Enclosure Coffec Work HiAu6c 1.e5 m square total l VC.little MS.hisirnic airtifacta Shed ISall7 '4'1 Enclosure Pig Pen Hivaric 26 In a lettcr to the County ofHawai`i Department of Planning dated July 30, 2018, (Log- No. 2018.00878 Doc. No. 18O7SNO1), SI°1PD requested a new pedestrian survey to identify all archaeological historic properties present on the project area,and to update previous archaeological documentation to include site:plans for each site with site boundaries and areas impacted by bulldozing,, pliotographs of all sites and features, an assessment of their integrity. and site signtlicance. 25. Escott & Escott 2018. SCS conducted an archaeological inventory survey on a 5.0- acre portion of Parcel 017 in the SML[hc:ast portion cif the current project area(Escatt and E,wott 2018) and recorded tweniy-two ncw�' archaeological sites within the project area (Table 4 and Figure 11). Fifteen of the sites are single-feature sites. The remaining seven agricultural sites contained two to seven features_ A majority of the sites are agricultural terraces and complexes dating to the pre-Contact era to the Historic. era. The agricultural complexes are located in the lower kaly'uhi zone, between 600 and 7O0 feet 4182 to 213 incters) arnsl. Three of the ranch walls (Site 30595, 30601.and 3065)are the primary dividers of the five-acre project area. These Historic era walls have typical characteristics of ranch walls including cobble care till and bi-faced inward sloping walls toward the top. They are approximately l.0 meter tall. Site 30602 and Site 30603 are Historic era ranching and agricultural enclosures constructed along wall Site 30595 and wall Site 306O1. These two wall sites are constructed into the west edge of the Site 30592 railroad berm and post-date the railroad berm. The northern third of the project area only has two sites (Site 30591 and 30956). Site 30591 is an agricultural complex with six terraces. Portions of the sites were bulldozed in the early Modern era. Bath sites date to pre-Contact to early Historic era. The terraces reflect Kona Field System features but are roughly constructed that more closely resemble Historic era cornntercial agriculture. Site 3+0956 is a rectangular Historic style hearth. The middle one third of the project area between wall sites 30595 and 30605 is within the bulldozed "terraces" portion of the project area- Site 30593 is a pre-Contact era to early past-Contact era lava tube burial. The burial will be preserved in place in accordance with a Burial Site Component of a Preservation Plan. Site 30594 is an 27 agricultural terrace complex that resembles the Kona Field Systern but is more roughly constructed. Artifacts recovered from subsurface testing at Site 30604 suggest it is a Historic era agricultural teiTace. The southern third of the project area, south of wall Site 30605, contained six primarily agricultural sites(Site 30598, 30600, 30606, 30607, 30610, and 30611) and four Historic era sites (Site 30599,3G608,30609,and 30612)with functions other than agriculture. The agricultural features included rock walls(Site 30598 and306O6), terraces (Site 30600 and 30610),and ag6cultural complexes with terraces (Site 30607 and 30610). The non-agrieultural features included three cnclosures (Site 30599,30608. and 30609), and a refuse Ali-,posal area Liva blister(Site 30612). The cluster of these sites indicates their use for l listoric crii eOMfficrw ial agriculturc. Twenty-nine shovel probes and two excavation units tested the sites. Marine shell fragments. a basalt flake and volcanic-glass flakes recovered during testing indicatc that Hawaiians likely used the area for limited agricultural purposes. However, the agricultural terraces more closely resemble the rcmains of Historic era cotrmercial agriculture. All 22 sites identified daring the current AIS study were assessed significant under criterions "d,_ as tlicy are likely to yield information important to history. The railroad berm is also significant under criteria"a" and"c" as it is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history and it embodies distinctive characteristics of the type,period, and method of railroad bed construction. The railroad berm was recommended forpreservation with preservation measures outlined in an archaeological preservation plan(Escott and Mello 2019b). The rest of the sites require no further work. I-he burial is also significant under criterion"e"as it has important value to Hawaiian people and people of other ethnic backgrounds in the state. The burial was recommended for preservation in place with preservation treatments outlined in a Burial Site Component of a Preservation Plan (Escott and Mello 2019a). 28 l able-4: Imoniory oFArchaeological Sitcs Identified on the AIS IIrojccI Jkj-e--a iE-scoll and Fscott20IS - Site 5ikc Type Fsakumw Wir Function Age Tenting Agic.ultura.l Complex 6 Aetncululn: Pre-c'unlao ics Hisfi)[ic I_I+l. 30502 Railroad IkJ and licritt 1 Ttatttisx3natiait Historic Ert 30593 Luca Tincc Burial Burial Pre-Cfxuact to Early I'sr11 3US94 A-lincultural Agriculture Pm—CO11t2c11L)Ili' ill: I.'J tii'-I & 30595 Rock Full 1 RamAiing Historic Err 1006 I Ic�krih Food PI'Vis,ir;ai i0r't I Iist wrK;Lrst 3059' Rack 1%all 1 Rmiching H.istaric Era 3ii^'f.'s Ruck Wall .hgriculhrre Rayicliirig Pre-Ccmtactto Historic L-m -- S[Riaehin Agrscultur� Historic Errs -1 &2.Tll-1 3U5{1'1 1'latftst°twt&F.nwlnsttr� � ,� 30600 Terrace I Agriculture Historic Era sP-1 M(YO1 Rock 1:1fl I Rmiching Ritilo6c line hick"are I RanchirggAgricuiture Historic Era tit' I_-_3 K 4 30t>P<)_+ 1 whmrr =4 Ranch ii*Agriculture Historic Era 5F' I & 3tN 4 '-,ornplex 4lcrreulture pre-coluact40HistodcBru 30605 Rt7rk Wall I R.mchingA,nicuhure Historic Era 30606 Rmn I Koiw4hm, rAgircwI1wL.. Prc-C'ont act loliistoricEra. [lull' A rricultural C ompl,: 7 Aficulture Pre-Contmtto Historic Era SP-I to SP-10 30(-Ut Enclosmv I 5truciure Historic Ern 3001) Fmclosum I 4trucum2 Hi�,mric Ertl 30610 Terrace I Agriculture Pre-contuc•lto Hisunic:E.m 5P-1 10611 l:trrcultural Complex 3 Agriculture I'rt-C'umRCt 90 Historiic FM 4P-I,2.3 30612 Lava Blister t Refuse C}urtrlr Historic Era 29 KEY b -I'rF SITE I#OS'?DARV WAILROAD RED i� ROCK WA 1A %IFF 3Ww" Fti 14I I'F _1 Wpt is :tY YYi bit Ya1 �ITF`SlFS wI i4�3iYF�t13 SFTE_Amt, F-WK92 S1 I i n. l�u �1 6 t .�t�i•a,4 S,i3 F _3GitlY+ w I i F�F1tilAA SITE 31Yni_' "ITF 1 kmil t I I ]4 11F .Y r I .4t�'i{Ith . til 1 J �IVS�H SI I+ ,uYr,a I of E H..SXYnsir� Figure 11: 7.5-Minute Series U'SUS Topographic Map Showing? Locations of Ese(At and Escott (201.8) A1S Project Area Archaeological Sites (ESR1, 2011. Sources: National C.ieognaphic Society, USGS. Kealakelcua Quadrangle). 30 26. Eseott & Escott 2020. SCS conducted an archaeological inventory Survey Ott a 71122-acre portion cif the current project area in.Parcel 016, 017 (loon),018, acid 019 to idemify all archaeological historic properties present on the project area,and to update previous archaeoloLlical documentation (see Figure 10). Seventeen of the twenty-one sites previously identified in Hammatt et al. (1992) were located during the course of the archaeological inventory surrey study (Figure 10 and Table 5). Two of the previously documented sites (Site 10020 and Site 10034) relocated by SCS are natural bedrock outcrops and one site former burial site (Site 10012), The burials at Site 10012 were reinterred off-project in 1983- The four remaining previously documented sites (Sites 10017, 10033, 1 M- 49. and 10071) were bulldozed prior to the SCS fieldwork and the remains of the sites rare no lon,:Tr present on the ground surface. Three previously undocumented sites were also recorded, including a portion of the railroad berm (Site 30592). a small coffee shed enclosure (Site 31181). and several ranch walls (Site 31182). A single petroglyph on a loose cobble was recorded as Isolated Find I (IF-1). A total of21 sites, 17 previously docimictlted and four newly doeutnettted,were identified on the Project area and are documented in this report. Tv%,o ol`the sites (Site 1.0020 and Siic 100,14) werc determined to be natural geological features. Six of"the sites were detennine+d to lac pi-c-Contact era, three associated with habitation, one with agriculture,a single petroglyph site, and one single feature site (Site 10012) formerly contained two burials. Twelve of the sites were determined to be Historic era sites, the majority associated with colf'ee agriculture and cattle ranching. Two Historic era habitation sites were also documented in the A I S study. One site r Site 10015) was determined to be a short segment of modern bulldozer road. The burials at Site 10012 were removed and reinterred off-project prior to 1983. The site was further excavated to ensure that all irW had been removed. The site was then back-tilled and leveled by bulldozer. 31 Table 5: Inventory of Escott &Escott (2020)Archaeological Situ. S I H L'# TYPE FUNCTION AGE 11101 l I'lattorm Ag.0caring Pre-conlae't 110[2 111alromi& wall 13tirial PrL-Conlact 1170k3 farclnsurc& L:tv wi Tithe Ilabil lion Pre-Contau.t. 10015 BulldLzcc Road 'I 1d1tsl)Q3'L1ticatt tLfo&m 11i01' Platform 4:,.IIIk Rnmr3 Nigtoric I00tx Enclosure A rICTLkLir`dl Historic 10019 6 Rock Mounds A (-l--1ting TIistn6c 10070 Bcdrock OutuLop Cicol€gical Foaturr Natund 10031 Enclosurc Wn[r AS-1 il'UhLIJ_Q IIisroric 10033 Planting Cohn ticx Collin Ag Hisioric 10034 BedriKk Ourcrop €nplou,ical,Fcaturc Naturul 10049 'Terraces Agiculture I I i storic 10067 Terraces I TabiTIfion Pro-C 0.111acr 10068 E nclosk= Habiwtiuet Prc-CUILUct Ilitif3L1 -Modified EilufflPla torn I tab kation IIistoric I11070 L-Shape Enclosure Agriculture historic I111)7l I'latforrrl Halaiiatinn Pre-COT11aet 1(11)72 Complex Ar,Clearing 111'e-Contact 101173 PlalfonUs it' 1W74 Ell-clo;um Cot3ee Wnrk Shcd Historic. 10075 Eni:10- TV Pi I'etl Historiic 30392 Ruitrtmad 13crm '1r:trisporl.uw t HiSLOriC 3119i1 Enclosure Cef cc Work Shcd III"toric 31182 Rack Walls Rawhing&Ag6 I11sturic 1F-1 Po.troglyph Marker I'ri-Cinttart 32 AIS SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENTS All sites identified during the Escott and Fscott (2018) and Escort and Escott (2020) AIS studies were assessed as significant under criterion"d- as they are likely to YICld 111fo ration important to llistorv. The railroad ber-n is also significaw. minder criteria "a" and "c" as it is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history and it embodies distinctive characteristics of the type, period, and D11: lod of railroad bed construction. The railroad bean was recommended for preservation. The petroglyph (IF-1) is recommended for preservation in a afe location on the project area, preferably within the Site 30592 railroad berm prescr�ation. area. Burial Site 30593 is also significant under criterion "e" as it has important value to Hawaiian people and people of other ethnic backgrounds in the state. The burial is recommended for preservation in place with preservation treatments outlined in the SHED-approved burial site component of burial treatment plan (Escott and hello 2019). The remaining sites are recommended for no further work. Site 30592 is summarized below from Escoti laid Fscott (1-018,53-54), 33 SITE 30592 RAILROAD BERM. FUNCTION: Transporta ion AGE: Historic Era. DIMENSIONS: 300.0 m long(NIS)by 4.0 m wide max. by 5.0 m max. height CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Unaltered: retains integrity of location, setting, materials, and workmanship SL;RFACE ARTIFACTS. ModernTrash Debris EXCAVATION: None DESCRIPTION: Site 30592 is an Historic era railroad berm located between 680 m and 690 in ams] along the eastern boundary of the project area (see Figure 8). The railroads berm is approximately 300.0 m in length(SE/NW) and 4.0 m wide by a maximum of 5.0 m in height. The railroad bed is a level dirt and rock surl'ace, and the berm is located along the west side of tlrc railroad bed. The southern portion of the berm retaining wall is constructed of small boulders and large cobbles stacked up to nine courses high (Figure 9 and Figure 10). The berm is well faced with fairly tightly fitted natural rack. The rode has trot been worked prior to stacking. The berm face slopes slightly toward the east as it approaches the tap to prevent collapse. The southern portion of the railroad tied top surface has been bulldozed in the fairly recent past, likely during construction of the homes along the east edge of the project area property. portions of the berm are partially collapsed. There is a fair amount of modem construction debris and refuse along the southern course of the railroad lied. The northern portion of the railroad berm retaining wall is constructed o f small boulders and large cobbles stacked up to nine courses high (Figure 12 and Figure 13). The berth is well faced with.fairly tightly fitted natural rock. The rock has not been worked prior to stacking. ne berm face slopes slightly toward the east at it approaches the top to prevent collapse. 34 +q�gr :` o M i T a !'�f c r' +._ 'r ry y,7�r"""„ � r,�.l ► YC a •::y .' r�'" ;1,. �, "•fir �},�.,,� � ,F �t A r P X a�� •� i-., . .y II +` �H _ t�L S�`' f �' .,. -r.. "4'1 "�4- ip'".iT• '� I�x .� 1. n �fa 1r1y r yy ] ♦ �� 4' �' 4 L },�,s_ .Y y 1, d �ti•s�+� a� y � '. x`�'�r- x. �i qy �+ I � Iyy r. o I r 45 Y �. t � � rr* %� 6 � ter• i r `.0 ��L 5 b / "ri°. 1'a r �. �- ` L � � I�;�•�r F r Y� `ti,..� `^:.J.i.}cd��+. I� The retaining wall is approximately 5.0 m high and is construcled of fifteen courses of large basalt cobbles and small boulders. The north end of the berm has been bulldozed roughly 60.0 m south of the nonhea.st corner of the project area. Site 30592 appears to be unaltered and is in goad condition. Only the north end of the railroad berm has been altered by bulldozing;. Site 30592 will be preserved render significance Criteria a, c, and d. SITES #50-10-37--10592 PRESERVATION TREATMENTS The Former Kona Sugar C"ompariy railroad bed and berm (Site 30592) is a long linear Feature extending across the eas,terri boundary of Parcel 01.6 and Parcel 017. Preservation at Site 30592 consists of avoidance and protection (conservation) per HAR §13-277-3(1). The majority of the feature will be preserved with the proviso that it may be breached for purposes of access. Short-Term Preservation Measures In the event of land disturbance or construction in the area of Site 30592 using heavy eart.hmovin,g equipment, a butTer will be established at twenty feet from the western perimeter of the railroad berm(Figure 14 and Figure 15). The twenty-foot buffer will be clearly marked with orange fencing. Any construction warp using earthmoving equipment in close proximity to the twcuty-font butler will require the presettce of an ambacological monitor. No c:ons"coon will tape place between the railroad berm and the costern property boundary. Any construction within 30 feet of the railroad bed and b rni ,hall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist familiar with Site 30592 and previous archaeological studies evrtdrrcted on the property. Long-Terns Preservation Measures A permanent preservation buffer will be established twenty feet from the western perimeter of Site 30592 (see Figure 14 and Figure 15). Native ornamental plants tray be used to mark the twenty-foot preservation buffer, No use ofhcavy earthmoving equipment will be allowed within the twenty foot buffer. Hand-tools only shall be permitted within the twenty-foot pertnancnt preservation buffer. Bureau of Conveyances Subsequent to final approval by SHPD of this Preservation Plan, a metes and bounds description of the burial and archaeological preservation sites,and perinanent preservation casements shall be surveyed and recorded with the State of11awai`i Bureau of Conveyances in conformance with HAR §l 3-300-38(g). The T'MK plat map will include a map of the Preservation area. 37 I Y 1 -mot-- — 6 f+�.,,. r,. E•unllki I tAll i 1 '��� 41 � aZ tf1.611-},I,LI 111�N51. ti !'kF'l M%tl l[i11 M1,l N11"tit 4. 1* ! IL nl,l ei'i• I N'+IYllryw.�. I.'Yr'n11111n1 I' Figure I4: t Kr I, luoa and Puu PSIhA,,llt, i..t)r aii,,u of Projcct Area, Arcltiaeoloogical Sites and €'rw:sei-vation EasementstESRI2013.Data Sources: N:1,, 33 /wl+r rt dw G , ws � r _ KEN' PR[l.H.[:T AR7=A 1: - RAILROAD BED � PRESERVATIONEASENIENA �y 4 B r � L k r � �' µ �� i ern .. ,��•- � � X dr A aK/*j .. wJiC wt s,i r ram' y I r;rM Figure 15; Poilion ofTMK: (3) 7-6-021 Map Showing the Locations of Site 30592, Preservation and Acccss Easements, and Access Breach. 39 Property Title The details of this preservation plan and its preservation measures shall become a matter of record with the parcel title.. The descriptions of the preservation easements will be added to the title, including the specific requirements and restrictions related to physical improvements, linage. maintenance and access. Access Pedestrian access to Site 30592 shall be from 1Q Place located east of the site (see Figure 12 to Figure 1.5). Parking is available can to Place_ The property owner is responsible for ensuring the access easeinent is usable for pedestrian travel, and is responsible for keeping the access easement clear and open. Access will be permitted seven days a week, one-half hour before sunrise to cane-half hour after sunset. Access can be arranged by calling the property owner. Signage Weather-resistant signs, approximately 18 by 24 inches in size, shall be placed at the railroad bed at the end oflo Place. The signs shall read: Kona Sugar C"onrprrn.y Railroad Preserve This sate is historically sigmiticar3. Historic sites are protected under state Iaw, Violation could result in a $20,000 fine. (Chapter 6E--11, Hai ai`i Revised Statutes) DLNR-SHTIT){S08) 692-8015 Maintenance The landowner is responsible for maintenance of the presen ation easement,access path, signage, vegetation clearing, and general appearance of the preservation area. 40 REFERENCES CITED Aki. H. 1952 Map ofKailua Section, North Iona, Hawaii, Land Titles. Survey and Map by IS. Emerson, Hawaii Tenitorry Survey Map. registered Map No. 1280. Alexander, J. 1855 Map of Hdlualoa 1 & 2, Kona l lawai`i_ I lawai`i Tcrritory Survey Map, Registered Map No. 1450_ Athens,J., T. Reith, and T. Dye 2014 A paleoenvironme.ntal and arebacological model-based age estimate for the colonization of Hawaii iilrt r i�crrr tlraricirrrd�, 79(�): 144w5S. Barrera, W. Jr. 1971 card Srwv 'at Kecrarhou, North Kona. Hawaii. Bishop Musewn Deparxra enral Report Serkc v 71-10. Submitted to Kameliarielia Development Corporation. B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Burtchard, G. C. 1995 Population and Land-use on The Keauhou Coast, the.M aukcr Lands Invaentrarr' SurTivy, Kecaihau, North d otia. Hcnval'r l:slcaml. the r' arratilw. 1?ar•l 1. Submitted to Belt, Collins and Associates and Katnehamoha Tnvcstrnr nt Corporation. l.A.RTI, Honolulu. C:ordy, R. 1981 A Stud),gfPraehistoric Social Change- The Development of Complex Societies in the Hcnvaiian Islands. Academic Press, New York. 1995 Cewr•ral Kona Arcahaeaingical Settlement Patterns. Dcpartmettt of Land and Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Division, Honolulu. 2000 Exalted Sits the C'hiel: Mutual Publishing, Honolulu. Dye, T. '1011 A Nadel-based age estimate for Polynesian colonization of Hawaii. Ar*chaeafc v in Oceania, :130-38. Ellis. W. 1963 Narrative qI'a Toter ofHawaii, or Owhtxhee. Advertiser Publishing, Honolte k. 41, Escott. G., and S. Escott 2018 Archaeological lirivrrrc ty Sara7vv]Reperrr for 5.O Aca"es Locarecl irr H&ualoa } ' Ahnpua'a, Nord)KonaDistriei, Hawaii Island, Hawaii ILWK: (3)7-6-021:017 Fria.f. Prepared Cur East West Realty. SCS Deport 1 71-1, llonoluktt 2020 Archaeological Invemorr.Surrey; Reporifibr 76.121 Acres Located rrr Hi)htcaloa I` Aharplra'a, North Kona Di n-iccf. Hen•vai`i Islranc#, Harvai'f[1 : (3)7-6-021:016- 019]. Prepared for Kona Tbree. I."I-C. SCS Report 2330, Honolulu. Escott, G, and N.Mello 2019 Burial Site Component of-a Burial Treaime ar Plcan.10' r;Burrdal SW 50-10-37- 30593 Localed in HOlriatoa I'Ahrilnra'a, 11orrh Kona Distr-iel, ad 4m--ai'i frkrrref, Hcnrai'r/T K: (3)71-6-021:0171. Prepared for Kona Three, LLC. SCS Report 2137, Honolulu. Google Earth 2013 Gorr le Earth Imaget . Google Earth. Mountain View, Ca. Flarn1witt, H. H., and S. D. Clark 1980 Aa°f{rd�r}raTr, rf`rrlTay.stlarcratdSalvagei�xc°er} rrrc►nstrf.alAcaeGirrter� Pdtacelirr No alarrlTracr a P akwhov, I.a alna, card Kol)etla`alaea, Kona, Hawaii {Eland ARCH Report 14-152 III. Submitted to Pacific Basin Resorts, Inc. Ham rnatt, H.H., and W.H. Folk 1980 Ar-c•hlac>UfFigicaI Sit rve 1, Phase I., Por"tiotr&of Keauhou-.ono Rc>sori, Ketzuhou and 1Kahuh `rr. Kona, ffinvaO Inlaid ARCH Report 14-177 II.1. Submitted to Kamehaarneha Investment Corporation. Hammatt, H.H., W.H. Folk, and D.W. Shideler 1992 rdhaecalr> icdrl.Sara vet Twing anti Excavation ql'u 174-Acre Parcel, Holuuloa, North Kona, Hagvai`i. Report prepared by Cultural Surveys Hawaii for the GanxlDn Corporation. Report an rile at the SHPD Library, Kapolei. Harninatt, H.H., and D.W. Shideler 2007 Letter Report Documenting Archaeolog ccal Sottii• Co)iduc ied Finds. and Their Trecatartent at a Proposed MulXiple-Fatnily Rc wick caul Development, Holualocr Ahuuct'a, Norlh Kona District, Harm`i Island! I Mk (3) 7-6-021:Ol6 por. CS Depart prepared for 1250 Oceanside Partners, LLC, Kailua-Kona. Handy, ES, 1940 The I-Jawai an Plainer, Volume L B.P. Bishop Museum bulletin 161. B.P. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.. 42 Hattn, T. L., S. L. Collins, S. D. Clark. and A. Qii-1 Lod 1986 Moe Kair a Ho`oiln:Haw aiicm:1Ioi-mc t-i-I'rcac tiee:s trt liec5 . K a, I1`cn� Chapter 'V t1_ Artifacts and Manuports from the Keopfi Burial Site. Bishop Museum Departmental Report Serif, 86-1. Submitted to Department of Transportation, Honolulu. Ffaun, A, E., J. D. Henry, J. A. Jimenez, M, A. Kirkenda11, K. Maly, and T. R, W01forth 1998 �11i` Hihs cr Placaczc11l9iricatirtrr {rr rrrrrrra '1acrs f-.Qr•chaecrlcr{zaT 1nlertsive kSt j-w;;m, ,Summ-ar v. vol. 1. 1?HR1 Report t 320-052798. Submitted to County of Hawaii`i, PHRL Hilo. Hommon, R. J. 1986 Social.Evolution in Ancient Hawaii- Itt I.slrarail Scre'ic'!r[, : 4rc:hacolragic'cal 4pproaches to fi!o trr on and Tr•arrTfor mat.ion,edited by P.V. Kirch, pp. 55-88. University Dress, Cambridge. Kahn, J., Rieth, P. Kirch, J. Athens, and.G. Murakami 2014 Re-dating of the Kuli'ou'ou irockshelter, O'ahu. lTawai`i: Location of the first radjocarbon date from the Pacific Islands. .knit-nal of the Po1vnesican ,Socigr. 1_13t 11:67-90, Kelly, _ 1983. Nd}f?dh:r o Inc ia-- Gardens of Kotw, Dept. of Anthropology Report Series 83-2_ Bishop Museum. Honolulu. Kirch, P.V. 2011 When slid the Polynesians settle Hawaii? A rc-view of 150 years of scholarly inquiry and a tentative answer. Hawaiian Ar;chaetdogy, 12:3-26.. Kirch, P.V, and M, McCoy 2007 Reconfiguring the Hawaiian Cultural Sequence: Results of re-dating the Halawa dune site(MO-A 1-3), k1olol<a`i Island. Journal of the Poivneshm Socien, 116:385-406. 2007 Revised late Holocene culture history fojr Molokai Island, Hawaii, Radiocarbon,49(3):1273-1322. Maly. K 1.993 Ka`ao Hu'cae ina Pi `iew ai Xo Ka-Mika, The Heart Stury Stony of}pia-,Viki. Published in Hawaiian, in the newspaper"K aHvlr r o,1Iclw ai'}(}li1o) .lanuary 8, 1914. through Dcceitrbor 6, 1917. Translated by Kepi Maly for Paul H, R.owndahl.Ph.D,. Inc, 43 1996 Historical Documentary Research. In Aruhaeoha `deal iravcrwol-v Survey Proposed Henry Street Extension Road Corridor, by WLilzen, W., T.R. Wolforth, and L.J, Franklin, pp. 9-19. PRI-11 Iteport 1465-092696. Prepared for 1vMaryl Development, Kailua-Kona. PHRI, Hilo. Maly, 1C_ and 0. Mali, 2002 Be ff ahi Mrs`olelo No Ka',iina A Me IUa 'Ghana 0 W aiki'i Ala Waikblr a (K V an a 0 Waimea, Kohaid), A AJe Ka 'Aiwa Mauna:A Collection nf'ficrclidovs and HisjoricalAccounis rtf the Lands and Families of Waiki'i at Wafkploa (TYahnea Rcgion. South Kohala), eruct the Moarrrfah?Lands, IFIaiid ref Haw ai`i (TMK Ovcti,It'1#'Sheer 6-7-01). Kumu Pond Associates, Hilo. McCoy. M. 2005 The development of the Kalaupapa field system, Koloka`i Island, Hawaii. .Iotarnal of the Polynesian Society°, 1 16:339-58- �lojizies, A. 1920 llcniwi'i Nei 128 Years Agri. Edited by W.F. Wilson. New Freedom Press. Honolulu. Mulraoncy, M. S Bickler, M. Allen, and T. Ladefoged -01 1 High-precision dating of colonisation and settlement in. East.Polynesia. Proceedings of fhe National Academe:ref Sciences, I08:E 197-F 194, National Geographic, Topo! 1003 Seantiless IISGS Topographic Alaps on CD-ROA1,, Htm ai'i. National Geographic Holdings, Inc. Washington, D.C. Newman, T. S. 1970 Htai aiian Fishing and Farming on the Aland o f'HawaH A.D. 1778. Department of Lund and Natural Resources, Honolulu. Rieth, Timothy M.. Terry L. I1unt,Carl Lipo.and Janet M. WIlmshur:4t 2011 The 1=3th Century Polynesian Colonization ofHawai`w Island. Journal qf' Archaeological Science 3&2740-2.749, Pukui, M,K., S. Elbert and E. Mookini 1974 Place Names cafHawaii. University of Hawaii Press, Hoitolulcl Sato,H., W. Ikeda, R Paeth, R Smythe, and M. Takehi.ro Jr. 1973 Soil Sury v of 1slatacf cif fl aivali, State of Rawaiii. United States Department of Agriculture Sail Consmation Service. Washington D.C. Schilt, R. 1984 ,.Subsistence and C utaf7ic t it;Bona, Hawvcai`i: An Archtteologicerl Sit Idj,qf floe Kuakini Highw v Realrgraaarew Corridor, Department o1'Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Report prepared for the HawaI1 Depai-tment of Transportation. On file at the SHPD Library_ Kapolei. 44 Tomonari- oggie. M. J. 1990 Ar•chaicol rgiccal Inventory Sur-ve-v of Develofrlrrew Parcel 6 of the Kearrhom Res,ort,�llrrrpma a off�ahalrr'rr, North Kona, Island of Ranieri. Prepared for Belt Collins and Associates. International Archacolo,,ical Research lnslitute, Inc. Honolulu. U.S. Geological Survey 1928 15-Minule Serlc�, Topographic Ililr; Orrrerlpangle Map, USGS Print, Washington, DC.. URI.: hirj.} arrrr.fit uvY.rls .�.ga4� :plv`fraprrrrrrri s";- '{Vancouver, G. 1967 A Voi-rrgc-ol'Discoveri-to the North Pacl f v Ocean, and Around the World. Robinson and Ldwards. London. Waihona `Aina 1014 Mahele online database, www_waihotia.com. Wilkes, C. 1970 Ncar•ratim o/the Urtated States Explor'hkg Expedif on Dnrirrg the Yc'ar► 1938-M412. Vols. 1-5 and Atlas. Lea & Blanchard. Philadelphia. ilmhurst, J.,T. Hunt,C, L.ipo, and A. Anderson 201 la High-precision radiocarbon dating shows recent and rapid colonization of East Polynesia. Proceedings o0he.ha ionalAcade}rat.-of Sciences. 108:1815-20. 201 lb Reply to Mulrooney et al.: Accepting lower precision radiocarbon dates results in longer colonization chronologies for East Polynesia. Proceedings gf'the Mcational Acadeniv ol'Sciences. 108:E 195. Wolfe, E.W., and J. ]cads 1996 Geological Map of the Island of Hawai-i_ U.S.G,S. Miscellaneous Investigations Series. Dopartmem of the Interior, Washington, D.G. 45 APPENDIX A: SHE'D AIS APPROVAL LETTER 46 t%!D V.Mill iaww 11"M C ul"tu, I rlo -WW STATE OF HAW Al I I d-1 HI DEPARTMENT OF LAND ANFIDINATV14W,RESOURCIF-S W SIA1 L IUSkOkk-PRIESILIRNWIJOIN DO.LSLON KAKLU 11 JL%VA BILAi LNU &0 1 KANIOULA 13 LVD.STL 555 KAruLrL HAW A13 IN REPLY REFER TO 10), Lug Nil, 20 18,1)1123 IN I KLI12-11jan-L"Ac-Su V1 Da,-No.I W5SNO5 I III0.I lal4-ZI I'L Q6NI Archaeology Email. D-ji,Mr.Vieelock: SUBJECT: Cb a pte r 6 F-4 ffl%lorlc Prc�ii-o tion Review- Archeo"I"I lnvrntory-Suivc-} off-Al Aenp-;in Haluolo-i 11161usloa I st Ahupus'j,North Nana DLs trict,hlan(l of I tz-A al-i TIN IKs(3)7-6-02 1 iO 17 par. This IdLvr ",ides the SLOte HislaTic Pirsurvatian Division's ISAPE),$) review of 111C revis6d "Oil RAILA JrrJkyd,alogical fnivnimy Aemwl- RcporV,feyr 3.0 Aemy LOC-atm m floivalpa ff.Ouplia'a. NortIf Keina. rfalk-,70 154NId, U011-41''O JTUK: rly O"'K.Citt land Em-*tl,m6wa MILY 20119 kcVisionli w the 11;WT1 wcn; ruji-Lested 5,iq email on May 13,2018 (Susan Lebo [SIIPT)j to(sicnin Escott[Sewitifle Umsuham 1--rrvices.Inc_ ISCSfl1 and S11PDree6ved the revised report on May 18.2017- SCS c-priducted the w1mcaloutcal hw-mToi3r iLIITCV(AISI ar rho T. qLIe%T of the landowner.Kona Time.LLC.The ,Vg%vas conducted in suppovi k,.I'j 021(1111i 411 IIIJ111ii 11VIIIIiI.;11)1114caiion for proposed OeLLIopnwril urille property. The AIS covcre4i a 5.0-acre portion of the 3fl.L;lII-LIC%PDrLL:I. fir Fi%Adx%-Ork r1clud%:d LI II?IPI.podcsteian siuvev of tiv entircTiMimi.urea,(7jmuwW vjLdhiliiy wa4 hair Ill Ir,lnr.SU17WITI`ILL: WA,C0IjdLILIVLLLI,.Wk,Mj rCLitLllrVb, The AIS dbftLak'fited ILM1121111ty-LIV4WWIv WcafiFxil hi.,mric properlirg LTullbhe 1).The 5iw,Rinclude a pr&-And?orearlv pum-Corilaur lawa lubc burial, pre- ivwkbr t�jrk, post-Coiir.ici. auisruhu"I zcmwris, "d PD.La-c'unlarl %,.alls and CW.IkD,-wTC,.; With LIgIjCILIIIJrC 1111116'ff rjlMdlillL.A10.1[Ni,I4';in1ac.1rpiIronahcrn)- Table I SLLIII]112J'y OI'SiW5 DO-IMMAIed fil AIS SlteN'5040-37- Age 30591 Aocultural PONI-COW.10 3tL2- R-,1111,lild alld Ekynl i.i il;[�u ri-i IiIL4;xic 3M93 LiVa'l lih,"-' H116:11 pelt to Fariv PoqT-Cnnu,..i lill-IrICN N4,Mk:1lIIlL1r I'IY--11)PI N14 LIT112LI 30595 Rock,Wall I Raiichkn2__ 30596 Possible Hearth Foid PMrranon 30597 Ruck Wall RaLLCftia I iis-lijil'! 30598 Ruck Wall ID t'C'SI-COntaci 301199 Platfurni&.ETwlo%ure RAI 1-::A rl U L-I-JL7 1111111 1 c;;,Tic MMOO Tcrrwe 4 rrullurr I i,-.-I ic mww -Rockwall 1�111,:ALL'-' 30ho., Encleskliv R�111,-,irw 1 .1060.3 F.n c I kiti LLTr I Ruliv�in 6^Apric I I I Iff.: ik-,mc 47 M-.W'hcoilaoek ,Mny31.,.R1A emG into iO-lY-37 I'muctlme t h, ]OFSI]S �:�4lTmll Rnach,: _ r. . =t,•ria.t 30C+1?F1 ilLIedl wiR IlpnFhl 306M / IL 61LY fal C ex A muF tJIr lfll lli Lielunaec Uvelhep rrxt St, I 1�J0/{�6,09y Faclamute G''.•. NOW I VIl"I.,f'rIN4i :5. _., ....I= JY:4 :;1.1!:'.1. 3[1811 y�,..,,ulttunl C �., . 1 Jrtt.112 � C.;h'i Illt Et,=1u�1�1rfl7p I :..-_ T11e 22 F,t WEB 3,.10.., 4.;k,n, 1: r H'S.1r `,'1 3 714.6�+' _ _ 4�rFt4£,nFl I� ti.!' •.^'t 1 I',YI'f I`\:TT-1 '.l.Y'.:i.. Y6M-k4 :1 a9 1111,1:`r 1 -°,.•.1,Y.I'..r. 1. '..L ,n1'nded r,-n.i r4..41,,,r. a. I :-11'.. 'c-.,h,,rY111) Y►'i4 a-�c- •. nri;-J,fz'11FILT:..Tr,•n.-:. n 1,..,. r ,--n-, -n_cil fi,r. n f7r.r'n. .,,, .Ir,•, .bill be 0 at]Frrll 1n t4 1-,J1 Tv-,i7arl P ,r 1: - - ::r: :a' , -Osi :u4:1 iJr 3'r�•: ,yt,.,; ib,:,�� h s.'.;.i:Lr.t-I.._,.-: . :. .. -r•,id'oo. fr'tv!m,annn r.n rheir spr.,,l '. Hx9eJ dm eFFr riarF�'e 19Y Srmnei. 1 ii.l' .tulwr„'Ir:i ql 14"oNftt,wp* I48t,e1K+l .:,r Skr,1t� MID CE„7-ws with the silmificuwx and tmatm,ni :•,:t'r mcrdatk n, The report meets be rh`+,tAftmwtrr, v%Nitled to HAK 111-216-5. The mpom Is ampled, I'WW Send two Iiii" a7praelr of i[he document,cleari4•n ked FINAL al@w wsih a copy al this review krbea and a irm-maanhabie FIEF v,s►itra W the V.406,1 SITYD i3trNt.,sttrnfiuth,SFfrf :."T As stipdmd in HIAR 413-284-7. %ta SifFil wmfncirm shot a rmiewc %ill rcmAt m°'t Tow with gmcd-qm rnitigGltutrn crmmitracnta .thrn dea411ai rriaig wri l,lane dual l be Ylcvclopl;,1 F,r SHFV r1:v'iow arhd axc}rta=pzar ty,pet«joet h[ttuftitrft•Tire ®pot,mirIgAllr,rp;;Y,rvTGltrrwnrr vc,)f"cr-.ihln-,aW afrhwdpgW rrmlm ortog Ih,awwK W HAR ¢13-284-1, SHN) tuck, furwarti to r clviue n huhd WeAftissnt MAU Ifrs Stye 70543, an atchw olFy cart pecserrawa plkn arerLny Lhe mgasrrruul%r1; :I kR I 1-''144 iur w LhAWm#6" r�„riq>tr'ttgl plrtm taasatd tha ragotrafnccots of HA Cx$I s-:zila �-..,r;, rn '.. r.rt�1':f't... �uli�S?F, ti#1 Piz Nhat1 pmIA,the Cmn"wtic h um ofrhx ha.rCkrcWr.4.Yn:_.�Lr;,rrrs ri=.i1 tdl pr[5crraatan t ili[) floe rrch "110ptdul monitoring ptM and the irh=rti prtsm,jIva aril I:r: rxid, =uIent tarasum hav'E been 6nplrm ented.mid 1y1r Pertdt Fryplimiian hak b,nmh revimecl,am 7 M91V i 0::u1.:a ma}mac. r1cr,&c 1=c>iawl SM IWADMmxalc 41 IluWl Q33-'b3l ar r,f�cgn f' h.,c mr,� pc;.,,as aw m beats mprdifrg h6la lemn Aloha, s.w_.t A-Los u,.PhD AFLhAtOlugy}kmhch thief I:c fibw 48 or Or LAN D C()1,1 KT RF- A R SYS I'LM K L L I:i b� ."I Li I I I TG-. A"yn P.cu� �i,7 �,�nd ( :o rr,mij n i1v 1),. 1 np iT�c, t 1.�I�Ice (-I I- z, -,L -I 19,)(" K:Ilo olL: St , Suita 102 Nd Vwk Hilo. I lawai'i 967-20 [)EBi�N. TOMONO TITLE OF DOS I.IMENT AFFORDABLY HOUSIM. A(eRITNIFN F PARTIES TO DOCUMFNT: COUNTY: M.-NTY QF HAl;V:%l'L mim 1pll CL rpci-iAll)i K r,lu ',,I S LI JtEL 1; 111.-), 11 96720 DEVELOPER' Kor,�i TIIL�:L- HaLA;J,I-1 is 101 1-1uaIklai S trect,Hilo, H,i I L 1 96 720 A ffects T M K(3) 7-6-021:016 and (3) 7-6-021:017 Document contains pages. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGRLLX ENT 1 his Afk)rdabL HoU g Agreement (`AA iccrnent l is maple and vt`footive this Vlh day. VIM C,f 161#')_VI !vM 20LI'(die"Effective Dale").by and bctwoun KU'V_A 'I TREE L LC:. i. 1 nv;li 1 lirritt ct,mlipany, (the°`17evOop, r").NV40,L: placti of FL 171c:'s wid rn.:il:riL address in tic State of llawmlici is 101 Hualalai Street. Hilo. i:awai`i 1`67'2:G. ar.d fic CUU.� l 1' IF J J;1 1'M rS 1y1 mmtnmcllafll corporation vl the Slate of 1Hav-'a1 !, [tlt� i,ti'}lllli4•' `,I_ `.:1 I10i? e 131'11.LAP, plaLtic c t bus1Ir,css and mailirlg address is 25 Aupuni Stree(, i I lo, 1-1awaVi 96720. RECITALS `,4 H� A RFS. :Fe I),-veloper proposes to develop 454 residential its on a.Vr&xwlrat:E'v 08.8.kr ;rcr{=s o, real property located at I l t ialoa,North Kona, Island, (u..V.MP,., and Siailc of Ha.iwai`i t ul '1'.-x Mar l�,Lv E TMK's Nos, (3)7-6-021:016 and (3) 7-6- 021;017, ht 1yz:'t 41t4r c:afled the"Ko.iia Thre.l_ Pro jtcC' and nwre particularly described in Exhibit A atlachmi .�ie: cto and made a part of; aTld WHEREAS, the 17eve(oper proposes to satisfy the Dona Three Project affordable housing requirements, along with additional regtlirearlenits fir Csarnlon Corp. ("Original Project Developer")through tho acgxiiwirion ++I-a fordable housing credit`s in accordance with leawai'i County ("'ode Soc't ion I I-Y a 1(: : arid WHFREAS,on Demni,)cr 1.3, 1983,the ti4o' I and 1.1se.Corn,mi:4sion ("MJC") of the State of Hawaii arrlended the AericulturzJ Land I. L-�t District Fiotlndary into the l_irban Land Use District Boundery of appro-ciriately 173.66 ; prrtp, r#.ti, ul,icll includmi the Kona Three Project,subject to C ondi.Inn "A",wl ich prm-kicd for the "cl-elonn7wrtt otaffordablc housing as follows: 1. Pell',Ionc7 Ji:dl provide housing opportunitic.: t<_-r 1.1%v and rll �4lL:r.�:c rocs r�,c :,- mltsprlilrloassign-mi n7-1 arttii('I'Thg- (k,Nrt'pl. by %v-aa cd ST7C3rS ig or c7a^51E'II]Fr7" 3ti $ LIrF'I :%') Its ll} rc'til. kll '.1-e 1i171�C� 1 1Y71' Ill', ti 5' i::t '.c.'15� �.i5r sale. can. a pr JL;vL:iLi;_l l7t ., .ui iL:,,-tWn(;,oul)Um:rttoll Willi ei-Lhcr Vf 1 olk C:iu Hav aii ,At,tllc,r iv ,,!- :.hc.' Ccvinry a i`l:lril :ai i.. ten peraenr 00`) of the lot nr house'--, and lnl ;r, tv. k1L-,elor-, i or ilia .sallject property',to resldwnrs of rll; S:at.0 of f lay ,_i`1 ,^,1- low an; rlsnkraw llwiiiy income as deter'lrlin:,J ')v '.3=e Hav4i Hcnising Aa.'V::rI iry orcoui.ty c't l7awati`i from lime to time. 'Tire I:rcrt{°r�:rri:al ktls car hoilses Z!id lots Shall bL for.sale at pr;ccs noT excecdinp. ;rice; that enande. 3t1ch purchasers to alLnd1fv 1'rrr rind obtain SfMt Act 105 ar Hula 11++1ae) or RAer.11y insured or assisted '-Jnr ,,-.J l.t; (i.r., F1(A ion 243) Program) iutead�,,d to znLDUMELt hUnleOWllcrll.lils b)- 11 PtV 11WL1LTdt.C-111;, 11W families Wf-1ERPAS, cln Islay 15, 1 994, t IiaTl 'G 0JV.i111U 01 diri-vi c e 94-23 became effective, rttnending the lairs froth Unplannl d (U)to S ir1._le T.,A;lill I�.4°�icicwntial (RS-15) and Ml ulripi: 1=an,,illy Residential (F-IM-51 forth;' i'icn T'.-1:< 1tir,'�. # �1 6-021;004,(3)7-6- 021 �00911WOUL,111 0l �,larld 7-6-0-21:01`+ .li,,ouae.lt 'i" , ,a1'jcct try t nr%i.on"P,which provid for the ilevuksp ent cif aJfoT-Jahlc hous!.l , as lC°11ti7.v,. J. Housing opportunities for Havaii dJl 1,Lf pr-ovidV-d JU accardanec with the coridifion imposed h,-,:h C, Sian- Lind I.Ne i n ni i Fz:t a i i Yh z2 n i irn her o I'unit 1, 1111, 1 n;-i n rli i- I n ,%.4,1 c I- T 1) r(-. -.C, prov 1 6cd wha. 1 meet vvit]i th,; a�-)proval o Ctllti H a%k a:I ill I.%. WHP,RE.AS,the 0riFJra[ f)LVc1cpx�(;vclored and sold two hued and fifteen(215) units vyiinlin th original pro,:%;ci arL w �A 173 66 acrcs, and provided no affordable housing U11 I t" in L h Is di, Q I(IF,M e nt p ba.,�U I a n t I NVTIERE.,'�S, 1.hc D-vcloper pr4-,pos4, LLiA t11,,; Koil.A Three Project will consist of foor- hll-ldl�Li ui)d fifty (450) residential units on appi tely 68.836 acres;and %V1 I L-RLAS,Chapter 11, HCC, Section I I-5(a)(7) provides that it h 0 a n 6td aF I U 150L!4ALI,-' 1VkJUi1k;:1-LL;J!kS �Ali k"; by ubtahiiilg LAccsS L;rCdits fr,uni anofli�,r dtvtE011c!F 13 I J I—13;11 f;L�i fill �J-1 k S WHERE the OHCD has con fi rm"'d I Wi I I 15-- P.�s q to c,on s e nt to such a j) s:,i��n rner.i o x=ss h ous i rig cred i is for th e 1-1-v t I i L:r'L, :taerlded purpnx-.-, Mid WI I FR R A S. di e Dev e I Dper Iles confirmed its w i I 1-111 gness to comply w L'J') Ills: °L:I I 1)0:,C,01t rcquiyement -imposed by the Sta.ct Land Uci.iiidar.y ?1m,-ridrm:ra I�C7.--1 tl 111 E rd i�1 a-1 C'e 4(-r 11-e e n,i re PFA)pe Ft Y C(-.l-.4 I s,t El t-. o-:�Rp r ro%,1.m-LV,§.V I T- `lf-1 4,111A.V1M4 tilt f-,}ra c3lrnb1n(L!11 L-1tal Lwl"", :Allc. \VHERFrr",S, (J-.aptcr 11, Article I of the Hwvvai'L ('01!ni, to Afforl--Ne Housing, Poficy, xI.iili ri/cq le Mayo]., tfie ( 11f ic c- 1 Hoo�wP ati 1 '0-1L1:IIF11V Deve I n P rri en t C)T IC F) r Ci e i r d iu Iv a u d i v r'L/ed to I[IV--7LIS dle Devek, t) pol.f,-,I I i I o n C I'll a L k, L i nali on of the 3pti&AS fOr Sat9�fdJk?Fl -aftht LL 101 L'LLb I Lf housing requii,emerriS Coikiaty Code Section 11-5; and NOW,THEREFORE, in c o eration of the mutual covenants In this Agrze i ne-n t! rand pursuant to Chapter 11,Article I (Aff.ordab I e I fousing)of the Hawaii County Code ("Chapter 17),the,parties hereby 3greea� follaws: I The Developer hall provide proof amd OHCD shall verify cx�css crcdlts are vaHd. Upon il,c closing of the Developer's purchase of the 67 excess hou�lm,; cred'A-, v.-hicb are verify---d by OHCD, the DevOopor will, be (-ntitled to u,,e said howdne �-Lddils to satisfy 1he afl-oiidabh,housfi,lg requ;i-emulits Ful Clic enCL! project inc,ludinF, Gamlon Or'Vi]11 al Dcvc1;,)prnQn1 Projccl of 215 units and Ow Koiia Three 1'ro'ji�x� consisLing of a maximum of 4-70 residential uia_f&":�ots, p,i,sj�-int tho following- HCC, Chapter 11,Article 1 (Afford ab I e Housing P o 1:L 2. Upon the closing nl`the Devel(:,per's purchase of ih;: 67 excess housing eredits,a full Release ofihis Agreement and any ether appropriate documenlation reasonably required by t}rc parties related it) the sa(-LA'sic:titM of the affordable houslug reclurt-emerLis r'or this 450 rt:s clen ial Urtit..Korta Three PrDjei r shall be executed by the parlies hereto and r--corded by the Developer wish the Bureau ofConve anccs,or with the.Land Court of tlic Stir. ofHa�.vaii, as applicable,with Dv -, tuper payh-IL�all c as#s of recerdalion. 3- In that evlwnt the Developer builds more than 450 residential units, Developer shall t-bo in the rewired credits to satisfy the affordable housing rNuirement for the additional units. 4. This A.frreerncra surcr=c:dcs all otll r ;ls-7:� -FWPt iind understandings +•1<1.1 :or%vrIten, lll.;(le o.. c.c Ztr1,71 r,l:fn=.,rlsly herewith bx tho oarties on the �tjbieotmatter hereef. l ho, gro"isions A'-[r Cnlentlrnty not I:c 1!wdilICJ, Lsl_CVCd, �11' LI1-171z,Cd „11011ler written instruir ent e.xe,utw d I)v th4 :),-ii 2. This A reemew hill r ill wi;h ;lie kiici r.;cl sh,-3H Le bIndit7 4 upLl: and imire to the henul-11 oftlie: pal fIcs Is.:t;to, aii4 ILL rtit rc: J)LW:i.ti ;uir.L.La I , arld r4ti.,i.,f; . This. Agreetnent shall be rcc o,-I1 d :l�'.Jx7st the title is tic Affordable 11c,usin9 Site by the Deweloper at thi: BUrc>att c31 t."t.,.ve ances car `'•'iil the Land Cc, of the,Slate of Hawaii as applicable,within; tllir .: ;.}li l day :rrtcr hcing flllly cxeti,itw!J the parties. The parties tc-iak tt str.'l, ric]V_lris and execute do .irl,,ents as arc n�aq nablw n'.0 ArY l;> et 'tXAAante:x. c:rl-r-)- 4?V1 111.zt ill len, ti F 1-:e'iiis� ili(`illi, Air°ecntient a!un�44'itlt ar�y c;t};er al?[lri ?ri�LtC :�,I�u-ue-�i:ttirtl. 3. `fat:cc s. All Notices to b:e given purst.tan`to this_,InLL crrx-r:' si .iH L%' it; vv[-11,11? :117!E sh;I'I be .:Ir. .,tt:d gilvtn when mailed by (--rT1ili�4l _+r.I r.4LJ-iAra-z',d Itt lsl, r l.krtr r ilrt nt[ueAe•d,t0 1tiLL [aortic.: Hereto al the.adJresscs sat „trtls I.ti I . o to ,.ucl- oL[r_r plac.o a, a party r7av tri i,7 rime to tin^ . V�TlTir1Q. To the C riunly: Housing ,Adivinistralor Offiire.o' I lousing and C:rsrnn7iriity L)t+ ':4oi}rr.rr.i 1''c40 Kino'oIc Street, SaI(c. 102 11), Hawat: ' 96720 To the L)taveltij)el-: 101 11u.a6rtl yi Sir ei 1111.1. IT=-wai;i �-6 1(} AYFN: RO I LtT;d I I I gaMc 'rtit ow-F) aro 0e [IM.,, "UY 1101iCC- U]'4-CM hk:.I-Curi,J1fr. any [Uilhe- Ljl' 4JJI-VL piciiL L:L:!"I: L I' it'n r ..S�:s tc v]:1,1 L �ul)�,i:- cornjnuiiiG�aions siial-' be sent. 4, The Developci if applicable, that L 11 LakQ a11 actions necessary to effect amendment of this Agruc;inenl aw may hL; ,.i with aineadments Lo HCC Chapter I 1 17'1 �!I M 11[11 i Ca b I e r L I J r'3, rCr.U I ,t i Procedures, rulings, or other official Niatemcnis pQri.,,.1ning Lo Ch-ape i I L 5- This iwaruni�iit rna-v be cxecuted in tv,(° oi-inurc ?-uiki vft n alt CJUE)tCTPdI-LS have btvn cxz cuted, i:ad, koimt.:j pm i dnth hC Lill !.-,[4211-al but when assonibIcd shall c(,.l-,,Jtute orL;and the `alit; inszrljir -n- aiA 01Ll"! the J'orQP and effect as though al' of flic 5inriacor-:-,'; kq,i L:xccuitd a Siilj,: nal'irc page- Any uiitxtcuted dijpll:�111e Vnly be 011-dttCd J101T] 111t original douurnevr- 6. The partie.3 a2ree .bat no txirl.v shall b,2 11L-121-1L4i (k' 11L Lilo Agreement, alld fUA11C1'LhA Ili tilt uvuis�111is Agj'4LIRLJIL 11 i'Vcl ti:011A'LACd 1. a court of law, such court �[.all iial cC)t.-MrL]U ',hi--. Agrwvrncsl cr pr,)visions of this Agroe.mem qymnst ring'pmtL'a; th(- driffe-r of this Agre'cjivpl. 7. This agreement shall he rc�otded +, iih the Sixx of lla5'vafl Bureau of Conveyances, and a true acid correct c shall b.: P.To-vl"-JjCr1 to the County of li a).v ai i 0 M ce of Housing&Community De ve lc%p inent w ith I n 30 days- 8. This Agreement shall be governed and wnstrued in accordance with The laws of the ThIr4 Circuit Court of the State of Hawaii, [THE RE,MArNDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS III WITNESS % I-IEREOP,the parties hereto have executed-Iris Ak'_r tiL r' -As c'i Ehe day and year first written above. DEVELOPER: Kma Three LL C_ l3ti' , Name: I (_i, x. 11:71715 Title: 1'reamj1-tr cd '11—ma I h=ce I I A' artd N r of OIP. i-,1..C'_ a H.: Iiiii ted !i b.Ii[} urampany and mtrriher i,1'Kona Thret J,1,C Crate: COUNTY: COUNTY OF I[AW All. a municipal coi�anr c4i ti Stt#c Df I!Liwai`i 1' 11�: anag�n rye a 5aasaa, i�,, ltua'� . I l.oti irsa �STh:r VATator Date: 11 APPROVED AS TO FORM A�TD LEGAI,ITY. Deputy Corp«ratifm C oun'.el 1 / -7 D -� Date: STATE OF HAWAI`I } SS. COITNTY OF HAWAYI On this I Oth day ofJanuaU,2022, before me pmor lly appeared LEE E, LORD, to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he is the Managing Director of the County ofHawai`i, a municipal corporation of the State ofHawdi`i, that the foregoing instnirnent was signed on behalf of the: County of Hawa `i by authority given to said mayor of the County ofHawni`i by Sections 5-1.3 and 13-13 of the County Charter, County of Hawaii (2018), as amended, and assigned by the Mayor to the Managing Director pursuant to Section 5- l.3(h) of the Co-onty Charter; and said LEE 1 . LORD acknowledged said inst-nu-nent to be the free act and deed of said County of Hawaii. - ' _ Print or Typc.&aie Notary Public, State(ifHawai`i 4 My Col- rm9sion Expires: 041!01,122 NOTARY CER1111 CAT'1UN }uc, LD;ilc, i_lr lij;'2 No. of Pages: 7 Notary Name, AMBER K.S. KEPOO _ Third Circuit Affordable Hous Lag Doc- Description: A regiment _ f ! - I10{22 `'F Ir�f rfEl�l6k}':'•4� Notary Signature Date STATE y 7 �+��r /OFrY )SS'. y NAN ■ On 1 e,� aA 1-1 , before me appeared 6-Wi i fianr& to personally known, ti, 1ho. being by me duty sworn,did say that_-. Int, is the Y ta.,�0,_f_ of KONA TnFF LLC;that the instrument was signed ort behalf of lit)1\;% l E 1 R I-!- I l X' 1). ';u1hnri1y of its member(s); and acknowledged said instrument to be the fol ` Debra N.Tomono }�6k `•-....Vj M C0111"Iissiorke ices: �xa�Re �. 14 1' "L" Y P fiber 17s 2022 N IAlltY C-E RTWICATI[]N Doc. Da-tc: (},. M No. of Pages, N:itsry N;:mti: Debra N.Tomono -- - - Doc E'>r4c~iplia ai= AFFORDARLE � C ii;i f-to 021:016 and (3) {-6--0 1:01? rf Notary Signature I)a,LC- - ---- - = - i p�iTlQhl;October 17r 2022 °�.. EXIII.Bil'A VA I LIMP A- A 11 i.Obi '3Ft-t.Q I',A ld �1,.i I:w c?!&LC laad;s)dlcw7;K-A in I'Dd cu-,mmd by rOy,�• 1Qx-nl Nmnb4T 44)5, F.ar-3 C. rin;--,op) Awij-:! Nmu,�-rx 'M% App-np. 43 in Vi.!7,liv Kmj*imwa ivid H Lli-Flq'Y;-- $;T;L 3569W fO.n P M,-=) siftcwt, jy4kG still lri,at A( . v--, f Nl"h V.OYA� D;land LLA C.Oupl� of lkwZ31,Sialf,of Pawwi,briw LOT 2,If.'C'M bi)LVA-6!11141 Rc�unlng Ul ffiE 161,th.WCO(Antift of z.ir,pEltel 6f Lllyd,bei-og FLI in tlle nrjfthlves,,4xmer-3: is(steam]armi olrmg ttt milmmmmiy sad,,or Fawau ROV6.F.A.P Rc-w- ;I llr;�Jc-1 NA 11A-W-O, the toordica" of 5t�&, Es ipLl Of kg3jlaine Ti:lLrTw,, I-Q Tri.wipWiuR Swkm 'KA4 1W, L<:D& 9,2317.13 F=: WUdL 1,11c il- 1111, Iruc sokrb: 521 22' M S5.69 fW 434 i'-I hvmi BrIt Itc-mal,F.A.P.RnuZt I I Proitel Nf; I iA-0 Or �sr 30 'JIL75 1"t "I 4-V 35.V frt�c A z;mac; 4. 154' 1 V 197M f4Cd bI&M LAftjt; fi,-o-1 goag the imauxiej of Royo NT= 4475. UWA Commmien Award 7M, Ajia= 43 LzF gw"Mou; 6. Isse is, 17-97 feN mlcng mmq 7- 311- 55! 11997 feet aiDu it— tw,%6a6r of Rtyl limes l 4475, IA,4 0QE1tlRrliuiou Awatd 7713,Apafta 43 40 V kwfim Kamigrnafu (W 2-& 9- 3A' IT 15' 14116 ren NIMJE sm-m; Tkutic&Tccg fat 14 (Sv=m)fc3T the=1 tkyitica (13) cgwq M- tht&W mimul aftd d1m.0m be�b�: U, w 55, 54AS T-t; 12. 6r 0 16.70 feet; 11. 46' 390 13 437 fc e C', id. 51' tlG' 8331 15. w al' 139A4 lbeh 16, 51, 2Y 175.76 f'esl, 17, f++6" 3Z 9149 fccL, It W 49r [7046 ly. 3.a' 55r 247.57 16a; 20_ 374 21' IU6. ru-04 21. 31' 21! 3V 425,56 fact; Thence ally Lnt 15(Sham.)far mh&mxt trrt(lft)vnumc% kilt dir ct&;L-kAr,u d-LCZ fSCP.s 6evng. 22. NO 01 57.76. feet: 23, 66' 24' 13$_13 facr-; 24. 44' 61' 114.46 ruc€; 25. 67' 41' 13 Lm t=4 2& 1011, 13, 107.13 face; 217, 69' 30' 139.97 fce 2.1i. 31' 417 114-38 fiat; 29. 88° 52' 6CA red; 30, 114' 04' 60,71 iaee: 31, 77' 29, 132,01 fc to thr point of bcglrurinp wS rar,.tminh8 en Kc-a of 37-W aerate mnmc crr Ims. ;[�[ TF�f n lUl"f'Id F,.•.�,,r::ti -C-, T" T" M'd 7' ftr_ yti_Jwzti Lad �tLity pure^,, 2& .ia Me: -+lt%A tF 4, F2i, -A :e.� •' I, Ilse Ri 20au of ri,-,nnx-;t:fthe ,em:en'Fizvai 'n '�e� 1i'.�;4ifor sr: n, I IR;Fi':TI)lhc,tetntts rt�cl r' 0_T I-A f L-A SAU"-wo I iA Y k-Jc f,-+-!.1.4r t tx 0'J0 pllvx,at[40juaJoa isk and 9nd,North Aand and Cbunw cif Hwi i.8.we C)f Kuvimi. 23-ang-,,.n rrv)ns of RD;-d I rVxri!.3217, Lj i K3 Ccii i Ai ia,wco Awi�j d;5663 b Jchn P.M unn-,and 7713.Apana 4-4 to V. Kam"Mu. Bap*-In,9 8',an an 91 e m'thr P I.ts"Mly bwndary ol ftns�PDS1 Cf bM, bEA pq also the N W1 hv-,-_-s ru ly w mar of Lek I&G.I Gi U ii%s ab div.Flkx i wid at Olt M it WaslfmJy bcuadarya f Lot I A-!.Me cmdha�es ef 56d poirA of bVinFing inferred to Govemmant Sun-ey TriangruWon SiAim'KAILUA(WRTH 1AER1DIAJ%1j'b&.0 9='1, -0,-,0 1!.6�J7.CT 1z.-It Easi aW rLm Ing by azkmutim measiAril iu--;,Suu.ti 1- 39, ill I T 2-,1 61 fE_LL Zlf tq LEI _C_,I 0, Zti I. 'm I YJ. � S U._ k_� -7 T t' f 7,cl P3ta-fl 4475, Land Comfnbsk3n Aw,, d 717.3. Nana to V, Kan 4�r aki to a poifr, 1,,i mej f� bv �A:ibg Lot L',Stf ear-i (U-uwy cl H:&vafi) -.oiva-Da DFam 33-w:ay;ar.:f wD.rq Fi M CWIJ-diwdon ft r=itiri ow u I R12ya Paluit 21.4 7 r Av;n rd 7 • 43 to V. K. ,M�x 2. 3. 9E., 5 0, 277 37 ;7,c,lr-. �Vjj-jj LOT I-A 4, 74' W 132,84 fad[to a pdnt S. 107* W K73 (PrA b a pokC 6- 9a, 5w 191.87 rw t6 il T. 1A, it 98.T3 rc;A,-I;� A. 80' 071 9. N, 30, L PL)m: is 831 2T f i,r ri F 11. 64' W 1a1,72 r m- 1 L .i ThwcDp for IN nrM thr*3) f-Ar,-.,Vir-g gem-,q LO?4(Strean, CJ Fzv4,�Il (Hormhaa Sand Dralrtapmy�7 12. 211, 2U 3V 70A ILW aloe?U'�t,wro ;cw ol Lalvd Av?wd 77'13, A7--n2, 43 10 V. to a PoIr". 13, AT, 21' '27,12 Eio cc tn`:id Fatmt14 75. Lai,J C*Mfi%L--[on Awai 11 7 7 13. Aoaq-3 43 �a V. Kam�tmalu aml Pa!ent D217. ��l Ai,,,Ad rH3-1)to J(913 I P.IVU-0-n I v MAQ tFlet Ejv�o the re'raircle's_,,RCVO:Patirl r'..4?5, 1,3FO 1-1,f 7-1 V Y;C-,)tu-cL(i PA.uivi 13a T7,av,o,f.-r lh,3 nml fq!,.(IO) fohrwmig-,Inn7 Lvj 14 (r`-,vmi4:Lf (H,-.F5FM''41 R,99,1 ar,ti :iVr.,j [!if- i�N-ialrdt-r�4 F.tml 447� trlW Av.-,@rc 7-1,13.ADarw e.31oV himiL-inaj; 4v 140M feet W 2 POTI t� C-, 246' 3 Z 8741 (00t 10 a PDIM )-il I r',:y 170,04 f a.L,-,lz+a PC-..nt, 256 Olf, 140.06 fixit,,;a fx.ifil. 2�I foat to a FQ4.w: 20. "91 Yy 104-41 feet b 4 P(Afl-I 2 rf 4 "1=6 7hLWAS ASSOCAMS Lw SrrftLywz- 71r,1,7 N VW-,r&4 Sfi 21. 244l 49' 63.22 teig to at P*t; 22 77V 55' 33.94 Wfnap&C 23, ?92' 36 .57 O to a po'rrg; 24- 276' 5�V -QW9Zr NO to A ON; W4.. 021 65.41 fetit slcma LrA 2-A and-a-':irq Rgyal Paten; 4,t75 t.a.-J OP I Ti 104 bf; Award 7713,AP111-0 4" 11) V. k% polflt'. 26. 21' 41' 50" 8$0 reSt alarxi L-ot 2-C a7:c Royal P�Ient 44 rh I Ti-A N.-Y,(! Apona L3 LL) V. K", tc, a P.Ny": 27. M- 9' 87 20" 2()-0 -at m I --)ci o!2 r o-A iih .j., Ow rc'ivii)d,�,r,f Royal 'Q 17, E4j:�I ' o L3i w;s cri �-'!. Awrkr(1 vE1bV IQ john P,kAir�r,t4- D pc.ir.tl 2a, 5' 07' 20' 44,E* feel Q'*Tkg I Ot�!-C area edc-"�the Fermi-INN Of Roval PMn; s"17, Lzi,,d C-orrrri-,3 on A-,;ar�'W�D loluh'n P.Moo,to SpOiLit; 2or ma° 00, �.72 Pl:^' I Ot 12 arid Aimfl 11B fMai,"fl of Agana 43 to%'. 30. 3" (i2 2�S.06 �L4 IQ I.jpzici. 31, 77, 1�e 20-55 feel,2 rT q Lct 10 1,-1 a po-t; 32. 4' W 2,V-73 feet au: Ld 1 Onrld L-Ot I)[a ij p rum it. 33, 34" OZ 157.Of) If--01 blang Lot I-A-3 b�pclfn ti ;3A r 337' W v17,60 N ril,L;kxv UA LA t-AN-2 end 1-c'-I-A--I 'c; 12:ij-x A::ob uiji:l ning and W iLil.Q.Liq iL11-;u :ri u 21�.7-1i�Acxesl 6UEJEC F. F-ONEVER Y Gjvs,-b Ojta:.,ridnc-d to be CASIde the 0.216 amival 1.7r). V-,6,Y, r.,han*9 11,-,rd:�rea5sof Marnnusl C'1031C-G f-JOd YI'J! LTi.1:1AJU 11jar3 I lcuL or Wthdrafnogo czrui a 1"s Dian I square rae,'-3 or 4 VIES P-110111111S /-.SSO'X.r'159 -LO-'dSG:vcWm Sf:':F?, RG404W LOT I-A r:i'a.and are:s bra a r+ad by is e t r5rrr 1 M a wat chance flood),Zara AE Ispeaai flood hazard i,i.l idk-ion by five i3a c]n"I chanct Nood,BFE deterrt6n ,Zwtr AEF(ape t 1,o inurrdalxm by Na l%wmLwj ChafICe iIDDA ft*dwJfiy ama!3 n ZONV AL T I)efk5odwey is the C m--16 pT^t*ezm plu6any adjwmt fiwoplain afea s tlwt F=t w kept tree of enrinachmant so ltrat the 1%snm W chance flo Dd can be Cmied without i'Wremi•,g thr• EWE), 8s per Food Imuramic Rt3te P.1tip(F.l,r .Po9.] Commw-s pftnei NwnbSf 15 161�C%2 raased Sepiefnber 29,2017., TOGETHER W ITH, 18 d3-1 09t11s sulO'taaiLxv arxi bYlr'':s5 f ICLr}�irtV{; SCJlI16 ty! Rslaca7rr't rtt_.a',r;�trvrt. ALSOTOGETHIERMTH,exIMIr l.Jhnity Ptjrposi3saspre+rloresiym6o.dedattheEwirontr&GanvWmc inHordub,Hawail hUbcr21;� Ps,ar w$. AU,54 T(DGETHF-R YIIIITH, exis5ng EaSEM t 7' f<x Rbad aj Ulility Pufpe4et as re+rinusyrec�atdedslttve£drtrr uofCorrveyaati�i inHono�JIu,HawesIIInI-Iber2183b Page 3Eend OocuJr ent Number 2004- 6515, L ) i l La��4r�veycrs i r-."7;'..�,JC9Jvs4a:CJ�A! ft.n�ra�•�,� l�xma.=4b,4(!-".4'' �0 a r-v K N1 i0lael Yee Darya Arai LlrprtV Director wuu Hnval�i 00,1'C 74-5011 Anc KL!;--hvka]o1e 1!w) --w r I la wa"l OfFIQV K a i t1A:-K u;1 A,T lawai'l 96740 1 1 aua'Ai St w;tr,�,u ile.1 Phcol-i 80$1 3-!770 County of Hawaii 1-11:0,F-i'Mmi'i 96720 Fax MA)32,'-3-%� PLANNING DFPARTNEENT Fax L'80k 961-8 42 SePtelnber 1, ?017 Mr. Richard Wheelock Kona Three LLC 101 11 ualdl ai Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Wheelock: Application to Amend Rezone Ordinance No. 02-1,11 (REZ 4''IMF Subject: Project Consistency vti ith Kox*.a CDP and Status ol'Plan Approval (PLA-07-000325) Applicant- Kona Three L1,C (formerly Kona Vistas LLC and (}amrex, Inc.) Tax Map Keys: (3) 7-6-021:016 & 017 This is in response to Your July 24, 2017 letter requesting the Planning Director's determination of whether the multi-family residential project called "Kona Village" is consistent with the'Kona Community D(welopinenj Plan (CDP). The project includes approximately 508 residential units consistent with the, property's RM-5 zoning, According to the Official Knna Land I'lsc�, Map (Figure 4-7) '.'11 the Kona CDP, the westem portion of the subject property is situated In the Pua'a-Wai-aha Village Transit Oriented Development(TOD) Floating Zonc. 'Fhe location cft],I-, TOD has slut yet becorne fixed by a master plan and project district zoning; however it is like.'y that 01e. ['uture TOD will be located makal of Quecn Ka'ahumanu Highway and mauka of Ku�i'&-lini I 11"ghway. Therefore, the Director 1as determined the subject properties are not located in the '110. It is our understanding thdt the applicant will he submitting an application to amend conditions of the Zell I Il 01-d i nance and then the proposed project will be developed according to Policy LU- 2,8 (11), which indicates the project may be developed in accordance with the existing zoning, subjecl to the following requirements: Parks in Policy PUB-6.2, Affordable I-lbusing in Policy HSG-5,2, Street Standards in Policies TRAM-2.1, TRAN-3.1, TRAN-3.7, Wastewater in Policy PUB-4.4, Coneurrericy in HCC 25-2-46 and Policy TRAN-6.1, and Sensitive Rcsources.in Policy FNV-1.5. liawaii Cmaiv is an Equal(tpormpjay provoet,ad F -[SEP Mr. Richard Wheelock Kona Three LLC Page 2 September 1, 2017 The sec-and purpose of this letter is to infcrrn you that Plan Approval PLA-0 7-000325 is no longer valid per Section 25-2-7 of the 'Zoning Code because it was not utilized within two (2)years of its issuance in NOT Thus, the applicant will need to seUire a new Plaii Approval before building permits can be issued for the multi-family residential development_ Should you have questions, please contact Maija Jackson of my staff at 961-9159. Sincerely, e4q Y M1CHAEL Planning Direc#or Jd:mad F:lwpwin6lX-4lailzx`T.rn ri',f]rtenrpin.3tio�i Lt']ie�l,ck koja COSY I-uj).dar; cc: Kona Planning Office .flan M_ Okamoto, Nakamoto, Okamoto & Yamamoto via email Rohcrt G. � illiarns- Kona Three LLC via email FINAL Royal Vistas Tax Map Key (3) 7-6-021: 016, 17 Traffic Impact Analysis Report Kona, Island of Hawaii November 30,2021 Prel} red for Komi Three LLC. Prepared by F International PzCViQLF; S11t-11 Ii:tr.k elate Application �l i I)c I11111), 1 A , I1-' I•i.ii K",.1 , V 11, October 2018 Zoning Amendment I)i.;l'i Ti;;i:lk' IIY1-1;Err \ 1,11_,tii P-21), ri [Or the Royal Vistas May 2020 Dram.Cnvi!ronYien#al Assessment ir:,1(� \11.1.E;i�, Rq—wori ior the Royal Vistas July 2020 Final l;nvironmemal !'Assessment Royal Vistas TEAR SSFAI internatii3nnf 'I'.Iltic• of Contents I. FIKOJELI La-SCE P-ION..........................................................................................................................1 II- EXISTING (2019)CONDITIONS...........................................• ...........--..........,.........,...,...,,.--...................4 A. Geometric Configuration .................................................................................. ..............................4 1. Roadway Configuration.................................................................................................................4 2. Study Intersections .......................................................................................................................4 3. Pedestrian Facilities....... .........................____..................,........,...............................,....____7 a. Bike Facilities.......................................................—.......................................................................7 5. Bus Steps and Bus Routes..................................................................................................._.........7 B. Volumes..............•...........................................................•.................................................................7 1. Vehicular Volume................................................................................................. ........................7 2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Volumes...................................................................................................9 C. Traffic Operation Analysis........ ...................... .................... ................................... ....................11 1.. Level of Service Methodology..................................................................................................,..11 2, Existing 2019 Intersection LOS............................ .......................................................................12 3. Existing 2019 Mitigation .............................................................................................................14 lllo future(2024) fear-Term Condttions—Completion of Phase 1 .........................................................IS A. Sr11 rounding Area Developments............................,.............................................,.........................Is : Living Stones Church.....__ .. ...... ...... ........... ...__... ........ ...............—.... .......__18 2. Pualani Makai...........................................................,...........,,..................,......................,.........,.18 3_ Youth Gymnastics and Sports Fitness Facility..............................................................................18 B. Roadway Construction Projects.... . . ... . ......................-...................... . ............ . ..... . ........ ..18 1. Widening of Route 11 from Henry Street to Karnehameha III Road................-......-..... ..........19 2. Lako Street Extension..................................................................................................................19 3. Alii Highway from Hualalai Road to Keauhou Shopping Center.................................................19 C. Multirnodat Plans.............................................................................................................................19 1. Bike Plan Hawaii....................................,...........................,..............,................,.........................1.9 2. Statewide Pedestrian Master Plan..............................................................................................19 D. Corr7r'unit,P P' ri..............................................................................................................................19 1. Kona Corr7rriunity Development Plan............ ............__...._.._.......—............. 19 E, Volumes.,..............................................,........,............,,...................................,,,............................21 1 Future 2024 Without Project Volumes....................................................... .....21 i Royal Vistas T1AH 55FM 1nEernatiana1 2. Project Related Volumes.......................................................,........................................,............21 3. Future 2024 With Project Volumes................................................................................,............23 F. Future 2024 Intersection Traffic Operatlon Analysis......................................................................27 1. Future 2024 Without Project Intersection LOS...........................................................................27 2. Future 2024 With Project Intersection LOS...,,..................................................................,,.._....29 3. Future 2024 With Project Mitigation,.........................................................................................31 4. Future 2024 With Project Segment LOS.....................................................................................35 IV. Future(20291 Mid-Term Conditions—Completion of Phase 2...........................................................36 A. Surrounding Area Conditions..........................................................................................................36 B. Volumes..........................................................................................................................................36 1. Future 2029 Without Project Volumes...... ........ .................................................. .................._36 1, Project Related Volumes......................_............,....,.............,........,....................,......,,..,............36 2. Future 2029 Witt, Project Volurnes...................................,....,............,.....................,....,,...,.....,.38 C. Future 2029 Inie-section Traffic Operation Analysis..............................................................._......42 1. Future 202S l'dit-�out Project Intersection LOS..........................................................................-42 Future 202S V.'it Project Intersection LOS.........,......................................................................44 Fiiti,re 1i)31- bgrit-, F'n,jAr- Klit P'.-�ti-in.......... . 4. Future 2029 4^,Iit.•- Project Segment LOS............................. V. Future (2039) Lcnt Ter-r, C-cnditions..................................................................................................51 A. Surrounding AiL,, Coii::ili.ins...................................................................................................... .51 B. Volume5 .............................................................................. ..51 1. Future 2039 Without Project Volumes.......................................................................................51 2. Prciett Related Volumes...................................................,.........................................................51 3. Futk.re 2039 With Project Volumes..................................,,..,.,...,...,............,..........,.......;,...,.....,.51 C. T4it.are 2039 t^tecsection Traffic Cperation Analysis......................................................................54 1. Future 20'-W Project Intersection LOS...........................................................................54 2, Future 203 With Project Intersection LOS............................................................... ................56 3. Fulk.ril, i039 With Project Mitigation........ ...... ............. ........ ..........58 4. Future 2039 With Project Segment LDS......................................................................................61 VI. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS......................._...........,.................._..,..................................62 VII. REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................64 ii Royol L`istas TEAR 55F147 interna6imill I,ic1 rrl I'i;�ut'4' 11,,-1n, ; Prniect Lo,t,. i_i Map_._..................... ............ 2 i:..ir4 : Cc�nt'i1 lt1,11 wil.` I'I:at..... .................. .,. 3: 1 i11,-, 21119 Ltl IV, t 0111 i_'W't'son .............. 1'1' IFC! 1: RLU-.11� 11, Natii I :ii1_I<: Di i{+ I;Lialalai Rd. 24-HoLlr Volume Distribution(2016) ............. Fi,urr h: Exa-,rial, 2019 PL`::I., I Igor I.I1 123 ..........................................................................I..................10 1:1 11 0. KorLI L. ,l:r.nttu'it, ItL•�.4'_,,I'n;til): Plan..........................................................................................20 i I'I.,'Ic'.1 FIC!11, Hourvolmlies.................................................................._-, 22 ]ri .lCC 8. ENI,;1'712LI ] tilr.uc Lan. [_47rtfi"ur's"I( ) ............. I'is .Ire 9: Pll; 'k' I I'i;,j; R'-kliod I.ri; ;,.....................................................................................................2S his.irc 10: FLIILI:". 211-2- �� 1111 Proi,:(a Peak Hour Volumes.........................................................................26 I, t>3r>< . :ail_`L� 1� 11I14.1_11 'i;,144r l,.,lk I lour Vut>iultes...................................... ...37 Fil-:irc 12: F hij;�L' 2 Lihojnd P ,i .• ..................................................................................... 39 I^iu.iiL 13: Pl ;i,<: ' i killcLind I [o L:c: ILL:•I.ilc(l TrIns...................................................................................40 1;i,,:ir:• 14: 1 :-{:r, 1) 'r3 iih 1'1 jL : 1'rh IIttrlr Al.ines.........................................................................41 Fip re 15: FL:'L:"z� _'16 11 1Ihi)'_]I 'r.,11fL't Peak Hour Volumes...._.......... S2 FiL_'trrc 16: 1:L.-L.r,l Ith I'l. I cc-. I,L..Ik 1-1n11 r \'1-rlulnes.........................................................................53 L«l cd"ra tv lei I <r?Ic 1: ttrm(-v aw, 1 r:.lIlc VolarmvC..............................................................................................................7 1 :,)Ic2: F.xls:IM2 'i)Il ' 1't'cl~'•{ :<`'1 Itl'(a VQILIM,:-w...........................................................................«. l :gale 3. LO S ('riter:.i I.,r. llnmip—,i.i,:cd It:[,L:i tr,. L11.S.. .....1..... TlrDie 4: LOS C"rirer ,1 I'.-r 174: ions.................. TAile5.- V,'Isting 2.)I L,1 In' `, illoll I. ' L:I �d scr,"CL .......... 6' 1 :.,.lr Hour �' ar• urr I,}IiOlt irl 'I I P" :r..l11C vrlltll 1, w............ PL,.Lk-I";11-11-lV,lrr;11-1 on ':?I i 1r:r1-:is vt11Lr:1 ................. 15 'T,, 51 K,1,IIILI..L1K)111 i I1 Llt • st ......... I )IC1.-tiiStlLaL, l i�llCllTt�l11 — Ro'.lte I I and L.—A n eta-eet Lc-t-Turn Signal PhL ws to Alte-rlial,ii es .............17 I :1'�]L' Estim.Mt c Trip" (i01lrI:.:0d- I'hase I.................................................. __.....................................21 Tr,: 1� 1 l: 1=xtatirir 2t:1:1} :.all Route I l `- ,ird KLrt1 iill Ill €Lk+•'ay................23 I';))Ie 12: VC7lumes at 1''t,lipiia .11t.l Street............................................................23 1 :a�lc" 13: l-tll.Jri 0'.4 Witl.ulll P-'11�:.l Ill lir[,'L'1i'T 1. VC'I ............................. .........................28 1:1:dc 14:FUL.Ira< `024 Willi l'I(.' VLl IntL:i4,4tiull L4'iwI oI'Sk:i Lik.............................,................................30 1 :ole 15: Future '0"-1 Pea"A l;• ,r 41'sxrr �................... ......32 I10: L .It,IIC 'l 24 I'c;L:,-I k..,i 1::rrailt.................................................................................................32 Table 17: FLII Ile 'I;�:I \Vi#h 1'[ R.,iIrte l 1 and Kuakini Highway Left-Turn Sly rial Phasing Altcrnatives.................................................................................................................................................33 1`:1:71t 18: Fultlrc 2024 Witlioui Noiecl Roundabout Analysis at Unsignalizeci ...............33 T:la1e 19: F inure 2024 W1(h Pro'lec( - RL Ule I I wid l_ako SEreet Lett-Turn Signal Phu,1.1iu- ;%11cri Lilt iuC .34 I ,:)9r 20: Future: 2D24 With Ilroiect)Eormmt LOS....................................................................................35 lwl I r lc 2l: l~'.xtilt'ated Trills(je.nerated by Project—Phase 2.,......................................................................36 1 5Ic 22: Future 2029 Without PrQJCCt Intersection Level of Service .......................................................43 iii Royal Vistas T1AH SSFM Interna tiannf T:1'Ne 23: Ffitm-e '()'9 W1_th Prq.1et'! 1 I evel of Service................ 46 T:;•7Ic 24: Fti11.1r.2021 PLLak-9 1e, ,i- kl;lrr:ln ........... 1 .:71t25: t-u1.11k: .'.0'11 1'L7;11-1lo-'i 41:Irr:,r"t....................................................................................:............48 Ie 26: FLIItirc;2019 WV I. I' Ruute T I and Kualuni Highway Left-Tum Sign at Ping 111 t rnali vG ti...........""........"...,,...,"......".............."............""...."........"_..,.............,...........""................................48 I Ic 27: Future 2029 Lull-TUM ?h&4J1'12 Ahci vativ+ s Willi Project at Lako Street..................................4 '}S: l:'lll',II'i... 70111 %Vir1' S,, LOS_............ ......,. . 50 I 'miAL _'co 1't11.11C _( .;;i `'\ itl.0 l F;0 4., InIcrsection Level of S�:t�:l4e .......................................................55 1'°i )1e 30: Ful-11e 2039 Willi Pi(--�,,L:, JnteNection 1-eve]ofService.............................................................57 1 :'_,Ic 31. 1',i .n : "09 Pcatt l lour Warrrant.............................................................................................1-58 I;I'&9 32. 1.uIures 20.19 pe:1'1-1lc,al \Va]rant.................................................................................................59 I i do 33: I more 20 N With I'rtir t,€ - Route 11 and Kuakini Hi0w•ay 1.01-Tum Signal Phasing Al i inatives.................................................................................................................................................59 I xl le 34: Future 2039 With Project—Route I 1 and Lake Street Left-Tian Sigiml Phasing Alternatives,650 1 :1.,Ie 35: Future 2639 with Frgject Segment LOS......-.....................................,..............,.........................61 List of Appendices App ndri A ltll; SCI edulu :'.iiid Vhip Appendix 1� - 1-1lokii-and Peak €cijoil Fr2fic t1'omits .II.l14.SL5 Retorts F\::,liil.., I._I.VI').? COI3 LhU(Ic1, Appcndl.\ I Ali:.kx• i, R(cpt,v. I I.d.IrI; Ir ll.<I W-:hour I'l-q. Appendix L l u:uir I'll' I I Jill Coladiti.011, A1;pendll\ F .•11'"J"."Ii i\C ?,til'I: 1 ulllrti l'll'�i} '.Ills}"11 III-100 I�l7"„lill� [T loll;Iv-4_N l' ,!pt:l"[.� " I f '11J :I I'lti AI,_•:_ dix I I .1,n:<1vsis RLpk.'It} I'txlrllL: 1211"", W::1101.:: I'I I".'(:Ildi[io.)4 c.I} �:It[it• l AI: LII,,i FLLIUT, '•% iLh I']oICC t [ .,IidiLi.::I iV Royal Vistas TEAR 55Fl1'7 interna6imilf 'If. PROJECT DESCRIPTION K LI11.' 11`-.L'4 I 1 ( 111 annIi in�''I{1 L's1•'t'L It 113 a 11111.''I I I I I I'w 1'.:.-.'lt:L111.':I I J I I L I I t 1'�1s-71 1):1111.:LJ Itic+'.'.II V as in Kt1?l,l. nll tic kiiind ofl I;Iwaii. Tho pronL'rly k 1w-;1wd 01'1 1:'4t' 1 1:1'.1ki. ':Itl,: w the Queen K..L;111H nanu I[i`.:113'.'j1� (Routo 1 1 ) aL I vI K i*i 7-6-I1'; 1 :w f, 17 belt',(�,`1 Kona ,�1 ih1,1 �t11:c1i w:ca`1 111c1 Only 0nt rt.:1t1'.t:;1 .w 1'11-.11'114., Ll 1t•QV1 4�ti :IL I.,: for Phasc I of tJl;' 11i.+11;11`,. f fl1- 1 0:: Lh':J i :1114.LtiCCC:y lk Ltf1 Queen K'LliLI1.LI11.1iILI f 11,dU..,iI LlP!-31-(11,1H :_1L:; .`1f ':1 ieei llorrl, 0°'°111: 1 '.`.1111 1%L.ikl:.1:11 f I 11L". FtIr this tr11`f`st 1.1 _' X. ;1r:11k :.1c`1?t1rL { 11'tf.}, hi; t�'ti`,� i4ltfCli-I`tl :tit ;1, kk." ill 1 i•1:�: I.u,�,]`+.; .y" f hk�.prL} locwtictil:. .lf�';� ril 711�' �:-L'A, ,vith this TIAR. Trr ;Jinwir n f i' 1::w 1, Th(: 1''i-vzz kr\o 1 I.ti i4.!-.1L";tip ::"kt l.ti� L' , "IL 1- 1-.v�:"i though tf c no% Iti 4tisl�It ti .l:N:) .0TVI.: uni9,.L1,--L 1111-imed as Phase I. Ph:1�c 11-, rx eonl lu olll 11t1�-s I1_, �t1'•: Plm1 Lt .; will inL :Iwft t11e 1:1:.I l]1.16141u1Tt U1 ti iLTll�i11` ' L1; rill i!;. .hiss 2 is 2tl21t+. 1 h1: RO'rLl6 1ti4L1S 17I C11I,14•111LI%I- MIL ;)LA I x111}WIk ?Ik Fj,-."M-c 2. f;Lti ;i!i,:iii it'd, f 1AR Iti Lo e�aklate 'xi4riil '. •L7L1.1i.i,111 alid as-:i�:, •:rT.lc:ls in the Su1Crf1RL13d,m--, area a a resul' tv &L dL,vk~1L."prnCrk1 10' l't:Il" E'1',45e COMP t 11LT 11 .xii,' 1} 10-.car{f'I'„i L' 2 coin11'c:t1VIl lit .'G.''11. :9m1 ._'0-t'4`:il fiAtl.Ll'i'l't711[f111 1L4 :112039 t%11f ho ami:,.,-c.1. f L.71111 tit'.1_'- %',LfJ kJILl17.%'(1 s.'.:1h .)1.::1 tt::]i L.:7 1h'." .tnva f:IS �el�tljtL`C. •/ i x � •w �Y� SOv, ' -�- 4 yy T 1 Project Area Hot' lvat �} Project Location Henry 5 r ` d 'a He OkWaf 5t(Borth) ; =Huadadad St isOuth) rrtamncr F'C1tlFit r. p'uapu avnerg5t X nl r�xhfi taxte HIS f"kal ,f 'KuakInj Hwy V, . Lako 5t �.r KqupeharrfelsQ W Rd tYSafufrr+al Dr+vc 13 LaWaa Avenue s Royal Vistas TEAR 5SFAI infernaiAmIll Lv n c _ s N� xV �' [ j 3 j, 1 w 4f 44 ' I wa. � R 4} L Figure 2: Conceptual Site Plan 3 Royal Vistas TEAR 55FA7 interna6imill 11. EXISTING (2019) CONDITIONS A. Geometric Configuration 1. Roadway Configuration 0) Queen Koahumonu Highway kk 11.TC 11 1" .-13ti14 IV irk 11'0.',.:'1 Vil!. ' ROZILkv:l.�. 111x1humanu I li,,diwav (Pov,.- I ' o 1,: ir tidi�.;iIk:d, mo,-JanL, -):'Ll:2tN1 in JIIL' L11h dil'k.Cli011l. K,1,111 I _AtlLLIS IFom KLi %ail-;ie Roa: : P1 ille ro,.-Ill -o iliz, -_11!12:NeC1;011 Wi!�l PZ&111' R'Wd 4ROLL':. I`161 17. ill',k) ti1;111: R![JC I I k-, I)L)�L,d speed Ill-r-i ;jtunzg Q'),l4mi 11".; 11111111,�JIU [11.71)N;,,JV rliph. At the fLl-.L.I C P,Iwal V kri the posted spee(J I lim"it 15 M P[1. Queen L,ki I lwj,�w lv opens to L 4-5 Itl L�`,:.%V1-1-d1_:J'1L�Cd lCft rLII 11LI11-1 121d:L.L,',-r-Limi r:-_ lane _i ni jor intersection,;nti :wc!st ofiki 11 v -i k:,:t. Rothe 11 liv die v:trloLt"" llar%l t)uc-1- 111. A[1111-1:111L. I 11,01-lv.IV_ KLLAI, :11 j 1 ,,,hway, Mair kil-km ii R.Oad.Toavoid'ofllu"1011.dw Route I I will k u:,c 7t-.1'oughout 2. Study Intersections The study intersemor r-L,:Iud,, the f,!I lon ing: I Route I I ajid KciL_ !RC'LJt, 1')0) a, At th � Ioca'. on- kmii�2 I ' i, plN.domlln,)Titly oriented in an cast-west direction and Palani Road i:� prudomiiij;0% ,�i IL.mk:d W a nuilk-,"outh direction. b. Four-he-_- !%naliMl !I'll,]SCC t_011 Mth ded.I.Cated left turf- ing lanes and chmmelized right turn talk I d 11 apj irtmk:l -1 1:L7 Route I I approaches and the nordibound Palani Road api,.oiik I i I ni%c d oul,L, le 11 7 m!i lanes. C. All le,17 --i- i.s ;ai- pnl,.cied (have I III-Istts). d. The T1,01-11 IU11 Of t11C il)iCl L:0-ion CXIL:Ild" 'Jild C(_11111L:cls m ItIl N-1.1 I I :y (Route I. IffitIffiel'L,�[j 7C L _('l'.[I e(I faculty, 2. Route I I a i I I i i , S i rkxt a. At i:m,, ki,,aLL011. ROUle I I JN OrWrited 1-11 all ea"L-lk CA 1,11vzT.k)]1 x id Hc'11`, !'.1_1:t21 0:_ in a (11'rectiop. K Four-h:m-, �_-_,indjzcd "I A-1 &Ak:Ull d kT im i-:w,2 ,:id r ILT _A.:11 lanes, m' ill approaches, The Route I I dr)PIOJLl:L4 .1,1%U 1w:`l 1.11 1: c. L�,-. i-ir,, from Ruute 11 onto Si, :m: prx,%:..k-,d. I 11C I J,:111 S'l tiL` L'a,tlier di".,n d. The iionli of th-1, it[, Arc 3. ROLIte It 4111k1 I'LLIILIJ RLWkI L\01"h) a, At this ko�.-A: I I N nriewl�d in a, north-south dirccijon and Hualalai Road is oz!CE11tJ m ail b, 1 ii:Lti-I _:. STOP %1,L':I C(Illtrol Ld with dedicated lefi turning lades for the T11)1_111�',1k1Fk. :111d Q:411'101111d ;. C. I !�Ihl 11.11 ;WL", L`:Pti. IC). 117,' -IIIJI 1;0UthboUnd approaches. d- A kiji;: L,, pi ki-,_k[L:kI [I At -All:L�l L![_7.t7 ItOLIte 11. 4 Royal vistas TIAH SSFAI interna6imill 4. ROWI;« I I Jlld I lHid.0.1' ROLid i.1110LI.'0 a. AE 1111�, ov-mmi- I : P, orlemed In a nmth-wuth dirmfion and Hualalai Road Is b. T L-.Li. ti I 1.)1, ,j.L,:I ,,,I it I,,I L-d interwetion with dedicated left turning lanes for the ILI 11:kl c, Ch.irvi. I`z l I ...,.kt ki --I) Jr,,, kr- iht northbol.ind rmd westbound npproaches. d. A r-,I',, ns onto Route 11. .. 1:111�, 1,% 11 r k I I C, rO I- the W,,�Sj h()UJI(I [i��ft tUr 5. Route I I al%J PU',IJIA::ULKI a At i1r, oc-tzion, Rome I I i,, orkmted in a north-south direction and Puapmanui Street is OrIk2IItL:'1 III ml b 'Thal- -k��:. III I',-Jr ih,t S,oiiihkmnd ;iiid Nvestl)(,-Aad L:-')praachl-. c, Thl: lefl ILLI-11 S.1 P1-DLCCtCLL d Ch.,Lml-dized rt'I-J Fi�-Il I'Or 7111t riorlilbolmd m"d 6. At this local KOLItC I t JAL-iklnj Iii�li4y„1" a. Ruw,: - I is ci 1,:iited in Li -Ii-S01.1111 k1JECC410:1 UIIJ KI.Lik-m! I h2k%J'1' i,U:iClltL`d in an east- b. I C)P controlled intersection with dv�dlcatt d left tum ag lanes for northbokirc .arid eastbound. C. Chann'--lizCd =11 lanes exist for the eastbound and southbound approaches. d, A r,: lant: Is provided for the oa.tbound left turns onto Route 11, e, KLI;IkIrI1 I 114ZIIWLI�- 1S a suite-owy3ed raoillry- 7. Route 11 aril I.<i Im '.,t!-c et a. At this In, ii, Rome I I is oriented in a north-south direction and Lako Street is oriented in an b. Fom-lc-. IZCLI :111(~rSCctiowwiih dedicated left tuming hmc,, for each nnproacll, c. Lc',': Ai:i Ci vri 14;jv rc 1l onto 1.;i Ic,,: �i!e�t aro prmcc pz:rmi I rk:j. 11, iw r Ile t.rr.I V I LI,ti p:o iect .11 1:,I UII ROUE�.: I I I 11at 0.,L:,i f')I 0[k:k J 11.111 71)1.',[4 11 1 he L1,1 S i..h I I L: �1,"I'-.. d Clmn I I r,,1,7,1v ii:7-i i I m--e-, c\1.,.- 1"Or eiiich Lipptouch S. Rome 11 aril III ko Ell a. At i:uA ROLITc 11 Is o:LUI.: d 1:1 J 1101 Ill 111WA JI-d Ill Ko.i-! jS 01'ICIII.2d I:, ."Ai b, 211 MIT N' T.' I'k'1111101 '11 :1111.1 SkWIrY,M111d ;Ip, +L!�' c. Lc urns I fFOM R L)L I 1` ].1 arc` ci:rcd. T! K,I 1:1;1 1 iz I:n c i I It ni '-,,i 5es are split. C-hzm,iL:L,cd r:.i.dki w-n forsollillhol,:1,1 [rid j 1 1, 71. 1 1. 1 . :li%. )l%- -,r.LhW Qt)TjLnflj:t[ dw kAL,I - M I 5 Royal Vistas TEAR 5SFAI interna6innf RoFtR 1] 3 2 U e� 10oaear791�WaNmfs _ � � �� �� � Remora lS pr- �_ Rnute 13 S' Route 19 tawalew • ' p Itou YY YYY jr- a - C ikause 11 toKaauhou a s u Roulm 11 Rotite 11 �S1 x 5 = 101 j► —- = S a � � gyp i r i a j I ifuta 13 Ruts 11 Nut to Sca=z LeR2 n_d A,nalyxrd 1 S 1 c;erz' re�i iJnsignYalard —dL- stt p sign IIIIIII rosswa#k Figure 3: Existing 2019 Lane Configuration 6 Royal Vistas TZAR 55FA7 internatii3nal 3. Pedestriari Facilities llk, an, 1,-io<+ided can each corner i-,< ;il,wi Road -lid Hem-Y .Street, A -i;dc',kull•. i� iron ided on ili- S1.11 L`I IiLli t'.l Rt. .Itl' l I bLmcill I'.LI:IIIi Roml .III+ Wvr� �LLIC~k1-1111 Ill %Rl%'—Cd Isrt NAh >dcl� L+# 1�k1,!I lL:l 11"II 'Ic'' t ;:71k? _Oo" It:`I , i11-lu I111iIsecii011 \N11,11 ROUle I I T!1[:k 4I4}x•`,k;I'IkS [71i'11[sIL�I ,LL CIk inik.t;3Ccoori arc shown in I-Igurt�7. 4. Bike Facilities M-i:LiJ I Ikk: I:mt:t ;II"t' I i'kr.' t;k`u'" on Route I I at I kmry Sn Lm ,md k'X; T7tI not-rh. There arc 115r ILIDL'.S SOL11:1 C. L1ily lIL'.t:" iC'CiCYIi. There are bike lanel$ t>li 1-Ltko S71-Cet d~titit Lri Itt)Ute 11 t.+ 1 IL.,l:4Lldl R,",k: Ra'wd or. Ill- I'(1;11C ':''.C�'.11, marked shoulders along Route I in 'h siiidv.11"'.':'. I';11'0 , :L'•.111' '+ "C-:1 L,. I D 1'ec S. Bus Stops and Bus Routes I "n 4 i'llrl\ s I 4[Y'I' I":I ti,^.il nlCa, i I Icli-or, NI>) tj1)Qwn l l,;lVL bl.lti '0111tw ;1'.:II I'.:'.`,k 1 ;-.1:lilt' K'oi.- 1L : `k°.yl I'Li_, `;Ic l,iw. i'L1 Ill CLAAWY. LIr'L' 11,4:'1ik1 i1 1`,w.•:1u ol:LwillI? t, ' :11t't., rliLlli LI':lI I-1,it :'.iktl\. Irt. 1 i%m KonahkS L'i}Else' ,et',ti7. ' ;Jti sior ;.]I.L1 I}; : 'tip awl+.Lw�'I. ":tiS :k\1 Io 8:30 PI'V'1, Moll(111� Ill �51:11.,F l,ly" Appk'ridlix A irwhi 1uy tli4 hllti 1-k'I1LC :1T:[l I01 Illly rolite. B. Volumes 1. Vehicular Volume a') Rawhvgj, Traffic Vol a e8 BistoilcnI a%-oru e 4114 Lraf le (ADT)<]17d teak h01-11' VQIu111Cti J'.0 ,;z Ri--llli 1 I ill 1:1i .L1,1v ar-:' .11-i dlw.1 II iii fable I. 1 he AD I is brised on I IawAi DOT tr,,iM ceLME-, ir4:lk1C C,1 I• F'i.i;ti+':{'[ LI.7:'t "fable I: Roaidwa,, TI-AfW X 011.111irS Roadway Lo tion A DT Route 11 Between Nani Kailua Drive and Hualalai Road 25,900 101 Source: Historical Traffic Station :Wap.,; (HDOT) The 24-hour traffic volume distribution clang Route I I (see Figure 41 at the tral7ic count 5t„lion shows a variation in trravel patterns throughout the clay with P1rUr111MMI mor'nir.! .inn ,lnomolin coisimitior peak periods. Detailed 2.4-hour counts are ineluded in.Appendix 3, A r ''"_' Pir1.I C ? I, J'.r'.I1"1r`. , li,"rIt[ir' In I-,i`:11: 'it)11r" 1 7-(){Y _ 8'(i(1 :,\%,I. Ill�l L'•:L'1`t :i1til�riYlLl' I4 I- ati k�I11iIcS l�il 1I, I I'4':�1I I 11"CI'I'.1'_: _lkil'L.117CLIIYi 'i11:I 'rr� l+l}I1 II"_11';_I 11".`_ .`•uLIL:11h:AT11,1 je'S;" 'f LkiELiI (1I 1.84 '.h11. F)LirLrl t11 ar..rne n our Of 5: I-� PM. there '< L�. k� ;1pI1,rt1:x.1:7;1r,-ls' 914 vp€7 tray lin- no.-ChI3.-,l Id :lnd I- rl elvi I:ir_ ,,iutlibound f6i a total of 1,931 vph- 1 Royal Vistasgam SSFAI M! _ _l ƒ 5 q G \ CO \ � /�q . / | ) � & $� 5 \% 2 \ } \ - . � 41�1 qp'00) 01 � � 4 � 4 ■ } TI / 0 % IV° Tel . � . . . . . � Q © , g �� � � � � � 2 \ / \ \ \ Volume(vehicles«fh_Q Figure Route 11, \■ni K wlUa Dr to H Bala|a w Rd, 2 Hour Volume Distribution Rn|M a Royal Vistas TMR SSFN7 infernaiii3nal b) 1--vix7ing 20 Y 1'va4 I fe mi- Volunw.v Id';I It 11 I 'I;I I,r[I It I I,:I_r:" C't I I k:,I I I "I i:I k cc,,aw ti,Crc taken at the ei.phi qtudy I':Aim R.-.id =) Rt-LIO,: . I md I lcrL:% S-i 3 1 Rk-k.�': 1 1 and 11 1"0,1d i 11011:1:. 4) ROLL(, I I .1,L I K 041d (m.'[I,tl-1, I\'(11IIL ' 1 !111,11 I'I8OMIX,1111.11 S11 0.:�, f.')) Ro.111�: I I illd K IF �k o Streel,an L I Inc w . I I iI[,,.I Kaniellallldiit 111 k'',I d. C_cunts were cc d s:iL la.' a i C n I 11 1,Nday. April 311 2 U.9 and I i i:i-s.1 1 a v A ii -Li s- 2 Uk iflL'JULI1:J mLuk . -1) (1 1)1 1 'ITO _01'%L-Li, k�s, heavv truc aH'Lt I_t2 .'I J)LA [OUI %Ak1I:K;_S a]C �L(O%%IL iIi 1, 4,u-v 5, Dclalk:d I)L:,:I,. _,Lnod i otints avtw lilk2h:dcd In AjIpQn :.N H. 2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Volumes R i)i i i k: 11 1,a fivq,i,�'i i I i�4;1 r'..111L, 101. :�;:1rIlIctesaTid mid has regii lar-bicycle II(TITV F;-J)lC le '010 1�' N"wde ".;f Ale. L'b;ervtd pedestrian activiry ol c'Lirred at Ilea"',' �71('Qt. 3iCWI, c;),wr; c 1,-,-1 21 in rfii' I. 'ir rk,-m the PM puak houn Detailed pc,,-.k 11;21-iod and LPL,:-,E[c c.)Lii 7; ;rc ii, R_ 2: Lxisliii-', 21.119 Pedesti-hin and Bic�.Clke N (dallies Intersection M Bike Ped Bike Queen KGahumanu Hwy& P.-ilani Rd -1 3 3 QLI C-e c) <aahu man u Hwy& Heni-y St 9 4 12 4 Queer) Kaahw-ranu Hwy& Hua'ala" Rd (N) 0 3 a I Queen Kaahumanu Hwy& Flualalai Rd (S) 0 4 0 0 Queer Kaahumanu Hwy& Puapuaanui St 0 2 i 0 QLJ e.e'I S.-.ahijmanu Hwyr K i j.2.k i1 i Hwy a 2 tl 0 Qu e c �Aq.jirini,j I kvy n hk� St 1 2 0 jQuocn KGahullnal_,U ld%vy& Kari-IfIliameha III Royal Vistas TEAR 5SFAI infernaiAmIll —19 IQ�ta ii sc a � a �t li{kWt2 11 s �1e•i9.J�� �.ti•s � ��" �,L�GDi71l '� a- Hertrh�t 1 � I � �r 5?17_:• .� ply, # a 3591563}� ��� � ��`' '� �• l��1�53T U r e• Location-' �lanry Sr �tluCM ti a ra Cry m �I851] in IkoueaSl m ilaatr:i '� Yb9 i377J`�� i M 114Lff4�.S Rot4x iS Ilcae.:�li a3 � a�,cc as — --d Anaty2ed Ptak Hour VOI4 MPS YInahzed unsignalized Intersemion � � AM(PN:I(vehlhrj Intersedion Intemertion IN Stop Sign Figure 5: Existing 2019 Peak Hour Volumes 10 Royal Vistas TFAR 55FA7 inlernaiii3rillf C. Traffic Operation Analysis 1. Level of Service Methodology J 01'',,'P,ILt '." 0"': IN IT1 :!11:11Y Is 7-111ing "Y',lum III 11-Al lic c`ngjmeennij t(i ini�amirc th,:, ATO.-llv -JJ�Sz ;)j coildillor-: I'licr-- :]I..: �. I I I HS Irwri A ro F LOS AI` hl 111" 'A"I�L" 11t11.or _( :S I' :,,lAjwdas Xcmc: dcl_iNs exl�:i Clk..Alc'wc� IFL)m the ( ,r ic 7 o III, 1�F I 1:cj d C."r.1 11 L:I k�n I n.L� r". 7A 1i10n 4 Section 4o -h',i :m '-Accc,,),:ib-,: k'vk:', Wk: )m Iie levcl f110111V li: LIM. I a,cl l'%I peak hou is "D" Or 1--,Ltc-_. Lc,-,:. or LOS. A Cll',Jljtt&VelYlw l tltC dem [,_Lbing .1pL2,ltwI)a[ Cc ildikioil� w [.I ill a 1.LLfl'j1: ':LLJ bC L.y._-IIL the t)J-OCCCILIP�-., Ill Ill--' ki.t,".-A -(I I L�f I I I L: I I'3g[I', X, C':1 )Ac I n I I i.�r w: 1,''I I rm-L .:I::1.LL I'ori LOS r-k I k I.-I:-n \1vt c 1 i;'t L:I-I T1 I-I I-:L 1 It1r r11w 'I 1111 :1 It "d L L I Y'� I 3�'l 11 (1-:11 1..' iH-e sx15� ::'Ujy O_d using 20 1W LLCII&WdOIOa W;� A� �f:ited Ill the M,,,hwq.Y Caparfli, Manua! (HCAft 6" Ultion (TRB, N116), LOS for a two-way stop k'(l 'I 1110_11,14ti(l 11 I)v zhL' mk,.r,m-.-d comro' k+i.v I Alc ,I;1[: ;1k,:I I d ' I j --r I' wo�-Cjnk:lll :'Ji'., Elie jjjZ',J, 10•� 0�11.1, t)J' V,10i mirii-xil lcla% ,i L I:i% Li: !ill. Thc)-,e 1dl IJI.- ',ippf -11i :ill 1 1,),: 11 1: i-r 11 0vt:11-wn1, iire 51711-C wCl 0)" :1 T :Wl A11LI 1111',N' !111.1 :MLLI -I" I [ P a1;1"Lllg 11 t roA ;]r,l thL'. g, 11) v I I.I F)I Table 3. LOS Criteria for L cisignalized I iih?rtieetiows v rage Coil I I-I 111 P� ".1.0 A d 15 D t: 15 d nd F -'Ind F ....-�.(I Sotmx: 11CA/(TRB, 2016) The LOS aiialy,sIs for sigualized inter,;wlom4 is based on average total vehicle delay basiM on the me flhod o I k 4)1'1 1 1 R B. 1(3), 11t, ;11 o wT1 ;I I ,I ')h 4. [El L' I IC M ( 1 r I r, ..I o -XI,I IUi�ID(Pll JW �rlal sly ii=) [�•)rli ti.\Cl C 1% 111 ]n 7[)L)SO costs. rntthodo oL)jo,, I If'N1 1 AM ustiLl. For t'i's I rci t--1,,�.i I.Ed y,thC IZC$U IC I I ciMi i[Crll-L S1 I-CCi i I I LCI .C7,:k I orl w,JII lr,: I I 1':2 1 IC I I I will k lctok)L'y. Af)k?tIlC1' I 1_,Lz::,LIre Of iir,;k:,,,flon (I e I ay is the vo I t« C`"j]-),I City(VL, I� Ill N k tllti' 1-W;(, 0- T'-iti L-Tt: to-.IL-xa\.Iliu�ll-Volurie ofvelll:Iti, 111,1[ �a:1 h , Vacl-,mion CIL,]—1'.4_, a I 111C p,!I,:,)kI_ A 1'C --,Il 6 L1IId_ I-Q'L[11� t'l- I Ill,: :-'CLI, 1, Lti 011, IUII'Iff L-A[Ut- P LIC I t.' iJ:-I L L di.Iz, ::t! I 10, �X I-,el,12 ic,�A �11 Ir-,2, 1 oil is k I P 1:,J I I I enr its L.It Y When N-./C III'l 0.85 to 0.9j. I'L I flows ;11,., when the we i Lil _),:(ween 0.95 and 1.0. A 11 Royal vistas TIAH 55FA7 internaiii3nal 1' LOS but 10W 1 ti. V.1:1,"I tiLl'-": IhAi 11 L' 1''AIYIL ll':;l niovii,-ment, are Io%% "Lji I rk.,1 v, :11 rilritt lo I fle 1.1"'. i:OIWVCII i,!,. ov, vol 11.1v protected left-=I lll.: UT SILk AfCi tS All 111USt W;I t :hli-L)Ilgh 8 long CyCle kIF:Jh l'OT 111011 SlDfit to come up. Table 4: !.()S CrilerLi 1-or Sj,_,nAlized lntcrwclion,� I 41S bv 1-0S b". Averagt Control Delay V{c Ral-110 Milio 1".0 A I 1 <20 B >20 and<35 C F 5 -flId -No L F ."0 i F F SL ii j ,'A I I'(T R P,, 0 16) kVhcrc ignall'y.0d :7r4. l.x, Ill-in :tparl, the fac]iVv 0-HmId he n.", an orb.In s1ve l ;,Ind 111,.: 1 ;iAitic, (i) I or Url;w �,.r,-o 1I1l-bcz1c,: [11Inll �,:. 'Irl': 11101:.-- :kI,.'h .1111,. :. Id 117C h', %L:1-11wIC., '11 C',Id! h1.11.-:*.&A-,. iwer-cc!1on. Thl's pee l.orI11",1(:e131e41.-:LLre th-C J,gP'-C dic laciktl4- 2. Existing 2019 Interscction LOS EX r4t I rity ritersek lion and nao.ciiicnt LOS and Ll�+]' (in second per vehi,'IL') ",L':_0 klL'Ik'rI1I IW11 1111- the A%-11 and I'M pcak hcqHs. Table 5 shcnr rh: :\lm i:- wlii�uhu d -I.!-v ;-ii,° at k:-:,:h 11 : -,.OS Im NVOFSCJFC11121111.5 a) Route 11 and Polani Road. Overoll Intersection Las=C/C(AMIPM) All 1-n0Ve1I1e1jr14 ;II 711L',1S'JIJ;iCkl 111-.L'F�L,11:111i I S%N1 [',:1.111 l',l ilil I,, nprol---:jxi� D)-S D 01, V I Md peall- hcmr�, b) Route 11 and Henry Street Overcrif Intersection LOS---CIC(AMIPMI -,wi1-,-I1zcd iw,-, lor-�,of :�;.,uw I }l Hli I lcilry Street resulted in appropriate LOS 0 :1-- kclil-r V%1 iii:i PM llc:ik kow', C) fioute 11 and Hualaiaif Road(North) At 1?ic C I?c6 Ill-:j .,i Koutc ! I -,;11 li I hm.:ihi I SLi I Lor(I,I, Kt'[ Till JIL11" 111ovellIent �7- bas LOS F (vic of i.,I 2i'd I L:pcvtivelv) 2jl,j kj.jj -.-� L11:1 :ILr 1-..,111 �V ailkl VM 11,fak dour;are due Lu hipli volum�-s ;m I I. ThC T11.1.P11 :111-1: 011Ik's 1'111 41'-1 1:1%LI1Cr1:': opcmwd :11.:h:k:cpt,able levcls of service dill-in,' r 1�c .1"0 :.nd I I\I I)L;5 k Pl.r1: Royal Vistas TFAR 5SF147 inlerno6imill Table 5: KxiOing 2019 Intersectinn Level of Service AM PM Pole y(5et/Vvh)l y/C jof-la+y fsr.C:Vvh) Vic Los RO L-.F- L I k P31ij r)j Rd(QW.Fj$1 1 23,7 c c L L I =L,'t 38.6 0145 1) =4 74 D I 14,1 0.30 B 1 i --7 a P r-11 37.4 P. 1.7:TI h .2- Ro utf Ll F.HP r ry St p i a I 11 31.8 0.112 32.6 0(�5 c c l,':.T C' L :I 'il j.I c 1:�7:1 ..................................................................................... I WIL.R- "it :0 c 26.,' ho.r-,%P i h ro ugh D 37,1 0.% Herr% Ri�ht 1. ',103 c 32.5 0.02 c '3R--3-- 73 D SS ----------------- ------4.2 61 Route 11 9 HuAlalai�N)joverall) I L.I.3 - 110 R;.m.r '!I fJ 9 f 1 10.8 012 0 1112 0,0 8 I:-i D;-o -EC L-2 429.0 1.31 IF 1107.3 0,23 F Rome 11 &I lu'dalai(5)(Over-A,1) 3.3 1.7 Ko u:----'-I 53 ILL H LD.S 0 B H jA;;i A% I RI.'. F 171.5 0.s1 H.jz-1-o A$Ric.l Z1-d 7.d RoAc 11 &ftapuaonui St{overall) 9.7 A 9.9 - A R 11 S�3 J_C-t 60.4 U 7 1 E 53 1 0.81 D HJUIO 11WIB I S.3 D.:30 A 3.0 O.:,f A i FF: t 11,62 F P Hou,,e 11 &Kuakimi (overall) YJ ----------- ,INN' e IL ii.6 12.1 0.33 3 Rome-11 &tjako 5t 30,6 c 211 c Rc,u,.,. 1 148.C.,II. a ILS 014 a N ij ;I c t.&S 0?el Ci F.: I N I i,t 11 B R I 7h Fuiu gh jr, 0 63 5 20.1 ri 82 -E L;r C. 0.88 E 443 Cl 76 D :1% nrojLh Ri hi 3.16 r 357 7 D I w.I A LV IF L D 11 F1.Il,in7 LH r1 Envera l a7.7 .1 22.0 R. L -1"1'..I L 43.: 7{' 75 [1 R I• I. $1.r. a L S I I F I 'm:i-t, 10.3 1 f #4 1, 320 1 84 4LA G a L L' 13 Royal vistas T1AH SSFAI lniernaiii3nal dj I?auto 11 and Huclalar Roan(So uthl At the ur, _iiiiI -6`L'. L_1T4ly,Lcu o11 of Route 11 with l l_!.IIa:,I: 1',,,1i_i the westbeund left turning nlovem7 l:_ hc.ti L(]) I I%.. •:r1 0 l� and 0.11 I'CSP CIIVll_, 1 1-111J Ills "a 11J .7"III tam operates at LOS E {v L oI 11.11'.!, I'lti A1V1 l'l't11, 1101':'. I I't 1,7:1;_ t1:1:P1}7 1.1.11'1'.lr IN. :11 l ti1 :AlL1 11�d 1 cAk, hours are due to high thl'OU' 'wi) l llllti OF III)"1- .11; 101' I 1'E'll": �.i1341>li�l� I:Ir i$Z'�x}7rable lC4'CI.S' Df SL 1'k74 L L�lll31', L_'lu :Vvl 111,1 PM I II',II. IialI,1�,_ e) Route 11 and flut7p laanai 5Creet Overall intersection L 7S'=AIA (A 41PPA) 1 7i,' 4t.711t:11"'+:'11171 ],` t .tll., i 't.wTl)l}ll:l4a lk r-l'-L'I:leuts operate at LOS L. {VIC of 0. 4 ;` li' i3 �S, dtlrin,-,, t"7c :l l f,lti l.t I.I kll.. l li,vi ;,IwidA !,L t tll.rri{pei atl�k at LOS I_ ":'t o i.02 1 k.l.. ng the 11 .11, kolLr, The 1ei;t ILLr[l "+]ILLtl1L% :Il.; . r,l _-id , I57OJ ticar Ct",�L',, II'L' ,irtI rrpliId be ,itljUSGe d t,z reL11::c 11111.{1.1i':1 cli::1,,• If iIt!SII LL . f) Ruute 11 and KuaklnI Highway AT :.I-,,.� 111�1�11 x11LLx: I.1lL'1.1'Ltlt7?1 �: 1�s3lli� l l .+"fill �t31:],�11y ltlk lk�'l1. 111 �:,�tl�t?Illial l �i tl:''lillll) lik'+'i lment Li, all LOS F'(1 }I ] lk-m-, (iclav, 6LILu1 ' '0111 _l1~w•1 :1'Id I'"I I I dLie 1,.11--ll 1111"ow-'11 1('I'.Ll':I_' 011 _W'_ItC 11. 171L '.I:`jtll"'LIVC I;111•.:7' HILrltll- 121OV4 Alllulls c)PCrUILrLI ill ,lti��lxtaklL? lL'ti is Ike .k5VI :_r1.1 I'M rc7nl, koL: x. 9) Route 1.1 and Lako Sheet. 0vera11 intersection L 0 5= CJC(AlMIPM) A tll wi n [1;7cll 1,i I4 I:11:1r1 ; I l{. 111, I ,L 1111 1 ;':�,o ti11 L,:I" I I'.c Lil,,s11oIIntl leii tuns ore raw s at LOs .F (SIC 01 sl,w; 1 dilnuu jk, AM pC',1% I:t't,r I ,11� lk-'d tr11 ,,: 4l Ll:ti 1110h ,&,.hounL1 ]tiff :U[17 .I lLil:l , :::hl 1'1 517 1 131:.1 ir1;4 li'= :IIL l ;';.,i� `+11Lw1 Gi1111141'tClit'ti• i sl .. : IL'I IIII,'v ti111i1:1 Liil,o I':ti: oper,':ti, -La l I 1_+f ur bil ucF L1Le[-i;lil' IN'1.11 ; i11% Idol�1" hf Route 11 and Kamehumeha lit Road T1w ilvu:311 'I:EL: I t]C.}E1 I',.1lLi'�Lt 111 LOS 11 2nd (,_. or IhL A i :11111 1'\1 :iL:.i1: 'ioui, "ts17��',I :1:', All I11+',�` Ill lliti ill llle lweii,eaion of Ratite I I A11 l •':i11'chI:r1Z-11._ Ill RP:)1. `_t� lltekl 1-1 L.(_}S I)ui- '4c;'tvr Jui iIi j .AN-1 ;1r:ti [I[VI peals haw• . 3. Existing 2019 Mitigation 0) Traffic Sigrnal Wcrrant Analysis WCrC CV.11l1:rl`0kI :i1 rll,` Il;lwi, T l;t...{+ irlt;'r•�4tiLFn: 'a'hero 1'i}III"- il''I:" :11'l 14'.`- II+L1r' [r-,L111s' �I':-I"a ',k':rl"I"a'li'4 sF,'' �""`' •" 111L 1.111.1:1 x`LLt'1 lk:l: 1.11I1, ,ILlio Rot.1L' 1 . i. .'L"Li'i, it LOS 111 :i1: , l';+Ilr JICO"r: i11+L1:'N_ 11 S1l[tulc.l '�i IAML4 tll_It Illtiti 1110', IjaVeii I'vlil_`v I:i1:c" oii `{ou.-•,e I `1,1iIl'h :�, 110� 11.~ S1nchi-7 rand 11-ereit}l'e the 111,i11 t11k 4 i111:11€ acd c t:k ;1lcltan :`1 I ,i�`: �,. I hk: a a:l-:1r11 1, not ., LIC+(1 _17:":7 41r: v,-_wther or not a titaf c siunal C.1f.'1:li.l 1", ]ll t:l"l.'II 11: tl-_'_;� settinti. llitiwei r. It IS helm evalLrated a;.I;l p'o',Al d ;)nlv as all indicator ni'�A hc.1 t'e t1t1,17iti7€tit" The niilr rr sire: Ic-( IL.-n wok tflutrllr' :Ir i1I.II.LI::i RI,atl htiakini Hi,:litlx:} operate at 1_ 0') 1• L'_111;1. l,I:l:-1 1'L':.I; hours. For r lc'St: r11t4rse ,i i'I"^4• : iv r1111s+r lei'-' 1111";lw w-;re U:sA fur tfiL inin€r sheer it1111rili ch, The 11'1aj,,: ,`.Lilt was 1,.% ,1 'tun of rllL ;1110I.1,-I1 VOIut11L, i11_1_I -he left toms liom Route 11" Ri�.ill .kill" is r :.I l ill1 ,roacht:w -Iorn 1I10 :lllaly,lx since 111E enterthe roadway wlih mini iml L'II:'.I;it 1. 14 Royal Vistas TrAR 5SFAI internaiii3nnf Fort lie Four-flour�%;v-rarfl, FI�vji-l:4C-2 L%lI:TC DE It t;4 r3,,:cl�,int•k:fliu 45 N11'l 1131ssbe d-,pc cc[ Ili niI can Rotue. I 1 is over 40 MP1-l. The ' 2 or moor Lzin:�K & I l..LlI;t"- trill-Ve %%: [Nw t(l for mmlvsls.Table 6 Qiow,the Fnur- lour warrLlnt analysis. Table 6- Four-Hour NVarrant ixas .d on 21119 traflie volumcs Existing- Hualalai (N) 4--Hour Warrant Major Minor Warrant? 6:45-7.45AM 1925 44 N0 7:45-8AS AN1 178:3 7 V0 3:.9 7 4:00 -_1 I'll i.012 fib N 0 4:�)il .J:00 P1V1 1842 14 NO 1{1-6:00 'M 1767 7 Nn (: Major M'.no-- Wcvrant? 6:45-7:45AM 1824 9 VO 7:45-8:45AM 1769 C, NO 3:00-4:00 PM 2014 14 NO 4:00-5:00 PM 1900 4 NO 5:00-b:00 RM 1835 3 NO 4 6:1'� %:;5 M 21�.47 l() 7:45-8.4 a 4,1 1 7r 4 \10 :00-4:00 'Iv'I 1979 14 N CJ 4.11-1-5-00 M 19-nS 14 NO -6:0C, M 1749 5 NO For the Perri;-l€our wavrint,Figure 4C-4[MUTCD),,v:i-s ;irwcrlic \1I" I onR[lute 1 1 i,:over 40 MPH. The2 or more Lanes&. 1 Laae"cul've was used tat'aii,!.- *[�,. 'Fable 7 slioati the Peak- I:I«!lr w�'FuTartr =lttifrlv�i�- Table 7: Peal.-Hour Warrant Imscd nn 210111Ira11ic toluniusi Pc ik Hnur Warr�mt Mir or Road AM RM Major Miner 1r1,"arrant? Major Minor Warrant? Hualalai {Hj 1925 44 € O 2012 10 NO Huaialai (5) 1614 9 NO 1863 14 No Kuakini 2051 7 NO 1994 13 NO Norw cif lh,c three unsign.[li,cd intcr�ct:tion .11l.�Ik' Ilse 4-lIoi[roi- E v iIc E Blur fr.lf?fe Si-mil Warrant. �,A Peak H❑ur warrant was evi l[rzlted to give an indicotdnn of whether or riot ;in intt.,vi action should hi,considcrvd and monitored for a traffic signal_ 15 Royal vistas TIAH SSFM Infernaiii3nal Roupidahout A u ali wb; I minor s I rL w, 1,::S It-.:il ill OVINIIC tit,;" It both Hua k-fla i Road ind Ki.takini Higliw-ay ctri�mto -�I LOS F J111`aig built 1,-,:;ik 11k:LH I ('I 1.11C ,2 tlic tl',1:[',C :k�l::j 7k1j,zi -,1. 1,1: C I k'.111.1-JAIM.1 weru amlyied (sQv I:Ll-I I. V -i�1`1 111.1 1:I I I I"o:I k: -ill QT-ti3O'T .11 l* I I Minor 7 1 1 J� I '11 i' I 1-,)1-0,t: I LOS B ur better. hov,,ever, �Ile Loitte I I aq%ri,xi-,,h L() k-J�rl,�initLs to LOS C :): LOS D, 1"L'Auni Ill-Inway, Itic overall illrcr5cctiriri delay irjcii.:•Ii�,:Ll -1,111 -.7 sicot-,ds to 7.5.6 fic-:ii Cconds to 214.7 4ocond-.; W the .A NI and PM 11,:,I1. wo. The Rou(c I I �:,p!oadic-k -,,. :11 ai. -..0's F with V-V OVc111- 1.00 in ;1kC A-N1 p ;.k :io il. 13WC 8: LAAS6111,-, Roundal)fput Aual. sis al Unsignalized ArA <3 NJ LOS De I ay I see lve h) Vic LOS nai N�Inv aIF L 7?.,l �--�UL 11 &Huall [ . . j rove I S3 aparqa-:1- :f C 1•u7:i'a'%--ortb EB:ippr-ach A ij 151 3 INou Le 11 &Hua I a I a i I,S):overdll 3 LA C 17.2 C 'A",appfc-,-,h 1. 0.39 El 193 0.84 W B 9 0.18 A F.E-KK F.Ku@4dni (overall) 75.15 F 24,7 C Fi C?I i N 8 a rr [h F 195 G 85 e 1 Y'i df?2 A&I K u n p 13 1 0.75 D C) Ahcrijulire 11ifillolion Ileasirpre.s I 1--,IAI,li Roa(l (Souill) Tit- 11.Ki".-LLP P-lUd nqjit turn operates at LOS T tIlLI-Mg t1le ANI peak liour. An 1: 1 Ll i i.Iii !u r:•, u 11 r o I)urthbou n d Rou r t: I I would d rcm ove t lic c oTifl ic t at th Q flD.-, sim.I,ij i,., I:L:i 1.It,:L,,:c tions on the Route I I corridor. I :jk;i Sil-o.,l k%-J--, ,vill, 1111-1, jllmyIng for fli I-An Street :;.,proach. A comparison sliut in,, ilic Lh1-fL'1rCM Ictl 4drn 1)1w.4Llig ull Laku Sixo l`, w +1k%is lr T,!.-)Ic i-1. Pr,teed left turns on Lako Street will provide a slight iuipro% In rh%, c--. ;-nP but the eastbound Left will still operate with LOS E. The other altematiVeS-Wi I- jNvVtJ,- li,,c-Lptlible LOS for all movements. The City and County of Honalulit'; Trt.-rlfic As5esswenf.fiyr J.,,?fl-Turn Venal Phavr)?P, Carrcirlirar.c (ATA. 2 0 17) ill'o forzppro,:ClloLi 1-1.11 k,l- '10: 1'.11 k, .I, 'I 11, ;j 1%-e,dj I'l-k t T i I,rn P 1i should lie Col,--kk,IA. "WkI a 11lzrLc i� lloi. 'tillJ �,!,Alt dk(d]WC SI)OUld I k:,:1—'Ll t',:I 1 1: : :01.1!Lk:j.11-, J I.,'M I I:2 1 ICI I I I n;,Y0: I;:.(-1[,'eI i 1 1.1;1•111 L. I ILL' I J,�lijj i" U1 Route I I fl-oni HciuL 1,! 1%-1mm.:F1,1i1:Jrj J11 i� iL`cdct 111 211-24. 1 h Royal vistas TIAH SSFAI inferna6imill I AbIV 9: F-AiNtill"' ( "filliti0ii Roule 1I and I ako SI I-L-CI IXf I-I m-n Si�ilul VfiilSisl� AhOrnatives .7-1-1-1 P R MJ rP [I,P rot P c-tp d I pf 7 ArA PM Tu i n S i H ral P lias;ng on tA-w Sr-�e t DU I c-.'Y I-'LJ11 h) W/C I LUY bVIAY f+VL/ve h) V/C LOS Pomp I I&Lako5t(overallj + 1� 21.7 c 10 fb 12.9 B POU7C 1 40 r,-.r,-):-gh 2. 1 -..6 WS 75 B FCA -I IIq.S 067 2 c :C-L'- 59.9 0,88 F -11.' 75 D R 1, Lh i oil c V I D D I IA� D :-J, I' P.r. 036 L: I 4 1 I :,a2— D Z Lam Rcjut,, LI. LrfI AM 'Im Tum Sigr-,2 PI-as'iigcn Law De lay f5eche h) VIC LOS Droknv[sc,/veh) "Ic LOS IROLI U 11&La k o S1 overa111 22.1 c 15.1 a B n= Oil A i r ,j I c 1 c -2 U A 1, a 13.8 w "I-. B I c 35,6 C,5i D k IV;,,.!:h P .';-------- C, 2-LaAP Roul u 11.I'm k I P4i ri m Li'I L ArNI J3PA TumSjgral:Plias'iigon Larj,-� SlfQet De I o v 15 e0v h Y/C LOS Dekw I sLc,'veh) VIC Vus ROLIte Ii Loko S1 joverall I 2E.6 c 19A a I IV .I B h 077 1 1 Is 11 11 P, 0.20 L D 1.3 - c 4 Lane Paule 11,Sp'i!Phasing,on AM pm -ZikO Streel VF[AvfbL-C/wehI VA LOS DOAV faeL/vi-h) Y/C LOS ROU tC Ii&Laka St i ove ra I I 1 19.6 B 14.9 8 009 1 A ..... ....... ................................ ................... kuu Ea 1 0 0.67 6 14,8 8 Rol'Ie I!sr3 k.!k :2.7 0.42 9 9-8 A —- ------------------------------- ...... 0 L 0-1 5 LI Ph 14.5 0.49 9 13.0 1) B -m 43 ft 273 0.10 c 27,5 c B hra Fl7-P, 70.2 0.15 c 217 1-1 c L3gID"i-,o?f; '30.4 0,57 c 215.1 f: c 1.4m) I ri)!.j.T.i, k:u,ii! 27.1 us c 2.4,3 c Royal Vistas TIAR SSFAI inlernaiii3nal Ill, Future (2024) Near-Term Conditions— Completion of Phase 1 I I oy i-.!-1111 I"vol 1 1-1: 1 JI I I All -.IIL' 1)0111 ()t' Wk%'!� 11 11:` I A L' RI I �- I w,:i:, Irk ak I lvav alterstcung R t!l.:I v 11 Aloor i10 7",4,i I i i't I 1 17 - K ;i k 1 n i I I A. Surrounding Arco Developments Were ni=earched and analyzed to rise:',., 7h,,%t i'LLLUIV '11`AL 1 4111 14,1;11 xkl 11111c: developrIlLM ' MV -,X[ILTI,`Ll Ill he 1:LIlT0UI',�1 I rill I I i:I I Vol.110 si,e,r W QLVI Wlr_lk`,S or irafi". vollllilc al I I I,X [I(, I,. K---,�d on re-�.,iirch 10, 2' 9 :tE dle 0I I I11'0 ill I (H`Ict, I-I I. Living 50nes Church _FF1 L I 'VII-L' S'01_,^ t I_.II J I Ck: Ll.,:LJ 11,-'.111 QI I'l : Puairlul Slrco,jui i..)rl I i (d I k-,A1_i.Jll:I 'III I Ili; L 1'.1'Ch 1-1 "IjO ;oijf-: Ll h 'I T: IIII ior ,a iv.i tSF GFAr, offl gerienjt�ql h-, -Ili} rs-i5j I L'Cl Ql'. I tit oA�:iiv to be _nc1kidL:kI Ill i.'W z'Ro%Ill 2. Pualani Makai The Nalanal Makal d,vekirrnerll Is located livik.,ji 117,16;]To 11.acro,;,;cif Pijapmianull StrQe.over mo nines nurlh of the Lilp-,il,,il \1 ik;jI prok:ct. Tfils m'Aed-LI-,e J�:VCojpil-,:nr L;J' 111jlItj-filjjjj1: :fild '1711C PULIpuaanui Sin'c7 111r4;',Ci114111 Monlo": 1 Vq�- [di a Lctt fLlrn. throuOl- L11-Ai i",J lum lane fot- alt at)T!I_(%�:CI!Ci. API�l_(,K'1L:IW, 011 RUILTC I I Wclv "d to lli.1 rvo;ccl,:(I ro-711111,Ld le"t-tuna phasin. TI-.L-rL,va: lit) 1-�:olluaclldalloil [O'r the po,'[3lular--I i Street ;:1 Iv roaches. Thl Ad L ion of the maL [,-u of 11-1i.: ltm:,.jiu Street will di-vert some traffic r ThL he T-3V,,1V 0711 bi�akini I j PL RE! o ( jLffic N-Ixi.'t 2 0 19) 11 1 LL,Ld 11 I'k)i�!C t C[�C]LajeCl t-a I Lj'C 1:L I,Of1t IrUi'lie. Tcaj'fic i`c}rn 01 LL -1I I I i L� . . al.111 L11', I I rrc,ILci a.1 I 111-plcl rIlL! ;i,:idy of 11.1'. 17-vl,:C1 :11". ):Crc addL:d Lf7 lh(: N,`ck,,,rrcund vn.mvc_ The 0: \I;Akii [11 L'J 11 i0l. 110'1 11-,L,Lll I' I 1 -1-.1 1,"IC ;:I[Mc 11V 1JI111111,L h I 11C wl&l�I'lu it' Route 1: L. I('I I A k I I i I L k a v. 11 1 L:k I I'l :'C C t 1:11111 i'E)L 1 10 11 t 1:1 fO I I L'C 1.1 11 1 L I":t 3. Youth Gymnastics and Sports Fitness Facility I-lu Y, III I (I"i I I I:I.m:L Id I I I': F;'.C,I 11.% 1, 1, 1 Ck I i I I'RC 11 ith aCCC !" I I I I Ll'I I'll-Lu ](:);I LI III U]' l IIAI k 1 TLTJ I I k 1:1, I I oh,-I- I I I I!: mi- a-id I'vu,e ,: -eni tr are app:v',inm I zdy 15,1.1 6 11 1;l ;Ire L,-T,--1-:2(I o I I I i I:le ;j kernni-i i t`x I- 2-100 1)\1 I'N-1. Appro�%I ri,. LAy 15 to 2 f i 4-11 I I I W ::C Iiry. TO :11116,'1 114-L bV INS faeilll\ 1 :111CIL" k11 (hC k' J,:"Wl. .-I I'M kiitir_ T[i., -Acic ;i,rilh_iicJ h-Li-,cL, o:i "If). B. Roadway Construction ProjL-cts Ru;idw�i-t ,,onm?il-oior JCr _1 'I(-LI Wow were re5OAl,'),2d ;md xi--dy7cd ro assess rhei- xitential fillllrl� '111'LlCt Ol 4.11-% I'1�!LkI%l%:1._%- Unkl I'ILI"_,Ctions. No IlJ,cr htftirc _'LW1[U�_IH.'II are I I !,.I 111C or \-,1ILL111eS at TA. I,> on 1-k:% i,'kv Vranspon;iliun Pro--mam (STII'i. TL_, -:i flic 'ji PLn anci Hi_-e Plaii I Lr-�-aii are not found e tra 11s,p L tan C jI infllu S'l -P. I'IL. IrArLi: 4 1,oi.:cts wcrc assumod to be captuicc:' Ill 111C 13.1CkL1'LlU-id ialc. Royal Vistas TEAR 55FA7 internaiii3nal 1. Widening of Route 11 from Henry Street to Kampham ha III Read I Mf -i.; fjI..%. 'I I I tl 1-IJ TJ,lI -M11.1)r1 I I- 2:J I I.,I Cl::;: SitCL:1 (k I I h I 1111-:-. Rou I;: I I I I, e �s I,;C'-I-d I,% I"'o hird LwL,�_Itid l-wl CI-LiTL' foi this proicct and ih%Crefoik2 it wi,, i(J in the analysl offITUL.' 2- Lako Street Extensiorl Lakc) Strect i" thL' k~L-'l-'[it IC tl !-LIUII Ill: Al;l I)rl,, :. ThQ i;onnc�:!on iti AbOLL' I 11-11ti-; 110111 0 LI'C I lit I Il'o �trtc!7 117:1V LL- mn-hei- <'05'11e,:-0l- road -..ail 01 \1 LF Di 1w, wuuld pl-LIVICIL: iL�:C�:bS ILI Alli DFive arld 11 k-- -Lail=-:c -'J I I ThL;-rc is curi-cnily no ar.-Icl:-iaicd AaliUcomptclion ijaLc 1:61- [Ills proll.cct. 3, Alii HIghway from Hualalai Road to Keauhou Shopping Center ih� ,111,51 1 !01 LT Of K:iIii.hii-Kem.'w� P;ii 1-4) 1-1 QIIIAT K;I,ihui1i;wLL i I lo Keauhou, The ;A6-::-d 11-M 114,11 '1, 3Vk,l'I( 1!.1 i- for II',' \ani K. I u;I rm (see I-I:iu I 1! 61 dio',v, Ili,, fli rJrk2 A 111 11! Ji%X:i y lo Roble 11. ccnnccIi:),L--. 1L) Rowe I I I;Lcad an PWIII-,WAltji tl-C;-'t 011d CX"-A1kM1�' 11IJVUL!h thi: nro`,-ut Lircl- lo K.:m1]101.1 Shollpin,-- ('L-utcr- The, compiaium uf' ilds 1-17;+J %�()1LEcl rr,il I c L4:L-1 :112 rmii 1 1 o A 111 D I`v" �111 J Ro 7 11 111 1 h. 11(,1-1 h-,o t 11 d i T-,`Ci the rnrNx),ind 1,Axi S,'reul hL mi,' hllk�e 1pkiths -,ire [+miwd ;floncp tl A -I Z, I hg,�vvay extension. I here k Clirruntly no lrlticil,:-;-.,, �7.11-T date for this project aiid therefore it LN as not hicluded hi the analvsk 01 ftltWc,con-d[IlIOLIS. C. Multimodal Plans 1. Bike Nan Hawaii RIkv T'I:i:l HLiwal: rei'%frtnces st!vtra- 1 near-term projects. Two of h-- 1-01d on KLIAMI i :-I-m LalkaStreei OffiWakal Road.an-i ;i �I,-ned d- ir,-c ro."I': OIIROI:1:, , I J-JLIJ'.1 11�IZL1 St['12C: 10 fli.Liiiway. This pro'llect is not eXp-MCd 10 ll,"IFC an iMI1-1,' 10 (hC VCI'--1-Ul1II ill the wtzld.\ 2. Statewide Pedestrian Master Plan T)o c01 1 S Ia-,e N1Lh1t7 Plall &L-, not include any rcde umlii 411AI!,V L.rgrkades or In 'I, D. Community Plan 1. Kona Community Development Plan The OffiL'i;1:L i{42:U2: Vc, i. — Van( Kailua .4reri fi-on, the Kona C-'ommwdf,y Development P,la,Ii (Wilson Okoinow. 200,,1 Iiiii-re C01111,201UULS 01-"1111:1.11 I1-LII11lItiI Lo Route I I in the location nf'Royal I . k tleLiiklJl HZ�L'1'1-]JcLj Sh-eet 10 I.IfLL11'.1 SiIOC% .311k' :2) eNLtNiFl;t'PdUlelhia Sired Io kekt;m;wA -110MI i1i 1711CJUL : (). I li,,, t:oinploi.lon (if Al-11 mi(: :.hc F.1ko Sirect -in are okyo sho-%vii In 1' 6. The tiiwng 0' lic.m- mipol%�—nents i% and 1€ ;ti Iwt CXJ.':IJAI racy vill be complci`,-1 IIJOT 1- 111,4. lh�.: 11--o likcl� co:nd tion is 111-01 711L dL%ClQ[N:I-S OfRL.Iyal P.LLCC PhLtm: 2 1� I(,) Royal Vistas TXAR" 5SFAI internatii3nal 8 "'A 1 .— r an }' k PraQosedRoads,UaliUr,cacewr, PmporcoTrarml Lune" ^, r MP odletlw,minor' .„CiP,oa'karulA TikNub" —QP,COueclor rh4at M rrm„kir —GP,corlacWr mwer `q Plrl#skrkanAUke Pasha{CGP;l TOD 1l Id`` •' I TYPE we a+ rhaou N kal1c w.Nei [ 1Cc+ra IJ"$nn Alma' +'� 1.p"r.�'tI' I z� ' .F"elh-a ORu Tc, fC�f73' I -1•, �'� �Y ti ��„�`,.. Shwed GhmAckv e POfcy Layer N r i. w Feel 1 Of ecuals 2,(M&seek � Source: Co eri ty of Mawwatr r- The County of hawari Planning De pd.,!Tnew rs the repository of the o#tic iai rnop _ Kona Corrimandy Development Flan Figure b: Kona Community Development Plan 20 Royal Vistas TEAR 55FA7 internaiii3nal E. Volumes 1. Future 2024 Without Project Volumes 1 I-IC P-11.1LO ^,,(LIJY orea v"11117H, '1CM;I 1:1.1 L?4'01 Ill. 11100 1 AI) I onlill" oil Rourc .:Ill "'AI'llil 1 Mt: 1 13,11,1 il I Will I L I Ill 1 :,110%; J111 MCI .11 loi 1,1.k)lll to The --0.' x, TIvIc-,pol :1,11- i n K o r Li 1117 I I Ll -m i I i I�u 71 P 0: Ll I 4 I LIc =I.L; 1:_C-IC:S Ill 2f;'(P and % --jl 2035. Thl 11.1 J I", ;)1inual 2ro-v 1- WlL-.- 11- 11,.L ThereI'0i----. rakt ol I Y: J?Cl- lo;)k dir')L, -.11 :11oVC1l1C11I,� Al k0ar': I I al Ow 7I1A% Tl-.Lific from Plualaril Malcai and I:it Youth('xrnm.-isrlcs and Sporis I 'J-CF-C dddLd -ItLh :I.C, -110 1 . " ", 2 1.C 4- ;1 thL back--�Lotind C-,1,iLIJLLtCk: Id1L11'C VOIL.:1)CS A-11.1101.1.1. IILL� 171'0',C�A I'll 'I)L: ICUIL Sllowli In I 2. Project,Related Volumes The R..)-%tfl % 1tito,,include 25G 1111dr- I-L2 i dewi-L-11 dwelling foi- Ni:-,c 1. AJ o�'rhttMt Lirkf ?0 110 10'4' V LI e lit, xirll oo �i[ vii I I p, gorr�it,,d 7From Tile Ill-'OPOSCd filLiT V Ed o, -101 1 P'Llt,olvill,� lallj 11,�C 1:071.1 1!112 T':J? 10' 1 1 OTE, IT H, �Ilt: l.j, l fl-I",L, kl.%%Al m, I -I I-w 01,11,1ol)-1 io,�;wd 1 .111 IS l-IMS M 1114, I]L:%,. _,IP a'.tI':`4'tc'tl ],i(':I) Ihe 171opk,,4Cd PI-0JCCL 11C CAIII;,UCS lair IMF 11 l..I walcd I ri[v� ( vrivrallvd - I'llast- I I and Ilse Ill FC,odlul V(l Ll!It i(111 11 Fq 11 a io 11 1111164- 1111ik 11ol.1"irl" I I i F! 0.: 1 11 f Ln (T) " 0, 1 i Lm RisO 12201 ------------------------ ---------------------------------- ----------------------------- S '7 Ncv, Trip. i .7., Ina Out In out 23% 77% 63% 37% 27 90 86 51 T= Total number of(rips gcnerated. X Dwelling Units Trips generated by the Royal Vistas Phase I will cuter and exit at the Royal Vistas Roadway and were disbibUtCLI a,nlkj RUMe I I a"ording to existing travel pattcrns. The em4rlm 20 1 1) Volumes betWt�en PILLaPIKOMILH Street and Kuak-n- Street were u."d to detenuine OiL, Inbo-Lind p rL'zni &�,[rlbutlofl. - I r, ii iLj Du L 5pl i'-lir L,)vi(Jo,,J ny Te.-p Geriom fior?, 107l"Edition (ITE 2016)for Land Use 220 21 Royal Vistas TmR 5SFAI fnfernaiAmIll u P'I��,dAd 544631 w LPG 754 f 6S I + 164(22 M Y w RCWt211 y 71i35�V �r 4 �, Pa+ar,il d 1 HsmrySz —EZ3 t636-5 .. 57 IS-0- -IL Route Al t 'C7ii t OF Y •y x 4Y.. e•ice" C i ilgnrvSr n" 'moo.... I.Wp°'4S1 —55133) v o 110 t561 f CO I iC4Yf�i�S yt,� Nvim 11. ICnLRa Y1 Iwcae.:�li m�� 7 � Vim= w., � 83[ 18� �-v k, 17(20) a ,. .—36 r 4-- 12(11) C&662) 16 f7I F Asa a;, sa . asa ,;a Fr.mP i .: �e 11 — --d Analv2ed Ptak HUur VOI4 MPS YInahzed unsignalized IN Intersecs on � � AM(PN!I(veh. rj Intersedion Intersertion P �� Figure 7. Future 2024 Without Project Peuk Hour Volumes 22 Royal Vistas TIAR 5SFAI internatii3nal li:� cw.1 on the cxisiirlgy 2.01� Iralfli' v(11111110 oil Itt1I11L III hcIWL:Ctl I}LI.l111.13i111LI1 `itrccl alid Lakt1 Streci, ih,; AM peak hour directicii is nortlibowid,and the PM peak hour diFCctiuD is soutI1.17i}l nd. Table I 1 shows the directional perce11ta'7eS at Ro= I I and PLlaptlaamld Strect that were Used to deteriiline the inbound trip l.l9tit1'ibUtiOn- abW 11: I`:xiSIin,A.x, '_019 ViIIII11110 (Mf1L R01.11'e I 1 Ll01YvCII I'11:11111:1JIIIIIi S1 All I'LlI a IdIIi IIky[Ilk.!.• AM PIVI N 7, 513 N P, ';d3 VOIUrr 877 Peas 873 -3.1c) Pe rcent ,?.4 sfu 4CJ?U , The 2011)`} Lit PL:,1I1kMJJP.1L StY,et were used L4 detet'131Me-hW ;?'.IT'7{�';Illd percent distriL at1cm. Poval VkI.L.-:V-111 ILX, iin:il;1 I'Lil,:--i.eatiPualani Estates,wh1 -.hip > r1'iA_11Of Vi�[15""Ide1-'1I-,'H:ly '.II till ;l i1 :I' I1 :YI'l 41.( #5$ t0 Route 11,0u-�iit111LI I-<lI"�L: L 1,-:1F 1%1.'1,W. °ill' :'L<:Y';1111 k.StatC: +11 1}uiA.piu)tY1 .iL �Ireet is antic,.,-,'.`:'.i to have a si:1':Jl;kr cu`hc,iill,: tl-*`I'LL111t1011 at Jtoadway. !able EG :1h0A' 1:�: CXIN'`3t1��' 01tT)0..11LLI T'!.}Il.'.11L'4 foL. 1,11;:1r1rli 1:w':.1'.ti. X. PtiLipll=11h SILCC-. :L11AU- the AM L111d PM pt.`c`ll: how-,. TJIc 11,.i',,n 111 Table I I T'<-crc u1. :d CO- IIIL: t'+L1,h0L111:.? 11 11: LhAl 111.111011 -ll 111i ROVal 1tiL:}ti I li LLltt:k': L1lICl CeLIEI'.' 1d,'Iri I I, 'Ia1& 12: Existing _'1119 Outbound Volumes at Puapitnt iiid Street 1 A M Ptv? J`.`}1L1111'' .4l; 19f 107 4 P.'rc:1��r'Ir i=,�3".n 3�f�= 7(`'f� ,�•{ The fultlrc 'Tt. 1:l I t;j _. mL:ilinn :11 :sly:^ 4.1 the Rt5k;1` `4'i.,.Ll R+I2tJk>4•"av tt11rnL .ch to have a left turn and a riti�lll turn I-.nm 7rin LwI 2.i :11-C I'IVVILICtl I'.}"- 111e S(1L1-1' 111Ll':l.l ". II '.L:"ll 'L111d r1+11'L111`+'LMCI r1L-1111 1L:1-1- _11to Royal {Isms, J2't*:11 Iu;r ,� ,11-0 c l.11rl,'11'i,1c A Pk.-k how- II-:11 '.ti` r_'1 trial 13';Yrr�i'li itrlrl ;1 I':r'.ff Il-ll'1i,` 4'711;11 %v;irrarli ZT JC 4i)IIi__14CLi fiu 111�2 1LE'+4 1; "':1 Vi1[J� Ro.1t_Tvay,The ii,-Tf raall'kT'r,T _ISCLIi ]S+ 1 did nol-.vLu-Ltl:t d t.ILLrlr1- Ille A,,M i11-PiM hIedk I"All'. :ll,� I:'I: I`c 'I t?:1 t".'i ,LI1J1'.r.0 I J< LI 1+4t+-tt.'T ;107-LOHVOI.C.I II ;L'1'tic_L',iYll. A&I I-IC IYL1T't1L'kl I'll -.hL' t-J1 - ti:al 01 LhQ I<1;L'1' ,'t'lILill for PQLIc :''1;11` wt1lnl'Ic.ctivity. A rcCL.":' 1,11le J4L1 t+.0r11'.011`1( .,M rL.:'11ti,±_l,c .6i I T c 11 15i4`tiomll erdi 'dastnis isan '. LtiIL:};:II1.Qkl I Ili ers,,i-Tioil and 'rt1.I 1.11- 1_1111 I•I.l 10. ill, 41L1', -L-- The expccicd Ltlltt'i: Lane LiI 11Liiia-:Lars 1ti 'It'1 rl ul I'L1`.1rc 8. Pro"i1 1-L' C.`i1 -'11Y, 101-2024 (PI 1.'-,,' I J ::1'L' i�i(nvn L11 1'I'`,II'l' 9, 3. Future 2024 With Project Volurnes 1 _71t,]cL'l 1'L :LCc41 ti�iPS l :dI :L't1 i.I.) the Futt1)Fe 2024 WL01OUL P17(1'CCt VOIL1111ck ', L:Stl 11:LLc F1-ILLC'-- '0.? 1 'A i-1. .'ro.I..�7t p,:ak hour valtltll, fw•. J ::s:llrC [0), 23 Royal Vistas TEAR 5SF147 interna6innf , s i �aus�11 Li 1613. At da391OW i I 1 Rautel4 a Route 11 s �[ti m / _* fRoute 3 a �a�Kt driveway Route 19 t*Vftrmo l► � a C 5 Reuse 11 toKaeuhou Rout&11 CL �r m a Rout 1,x Aaow�•11 Ros�te 11 � Resmte it 7 In J j 4 Hausa 33 RnUMit Legend $ Analyzed ___-- Pfulect SignaEized �� ] urrsieft&Wed ( lnterse(Vorl DT—Oveway Intersection � 4rrkgsrcti42n i S Si n Figure 8:: Expected Future Lane Configuration 24 Royal Vistas TMR SSFN7 in[erna6innf finute it .- Route 3] s � m N 1r+1 � v U v s "�s t�i rr ss aa�t�ii Uzi�i+s) yy dR�lAMilt M+ �91 I3�J Wmue�1B xawalrr�a � � f � � s a �- w.,�2lliip a 5 s Iz�t�+• 'rProjeci c�:a 11[aF,exhffu tuner f i fwl [�,O11ti1.1 1 R ,`6 I.+ �4uf411 V Rot4x YS Nrac:,.¢:li �au[e SS. tto[ee].1 } P91k Hour Volumes Analyzed Protect Signalized Unsigna'"szed # Sia Sxen m C. +,, [ve r} Intersection Driveway � `n"rsezt!"D' Intersection � Figure.9: Phase 1 Project Related Trips 25 Royal Vistas TMR SSFN7 in[erna6imill Route it "" 4 " � 4 31 rr M•--• — u } a s41101—� "til � U I /� 5185M— � w e u, ko�ie z+�:esx�raa+nea s m —s G L, �`.1 y µ✓ n 38 I61 i Rnulr 11 �� '1 Route it oe a 61��9'S7}�► s � 4toulw 71 raltragiu � 29I12 Ralzal9zowalrr+tla � �� >t: r jecl tuner 17 • R al+l7rtc 11 Y ies993:� � � „r.< yi '3 i14uf4 17- RettRx Yl Nrac:,.¢:li ro c Bali oa ��"�'` ,� t ,,"" � d iaita�s�,► '� � � � ;tauue Si � bate]1 } Peik Hour volumes Analyzed ..... Protect Signalised Unsigna'-szed # Sia 5larrri Ck C. +,, [vehAr} Intersection Driveway � `n"rsezt!"D' Intersection � Figure 10. Future 2024 With Project Peak Hour Volumes 26 Royol 0stas TIAR 55FA7 internaiii3nal F. Future 2024 Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis Protected peri-flitted L:fi-turd pllii�1112 .)n Ri'kii, 1 1 1714.� 11Li1111-.Sive r] Th +.+'*t 5.+1�:1+' I :l:" lum at livalalai R.)ILLI (SOIJ'1:1 'A I'll J'. L'IL Rclw.r; I I. Future 2024 Uthout Project Intersection LOS HIC 202-1 Wi:hou 1_111C['SkXL1oT !Ti�; 1'1 VC1l1L:1,[ LOS and .L.w' W pCrvetlicle)were J,-1 ti I I I I let I 101 11 ;3 11,1l PM pt.:k. hkq� r,, sllm%n in 1:0-1 I e i 3, IT k;1%;f k 1 1,1%r, 111d W IwN the overall i,, ,liat opc rioed at LOS E or woi se art' l i i g ji I ig h t wd 111 yellow'. Sync hro output is in Appcndi.� D_ o) Route 11 and Polani Rood- Overall intersection LOS=CIC(AMIPM) Al. 11 1��:1 :11-N a[ Cic on (rt Ru,irc i I tw Ifl i 1',*luni RoLid in ippropriatc LOS D .I 11ellil t:k.1-.11}, ,%"I ,i i i t, P\I I ct,:1% 1 111Lr, b) Route 11 and Henry Street. Overall intersection LOS=CIC(AMIPM) 11 111 L'I 17 ti 111.1 ',I 1 111' ',1!_.I-,,I I k I 1111 1 U't:k 1'. 0 111 1 with I I enry Strut resulted in appropriate LOS D 11 o i i r,L j-.i i L? A.\t ,ill;' P M I L I tJ Route 11 and HuGlaiai Rood(North) .At the latersection ]ill I iLM1,-1I,1j Stfei,�0101 ffii,'-,IAbOUJIL� left Wining movement has LOS F 1l :c o4 1.97 aL;d 0_3 i wk ;\N1 Lm%.I. PNI j7CiL1ti ILOW', CILW LO III t",11 %01111W-,oll I I. I 11ti :11;1:or i:A ol I ti ;113110r 0J)QFLk1C(3 .11 LWC�:[!'Llbk: k:��AS of -ervi I — s dur i,,: tie -W 1111d I'M llt,Lk IWLJ_w_ d) Route 11 and Hualalai Road(South) t 014 1111�1(riwl Ized I'll lor, of Route I I ll 1 1.3,1 Lj'.i I m ii I li i i i-il I}-1 1 11 il':ig PiDvenient Ira-, (VJC of �,J Li I-L I G.S P ucl!ve k 11,t I I 0I i e I a�.-, d Li i i,iu, I),,)11) A M a I'Ll PN I I LL are due lo h i---,Ii ill r t§ti,,l L ol ani i.:s oll RoLl-LL: I I. 'I'llc I la.iu I 11,d otllc;, I;1 Ll a 1! IWw U licrits orcli tcd iti 'tCL�qlti 1110 lewl" all S�7�,ic.t alL1rills' I 11C '1--T ;_rill P\I pt ak h e) Route 11 and Pu uptiaunui Street. Overaft Intersection LOS=BC/0 C(AMIPA4) A 11 176d irtVr-:,,cilons of Route I I with PuapuaRnui Street resulted in appropriate LOS D OF and PM pe.ik hours. D Route 11 and Ka ukini HI ghway At 11lif unsI.-_,.jid I/cd Liior-,cctloil of Routt! I I -wlih ill Highway, northhound 'Iell turning movemen' has LOS I' ,% -� of 0.9 1) and long delays during the AM peak hour due to high through l'ohinw-: on Routo, 11 . 'I'll-, PuAanl Makal develt)pniciu will lead to Puapuaanuli Street kcowing a 4 lt�.- 11lw.:Lcw61on, Th.-, Pu,il.ml Makal TIAR ri�roiiw l the eastbound left turns from Kviakini to 11i1,1mmallUl SliLm and other inicrnal roa&�. 27 Royal Vistas TZAR SSFAI inferna6imill Tahle 13. Future 2024 %k ilhoul Project 1111ersection I.e"el or Ser-,ice AM PM Diflay sec ill Vic I Oul-y N-clyeb) Vic Los Rn L-.p 11%L Ppl'wl IRIA PveT'111 C 77:P L L L:: 0145 1) 74 D '1"�.Jph 14A 0.34 B 61 a �3 D R,I I -AI. 4. id,F h F- I.D Pai-ni I 'k 1 0 6e D RiputF Ll 1N,nry St(ov,i.=ijI) 3+1.1 0.65 1; 3.1.5 D K-'L -1-1 '![C�J::I' 1 ti I I- 'd J. 4 I -h i 1 42 1 -17 Lu 1 7 1 P 1%,z T Rou-,,11 Lq lduejlidm(.Ijj(Duel nl 11 13 EE L-2 : 37 11.3B: F RL'L'-"'L-11&71U.I1d1di i51 10VUrA111 I :L7 L L- D.24 a 11.7 0.11 B I ?M.b A I RO L CkS I I K Pi.-.-tp-.m.anLA St(ovornIIJ 711.1 - ------- C 7Z.3 - C 1 -1'4b-c rt D.3., ig.c 4- L. 11.!,:7.-INR 111�A:�'1 21. 0.83 15.9 K.:t:::-IS8 L.,,-. 11 i-mr F� D 17.-L", i L I!' 'D.O 213 C 13.3 L 6 C Roi-u'. I 1 9 R L..' jv u p rn I bi 10.0 7.7 40.2 0.91 C ROL',F-11&1Hkij S!jDvp.ra11j 42'Ll - 0 27.[ C PvL-'. -j'1?71, - ---------- 42.4 0.9-5 D 2-3 C81 C K'.k A, A 52.7 3.86 D 21 2 r 56 C 23.3 0.iG 0.94 F H A5 U.82 E I F, '.1si1-Right 41.2 015 D ;2 0.16 D L: 11, 62.1 169 E gc 0.159 E 54.9 0.34 D 5r3l 0.42 D RO L'-11&Yam 11 Rd ave.rAlj 18.3 24.4 - C D 0,74 D l!-L -1, L: V. D 049 D f-,, L_ 3.11 0 LL... 042 B a.74 117 11) L 437 062 D Royal Vistas TXAR SSFIvr lnternatanncaf gf Raute 11 and l.oko Street. OvernIt Intersection LOS- OIC(AM PM) 1t-11c sicltaliz:ci isltrrsecri�rI ,r V-uutc° 1 I -'<irI• L-IIlI.r tr4wt. -11c- c astbound I t m operates at LOS t, ('t- c ,I'-I.941 durnl'- the AM pcI, _1.,ur JIId 1-0') I: i','c. Fd'' -ti I dL.r-_1,, LIT F M n_-ak 1.,DLrr. The WCS11101111d :cfl It1711 :zko oper.attti 1- I.I1;, I ':,, c Cfl 0.60 Lialcl P 2:`.'I dtJl-m2 I'1C AM "Ltlil PNI PCak Itc1LLI--,- i I'IIs 141,1:. I, :rndhzitcd 1cs Ih, 1 ';ar11w' dtilrl :Jrlc. IIw yllil I',Il:lwi:-w -c-r tl1L L,!l u .Sti-eet approracilcs. A1.1 other ldl+ t wi]i�'le. at Lako 4LLC'e 7 ooi:_-ates at LOS Dui l:t''1�2I LJI.It 1}4't'1 peak I1oUl4. hJ Route 11 and Komehamelia II/Rand. Overall intersection LOS= SIC(AMIP1M) All n_ot k°al.:mts at th'- -;iumalized intersections of 1C I.Ir4 - - ',vlt,l [ti,..1t 1tLIn-ivIl;l I11 C c :lc1 ". L11Ted in az p.,,plja;: LEIS D4), 1;4t; , dui inn AM and PINT p7 1'� Z. Future 2024 With Project Intersection LOS l iiL- Wirli l'r,}IL-C( Tlll' l'c_-Lioll �i:`d tlt{1v -.nl:nt Lt..N and ai -L-'ap dclLa-v(l:i i,k 1,:r whick) were d',ICI'1111'lcal I01_ .III [1-L1 P\I I7c'11, 11:;u1 S,w h,>%n Ln t.Lh1: ',4. NOT 1--All :t�'.\.Ll " I'<ii, k 1Ll : .`• :II-C L'outed throtJt:t_1 1t` :.n.'11'0�4;i. :•.t.:•. .' c .;c Road%%�i, to RotltL 1 I :01'11U]"1l,' _ 0 111� "IjaSe I ;11:::.1',. I Ae shaded rw., 17idI k:Lilc-, IJiL: l!'ti`l`I:IoI ?:ii cr t:Ct1'UJI LIt'i.a'� . \1,': I:IC:I. tI:LIi ;}'.'tilLLt.` .11 ._t :: 7J1"worse Li.l` Ill:'IL_I"I:': i L11 vL'II.'''',% I'll:l ' 17[Il:- i iw I,I Appel Id i.\ I.- o} Route 11 and Poluni Road. Overall Interseetitvtt LOS= CI'C(AMIPM) A1, :I1,'ti llll.11'• L11 :1 1.:1;1L`d ill;c i{+I;S of Route I Witll P.LI.1111 KAILILI aw<Ld tLJ 1:i ' �I,Ic'IMIl4L c.LOS D ff bCI ICI-,:I.r'I1 t .alit.: I'`w1 I)CAk Ilk)IEl-',. b) route 11 and Henry Street. Overall intersection LOS=CfC(AM/PM)l T"Ic 1l C`';1'i Llllcl lei ILlr:l I,I'' l"Jt#'S at l-1.} ti . 1% C of tl.{i.�'} (II."1;11g t1le € NI 1l:Ll t l'(1111. Ilt 4I:':;I ' [ti ;I '' tiLllt Of tilti l'';I Iimim1 mid rllc ti_5?I..I :.1-1A1CF L:(Alld b - to ;113IY'Q'1;I1 dl:I't•'. ',II i.i<I), I:C -M"_1`w A the si-nahzed 111ttrsectiens Of RaUte I with Ilkmry Stied rC'stV:%-J 1:.1 ta1''I7':C11'Jrl:l.ti: La),, D ,7:' _�JTC-r i:'Jr1111; AM and 13M peak hours. rJ Route 11 and Hualalrrr Road(North) At t:l.' L11".1.111.alized iL)XjJ k:i"wn ofRoutc I I %vitl1 IlLtalslai Street I'MU-thl,e:Ir ,t)(AJJL, Icl't ti1L1tLL1 :1:'A::t1.L11 h_s LOS I- f1.c t7f :ic tj.43 re"r.LcLi1�'!v}Jurirl both r1M arkt '%I I)C LJL IIkAL' UI'2 dUL: 1.0 1'.1 _1 I:II't'LL!'ll vu[ullws oil Rouit I .. I :lc Ill:tJor am'!oilii.1- Ill;I )r lntn Qp}; Lik+d 1.11.1 C' ;?I:II",I Lk L 'L" '1L: 411: i:lm' The AM and PM peat.,I:,Iur.". d) Route 11 and Hualedai Road(South] At the Lan-,Igm liza:c1 11Ikr„,` 1,)r- ,il ki1iirt- I I with I lual;ll',ii Ko ad(smith 1,wccstbourkd lift turnim,Iino °cmellt has LOS F 1 ,,f 112") <':Lc'. 11.`N- r,`11VL tlt i'.', ; .`LII Ill^ Nif-i :111 and PM I}r:Iti 1101 : ; :Ir. ciL.i' 10 1`.1;'_1 t:lr'.m"h 1'(7.11111C' t111 ROLtt: I .. l..Jl: lli�l":.'li:,+'.ILL_1"',111!h"I'1`IW.c:'I'.CI'.° .,11c'1ne Ufil :ll IL:...t.',C K:-, Ill:: :' .M .ni(l P,",] pcLJt li(ogtr . e) Route 11 and Puapuclanul Street. Overall Intersection LDS = CI'C(AM/PM) ,All nlC}li~]Ilk':11:; III.' I:'I':I IIL`lt 1P1L'ntik2C1'RI;P : A, Isom. I %N:11'I :'tLLI' I:'.:11111' �+If L`1 1': .Ilth', Irl ,11'I71'i;17';I,II,^ LOS Dar K, r,ar L.1I11112 '�'-I :ir i_, I'%I :)c.lk h'.u1:} 7 Royal Vistas TFAR SSFAI inlerno6imill I ii hic 1-1: Fu I u re 2024 With 11 rojecl I ni ersvel ion Level of Ser,ice AM PM Delav 4.w.cfveh VLC LOS DeLlav(sec lvp.h I v)c Los RULIM 11&I"al.:-i:Rd I LjVL'mfll.t 2.1..3 c 27.3 1 1145 a 40.7 0, 1 cl D-34 v 1815 0.67 R G. U07 0 41.7 0.74 U OL47 B 17.0 0.44 9 D 41.8 0,74 D CL25 c 31.4 OLQ c 0.51 u 53.7 0.14 D DAB c 36.5 064 D IlRoi-ite 119.HerirV St(awraill 34.4 0.66 c 34,9 0:6q c -we I r'.1 • 0.49 47.9 0.63 Cr +wwx, I F I': D-38 c W-G G.M c I I LEAS c 23.i b u.19 c 0.4-4 1 56.9 0,63 E CL63 c 14,3 0-66 c Rouki! 1 :".6-1 [ 2S.] WA c 0.48 D 39.0 0.42 11 it,nrs %R;,-fr TI-,-).,.gh 3C...9 wio O 39.5 G,v D r.i,1. v...2 001 c 34.5 0-01 C- 11 411 0-14 3 41.9 a.lE u hrouGh R*ht 37,9 0.72 - 36.6 0,71 rl ---------- �RuuN 11 Ku A i;l ai I N)(,j 4L r u I 0.2S 8 117 OJ6 H .1027.1 2.37 F 239,9 0,43 F ROLIEH.it&Huaklai Sj(owaralhj 9-1 - - LlK -I S:j L,''1 13.1 0.14 6 11-9 0.11 9 167.0 &29 F 269.4 R58 F ROUtFl 12&I'Lar.UaARIJI St 22.9 - I 24.F> - c 13.0 CL34 0 213.9 0.49 c :,i,:!kjph 22.D 0.85 C. 17.0 ()76 Ft. 14.3 FLIS 19 12.2 GAO 8 I 19.;; 1177 6 29.1 0L92 c 1: ;1-,11 1 7F. FIT 3, 0L67 D 15'R 0,66 D J;: i--L II-l..Ar i 28.8 CL01 c 2j.6 0.0 ! c '.',L --T. 32.1 L1.33 L 31.4 1116 c 29 R 017 c r.1, (107 QoijLc-'I IlDyal Vistas(ovL ral 11 2-3 - 2-6 - ID4.2 O I5 F (33E c v W B Ri-h-, 20.5 P. 0 (1.M A Route 11 14uakir,r N ra111 ml 2.S - i-nt,Lc A 1,tl c 0L94 I U 037 c 'U", q:7-7p Lc-,- r n D.'OD A 7.0 C 1.0.1) A iftuEL 114&La ku St I U YOJ 412.3 D 27.9 c 1 5 -3 77.6 G 31 0.8L, l 2t1.3 0.68 c 24.0 0.. -7 ()5 c 23.6 .86 c f F 't, 39.4 0L94 F 69.0 0,84 E L-0 LI: II lk I i-I 41.S 0.2S SL).0 0.Lt 0 3 0.72 E 65.5 0.64 E 0,35 E 5&19 0,43 F Routu Ll S Nam III Rd 19,0 19 25.13 - c 42 C.80 D 9.3 0.71 0 1'.!? 16.7 n.70 13 25.1 E1.79 c -1 L.,'! 39.7 IL47 .3 ?0.5 0.4U D 11.6 C.34 '6.4 0.43 8 14 R 0 R9 C.6 p 74 i)-1 1.r1 I-TI 7: "1 411.4 0.63 D r7 Royal Vistas TEAR 5SFAI interna6imill h Route 11 and Royal Vistas Roadway t-1:c p,i:'•c,k�'Ll L::1 11':liS !ZtiCI 111C r'SlctllYil _lf I L1:_itti I I '.11ii1 t114 1 U4iC1 3 tt1ti l�i)tlt�th'Ll '. tllt S011illl)Olillll Ic t tU-'ll '1's+'.C1'1i[lt 1,-,:u1: Ro Lit 0 1 I iLl n Rc!; [ VI_;tas Road'ti�a� minLrual dcla '. an ril }zr,-,c o Ill 1C, I .,CC 11ld-,(111Cll1 h t11 [)C: : hk)7 Ir, 111 \Yr ,1[','..11 i'I I ;LI:IIII T rl",Ul tilntin; has I.O 1. c 0 Q.s9 d1,11-Ill` 71' A I l.'.`i v. :IiicI:tI 1)c::1% IourdL. r:7 'll'v'1I Ii-Ci11S'I LE11'L:*+NJr; 01111L I I. 111c 1t1IC2'ti LItL)r) i[lIICIii111.s Ali '. h tilvCl}1_:.1* 1;: iiW :1 .' ,) L Vehlc.l:: im til'c AM pc-as, 1,.i:m and ry.f'+ of dclt�l_, l,�I L•I1i."1:• i1. -1_.' P.MI1::,sI:llnur. 7l 11",1 oSl in�ill;llerminornux clt1c7t4�}1i�1: tLf ;?4 1�L�1l.iIII I.; 01 eOe(IL1111lJ, I I',t AM tall€l Flbl l)L;ttk 1101-i- . gf Route I and Koakini High way Al 1114 1 with Kuakini Highway, the n0rihh-,,�irCI .LA tum operates ai LOS E(vic tit C.9 I) :'.lrlll ':Ile :,e;i< 1' mri All otherinove€neuts 4peMtcii .'_' ,l,:L,,tp!.lh1L- levels ot4ervice during the AM mlt', ]'d 11L-.I; 1 1 4t11.ti h) Route 11 and Luko Street. 0veratt fnter'secfion LOS= DJC(A WPM) At '.1!t: C!t'Rt1LU I I 4kitlt 1.akC1 :1112 1:,;-11"All.al -L'It 1.11:1 CSJ)'r.'ICC M LOS F(v.c I J11ri11 1111 AA] l)_•-'k hour and LOS I-'. ir'f l!_N'-' c1L 111.:' 1',I :, a4. I".0111T. Thi~ %% ,-hound left TLMI Ld-o `I 1',11 :rt I,''-s I'. ;'t L M,1 111s'. rI.S`+ .re9peci vel I Jurillr 1.1'L 1`,l .1'iL: 1'%l Thy I:_,icals'! s.p r:llk-, at lt.).,-� I. 1, t1,;5 �s11,1 ti, M,rLti ti'tw1,1 durinC the A I and I 14}v -L 1,.o,Ir,,. 1_lI Y,1,1, is at1:t] tl ttl tl ailtr , furl '; ,,nd spilt 1)has1tli-, fbrthe Lako Street app-mach <. :111 oil -'r rl:t v,!.1. :rl, .It Lak1 I I. I.c)S D ov Lurid,-. 11,,ih 71K'llc r� Route 11 and Kamehameho 111 Road- Overall lnterser.trgn LOS= RIC(AMIP10; ti 1 II`t ,Cll. ll[; a' 111t �L'�LI$IILCL.l 11':._ �Ctil,. Jl}: t}1 1�4,11[ti lt'I [ 1i,11Llllnriwll l 111 :.d ltiwLLL'd ;u ;f�11�:�!l,ri:L:_: 11.)� l}{,, l,s•uL;r duril�� r'l.'41 :ln:� l';�I llian I:Y�I::• 3. Future 2b24 With Project Mitigation ! 1, lti 1.:11-:) Street F' ,,n—,i, ;. h.4 4, :1 ll tiun of Alii I Iigliway, and the I : i'A)111 1lCliL'- to"-nehanneha Ill Road\ ill improve regicidal tt'ZiffiC iu the AUdY 'i iLS . FIlt 10Fipk:-.,m dates ofilit--c: are notknown.. In the lntcrim. diCA-tnin [11LCtl�.3[1C►174 M'CL-t' Ci l,-iIL 'Vd. a) Traffic Signal Warrant All i1 filar tO tll:' L tii tiI"' %t011 Ir [or.. 1°1L� 1,11 11 rr, -il,I:l I .11,"it c1) let turlt,, Upcc-!-._c at LOS F during, L0ih licak- hLru ti ',It boils liu,.:;:lai Road inter.,olo-1•: :1.1d :lle 110�I Vi 1.11; driveivay. Pkeak-Hour ►•oltlr>r>le traffic si-nal -warrants were c'-..i:LiAed fi:: I-I,2 ?'4l '.,ire, ind withui 11:oi,�ci Lviid I _L}-1 :.i11Ic 15 shows the Pcak-flour warrantanai1 ,1:, in 2024 1'L1.1. L:ic 4k 1'Iiktw. t 1 1. J] Royal Vistas TFAR SSFAI inlernaiii3nal 11 able 15- Future 2024 lloak-flour Ntarraill, 2u24 without P,-ON HOUr Warrant A ro Wil Fra nt Majo 1`011 ri or V, M,D-1-1 I 9 i 44 Hu,flalzi(N) I'll N,0 V-) NO KLAiri'l Hw� 2.407 0 1 202 4 W1 111 F1 roj L.c, r.,;i Vajc;.r Minor %1v::r -1-1.2 aj C. 1,11,1C. W, 2261 44 NO 1-'16 L'i Hu,�Ialiii(SI 2170 9 17 ':j j 1 1.1 [Royal`,'ista,Dv%,y u'30 24 D l0 al I 1K,.Aki,11 HWy 1 2.4118 Ct Ij None of I he unsignahzedintersceti on s sansfyi lie Poalk, 1 10 �"ik11�I�:iv-I:-., operate with relatively low overall delay. The minor street k-i M Street are relatively low and the observed delays are gencru.I,, nit.cl, lt,k%cr flt,ii: It,: J-, Ole 26017 MUTCO states: -At an lnterq, Cdon with hiLfli apt li,fl-wrj, ir:d:L,° h-,5111 ljica ill' zrI ex. artalv"Is MAV I)C I)CIfil1111CLI HI 'Li 11MI r il _.�M( LI1LI,-I ti Ih',- I]] W1 0 1'1:W I 11,111 k 4I-ti,l I-,ct [I-Ii -I I,1,:� .1, 111c ,MI1IO1,1.1VC1 OILIMC JM1 I hla L01 I& I.'. III I.-L! 1111, A', 1`111,1k,-11'r 1.,l I:-I"" I I I'1_� ri:,dra tiin?ei I,; r1le H- 7' 1 Z I.P 11 e 1 1',1 k L 1,1 Iti I n I I I- I box .I I I I. I-rI I T'Tw AM I-L::& 7o-l1' I-or rK,, nurthbotind Ikmi) mri ,oh ii,, rujirc,c,11 fll:.- 131. or tWll VOlume, ajiLt the k),tJ)osiiig southhCRIM.1 �,nlunic reprc,;ci1N the irajor Tahle 16: Future 2024 Peak-Hour Warrant' 21),'.4 VAthoUt I I t:a k"H ou r'A'_i ant Project PM �Ivarrant? ma]:.r Minor warrant? K.�;,k:ni l•iv,Y SOS f,02 YES 1 1:_11j 340 YES Peak Hou r loval ra t Y'jj i h F1 ra e Ct AM PM t j-)r Minq7—warrant? or Minch warrant? K,takini Hwy 932 W2 YB 1M I W j YES The11 aiicl Ktia�,Iril Ill satisfy the PC<lk HOL11' V`M1.1J11 .:i 7r�'4. Fi�: illll5f;t4'nwl [ruffic Wall-LIT'' :ICL'.I DO: A:1111' 111L. "_1011 ON IMIF-IL' 1�LTI�'Cl I I'A;3,; ;).., : 1. 1 1, 11 I1i1 -I 11hor-"I lets-turn ]%I- %kir', ori�.:Iiwii 17). Siogle leak i iW ur warar17',V,3S eVaILjTejs tecause sufficier-,dzra %vas avafla�lcz:and to�!I;e an :ndicj.7kall c" whP7her or not an inter;effrjr,shcdd be considered and rne- f.-Il' 3 -L!-&tfiC SIF,1-121, SiYigle FliA �-.ri,r %vmran! -,v,i 4 ev;fl 1.�-:(,:: 7,6`r:atlrse%I iffider. II -";i v r--1 ei rO in G:ve ii r i ril I if::- it ne.her o I nat&I I jltersectlfl`",'�I If'11 Id bl.' LC 1' -1 -wd om LDI L�A f-,)I i 'Lri�ffic signal. Royal vistas TIAH 55F147 inferna6imal LOP I e 17. Future 2024 Wilh Project- Route 11 and Kuakioi Highway Left-Turn Sigaal phasing Alt-cruatives I.an p PSI Lit r?11,PFO(rrted t,eft Tkjrn AAA Om Delay 'Elveh) Vic V/C -�SL WS: Del (seclioeh) LOS �HOL:ti:'-I Kunkini I vIV(overaIll -17.5 ID 2D.3 74A 2.DD E .111 1,C T 1,5 0.56 A .1.4 .3.56 A J D 19.7 9 -,;Twoach ;% A 2-Unc.Riou e L.L.Pormissivo LtflTurg PM SL!(-/%-L!11) •JE- LO�, Dddylm�L/w:h! VIL E 2.7 Jz A 1.4 r. V: I A L.9 0.0 G�L� 2 Lanc Route 11,P 101-RO Fi,i Left I ut ii AM PrA S j:n a I P h;3,,,n f,In n Ku a kim H S:h vay 11L,k3y J s v rJu Li h) LOS DL I aW f re rfviE hJ vlc LOS RGLIr L&KLhikini Hwy(ovemill - A - A E 2 ....................................................... �7 I t: 7 rgpFl, :1 3 J.11.. 11)L ---------- ----------------- I lie owral I delav :It till, I on 111,1 11 in b,--)-,h ,-,hl tl,k- Jt mi-:1, %vill dill Vp,ti[,OC at LOS 17 or tit,,: i- Li'l It]ik:n%ml I%4w. It is 11 11 110 kc 111%,1-,..LCd it this imel-section. b) I ."It' '1'1!1kT 'JIV,': IL'r W.'11 1110'AT.1,'11, J1 hUl I I 1.1;1hL-1 ko%itl ni d kmikini (11'V711t., A m-, 171': 11.11')( oll" 'Im IMIklC-,; :-,LC I J'-k: 11C 1-C6 1-. ri.1-11 L11C V:C J),, I r,'.' !'I, ,I',I I C I U-1 111 J ti !I I,1,11 C L 1-2 i 1 7- [Ile UJ341_11?;J I 1rCj I I 1 11 'L L L 11 R; 4=01"k11:w11:, v.L:1-Lnot anaP,,/ot", 1,111U 131E tTaf-11C %01LMC1' O'AA4. 1nci,ease, anti the \:i: Fable 18- Future 2024 Without Project RoundahOdl A1121YS1S atURSigNaliZed 111(0`SCC6011S AM PM Delay{se e/vehl L05 tMov(seri,00h) Vic tins Route 11 K Hmalaial(NI lowrall) 175.2 # 97A F HQU-W I N::J aop, 16:L5 L31 F -M4 F -------------- -ROWC I SR ApDrOaC!' 9&7 IL 12 F 121.1 1121 F 'i I,-i,'-.I:%,:?�I I-11; A F)�m:S„i;1, a 7 U7 F3 17.4 0.10 C 1�11.-11.-flai(5)!nVerall) 83-0 - F 93.7 - F "J 126.7 1-23 F 1&3 1 10 "CIL 11:-.:"IDIF.t 39.6 0.96 E '-'-2.3 2.19 F 25.3 051 D 15.v a25 C Route 11 K Kuakji,i (o,�erzll) 297.2 f 13,6 F C,L, 1 '4 3 d, f 1.19 11 235.5 1.48 1 3G.4 1.75 f 22M 1.46 7D 1E.4 0.44 C 71-7 6.95 F 33 Royal Vistas TFAR SSFAI inlerna6imill C) Alternative Mitigatica MPtisures (1) Alterni:]'%L,., ai 1._-,,,ko AiCompat -lsmi tk widen W� cl"Ror'e. [ I and ,;wkm %1 kjklr J lm�d foi Ili, I t lui-e 'Ili" h,,-,vn in I'able 19. All n1ov(,I1wI-I-. J,11 Ak 11�,l !M �k ji_i I Lane Rc•uh, 11 ]Cft-u:!11 011 !__k,,i P:,.-.,-ct1-(- left turns on Lik;, 1.1 1,,% Idc a SI.;_;III crl,::Il Ili :11C 111-11 ChC J!d[IOM L, k2f 'A 11. L+. , :1111_<. 11C "V! I 'III I OJILT'11, A1.11 I h'I'l 1'111-. 11011". hiblc, 19: T`uturi- 1104 %Vith 11i'll),ica- Routc, I I iaid I A-fl Isti-ret Left-Tilm Sigral Whasing AlICI-111IGNes Z-Laiw RojtF Lp,F'r,3tp.clp.d Lift ANI PIM Tuui S-_final p3h,j 17 g uci L,3 ku St r L-v t_ Do la sc!r/vi,hj u1r==LC5 De I aV I s @ clva h V/c LOS JR0.4i I p I I'K l,,.4,(0S1(ove m 11) 39.5 F 1, 11 1: 11 16.d Cl :. b K. C 0 1 7.-- T Im F.1 0.73 c 21-9 L.85 c 83.3 0.93 F 59,0) 0.8,4 E 44.8 D-16 ri 5G.A 0.14 D 157.D aM (A,3 b-CA 52.4 147 E 6LS 0.55 .......... 2-1 H rke R(H]Tc 11 1'�rrm N i vF F,ft AM glhl Tu r-,i Sig4al I'haii r 9 t),i[,:3 ku St rp v.t D�Aay(sertvL-L) VIC LOS -JL lay J!;odVf1h) V/C LOS Likn.ST(nvp-.911) 33.2 L ........ 2_.�- c -------- ----- i2 '1 092 0.82 D B I I Lj I i 7 0,75 c 2G.8 c 7 U 3 Q.11 c 2.1 LAI I c .7: 0,N D 34-5 :.21 c 2-L.mL-Foutp 11.Ili c 11+11 L,r m U- APA Fj r-i S_.g nal P hii sJ i g:.I I U ka M ru v t �[,Wsk dvuh:, 'd/L LOS Delayjsec/vellI V/C LOS Route I & 1;�ca St(ow 318 c 233 I i I- in 0 11 H '1 1.1 c 19.5 C..G5 6 ---------------------- ------ -- L1 L. 11��U,T i,(,- Ls., B 2L2 ell- c U 1,j L) V,,T L9.9 0.38 1 ----------- D ------------ : .- --------------- ------ JJ F T rr,.Aj:q H:�,.M� 67.5 E L 7 L1, 4-LA PP Route 11,5 14 1 t Ph,75i ri 9 on AM PIM Lakto Street Delay�SeLjwh) V/C LOS Dale-y jsvc/vnh� V/c LOS pouts I I Laka St I uv+--ral 1) 21.2 15.9 6 ----------- ].,5I,jjt ph_ t L.v. ]0 R I A P 0 L.-f' II N�B 7h �.j q 1 20.2 a 69 c c 1 13 n L 11 1.B�.?t7 I.L.3 Cl 51 B W f1 51. El --- -- --------------------------------------------------------------- ...... I.I.1,H I-1,f),.C.� 15.4 CIM S 713�2 L,J ------------------------------------------------ l1 I(I u„ 1 0.14 c L6,mWISTimugh-Right 3f.L 0.31 c 30.0 4.34 c 34 Royal Vistas TFAR SSFAI inlerna6imill I i..,to, i,irj; :Al V 7 t I-C"0111111CnJI,I Illlt lic 111 vE ,i0 r k I 1 1).1 "Je,1.[:A,- Ir"'1_1 L";I�'.ij I)L:t. i I 171,01ck I le Ci-i.I I I p li.:,,- r,I ,i I 11,: hi L -I:ler}d. -trl; l Frel'I I I I-.,i I L- A.-i'l-I L I 1.11 1,, !';11 V.I I- I hok"Id:1,�I wi,:�,,h "11CIALI 1_14 bCfOI-C allowilm, pclllnsmvL� left-tatil Plia- sing. lilc widClIll 01 k''Url' I I Ir IAAIAI it 2r.-24. 4, Future 2024 With Project Segment LOS AvIci-r-d D Lll,[ it- S.,lich") :I, R,muc I]ULLI,:1-:1 I A,Ull I tL' I), ;I Fe SL:1?. 11 C,� lhan 14) :Iil ti '-n an LII_I).LrI 111 Ll(. lilt' :;l_Ay !dWL.IJ :;l:'_k/_'d lull III%: me'mhoL:olk,�_ e,�of l-,wil lies. For L I to 1,1c,ljl} LOS. caji '%, The arterial LOS �Lm K [,-L.nd in Tabl,: I:iblv 211: Fidurc 2024 With 1'r1rJer( Segmeii I I.(,)S Feak �Io i I r Noill-t-ound (ToV�i-j i-i;ea) I Soutl ibu u i i(y (T-li Kcr I u I I L.!'.J) Speed (mph) LOS 5pc,2d (rnph) LOS AM PI @k 19.3 c 23.9 c ?M Peak 21.7. c 22.2 c 1 1 1' R o L.I c I I c 1'<k L I C)S� C irl .Ih' I1:7!,11ILound and SC I I I 11h0l ITILI J IFL U I N)TI d I fl-liTU-1 1.1ic! A NA --�,.,:ik hours, satisl� -�I,er 25 (Zoning). Article _2 (Aklm'lnP,,-tr;jtIon and lk:� P)d _. .. �. I Of 1 1:!�%,L: Ch�_,� Division 4 1 L 4,n;vl -6 (Concurrency RC(jUiI-CRlCDtSl regarding, "acceptable .LL�C_ 'It ;Ll% LCfil[ 15 Royal Vistas TEAR 55FA7 internaiii3nal Ill. Future (2029) Mid-Term Conditions — Completion of Phase 2 A. Surrounding Area Conditions Phase ' i'; L:\P °ciwd 1+, he kv Ir1Ctcll I'\ 2,,I_";. I--III�w rl'iI:_. i1w full heilclout 10-Fear future fc)re'cast. Phase 2 Fill co:11:1 n 1 y.� Ili-!ll1111,1. Irlhou>tu't i_? :'.-ld 1`11 tsi�: 1 ou1laoitnld[rips eolitinuL:io use[hc Ruyal Vistas Ro clwa-v and Kcitte 1 I itrersectiuil. Ling t irm iiiipr,,,k'I1•,:it;ti including the Lak.0 lreeL EXWO:Sloll. [lie completion of Alii I highway, and the wideninLy t11 ti;,-iit I i l,m Henry Street to Kamehalneha 111 Road mill improve rep'- %111;11 traffic in the study ?Irl-�i, The etst 11�Itir On dates of diese proiccts are not known. Volulties v r rL rlL:t ,Ik-. LL�lr� (eased on these 111111ri'•"+'4'lllt:ll 1;ti''+��15., B. Volumes 1. Future 2029 without Project Volumes Thkc p iv.IL=wt stuLiv :.r4sL %\-It]i n Kc)n9 has been c :per+_e.nle,n, .Z odc;, k-rc)v th. 11DOT ADT counts on Route ) 1 Ii Ir,v,2c s N iIli KLli_II.I I_irstc.ltid I InalaIai RoLld didn•i xho Linti inci-cLi�c in VVIliCIIIaV VOIUFntwg fTotn 2015 Io 2016. tii1 iilalrle,,Ilc_' l=.; 1=�21,ler.tl .Nld HigihMa;k s l_.on.g..RL7rlgc I nul.�:po tatlon Man forecasts average daily Ira T;c ,1' KL11 ,c. I,, l 1 F:,r} ,5 1Lcszy t[i 2t.t_1.11.111d 4X.[1()()~yeh1,1cs in 2035. I'his is 4)pproxirnatcly cqual to a 1:'.n l[ll'UJI v.rti T I:71(- 1 I'_e 2MIll-.dLCd I11WIe %;_11U<IleS kN I1h0L._ rile praiecl for t`tc. J'utare_year 21729 are shown ill F I"L[F'C 1 I. 1. Project Related Volumes The 1,_:t1nc}4tiLI Ik'.5 't9l VI: ix; � 91:cIII& lr}_' ii1t.W-I:L1:lilt rL:w:JL:n1i;L. dv .ILng,nnits forPlli.,L A,I ,}: [lil:sc are eNpect2tl 10 1)L- ',av, riSC l:'lil} -ti4I111 13, r 1'lrL�: <-.'ri��. Ti-'[[-, s L°i L:r;iI_'d :1V1.11 711e P;_OJIO CkI CAL:I 'A were 1;!IIJ 11-�4 I.ILti'+ f:'L111 iflti +'a}' 'C''!:,'. fYC' r 11,1 I.tll:19-i;1 (I 1,1 .1.1{ i ITF 1101net I lic "I LI Ii I-C;IIil1 i IOU.,.I', 1 1 01, R -iQ l l 1L-, s.i. IIYi:I.Ii c1,2111";lr;Fl! IdS.t4.'k*.lilt:, :.°;lt". 1FI: 1 III:.IiL:I:I4 k)L:_:U:d1 _kiLILitt L lC ;,UL1IC hl-EIC11_1U Ai111 AL IC:.LA 11lhL_:- �,iis II.It+, units" TILL ll'..11ti 1. I`)-' i1',%C 11'1! IL111L;. :iti die lndcl:�:nden[ to k2-Hn-:ik 'l l 'riln., L:71pcc1c,: I.voill )'liwx i o" I']- I�r,al7cr r11 pn�leiL. I-c� kv nev4 trip.% twrerjtec I'll:t:.v .Ire i;-I 1.11; � 21. IAIkk ?I: I.wl ill INI Cd 'I'I-iIIS (.eI1L'r:i[Cd Ike 1't-+IicVI P1,1xw 2 AM 1'M 7111(lUsc ill F C'rP&I 11JILI Ilicln Vlq trinrt 1n11i-1Litttil► H{�[t ii><;,f Ln I`lr} 1).L);, Ln 1 4} L.i (l'; [t.1,1)°"Lil N 1 1.1 qw, Ukk� ) 1220[ C.51 f1 f1' - ------___---------------_-.. __________________________ __. __________- 5 _ Nes % 89 I lac, Cn` [)tt1 1[t (?tat T Total number of trips dent :I;dcil. X II .il :. it .1,1 '_ D:I:,rl•::I, ,. .ly fr' ti r,.r:�[:� rr 1:::'" Edition (ITE 2016) 1nr Ladd Elsa 220 36 Royal Vistas TEAR 5SFAI internaiii3naf Rnu:xa I 1 Prolect nV — ril p'I�nd'id � 54 4631-� Y � � w } a+ RCW}t211 oe 21�1��3 ,'."+, � c•� �Ss.^.;71d '� H�rtrx�r 7: c � Roure�1 e• 1 i ilgnrvSr a� 11v:CSDI � v' F3 } I Iluua$11 oAg haute 3S �' Rce:'a]1 -ep--d It Anaty Zed Ptak Hour VOI4 MPS S gnali e[i unsignalized IN Cntersec7ion � � AM(PNlI(veh. rj Intersedion Intersertion P �� Figure 11.Future.2029 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes 37 Royal Vistas TFAR 5SFA7 inlerno6imill The prol:ci 1%1111ti1i 'I'l[11' '-VL-TV 1111a'`Od 'lcck rdl n"' tkl L'N1.<'IT'l betwe,---1 ['11.11-m.1mull Alld :L, the 1111' 1111'Ll kll'JI-ll)kIljL'II Fill!'ll-k- Irhkm-,ld -1-41" IN.-III 'IWIlU,: M Ih,' 'l',YJ I \, It Ri 11,- 1 1 Ir &:il ;j lU Lako STL,L:cl Is 111-ovaicd. I'L.-I'L: § L'I -i,Il (11AIIIL`;)IIIAJ 71LIj:['lC) 111][ Itiilllr.L I>-' I :I It --,,I d I I I-iFIL< Ilia nes;I, hk I L7!'-s, It II.I'.` u I I: .i I,o I k1IlR pi o N I C4L I I L I-,C", 'I I � I I V llt)�. L '1 20 k filk I 0,1 '1 ,- 'w.ir-, :02-4 lane configporatioll, Figure 12 shows the Phase 2 Inbounk I Pl-Q-7e'J tQd rM([ L I 1 1.- I l C;1, dips. Figure 13 shows the Phase 2 uuil,okmd poiccl ind dlsmkw,d trips. 2. Future 2029 With Project V a I u mes Phase I (Figure 9) and Phase 2 pro-icci related irips (Figute 12 Lil'd FILL ire 13) t�-civ Lil�dczl Io -11, T-u[Ltw� 2029 Without Projcc-t vclumes (Figure I I I to estimate future 20 '`� Wiih I'-lol-o L:Q Figure 14). 38 Royal Vistas TMR SSFN7 in[erna6innf Rnute it Route 3] 4 r�r T G 14 r Rnulrll Rvuta 11 n � � n n '� EMiwwrat � '*— tlo�w 71 rakaaclwru, � � �� PEmuee 1B xawalrrA.Nk a m Y � a v 5 iProjecl Rc�.®11[aF.C3tk1ff11 r J'� tuner 17 �,O�1Ci1 1 1 � ♦ R f _6 n a. . ICestRx YS Nrrct�li V a e9 �auue SS. tiaee]1 legend } P91k Hour Volumes Analyzed Protect Signalized Unsigna'"nd # Sia Sxen m C. +,, [vehAr} Intersection Driveway � `n"rsezt!"D' Intersection � Figure 12. Phase 2 inbound Project Reiated Trigs 39 Royal Vistas TMR WN7 in[erna6innf "r Rnute it } R{aute3l ta�rurt a�:ex°ra'r�vaa _ Sr' � r � k—d14) 0 1611C41 Rn�rec ss Route 11 �111J � a d �. �1GIa{t Ekriwwa� �'•_aJ1301 Bowie :a 71 kaaJwu I i re + lr Route 19 tawalmww r 2 �.16 PI 4--21115) 2(z) - 5 1' RQate 11 Rc�:a 11[aF,exhffuvial tuner f i k� [�,OI�Cil 1 1 6 ff• G CL y _° a lJ 11 oiuua$11 N RDLRa 11 Rrac ¢11 NMI toScaIf, - 3ae,ue11 tto[ee].1 Le�eaarl v;w Hour Volumes # Analyzed Project � Signalized � Unsigna'"szed � stop 51e" (Yeh/11r} Intersection Driveway `n"rsezt!"D' Intersection Figure 13. Phase 2 Outbound Project Related Trips 40 Royal Vistas TMR SSFN7 in[erna6innf P.cuts'!1 Route 11 4 w 44 591�9ti-,g� t4d*51 _^'v SIB f734j Rnutr 11 ztRoute 11 5, a S�(11�9'��► s�� G �.-. w Pra*t y,;� EMiwwry v'i 'N '*—IDS ISS}� Bowie 71:*K.lciyqu 291121 I1 RauTO19toWMMMM -r s n k 545 MR w n. rJ Im +—763 17V m�n = 16'G14 + Rcl..a it[oF�ca�ou � tuner f i Route 11 5g„� _ 1 R 751' '�: su V CL ? qZ v' P c[[c 11 Y ies993:9 „ram 1, �4 " Y Nvim 11. RDLRa 11 Nrac ¢ li is „ mff 12111' 3 48 in, ��y� yr � n� 8oete 11 legend } P 9 1 k Hour Volumes Analyzed Project Signalized Unsigna'"si!ed # Sia Sxen Ck C. +,, [ve r} Intersection Driveway � `n"rsezt!"D' Intersection � Figure 14: Future 2429 With Project Peak Hour Volumes 41 Royal Vistas TEAR SSFAI internaiii3nal C. Future 2029 Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis . SIL1 l 101 11C liwr 010 ;11-lvsls"I -I: I 1111:1-Q 01-1 �!,w a-TILI ; � I. Future 20213 Without Project Intersection LOS T1-10 IS 11111 NTVeJJi('Je)Were dct4n'.iin,i ilw ANI ,ii,: 1W )eak C)e I i i I it v a i -c I f 11 t C i llt'l1. Tl:c :I,!(i C L I 1-k I(i I :,I LC'+ 111 :1 J I -1-. 1:)Tl r. Iil,. T, VL:I I I I ti I I Ult a.. I F 01- I'l L:'lk1',\ IC'111%1 :-i F. Route 11 and Palani Pood. Overall Intersection LOS- CIC(AM/PM) All niovcircm, !ii '11L. Rua,[ 1 i.c).s r) or better dur-IngAM and PM llo.-I, 1"-mr, b) Route 11 andHenrySrrper. ovt�rafl Inne,r5ecrfon Los z CID(AMIPR4) AE lm opr Li r� D ur [IC11 i:I ''.LJJ LL: JJK. I'C':h LuLLI C) Route 11 and Huafalai Road(North� At I'l L: LI 1: 1/.'V. I I I'AA ion of'Roule I I with HLIqlalai Street easthoulid le 11 tuvi6w inovement o C I�k 1 1 1 rQtipLxt Ivc I v) wd I omz during hol h A 1`0 Hnd I'M PQ'IlK hoI.Lu" al-V 41;1Q I)i i'll 1111-1 111:".11 1 L'I�I �11 ,�15. %e 11. The nikkiier and other rilinor movemenu operated at Rcceptable letiel Of'S,'VAA:C 1,11C AM 4'11d PNI peak hOUrs. d) Route 11 and l4valaloriRoad(5ourh) At Of R01-1te I I With HILialalai Road(,south),westbound left tannin- movcinent h-i, LOS F 1.t,L: and 0.60 resInvtively) and king.Jclay!i during both AM anLl PM peak hours are due, 1, 1_,h I lit-0.1_'.l I k 11 nes on Route 11. The V,20',01OUIld H u111111 Ludt alas, operale.4 at 1.OS F(v/c o1-.74)during the A\-I hk!i i i The major and other minor moverneilits operxi�(l at accepmble levels ofservice during the A N1 ,:11 c'. I",,1 1) lk hours. e) R o a te.11 and Pu tip uo cl n u i street. 0 veraft Intersection L 05=8/8 fAMIPM) All inovc I:I,:-11 111 L;--i i,i I 1,.kA', I I-1 v:I�,CL 11:11.S of Route 11 with Puapuaanui Strect resulted in appropriate LOS D NM iint: I'M pc;ik R o u re 11 and Ku a kin i Highway C k 1 F I I n I I I 1 117,L!I ,'A:11,1[I o I I�o I I[o I I wi i h K lI i!L k i ri i F1 i i<h wa v,r o ri h bo u n d 1 c 1) 11 i mi 11 F T-&0 V42 1!1 Un i I I Lq N I CIS 1'. of(l ) ) 111c loos' LIRring the N\7 p,,-:ik kcill" (i.LC. \011.- flo.N Oil I-'-IC '-.1 N1 L I k.;I I I lVl L I 10 P;- p I,:; k 1 i S 1 4:1 r I- 11!; kni T1w lllu:il:irj L:1, T JA R rtr Al k I C Ll t I L: Cd,C.' LI-AI ICI 111 frU I I KULik ill'L I I I�I IWIJy tit PUL111 L I. I 1.1 S 11-0,2 1 Lt I)d Url ICI' roads, Q) Route 11 and Lako Street. Overoll Intersection LOS z DIC(AMIPM) 1'.0 Iftel (,I I%:I I ill R,mle I I -.,A Ill i 1.}iko S rct:[, m111.11117(P1.111d loll I L-I I -�l ' p-i� ,lw',i a1 L LOS E or Li irl,w 11�--AN-1 riL-�i k '-1: ur The t�a�lbound left k 11 :Pld %�elkhLHMO ;11' 1 ;L- „i :t:d11r in, lik: AM ,jri,,l I'M pc ik i-iours.Thi ti(IL-,l nix-is.I:I i ihii I od iti i lic nr i 1'11 .,olu rn,�,;�irid i li; -,plit phasing w f 14 I -Liku ap-rf,,ii:lics. All other movctnClItS LIE I A0 SWI-Ci t Or-Ul'LItC t1, 1 OS D01-ht.':[,!I' both rc lk kul:: 42 Royal vistas TIAH SSFAI interna6imill Table 22: Future 2029 Wil houl Project I Werseto ioll I,evej or Set-,ic(. AM PM M1W0eUVM11 Vic I 100ay N-o"iph)I YJC T-LOS Rn L-.p I I%L Poijin!IRIA pveTall 1 C 7 9 C L L L:: 3E.7 0145 1) 75 D '1',�.Ipdh 14.6 0.36 B 65 a 0.67 D D P - -.11 7�7.5 15-17 n -I I .. ........ ...... .... F- 42 pai-ni I 'k 0.63 C: RiputF Ll 1N,nry St(ov,i.m1l) 33.0 fl.57 C 31.G D II 11 7L) C 068 C -1'':L-h I od l 1 37,0 b D -32") Q'I C C -------------- --------------- Ro u-,,11 Lq 4-W el I ii I ei I(Nl(D Ve I nl 11 ZI).0 1.4 EE L-2`: 1027 1 2.37 239.9 0.43 F kuu-,e 11&lik,.Ildl,li i51 iovuralll 1.2 1.9 - L L!- ROLCkS I I K Pi.-.-tp-.m.anLA St(nvomllj 213.7 C 25.1 u4.2 _1: 0 -INR 111':A:,I 21.6 0.84 C J.� ") LI, 10 12. 0.41 H 11 1-mr J mI.,I F' 1)66 1) 7 D L-! I!' 28.5 1D.0.1 C C 31.1 0.32 C 6 C Y9. 0.Ll R 1.1 9�V I. k I 1'11 L,Y .7 47.4 0.95 E ;q C K.jA F 0 C 0.00 A A ROL',F-11&lake S!JDvp.ra11J 41512 - 1) C P I %P 27.7 013 5 21) R -1'1?71', 45.5 0.95 D 27 C F'. A, A 66.7 088 E 24 U C R. L 0.76 C 2Es.0 0.89 1 7! 55,4 0.76 F 67.7 U.84 E I F, '.1so-Right 48.1 016 13 502 0.16 D L:7.3 V 11, 72.2 0-72 E 65.3 M9 E 63.8 0.35 E 58.7 0,43 L RO L'-11&Y.a 11 Rd(ave.rAh 19 a - IN 25.1) - C D 0,74 D LiI T, [,Y71 1 0 66 H 0 79 lt-L 1, L: 0.48 D 1 049 D fl-r A' L 0.32 9 1 U'p! B k 0.76 r L 0,62, D 43 Royal V sfas TXAR 55Fllb7 interna6imill h) Route 11 and IMomeharnehp III Road. overall intersection LOS= B,IC(A /PM) All mov,,n-cents I- t11ti .-_',natized irt.rsections of Route 11 with Kamchklkiieha 111 Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or lactic,during AM and PM peak hours. 2. Future 2D29 With Project Intersection LOS I :I� _I --N � 1-11 'l',''I�wL :lllti:'�L` ll{'ll d :4l I"It;'«;TiLTtl 1_;) .LI',14 :L',Lr:l_i 1.Llay(in ki,Lond l�i`r Vl'17.1CIe were : :CI-rlli`1Ld 10I-Ih, A\1 .Ird 11\1 1 cak :1•: IIr- 1'•, - I:r; lC 11 NII,!dCiI i-ow 1ndIcolcti i1i Q ovcrall 1r1ersQQI1011 'I'.,lt Llt Lt]� I t)I' .w"r71"44` x,,, ll, hl;!'.I'[ '(I In yellow, Sync ro ouq)iIt 1s 1.1t Appendix 1, a) Route 11 and Pofan�Rood. Over-all Intersection L05=CI (AMIPM) 1 "lli,'•',E'llli'11 • 711 -1),` }It'I1,&,4d in«i,c,,li,}TI; of Rome I I with Palaui Road resulted in apprapriatc LOS D OF bCIIc.r dUrill A,\f ;;nE P\I rc-mk Irt,Lkr;_ b) Route I and Henry Street. OverlL7✓i intersection LOS C/O C(AM/PA4) 1�14 ',iy'41:}t�.Il:il I�:' 6Ir:1 ti+�L`r:n�:� a.L LOS I" .l� rill S; I:lc i'!.I I]e�kl. III,I.-r. III` ll,�r:sl +.Ic1LIy ".Ii1 I {-)S ll,.'�,`-.'? 1.;1 1 'MI `I' '+'.t ;`,4' ,::IL' I'.1 1,14' J,icro}ise il; 1) WV.Ja7L.11c.L 1'4111I1 I,' I I'C I'14' l Ip I'LTL'I:iteil 1,_ 14,I,A1 'L".31,IN. l :;(' ,;lik"L 114 1.':t Jkll'ik- I..114 PM rc,Ik 11,11Llr a of �s vclliclti'; 11-1. w FIL1I:11: ',t L_I t., ,lr I-le 1 ",'i':+ 15:' t,4'. 14 413L'i4.:: 4'.`- _Cti)[lk 4'ti4}I:':1ti s'.L1I14717r thl' -)w 1i7 �l IIli I:w 1,:.lj�ci. Th-1, 1 II._'li;l c Ill ifie me., 111 il4'11 '. t Illy] C:Iti'lc,l'% Iliat ]llMl";`;} tll: ,•It'.:1`.' ll'4 I l,' L11, 4 I ill Ii;I,i'Tl-S.,lnid '-(,Iiiri, :Ind IIf%L sp111 pll:l�;l`. All ol1il ":`1?l',l'•'l`1'.l4`111 ;I, I11t` signalized ll1t214a" tl<]115 UI Route I I with lleluy Stied L'esuhed in appropriate LOS D of Lbc°t1'L r w'.ill-lllg!,-\1 and PM peak I)OLLFS. c) Route 11 and Hualalar Road(North) At 111C t11iSl nallz_,,� in-c-i-gcctii:l:i of[Unto 1 1 wiith Huaialai 'IU-C i Ilot't1i1. .: l�Y!?�LLI14 li ft YL11'I1!il� P11[7x'i;llw.tlt haw LOS 1; 0C .'-1 5 iMd 0.,� Lind 1mi.-I s kT-1'yl 1 0lk .\M kil`.d PX1 pL:ak hfaLLrti eanz due to &-Ilull 111rou"11 vi}luniWy ull Ro:IYt: 11. I Ilc I'•1_: ul1 :1I', orllt 1111';_I' I'ltl'.'i'lll'rl"y -+I),:I':IlVd at acceptablw lk'1:';is OfserviC�dWitl" 11:C :1M elld 1'M Leak 1'L1LI:'�. d) Route 11 and t,Iualalai Road(South) At the misigilalwed sla rwcc,i01� OC ROLltc 1 10;th I-;UaU,1i Road(s+artth). I'd I :L t.lill :1,o,:-micllt laLl, I.,0` 1' oC0-42 -Li r:LI 0. !b I'i PC C II%;CIy) alLd IlIl1g d�.1.1 1':'lt i :�",I ULd 1�,N1 1:,1:r'y t11L'clue to hio 1111 111;`11[llumGa L111 I�OUTC 1 1. 1'11w�S`4 stbukll'.., f'I'v 17k 1,11,1 i1.yLI C' ;II'L',' iII L.0S F�y/c UI't,. ,:1 tlL:'i,l� the AM I)k, Fleur: The mgjor and ot11el 1.11;l or nao%-en LnOC tl;i,:.: :�1 ,11 ac ccptable leVels of *C k :'3t'l llt,L Ing the AM ai C Wdk 1iI ii.-. e) Route 11 and Puapva unui Street. Overall Irrterser.tion It05= BCfB C(,GMIPM) Thee southbotltld left all:i ., 1. l.s)'�) I: i.LllJIv' AM ;111L1 1""\-1 11c,11. Illy-LI. 1 l)e 'NOStbOLItId IC11 Ulm operates at LOS b dluTinlg t1w MI pt:ak Maur."Tll w dcl:.kys arc dur•to Lhe eyLcIc Ili. 1-1 r Icll Iknrl %o1wlin- are low and should cleat every cycle. f� Route 11 and Royal Vistas Roadwoy At the 111'l po-:,�d I.,iz z'nall7Ell I:" 7�0':IL I I ll'.; Tli-, ft,l'y,.1 'ti'],:�taN RoLldwa\'_ thL, turn 11)03 L'1:Ic`111 i`:,.7L1: Routti : I iu- , R''Y.1.1 VL>L k-A 1?I.=,L41. .Lt, '.Ir: :titans well, tE iala inini►ltal dehr- -.:n of 10 to 13 b :?]li: Lmu ll k_II:I 41c`,11•. lio-iii-,. The 'IC A'I. L'.I111f:1 I'.I;.1''.L':l'_EIIr Itas LOS 1'-1,L i .}I !I.t'I alld 0.52 1 ,,:__ii M?- 11oh A\I 129 JI: I JAI i I :LI_: I sl J%ML I , ur. dlIC ;D I'll-Ill L:1r0LI111 44 Royal Wtus TXAR" 55FA7 in[erna6imal `t'I11,1mc1 : on Row,: 1 1. 2 oft lurn,, cxil3ng Ronal ViNk , :L'.'': :r1'74'.':d ill LItiG' I.:iz10 S-I1"l 110 :LC'CCN.S Rolite 11, The IIiI-I n,Iinii function :w.-e.pI43[y. "Jth 4111 a%'1r:UsI.r of(:,-I y rcr % ill the A\1 Ilt.Lk Ili it :11'... (4 ,1;-h3.' 14`r vttl,'t'I(' in I I� PIM 11c.1; '1 ?1J1' l hi' rl.: 01' ::11 j Dill.. ' r13MOF RILA •ML1'.:, i31}:I.il:;_. ,LL ;-.LtQl.lHC 1?I ,tiI'ViCL: dUlilh ie AM mid PV j,1.',L7\ Ie:IIIL:;. g) Route 111 and Kijakim Highway At i'',C Uri ,:d fill' i 11S'I_ v lih Kii-k11'11 I 1 'II'r, : .. lsl_' 11w1111--or:ld IL-':1 [111 II.II-, "I:S>'.'C111VInt I k t I,L II IP1%r'I114I km - tI ILr, ; dm-'!nF- Ike AM beak hour 1�,dac I'., 1 1-'11 T Route 11. Al. o-"I'.;"I" 11"ii31,,'I'w,lly ;1i .11ve r,ll-11t, }C'1"V,of Servic 1w .-%\1 ;111.1 :'VI I1+':1k hoi:1-;. h) Route I I and Lako Srreer. Overolf Intersection LOS= 01C(AM/PM) At tR-,e tIS'.I1 :�1l� merseclloll ,1: P,016t-, I I tk'Lth 1_J::; 3 Ll"L ?, L11Z2 `,'''.LL'l:"1S^ Tk1 .Ctt to nl opCrafcs at LOS F(v.l of Lf 101ti,.0 lI -N1 AN1 hour, while sc-v '-A 1..,liku �Ir I 411 !.',11SC, 1lll ckla-, :,: attnL,ulL�,1 Lk} the LI11:1 •„U1111C 211d t;i4 E�€i[ �]La i1.:'_. €, ill: I akk: sit,: ;i All k'Lllcl Ill4,ke-me ltti 11 L,'ALl �I[Uee� AIC •1 thUill [10111 1',1.11 0 Route 11 and Kamehameho Ill Road. 0veraff Intersection LOS=SIC(AM/PM) AH ]l o emtiits diLring ho>h pQak hoikrs operate at LOS D or bomr. 45 Royol V sfas TZAR 5SFAI in[erna6imill I'aI)Ie 23. F11iure 2029 IN it Projeel Iwer velion I.evd uf er,'ke A Lt'1 _ 1'R'1 9•IrerSnrr-nIr .. - J¢da'4I'M!CNt'i v/c LOS -7rlahr sarvr-�" k'+c� LJ5 ROLItL"Ll&I'31ani Rd;:,VE�_III 23_IL 27.2 C .. D.45 r7 -5.9 -_. -- D D.67 0 S2.G D Ro.r• I .:F.Ih+„+'I 051 B 17.3 EL 1172 0 42.9 D h 0.51 u 51.7 D nal' G.5 C 35.1 D o' O Ito++tL,Ll&Ht 17ry St I�v.°all,l 33.5 0.69 C 34.9 0.72 C r.rr• '1-"sl, II R:'''s 4.61 5],$ D7) r5 i:. I F;-I r A:.: D.4 c 32.2 D.74 £ :1: •I,+0 D.UH L 2S.8 D.LJ i � .r •"I .'.I. "i; ?r 'i D.d3 ,� 54.2 D�7 E] n.r:. I .,•F.TI nr.i-1 ;L:; V4 C 34.E D.7rr, C I`.;H ".S 0-36 C 27.3 D.2 C D.47 D 3E.5 41 0 ..... .......... l I I TI,.•,ir,h - L7,58 J 37 R D 57 17 _ 0_03 C 33.1 '}.U3 C i I '�rogl' Rielit i_ -I i4.] 771 R.otih--Ll H+dl-I a;(N)(ouer.34� ! Z7.2 - LS - - t _1`.'L�'l 12.4 D.21 8 13.5 D.LS H I:I WR 3 3.15 F 1,55.4 057 ROMP Ll 0,H,ial:du .S overall 1.r1 2.4 __1 s L•-I L 14.1 0-17 8 125 0.12 a 247.1 OL42 F 400.5 016 F Routr.L3 5,PunnLiaanul St ovmil11 27.E 1 32.2 C. k 0.37 B 28 IJ 0.64 C 1 19.9 1123 13 14.9 11,46 13 0132 C 43.5 1-00 D r=,i7+iA'F.Iir 3,� OG7 J 34.7 0.65 D _b 'r',I.iah I 28,X em C 29.6 0.07 c 32.1 0.33 c 31.4 0,17 C 21I..H 017 C 2r,h 0.07 C RDuLL 11 9,RuV:l Vsstas(nucral1 1 3.6 24 - RDatL6 1.1 1. I I IL, D.U•9 6 12.5 D.1` Ri Jmsla.'I:•v'1!" �:'_.. 149.1 D..(;1 F 1 )52 rtr, al J,cl ,:,1:6 i?r,l: 27.5 D.43 76.3 D.31 0 Routi Ll&Huaklm HwvaveMl 12 8 2..6 wi�oulc 1I Lr°I 54,2 D.98 F ]9.7 4.55 t n D.nn A n.n :}.M A Route11 LakoStIaverall) 5Z§ 1) 32,1, - C i 1 N:1 Lc'L 18,2 0.13 6 22.3 ,^..1G C n.+:a ;I 7: rr.+,rri 48.3 D.97 7 25•$ DR5 C •.i,u'.: .1 S 3 L,:11 107.8 L40 F 34.4 D.?1 C '0,1„ '1 'a?l- ,.,; 25.1 0,73 C 763 D.88 C 173,4 1,02 F 00.8 D.$6 k :L I:r,,.,,I' :,sl': fal.,} 0-21 J S5.1 D.16 E - kv., I;. 6ss.6 (05 E 72.2 0.73 Ri::l': 53,3 432 R 54.0 0.43 c Route:L3 F3rn 411 Fhd IiM.,al11 A B 27,k1 C r7,I 079 D j3.$ D.76 0 ,upi+ [ 1�.5 4-67 S 24.R D,77 C 11S U I L =.s 1aL48 .3 SD.G 0.51 0 16.4 D.41 B Y,-in-F?.'::nla h'„i'�IP"r-: - 44.,3 3.98 D >,:m l,a'1v31- I'Tl,r:,rl-r•• 17t r.h '1 J 51.8 7.56 D fi Royal Vistas TIAR SSFAI inlernaiii3nal 3. Future 2029 With Project Mitigation Long tern improvemont., i lie I I yd i 11'� I I w, Loki) Stn4.�ct Fxtcn,;J,)n. -,ho (7,)n-.!~I:-ti on of A.i i I I i�I I m7idcning of Route I I fio-.ii I I ciirti S-I CCI to K-LI I I I I:�l I I 1 16,:1,1 %,.-11 a I I I,: T. :II I'I,: .-Ud� area_ The corwplbon dales of these projects ape i 1w 1,w im i h II. d w i W ed r. dwnc a n i nQ 1.,_rdUC)11S �N t!fe 0) Troffic Sigma!Warrant Anolysis 'S i 1-1 i:;l r To r1l". ',.i'T i I,,_,. tr1w 11.1 i ll:)I. �t"i, Al,qpmch ICR rams njw-<Ilc at LOS F '11 I in�y bot; pL',11C :It 1,-,C Th I I ii:,!�In i Road h1w wtk ri o a Q -K c R,-wn-I Vistas dviyciv�,.y. PLC.ikI hmi r vol-Li rnL rc-,itf-i c ig r a �i 1 t)i were (',d.U-Lted fc, I_L 11 i(' rniect cNiNuon, ON 24 xbw W OnbHour I UK 24: lbblure 2029 lVak4bur WarraK 2029 Othoit Pea Hour Warrant Pruject A N" — P NV T Mriior I'A i n or VVa r r;ir-i? Wjor V i ri 1), VIA r�r r-t)n t ISK) )434 10 N G hj,iki .1i (N) ))SS 4L t:,7;i r' H 4vy 2490 0 N 0 148) 0 Nu PpHx H(w, Wwranl 2029 OAK Prjcct A M PIm Ilyli;jor Minor W1 ua"? Major NMI mdr WarranW duma A M) Z109 44 NC) 25YO 10 Nit) -d U-11� J i (S) 2317 9 N 0 2594 14 N 0 Vist�s F)Nv Y -940 29 Nib -)283 12 N 0 /Z-41 1'11k!!S-VC11L'n9 'Will 1111-iSfy the pt;:Ilk 11,i111 A;wr-,-.Irli. Cl' 1 _0 11111�,�IVIIVOLII %2 r i ow ovc i:A I dohy. The rphwi noxi 0 H wdunws at I Am i H d and PLL',IILLtIal:_R ,:.l I C:Iaix ely 101V ;A1J GO Umnod Walh arc qvr tnVllt MULL Iuwer thaii jawyS. TI)e 200c) NfUTCD saWK -An an KcNmlon whh Ilia munie orleWtin1 trM71c from the major street, Ill c > p i m 1 1%d Y n U 11 0 1 VY A S I U ly In c y H 0 n n c d Ai a r m I 11:1 0 1 :.1,t I -i I'I,i L[,:T'-; Ills 1)i,L:1,:1'k I'I.I i r TIJ 10 r-`,]L',2 C1 I c I I- 111-11 IjI-,l I- ;hi -111filor-Ni r"ot- vAumo and Giv wovoyWhy inds d:ITCHOP Or-WINWng W FA; Lin Re ti cl is iiht 'rna i0i_1-1_1L:Ct'- volume'. Rok-it 11 arA kU i L i n i I i�I i ii% 111;1 Jilt] Iej_; 7L,1-11 I� - 1�i i�, _L }It.-I L,' I C[11 Cm:!I i�,-Lit LOS E dur�ii!7- i�i,: AM pcak liour. Foi --fi 1111 111L. -1w..'of- up11roilch %oluine, UWU 1110 OMMA", MAIJ1110-1.1'A 101L11[h_: WC 11 Ll 01 ',JI)['JV,:1-IJ nc I wMa 21�. ShgV �ivk Hour warrant w,i bf,CaLMe SUMdeni&am was awdabIe and to goo all WmAn n' t:i ci Wter&eCUW,,dintdd he cmNdwed .-vid niw Anted for a vaMc signal. 47 Royal Vistas TEAR 55FA7 interna6imill I a14e 25.- Ftllllre 2029 Peak-11(oLL r NN arr:illi �1,2tJ Without Peak Hraur Wdrrar,t ProreCT Major minor Warrant? Ma-or ".I. .,I tI`vaI Q017 Kuakrm Hw 945 602 Y i 1157 rE_ PeakHOUrMIi-r`Ii 2O29With1 Pralect AM P1, ma'pr IM!nQr Warrant? Major MirOl ,rrar Kcjakin�Hwy 972 W2 YES 1,ST,R 341 Yf": The Route I I and Kuakitni Ili liway intL:rwL:crion ;,mill satisfy the Pcak l okii ' ai-il,jir ill ;12u. I :lt :satiwfaction o4_a r.raffic warrar_r dc%cs 1101 rC4',UIre ofa tr'af°Fi itil:l:l: 1 t_Y:1d_. KLLL37.1. Ili,'i'•,,ay -was analyzed as a signalized l.tlterse hotl tk'Irli v,-; r0Ul !101-till)01111d lr1'r I7hu. mg fow- tltz� H'L uvt� 20-19 W IEII Project condition{see'fable 26). Table 26: Future 2029 NL ith Pi kyied— Rollie 11 ajid Kiiakitli Higimay Left-Turn Sigltal Pliasiiiig kItvrnatilrti 7-Lane Route 11.P'ratceted Let Turn ANI PM Signal U11 I(Lakini Highway 0121.1y 1.05 Delay ISeC}lrtrtt Vic L45 Route B1&{�t„kini tfw3�overagt�_ 41 s C 21.5 C Rh C K l ':'Tl;E3 apr roa 7-1:1r1i,rlpvrr.11,PQ•lrissiur*Li, TtIm Atli PM Sig=foil PI°�i::ing 0:1 Kwk,ri 1119:'Mby ticl)y lscC.+v^h,h. vie LJAI Lle'ay(Sec,lvCh) u c Ld5 Rorate':1&X1. kini Hwy�ovcra':I) 27..4 I j.1 A K::I I :: .:I I I:` _'I 1.1 0.!i I.; i?1 F1 .................... _ KL'.Lik I I. -,vay Lt a'pm:od, LI. II L'- r' D. Z ld rw fold Lz 11,Prelt+Pc r rrl LuItTtiru ?.hl PM SIjs.',a111 h,a<_1 ng O:'Y K uJi k+I-.1 11ag*1%%ray l)e ray(sLcvL:h v/C LON Lic.a 15r*C•`vCh Vic WS Route_1 livakini Fiwy f lavrr3'1) 3GA 4.7 A f,L 1_ ! .1 '-:-u'h1 I.! Y. Kuak.IYI Fkt hw-'IV I a rp ri aCT`, Ij.: L!I.% is I'hc ovmill tit'lay at this ill 1W., a 1.1 ircr�`..wk' 'n hisih I, :1.; Ir1 , .. v,hi rh, rs!`11 lu:•r"1cl Ti 1r"r .ti i I still operale at LOSE l71 :, s° :i`r �l,l alrernarr� .: . 11. is r,°,:1. 1:1r.1.::1{ I .. -11a1 wL.LE, I lint I:.,. 1LYt,1l'L•ci ;n 1111.E inter'sectioll_ 7 5ingle Peak H''our warrant Lv,j (".1i l,.stcNi,b(,CaI U5V 5I.I#ficient d;t,-;r wiiLi availartslt tjnd to give ran Indic;5tinn a whether or not an intersectiw, _:I if,I,Id lvr cca-tildelr:d ,vid r',r,r: Lored for a Lri�ffic signal. 4F, Royal Vistas TFAR 55FA7 inlerna6imill b) Alternative Mitigation Measures (1) Alterni:]'%L,., Lako S,.r,ci A'C'ompiulsmi tkwldeiiWL� Jftm:`e. [ I andl.;wluzj,^ J lm'.L] foi ih, I t.lui-e V, 1"I-, hown in I'-,ible 27. All n1ov('IIwI-I-. J'11 I!I1"':k' Ak 11�'I ;fl) �k ji-i I Lane Rc•uh, 11 ]Cft-u:!'11 ph�r�ing on L ;k,'i left turns on Lik;, I "L it tiI Iii the ovemll [)',I 1 111.,: 11 I alflt 27� I'litilt-i. 2112ij N%-'ith Project- Route 11 and Lakin Street Left-Turn Signal Pliasin- 2---al e E r)L I H 11,Pratc,ctp.d Left ANI I LF i^�igim-PhA%inp un LAU SkrrePll Delay{sec/Felt} V/L LOS Del �C/'Ilh 11/r LOS .pow I, L;ikn.51{uvFw.r;flll 45.0 D 29.2 c -'n, -11 �%h Lpfl. I; "1 -199 i 11'%H 1hroligh 41,2 0.95--------------- 677 0-8' 1.K8 7; 211.3 G-76 c 23.3 0-86 c 78 Lx!I L IG3-9 LOD F 78.8 C1.86 E 0 0115 0 56.3 e 7. (i 7.91 U.7=; E 7R8 CL 73 E WE� lvf�ugl'-R pht 0.51 r fD. E Z Lane Route U,Perrr ssiv@ Left AM PM Tu m Sjgnaf Phasi ngon Lakc Stre et [)F 1.�y j 5ez/veb) V/,7 ins I)H I ay(5L rjv?b)I Route I &La ko St dove ral P) 41-5 L) 23,9 c r'.0L A I I E,b.- 17.1 0.13 3 16.9 0-16 B 11 11 0.11 11; 114. ci 82 c Ur9Z I,L" . .......... ............. iD.$ 0-96 F, C.11 -3 0.11 D LAID - 1 7 0.28 0 11! o 2.LLAm Routu 11.p r u I-pu r"n Lu f t A U Pm Tura'Signa flh-j,irig uii Ljk.0 Slrett De lay 5f,r/u P i V/f LOS Delay(secjyehl V/C LOS Routo I' &I a o St�ovc rd I) 34., C 244 - c I I k I, H i5.f 0.16 H 10.137 c 20.0 082 B L k I 1 7' 6 0.92 D 23.5 0-68 c I 1 19.7 0.75 B 20.5 0.95 c J 64.2 0L86 E 61.0 172 c 45.4 0.21 13 52.? 0.75 [) 11 4 9-9 0-40 c 50.5 0-34 1) I 11G R-1.1 57.5 EL47 %8 0511 E 4-tone RnAe I],SPlit PhFrdng on AM PP.A L.ikri S'.u c,t 1)12 1 ay 12 L/W a I I I Vic LOS Delay(SCove;ll W.L LOS Route I' &I aka St jovcmll 2.2.6 - C 16.E, .3 C.L t-I 1 ) 0.12 6 5 B 0,74 c 13.8 d-64 6 c, 1-1 C.1 32.5 O.T:I c I �kn i-8 i.,: i„-d-K 7 25.5 014 FLAO IN13 R I-E± ?I ti 30.2 0-34 c 44 Royol Vfsfas TIAR SSFA7 interna6imal -11c ri i 1 i;SI; I,f." ."Inns(ATA, 2017) rec c mi meii t 1,,t?i i it a pp ro.dies III ill do 11 co IIJ W"!dL.'k J.%i"' 1'1s 1 17 11.'0-1,11 1' 11113SC 1).' I'Lkr J,'01d 1 ich-I L I I I 1 -31111 sc Is]:;11 � I I 'A I' c :',I St110L;!.I k I i I )I o,4I1 1:1 c I-4r.;i icL: i,:i It I c ,I 1L-,,-kcd bcf6rc cwls�dcrllig I L � L I I �' C�:kLd 11 allowk),g Null �" �-C� Itf 1 -1.11 1"�'n ILY. le vL 4. Future 2029 With Project Segment L 05 Ar 1k:1 1:.,1 1 0S was at 1:1x%".wd in S%ii�IiTo on Ko[L I c : I frorn I I ua 1.,1:-,1 t'.10F[I I'l tL SJL:w:. '--V I ':I C -.I glial I zed mLLe'-ti,-c� om are less flimi 2.0 mi apart,tht facility Lhould be tia�'Sified a":w urb m :-1%1.'L I'l Of � jbLUj Strcet Facflitu�,. For Urban I tIlIOU L'L tL %L�l 'IICCd is U�:,:d i0 fllilh Cl'IL:111,11' LOSL Analysis wor"-Beets uri Ls.uiid I-i Ajyc!u�i-� l i. . li,: ai Lci Ld can be 11) '28' Tliiw smmienf ofRuutu 1 1 mierites :ir LOS C in nortlibowiJ and wLwfl i boil tid dirc-cflon CjLtr-jnL1 the AM and PJ\1 :-�,,ik bours- [I.L: Id Rwo -iar-L- ALI1'i1:1:mr-,m,m and Avl,'I([1171t1'1-1i-.'. 40 level ofsLr% foi fizik I aloic 28: Fuem-c 2029 Nkith llroji•ct Sc-mciit LOS -lour Nnr-�H.nnund (To W irnea) Sruthhour-rc. IT-i I C-,'L=i L j h I-) I er,Ld !mph) 1,05 ')f)Fj-[j (711;-J�1 1 C-S AM Peal, I F S c 2 1.-) C Pm Peak ?;-'A c I 2C.S c Royal Vistas TEAR 5SFA I internatii3nal V. Future (2039) Long-Term Conditions A. Surrounding Area Conditions I.(I-,1 icrrll 1ITIIIt0',E'IIle;11s 111CI ULIi!1« llle I.11 1 street FxtenMon. The cs inrilelinn of Ald 0g11way. and the oti 1c1c11inL;0 Itotztr; 1 1 ii(7]ll l lcalry Strvcl to Kam<h an:Q al III 17u;d:1 ,,:ll :mI)rov rtzalt�tla'. traLl'iTt :11 1R1ti1 fi[r ti area, 1 lie completion dates of these projects are not lalown, Voltallle" � wre not haceLl on flni2- imvrw,!cment rrnjects. -No oIIl.I develti:l it-crt[ ti] 1.11.1lt Ck%r-�l -rl(:rion PrOJCM, are exptcled i11 lh: tl' 3t would s1r1• Ii::,Llll ;11'.k r Ill;' It:..41',t it 4,7I1 4'I rlk'ti ortraffic-volulu;:s atthe tiC l E on rcselarc tioiliplcilcd tin C- 20N ,1[ 1hk:State of Ha--,.';111 O!"i' :r of f_1Lti'irs+rllllcr::ll (11�,J1i[t' 4:czr1[�srl (OFIQC ) Wel)ti11e i111d [Ile Ids 11.11''131+IL.L[:011 Pio.-.Illl l ISTIP). B. Volumes I. Future 2039 Without Project Volumes I "Ic P-01E41 tillAv .' ca ''.1'll ll:n ItiL.11L1 has 1,c:ii w:.xp rIctic:u- ':Il['L:i '-"OV,Ill. 111.)OT ADT COLIJIL. 011 KZ 'LLLL i.''.':veand Hhi1 ala; C",s}uLJ dLL111'tsllM% a11% IIICI :1.tiC .11 ','JilcularvolllrnL:s from 01 i io I:l,6, Howev.:r.thc. :'.[1 ,' I Wcl,1r; l A:d I I I,,,hways Long Kl;..ngt I :-<.!nspoTt,,Mt1r P';in IoR. ;l-,-, 'V, 'I J.lily tra_tic in Ko:ia on 14a,ka1, B.,- ;. 761,11.1 IL' 11 I l 900 VCMC •.- in 21''I1 •Hlk I ;.IFI;I ,c l :ti l� � ,11 '':�::�. 'I his is 'til'11LIIU 2,1u:I ICY .1 I ln'_ILI;.' _'n.71S III J':' over 15 c,--Lrs in :hc KOHL; ',rc;L. Since t11ero ', •! t`d'il'.c' i'�,r c;11,L'1i1C me.nr rin(l to ak-knowleIjEr :?I1 otherprojec'r� ,�I' ',1 are 11' llhili-,MtT 11M-pe, a vckS''I'.iind !_'1ov%rl1 r.:1,' Lil ` l pcir `,l`ae W i. ;Iti 'JlllLi w ;wcounr fol .'i_li.lrltiilil{ fl';IIr'i` ;II II14` .�rl.dv iritcrsccuuns,Thcc-,w ai,[ 41 iuru" l 01.11'11�4 1111+`rul 111t'111-(jcct for this.future,year'U39 ark:-,ho ar1 in f'19U1c 15_ l2. Project Related Volumes Phanv I rind Ph.i-v .`. �11. b.: :111:1 :'':1.'.' respek:iI 0v. ThQ Irlps ac114r:r[ed arld distrlbui d by Phase 1 and Phase? will not change. 3. Future 2039 With Project Volumes Project related trips froln Phase I (Yipire Q)and Phase.-(Figure 12 and Figure 13)w re added to t11c l;utUre 2039 Without 1'ra.luct volumes (Figure 15) to cxtilnat4 F'L1LLIrt; 2039 With Project peak hoi,lr tulwiies #see Figure 16). 51 Royal Vistas TMH 5SFAI in[ernatii3nnf IPA Pro ect F q+ rM Q p I i' SJ PII�Aiald R 54w3i--,,+ ^�m fto�rceii m RCWt2 11 1•�e rt CNN{ Gl Hertrx�r � ear!m� r•-..i&9�'35}'G� „'�••� c x Ralst�i -.a e• Location. ilgnrvSr ! 1Yv�i5G1) � _'� T�• � ®f m a n ''S,_,j►� a ,i a o w c73r—r, � x iC4uf�i 1 S ;�n Iluua$11 Ago —ep--d It Anaty2ed Ptak HUur VOI4 MPS Sg1nah7ed unsignalized rntersem on � � AM(PN!I(veh. rj Intersection Intemertion IN Stop Sign Figure 15. Future 2039 Without Project Peak Hour Volumes 52 Royal Vistas TMR SSFN7 in[erna6innf Route it '� Route ii m w m 140 tr 11 a �9fl9 Rnu'er ii '� Route 11 w Pra�acr m•^-. y EMiww�i' '*—iCr1715S} 4to�w 71 raltragiu � 29112} _ Ralzal9zowalrr+� � � �,a -r r Imo,� +r-S3�17�a'. ��• 5 ass t53Hulovioa I�w1�41 �r W nProject ir Rc�.a it[oF caou tuner 17 r c-� G ad J `+ �4Lff4 17 ResLRa 11 Rrac:,.¢:1L "�.. +"r 39 lad; � �•�'�°. r— 1'z 111' �autie ii..� u' tto[te]1 } rro1k Hour volumes Analyzed Project Signalized Unsigna'-szed stop Sxen # Ck C. +,, [vehAr} Intersectsan I)Hveway `n"rsez-t!"D' Intersection Figure 16. Future 2039 With Project Peak Hour Volumes 53 Royal Vistas TEAR SSFAI interna6imill C. Future 2039 Intersection Traffic Operation Analysis 11 Future 2D3.9 Without Project Intersection L05 Thc 21).",) l 1-1116.'[.. Pru LOS J':�-m ill- -:L:':"l'd-' I,,:;- v%21110c1 %�':tc (I L71c ril I'm-:hc AV, ;mkI 1"�,l hot. y, NOTE: 20.11.1 FulUreproi. km rxe for 2f; % v,I iAi is acojmser%alik-" a'4':Jill ptioll. Tal?A' N 4ilwsthe anki level of C I I lilttCI k 11- The SILUiCk] 10W inkfi,:ML-, lk: ''%CIL111 loil 1�:it�' Jult E oi N - '�1.k:!uperaic a� 1.0S - 1.1 VL'%)��. �.� Idil'O�IAL:IL� -:I-� - a) Route 11 and Polo n F Road- Overall In tersection 1-05=CID(A M/PM) All 'm1l '11,: of I i wlh P,,; ani kk);icl in appropi-l",c.,: I.(-).S D or better cw'm, V%I m,: l',oilrN, b) Route 11 and Henry Street. Overall intersection LOS z CIDC All movements at the signalized intersections of Route 11 with Eeliry 'Street resulted In appropriate LOS D or betwr dUrka AM and PM Beak hours. c) Route 12 and Huclulai Rood(North) At the i ii i s i,-,j i i I ize i i)-.ti r e C'l O'l -.-)I-ROLItC I %'%h1l I 1U.-I alli StL'C'Cl(1101 Lh 1. L-astbound left turning movement �, has I OS l' (>f 3-3" :I I,Ll C.(1 1 1.2 C L:I-v c I v) al:'J I k I;I,-, d i J'J N-,i dt i r1l n L, 1,-)11; °Vlvl and P M Nak hours are due to 111L,]I 1111-o1 v-JI Votun%'ti ;'ll L: I I- I I e MaJOF and 091el-III mor n1w,L,-licw, operated at acceptable levels o f 4,,i t: 4 1 t i 'i n,�tht A\T a n c 1 1'%1 [1 1 L 1 L.' d) Refute 11 crud Huclalai Road(So a th) At the u n 5 1 L,na I i zed 1 nte rs ect!a Li cyl'l'o i i t c I I v.-i th I luala la i Road(s t:,i i tJ i i. w�,,�t L, I i i I -T t-1 i i i I. i.L, ni C,v ement : . - 1--o has LOS I o,'�c of 0.40 Lind 0.85 r,,SPCCt--%('IV� Lil'd LIU t'.-'th AN I LWC1 I" I p-- C dI are le tilt AN-1 i3rid PNI pt:ik 1,01:-V e) Route.11 and Puopuaanui Street. Overall Wtersection LOS!--WBC. The �cunhlonml felt lU11V One!'i4e 1[ T CA F 10MIL-1 �0111 [1e0k 1101-Irs. The ivesthnund left turil operates at LOS E durim', (I±L: FM peak 11OUL'- 'I hcs"! tLLIN" 1.1n: dm it, [lje cycle length. The left till-11 vottlaws afe kw and -,!;-,km1d C lCL11-0 171 C,t!C- f) Route 11 and Kuakini Highway :: � I - -1 ll()%C lent Al filC z--d irtcr,-,,;�A I L 1'. �1 I XULItC I I �k Ith K.1-:111:11 I I I LJI VVII�,111C 110T1111-01 �Id ICI ILID11111g.1 11 hu.,, LOS i Wcof 1.03llmd 1011,- �LJW,-: K! V\1 rlurkh.)Iirlsdui io "-ipmgli volumes oll. Route I. I 111;'jor and Who- li'.u% rwni� d LL lc',.1, kkll-I 11L%; flw -%-%-1 -JI-d I'N-1 gf Route 11 and to ko Street. Overo It Intersection LOS=EID. At`-c s -�:Cfl4.�n of Roil- OS h,nafiZL'L1 WC1" Le I I w:t�i Lakes Street,various movements operatc at L E or worse. Z77 Thil�&iay k am-i bilLed ILO UIC h'3ifiC vc1�h m'-- and dw split phasing for the Lako Street approaches, h) Route 11 and Kamehameho M Road.Overall Intersection LOS=CB/BC All movements nt the signalIzcd inlcr�ccllons of Route 11 vfith Kamchaincha 1H Road resulted in appropriate LOS D or better during AM and PM peak hours. 54 Royal Vistas TFAR SSFAI inlerno6imill 1'able 29, Future 2039 VN i I houl Projec I I Wers eel imi Leve I or Ser-,ic(. AM PAA Pole set I vIr 0rla fsr.c veh V E Los RnL-.P11%LPp1j1n1 ltd PyeTall) 233 c 77:7 L L::-. 313.B 0145 17 41. !j 7.C- D P.h 14,9 0.39 B 2C. Yu c 1 0.67 D t.1 D 15.6 �53 8 B P % I I 37.7 n_ c 1) .... ...... 26.0 2 S 30.? 47.7 Pai-ni I 'k I 33.9 0.63 D RiputF Ll 1N,nry St(ov,i.=ijl) 33.4 (1.70 0.73 c D 52 C---- ---------------- I,':: 7, 7 1 i EY 1 1 I-r-, v A 7.5 D Lu 1 7 .:4 0 ----------- ---------------------- Rou-,,11 Lq ld m uejlid (.Ijj(Duel nl 1) 11 22. r)77 El 15.8 U,17 I j: D EE L-2`: 1620.7 384,4 11.61 F RL'L'-,L-11&]iU.11d1di i51 JOVUrAllj 1.5 17 - 12 I. ; 0,85 F ROLCkS I I K Pi.-.-tp-.m.anJ St(cwomllj E. P4b-rt L. 64 11.!,:7.-1 NR I I I L I K.:t -IS8 LI, -D 10 L: 11 i-or F' T, 1 =in 13 4? ;i 7 c c c L) Ro i-!c,. I 1 9 R I..' jv u r,[,.-I Ikin H� 25A 2.9 ..,.11. 68.2 L03 F 27-9 c ROL',F-11&1Hkij S!(DVFFAIJ 591 - E 35.3 F, I T, 19.4 014 5 291) J. -1'1?71', 58.4 LGI F 26A C37 c K,- -I I- 14.5. Los 3S.9 vao D R. 1 25.6 0. C 34.C, 0.95 c 1.03 F 776 0.85 E I F, '.1so-Right 50.7 017 0 552 13.17 E L: %2 11, 73.9 EL72 E 71-6 03.1 E i igh 65.3 0.25 E 64.3 0,44 E ROL'-11&Eam 11 Rd(ove.rAl 1 19-7 - IN 26.1 - c D a,7B D p.I I T, hY:1 071 H 0 71g ---------- 3.."Es 9 L B L 70 D 5 D 55 Royal Vistas TEAR 55FA7 interna6imill 2. Future 2D39 With ProjcCt Int(trsPCtion LO.5 I.'411�11-,' '113�1 V,I` h PItC11 L ltl't'yl Cm.:11:i tIIILI :1=L+1 i`I:l::[1C LOS,it:li-1 i;1"ti"Ill,., I.IL:I,I'. �ir. 4c'coni.Iw I'i-I� wt..l li lc.i k5.'4L': d UtI,:11L11:15;L1 101 1:1: AI :11:d PM I;OL `. ;I{J 'I n in TabI r+. TI;L: iIK!:AC lil,_• 0\\ :[.1.I 111" :4:4".:4>Il L1�.;:1. ltYk4'll :llt5 dint o r:ii at LOS L or14`�+1`t•: � in A pvndix 1. a) Route 11 and Pafarrr Road. Overall Intersection LOS= C/C JAM/PM} f1F :1t-hL, :Is111::I'.7c'SI II1 l +`:'11=111 5Z-1:.11'--.' I ' 441711 I''lml Road resulted in appropriate LOS D oI i)k:M:i °I.1'11 _> 11%1 and I'll I,C: I: hair, , b) Route 11 and Henry Street. Overall Intersection LOS—CIO. A I •11o% :11 1 rti 'Wil, h7cc :11"E'•-cccijons of Rom,: I r11 I IL`nryStreetresulted in appropriate:LOS D OF bC[I.C.r 61-Aillg' A N I L111E P I+C.:.I, I:rYLIr�_ c) Route 11 and t-ualcalai Woad(North)' hI `I ti �%l PUA liullr, tilt UFLi S!I..I :/Al iniersc.'1i,111 w Jlo,IIL` i I wish Hualalal Sii-Lkr Iroill';, o+ r:1ll I'1- .jL+I.. '11 I11Lw 111tCrSreGt1o11 lS 16 :•'vt:r11'tl4 Ptr lt]I :li'- .L 4 1::!li. L11CI tl(?]71 tit! �11 ''•11"i15'l:r I''101"'r•1 r1'dF1011, IhC. I;t tl]4La'1+:'. _s`11 [l.i-C.11:!' 1=1t+',4Incntlia,tiL(1 I Itr'1eof4-Y)anJII.? . 1", �:,:L'S,'l.N': tlLll]ll_ 1151111 1�I kL d PM k I!:rur� LILk: TO I:-CII 111FUL1;?I' 1•o,IL1r. 4 a.11L ki:ttic 11. Thu tntljl . :Ir`,: wIL.:i :IIiI.,Il :L10+ C111:3I OPer`aled :'.° .l cc ;:')k l:.til, (If NCI l ICI ::111111t? 111i :•1.'EI ,Ilk- P.",I I)va, 1k1.W!" d) Route 11 randHuatalai Road(South] l 1:152 LIiIA_'11,; 'YLd `llterSe'CiLor '.1t'RontL: I I with HLl•.11:l.Yli Rilil:: ;wL`Lltll1, t4 ,11';)111_11 IL'.t I,II-11':lir ',VL%'ti:L'_111e1nt hs1. 10, F I,-c of!1.1?1 Iir.d I 11.`�lc'S`r'i�"I'.'! ,Ird II, 1!, Ld ,s u l 1, ,tl•I '1'41 i11'LI 1''t,`i 1L-:' I 1 , 5 I � a1 C 'l'�Yl, I <' 1{tir� are due tl; "11!°I1 throu'"11 Vol,Ir1: 11 s1"'7L' I i 'I 'li i'1`'.jl l :fl`�. '}tllti` I lll;ti31'i130V1111Cri;4 ,:I�L'I':1t4('1 .rr;i:c,-ptablelevels +1 *ti:'.t C dLLIJII_�, 1Ix' :111 _'Al-1 PM I7Ct1}. I:L)urs. e) Route 11 and Puapuraanui Street. Overa it Intersection LOS=BC/BC. The ciN11--um),.l Ic1� :txi I 13:,';11C, ;: l 0,-� F (v c 1'1I'0_79) clltr'ing the 1'M peak hour, The delay its a result of ,4'ioInI Li I.II-i r .�lld rile '__*r.11 tc1111111' 0:+ Alli 1-L. Lldiln�ted to redLLCe approach delay- All othermmernent�at the sign,ll ;•1`cl 11 1 S c1_.or.,s L1I'I�oul,? 1 I u it::j 1'tulpll ianiii SLreci r sultA in appropriate WS D or betted'during A l LIr_c 11.%1 jicak �W)Utn_ P Route 11 crud Royal Vistas Roadway Ai .I:L' 1:1:1 I+,. :cl 1;:1 1_r:1:.1',<I:d 111to1`S02tlu11 Of RO..1: 1 I :11:C. 111: 1r.il :3I `',': 1.1 li.1,IL1'-',1Ik'- Ilk: �,i)L'1:b(CJI1 a L"t t11 n _1'S,k:I:1L'[11 1 :,CI' R+11.11�' i i inn i loll A I tkLt '�`i kl`.:14 5t, i. ,•II .-I1.Y-14 'ei LT., ti4:`. i 1:11:1':11;1 : l` il's, <:.11 ; of I 1 5, I ? ;alli:ti s.:',Il 11: I)Cll.11 1J4?Il 11C1':Ir.ti. I hG '•`t' '`•.I'.L,l.`14: ;II I.I1lll:ls;1'1;'': ''.1'e',lll l'.:i> I 0S I 14 1.11 '•.I.X I and G.1 J kiurl:l-_� I?1,?th AM, I'ti) z.'4:i1;`-by}'Ind .'N'I 112 r:"}' PL5, Ik hollf�i..L1,'tC, l ILa r:1fLl,1411 Vt111_I111CS ')I1 1tL u1w' I. I. l'I:_l L. 2 lell t L1 1 :i1'. I;'.Y .cl l i%.;: :. LPL �."_'d I0 WIC 1.1t,C' LI`4wl lit LKCC:; l '.!llft I I I I:: Il1IL1'N,CC11 Y11 I101,A10114 :.II :L'.':1'1_rti A '. %C:• ilil of iL': :i', pCI. "-'LIIlw1: III 1`.'I- A11 l,e,l, 15-u:- ;rr;: _ nl t c X1 ,cl Irl 1 1L 'M hc;i., a,-Ili. 1 1e mil 5lI ,�I1,I Ll1 li- I1`.I:or 1111�1'tl1;bl .> oj),:iAlQiti al ;,.',,' , 01 ,wl'': 4: JLFII-'L Ih;• ANI rr141 PV Ivakhollrs. g) Route 11 and Kookirli M ghwayl At the un,1 1r.I::L:d tionof I cute 11 wi:l, KJ„}.1:1i I JiL�11 Cit northbound le'! tLIr11:1L'y :1:ovement III-Li, LOS 1!• : 5+I I_fl`+1 ;_t1111r1i t}rc A\J I}::.1 Iio-1= :'ti1. 117115`I I11'.''iL`ILl,!llt5 I}Ii 1'.:_E I :1- Liti 11:a1�.: 1CV:,, of 4L!1 l :5 tIu61 71 ['1L: 1k•} and l'lb'1• 1)eak hoLLrs_ S6 Royal Vistas TIAR SSFAI inlernaiAmIll I ii ble M: Fu I u re 2039 With P rojed I ni erseel imi Level of Svr%i ce A'A PM Dp�.:tv( p c/v P.h'l Ded�v fsar)vph Vic LOS Rout_I'- Mal a n i Rd ovu rij:11 2.3.3 C ZE.-' - C 0.75 D P:-11_ I �r,I'h").J.: 1 140 R 0-71 C OM D it. I -Al 1", ti 9 0.56 8 17.7 0.52 B r.. p 6 G73 7 Cs.0 n.75 D P:� C.-;el 26-19 a25 C 4 3 C i 7 5 0.51 -1 74 D v 1.!,1, 0.65 C D RoYte.-III&H.,e,.nrV ;overol 1 072 C 0 R;.,jt,:- I' --r-. 061 4).72 D 0.17 r�Sl D krsule I_ L', L I L 47'1 *,43 F) R 1 7,1), i- AF,5 CF,RjfJ D D R I: -Pj VI' ?7 7 0-36 C D..?11 C 0.17 4 1 D ..................... ...... ........ 14f AR 17 5 0519 1 57 D H+,r-.,-i Nr,Rr hl 37-4 0.03 C C-03 C I I q: 0.74 J 40. I 1 L)�.m I(OL:'ll i'luk q9 7 671 7 347 r.71 C Route 11&Hu aiatl ai(N u-.%.,rail I 36A - -::Z: - 2.4 R,-dL I' N tS I L D. 6 41 (}-)C lluai�;al Le-. 216;6 430 F 5531 0.79 p Route 11&Huzia I ai fS) avc fa 11) ILI 1:1..1 L,- i S&LC! 15.± 0-19 8 '-3.4 0-13 9 I L 0 404.p. 0,51 F 679.5 Idl F RDut 1'-K 0 u nptj on n ub Sl overall ZILIL C 330 C 173 0.40 0 47.2 0.75 0 193 01,96 7 -.9-1 D.81 ;1 k::.I I I -.P. .. 24.5 0.28 C '-7.7 ;,4'1 a k7,".Il V;It II 2LE 0.81, C 41.0 0.99 Ci 7x 54,5 D 75 64o OL78 E -:-,.1, .:k.gl: 317 13.03 C 3ac) 0-09 D �+:-Li----f L 27.7 a 7 41-4 it D 34� r)Lq 4 39.0 ng n Route.It 7ay I Vi&ea-mIOvCrill 49 - 3-1 H:-:Jk,1, �15 .,?lt L1.2 U CvL b 3.3 LU? a ',V3 Lift ).42.4 :3.81 R 405.8 D.73 k�-).:� 13,3 7 .11.4 35 n Route 11&KuAkInI H L 2,9 1 .2 kc,b:�J' N,.- 77.5 1.06 F 23.4 D.65 C ................... G p 300 A 0.Ll Roule 11 Ld ko St(ovu Fa;1) 65.4 - E k,.lt---I Nii!.cfl 21.5 0.16 C 31.6 C 29 C 1 N";--)'r::: 61)q 1 05 F 45.1 'v.97 17 1-EB 07 1.11 F 77.4 0-9c. E 28.6 0,08 C 37,8 11,95 I r= :�t- 122-7 1.04 F 81-5 ;f-85 I H 15",:, LA4 0.11 .3 SS5 LlG L 73.0 0.76 E 726 �.73 E 0133 E 6i.11 D-41 F Route I L 8.Aam III Rd overall 19O9 0 ZENG H: it. 1 11 D F. .11�-1 qh 2 s P.7 C .3 L SL.7 D "I. b .. .............. ............................ F. 31: -1- r);i.-,h �F F) K-n. D ae,6 D 57 Royal vistas T1Arrd 55F147 internatii3naf h) Route 12 and Lako.Street. overall Intersection Los=EID. At the signalized intersection of Route 11 vk it`1 Lako Stivez. various r11ov cments opi rni e at LOS L or worse. This delay is attributed to the traffic volumes and dw split phasing tat•ilic l__.akt•1 'mi-ccl appr><lachos, i•) Route 11 and Ka ehami ho III Road. Dvproll intersection L05= G/C° U wo%cwl!nt� at the s1tn,6L:L_l i1 : _ 4`t'11 rtls of ROUCC 11 with Kanich-Linicha 111 Road in LOS D uT bcr,o1 :lLi I IL_ ,'~%J .111t1 P;IN'[ peas Iwux rs. 3. Future 2039 With Project Mitigation Long tens inc;lrLLj11W the La14c) StrC;:t :l:L: completion of A'11 Ifi.21!v'u. , untt hc, wideniilgof tomHenrw ioKwnehamehtaIJRcatlww11Il -improve re!'Orl,] .1111v ,=uriti arr L. The coilipk:ti :i'r1 cla(es ofthesr 11`+,I:Lts are not k11own. It, 1hV 111U:11;1'. 111.11'IL;:IIr11'� 1141: a) Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Simi l,lr to th,: -,,i-ILi Lq, condimol.. 1 1: 1 1Laul �;1rtiL_1 tLpproach Ioti iuntw operate at L(J�) 1 r_IL.L::LL +; ,I. 1 ::1Ic hoL. ; al both l` ul-iWai Road I Iti a-](l the lloyii I Vima1; d.-ry )%ay. Peak-Hour '-ol.ILiL. I:.itlI 1_'1!a1 15:91:..rlt>: "A t'fr_' 12" J.II:It4'.{'. `i'.: t'l.'. _.,11+li "iti Itl- :I1-,, wL':tll{SL: lit{]l,.t:t con{llt ony . Table 31 shows the Pe,* I l'°'Llr yS 151:;"rlt Clli;l,4:1; 'II 'ii `I V:l;l' :Aii 1[I-l}LI t !4' ;]roi•.'eI I a1hIe 31: Future 2039 Pea k-Boar Warrant' ,1 2. JV:thout Peak 1.1our Warrant I.1 P IV] m'c7 c'r Minor %Vd"ranE? (ti.11a qr M riv _.1 it•�- 'I1 . I-..;1h.11 i rt 1 24t{9 44 I-.,.rl•a.'i1 i:_1 .i A, 9 V:' t; 14 14r .t Peal, d•„irrarrt JP79 Wiih Project AM PM M ar Minor Warrant? Major Mirror Warrant? I :Al.ii r,1,1 a13 44 N0 2792 in NO I ..�ild,i ks 2521 9 NQ 2820 14 NO ko at Viiras Dwy 211-1 29 NO 2489 12 NO K_ikin1 !-�wy 2721 U NU 27&6 u1 NU None of the tails iial r.-d i?1wrticrrtions will satisfy the 1'vak Hour Warrant. Each of tho unsign,alizetl intersections op,:-,:tt: '..°t31 relatively low overall delay. The minor street left volumes at I lUalalai Road and Puapuaanui Str:,•- ..1�6 14 ativciy low and the observed delays are generally inuch lowor than the calculated del ays. 'I"',-W 200. Il I [-•I) ,.1,Ir,` ' :fir :-F. 111tQTr,4�°IIQTI %V1Ill 11tlll1 VU l U I1W of Icf'l-IL11"Tl Ir:Il"I.; I'l-oln Ills` :I'..I:oi- -�Ia,1l, tilt 'a:t rl;i. '•441:I ill_t :1J.v5i,. riL: ' be perf47mwd in a trio nerthat considers the hii, wr ofT'.l': turn 11 I..tl`I s 1* --h-- ':111'KW-MI,:Ct' vc~,ltulic anti the cornnpondulL),sine=IC direct14'Il of oppo(i.Il_' .I 11.n' rill 1,:1� mzjor sttc:cl as lht 'n'.:Iit"'-•t ct" vuh.wic'_ Thy Rcitrre I I unci Koakini I14:ln', i.. -i,�r..fl i.11ti1 Icl: :L.rr1 operates at LOS E dur n•;. i It '%M peak hour. For th *analysis. the norCillound J1 iur l '...,IL-ml reprr*e 11., the iriinor approach 'Oilll`"i,.. :ll"t, d,' , s,)1uthbL)U i4i w'4lIu1T14 rl`4 ir:i ol' •II k'rr: §{Il vt kirl, (see Tabic 32), "Single Peak Hour warrant Lv,14['V it ll:S:['.rt b(,,Ca11'5=5LJff dent iji>t,l wo Li avaikitslt and in g ail`,11- '1'lir::: i,:n [ ' whether or not an intersectio ,_inuld klr cca ti1L3erL d ,vid niw torrid for a Lri�fric sigr-e_l. 5�, Royal vistas TIAH SSFAI interna6imal Table 32- Future 2039 Peak-Hour "'arrant' 202gWit1hout L'rdx. -1 Du f Warf 2 rit Project AM -,oar � VVirrarlU M.ijur V-1:1ur 'N ma�uv:] Nli nor �AII`Ta ri L. X klak i n 1 11WY 1029 1 602 YLS 1�719 —0 YES Peak Hou, nt Nla-cr Warrant? Major i -Ir- Warrant? Wi YLS 1270 ---,LL0 YES The Route 11 xid Kul i%-Lm lh,--,h�- -y interst:crioil wi:1 Satisfy the I'�-' 1 out 1V;III:.I1I I ti;itiStaction of a. -m Irc warram, dlia,ti ml I-Cutl,:C [11,: Dfa Udl-IL- C(':)A''-1 h.IIa.,I:1' 11 :1 %N a,, mizdy/.ed a,, iiiier-it!cnork %-,Ll I ouF lui:-i.m, id for III,: F.ikiic -2i124 With Projeet CLm,fiLlon (sL� Tabl%: 311), Table 33- Future 2039 Wilh Prejecl— Route 11 Rild KLIIkilli 111VAINVAI Left-I'll I'll Sit-11,11 PIUSing Aftcrnatives 2-Lane RputE,3 2,Prate dud Lett Turn AM pm Signal Phasingon Ku2kFnl IlIghway Delay(seUveh) VA ;as -'Claytm!mlveN VA I,.D5 Route li&Nuakini Hwy;overalo SO.1 D 260 C ppx, i i v,P t !U Po: I I N D Thro.I_nry 2,1 0.65 A 2 L (1.6a A 64.9 1.0� '.9C. r A ;:0 Z-Lam v ROLM' Pe rrm ssi ve left Ti rn AM Pry Flnivmk nn dua:,oni Highway Uc[,Iy JseL,?Vuh), U/C LOS -it k3y I L.4v L!I V/C LOS Rr, uz i n i I I W V rlvv refl 1 :16,2 17 A 1.55.6 1120 B —-- ------- 1 06. A 2.1 !:m6 A R vo!f, I I SE. 2.0 11 A 28 0.72 A K L to il -LJ 0.0 L:LYL, 00 C.m A 2-L2,1v Rouic IL,Fmt+F'zrml.art[urn Aryl pry Sipnal P-mimp.nn fuaeir7iHighway V/C LOS J%FqvuFl Y/C LOS ROLtf'it 91 I'U1-.rJni HwVia,�P.Fnllb 4,23 D 72 A i4)Jir: VI h .et t 98.3 Lm R mite 1 1-N.H-.Th rough 7.I 4.65 A :'i Du LL,I 1 1,1,TI i r rjugh .51.8 1.00 A 00 000 A I1IIC :1.1 %%The oN-erall d,-Ln !I V.1��, T,,CC,I0I,1 1. 1 h Isl still operntty at LOS F tbi- ;ill alt�rmtives in the AM peak limir J 1-., %-,,C Tl-.ir i <i�.1.d r., t --,L, installed ar this intersection. "Single Peak Hour warrant W,J b('CaLl.se SLIfficient wwi available rind to give mi indic;56]n of whether or not an intersectiw, dinuld lv -vid niw Atined for a 'Lri�ffic signal. 59 Royal Vistas TZAR SSFAI interna6imill b) Alternative Mitigaboa MPcstires I A I te ru 17 1'%L,., L LLk o S�ro c' L%I'lr pl-;i�ir- z lfortheFmm,�!;Il I"All! t[IC' 1:1[' Of Route I I m I %_1 Ck T.)", 141.171, 1"I.. ;'xi :I[ I Sir,-et,showit 'I- I Lments wil' mpl rmk- %vii 1: m accept,,Ib�,.- IS -t', ct I c A.turns on L-,i k;, �r i L I'1 1!1 .,1,: a ti1 I--:I I 1.,11 k,.,L'i L I I-1, 111 the ovenill Lkda�l. h.11 1'.L� J11,11 I'I -,I 1 4%-~c I aI 11: k1bIt 13, hitill.i. 11111) NVitll Vripjc-vt- Routc, I I iind Laka Street Left-Turn Signal Phasing AlICI-WIGN 0, 2-4-wip Roukc,.11,I1mtprtv.d Lof- AM 7 N1 TUT11 SigrA 11'1 as:rtr GH L,3Au S.rLe I Ue[aX IsL4vq2 h) LOS Delay 15 vCINLfl Z1 LOS Rou kF 11 k La k p.5 t jpvt�r H I I I s-;. 0 I- , 1&9 024 1 b 25.9 0.25 c 1. %J T:ifo,gh 58.7 1.02 F 30.7 0.91 c =1`1 139.3 1.07 F SI&3 0,89 6 I .!,(Jgh 2$-() 0-81 c P.R 0.94 c La. L3 11LD L01 F 79.3 0.86 E 13 1),z".I 11-R 51.5 0.19 D 56.3 0.19 E I.AiWWS LeF 0.7? t 7DL 8 1 0.73 L I a54 I 70.3 0.60 c 2-Lane Rr;Ljta 11.Permv.,stvv Left AM pm Tumftnal Phasiqgon Lako Sive km De1ayjsecjvch)j WE LOS 'Delay[wc/veh] VIr LOS Route 11&tako St(overaIll 54.5 D W - c Vol:' 11".1' 2-5.3 O.S6 c 24,R Cr 21 c ROW(' I %J 1 0.3 1,05 F 217 Q8 c I �-; 11 1475 I'll F 35-.5 a-PA 1) I S:1-1 -.'J* 27.6 0-54 -C 2152.6 0.91 c 1,i.2 P;711 ❑ 59.1 0,67 L I) p fj 1 i p 49.0 0 11 r) II .'.i.,, k -1 11 4K.4 0 B D Z.Lar-"1 HGutL,12,11rat+11crin Left ANI Pm Dp.1;:Y4,E-CJVEh krIc 1 Las DeIaV[sec/veh vJc LOS RIDUNI 11&Laka St love raill 43.5 28L4 - c 19 c W I; N- i r: jj D 2.1.11 08,5 c Y. .,:,I� 11 :. L 32.9 0.76 c I 1 19.3 0.77 B 23.5 0A9 c R 101.9 CL99 F 76.9 460 E 52.4 0-25 11 61,7 0-26 F 55.6 0.42 F 61,{) 039 64.4 0.51 E 71.7 0.61 E 4 Lane Foule 11 sp:i!11hasing an AM PM :-,k r.q t r e pf jDF1..Y[4-1jVFfl, W/r Lo-q Vh: Los ROLRE U&Ljko St love 1,111) 23.8 r 17.5 a L.It 4.57 B B I.S 0 69 '2.R D 0.75 c P 2 .3 c i, c 25.9 0.14 c 0 UA a-60 c i Right 314 0.29 c 3A4 0L34 -C 60 Royal Vistas TZAR SSFAI inlernaiii3nal I i..,to, i,irj; V 7) I-C"01111nCnJI,I hlt 11C 111 vE ,i0 1'k 11).1 I:A,- Ir"'1_1 L";I�'.ij I)L:t. i I 171,01ck I le i-i-i.i i i p li.:,,- r I i i I,: hi L -I ler}d. -trl; l Pffl I I i-.,i i L- A.-i'l-I L I 1.11 1,, !';11 ",.11- ...-'k. I hok"Id:1,�I wi,:�"h kfOl-C allowiliv powls"IvLc left-tatil Plia- sing. Ijic widC1111 01 K''Url' I I 1' 1.1,AIA1 JI 4. Future 2039 With Project Segment LOS Arit.'ri-J L( L� Lri,i 11. S..11C 11,') !I, 1" ')lue I I uLd,:I l I I I I tL' :,O SI i L 1 1, i I tile 111t 1110k-.1 llk•L, t; 4 1 1"Ll-i �,-i w I I es. For U-Nin IIII,)L1IJ'-,,fIII,-If tl.:��I wJ,eed iti used to anal l2.e vehit:t.:ai D I i Call h-,; lk-LUld Al lj`i:JIJJ\ 1. 11 Ldl.tl� CAA III' found in T;v,'L 35. kIbIV .1:1: 1-1,111IL11T 2019) with ProjLL0 Segment T.O�� Peak �Ioijr NoiII-t-owid (Ti, Southbounc; (To KPIL.I1l0IJ) Speed !riph) LOS 5pc,2d (rnph) L0S AM Peak lb , D 12.7 L PM Peak 19.1 C 19.7 C This grwnt of Route I I OPCI_'IIL_.i :': - -) :11 tj rL' [Ik'I 1:11XiArld 1111%_'L1IL1n 21nd LOS B in tile southbound direction in the AM peak hour. io..: 1"N1 P Ik hok.,-, 1-;)III operate at LOS C. The arterial LOS for the AM and PM peak- hour,; satisfies th,, County of Chapter 25 (Zoning), Article 2 (Administration and Enforecnwn(L Division 4 Section 46 (Concurrency Requires ients) regarding"Icceptable 1e�el Jbi- tva. n�pomtlotl 1-kilities, 61 Royal Vistas TEAR 55FA7 internaiii3nal VI. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS K LYR=S I'hicc IA i��i,I'1lanli]n+g''10tst•','���It1I"�.1 '11.1'':i-:::',1111 't I :�lt:C1l l':1 I.I I YJ I t ib i s-'1 h:I I I L t.11�t"_';II �'i. il't Itii1"1.1., oil rliti-` I`: Ilit IIR 11.141 fii, T:1L' F11"t'] .:t.• 1'-� 1.117'::11L1 11 ) ;11 I f K l i1 7-6-0'.1 )16. 17 bc--,%L•cn 1\una 4 .•,ra Subdiv'':ilYn :1r.d Pt"'.I:Ir 1 1:It,' ''gllhdi`, , con. C1.1e. aci-c k 13liwr icd to cot7ll�Ct to 'R,,.LtL, 11. lipproxin'.;Itw]_, 6l!0 tk:ei Lli''J't.'1 o: the 1iltersccut)11 %Aith K;o, :;I17.1. aecec�, ,61.11 bte hLL111 l'1e1s7-e '11-_ Lo 1�ti 9:Cs;11':i{JI1 l�1ilCL". Various foadwa p1r,�Ie::w thl.-, %vi-I l:kkl J,i' ti11tE1Ct:.l iI. .111d Ca17aCLtV 4l..,; 1`.J:1ECLI to + The.." ic,enirlg of Route 1 l from Henry Str4e1 To Ki lr':wllaflloll l 11I Rc1 d.. * The c:on1 ,?:rlLcuoii A'v'llii Hikhka n I)virt ]IL alallai Mta-(1110 KCal1]1011 • 'The Lako Strt:et J'. • HuturL` "minor call.' rc r, " n :lrlir_.o. p iI,III l to Rcvlt ' " 1 rl riu l `,'i ..'w iI:cIll :xtcl irl', IIoortla-P a S1Tekn tu[.L�i1;111'. SiT-c.1 :1'1(I :`,I�ll1"'ls' I','.Ilt:l 1�Irc'.. It'• K Ck.I:"7:It'.;I I'I;ite. 13&ed oil the c.vistillg trafl"Ic N OILIIrieS 111d 1`L1ttLre proieciit v, ; ol`R.nval Vi4(3s oJ1 ti,�SI-Irroutrding, roadways, 111c Ro.11C 1 1 mid i.CC'Io S:1vo. ` 1111C I!di1,LduLil lilil'y:11':Il[': .°I odic ]R;til'}i:i1On", :f e L%J. cCtz? I ii, deter11 i-Lne ro I. 11 1_.[)t l4+}"3r. I'le',!':ylt J1i91 "='r °�f7e.Jt I [i} 1-I,_'l „LI'1� :11e coil i pIz:_s", 1 t'11 %.Ili "CS'1onalctil};1Jl`.', Ir rI"t,"I1lti rr. t`7l" It, Ils1'+111:_ '•`-1LI11-ti: ,le 1J1'.1 i:i' .tSl1 I:I'I'JLL1i'lll CC); 11! i`L-CL11I1Ji71.:.'ldtiL� tf]' fon.s1CIci':. :o1. %}', _'1 _+1CI.: � ilmill 'Lind 111)( I . 1 R1111,' I I 11;,.11'rl;Ir 1{['at` 1)111:", i11vl.-,-1i iPd1C:A,' I)1'4 1111,`r':_`i`rloll IL". I 01-1,'F;ITP at all acceptable LOS. 11 1:Arc}x,_r.1 rlt. _:':i intti:; c'ts+]n are 11t= ai Ill., lime. WdlccmL this inteTs ation will operate at an acceptable LOS- 1, ,; ,tixk.�r1:111ti '::.I; 'RIti 5ticlEclr, .Lei; 17cw. reconnnended a( this time, R,)w-k: 11 ar_;I l.11.11.l_.1' Road I,.Norths I".•1ia I111clii'_I1or. i.1ocs rlw pa.'s tI.':: roal•-Hl ul,wat-rant nrre�ik rile nv-i"c`rdition- The 1i1'.'17 i'w` -m, `ti Jr 1f1 1�.e II:C 7 ','L7ltlltlw iY`1 Iit!'.I I I .!1_0 .11 .1 1 lit I:1}, tll,, .,.";'1°,'•1.:7t' 10: 1,1r11 Ill :.7c: ,W .-I-0 P.1". I '.::. 17i,1Y1, . :C.ry 7tst'll'. :k', ti4s'I",:11 117k' h 4:J:',i' Ii 111 111-1,�, lc UI_ I_Ii k_:�[I1(141C l 1['''tii: ❑1'C hI11 Ik' Ill 11rid :ill.":IJill`.E` r,'ll:ih. :k, II_' IC Imic _o.milClhi5w.. 1l'III 1tilipri)1': 'I';11_lti L'IIiL`r 111L1111 11114 IIIILTIL_a'i 0'1 .01' I'l.' i_'fTJl'-orl hill \Noy1 ei7 W,, I..(1 ;1:'tt:l" 02 ri'':'kill-,riell,I:',' :11 1'11ti 4. Routo 1 1 Mld I tLIAI.1 .1 kl). Id As the�vctit17outi[I Ic''t l.I1r.1 tIe_,I c-.� worse. dt'l rti I:l:l'. E:e Idk 111 1. C I'10Jl .,I::,,'IL'_LII `::1 lL-1 ;,I 1 L0 Rover , I I in TlhL 11-1111L":�L111d tluvc'lii7R_ This irlter Loior. JiL.. rl,'I r'Iti I tair-flu Ir %\Cirrant OT the 1-icak-flow �1amir..I tlLL?t" II"L' L'Xl-lIIM? OT ftltMlrC COR 1111i117ti_ 11,.Iti.'il i`1_ 017L`r':'_ :10rti, It is reconiri:� it ::cd an acceler .-Io') .-lie be installed for the Vb`QVh01I""I•.1 r':� 111 1.11T i'rrs, K,Vlre 11. A "meroundabov-" ',vil i111:`1'is 't"'';1-xICoperationsatthd:, "try:", `.7',r17 fD1 - 1,' ,'7",lill:'t'i,'li'.irli§r1 but 6tov8 L11 to LOS F '.I'Li I' 'C:14, A roaF)L1_'."0L1' is not rec,.1'r-n,� Yd_,II hk 5. Route [I Llyd Puar1.L,-.;inl.i Sl,-rnal f1'1'll *I'+L'11 it I't' I"1, ',1'I l' it ; 'ld :1LI1'.istti:d :ii IIiL'L iC to lncic,l7�k: ilit: l u_},•, l l:i, Il1::r AIL't'L-jos o::I R-11le I I ca.1 ,-Icaj :Ilc' Illlt'1 '--cl1,°11 ill f cycle. 62 Royal vistas TIAH 55FA7 interna6imal 1. R o I L t V, I I and R c L I V I, k(-.l L I v4'iI I Ilia I I jltlj-s e C'I o 71 %.11 1-:I,: I o 11 2 LC Qtv i 1, 111-o I.,..I "I w i I L I' H i:i,;-, I b 11110 o I it. Be f(-)re ii n P I i:i m� 2 ir iw vk,%,ommk:rd,x. 11v: 1k) Ko�,J.,imlkj'a illace 'Is completed ,;o llnil Ro,):ail xt) ow, ",ILI [[I,: L,Iku mtcot trairic signal, 7. Rtmtt� I I I-.LiKi KILM1,1171 I1J1.,L'., 1:', PL'�: Ili M1, %4.W!':1111 fill'Im, III pl:-kk fiollr-ti for mll CoTldE,:I9m-,. I .1. )-':I do_- 110 111L:iIil :1 17,- -d 11--cre or, ,rllL:I- ihal SLL-11'A 1),` ;muk/1:J ".1 AC:1 ill"Ll"['11%,L4 cl. :Ijic 111E 1:1-_1vi2l (if o':Cw .11 I:L 4v Lraff.., Ar:i',.41� of Ibis I tv Lt ,2 cl:kill :1170H., Pku.;ill?L? o--Icr;ld k1clov at the"III 1,2:"C'1 l"'J3 d -Ilk: rLli-'hb(vJrd 1z:1`1 lurn wdl �-01 F orworse. A signal �,10ki:A not be in-stalled aT thison. Ro- al Vitas traffic has vcry little: C�ffect on this A mlLgle-lu io r(11LI)L:�.:'VUt INLI or_aze at LOS F for il-k: AM peak, hour Q0174I17.1011, and LOS F for all :-)nk;jjk)ns. A round6out is not recommended at this 8. Rouik I I mid Ldl-o Street Ttic, I i,�ko Sir%2L viorQcnou uper";", I' I 0S F 1) I'V., 1ti1111 0" C% visor tlic! 0',1) co T-r 7 ni::wier than 2rid illoti. L;il. VI.... I�:1." w ci.:rr,1i 1) o,�l I 1w L.:i k Feet:lr pt 1,1. i'r pht iNvi_ ,I i,-I[-.% over the (fi:LI I Jrhou L,h I _v Will still oper<!,,, ,it LOS L -.I Nvorsc. This MicrsmLon �vuuld *O I'l-11 D I% 1 1,::11 1 1-I i I-mire norih-south i�laal ci 11:r�:I I dcd MY ilit: cury]ction A :k]Cl_:I7 klfP.MI1C I 1 Herr Street to K;iriAixiiLIi:. I I R<md -Lind lilt con,,,iru,tunn WWII Nvx% P,,)iii-, I I mid Kimeh�imehi III RoA :'.'.1c1 I'LLU,w mdj�,itc this intersection will operate at an acceptable LOS. huprovL:ltcmi to 6DN Mici-scclion arQ not I:6 k`ommcndod w this, timo� ,"eri:d I (),S-Arto nmri!v7ed it, Or 1'O'C1111 I lualli 1:6 rh)to 1,A'o Srrcci. Whk rk! intersec-otrz ai.,e �c%:,thwi 2.0 1,.,11 1 11C facility ShOldd be Ciil� ltkd:as Z111 LLI-INA "ll-Cct ;'Ad analyzed with thC MCt1 OdI.110 'ik1 UT Lrb:-n �(r.2,1 ]1LicJVIc%,. For Utkm SlIrCCI F.tclhllcs, Il1r%)U�i7j1-Vcluck: tF,11',:I spccd -1.4; _U.Sed tO ELAZI[VZC VV21I'CI.Im"1 1 P l 1111,; 11 Jt I OL, D o. 1%�t-er for 0-wh -ontiltioll 41 theAm alld PM I he QW C OLJJII� CO"171,lWah 5' 1/1'11m l. e'",I I,-1i 2 1. A,I'llm 4 SCCLIon 46 regarding level of Berl ice" for truivportation tacilities. 53 Royal vistas T1AH 5SFAI internattmnf VII. REFERENCES AmLrlcm Assoc '°:al l Safi ;1,4r4 I lip=.hway anti Transpartatim Officials. A Pohe ° ❑n GeometfieDesign of fliKti44'[rl°.k' :rrP_f S t"t'C"".2011.. Institute of Traln,sponation Engincers. Trip Generatfon, 10th Edition_ An ITrE; Informational Report, September 2017. Office Of 1'Al,il-011fl�Clll Ll QLI.AitV Control. EA and ,EIS 0r,!,.w a`ri; ;;, Aecemd July 2019. StDl,ti 01 YI2�'ail. LC}:27iLL'lMCI.'':t oy; ] L-'In-!Jlort:9t:(oll F'-,'A'7v!-.lrf? r,,h'(-v and Siau� of 1 lawaii, D, ptiartinent of Transpoilation. Federal-.did Highways 2035 Trarz partutiau plcrrr)&r•file fAor'r4-t of 1laLv'irrr, 'ItI[v 01 , of Hawaii, Depe'im.iti id Sia' .7t }"l yl4:L f. Dej1 3-rikjeajl Lys I,j i;�.7om11loll. Jbi 'iw'ir .r} l.'r.r/? < , 'r:trirarr ,1dS.r}rs, 2.01�. Slat,. of Hawaii, DQpairtrnem {;t Stweivide Tran6portation Improvements Program, . ix—,-ti1;ed duly 2019. httptlfh w' lii. cjk'.'cio� h �tilxtisayslST1P . Stxc of Hawaii, Department of 'P an,1,4'.-nation. Sici wide Un,j'brrn Design Manual./UP Streets and Fir>fr titi crl::v. 1980. 'I'lle Uraliir< -Malia�r)L'IlmlL Coll,tll I'll e1 (2018). 11> l tlt�4: 9,nL;tt�a 1�:�11 C onsultont,Pualani ,'.fir,',c'? l;a0c 4'li�trlcf:r . i ��fl iti 1 LY":-wt (2019). l2o. ::;di Board, rit7nal$tcsi:tr491C'r,ZllitiLl. lfrrfl;r<n ('ir,��rrcr Mirnaill- 1'+ ishing[on,D.C., fro'' �tlltls'I]- 64 Appendix Bus Route Schedule and Map Appendix Bus Route Schedule and Map �r •-fr1£� �f Jfr�,rrF ref f b tf'�7 t,1�fr to 7{trlt�u rr~ CL U � I 11.7r CL ZO ;., _ In �'7 rf kn rr, i rr +•, }rrlrr. .•lf ,�1r! } SFr [r-_ _Y, '' fr.' sr. rl'fo.: r, ffr'rfrfr. f ,. .. j.. Ins a €: cam, rp w imr *6111 .!. I. .. ro In IR ��� ✓ ''�., y ," 'fit'. �I [' -�y -r sj• _ .'rr r1 ,+i ' hr. ..1 a: }' � �5 ,r ��. '�' I �+ C' 't 'fl:t. i •, 1 CK ..IS. r V }' I + r " ' c ..rf"., '!lINf �= �� clt7,:i � i��'a {�}tP L y 4 —C•! n 4' Sf5 4' v C — ® M r rL• mj 74 r � r ti rj ff � r \1 by 4 Q t d i g 3 is ti{ d V 1 ' w l-lu'Y t I AppendixB 24-Hour and Peak Period Turn Movement Traffic Counts Type of peak hour being reported:User-Defined Method for determining peak hour.Total Entering Volume LOCATtCM: Palani Rd— Hawaii Belt Rd QC JOB#: 14§72601 CITY,/STATF: Hawaii, H1 DATE:Tut,Apr 3a 2019 sm zw Peak-Hou r.7.20 AM--810 AM ]A ?a Pik 15-Min:7:341 AAA--7:45 Afb3 + r 17? 3'2s 20L I a6 1'I � r i U L 1"r 71 t it 23 r Gas 0 r 11,:ti t � ' t'0 r Sl � 'AM r 2%4 t 163 r "S6 �0 rt IDS% � �'� F 17 t 75 �143 192 1fA� -1*] tr + 7� W Quality Counts S 22 I �✓°"��,� � � 1 1 r« � a f ; a oe; o n w + a 4 4 R t L % L t 1 C J ss# t h}dl r w NA N0.M •� � NA + t i I5-Min rnunI `'AinY Pr: IIn1.)rr Rd H,Yw aYY 4r:lr Rd H;:tr,.r Rr ll Iwri Perind (Nufll ::1:1jiul) CA'-+IIri1Y.rILI) [�1�1 he�urly R3I.eirrnin• A[ fcs.,a s. � � 14it Thru tts rh L1 I i:Fl Tfrru Ri.til�r I1 I c•i, Tlu�, F.ij;l•I I1 I Y?-1 TI- �, R�,h: I1 6:A5 APA 43 18 25 1 7:�AM 51 35 25 1 5 55 17 11 51 38 �6 179 3 715AM 51 39 27 t? 4 78 13 1 20 72 .38 r 11 157 1 - _'14 '11 51 26 0 a 91 38 0 13 131 58 0 40 163 11 0 6,84 3379 1:45 fv1 63 55 28 G 1 F0 411 :} 23 104 719 1i 45 3,2,4 7 0 !i.56 2500 I:on AM 58 39 29 a 7 70 S 1 7 17 :11 S.3 0 Ord: 1. 4 3 r3 671 767 1 AM5fi it 27 0 C.1 2'3 D 22 :2'} SI 0 3R 2:i 5 ? ;R3 269.1 '1I.1 1'.: is J 25 13{, 1� 0 51 lei! 4 0 131 2 740 I'i,:k I':-b1Yii Northboun-- Southbound Eastbound We5t6Crund Total fluvxreles I�f1 -ll1iu Iil';I11 ll Iwfr Thru Rilht I} IFft Thru Right; ll Ip.ft Thru Righl Li A 14'eh cles 216 Cl 52 524 231 0 HO 652 44 0 27]6 "a ay Trucks 9 i ? 0 < 62 7-8 0 213 a 123 Pedestriwis 0 p 0 4 Bicycles 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad red(3LE50. 5 ?uenr5': Regortgenerated on 5/1-112015 3;10 PM SOURCE:QualltyCounts,LLC lhttp://www.qudlityeourl:5.iie.1 L-2i77-580-2212 Page 1 or 1 Type of peak hour hung reported:User-befIned Method for determining peak hour.Total Entering volume LOCATtCM: PalanI Rd--HawaiI Belt Rd QC JOB#t: 14972602 CI TY,/STATF: Hawaii,Hl DATE:Tue,Apr 30 2019 4n 5w Peal 4lour:3:45 PM--4:45€'M 13 17 s Peak 15-N1rh:3:45 PfV1--4:00 PM 11• 11 117v 313 51 17 ?� u t +. 1W r;ley.r A. di + M 36 r 7;.1 L U 877 w liffl] t ffs 2z,+ , MrSR#% rMr 711j 21• 1 % !Qyrt 22 cl 2IF 2&3 # *7 F rW Quality Counts 13 1fi DATA THAT URNES(-.L IM P.;f-N'T, 0 6 77 J i � a f 1 ,. 1 w • R a } r l � � +J fl fl KIA 4 1 i r ! L rv. NA NA � . . � I ' F t i Min(.narnr `';71,7ni lEr; IIn1.)rr E2r1 H;iw m 4rIr Rd H;,w. 1 Kr 11 lirl fr�lit'il �lUprvl :;rolilul) [ti a 'Iku+iirlrJ� �F._, Il; .lnlJl l'w"di% Iri11.rI J) [�1�1 he�urly Kpp:irrim;, (tl Ls.,7ls. • let: Thru R'�,hk Ll lial Thru Ri.til�r lJ Ic•i, Tlut, Rij;l`I lJ II?-1 TI-r�, Rah: lJ l V t34 1 "v1 56 7F 61 } 13 } 29 sf, 7 E11 ;5E 8 — ? s11 P.M 77 St SG f1 15 G4 ?7 n 93 4 Irr: 4-45 PM 55 92 65 0 21 93 29 7 55 199 131 1 56 154 11 0 952 3670 ❑0 Pm 52S7 46 i 9 74 27 D 6fl 7?7 17S' F) 5fi 172 3 D 9 1 3674 'S Pm 73 59 61 l7 12 79 32 D rc] ?13 1.31 0 543 1;$ 5 0 9 ; 3732 A. 30Pm 46 75 73 } 0 �7 1.9 1) Ia ?313 1P? 1 55 141 15 D �If, 1741 1 S PM 59 71 613 a 16 94 37 4 65 .713 121 052 1L,1 17 0 8S? -7 1-(C Pm 67 79 S) 1 11 69 3n 0 63 7?5 1 11 114,' 15$ a 1, Ii: :.;tJ� .%I EA 58 6E, a d 91 34 0 EA :7b 1 D 1 f] G3 142 a f} i.:.•r 17i -.3u P.m 47 15 55 0 3 GG 19 D 4G `Gy 94 0 57 120 a t} SA 5 Pm 51 88 so 0 1 7 59 13 0 391 i6--11: 69 1 41 10'- 9 0 451 ,(;_ Peak 15 Arlin Northtiound Soulhbour►d Fastbaund' Westbound Total FIr1w'ratEs Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right Ll b2ft Thru Right U Left Thru Ri hL U k Ue .G ex ?7.0 3?$ 7f i1 Rd l77 1 i6 0 72.D 7+)] 574 4 77i 616 dd 4 3S174 Hewy Trucks 1r, a 4 0 8 El 1� zo H a 414 0 117 Pedestrians 0 4 4 17 eacycles a a 0 (1 D D 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ G Ri l-jkoad Stopped buses f't7YJ7117e'r7f;: Peportgenerated on 5/1.3/2i11y.;:06 PPtiA SOURCE:Qualityfaaa,nts,4LC(htrp:/Jwww•qualitycounU,net}1 877 a9tJ 71.2 Page a or 1 Type of peak hour being reported:User-Defined Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume LOCATLQN: Henry St--Hawaii Belt Rd QC JOB#: 14§72603 CITY,/STATE: Hawaii,HI DATE:Tue,Apr 30 2019 Peak-Hour:7.20 AM--810AM i ♦ Peak 15-Min:5:15 AM--8:30 AM + mg DA 2;w L sm 4. %Q t ar,r* 11:9 ss 0.al j :n* « an aM w 4 � « i8 LAG 337 42 a-6s z7 7 # -7 25 !�n QuaUty Counts -1 F i o 0 .t IJ i L A 3 C1 * # a 7 r ra y 4 1 RA.0t f� . NA NA I r I NA 4 # 4 4 74 t IS-Min Cnunr Henry 5( kenry tit H,iw aii 4r:Ir Rd H;,w. r Rr lI Idri Period (NurlhboLin SFYuthbaund) %I I 11.r,LI) Fa1ai �4t3115 Rpgirening,At Loft Thru Right U taft Thru Right U Ic•i; Thm Rigl•I U I,>=1 TI- , R ,,h: 11 6:A5 0.P11 31 57 5 0 i7 48 26 D 1C. :+ D 7:DDAM 32 40 13 0 109 69 20 0 19 6 16 D - 7:15 AM 44 81 8 a :I12. 78 25 0 27 I'S 0 7:36 AM 24 81 7 0 78 58 35 11 '32 40 0 ;,7 124 7 4S A �4 82 7 rl 92 ry3 31 1 73 77 n �.I 71, �...1.. :or..aM ail sa 15 n H, a:� a, D 27 53 30 a 165 117 0 7,92 3053 8:15 AM 50 81 12 4 89 77 37 0 Z5 97 37 l7 16 184 86 4 794 1 3069 H:31L,AM 4b r.S I cl L Sr1 63 -so co 3S r] 1k, 163 LL1 0 'I 3L)L,6 Nak 1rMlri Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Total Fl4Pwrate5 I�rl Thn, RiSh1 11 Ioft Thru Right 1.) IFft Thru Right 11 lift Thru Righl La A.11r'eh cles 200 324 48 0 356 30B 148 0 16D 3-H 148 0 76 736 344 0 3176 heavy Trucks 4 16 A 12 S. 0 0 315 16 4 44 70 164 Pedestriais 0 0 12 4 16 Bicycles 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 2 Railroad XI0PPLd Ruses �[+i Ftf r'd YlfCS': Regortgenerated on 5/1-112015 3;10 PM SOURCE:QualltyCounts,LLC�http://www.qudlityeoura:s.iie.1 L-2i77-580-2212 Page 1 or 1 TV"of peak hour hung reported:User-befIned Method for determinIng peak hour.Total Entering volume LOCATlQN: Henry St--Hawaii Belt Rd (IC JOB#: 14§72604 CI TY,/STATF: Hawaii,HI DATE:Tue,Apr 30 2019 KU Peak-flour:3:45 PM--4.45 PM w Z2 I s Peak 15-Min:3:45 PM—4:00 PM I i r ♦ r i +. M4. r M"1 6 114 ► E34 14.4.7 1 ,,.`~'`�„. %. L9 4. 3.1 F63 s � a Se2 3' C y -42 1114 r NI % r 72 r iw 22• 03 S � �'� f 0 t ]!I # J— IM 338 34 cl %1 0 n * F 7B Quality Counts N 17 DATA THAT URNES(-.LI ifN'T', fNP � r N4 U."r r NA t j NAy -10 IF 1 i Min(.o4mI Henry St Hvnry 4i H;iw ail 4r:lr Rd H;,w. r Rr 11 Idri fr�iit'il �NarlhLu�l�nd $[fs, 'iku,iirirl� �F._, li;,.inilf 1'w"di+. kH11.rILI) [�1�1 he�uriy Al left Thru Right U Lwft Thru Ri hr tJ Ic•i, Tlum Rij;l`I kJ TI- ,, RPh: t) I t. 43 74 9 0 91 53 63 b 3 "41 29 95 9 0 1117 $3 52 0 46 i55 54 0 18 1'5 76 k} 873 ? fj Dm 42 R5 2fi 0 S4 7.3 41 Q 56 155 58 0 119 34; U. 0 R71 3--A;Pm 31 73 12 G9-9R0 51 9 a5 182 67 R 17 147 74 0 877 3482 'I DO PM 35 71 7 G F30 N 54 4 q0 ifi1 69 fi 14 127 73 {} 826 U45 ;.'S PM 29 E1 D R8 70 34 ❑ 5.1. °6?fi 73 7 7S 149 R11 Q r360 3434 �. 30 Pm 30 87 S} 81 98 51 13 54 ,Y 82 0 i G 126 R-4 ti7 873 '34:36 I S Pm 2a _':r.' 0 87 8D 47 4 55 I GB 611 0 10 1 L9 F5 0 829 33SS O;Irll 30 81 S7 1.1:1 9 40 56 12 0 8 3�s SO 4} f41J 3394 49 z1 1< 78 ;8 0 49 :L2 1 1) 12 j27 Ft] {} 8R. 4-MO ,.3u PM 27 * I 0 41 tS0 36 0 17 218 S3 0 696 1i63 SA5PM 18 t:. 0 is 143 40 0 5 10- 77 0 1 685 1019 Peak 15 Min Nwthtjouna} Ss>ur•ikn,urld Fastl6nund' Westbound Total Flowrates Leif Thru Right U Left Thru Right J Left Thru Rl ht U Left Thru Right U A 77 77es 174 788 4S3 0 995 37D 704 0 186 779 768 0 &8 588 795 4 3508 Fewy Trucks S a 0 4 4 D 1� 0 a 36 0 Fri Pe,destrianz Q v $ 1z a0 Bacycles 0 a 0 p ❑ ❑ 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ G Stopped 6uses f't7YJ71Me'P f Reportgenerated on 5/13/?i119.;:06 PPA SCURCE:Quality f vents,4LC(http:/Jwww,qua]itycounU,net}1 877 a9tJ�71.2. Page I or 1 Type of peak hour being reported:Systern Peak Method for determinIng peak hour:Total Entering Volume LOCATLQN: Queen Kaahumanu Hwy--Hualalai Rd(Northern Most) QC JOB#l: 15639901 CITY,/STATE: KaiCua, HI ®ATE:Thu,Aug 29 2019 Peak-"our.7:00 AM--8.00 AM a 16 # peak 15-Min:7:15 AM--7:30 AM } } 3e f76 a Q b.2 U .+ 4 .r t S. 19$ A. 44 1 u . 0 0 . 0 f 0 . 0 0 + a 0 0 • • 0 92 r 48 1 R 0 r 0 Q . 0 1 f 0 t 0 - -m �' * { I * F', F CI 824 114!) C uaLity Counts 5.9 17 0 0 1 U J i � G � Y fl fl Aq * L L �, N4 + 1 t r } i • f 1', Mil(Omil r_luee-K,i:rhmn-inriRt" s`ijeen Ks'Furry,iI Hw-j Hiial,ilai Ri(R,vlhrrn hlasli N.�lal i lu;(4, rihrr h1r; 11 Fli,imd (NmIl :;romd) .IIH 11.rILI) [a1�1I T�tialls Rpp: Trim..' Al Left Thru Mght U 1wft Thru Ri ht U Icdi ThilJ Right U Ieh Thru Rvh: 11 1 1).-!E,m 28 239 0 0 J 190 4 4 % 5 0 0 0 ii 4 472 7:1.5 AM 3.6 263 0 0 0 212 11 0 9 0 18 17 0 a 0 0 549 7,30 AM 32 260 0 0 0 198 3 0 24 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 536 7:45 AM C43 223 0 D 0 174 7 D fi 0 10 Q n r1 0 0 4qn 7017 S.DO AM 3.9 229 0 6 0 IE4 d 0 0 C 7 0 n 0 0 a V 1017 A;1 q A M 'lh 232 0 G {S 1 F,9 a 0 (7 l i G it 0 0 0 454 '.`%2 2:3bAM 34 22- 6 1 0 1t$ 1 Cl 0 { 1G 1 U G 0 0 46 :.1n &AS AM 37 354 u 0 0 1,R2 2 0 c 12 0 a G 0 0 4%; I've k 5-Wn Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound r1 >mf1.ates L Thru Right U Left Th ru Right U Wt Thru Righn U telt Thru Right U Total A l 4'eh des 144 Sfl52 0 0 0 846 44 0 36 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 21.96 I-eavV Trucks 0 2z 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 4 0 1} 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I{�ilrga� Stopped Buses Cco-mr"enrs;---- —=1 Report generated on 9/12,l201510:40 AM SC URGE:€U31ItypCnunts,LLC ihttp://www.qualitytourtmnetj 1-17`7-580-2212 PagL a or 1 Type of peak hour bcing reported'System Peak Method for determining peak hour.Total Erlteringllolume LOCATI[CFN: Queen Kaahumanu Hwy--Hualalai Rd(Northern Most) QC JOB A.- 15039902 CITY/5TATF. Kal[Ua, HI DATE:Thu,Aug 29 2019 rs Peak lerur:3:00 PM— 4 D0 PM ]a A + Peak 15-Min:3:30 PM—3:45 PM + 11 1t05 D I L U tl r t r. x1.. 10 ! Lu4. 0 1 + 0J 604. 0 4 » w 6 r1p r 71] 1 P 0 r 0 Q • O S ` f O t 0 84 W3 0 cl 117 0 4 * -14 * F 103 I= Quality Counts 13 3A DATA THATURPVE-S f1P.4LJf M1lT'; 0 6 U J i � G � 9 1 fl • a ras a a ti L --1 L + 1 c a>!w c ..sly V, Mil l0mil 1.1u+'r^K-i:rhuin:inii Hwy }irr rn h,arhurrr -m Hta^l Hiial,ilai R i(R,vlhrrn A1n",I} H �I:al i lir (k;>rYhrrn h•1r�5tJ Frs,imd Hourly Fp•iirrun_ At .} Totals n let: Thru Tt'�ht U Icifi Thru Ri"hr U Iri, Thru Ri N U I >=1 TI-r,, Ri hl U ?00 PM 27 119 17 24? 0 3 tT 24 i I' 0 0 525 3 :',=,5'41 1 ±]7 2.59 4 7 4 C1 is r 0 Q 521 3-;10PM 22 26" l 7 242 3 0 0 0 is 1 i^ 0 0 546 yr, PM ]Fa ?15 Si ;� 757 5 0 3 Q in 1' 0 Ql 7U7 73A9 .1:00 PM 14 "'tis 0 D 758 d ❑ 1 ❑ 1L 0 0 0 ?} 5? 7L[17 47':5 i:M 22 2: 0 11) 225 4 A 3 0 23 0 0 0 0 RM7, 4:3L'IM 14 198 0 cl 0 200 2 S 0 21 0 Q 0 (} 445 PM 24 219 0 ❑ 0 232 1 b 5 0 27 0 a ❑ Q S100PM 12 178 0 0 0 2$7 6 0 3 0 30 0 0 Q 0 5_ aPM 17 =a5 0 0 0 252 z 0 4 0 xg n n 0 0 {> ;: :=,16 5:30 PM 25 195 0 0 0 225 3 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 WIC 14t"6 5:45PM 13 1-1-- 0 0 } 152 3 7 0 0 16 U U U ') ?` `e:a 1874 Peak 15 Min Northtiound Soullihound Fastbound' vuesi.buund rlowrates Left Thru Right U Left Thru (tight J left Thru Wight U Leh Thru Bight (1 Total A ue .G ex 88 7 T9l 0 0 n g58 1.7 b it 0 77 0 0 ❑ 0 4 2184 F-eauy Trucks 0 S8 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 a a a 64 Pedestrianz 0 D 0 ❑ V Bacycles 0 ❑ 0 {I r} ❑ 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ G ftallr+Yad Stopped awQs f'a3Yl'1117CP f Report generated on 0/1212013 10:f3 AM SCURCE:QualityfcauntS,41.12(http;/YWWW,qua]lycounts,net}1 877 a9tJ �71.2. page I or 1 Type of peak hour being reported:Systern Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume LOCATLQN: Queen Kaahumanu Hwy--Hualalai Rd(Southern Most) QC JOB#t: 15639911 CITY/STATE. Kai[La, HI DATE:Thu,Aug 29 2019 @1 il10 Peak-"our.7:00 AM--8.00 AM s 15 + f I peak 15-Min:7: {31M—7:45 AM I + ¢ 4 'ro 3II 11 U 4.9 Si .! L * 4 .! # M. 0 * O-T] r 0 + • B -14 F -10 C1 757 10Z1 Quality Counts 49 i8 DATA THAT VRPVE-S f1P.4LJf�M1l�T'; 0 1 1 J i � I L o t7 G 0 1 OF I L h�a N4 P + , I L 4 1 t. @U7 r r hlA MA y t ,A .r • f 1'a-Nlin i_ounI ,.lWf rn NL'1:rhmn-inir Hwy s`ijeen K,s"Fria,;'iu Hvry Hijalolai Rd(1.0111hr-rr Mwd'- Hi n alai R.,:(tini Ihem Most] Period (Nw!iI :;ro md) IIi.mrllll iY"t-.IIr1I11 t(i) Total Hourly RF irenirt AI ko—als. 6 !1 i.el: Thru tts kti U 1 wft Thru Right U I eft Fhru lei rt ll I eh Thru Ri hr t3 7:01}AM C 24 L 3 q 9 193 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 12 4 448 7:15AM 267 3 73 141 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 35 523 7:30Aryt (1. 267 B 'r 23 193 n 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 5.35 70,'r,r,t � ?; 1 ,l 1� W1 n r) n n n 4 n 56 0 499 Ir-'r1 R,Or,,Am C sl 1.1 17 I'll) 0 1. 0 C: D O 0 7❑ ?) 4AID 1'.E U:3L°-AM (i i'•'J 1 2 {1 0 0 Ll L U 17 {i 4bZ, L2311 2:,15 Arvl c 2?2 j 1 1 177 0 0 0 C c1 L' ID is 481 1 18318 I've k k1i11 Northhound Southbound Eastbound Westhaund F15ates Loll Thru R%ht k1 I NL Thru R t U Left Thru Right U telt Thru Right u Total A l 4'eh des 0 1368 32 a "2 i 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 14a 0 2140 I-eavV Trucks 0 4 4 8 32 0 0 0 L1 0 0 4 52 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 L1 1 2 Raikrgad Stopped Bum ra[tmr"enr3; Report generated on 9/17,l201510:40 AM SCURCE:QualltypCnunts,LLC lhttp://www.quaiitycourtmnetj 1-87`7-580-2212 PagL a or 1 Type of peak hour being reported:Systern Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering Volume LOCATLQN: Queen Kaahumanu Hwy--Hualalai Rd(Southern Most) QC JOB#t: 15639912 CITY,/5TATi<: KaiCua, HI DATE:Thu,Aug 29 2019 ,� 1a13 Peak-Hour:3:00 PM--4:00 PM I-S 3 s }� Peak 15-Min:3:00 PM--3:15 PM � + €1 !w5 dr + >.s * R fT i t 7t ♦ bi 3J + P # i 1A r Z4 cl 0 0 1 R L4 a, 6d 0 + 0 % I,PA i 79 7 0 W f 0 I] 0 * F 90 Quality Counts 1.6 3A DATA THATORWS CCTV 'Jf INIT'; 0 6 U J i � f 1 L p ! 4 0 D "I7 r 0 � a } t G 0 0 fl KIA L. 4 1 i hL7 r r NA NA y t `,A Fr � • f l:a Min{:(font 01J,'r^K-i:rhi,n-mil Hwy s`ijeen K,s"Fria,;,u Hwy Hii.il,ilai kirk�4rr ikhrrr M•�'.I} H ,i,l i h:;(tio:,i Ihi'rn M<r5k� PeriDd (hlrir,I :;romd) 1w.'e+. kriiisrsrl r(,Cdl he�ur�y Beginning Al ro—als. Lott Thru Rs hr U Lwft Thru Right U Iri; Thru Ri N tJ Ia°i Thru R; hf U : Cf' 4 742 0 0 14 258 4 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 21 0 543 :1 Phl 0 217 2 D 17 '66 0 0 0 a 0 r; '4 rl I# dI ;ta 33D IPM 0 259 1 0 14 246 0 11 0 0 0 0 1 0 19 0 340 3;45PM Q 227 3 D L4 2,45 9 1 0 0 ❑ 0 A 0 IR G ;❑; ?W5 4_00 Pm C 20:! 0 €) 75 277 0 .7 0 C ❑ 0 k ❑ 11 0 3 k 1 7.0'77, n ,S PM a 24Z 1 D to 144 0 0 0 0 0 11 2 A 6 0 5€r, 2061 4:30 Put a 2Q7 2 l} 14 2% D 0 0 0 l7 0 1 Q 11 0 441, 1962 4:45 PM a 213 5 ❑ 15 25ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ 14 0 497 195,; 5 00 PM 0 194 1 D LS 2bS 0 4 0 0 q 4 Q 12 tk 40.; 193 .13 r il" a 2t1S 0 ❑ 4 2% 0 0 cs 0 0 0 1 0 1 a Y13 1 s?,6 ":A P.M 0 i98 1 0 6 246 0 3 n 0 0 0 2 0 5 0 4:18 14,E 5:45PM 0 163 1 0 7 247 0 i .I) 0 0 0 0 0 s 0 421 1877 Peak 15 Min Northbound S4Ulhbound Fastbaund Westbound Total Flowrates Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right J Left Thru R1 ht U Left Thru Right U A7 ue ,Ges n 968 o 0 56 1037 D a 0 0 0 0 7o Q 84 Q 7164 Heauy Trucks a 12 0 4 7n ❑ 0 a D a ❑ 0 3F PFdeStriail5 Q 0 Q Q V Bacytles C1 0 0 0 ❑ ❑ 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ G kleilrryad Stopped 6uses f-a3Yl'1117CP f Reportgene-ratad on 9f12/2013 10:43 AM SCURCE:Qualityfcfunts,4LC(htrp:/Jwww,qua]itycounU,net}1 877 a9t7�71.2. Page a or 1 Type of peak hour bcing reported:Systern leak Method for determinIng peak hour:Total Entering Volume LOCATLCFN: Queen Kaahu rrlanu Hwy--Puapuaanul St. QC JOB W: 15039905 CITY/5TATF: Kai[La, HI DATE:Thu,Aug 29 2019 1m 1m Peak-"our:7:00 AM--8.00 AM 47 ?-3 # } I peak 15-Min:7:15AM--7:30 AM � + } V t1t1 -03 al R R ► i3ir2 1] r PaF t, 1br11 a . a 1 r R7 r 5) Q + O s �' f 0 t 15 f -1 * F @36 877 QuaLi Ly Counts 43 74 DATA THATURFW5 CC,JM1r1rllUMTH I 4 I G 70 1 fl KIA hU7 r NA }I a NA r w t8'4 � 'i {". ■a � I I � w° w � • f 1', Mil(0mil 1.1u+'r K;i:rhmn-mu Ftwy s`ijeen Ks' Fuy,rr w HWY I 1.1pli;mi'l Y I iml-11,;;in i1 Y Fli,i and (Nu nI :;ro md) yrfsi 'ih,aiirirl� (F Ii; .mill i'w".'t•".I 11.rILI) I0Iall Hourly Bp.eirrmn-�A[ I,ot: Thnr M rh,i U 1 P.ft Thru Right U I eft Thru F.i/gH U I rt°i Thru R:Vh: U 7:DD AM C 'c24 5 0 17 171 0 0 0 ti, ,) D 11 13 2 F 0 450 7,1.5 AM 0 246, 3 6 1 8 184 Q 0 0 0 0 a 2,0 t1 48 0 509 7,30 AM C 2091 4 0 12 IRS 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 48 0 489 7:45AM r1 174 12 7 II 175 p 0 0 0 0 A 28 a 57 0 462 1,910 R:DOAm C 11$ 10 G 9 IkiS D D 0 C ❑ a 78 d 39 0 459 1.91.9 u:'I5 AM {j 2R 1=. iq 1.9 154 fl P 0 C D D °3 C 3D 0 44a 1F50 u:3DAM fJ 22U 11 G 16 179 11 U 0 it Ll 0 11 kl 32 0 468 L829 2:,15 Arvl C 245 11 a Ill 159 to b 0 c D U 17 ❑ 2a 0 469 1: iti I've k 15-mki Northbound Svuthbound Eastbound Westbound rkMVdte5 Ix,II Thru Right U Left Thru Ro t U Wt Thru Righn U lel` Thru R9gh1 U Total A I V'eh des 0 98, 1.2 ( 32 73fr 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 0 192 0 203f I-eavV Trucks 0 20 0 4 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 52 Pedestrians 0 0 0 0 Bicycles 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [1 0 aid L „ Rad Stopped Buses +a co-mr"enrs;---- —=1 Report generated on 9/17,l201510:40 AM 5C URCE:QualltypCnunts,LLC ghttp://www.qualitycourtmnetj 1-87`7-580-2212 Page 1 or 1 Type of peak hour bcing reported'System Peak Method for determining peak hour.Total Enteringllolume LOCATI[CFN: Queen Kaahu rrlanu Hwy--Puapuaanul St. QC JOB W: 15039gN CITY/5TATF. KaF[Ua, HI DATE:Thu,Aug 29 2019 Peak-flour:3:00 PM-=+4:00 PM L4 3 U Q L7 0 R R ► tW7r W 3J r PJ t,t7r35 B a r 1 r 14 r Im Q + O s � 4. 0 t 1_1 9W on Quality Counts 1.6 2A DATA THATURWS€=C,JM UMTif 0 6 U 1 I I L P ! 40 1 AL— D "I • 0 D � S- 0 G 7 0 0 fl hU7 r NA a NA w M • f 1', Mil(,]lint Ourr^K-i:rhuin:inu Ftwy s`ijeen K, Furr, ir Ii Hwy 1.1pii; u rini. Y I .grli,;;in 114l F'K,imd (hJm 1 :;roi,iul) %IIH11.rILI) Hourly Kpp:irrim;, nl R Totals i.el: Thru ftx hk U 1wft Thru Right U Irix Thru Ri 1�t kJ l a7 Thru, R; IiE 11 3 00 P.M 9 199 14 0 3? 231 0 0 {} 0 0 Ci 0 23 0 311 305rp l n 205 14 0 27 2d3 D 0 •;} 0 a 0 12 0 23 ;24 3f1`pM f' 230 12 D 37 213 0 0 0 0 [l 0 ? 0 17 0 328 r ri4r r 1'7' . t 1! 21'1 n r) 0 C ❑ 4 ti rl 14 41 4111) 2052 i:00P\A C 192 G .1.1 ..I5 0 0 3 C ❑ 0 12 0 16 i 496 2037 4.5 PM 0 207 1'- q '.;, in p 0 0 0 17 rl 11 A 35 r 1., 202R 4:30 PM 0 1t 1 lu (} 1.:2 $ U 0 0 0 0 4 0 12 {i 4.21 L921 4:45 PM a 209 is ❑ C ? 0 0 3 0 0 {1 13 ❑ 29 i) 512 19s❑ 5 00 PM1 0 159 7 4 J 1!3 0 4 !� Q 0 q 4 Q 1l t5 454 1948 r F' 0 195 11 0 'i, 19 0 0 !s tl, 0 0 7 0 0 491 1884 ":A P.M f 7Y 1G G I'll :vo 0 3 n 0 0 0 10 0 22 0 469 L926 5:45PM ,ta _II .� 0 0 a 7 0 23 0 419 1833 Peak 15 Min Northbuuni� "(mr•ik,mirld Fastb4und' Westbound Total Flowrates Left Thru Right U Lett ThrLA Bight U Left Thru R1 ht U Left Thru Right U A ue ,G es n 9ZO aF3 0 14F B57 1) 0 0 0 0 0 35 Q 10 Q 2117 Hewy Trucks 0 28 4 0 1) 0 0 0 D 0 0 17 as Pedestrians Q 0 0 P C Bacytles C1 0 0 {I D ❑ 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ G Fleilrryad Stopped awQs f'a3Yl'1117CP f Report generated on 9/1212015 10:f3 AM SOURCE:Qualityfraunts,4LC(http:/lwww,qua]ilycounU,net}1 877 a9tJ�71.2. Page 1 or 1 Type of peak hoar hung reported:User-befkned Method for determinIng peak hour.Total Entering volume LOCATtCM: Kuaklni Hwy--Hawail Belt Rd QC JOB#: 14972605 CITY/STATF: Hawaii,Hi DATE:Tut,Apr 3a 2019 o Peak-"our.-7:20 AM--9.20 AM a a � }L Peak 15-Min:7:30 AM--7:45 AM j + tl d kr {7 rr U J } 4 r t Y3 rr 0 J L 4 • LtsS-x b P J 1. u 4. U 733 r F�q * W1 E 7,2•• r i.l. M.6 61 % e 517 r Sm r.1 4 4.9 f'1.2 t 66 7 0 uu C r� U -1 F 57B D6 QuaLi Ly Counts 1.6 3A DATA THATURNES CC1M1r11uWTIr'i 0 6 U J i � -1 F_ i, 1 0 fl fl P * 4 J a 4 L ♦ 1 i h15 NA �. a MA o ,A f IS-Min CnunI Kuakim Hwy KLUIl l Hwy H;iw m 4rIr Rd H;:1•r,.1 Ki 11 Iwri Period (NurllIh0LIrIc1) CA'-%IIH11.rILI) [�1�1 he�urly rap irmiri A[ rG.,als. 6 1� I.4ft 7hrr[ It'sRhr U Left Thru Ri hr L1 Ic•i, TI7,�, Rij;l•I I1 I�>=1 TI- �, Rah: L1 6:45Arv1 2 0 37 0 C. 0 p 7: =d }i.,: 7:00 AM 0 0 3A 0 0 C' r D 0 21as 3 0 65 240 0 0 7:15 AM 3 n 45 0 : n n 0' 20'- I, 0 85 234 4 0 3 7:3C.+M 3 0 44 0 0 6 0 7 0 m 1.7 0 414 21S 0 0 604 2247 7:45Arv1 '7 4a 0 0 0 [} } 0 150 20 n 189 156 0 a 562 2297 &:UQAM 0 36 a n r_1 r,. 0 7 Sfi3 17 0 118 ?07 i} 0 537 271t6 R; 15 AM !1 0 49 G ii r] D 0 1TR 12 0 'm 2�:i 0 t3 ,48 71S] E:3UAM 2 U S'_ U D U L', D ID 1132 12 U JU 230 0 0 1}n freak 1"rArlln Northbound 5outhbound Ea5tbflund Westbound Flowrates f pri Thru Righl L1 I oFk Thru Right U I Fft ThrU Right 11 1 eft Thru Right U 7°mil A I Veh cles 12 0 1761 -0 ra 17 CI 0 0 832 68 0 45- 872 0 0 2416 "a ay Trucks 0 13 0 0 0 56 8 0 24 0 86 Pedestriwis 0 0 0 0 4 Bicycles 0 0 t) 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 Railroad 110PPLd Rusfs �[+i Ftf r'd YlfCS': Regortgenerated on 5/1-112015 3;10 PM SOURCE:aualltyCounts,LLC(http://www.qiAdlitycouii-Lb.iie.1 L-V'1-580-2212 PagL a or 1 Type of peak hour hung reported:User-befkrled Method for determining peak hour.Total Entering volume LOCATtCM: Ktlaklnf Hwy--Hawail Belt Rd QC JOB#t: 14972606 CI TY,/STATF: Hawaii,Hl DATE:Tue,Apr 30 2019 o Peak4lour:3:45 PM--4:45 PM a a � }L Peak 15-Min:4:15 PM--4:30 PM I + t� ti tr 11 � � U IL - J } 4 Wr 854 + S9+ « 3.3 923 r M '# a 243 r In ! 1.6* 1A � r 23 0 3n 7.1 n n 279 ass Quality Counts 1 (13 DATA THATURfWS CClMUUMTIr'i 0 n I7 J i � G � Lt fl fl 4 _J + ~ L @U7 r r "A {. a MA y t `,A 15-Min Colin h11:1kin -�v,ry K11, ,ml Hwy H;iw m 41Ir Rd H;,w. r Ki 11 lirl Pvl� f:d (Nmil :;rrmd) CA'-%IIH11.rld) [i1 rl hour�Y Kph :1rrim;J Al 1 1_i.3 5 lir1: TI'i•'u 11x h,i U trft Thru Ri hr tJ Ic•i, Tluu Rij;l`I tJ I�?-1 TI- ,1 RP,h: tJ il,) 'V 76 a ;) C. D D 51� wis, 3.15 P%1 5 U 75 } ry C' r D 0 73- 1a 0 59 21=1 } 606 3 30 PV. 3 0 &� 0 n 1) 0 205 15 0 18 717 0 ;7J 3.45 PM 0 0 76 0 1 DG {1 4 323 6 fl 57 317 @ 4 5$s )-ia;; .1 no PAA 3 0 97 5 1) ri 0 P 0 7,n 1 n D so 715 it 4 fin; 7 .5Pm 4 a 1a1 } D Q d 0 �a1 L5 0 55 i1d t1 G 6t3 gar: 4,34Pm 1 6 4 1% 13 0 r, 31 D 0 3P 1 U 71 201 0 U bay, 4:45 PM U 212 J v U U U 0 208 7 U 78 225 D 4 6" _]I:. 5'00 PM 2 0 Ica :] :} I} 6 J a 2.25 9 U 56 18' 0 1, 39r' )'PI S",Pm a 17 U I? 1) €} 4 219 11 Ll 39 IT O {} 53 530 Pm 0 0 1C2 0 1) 0 0 D 0 223 7 0 54 1311 4 b e,21s1 5:4 5 Pm 2 0 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 203 13 U 58 176 _'L Peak 15 Min Northbound Sou111hound Fastboulnd' Wesk4ound Flowrates Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U left Thru Rlight U Left Thru Bight U 1ULdl k Ug .c ex 16 a 4[14 a 0 {Y Q D a MA 64 0 zTf1 �i5 �] 0 7444 Fewy Trucks a a 0 0 1] D 0 1.6 8 4 ?s a 5G Pedestriail5 0 D 4 ❑ V Btcytles a ❑ 0 {1 D D 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ G Stopped Buses f'r7YJ71MCr1 f Peportgenerated on 5/13/2i11y 3:06 PPA SCURCE:Qualityfaaa,nts,4LC(http;/lwww,qualitycounts,net}1 1.2 Page a or 1 Type of peak hour hung reported:SysteEn Balk Meth®d for determining peak hour:Total Entering volume LOCATI[CM: Kuaklnl Hwy--Lako St QC JOB#- 15039907 CITY/STATE: Holualoa, HI DATE:Thu,Aug 79 2019 1310 Peak-Hour:7:00 AM--8.00 AM s + Peak 15-Min:7:45 AM—8:00 AM + i25 #.17 141 2.4 3n 51 a/ ♦ 4 J } U 194 b 2S1 t A. Ct r $n 15 r 2 J # 1_9 r 1.9 q6 r � t 35 CI 368.r B3 t l f9 bW 1.9• 1A % n rt 45 55 ]d5 * * F W Quality Counts 32 13 DATA THATURNE-S CC,JM MWTH 0 6 U J i � -1 F- J 70 1 fl to. F 1 5-Min Cnunt KUakinr HWY KuaS wi Hwy LjknI�t take)St Period Total FfcOI,rI Beginning At Loft Thru Right U t aft Thru Right U 1 eft, Thru Right LJ I eft Thru Right u uIlly ?:W AM 13 2211, 1,5 4 34 152 t8 {} 41 4 13 0 9 6 53 4 559 7.15 AM 9 188 1.4 1 36 154 15 13 66 9 21 0 17 7 61 0 616 7.3D AM 6 202 15 0 14 171 36 0 57 11 19 0 16 1,0 57 0 615-1 7.45 AM 6 181 11 a7 37 170 26 0 77 24 16 0 27 13 86 0 674 2533 R:DOI,M 3 206 17 n J7 145 24 D 55 19 11 0 13 7 65 0 601 2:a4: 9:'15AM 6 %Lq 17 q 19 1f.5 L6 0 +14 6 6 0 1 SI +J 770 249M 10 Ah:1 d >20 1G 0 :40 livLl 22' E7 77 1 10 0 'S 6 70 ? f,24 2469 E:a•=AM 9 2Lb 2L) U A6 1'0 is D I;: 9 0 13 8 CI4 U s9fi 2393 Nak 1rMln Northbound Soutlhbound Eastbflund Westbound Flvwrates I E?f1 Thru Righl I I PFt Thru Right 1.) 1 Fit Thru Right 11 I V.ft 11ru Right LJ Total A I Veh cles 24 724 44 0 14S E8D 104 0 30B 9E 64 0 licz 52 344 0 26913 "a ay Trucks 0 S 4 t6 40 4 0 0 0 0 0 a 90 Pedestriwis 0 r; 0 0 Bicycles 0 _ 4 t) 0 0 1, 0 0 4 D 0 2 Railroad Sto ed Ruses �[+i Ftf r'd YlfCS': Regortgenerated on 9/12/2019 10:40 AM SOURCE:aualltyCounts,LLClhttp://www.qiAdlitycouii-Lb.iie.1 L-2i77-580-2212 PNge 1 or 1 Type of peak hour being reported:System Peak Method for determining peak hour:Total Entering volume LOCaATtCM: Kuaklnl Hwy--Laka 5t QC JOB#: 15039909 CI TY/STATF: Holualna, HI DINE:Thu,Aug 29 2019 1m 1n74 Peak-Hour:3:40 FIM--4:00 Pi1+1 ar; # Peak 15-Min:3:15 PM- 3:30 PM + } 176 JS77 1151 a6 0j, 33 a/ ♦ 4 A # 4 2A6 r 1117 t A. 199 r 414 U ru 39 t � ` t. L7 r 41 3m r 1196 t 39 l 0, + C,k � .5.1 X5 r M t r 0 � 2M 29• 2.1 % � � f 15. 25 __1 # il' .t[ c _1 # * F 9B7 a55 Quality Counts 1 32 DATA THATURfWS CC,JM1r UUMTH 0 6 U J i 4 � a } t i, 70 0 OF * 4 L PA NA m Ip � + f F 1 a-Min Cnunt Ket:ikim Hwy Kttakmi Hwy Llknl.�I Lako 5t ly Period (NnrINHIurldJ (Sou;M141and) Fatili [f lW nwtn "tbound Hour Total Hourly B3-.ginning At i.aft Thru Right U I Mi Thru Ri ht U 1 eft Thru Right U I aft Thru Ri hl U 3 Ll0 P.M 13 1913 20 0 42 216 38 0 27 5 10 0 23 9 51 4 644 I'D PL1 7 192 19 0 51 2A3 45 0 2R 8 14 1; 12 4 46 0 G73 3 30T"m 12 196 17 4 °1 211 41 0 39 8 7 0 lb 11 63 0 662 i n;PM , 176 9 11 ;7 7f,7 1 17 31 9 17 a 11 ?G 13 p AGO 7482 .1 an PM 13 13'_ 1.2, i', "I)6 D 33 10 1.2 n 17 8 35 ?) 631 27,611 4;15 PM 19 20: 22 223 60 0 25 41 i'l D 21 '.1 1r1 tI 6T) 27,97, 4.30 PM 10 1/f 20 ch 41 2D2 39 t7 31 10 ! 0 20 d 11 G 601 2S,Iu 4,45 PM 12 ,r22 0 52 2,AU 41 0 20 10 7 U 22 8 36 11 67S 2612 5'00PM 10 0 30 J25 57 0 A 6 8 a x All {} 6o) :�S o 5_ 'a PM 12 1< ❑ 5S 212 S3 0 AM I 11 17 l'J :{,, Ad {} ;,!�8 2711': 5.30 PM G 0 60 :Dt 44 0 !} 11 G 0 '11 :1 38 0 �,9'2 2}34 S_15I'm 5 130 '• SO 7 ]' S 7 23 ;> 5r6 2+01_ Peak 15 Min S(ruifthound vuesk4ourld Total Flow'ral s Lela Thru Right U Lett T)ru Fright U Left Thru R1 ht U Leh Thru RighL U A ue c ex 78 7�6$ 72 0 Ins 3; 180 n 117 W 56 n 4J3 36 iFyfl Q 7697 Hewy Trucks 0 16 0 4 a ❑ 16 a 0 a a 17 5a PFdeSsria%15 Q D 4 4 4 Bacycles 0 ❑ 0 p n ❑ 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ G f1alJ"i ad Stopped 6uses f-a3Yl'1117CP f Report generated on 9f1212013 10_c3 AM SCURCE=Qualityfraunts,4LC(http;/lwww qua]ilycounts•net}1 877 a9tJ�71.2. Page a or 1 Tyae or peals hour bclm reposed:User-Defined Method fordetarminine peak hour.Total Entering Volume LOCATION: itamehameha III Rd-- Hawaii Belt Rd QC JOB#— 14972607 CITY/STATL Hawaii, HI DATE:Tue,Apr 30 2019 U 34 Peak-Dour_7:20 AM—8.20 AM 4,7 D + +I Peak 15-Min:730 AM- 7:45 #M • 11 JS 11 L6ll -- a� a 5a a 14 J L 'S A. S66 $7 r 0 .0 t {i r 62 4i7 r F� . 475 5.5 r « 5.7 716 rt 295% 4' 16 rt 4S9 S.7 rt h3 1 P ]U4 rt 57 "F- 5 * �7 {S t#5 F Jam Quality Counts 7.2 &4 o s o -1 L J i 4 G -1 1 ] l) 1� * -1 i L rW ryp. V, N1iI f Omit K, nc hrlrr.,,h.3 II Flr1 Man,•hn-T),,h,t II lid H iw m 4r:Ir Rd H:tr r K 11 Ii41 F'K,imd (hlrirll :;romd) (Sou.'iku)iir111) 1i;),IrII11 i'w":"%IkH11.rILI) [�1�1 he�urly Rpp:irrim.r' lir1: T'•'u R'�hk Ll IiFI T1ru Ri.til3r kJ Ici, Tluu Rijl`I I�?-1 TI- R�h: kJ Ls.,11s. 4r.1 1 i 1 rt 4:; I i .. 7:DOAId 41 ;1 0 } 1 2 2 D 3 1' = 3 sr 7:19 4M 3R 5 0 3 2 2 D 7:3D AM 36 1 11) 0 a 4 6 0 4 111 88 0 22 107 3 0 400E 1 1517 7:42I'M 37 5 0 & 2 '1 } 5 3 78 Fi 2,5 9°3 (7 0 300 151Z 9-Dr-AM 11 $ 5 Q 1 •1 1 D 3 V `_:S 0 17 12.1 •S ej 3.17 148.; H:15 AM 91 L 7 Iq 'i 1 :s D 1 Y,= 61 0 �0 15:� 'I %) :m19 1191� li:3DAM 34 1 111 U 2 2 4 D 2 U S� D 1 11b 1 U 329 i42f. Prak 1rWlln Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Flvwrates Iprl Thru Righl I1 IoFk Thru Right U IFfl Thru Right Ill I�FC Thru Righl Li Total A I Veh cles lt4 4 40 0 32 16 211 C1 16 04 352 D as 428 It 0 1GOU "a ay Trucks 0 0 8 0 D 0 0 32 4 24 24 tk 92 Pedestriwis 0 D z 0 4 Bicycles 0 _ 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Railroad Sto ed RuSfs �[+i Flf r'd YlfCS': Regartgenerated un 5/1-112015 3110 PM SOURCE.QualltyCcFunts,LLC(http://www.qudlitycours:s.iie.1 L-V'1-580-2212 Page I or 1 Tyae or peals hour being reposed:User-Defined Method fordetarminine peak hour.Total Entering Volume LOCATION: itamehameha III Rd-- Hawaii Belt Rd (IC JOB#t: 14922608 CITY/STATE: Hawaii, HI DATE:Tue,Apr 30 2019 Peak-Hour:3:45 PM--4:45 PM a P6 I • t I Peek 15-Min:4:30 PM--4:45 PM + + ll L� L� ' II o tti u 903 w 11 ! R 11 r SI'f 21 r P J t 0 r 6 511 ► t 254 «76 812 r MA 9 r fA 5m 11• 1A 11 .6 2S cl -1 F 3D as3 Qua Li'ty Counts 17 37 DATA THATURWS€=C,JM UMTIf 0 0 6 U J i 4 Ca 70 0 2 F 'P ; 6 V, N1iI f Omit K;;-nch;irr.+•h.3 II Elrl K3mehn-Twh;i 11 14d Ww.,m 4r:Ir Rd H;,w. r K 11 Idri N,imd (Nmil :;romd) %IIH11.rILI) �i�ouly talls Al lirl: Th"LJ ft'�ht U tP..ft Thru Ri h'r 11 Icdi Thm Rigl'l U I ?-1 TI-r,r Rrh: 11 or;:V S 3 14 a 4 2 c -, 4:: 3.1D P%1 47 10 22 0 4 6 5 db 13_ 3 k} 9 3:30 P O 65 6 21 0 '1 1 5 :r 1, Pu 119 4 0 457 3:45PM 74 4 12 0 2 2 6 0 6 11R '8 1" 13 21-1 3 4 433 1=J:s 4:P0 PM 78 1 12 0 1 6 4 0 4 17 74 0 17 I E4 7 0 V 1 i 71i:3 4115 PM 6.5 5 12, 0 0 3 5 0 1 134 62 ri i3 136 4 4 433 1.757 4;30 PM 1 70 1 15 0 d a 3 0 6 14 7Q 0 1r 1.37 7 0 466 1771 4:4aPM 72 3 14 U .2 d 4 D S iQ$ S{I D 3 ' G 39a Lx3: S:uD PM 48 4 2S 1 r+ :3 2 a 5 i23 90 ci a'. 3I ] sa 44': 1?.36 5= 5Pm 56 - 1'- 0 a J 7 0 3 108 75 0 21 101 1 0 3S7 ih90 5:30 PM 46 3 if) (1 1 1 4 D 4 141 71 8 8% b 0 -M1 l60" 5,4'.PM 36 1 14 0 3 a 2 0 2 if, 41 0 9 V 1 0 :256 LL,07 Pa.>.,ik 15-min Northbound Southbound La6tbouE1if Westb d Total Howrates Left Thru Right U Left Thru Right U Left Thru U Left Thru Right U All Vehicles 284 4 64 0 16 0 12 0 24 564 280 D 64 w a 0 1S64 Heavy Trucks 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 12 4 0 17 0 96 Pedestriarls o o a 0 .. E3iGycles Q Q 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 4 Railroad Stinpjped E3r,ses �iTf1�r1'k�rxrS. Report generated can 5/1 3/2 0113 3,06 @PEA SCURCE.Quality Counts,LLC ihttp:/Iwww.quaiitWounts.netl 1.977-580-22.12 Page 1 or 1 Traffle D-11a service \4 N ieow-n D2 Mo Qwen Kaahurnanu Hwy ------------------------------- --------- ------------- D Narii Kailua Dr hlrlrjrk fle I. Ln.('7 00910037,1371DD1112038 19,63455,-155.9779 D0E10033_B71001112038 Station Description: Queen I<aahkwnanu Hwy, Hualalai Road to Nam kadua Or tiurve.,Remmim,Divc.,Time SurvVyl.. Ilin-Dace [ill.r. 1}2'1 Jjf)]K) yrIIr S4 246 Sm%eY NIvillokl: Rood Tbk Ekfl to,Tyl*a: Chat Sur"vv CTVIh- UM Cl 1) ,;kcich kJpdEklcd DI N'ft Re nind 4: 1 1102 FACILITY NAMF JURI FLNC A 1R FA ROU'l F Ic LASI.'N I YiIL NU. MILL queen Kaahumanu KOVY 14 W Ifi T)I=Nrcc6oil io F.nJ T)i:Nanl railua Dr!Tlalani N S Rue 043) Dl-DiFucifiLm;o Beg-hi D2!H uala lai Poad i K i=hxmhv Ave I Rte m < 7- L U 1 .1 11 t..t 11 �7, c4 c4 0 CV m CL Ln IN N R 4 ; - :3 9; - T, I 14 — lo — vco Ir? am r 41j ..-j C., o' L� Sj v 11) c.i iTL CC 01 cq 17, M w ko (D 7r - 7, ;s CL 1 -11 P7 1,1 17, 1� -'Z �7 — Irl -D I r.- C 'D IZ 11 1 c M 4 -4 7) co ca 'm m ul L-n a r;o; rV U lo- r.- G iD J2 ML', -t LM M W U50 Q kn ko w n2 v) r, k, F, Q 6) v Gn v v LD 11 vi 'r v IT w� -T -w v) W, (n j) C, c. �o *v r-. c, LD f; w r- c,3 c, r- M rN C4 r%i I N (7v r -.1 C4 -.I C-� CN cQ r.11 CQ 7 -J 117 ;n 11 71 �1. 1. C. 1 :,l I Lj rl :A 11 1:11 LL CL u-' J. ol 1 C. 1:1 lz -z '4 7, 1-.: 7 7 Ll 11 1 1 11 1% 1 .1 n 7 7 C c c�Cl • 17, c x uL a LM N C, W C`a4. I D d) --I) CL FL C;, o Z, lz o o lz c cl c c3 c c:; D c, w -D is c3 N Go kD c 3 G, G G m C4 't XP kr) Z4) C t 23.N Do �3 cm j L c C. V) 0 r, N f- i r -c r- i r- LI Z Cl N 0 '7 7. llj M ID I 4P w ZQ c4 17 c d eam+ cL Ln cp L Q vl: , CL 13 Lu l: ;e� .1 7: -7 C, cs 17 7. 17. 17 — IL7 LD c; Lo 7 7 OL 17, 1 Co 0 c3 ED I Ol 1D Lrl 1r) C') ',D 0 � C+1 rc LN co m cc N auP c, u3 Q m cA to Cl) ra _j u- J in 4L CD L> C) C4 In 'T L-- -7 T 75 k!! C5 lnl m e2l W. n 121 M Cl Ln c U's n — - :I al y rl — 1!3 'I I < 7 < -,t .0 0 Z < W w N cQ cu ru M 77 7: :, , -m LL LJ- .11 , ,- I 't < < < c� c> 9 r- cp c� 7 p o cj m L;) C m 6 L ll s L -D c, L� LL —i F- -, 7?-n -N 1-3 c-4 N-n i c:4 c0 o CL An vA ID N �0 r� La Lf, -L .71 Lff CI C� w -7 c� 't- c, "d LL D- a iv In ie) tft S c, r. m 'P el '7, c 717 J3 w ko rl C, C Irl ",:p Ln rL c P C I in 0: oo ID fn '4" coo C -j Q Q clr It m kn r- w c4 lo m D M & 2) It -t 7 -w -w il �k, CL 0 F- eD Cc cl c, c, C- cr) cl c ID cl cl, -0 c� N w ;D "j U, CSC ZN rd C4 �l clj 7A z%j clj `4 N N C4 .11 Z'j CN N 7 rL N Lj c-_- LL 7 LL C, rd .,l ij. jj I- c LL �L -C Z1. 11 v- ID z r -z 1 t '4 1 Vj 11 11 11 11 1� 11 n C c� FL (J 4. ll 1-9 1 11 11 '7 1 It I z, lz I D f) c c cc 11 1z, C 0 c3 C 'm D cq 0 0 6 ta 99 L) do Rn D3 ra -k ;3 Td Lf) 0 0 C'. ..' P- -4. ^ 'D 0 L.) I': r-.1 rq r�l co '. r.j -,j c-� 0� cl) Ill IN cl 11 �N QQ IN 114 1� U) LU 'R, 'b Z:l Q 713 cD ul rr ir, L: c. LL" c- L: 71� It c "I '!� c A -, r-, v M -, -Q c.j T, r- r-- 7- Ic ;e� .1 1, -- -- CL In 7 7 Oj SY ." - .: -Y, % 9 CZ Ic c; 1, "1 c; ku, 'It q 7- 7) rC, "o c rp r.. r- v m C. 11 1., G ILI C-1 lw 17, 1 In < cl cY g) a rD 'E2 ul Ncu ,, kD g, c) 0 w Ln m 4-- T -4 - r14 -N IP M .6 E rc 0 LN r- �3 n u w r� in m N c) C, — co m r-. In m to M c� 00 m cc Cr) ra �j 7j CD :0 t, LO m cl - 0 v r0, ah r- - t- oo 4L Z5 75 - t� - - - - - - - - 'n c, 'n CD - - I" 1p Cr1� P� r In "ir 9 �'l l'J rr < 7 < N cQ w ru m m c- -,t -0 7 7 7 LL Lj- 2 c cp c� :p p o cp c� c> m C ll3 CJ L;) C m 6 Ln L6 L 1, 6 f-. L� c cc C4 -, : -N N CJ Ti n i< 11) LL -i 0 'D �D c: 6 6 - S c, c, c, 7, C' r7 c c, Run Date: 2U 1 6'U1 9 Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division Highways Planning Survey Section Vehicle Classification Data Summary 2015 Site II]; B71001112t138 Rraute Cho: 11 date From 2015i09;10 0:00 Town; Hawaii Direction; �E,i? Date To: 211 5'e7q.11 23:45 Location. Queen KaalllElMnu Hwy-Hualalai Rd to Nam Kailua Ear Functional Clawfication: 14 UR13AN:PRINCIPAEI.APTErRIAL.-OTHER HEPOH I f OIALS-46 HOURS RECGRDE8 VOLUME % NUMBER OF AXLES Cycles 263 0.49% 525 PC 4'.)148 84.23% 90295 2A-4T 7438 13.88% 14875 LIGHT VEHICLE TOTAL,+ 52549 98,60% 105697 HEAVY VEHICLES Bus 0.16% 213 SINGLE 1JNIT TRUJK 2A-Tr 3.7 . ';+:a 192 4A-SU 29 0-0b". 116 SINGLE-TRAILER TRUCKS 4A-ST 266 0.501/. 1064 5 A-ST 50 0.091/a 25C 6A-ST 34 0.06% 190 MULTI-TRAILER TRUCKS SA-MT 12 0,02% 6A-MT 1 0.00% 6 7A-MY 15 0.03% 105 HEAVY VEHICLE TOTALS 748 1.4W. 2678 CLASSIFIED VEHICLES TOTALS 53597(A) 100.00% 108375 (0) UNCLASSIFIED VEHICLES TOTALS 2 GACW0 AXLE ROAOTUSE ON FAGTTEC AEC) EQUIVALENT(Br2) 54167 (G) FACTOR(A+C)� p,g8g TOTAL HIPMS PEAK HOUR PEAK PEAK 24 tioun K-FAtCMR VOLUME.: 2034 HOUR HOUR TRUCK OF (PEAKIAADT) 201510911014:00 TRUCK VOLUME VOLUME AADT AADT (ITEM 66) VOLUME SINGLE UNIT i55A-1) (6SA-2) TRUCKS(TYPE 4-7) 10 0,49% 187 0,72% 745% COMBINA11ON Z65E3-1) 25800 (658-2) (TYPE 8`13) 10 M49% 187 0.72% 7.85% Traffic Data Service Traffic Stition Sketch N Llsnd9 Hawaii Area;Kona Srrriiui ff}.+.Sr,rinii+i:f371[}(1111c"'�`$ Hualalai Road U2 Queen Kaahumanu Hwy UI Nam Kajltm Dr 4lrf'r9 Idle\urYrr mp boo;I::.,x?" l3? k'i11.1 F2[}_i8 19.63455,-155.9779 �. D0543008 Slation Demipfinn: (queen Kaahurnanu H6%ry: Hualalai Road to Mani Kailua Dr 4tcrv._1 1koirri inn Dt+rl'1ime: kurvtyEizdingDattf inw: 3arve).MtAod: Road Tube TX!.iTNp,:: Clfl s 4aia,•ti1't."'u, LM CIB i{ t�h lJlsrl i:rd: k.': SR ('I I'1'I'I'. NOI MR-F Queen Kabrlulmmu HVeV I dll lif fDl—fNrtxi:,on in Fni i �daC F,iIi6i f)r'F`.il:uii R,: I{r: Iorn ni I;.;aj h.. i.1 w..1.•, 1 .b 6., ,.� La m GB r N r- Q r2 m M L63 m w w ill LfJ Q N RV 0 N H7 IAT Lf1 h 00 EO Li, Y] M {,7 T] r 6 2 T� T+ h � C] 111...444 ;h eacae� mNNN [a .. .. .. .. .- ... ..• ... r ,. rrwr rr.: r UL? :L 4 EL I.. _ I. Lp U! EL 40 frJ !h N ILI Id} M6 CO li] ,.7 h Ifl m � i1) M M N3 {L SU �y � � 6 Q -M 5 fa 6 � a r LT 'i7 07 fitl�yy' +- �n H Qt +- r +- ri •.. E C7 C4 yq U'l LL CC Q. e?�t�I' uD. N 11 - ,n 5r7 LL it III r- M1_ i. J7 c 7 r _ iJ fl rJy J� D L UJ 0 0 rD N L CJ J Jh C7 b t_-� d C-J C: 6 4 0 s3 O 0 O 0 O C7 O Lr � � �' A ol R? 1p Gi Hs D sfi O r f� M V to m +•- V a 44 ° a m 4 �, s o ea C3a00 LL CJ r, CJ . ,. ,; C„ r... C- ., ^! 11 ;.I ^ .. s_^ ILI - ^ - ..� CL r ('tf O IJ7 r� ll] S C' l 0.: iJ 4J i �]L L:: — w Z _ L — Jy� VA CU '9' f-: -1 r . :Il :-1 J. -1 �} �� C, �T al yy- Ctl GV CV CLL N N N L l.J 1. [v n: SJ ;J .J _M lV ,_ :'J .v r:\• I 1: I- I _ yS *i. ,i 1 14 {JtJ r:Un e.. •1 L} :' A L i 'I 1 Lf. C!7 r :7 rt ens -t C In 4V L LL LL _ I a- I O T: Jl J s J J 1 a q - N "1' �7 C' to �fl Ifl W CL 3 C7 ID O C7 .. ri L11 LL ` J. d1 r C ��-+ P3 N .- � r f7 T wcli rJ �ey3 LT1 C„ r_ C •_'.I '\ 1 : n C.. C.• L {I V 1J -- CJ C _+J W 1: — Ir IRi [d�'}} daa _ � H7 M tn wIlS m r t In p } C) G v- F- w r� q -r r! Cs n,: m tla e+f I F, ir: +7 iA �J F-3 47 G r n T D �i 4 an .-- r r r - m 7J d 4 c3 LL p Q ., - - p In r� 19 11 0 Lf7 r" r ': n u-; 'l K, '_7 r} r: .3 :A u} O 47 6} [[`L�}; ?y � � � N. CL y, ti O L7 I; r+ T 4Yr O OI (5 d @ 47 V 4 T � rrto riV N G fv IC a M r>A N � G Qs ;Lr0 :TY - f_ _3 sT is E 71 x r r P a o a Lnr a L� n L a L�, n LL, mM. r 1: R T ""i 5; 4 �' $ �E P ILL. LU LU e �4 r m wh iD R U1 14 h Cl *.7 in ,ll in w A LC LB l^'l m +G ^7 - f I _' ' 'X. LLI x - { l h — r tv i4 u7 G �' T_ T ,— .. T I� T . sn n cg In c m :n a �-, i r. �. I - L .. LL t r •r 7r G• .- M -f :� ,- M K - n7 -3 r .•- ^ 7f C'.:•. 4; N GV N L -1 L l •I LL LL .. 7 u i^.. '� kn �" l 0 kn _ Lr. M I1,, f f} iry C .-.. ._.1 � (f} LJL ..� C7 � � � ry �' r — "., r- r_ r� 'n n t n- - •.'ry n Lrs � �' I_ L z m ell C2 CD 0� n C� -r m C� It Ir 113 1p 71 0, C7, 0 IF; m I- T-- c CC U EL It Co M ca EL Cj 64 40 7; C,Z em Go r- M CD I cn qq r, .7, 0 o U.) a q C17 kr CI C- z ILI 10 ot cn Li I 7 7 1 7t 7, 7 CA — L, - ,, - Cr, n m c7 b a cf F- ' w M CL CL m E A C3 0 0 LQ 0 C' �D 10 �f 10 7 "1 Cq :3 CC N N C9 411 C, IN N N N N 12 1, u n3 CS a L,I N OJ 'j CIJ Ll. C'j N T 2 T7 -t -t -t ri 7 L- I 2 2 L CL Lj M- 7' �u C) LU 7- 7 F- Cj CL LL W (D C 9 4 u A fi 4- cli Ir w It m rd tm OL 0 a- L" 1'- 0- 1`3 C7) n C) ZIG C77 2M EL 0 0 0 U CP -!t ID W3 C. 7 L- 0 7, 41 19 u-, M -t e:.. m 7 7 7 (R 1- 17 �.j 7 j'3 "0 rd < n :L CL 13, Yl "1 m cq -11 1.2 1 LL LL -6 1 LU 0 < a- rq m w CU "D w C� W� m a N r- U) m w 7 fn tD CC, j 2, >' LL < -D n c s2 'n <D LL f', LL 7f C. N LL L, m 7 7 u kn Lr:, -r. 0 kn Lr. c 1, 7, ;f- r) s U-) 5 o t < Run Date: 2U,7'U8`018 Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division Highways Planning Survey Section Vehicle Classification Data Summary 2016 Site II); B71001112t138 Rraute No: 11 date From; ?;i v 05'03 fl:00 Town; Hawaii Direction; l E,i? Date Tu: 2'11 c,05 04 23:45 Location. Queen KaAhUlnanu Hwy-Hualalai Rd to Nam Kailua Ear Functional Clawfication: 14 UR13AN:PRINGIPAI.APTErRIAL.-OTHER HEPOH l IOIALS-46 HOURS RECGRDED VOLUrnE % NUMBER OF AXLES Cycles 338 0.66% 677 PC 35846 69.91% 71692 2A-4T 14195 27.69% 2831H --------------------- -------------- LIGHT VEHICLE TOTAL,+ W 98,25% 1007a HEAVY VEHICLES Bus _'.i4 i 585 SINGLE UNIT TRU"'K 2A-6T 7 :i $14 3A.-SU 445 435 4A-SU 31 J.uG'6 124 SINGLE-TRAILER TRUCKS 4A-ST 153 0.301fa 612 5A-ST 95 f1.19 475 SA-ST 31 0.0 6`Yp 186 MULTI-TRAILER TRUCKS SA-MT 14 0,0311r6 70 6A-MT 1 0.dX0% 6 7 A-M Y 33 0.06% 231 HEAVY VEHICLE TOTALS B94 1.743'0 3038 CLASSIFIED VEHICLES TOTALS 51277(A) 100.00% 103803 (0) UNCLASSIFIED VEhIGLES TOTALS 1 0ACW0 AXLE ROADTUSE CORRECTION EQUIVALENT(Br2) 51901 (G) FACTOR CAM) 0.988 %TOTAL HPMS PEAK HOUR PEAK PEAK 24 HOUR K-FACTOR VOLUME : 1970 HOUR HOUR TRUCK OF (PEAKIAADT) TRUCK VOLUME VOLUME AADT AADT (ITEM 66) 2t116ft1314)315:00 VOLUME SINGLE UNIT (65A-1) (55A-2) TRUCKS(TYPE 4.7) 33 1.68% 283 1l19% 7.U4% COMBINATION ( 65E3-1) 25800 (658-2) (TYPE 8.13) 27 1.37% 163 0.52% 7.64% Appendix Analysis Reports — Existing Conditions (2019) Tinilr-gS 2019 AM t Falaili Rd CQii-,coll Ka&l1LW-1ar1u I WY 1�c 12 272I Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NOR SBL SBT SBIR Lane Configurations M tt r M tt ' +t ' tt r Traffic Volume(vph) 71 457 218 163 678 23 243 192 109 20 321 177 Future Volume(vph; 71 457 218 163 678 23 243 192 109 20 321 177 Turn Type '-'rat NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prat NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 4 8 2 6 Qetectad Phase 7 4 4 3 8 S 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MinimumSplit(s) 95 36.5 38.5 9.5 38.5 38.5 9.5 42.5 42,5 9.5 42,5 4.2.5 Total Split(s) 10.7 38.5 38.5 14.9 42.7 42,7 18.5 51,6 51,6 10.0 42,5 42.6 Total SPlit(%) 9.3% 33.5% 33.5% 13.0"k 37.1% 37.1% 16.3% 44.F/o 4 .9% 8.7% 3722% 37.2% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to 1.0 110 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lies 'yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max Norge Max Max None Ncne None None Nave None Act Effct Green(s) 62 35.1 35A 9.3 40.6 40.6 11.6 29.7 29.7 5.6 17.1 17.1 Actuated grC Ratio 0.07 0.38 0.38 0.10 0.44 0.44 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.06 0.19 6.19 vie Raba 034 0.37 0.32 0.49 0,46 0.03 0.58 0.17 0.19 0.19 9.50 0.41 Control Delay 49.2 23.6 5,1 46.3 21.9 0.1 45.2 22.8 5.4 50.2 35.3 7.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total aolay 49.2 20.5 5.1 ;6.3 21.9 0.1 45,2 22.8 5,4 50.2 353 7.4 LOS D C A D C A 0 C A D D A Appicauh Delay 20 6 25A 29.3 26.3 Approech LOS C C C C Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglth:115 Actuated Cycle Length:;91.4 Natural Cycle: 100 Control TyDe,Semi A•t-Llncoord Nlaximum u c Ratio:0.58 Intersection Signal D] lay: 25.2 Intersectlan LOS-C Intersection Capacity Lt6lization 613% ICU Level of SeNce B Analysis Period[min) 15 Splits and Phases; 1.Palani Rd &Queen Kaahumanu Hwy Q 1 1 oZ 03 -*04 5.00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM +nth Signalized Ir,ttorsection SUn-1rna{y 2019 AM 1, Palani Rd & Queen KaahUn�anu Hwy 11:1212021 t 1, ._ arrtent EBL EBT E.BR WBL WBT WBR NOL NOT MR SEL f $,OR Lane Configurations M +f r M tt r 1) ++ r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 71 457 218 163 678 23 243 192 109 20 321 177 Future Volume;wehih) 71 457 218 163 678 23 243 192 109 20 321 177 Initial Q(02b),veal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0a 1.00 120 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1,D0 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.00 1.DO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1737 1767 1737 1$41 1$f 1 1841 18A1 1870 1856 1870 1870 1M Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 72 466 0 166 692 0 248 1% 0 20 328 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 D.H 0,98 0,98 0.98 198 0-R 0,98 0.98 0.98 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Gap,vehl11 161 1537 249 1656 344 7aQ 40 500 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.46 0.00 0.07 0.48 •0.00 0.10 0,22 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1569 3401 3554 1572 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 72 466 C, 166 692 0 246 196 0 20 328 0 Grp Sat F1cw(s),veh!hiln 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 1.7 6.9 0.0 3.8 10.4 0.0 a_6 3.£ 0.0 0_9 o-D 0,0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 1.7 6.9 0.0 3.8 10.4 0.0 5.6 16 0.0 0.9 6.9 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},vehh h 161 1537 249 1656 344 780 40 600 VJC Ratio(X) 0.45 0.30 0.67 042 0,72 0.25 0,50 066 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 251 1537 445 1656 613 2108 123 1714 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,x 1.00 1.00 1 J10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0,00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slued 36.6 13.5 0.0 35.8 13.4 0.0 34.6 25.6 O.0 38.4 321 0,0 hor Decay(d2).slveh 1.9 0.5 0.0 3.1 0.8 0.0 2.8 0.2 0,0 9.3 1.5 U In!t at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 1) .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Back=(54°lo),vehfln 0.7 2.5 0.0 1.6 32 0.0 2A 1.5 0.0 0.5 3.0 10 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 38.6 14.1 0.0 38.9 14.2 0.0 37.4 25.8 0.0 47.7 33.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B D C D C Appfoauh Vol,veil h 538 A 858 A 444 A 348 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 17.3 18.9 32.3 34.5 Approach LOS B B C C Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 6.3 21.9 10.3 40.9 12.5 15.7 8.5 42.7 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.5 47.1 10A 34.0 14.3 38.3 6.2 3U Max 0 Cleat Time(9_c+i1).s 2.9 5.6 5.8 8,9 7.6 8.9 3,7 12.4 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 1.3 0.2 3.1 0.5 2.2 0.0 4.9 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 23.7 HChA 6th LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [NBR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Brasc::,°:c� Synchro 10 Reporl Page 3 Timings 2019 AM 2: Henry St & Queen Kaahur-laaPLI HWY 1V12.202'I ,# t 4 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WEIL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations M tt r +� 0 1 4T Traffic Volume(vph) 107 359 124 52 600 467 146 337 42 362 339 Future Volume(vph) 107 359 124 52 600 467 146 337 42 362 339 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Porrn Split NA Perm Split NA Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 l~ Permitted Phases 4 8 2 D9tectar Phase 7 4 4 3 8 a 2 2 2 6 n Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5,0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 9.5 30.5 30.5 9.5 30.5 30,5 35.5 35.5 S5,5 35,5 35,5 Total Split(s) 11.0 32.2 32.2 4,8 31,0 31.0 37.5 37.5 37,5 35.5 35,5 Total SPlit(%) 9.6% 282% 28.0'A 8.556 27.0% 27.0% 32.6% 32.6°l* 32.6% 30.9% 30.9% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3,5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.1) 0,0 Q.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tatar Lost Time(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max Notre Max Max None Ncne None None None Act Effct Green(s) 6,6 30.5 30.5 5,4 27.0 27.0 17.5 17.5 17.5 23.1 23.1 Actuated grO Ratio 0.07 0.33 D.33 0,06 0.29 0.29 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.25 vie Ratio 0,50 0.34 0.22 0,28 0.62 0.61 0.46 0,57 0.12 0.71 9,70 Control Delay 53.4 28.2 6.9 50,2 34.0 6.9 39.1 38.0 0.7 43.2 35.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 D.0 0.0 0.0 D.0 O.D 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total delay 53.4 28.2 6,9 50,2 34.0 6.9 39,1 38,0 0.7 43.2 35.2 LOS D C A D C A D D A D D App, cauh Delay 28.3 23.5 35,3 37.8 Approach LOS C 0 ID 0 Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih:115 Actuated Cycle Length:92.5 Natural Cyde: 115 Control TyDe:Semi Act-tlncoord Nlaximum vlc Ratio:0.71 Intersection Signal Delay;30.3 Intersection LOS-C Intersedon Capacity UWizaton 68,91A ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 S life and Phases: 2:Henry St &Queen Kaahmanu Hviy 07 08 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysts 2019 AM 2. Henry St & Queer! Kaahumanu Hwy 11!12.202'l -,# - t 4 I'41oamerrt EBL EBT EBR 'WOL WBT 4NBR fNBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SER Lane Configurations M tt r tt r 1 4+ 0 Traffic Volume(vph) 10T 359 124 52 600 467 146 337 42 362 339 124 Future Volume(vph) 107 359 124 52 600 467 146 337 42 362 339 124 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1 Wl 1900 190Ci 19W 1900 19M 1900 19N 1900 1900 19M 1900 Total Lost lima(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane tltil, Factor 0.97 0.95 i.a0 0.97 0,95 1.00 Q.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0,91 Frpb,ped;bikes 1,00 1.00 D.99 1,00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.Oti 0,99 1.00 1.00 Flpb,pedibikes 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 i,00 Frt I 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0,85 1.00 1,00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Proteccled 0,95 1,00 1.DO 0,95 1.00 1,00 0.95 1,0f} UQ 0,95 0,99 Saud, Flaw(protf 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1467 1595 3174 FR Permitted 9.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flq4 ' errr' 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1487 1595 3174 Peat[-hour factor,Pit= 0.97 0-97 D.97 9.97 0,97 0.97 0.97 0.97 D.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj, Flow(vph) 110 370 128 54 619 491 151 347 43 373 349 128 RTOR Reductknr (vph) 0 0 86 0 0 336 0 a 35 0 23 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 110 370 42 54 09 145 136 362 8 283 544 0 Gonfl,Peels.(Nhr} 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl. Bikes(R+hr) 1 Heavy Vehides.�'Xgj, 13% 10°'i 5% 6% 6% 3% 51A 3% 7% 3% 4% 51/0 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm split NA Perm SPA NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Pgrmitled Phases 4 a 2 Actuated Green,G (s) 6.6 30.6 30.6 4.1 28.1 28.1 17.5 17.5 17.5 23.1 23.1 Effective Green, g(s) 6.6 30,6 30.6 4.1 28.1 28.1 17.5 I T5 17.5 23.1 23.1 Actuated gC Ratio 0.07 9.33 013 0.04 0,30 0.39 0-19 0,19 0,19 0,25 025 Clearance Time(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehde Extension_�s}_ 3.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 34 3.0 10 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph} 219 1076 497 145 1025 466 293 627 278 394 785 v+s Betio Prot c0N 0.11 0.02 0 18 0.09 Q011 cb.'8 0.17 Vs Ratio Perm OM 0.09 0.01 v.+c Ratio 0,50 0-34 ME 9.37 0.60 0,31 0.46 0.58 0,03 0.72 0-69 Uniform DF-4ay, d1 41.8 23.7 21,7 43.3 27,8 25.1 33.7 34.5 31,0 32.1 31.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.a0 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Inc'emental Delay,d2 1.8 0.9 0.3 1.6 2,6 13 1.2 1.3 0.0 6.2 2.7 Delay(s) 43.6 24.6 210 45.0 30,5 26.9 34.9 35.B 31,0 38.3 34,6 Level of Service 0 C C D C C C Q C D C Appruauh Delay I.sl 27.5 29.7 35.2 35.8 Approach LA'S C C L' D Intarsection Summary HDA 2000 Control Delay 31.5 HCM M level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 93,3 Sum of lost tirna IN 18.0 Intamectlon Capacity Utilization 68.9% ICU Level of Service C Analysts Period(mire) 15 c GrOicat Lane Croup 5.00 pm BasA-fine Synchro 10 Report Page 5 FICIVI 61h TWSC 2019 AM I Hualalai Rd 4North) 1 12.2021 Irtiler.�e�.lic�rl Inf 'e.Ny s.v9h movement EBL EBR NBL N13T SBT SBR LdnC-Gonliguretions r t f r Traffic Vol,vehrh 44 48 184 985 776 30 Future Vol,vehlh 44 48 164 985 776 30 CeniticOng Peds,Or 11 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Canhol Sf,p Stag Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - Nome - '1'Ad Storage Length 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Faclor g3 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 PAvint Flow 47 52 176 1059 834 32 Major"Oa Mincr2 Majbr1 Mali. Conflicting Flovu AJI 2246 835 0 - 0 Stage 1 835 - - - Stage 2 1411 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6A2 4.12 -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 2.218 - - - Pol CW1 Maneuver -46 0 798 - Stage 1 426 0 - - Slage 2 225 a - Platoon bluGied, 'k - - - Mou Cap-1 Maneuver -36 - 797 - - tJlav Cup-2 Maneuver -3t - Stage 1 331 Stage 2 225 Approach E5 M6 so HGM Contra Delay,s S 429 1,5 0 HCM LOS F Mhor LaneMaior Mvmt NBL NBT EBLrr1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity(veh?h) 797 - 36 _ - HGM Lane V.'C Ratio 0,221 - 1.314 - - MGM Contrd Delay(s) 10.8 - 5 429 0 HCtwf Lane LDS B - IF A - - HCM 95th°Mile Q(veh) U - 5 Notea Vdume exceeds capacky S; Delay exceeds 300s +:CompuWon Not Defined `;Afl major value ira plattson 5:00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 7 HCM 6th TWSC 2019 AM 4: Hualalai Rd (South) 1111212021 Inlerseclion Inf 'e.Ny s.v9h movemem Y4'BL WBR NBT NBR 3131- SBT Lane Gonrigurations j r T t Traffic Vol,v&Vh 9 140 1006 15 73 748 Future Vol,vehlh 0 140 1006 15 73 748 ConiticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Yield - Yield None Storage Langlh fl 0 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade.% fl - 0 - - 0 Peale Hour Faclor k 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 13 6 5 MAvint Flow 10 151 1082 16 78 904 Mejor"Oa Minorl Majorl Majior2 ConllicGng Flovu AJI 2050 1090 0 0 1092 0 Stage 1 10 - - - - - Stage 2 960 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 65.42 J.22 - - 4.16 Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.31$ - - 2.254 - Pol CW1 Mammar 61 262 T - 630 Stage 1 322 - - Slage 2 372 _ - - Platoon bluGied, 'k - - - Mou Cap-1 Maneuver 51 262 - 630 tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 53 - - - - - Stage 1 321 Slage 2 32,8 Approach m N6 so HCM4 Control Delay,s 38.9 4 1 HCM LOS E mhorLarie1i41aiprMMlvmt N8T NSR)N8Ln1WbLna2 88L SQT Capacity(veh?h) - 503 262 6 57 - HGM Lane V.'C Ratio - 0.153 0.:6 V. - MGM Control Delay(sj - - 87_.5 M.8 11,5 - HCtwf Lane LDS - F F E HCM 95th%file 0(veh) - - 16 3.3 0.4 5.00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 8 Timings 2019 AM 5; PuapLtaarlLll St 11112f2021 f- t Large Group WBL I/VS9 NEST NBR SEL SBT Lane Configurations I r t T Traffic Volume(vph) 67 185 8;.t3 24 43 718 Future Vol ume,wph) 87 '185 8 3 24 43 718 Turn Type PFot Perm NA Perm Prat NA Protecled Phases 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 8 2 Detectad Phase 8 8 2 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.G 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimums Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22,5 2Z5 9.5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 76.5 7&5 11.0 87.5 Total SPlit(%) 20.5% 20.5% 89.5% 69.5% 10.0% 79.5% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 IJ) to 1,0 1,0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 U 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 Lead,LaEg Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Gptirnlze? Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode Norre None Max Max None Max Act Effct Green(8) 10.8 10.8 78.3 78,3 6.3 84.9 Actuated grC Ratio 0.10 0.10 D.75 0.75 0,06 0.81 vie Raba 0.51 0.58 0,56 0.02 0,43 0.52 Control Delay 53.6 13.4 11.2 2.2 60.4 5.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 6.0 0.0 0.0 Total aolay 53.6 1 J,4 11,2 2.2 14,4 5.1 LOS D B B A E A App, cauh Delay 26.3 10.9 8,2 Approach LOS C B A Intersection Summary Cycle Length:110 Actuated Cycle Length: 104.7 Natural Cycle:80 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Uncor,,d Nlaximum vac Rana:0.66 Intersectlan Signal Celay;112.0 Intersection LOS.B Inter con C achy utilizalion 618% ICU Level of Service 8 Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases. 5: Pua aanui 5t 06 5:00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page*9 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 AM 5; Puapl_laanui St 11J12f�021 Ir t Nbyement VVBL WER NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations r Traffic Volume(vehfh) BT 185 858 24 43 718 Future Volume;wehih) 87 185 853 24 43 718 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 9 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.90 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.Do 1.00 1.00 1 A0 Work Zane On Approach No Nc. No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 I d% 1870 1670 1820 Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 93 0 07 0 46 764 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 G.N 0,94 0,94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 3 2 2 a Cap,vehlh 120 14119 65 1536 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.00 0.76 0.00 0,04 D.84 Sat Flow,veh h 1781 1585 1656 1585 1781 1826 Grp Valume(v;.vehfh 93 0 907 0 46 764 Grp Bat Flavv(s),veh!hiln 1781 1585 1856 1585 1781 1826 Q Serve{s-s),s 5.1 0.0 22.7 t7 0 2.5 11.3 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 5.1 0.0 22.7 0.0 2.5 11.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh ih 120 14N 65 1536 VJC Ratio(X) 0.78 HA 4.71 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 325 1409 117 15365 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1,00 1.00 1.x 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 4.00 1,00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 45.3 0.0 5.6 0.0 47.0 2.1 hor Delay(d2).slveh 10.2 0.0 2.3 4.0 13.4 1.2 In!r al Q Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(50°l9),vehfln 2A 0.0 7.5 U 1.4 2A Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 55.4 0.9 7.9 H 60.4 3.3 LnGrp LOS E A E A Appfoauh Val,veil h 93 A 907 A 810 Approach Delay,s.,veh 55.4 7.9 6.5 Approach LOS E A A Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 5 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 8.1 79.4 87.5 11.1 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 65 72.0 83.0 %D Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 4.5 24.7 13.3 7.1 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 9.3 7.0 0.1 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 9.7 HCl`A 6th LOS A N otes Unsignaiized De"6Y fn? [[,BP: t';BF :;exduded fr,uyn calculations of the app,'oaJ'delay and intersection delay, 5,00 Synchro 10 Report Pagh 11 FICIVI 6th TWSC 2019 AM 6. Kuakini Strect 1 12.2021 Intersection h t 0 Y s.veh 7.7 Moveme,I EEL EBB N,BL N3T SBT SBR LdnC-Gonfiiguralions r t + r Traffic Vol,v&Vh 7 169 517 801 733 61 Future Vol,vehlh 7 169 517 B01 733 fit CcniticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 a Sign Control Slop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channeiized - Free - Nome - Ykk Storage Lenglh 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% C - - 0 0 - Peaak Hour Faclor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 7 PAvint Flow 6 182 656 861 785 66 Majo!-Unnr Miner2 Majorl MajW Conflicting Flovu AJI 2761 78# 0 - 0 Stage 1 788 _ _ - Stage 2 1973 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.42 4.12 Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 _ 2.218 Poo CW1 Maneuver 22 6 831 - Stage 1 448 0 - - Slage 2 118 a Platoon bluGied, 'k - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver -7 - 831 - - tJlav Cup-2 Maneuvar 7 - Stage 1 148 Slage 2 118 Approach U NO HGM Control Delay,$1035.4 6.9 0 HCM LOS F MinorLanielMaior Mvmt NBL NBT EBLra1 EBLQ 5BT SBR Capacity(veh?h) 831 - 7 HGM Lane V.'C Ratio 0.669 - 1.075 - - MGM Contrd Delay(s) lie $1 a35A a HGNI Lane LDS C - F A - - HCM 95th°Mlle Q(veh) 5.3 - 1.7 Nctft Vdume exceeds capacity $; Delay exceeds 300s +:CompuWcifl Not Defined `;Afl major value Ire plattson 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 12 Timings 2019 AM T; Lako Street 11!12.202'I t l Large Group EBI_ EBT W8L 'WBT NBL NBT NBR SEL SBT SBR Lane Configuratians I 1 T4 + t r Traffic Volume(vph) 251 48 59 36 33 792 55 141 647 125 Future Volume(vph) 251 48 fig 36 33 7ta2 55 141 647 125 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA Perm pm#pt NA Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 a 5 2 1 6 Permibd Phases 2 2 5 6 L7etectad Phase 4 4 6 8 w 2 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split(s) .22.5 22.5 22,5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22,5 9,5 54.1 54.1 1U 55,5 55.5 Total Split(%) 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 8.6D/a 49.2% 49.2% 9.9% 515% 50.5% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 I'D 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 LeadIag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Gptirnlze? Yes Y Yes Yes Yes Yea Recall Mode None Nave None None None Max Max None Max Max Act Effct Careen(s) 17.7 1 T.7 15.0 15.0 54.7 49.7 49.7 583 55.1 55.1 Actuated grC Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.14 0.51 0.47 0.47 0.55 0.52 0.52 rile Ratio 0.91 0.38 a3O 0.88 0,13 0.97 0.08 OX 0.72 0.15 Control Delay 79.4 26.8 44.1 46.0 12.6 54.4 0.8 72.7 27.6 3.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 D.0 t].0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 79.4 28.8 44,1 48,0 12.6 54,4 Q.8 72.7 27,6 3.6 LOS E C D C 13 a A E C A App, cauh Letay 62.7 45.7 49.4 31,3 Approach LOS E D D C Intersedan Summary Cycle Lenglih:114 Actuated Cycle Length; 106.8 Natural Cyde: 110 Control TyDe:Semi ANl-Unooard Maximum We Ratio:0.97 Inteisectian Signal delay:44.3 Intersection LOS.Q Intersection Capacity Utilization 96, A ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 7:Lako Stme" 1 1F�2 0 F35 06 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Pagh 13 HCM kith Signalized Intersection SurTimary 2019 AM T; Lako Street 11!12.202'I Nbyement EBL EBT M WBL WBT WBR, NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1 1 T V t r T r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 251 48 59 69 36 267 33 742 55 141 647 125 Future Volume;vehih) 251 48 69 69 36 267 33 792 55 141 6i47 125 Initial Q(02b),vets 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0a 1.00 1.Go 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.40 1.00 1.0151 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 18?1 185E 1870 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 267 51 0 73 38 0 35 B43 0 150 6B8 G Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0.94 0.94 D.M Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Gap,vehl11 303 318 110 116 344 971 258 1016 Arrive On Green 9.17 0.17 0.00 9.06 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.52 U OQ Q.05 0.55 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 17B1 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 187C 1560 1725 1856 1585 Grp Volume(v;.vehfh 267 51 G 73 38 0 35 843 0 150 668 0 Grp Sat F1cvu(s),veh!h.1n 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 Q Serve{s-s),s 10 2.2 Q.a 3:9 1.9 4.0 0.9 373 0.0 3A 25.5 O,Q Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 14.0 2.2 0.0 3.9 1.9 0.0 0.9 37.7 0,0 3,8 25.5 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 D.DG 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.DO Lai1e Grp Cap(c},vehih 303 318 110 116 344 971 258 1016 VJC Ratio(X) 0.88 0A6 J,66 0.33 0,10 0.97 G,58 0.68 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 336 353 333 353 381 971 270 1016 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 O.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 38.7 33.8 0_0 43.8 42A 0.0 12.7 20.1 d.c 19.0 15,5 0,0 hor Delay(d2).s7veh 21.5 0.2 G,0 6.7 1.6 0.0 0.1 10.4 0.0 2.9 3.6 0.0 In!r at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 +0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 7.8 1.0 0,0 1,9 0.9 0.0 D.3 17.9 0.0 1.7 11.0 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 60.2 34.1 0.0 50.5 44.5 0.0 12.8 30.4 0.0 21.9 19.2 0.0 LnGrp LOS E C D D B C C B Approach Vol,veil h 318 A 111 A 878 A 838 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 56.0 48.4 29.7 19.6 Approach LOS E D C B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 5 5 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 10.2 54.1 20.7 7.5 56.8 10.4 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 6.4 49.6 18.0 5.0 51.0 1$.D Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.8 39.7 16.0 2.9 27.5 5.9 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 4.4 0,2 0,0 5.1 0.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 3C1.L HCl`A nth LOS C; N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectiol)delay. 5,00 Pr- arse;,°:c� Synchro 10 Report Phgh 15 Timings 2019 AM 8, Kamehamehe III Read & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 11112l2021 t 4 Large Group EBT EER WBT NBL NBT 8BL ajj Lane Configuratians 4 r 414 T4 }i* Traffic Volume(vph) 5 26 12 76 475 14 417 Future Volume(vph) 5 26 12 76 475 14 417 Turn Type NA Perm NA Prot HA Prot NA Protecled Phases 2 6 3 8 7 4 Permitlad Phases 2 D9tectad Phase 2 2 6 3 8 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 9.5 23,5 9.5 23.5 Total Split(8) 30.4 30.4 30.G 13.6 40.0 9.6 36.0 Total SPIrt(%) 27.6% 27.6% 27.3% 12.4% 36.4% 6.7% 32.7% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 110 1.0 1.0 1:0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.G 0.0 Q.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? Yes 'des Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None Nave Max None Max Act Effct Green(s) 13.5 13.5 T1 8,3 45.0 5.2 36,2 Actuated grC Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.D9 0.11 0.59 0.07 0.48 vie Ratio t3.57 0,08 a27 0A6 0,50 0.12 0.48 Control Delay 37.2 0.5 30.1) 43.8 15.3 40.8 14.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 Total aolay 37.2 4.5 30.0 4`?.8 1u.3 40.8 14.9 LOS D A C 0 B FD B App, cauh Delay 32.1 30,0 19,1 15.d Approeah LOS C C 8 B Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglth:110 Actuated Cycle Length:76.2 Natural Cycle: 105 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Llncoord Nlaximum vac Ratio:0.57 Inteisectlan Signal Nlay: 19.3 Intersection LOS.B Intersedon Capacity Utiil zatian 57.k ICU Level of Service 8 Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 8.Kameharneha III.Road {queen Kaahumanu Hw *aa ivas 03 04 07 t08 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Reporl Page 16 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Srtn-ima{y 2019 AM 8; Kamehameha III Read & QLjeen IKaahumanu Hwy 11.12-2021 t 1* 4 I'4layament EBIL EBT EBR WBL WBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r :k I +T Traffic Volume(vehfh) 15T 5 26 16 12 15 76 47w 15 14 417 255 Future Volume;wehih) 157 5 25 16 12 15 76 475 15 14 417 285 Initial Q(0b),vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0D 1,00 0.95 1-CI0 0.98 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.40 1.00 1,D0 1,00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Rove,veh1hin 1811 1870 1722 1870 1781 1796 1737 1811 1870 1870 1811 1811 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 169 5 D 17 13 16 82 511 1G 15 448 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 OX 0,93 0,93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0,93 0.93 0,93 D.93 Percent Heavy Veh,% 6 2 12 2 8 7 11 6 2 2 6 6 Gap,vehl11 230 7 26 20 24 103 933 29 32 1689 Arrive On Gruen 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.53 0.53 G-02 0,40 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1732 51 1459 598 457 563 1654 1745 55 1781 3532 0 Grp Volume(v;.vehfh 174 0 D 46 0 D 82 0 527 15 448 0 Grp Sat P1ow(s),veh!h.In 1784 0 1459 1618 0 0 1654 0 1800 1781 1721 0 Q Serve{s,�s},s 5.2 0.0 0.0 1.9 G.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 12.8 O.F 5.1 t7.Q Cycle fD dear(g_c),s 62 0.0 0.0 1.9 0,0 0.0 3.2 0.0 12.6 0.6 5,11 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.97 1.b0 0.37 0.35 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.00 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veWh 237 0 74 0 0 103 D 962 32 1689 VJC Ratio(X) 0.73 HO 0.66 0.06 0.00 0,80 0.00 0.55 0,46 0.27 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 6% 0 622 0 0 227 D 962 137 1689 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,x 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.0 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 277 0.0 0_0 31.3 0-0 0-0 307 0.0 1U 32.3 91 0.D her Delay(d2).slveh 4A 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.0 13.0 b.0 2.2 9.9 0.4 0.0 In!t al 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 +0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Back=(54°lo),vehfln 2.8 0.0 0.0 0 A 0.0 0.0 1.6 Ok 43 0.3 1.6 10 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 32.0 0.0 0.0 41A 0.0 0.0 43.7 0.0 12.4 42.2 10.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A D A A D A 6 D B Appfcauh Vol,veil h 174 A 46 609 463 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 32.0 41.4 16.6 11.3 Approach LOS C D B B Timer-Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 a Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 13.3 8.6 37.1 7.4 5.7 40- Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 25.9 R1 3115 25.5 5.1 35.5 Max 0 Cleat Time(g_c+11).s 8.2 5.2 Tl 3 9 2.6 14.5 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.8 0.0 217 0.2 0.0 310 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 17.? HCl`A nth LOS B N otes Unsignaiized De'16y fn? [EBR SBRI is excluded from calculalioas of the a;,pfoach delay and intetsect!ar7 delay, 5,00 Pr- Brasc::,':c� Synchro 10 Report Page 18 Tin7ir(lS 2019 PM t Falaili Rd & CQii-,coii Kaahun�al-iu Hvvy * 1 12 272I Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL 'vVBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configuratians �1 tt r t� r 1� ++ r '� +t r Traffic Volume(vph) X0 677 503 223 609 41 227 283 247 51 313 107 Future Volume(vph; 2160 677 503 223 609 41 227 283 247 51 313 107 Turn Type ;'Tct NA Perm. Prot NA Perm ?rot NA Perm Prat NA Perm Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 Permibd Phases 4 8 2 6 Qetectad Phase 7 4 4 3 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MinimumSplit(s) 95 38.5 38.5 9,5 38,5 38.5 9.5 42.5 42,5 9.5 42,5 42.5 Total Split(s) 17.0 40.5 40.5 15.0 38.5 38.5 15.0 48.1 46A 13.4 44.5 44.5 Total SPlit(%) 14.8"Io 35.2% 35.2% 13.0% 33.5% 33.5% 13.0% 40.1'% 411% 11.7% 38.7% 38.7% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.G 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lies Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max None Max Max Nave Ncne None None None None Act Effct Green(s) 11.4 36.5 36.5 %1 35.1 35.1 10.2 24.0 24.0 7.6 16.8 16.8 Actuated grC Ratio 0.12 4.40 0.40 0.11 0.38 0.38 0.11 0.26 0.2E LI.08 0.18 0.18 vie Ralio 0,62 0.64 0,60 0.60 0.47 0.06 0.62 0.31 0,42 0.36 9 49 0.29 Control Delay 463 26.8 9.6 48.2 24.7 0.2 48.6 29.1 fi.ar 49.7 35.5 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 6.6 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 46.8 26.6 9.6 45.2 24.7 0,2 48.5 29.1 6.0 49.7 35.5 7.8 LOS D C A D C A U C A D 0 A App, cauh Letay 24.7 29.5 27.4 30.7 Approach LOS C C C C Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglth:115 Actuated Cycle Length,91.7 Natural Cycle: 100 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum u c Ra#o:0.64 Inteisectlan Signal Delay: 27.1 Intersectlan LOS:C Intemdon Capacity Utilization 66,6*A ICU Level of Smvice C Analysis Period(min) 15 S lit$and Phases, 1.Palani Rd &Queen Kaahurnariu Hwy 11,601 1}0 ■ o 3 -W04 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM +nth Signalized Intersection SUn-1rna{y 2019 PM 1, Palani Rd & Queen KaahUn�anu Hwy 1 12.202I -'# --- t I'4layarnerrt EBL EBT EBR wBL WBT 4NBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations �1 tt r t� r 1) ft tt r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 2cla 877 503 Z23 609 41 227 283 247 51 013 107 Future Volume,vehih) 2K STI 5G3 223 609 41 227 283 247 51 313 107 Initial Q(0b),vets 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0c 1,00 1.Go 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.i}U 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No Na No 04$at Row,veh1hin 1855 1856 1670 1870 1841 1870 1855 1870 1870 1870 1870 1 M Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 265 895 D 228 C21 0 232 289 0 52 319 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 US 0,98 0,98 0,98 196 O.98 0,98 0.98 0,98 0,96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 3 3 2 i 4 2 3 2 P 2 2 C Gap,vehlh 357 1578 316 1521 319 691 76 512 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.45 {i.00 0.09 0.43 •0.00 0.09 0.19 100 0.04 -D.14 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 3428 3526 1595 3456 3497 1585 3426 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Vclume(v .vehfh 265 895 0 228 b2t 0 232 289 0 52 319 0 Grp Sat F1ovv(s),veh!hiln 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714 1777 15a5 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve{s-s),s 6.0 15.1 0.D 5.7 ".8 0.0 5.3 5.7 0,1) 2.3 5.8 0.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 6.0 15.1 0,0 5.2 9,8 0.0 5.3 5.7 0.0 2.3 6.8 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.110 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh/h 357 1576 316 1521 319 691 76 512 VJC Ratio(X) 0.74 0.57 0,72 041 0,73 0.42 0.68 0 62 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 533 1578 451 1521 448 1 B38 197 1767 1-10M Platoon Ratic 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 O.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 35.0 16.5 0.0 35.5 15.6 0.0 35.5 28A U 3.8.0 32.4 0,0 hor Delay(d2).siveh 3.1 1.5 0.0 3.2 0.8 0.0 3.6 0.4 0,0 10.3 1.2 0.0 In!r at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bac)(=(54°lo),vehfln 16 5.9 0.0 2.2 32 0.0 2.3 2A 0.0 1.2 2.9 10 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 38.0 17.9 0.0 38.8 16.4 0.0 39.1 28.8 0.0 48.3 33.6 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B D C D C Apprcauh Val,veil h 1160 A 849 A 521 A 371 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 22.5 22.4 33.4 35.7 Approach LOS C C C D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 7.9 20.2 11.8 40.5 12.0 16.1 12.9 39.5 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax),s 8.9 41.6 10.! X0 10.5 40.0 12.5 34.0 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 4.3 7.7 7.2 17.1 7.3 8.8 8.0 11.8 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 2.0 0.2 6.0 0.2 2.2 0.4 4.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 26.1 HChA nth LOS C; N otes Unsignaiized N716y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Yrr- Bras.,;;,°:c� Synchro 10 Reporl Page 3 Timings 2019 PM 2: Henry St & Our-,en KaahuralartLI HWY 1V12.2021 ,# t 4 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NOR SOL SK Lane Configurations �1 tt r M +'t r 4+ r 0 Traffic Volume(vph) 190 663 2R1 72 548 314 126 318 34 348 342 Future Volume(vph) 190 663 291 72 548 314 126 318 34 348 342 Turn Type Prat NA Perm. Prot NA Perm Split NA Perm $OR NA Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2. Qetectad Phase 7 4 4 3 a a 2 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#(s) 9.5 30.5 30.5 9.5 30.5 30,5 35.5 35.5 a5,5 35.5 35,5 Total Split(s) 13.0 34.0 34.0 9'5 30,5 30.5 315_0 36.0 36.0 35.5 35.5 Total SPlit(%) 11.3% 29.6% 29,6% 8.3% 20.5% 26.5% 31.3% 31.3% 31.3% 30.9% 30.9% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.a 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 LeadLag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max None Max Max None Ncne None None Nano ActEflet Green(s) 8.6 32.3 32.3 11 26.5 26.5 16.9 16,9 1&9 24.4 24.4 Actuated grC Ratio 0.09 0.34 D.34 0,05 0,28 0.28 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.26 0.26 vie Ratio 0,64 0.56 0A0 0,40 0,56 0.48 0.41 0,% 0.10 0.73 9.69 Control Delay 55.1 31.0 5.6 54,3 34.4 6.7 39.5 39.4 0.6 44.0 33.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 07 0 0.0 0.0 0,0 D.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 55.1 31.0 5.C, 54,3 34.4 6.7 39,5 39.4 9,6 44,0 33.0 LOS E C A D C A 0 D A D C App, cauh Letay 28.6 26.6 36.6 36.7 Approach LOS C C D 0 Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih:115 Actuated Cycle Length:94.6 Natural Cyde: 115 Control TyDe:Semi A,c#-Uncoord Nlaximum vlc Ratio:0.73 Inteiseclian Signal Delay;31.2 Intersectlan LOS-C Intersedon Capacity Utilization 72.7% ICU Level of SeNce C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2:HenrySt &Queen Kaallumanu Hwy t f 07 08 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2019 PM 2. Henry St & Queer! Kalahumanu Hwy 1111212021 -, ---W t f'41oamerrt EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT W5R NBL NBT NBR SBL BT SBR Lane Configurations �1 tt r M +t r 1 4+ 04 Traffic Volume(vph) 190 663 291 72 548 314 126 a18 34 348 342. 190 Future Volume(vph) 190 663 291 72 548 314 126 318 34 348 342 190 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1 Wl 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1800 1900 Total Lost lima(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lana tail. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 0.95 1.00 Q.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 Frpb,pedlblkes 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.90 0,98 1.00 -199 Flpb,pedfbikes 1M 1.00 1.Do 1100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.W 1,00 1.0 Frt I M 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0,85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Flt Proteded 0.95 1,00 1.DO 0,95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1,00 UQ 0,95 1.00 Said. Flaw(protf 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1510 3193 FR Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.04 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Setd, Flow(Derrl1f 3335 3539 15K 3433 3471 1561 1.595 3382 1537 1510 3193 Peak-hour IaCtor,PH'F 0.98 0-98 D.98 9.98 0,98 0.98 0.98 0.98 198 0.98 0.9a 0.98 Adj. Flow(vph) 194 677 297 73 559 320 129 324 35 355 349 144 RTOR Reductknr (vph) 0 0 197 0 0 228 0 G 29 0 47 0 Lane Group Flow(vph1 194 )77 100 73 559 92 116 337 6 302 549 0 Gonfl,Peels.(Nhr} 1 1 4 7 7 4 Confl. Bikes(A'hr) 1 1 1 Heavy Vehicles i°e 5% 21% 2% 2% 4% 2% 3"gym 2% 3°ta 2% 2% 2% Turn Type Prat NA Perry Prc1 NA Penn split NA Perm SPA NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 n Pgrmitled Phases 4 a 2 Actuated Green,G (s} S.8 32.3 32.3 3.9 27.6 27.6 16.9 16.9 16.9 24A 24.4 Effective Green, g(s) 8.6 323 32.3 3.9 27,6 27.6 16.9 IM 16.9 24.4 24.4 Actuated g C Ratio 0.09 0.34 0.34 0,04 0„29 0,29 0.18 0.18 01118 0126 026 Clearance Time(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Verde Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 10 10 10 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 300 1196 535 1110 1003 451 282 598 271 4'1 815 v+s Ratio Prot c0.06 C0.19 0,02 0.16 0.07 COAL c0.19 0.17 Vs Ratio Perm ME 0.06 0.00 v.'c Ratio U5 0,57 0.19 0,62 0.56 0,21 0.41 0. 0,02 0.73 0-87 Uniform DF-4ay, d1 42.0 25.9 22,3 44.9 28.8 25.7 34.9 35,9 32,5 32_6 32.0 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1M 1,00 1.00 1.00 UfO 1.00 1.00 Inc'ernental Delay,d2 4.7 1.9 0.8 3.;a 2.2 1.0 1.0 1.2 9,C 6.7 2.2 Delay(s) 467 27.8 2.3.1 48A 31,0 26.7 35,9 37.1 32,5 39.3 34,2 Level of Service D C C D C C D D C D C Appfuach Delay` ] 29.8 30.'9 36.5 35.9 Approach LA'S C C L' D tntatsection summary HDA 2000 Control Delay 32.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 95.5 Sum of lost tirna IN 18.0 Intamecflon Capacity Utilization 72.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysts Period train) 15 c CrOical Lane Croup 5.00 pm BasA-fine Synchro 10 Report Page 5 FICIVI 6th TWSC 2019 PM I Hualalai Rd 4North) 1 12.2021 Intersection h t FlyY s.veh 1 10lovemenI EEL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR LdnC-Gonfiiguralions ' r t t r Traffic Vol,vehrh 10 70 84 923 1005 17 Future Vol,vehlh U 70 84 923 100,E 17 CcnnicOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Canhol Slop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - Nome - YWd Storage Lcngih 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Mediae Storage,# 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% fl - - 0 0 Peak Hour Faclor S7 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 4 2 6 MAvint Flow 14 72 87 952 1036 18 Majo!-Urnr Minod h18]6r1 Maio, Conflicting Flovu PJI 21fi2 1036 0 - 0 Stage 1 1036 - - - Stage 2 1128 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 65.42 4.12 -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 _ 2.218 Poo CW1 Maneuver 52 0 671 - Stage 1 342 0 - - 5lage 2 314 a Platoon blocied,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 45 - 671 - - tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 45 - - Stage 1 298 Stage 2 310 Approach m NO HCM Control Delay,s 107.3 0.9 U HCM LOS F MinorLariie1i iorMvmt NBL NBTEBLrr1 EBLn2 'SST SBR Capacity(veh?h) 671 - 45 HGM Lane V.'C Rat#o 5.129 - 0.229 - - - MGM Control Delay(s) 11.2 - 107.3 0 HGNI Lane LDS B - F A - - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 7 HCM 6th TWSC 2019 PM 4: Hualalai Rd (South) 1111212021 Inlerseclion Inf 'e.Ny s.v9h 1.7 Mulovemem Y4'BL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT LanC-Gonfigurations r T t Traffic Vol,v&Vh 14 71 040 4 61 1015 Future Vol,vehlh 14 1 940 4 61 1015 ConiticOng Peds,Or 11 i 0 0 0 a Sign Control Sire Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized Ykeid - 'YlERd - Dane Storage Langlh 0 0 - - - Veh in Median 5tm Ger# 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade.% 0 - 0 - 0 Peale Hour Faclor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 8 2 MAvint Flow 14 73 969 4 63 1046 Mejor"Oa Minorl Majorl Major Conllicbng Flovu PJI 2143 971 0 0 969 0 Stage 1 971 - - - Stage 2 1172 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.47 6.22 - - 4.18 Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.47 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.47 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.563 3.318 - - 2.272 - Pol Cap-1 Mammar 52 307 - - 688 Stage 1 38o - - 5lage 2 288 Platoon bluGied,% - - - Mou Cap-1 Maneuver 47 307 - - 688 tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 47 - - Stage 1 360 Stage 2 262 Approach W5 N6 SB HGM Contra Delay,s 35.6 0 0.6 HCM LOS E Minor L.a*majdr M vmt Nf3T NBRWBLn11BLrQ SOL SBT Capacity(veh?h) - - 47 307 688 - HGM Lane V.'C Ratio - 0.307 0.238 0.091 - MGM Control Delay(s) - 112.5 20.4 10,8 - HCtwf Lane LDS - F C B HCM 95th%file 0(veh) - - 1.1 0.9 0.3 - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 8 Timings 2019 PM 5; PuapLIaarlLli St 11112f2021 f- t r` Large Group WBL I/V59 NEST NBR SEL SBT Lane Configurations I i1 t T Traffic Volume(vph) 34 107 825 48 132 906 Future Volume(vph) 34 107 925 48 132 906 Turn Type Prot Berm NA Perm Prat NA Protecled Phases 8 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 8 2 Detectad Phase 8 6 2 2 1 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimums Split('s) 22.5 22.5 22,5 225 9.5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 69,5 69.a 18,0 87.5 Total SPlit(%) 20.5% 20.5% 63.2% 63.2% 16.4% 79.5% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 A l-Red Time(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1,0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 U 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tirt!1e(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Gptirnlze? Yes Yas Yes Recall Mode None Norte Max Max None Max Act Effut Green(8) 7.7 7.7 69.0 69.0 11.9 85.5 Actuated grC Ratio 0.08 0.08 0.68 0.68 0.12 0,84 vie Ratio 0.26 0.50 a68 0.05 H6 0.60 Control Delay 48.0 17.0 14.4 2.2 58.1 4.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 48.0 17,0 14,4 2.2 581 4,9 LOS D B B A E A App, cauh Letay 24.5 13.88 11.7 Approach LOS C B B Intersection Summary Cycle Lenpth:114 Actuated Cyde Length; 102.2 Natural Cycle:80 Control Tyre:Semi A-A-Jr-,cooA Nlaximum u c Ratio:0.63 Inteisectlan Signal Nlay. 13.4 Intersection LOS.B Intemdon Capacity UUlizaation 66,21A ICU Level of Serui;:e C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases. 5: Pua aanui 5i 0 a !}`02 t4 'doe 5:00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page*9 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 PM 5; Puapl_laanui St 11J12f2021 Ir t ' I'4layament VVBL WER NBT NBR S13L SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume(vehfh) 34 107 925 48 132 9N Future Volume;wehih) 34 107 825 48 132 906 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 a 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.90 Parking Bars.Ad} I.00 1.00 1,a0 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No Nc. No Act Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1826 1856 1841 1$70 1870 Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 35 0 B51 0 136 934 Peak Hour Factor €,1.97 0.97 0.37 0,97 0,97 0,97 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 5 3 4 2 2 Cap,vehlh 57 1356 168 1634 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 {1.73 9.00 0.09 •0.37 Sat Flow,veh h 1781 1547 16% 1560 1781 1 B70 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 35 0 851 0 136 934 Grp Bat F1cw(s),veh!hiln 1781 1547 1856 ISM 1781 19701 0 Serve{s-s),s f.8 0.0 21.F, t7 a 7.1 11.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 1.8 0.0 21.6 0.0 7,1 12.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Laiie Grp Cap(c},veWh 57 1356 168 1634 VJC Ratio(X) 0.62 0.53 0.81 0,57 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 337 1358 251 1634 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 4.00 1,00 1.00 Uniform Delay(d),duet 45.4 0.0 6.2 0.0 42.2 1.5 hor Delay(d2).slveh 10.5 0.0 2.2 0.0 11.0 1.0 In!r al 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bac1(=(54°lo),vehfln 1.01 0.0 7.4 U 3.6 1.6 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 56.0 0.0 8.5 0.0 53.1 3.0 LnGrp LOS E A D A Appfoauh Val,veb!h 35 A 851 A 1070 Approach Delay,s.,veh 56.0 8.5 9.4 Approach LOS E A A Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 6 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 13.5 74.0 87.5 7.5 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 13.5 65.0 830 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 9.1 216 14,U 3.8 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.1 8.1 10.2 0.0 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 9.13 HChA nth LOS A N otes Unsignaiized De"6Y fn? [[,BP: t';BF :;exduded fr,uyn calculations of the app,'oaJ'delay and intersection delay, 5,00 Yrr- Synchro 10 Report Pagh 11 H M6thTW C 2019PM 6, Kuakini Street 1 U12.202'I Irb(mdorl Int Delay.siveh 2.8 movement ML EBR 51BL NST 89T SW LdnC-Gonligurations r t t r Traffic Vol,v&Vh 13 372 243 854 887 36 Future Vol,vehlh 13 372 243 B54 887 36 ConiticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - YWd Storage Langlh 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Mediae Storage,# 0 - - 0 0 Grade.% C - - 0 4 - Peaak Hour Faclar 98 96 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehictes, % 5 2 2 3 2 6 MAvint Flow 13 380 248 871 905 37 Major"Oa Miner2 Majorl Major Conflicting Flovu PJI 2272 905 0 - 0 Stage 1 905 - - - Stage 2 1367 - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.4.8 4.12 -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.48 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.48 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.572 - 2.218 - - - Pol CW1 Maneuver 43 0 752 - Stage 1 385 0 - - 5lage 2 230 0 - Platoon blocied,% - - - Mou Cap-1 Maneuver 29 - 752 - - tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 2D - Stage 1 258 Stage 2 230 Approach Es N8 SB HGM Control Delay,s 20 .2 2.7 4 HCM LOS F mhor UneNaidr Mvmt NQL NBTEBLnl EBLn2 'SST SBR Capacity(veh?h) 752 - 29 _ - HGM Lane V.'C Ratio 0.33 - 0.457 - - - MGM Control Delay(s) 12.1 - 20Z.2 0 HCtwf Lane LDS B - F A - - H M 95th%file 0(veh) IA - 1.5 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Pagh 12 Timings 2019 PM T; Lako Street 11:12.202I Large Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I � '� T4 + t Traffic Volume(vph) 12T 30 52 39 37 764 64 181 577 170 Future Volume(vph) 127 3D 52 39 37 754 54 181 877 170 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pl NA Perm pm-�pt NA Perm Protected Phases 4 4 8 a 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 2 2 5 E L7etecttx Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Soli#('s) .22.5 22.5 22,5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22,5 9.5 52.2 52.2 12.E 55.5 55.5 Total Split(%) 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 8k% 47.5% 47.5% 11.61% 50.5% 50.5%, Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 I'D 1:0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tirt1le(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 Lead1ag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnlze? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None Nave None Max Max None Max Max Act Eff.t Green(8) 12.5 12.5 101 10,2 53.0 48.0 48.0 611.2 55.4 55.4 Actuated grC Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.55 0.49 0.49 0.62 0.57 0,57 vie Rarbo 059 0.31 0.35 0.72 022 O.6 0.08 0.73 0.86 0.18 Control Delay 51.9 21.8 46.1 23.5 12.4 34.9 1.5 31.2 31.2 5.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 07 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 D.0 0.4 0.0 L,0 Total Delay 51.9 21,8 46,1 23.6 12.4 34.9 1.5 31,2 31,2 5.3 LCS D C D C B C A C C A Appicauh Letay 40.4 28.3 31.4 27.6 Approeeh LOS D C C C Intersedan Summary Cycle Lenglih:114 Actuated Cycle Length;97.2 Natural Cyde: 110 Control TyDe,Semi Act-Llncoord Nlaximum We Ratio:0,86 Intersection Signal Delay: 30.0 Intersectlan LOS:C Inter lion Capacity U6iization,86.3% ICU Level of SeNcc E Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases; 7.Lako Street 05 0 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Pagh 13 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 PM T; Lako Strut 11112f2021 I'4layament EBB. EBT EER WBL W'BT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 14 T V t I T � Traffic Volume(vehfh) 12T 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Future Volume;vehlh) 127 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.00 1.00 Uo 1.00 1,0C, 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.Do 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1841 1870 1670 1870 U26 1626 1855 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 132 31 0 65 41 0 39 7B5 0 189 914 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.D6 0,96 0,96 0,96 0,�6 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.06 D.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 4 2 2 i 5 5 3 ? 2 3 2 2 Gap,vehlh 173 184 102 194 277 10H 373 1119 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.10 0.00 9.06 0.06 0A0 0.04 0.57 O.00 0.07 0.60 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1670 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 132 31 G 65 41 D 39 785 0 189 914 0 Grp Sat P1ow(s),veh!hiln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 Q Serve{s-s),s 6.3 1.3 0.0 3.0 1.8 0.0 0.8 27,2 0.0 3.7 32.8 0.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),5 6.3 1.3 0.0 30 1,8 0.0 0.8 27.2 0.0 3.7 32.8 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 B.N 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-110 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veNb 173 184 102 104 277 1050 373 1119 VJC Ratio(X) 0.76 0.17 G.64 0.39 0,14 0.75 0,51 0.82 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 370 395 376 38S 316 105D 426 1119 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,x 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1100 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 373 35.2 0.0 39.4 38.8 0.0 12_6 13.9 f7,L' 12.4 115 0,0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 6.9 0.4 0.0 6.6 2.4 0.0 U 0 0,0 1.1 6.7 U In!t at 0 Delay(Q)siveh o.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 +0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bac1(f}ftn(54°lo),vehlln 3.0 0.6 0.0 1.5 0.9 0.0 D.3 11.5 0.0 1.3 13.9 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 44.3 35.7 0.0 45.9 41.2 0.0 12.8 18.8 0.0 13.5 20.1 0.0 LnGrp LOS D D D D B B B C Appfcauh Vol,veb!h 153 A 106 A 824 A 1103 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 42.7 41.1 18.5 19.0 Approach LOS D CD B B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 5 5 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 10.3 52.7 12.9 7.5 55.5 9.4 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 8.3 47,7 18.0 5.0 51.0 1$.D Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.7 29.2 8.3 2.8 34.8 5.0 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.1 5.6 0.3 0.0 6.6 0.2 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 21,B HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectiol)delay. 5,00 Yrr- Bnsc::,°:c� Synchro 10 Report Phgh 15 Timings 2019 PIVI 8, Kamehameha III Road & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 11112f2021 'N t ► 4 Large Group EBT EER WBT N'BL NBT 8t3L S6T Lane Configuratians 4 r 4:� 1 T +1� Traffic Volume(vph) 11 52 11 64 495 17 511 Future Volume(vph) 11 52 11 64 495 17 511 Turn Type NA Perm NA Prot NA Prot NA Protecled Phases 2 6 3 8 7 4 Permibd Phases 2 Qetectad Phase 2 2 6 3 8 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 95 23.3 9.5 23.5 Total Split(s) 30.4 30.4 30.G 11.6 40.0 9.6 38.0 Total Split(%) 27.6% 27.6% 27.3% 10.5% 36,4% 6.7% 34.5% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 A l-Red Time(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.f1 1:0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.G 0.0 Q.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None Ncne None Max None Max Act Eff.t Green(s) 19.4 19.4 6A TO 411.7 5.3 35.3 Actuated grO Ratio 0.24 0.24 0.G9 0,09 0.51 0.07 0.45 vie Raba 0.74 0.12 0.Z3 0.43 0,56 0.15 0.54 Control Delay 39.9 1.4 25.2 48.3 20.7 44.1 18.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 O,G D 0 0.0 0.0 D.0 Total aolay 39.9 1.4 26.2 48,3 20.7 44,1 1V LOS ID A C D C D 8 App, cauh Delay 34.2 28.2 23.8 19.3 Approeah LOS C C C B Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglth:110 Actuated Cycle Length:79.2 Natural Cycle: 105 Control Type;Semi Act-Llncoord Nlaximum u c Ratio:0.74 Inteisectlan Signal Nlay: 23.9 Intersectlan LOS:C Inter eon C acity U61ization 65.4% ICU Level of Smvice C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 8.Kameharneha III.Road {queen Kaahumanu t08 5:00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 16 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 PM 8; Kamehameha III React & Queen IKaahumanu Hwy 11.12-2021 t 1* 4 I'4layament EBIL EBT EBR 1NBL WBT WBR, NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r :k 1. +T Traffic Volume(vehfh) 290 11 52 7 11 18 64 496 11 17 611 284 Future Volume;wehlh) 290 11 52 7 11 18 64 495 11 17 511 284 Initial Q(02b),veh 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.0a 1.00 1.G0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1855 1767 1 B11 1870 1$70 1870 1856 1850 1870 1870 1670 18%, Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 305 12 D 7 i2 19 67 521 12 18 538 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 a.95 0,95 0,95 0.95 195 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 D.95 Percent Heavy Veh,% 3 8 5 i 2 2 3 ? 2 2 2 2 Gap,vehl11 364 14 11 20 31 89 B52 20 37 1592 Arrive On Gruen 9,22 0.22 O.DD O.Q4 0,04 0.04 0.05 0.4$ DA8 0.02 0.45 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1622 64 1535 313 537 851 1767 1806 42 1781 3647 0 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 317 0 Pr 38 0 0 67 t0 533 18 538 0 Grp Sat F1ow(s),veh!h.In 1686 0 1535 170Z 4 0 1767 0 1848 1781 1777 0 0 Servefs-s),s 13.4 p_0 D.0 1.6 0.0 C1.0 2.8 0.0 15.8 0.7 7A 0,0 Cycle fD dear(g_c),s 33.4 0.0 H 1 A 0,0 0.0 2.8 0.0 15,8 0.7 7,4 0.0 Prop In Lane 0,96 1.00 0.18 0.50 1-00 0.02 1.00 0.Do Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh/h 378 0 62 0 0 89 t7 882 37 1592 VJC Ratio(X) 0.84 HO 0.61 0.00 000 0.75 0.00 0.60 0,48 0.34 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 584 0 580 0 0 168 D 882 122 1592 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1,00 1,00 1.D0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,170 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.0U 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 27.7 0.0 (1_0 35.5 0-0 0.0 35.1 O}O 14.3 36.2 13.4 0,0 Moo Delay(d2).slveh 6A 0.0 0.0 RA 0.0 0.0 12.1 0.0 3.1 9.5 0.6 0.0 In!t al 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 Q.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 0.0 We Back=(54°lo),vehfln 5.9 0.0 0,0 0,$ 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 6..2 0.4 2.6 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 34.1 0.0 0.0 44.9 0.0 Ob 47.2 0.0 17A 45.7 14.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A D A A 0 A B D B Appfcauh Vol,veil h 317 A 38 60D 556 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 34.1 44.9 20.7 15.0 Approach LOS C D C B Timer-Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s .21.3 8.3 38.0 7.2 B.1 43.2. Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 25.9 7.1 33.5 25.5 5.1 35.5 Max 0 Cleat Time(9_c+i1).s 15.4 4.8 9,4 3.6 2.7 17.8 Green Ext Tome f p c),s 1.4 0.0 3,3 0.1 10.0 2.9 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 221, HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De'16y fn? [EBR SBR(is excluded from calculalioas of the a;,ptAch delay and intetsect!ar7 delay, 5,00 Pr- Brio;;°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 18 FILM 6th Roundabout 2019 AM Roundabout I Hualalai Rd (North) 11;082�J2`I Irbirwdort Interseclion Dday slveh 27.1 Intersection LOS b ApprWh EB NB 9 Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flow,vebih 99 1235 866 Derrand Flaw Rate,vehlh 101 1260 917 Vehicles Circulating,vehlh 884 46 180 3lehic lae Exiling,vehlh 213 937 1128 Ped W Crussing Leg,A 1 p 0 Pert Cap Adj LON 1.000 1.000 AWDnh Delay,siveh 819 34.3 191a Apprc-ach LOS A U C Lane. LA Lail Left' Designaied Moves LR LT TR Assumed Moves LR LT TR RT Channeli4ed Lane Uil 1.0W 1,000 1.000 Fallow-Hp Headway,s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway,s 4,976 4,976 4.976 Entry Flay,vehlh 101 1260 917 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 560 1314 1148 Entry HV Adj Fodor OAW 0.980 0.944 Flown Entry,.vehlh 99 1235 860 Cap Entry,veh.h 549 1288 1085 VIC Ratio 0.180 01959 0.798 Control Delay,siveh 8.9 34.3 19.0 LOS A D C 951h Vile Que4e,veh 1 18 9 5.00 pm Basetine Synch re 10 Report Page 1 I°ICM 6th ROUndaboul 2019 AM Roundabout 4 Hualalai Rd (South) 11108,2021 lrbtwdon IMerseclion Dc4ay slveh 18.4 lnterseclion LOS G Appr0r h WB N8 8B Entry Lames 1 1 11 Conflicting Circle Lanes, 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flow,vebih 161 100 682 Demand Flaw Rate,vehlh 164 1122 927 Vehicles Circulating,vehlh t104 83 10 3lehic lae Exiling,vehlh 101 854 12H Ped W Crussing Leg,A 0 p D Pert Cap Adj 1.00D 1.000 1.000 AWDnh Delay,siveh 14,7 24.2 11.8 Apprc-ach LOS B C B Lane. Left Leif Lest' Designaied Moves LR TR LT Assumed Moves LR TR LT RT Channeli4ed Lane Uil 1.00() 11000 1.000 Fallow-Up Headway,s 2.60,a 2,609 2.609 Critical Headway,s 4,976 4,976 4.976 Entry Flay,vehlh 164 112.2 927 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 448 1268 1366 Entry HV Adj Fodor 0.`.82 0.079 0.951 Flown Entry,.vehlh 161 1098 882 Cap Entry,veh.h 439 1241 1299 VIC Ratio 0.366 0.885 0.679 Control Delay,siveh 14.7 24.2 11.8 LOS B C B 951h Vile Que4e,veh 2 13 F 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 2 FILM 6th ROUndabou! 2019 AM Roundabout 6. Kuakini Street 11;t}8202`I lr Ilion Interseclion Dc4ay slveh 75.6 lnterseclion LOS F Apormh EB NB 3B Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circte Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Row,vetlih 190 1417 854 Derrand Flaw Rate,vehlh 197 1471 6R8 Vehicles Circulating,vehlh 827 8 567 3lehic lae Exiling,vehlh b3B 1g 16 912 Ped W Crussing Leg,A 0 0 0 Pert Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1,000 AWDnh DetaYr siveh 11.0 64.6 108e 1 Apprc-ach LOS B F F Lane. Lett Leal Left Designaied Moves LR LT TR Assumed Moves LR LT TR RT Channeli4ed Lane Uil 1.000 1,000 1.000 Fallow-Hp Headway,s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway,s 4,976 4,976 4.976 Entry Flay,vehlh 197 1471 898 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 594 1369 774 Entry HV Adj Fedor 0A64 0.963 0.951 FlDw Entry,vehlh 190 1417 854 Cap Entry,veh.h 573 1318 736 VIC Ratio 0,332 1.076 1.160 Control Delay,siveh 1 t,0 64.6 108.1 LOS B F F 951h Vile Que4e,veh 1 30 27 5.00 pm Basetine Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Timings 2019 AM Protected Left Turn 7; Lako Street 11!12.202'I I Large Group EBL EBT WBL WET NBL NBT NBR SEL SBT SBR Lane Configuratians 1� T4 ' + i t r Traffic Volume(vph) 251 48 59 36 33 792 55 141 647 125 Future Volume(vph) 251 46 fig 36 33 792 55 141 647 125 Turn Type Prat NA Riot NA pm+pt NA Perm pm#pt NA Ferm Protected Phases 7 4 3 a 5 2 1 6 Permibd Phases 2 2 5 6 L7etec#ad Phase 7 4 ? 8 w 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Split(s) .22.5 22.5 22,5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22,5 9,5 54.1 54.1 1U 55,5 55.5 Total SPIrt(%) 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 8.6D/a 49.2% 49.2% 9.9% 50.5% 50.5% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 160 1.0 1,0 1.Q 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 LeadIag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optiinize? 'Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Max Max None Max Max Act Effat Careen(s) 17.7 .25.2 R8 110 54.7 49,7 49.7 58.$ 55.1 55.1 Actuated grC Ratio 0.17 0.24 0.G9 0.14 0.51 0.47 0.47 0.55 0.52 0.52 vie Ratio 0.91 0.28 1146 0.88 0,14 0.97 0.08 0.90 0.72 0.15 Control Delay 79.4 22.3 55.4 46.0 12.6 54A 0.8 72.7 27.6 3.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total delay 79.4 22.3 55,4 48,0 12,6 54,4 0.8 72.7 27,6 3.6 LOS E C E D B D A E C A App, cauh Delay 61.3 47.7 49.4 31,3 Approach LOS E 0 0 C Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih:114 Actuated Cycle Length; 106.8 Natural Cyde: 110 Control TyDe:Semi Art-Uncoord Nlaximum We Ratio:0.97 Inteisectian Signal delay:44.4 Intersection LOS.Q Intersection Capacity Utilization 9t1, A ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 7:Lako Stree" 1 1t02 o3 F35 0 07 02 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM kith Signalized Intersection SurTimary 2019 AM Protected Left Turn 7; Lako Street 11!12.202'I I'4layament EBL EBT M WBL WBT WBR, NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1 1 T V t r T r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 251 48 59 69 36 267 33 742 55 141 647 125 Future Volume;vehih) 251 48 69 69 36 267 33 792 55 141 6i47 125 Initial Q(0b),veto 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0a 1.00 i.G0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1.40 1.00 1.0151 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1641 1811 185E 1870 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 267 51 a 73 38 0 35 B43 0 150 6B8 G Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0.94 0.94 D.M Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Gap,vehl11 302 304 111 104 351 9a1 264 1025 Arrive On Green 0.17 0.16 0.00 0.06 0.06 •0.00 0.03 0.52 U OQ 0.06 0.55 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 267 51 G 73 38 0 35 843 D 150 668 0 Grp Sat F1ovu(s),veh!h.1n 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 13.8 2.2 Q.a 3.8 1.9 0.0 0.8 36.q 0.0 3.7 24.9 O,Q Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 13.8 2.2 0.0 3.8 1.9 0.0 0.8 36.13 4,f7 3,7 24.9 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 D.DG 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-DO Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh/h 302 304 111 104 351 931 264 1025 VIC Ratio(X) 0.88 0.17 G.66 0.36 0.10 0.86 G,57 067 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 339 356 336 356 388 981 278 1025 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 ll Dx 1.00 1.00 1.00 1•Q0 1.00 1,G0 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 O.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),c'veb 38.4 341 0.0 43.3 43.0 0.0 12.2 19_4 0.0 18.4 15,0 0,0 hor Delay(d2).siveh 21.5 0.3 0.0 6.5 2.1 0.0 D.1 9.7 0.0 2.5 3.5 0.0 In!r at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 7.8 1A 0.0 1.9 0.9 0.0 D.3 17A 0.0 1.6 10,7 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 59.9 34.3 0.0 49.8 45.1 0.0 12.4 29.1 0.0 20.8 18.5 0.0 LnGrp LOS E C D D B C C B Apprcauh Vol,veb!h 318 A 111 A 878 A 838 A Approach Delay,sve,h 55.8 48.2 26.5 19.0 Approach LOS E D C B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 10.1 54.1 10.4 19.9 7.5 56.7 20.5 9.B Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 6.4 49.6 18.4 18.0 5.0 51.0 18.0 1&0 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.7 38.9 5.8 4,2 2.8 26.9 15.8 3.9 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 4.6 0.1 011 0.0 5.1 0.2 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 29.B HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Reporl Page 3 Timings 2019 AM Permissive Left TUm T; Lake Street 11!12.202'I r t I` Large Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SEL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 T4 ' + iN Vi t r Traffic Volume(vph) 251 48 59 36 33 792 55 141 647 125 Future Volume(vph) 251 46 fig 36 33 792 55 141 647 125 Turn Type Perm NA Perm. NA Pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protected Phases 4 a 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 4 1 p w B 2 2 B 6 Q 't (`it Phase 4 L U 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Please Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Soli#('s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 39.1 39.1 39.1 39.1 9,5 50.7 50.7 10,2 51,4 51.4 Total SPlit(%) 39.1°la 39.1"A 39.1'/% 39.1% 9.5% 50.7% 50.7% 10.2°lo 51A% 51A% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.g 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 160 1.0 1.0 1.0 110 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 u.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4,5 4..5 4.5 41,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 LeadIag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Y Yes Yes Yes Yea Recall Mode None Nave Ncne None None Max Max None Max Max Act Effct Green(s) 34.6 34.6 34.E 34,6 51.2 46.2 46.2 54.1 50.7 50.7 Actuated grC Ratio 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.51 0.46 0.46 0.54 0.51 0.51 vie Ratio 1.04 0.20 0.17 GA8 0,14 0.98 0.08 0.91 0,74 0.15 Control Delay 101.1 11.4 24.2 12.5 11.1 54.0 3.8 71.0 26.5 3.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,4 0 0 0,0 0.0 o.0 D.4 4.0 0,0 Total Delay 101,1 11.4 24,2 12.5 11.1 54.0 3.8 71,0 20.5 3,2 LOS F B C B B D A E C A Appicauh Letay 72.7 14,6 49.2 30.1 Apprc,ach LOS E E D � Intersection Summary C�Qle LE-og1l).100 AcNa'keo Cycle Length; 100 Natural Cyde: 100 Control TyDe:Semi Act-uncuord Nlaximum We Ratio-.1,04 Inteisectlan Signal Delay:41.7 Intersection LOS.Q Intersection iCapacity U6iization 96.9% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 Split$and Phases, 7.Lakc Sine" 001 #02 --W04 05 0a 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM kith Signalized Intersection SurTimary 2019 AM Permissive! Left Turn 7; Lako Street 11!12.202'I I'4layament EBL EBT M WBL WBT WBR, NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1 1 T V t r T r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 251 48 59 69 36 267 33 742 55 141 647 125 Future Volume;wehih) 251 48 69 69 36 267 33 792 55 141 6i47 125 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0a 1.00 i.G0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} I.00 1.00 1.DO 1.40 1.00 1.0151 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No Act Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 1811 1656 1870 Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 267 51 0 73 38 0 35 B43 0 150 6B8 G Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0.94 0.94 D.M Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cap,vehlh 390 447 376 447 382 1015 294 1057 Arrive On Green 0.24 0.24 0.00 0,24 0.24 •3.00 0.03 0.54 U OQ 0.06 0,57 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1367 1870 0 1340 1870 0 1781 187C 1560 1725 1856 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 267 51 G 73 38 0 35 843 0 150 668 0 Grp Sat F1ow(s),veh!h.1n 136T 1870 0 1340 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 185t;€ 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 16.1 1_B D.G 3.8 1.3 0.0 G,7 31.9 0.0 3,2 21.6 O,Q Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 17.4 1.8 H 5.7 1.3 0.0 D,7 31.9 0.0 3.2 21.6 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 D.01D 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veWh 390 447 376 447 382 1015 294 1057 VJC Ratio(X) 0.69 0,11 0.19 009 0.09 0.B3 0,51 0.65 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 619 760 601 760 427 1015 306 1057 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1X 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0,00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 31,9 25.3 0.0 .27.6 26.2 0.0 10.1 16.2 0'c 15.2 12,5 0,0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 2.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 7.9 0,0 1.4 3.1 U In!r at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 5.4 0.8 0.0 1.2 0.6 0.0 0.3 14A 0.0 1.3 8.9 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 34.1 25.5 0.0 27.8 25.2 0.0 112 24.1 0.0 16.6 15.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C B C B B Apprcauh Vol,veb!h 318 A 111 A 878 A 838 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 32.7 26.9 23.5 15.8 Approach LOS C C C B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 5 5 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 9.6 50.7 24.8 7.3 53.0 24.9 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.7 46.2 X6 5.0 46.9 34.6 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.2 33.9 19.4 2.7 23.6 7.7 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 5.0 09 0,0 5.1 0A Intersection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 22,1 HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBRI is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Timings 2019 AID ProtPermLeft Turn 7; Lako Street 11:12.2021 t Large Group EBL EBT WBL WET NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I 1 T. + iN t Traffic Volume(vph) 251 48 59 36 33 792 55 141 647 125 Future Volume(vph) 251 48 fig 36 33 792 55 141 647 125 Turn Type pm+pt IAA pmTpt NA pm+pi NA Porn pm'-pt NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 4 1 B 2 2 6a B Q t (`it Phase 4 �.�. U w L 2 1 6 6 Switch Please Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#(s) 9.5 22.5 95 22.5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(8) 157 25.0 10 2 2215 9,5 51.4 51.4 10A 52,3 2-3 Total SPlit(%) 15.7% 28.V?1 10.2% 22.5% 9.5% 51.4% 51.4% 10.4% 52.3% 52.3"A Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1,0 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Q.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 LeadIag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? 'Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lies Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Max Max None Max Max Act Effct Green(s) 29.1 21.1 19.1 13,4 52.0 47,O 47.0 55.4 52.0 52.0 Actuated grC Ratio 0.30 0.22 0.20 0.14 0.54 0.49 0.49 O.H 0.54 0.54 vie Raba 0.95 0.29 0,26 0.84 0,12 0.92 0.07 0.85 0,69 0.14 Control Delay 72.4 17.8 26.6 X5 10.0 40.6 0.2 58.6 22.7 1.7 Queue Delay 0.0 4.0 0,0 6.0 0,0 0.6 D.0 0.4 0.0 0,0 Total Delay 72.4 17.8 26.6 36,5 10.0 40.6 V 58,6 22,7 1,7 LOS E 6 C 0 A Q A E C A App, cauh Letay 55.1 34,6 36.9 25.4 Approach LOS E C D C Intersection Summary CpQle LE-opilh. 100 Actua4et!4 yLde Length,95.6 Natural Cycle: 100 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum vlc Ratio:0,95 Inteisectlan Signal Delay: 35.1 Intersection LOS.Q Intemdon Capacity lJolization 96.9% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 Split$and Phases; 7.Lakc S1ree" 01 t02 11'03 4 l � 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM kith Signalized Intersection SurTimary 2019 AM ProtPermLeft Turn 7; Lako Street 11!12.202'I I'4layament EBL EBT M WBL WBT WBR, NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1 T V t r T r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 251 48 59 69 36 267 33 742 55 141 647 125 Future Volume;wehih) 251 48 69 69 36 267 33 792 55 141 647 125 Initial Q(0b),vets 0 0 0 0 4 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0a 0.99 1.Go 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} I.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0151 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No Na No 04$at Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 1811 1656 1870 Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 267 51 0 73 38 0 35 B43 0 150 6B8 G Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 0.94 p.94 0,94 0.94 0.94 D.9A Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 b 3 2 Cap,vehlh 370 260 253 113 380 1014 292 1056 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.14 0.00 0.05 0.06 •0.00 0.03 0.54 U OQ 0.06 0,57 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 187C 1560 1725 1856 1585 Grp Valume(v;.vehfh 267 51 G 73 38 0 35 843 0 150 668 0 Grp Sat F1cw(s),veh!h.1n 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 11.2 2.1 D.G 3.3 1.7 0.0 0,7 32.5 U.0 3.3 22.r7 U,o Cycle 0 dear(g_c),5 11.2 2.1 0,0 3.3 1.7 0.0 D,7 32.5 4.0 33 22.0 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 D.01D 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh/h 370 260 253 113 380 1014 292 1056 VIC Ratio(X) 0.72 0-20 0.29 0.34 0.09 0.B3 0,51 0.65 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 370 508 280 389 424 1014 306 1056 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1,00 1.00 1,x 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.Co 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 O.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 31.9 33.0 0.0 35.6 39.0 0.0 10.3 16.5 0,0 15.5 12,8 0,0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 6.8 0.4 0.0 0.6 1.7 0.0 0.1 7.9 0,0 1 A 3.1 U In!r at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 +0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Backf}ft3(54°lo),vehfln 5.7 1.0 0.0 1.A 0.8 0.0 D.3 14,7 0.0 1.3 9.1 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 38.6 33.3 O.O 363 40.7 0.0 10.4 24.4 0.0 16.9 15.9 0.0 LnGrp LOS D C D D B C B B Approach Val,veb!h 318 A 111 A 875 A 838 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 37.8 37.8 23.8 16.1 Approach LOS D D C B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Ra),s 9.7 51.4 8.9 16.5 7.3 53.7 15.7 9.7 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.9 46.9 5.7 23.5 5.0 47.8 11.2 1&0 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.3 34.5 5.3 41 2.7 24.0 13.2 3.7 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 5.0 0,4 0.2 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.1 tntarsection Summary ,. HCM 6th Ctrs Delay 2U HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exdWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Timings 2019 AM 4-Lane T; Lako Street 11!12.202'I - , I 1* * Large Group EBI` El3T VML 'WET NEL NBT NBR SEL SET Safi Lane CDnfiguratians I 1 T4 TT +t Traffic Volume(vph) 251 48 59 36 33 7S2 55 141 647 125 Future Volume(vph) 251 48 fig 36 33 7ta2 55 141 647 125 Turn Type Split NA Spli# NA pm+pt NA Perm pm#pt NA Perm Protecled Phases 4 4 8 a 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 2 2 5 6 Qetectad Phase 4 4 $ 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 22.5 22,5 22.5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 9,5 25.5 25.5 9.5 25.5 25.5 Total Split(%) 26.1% 28.1% 28.1% 28.1% 11.9% 31.9% 31.9"A 11.9If$ 31.9% 31.9% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 160 1.0 1.0 1:0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.1) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 Lead1aEg Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Gptirnlze? Yes Yea Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Norse Ncne Nave None FAax Max None Max Max kt Eftct Green(8) 14.6 14.6 1 U 10.8 26.3 21.3 21.3 29.3 27.5 27.5 Actuated gr C Ratio 0.21 0.21 D.15 0.15 0.38 0.30 0.30 0.42 0,39 0,39 vie Ratio 0.72 0.30 a27 0.74 0,11 0.78 0.11 0.68 0.50 0.19 Contras Delay 38.7 14.9 28.8 20.5 15.2 30.7 0.4 36.1 20.9 4.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 07 0 6.0 0.0 0.0 D.0 0.4 0.0 L,0 Total Delay 38.7 14.0 28.8 20.6 16.2 30.7 0.4 36.1 20.9 1.8 LOS D B C C B C A D C A App, cauh Delay 30.9 22.1 28.2 21.0 Approaeh LOS C C C C lntersedan Summary Cycle Length:80 Actuated Cycle Length::70 Natural Cycle:80 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Unooard Maximum u c Rath:0.78 Inteisectlan Signal Delay: 25.1 Intersectlan LOS:C Intemction C acity U6iizatiorh 77.1 ICU Level of S ice D Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 7:Lako Street \001 toz 4 *Too NEEL 05 +<06 5:00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 7 HCM kith Signalized Intersection SurTimary 2019 AM 4-Large T; Lako Street 1 U12.202'I Nbyement EBI_ EBT M WBL WBT WBR, NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBiR Lane Configurations 1 1 1 T V +t r t+ r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 251 48 59 69 36 267 33 71,12 55 141 W 125 Future Volume;vehih) 251 48 69 69 36 267 33 792 55 141 647 125 Initial Q(0b),vets 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.00 1.00 Uo 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.40 1.00 1.0151 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 18?1 1656 1870 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 267 51 0 73 38 0 35 B43 0 150 6S8 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 0.94 O.94 0,94 0,94 0.94 D.M Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 b 3 2 Gap,vehl11 335 352 129 136 378 1261 357 1403 Arrive On Green 9.19 0.19 0.00 0.07 0.07 •0.00 0.04 0.35 100 0.08 0.40 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 17B1 1870 0 17+67 1870 0 1781 359 156C, 1725 3526 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 267 51 G 73 38 0 35 843 G 151) 688 0 Grp Bat F1ovu(s),veh!h.1n 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1777 1560 1725 1763 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 8.5 1.3 U 24 1.1 0.0 0.7 11.a 0.0 3_2 8.6 0.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 8.5 1.3 0.0 2A 1,1 0.0 0.7 11.9 0.0 3.2 H 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.DO Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veWh 335 352 129 136 378 1261 357 1403 VJC Ratio(X) 0.80 0A5 0,57 0.28 0.09 0.67 0,42 0.49 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 542 569 538 569 462 1261 365 1403 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,x 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 11,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),clveb 22.9 20,1 0.0 26.5 26.0 0.0 11,5 16.1 fi.L' 11.9 131 0,0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 4A 0.2 0.0 19 1.1 0.0 0.1 2.8 0,0 0.8 1.2 U In!t at 0 Delay(Q)siveh O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 3.7 0.6 0.0 1A 0.5 0.0 D.3 4A 0.0 1.1 3.2 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 27.3 20.2 0.0 30A 27.1 Ob 11.6 19.0 0.0 12.7 14.5 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C B B B B Apprcauh Vol,veb!h 318 A 111 A 878 A 838 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 26.2 29.3 16.7 14,2 Approach LOS C C B B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 9.2 25.5 15.6 6.7 28.1 8.8 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.0 21.0 18.0 5.0 21,0 1$.0 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.2 13.9 10,5 %.7 10.6 4.4 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 3.3 0.7 0.0 3.4 0.3 tntarsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 1&. HChA nth LOS 8 Notes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 8 FILM 6th R0Undabaut 2019 PM Roundabout I Hualalai Rd (North) 11108,2021 Irbirwdorl IMerseclion Dc4ay slveh 18.3 Intersection LOS C Apprmh EB NB BB Entry Lames 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flaw,vebih 82 1039 1054 Derrand Flaw Rate,vehlh 83 1079 1076 Vehicles Circulating,vehlh 1057 10 a9 3lehic lae Exiling,vehlh 108 1130 1000 Ped W Crussing Leg,#41 0 0 a Pert Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 AWDnh Detayr s1veh 10.3 16.1 21.2 Apprc-ach LOS B C C Lane. LIR Leek Lest' Designaied Moves LR LT TR Assumed Moves LR LT TR RT Channeli4ed Lane Uil 1.000 1,000 1.000 Fallow-Hp Headway,s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway,s 4,976 4,976 4.976 Entry Flay,vehlh 83 1079 1076 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 470 1366 1260 Entry HV Adj Fodor OAN 0,983 0.080 Flown Entry,.vehlh 82 1039 10544 Cap Entry,veh;h 464 1315 1235 VIC Ratio 0177 0,790 0.854 Control Delay,siveh 10.3 16.1 21.2 LOS B C C 951h Vile Que4e,veh 1 9 12 5:00 pm Basetine Synch re 10 Report Page 1 I°ICM 6th ROUndaboul 2019 PM Roundabout 4 Hualalai Rd (South) 11108,2921 Irbirwdorl IMerseclion Dc4ay slveh 17.2 lnterseclion LOS G ApprWh WB NR BB Entry Lames 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 b 1 Adj Approach Flaw,vebih 87 q73 11D9 Derrand Flaw Rate,vehlh 89 1002 1135 Vehicles Circulating,vehlh 998 68 15 3lehic lae Exiling,vehlh 72 1082 1072 Ped W Crussing Leg,A 0 0 D Pert Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 AWDnh DelaYr siveh 9.9 16.0 18.7 Apprc-ach LOS A C C Lane. Left Leif Lam' Designaied Moves LR TR LT Assumed Moves LR TR LT RT Channeli4ed Lake Util 1.000 11000 1.000 Fallow-Hp Headway,s 2.609 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway,s 4,976 4,976 4.976 Entry Flay,vehlh 69 1002 1135 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 499 1287 1359 Entry HV Adj Fedor 0A78 0,971 0.977 Flow Entry,.vehlh 87 973 1109 Cap Entry,veh;h 487 1250 1928 VIC Ratio 0,178 0,778 0.835 Control Delay,siveh 9.9 16.0 18.7 LOS A C C 951h Vile Que4e,veh 1 8 11 5:00 pm Basetine Synchro 10 Report Page 2 I°ICM 6th ROUndaboul 2099 PM Roundabout 6. Kuakini Street 11108,2021 Irbirwdorl IMerseclion Dc4ay slveh 24.7 lnterseclion LOS G Apormh EB NB ;Sly Entry Lames 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 Adj Approach Flaw,ve'hih 393 1119 942 Derrand Flaw Rate,vehlh 402 1150 962 Vehicles Circulaling,vehlh 923 14 253 3lehiclae Exiling,vehlh 292 13 t1 911 Ped W Crussing Leg,#41 0 0 D Pert Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 AWDnh Deeayr siveh 78.1 1915 29A Apprc-ach LOS D C a Lane. Lilt Leal Leff' Designaied Moves LR LT TR Assumed Moves LR LT TR RT Channeli4ed Lane Uil 1.000 1,000 1.000 Fallow-Hp Headway,s 2.60 2.609 2.609 Critical Headway,s 4,976 4,976 4.976 Entry Flay,vehlh 402 1150 962 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 538 1360 1066 Entry HV Adj Fedor OA7� 0.973 0.979 Flown Entry,.vehlh 393 1119 942 Cap Entry,veh.h 626 1323 1044 VIC Ratio 0.747 1845 0.902 Control Delay,siveh 28.1 19,6 29.4 LOS D C C 951h Vile Que4e,veh 6 11 13 5.00 pm Basetine Synch re 10 Report Page 3 Timings 2019 PM Protected Left Turn 7; Lako Street 11!12.202'I Large Group EBL EBT WBL WBT N8L NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I 1� T4 + iN t Traffic Volume(vph) 12T 30 52 39 37 764 64 1 a1 577 170 Future Volume(vph) 127 30 52 39 37 754 54 181 877 170 Turn Type Prat NA Picot NA pm+pt NA Perm pm-�pt NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 a 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 2 2 5 6 Qetectof Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Soli#('s) 22.5 22.5 22,5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22,5 9,5 52.2 52.2 12,E 55,5 5S_5 Total SPlit(%) 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 8.6% 47,5% 47.5% 11.61% 50.5% 50.5% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 41,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 Lead1ag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? 'Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 'Yes Yas Yes Recall Mode None None None Nave None Max Max None Max Max Act Effct Green(s) 12.5 15.5 9.0 9.7 53.0 48.0 48.0 60.2 55.5 55.5 Actuated grC Ratio 0.13 0.16 U.U9 9.10 0.55 0.50 0.50 0.62 0.57 0.57 vie Ratio 0.59 0.26 DAD 0,73 022 0.85 0.08 0.73 0,86 0.13 Control Delay 51.6 19.4 50.2 24.4 12.4 34.4 1.5 31.7 30.7 5.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 07 0 6.0 6.0 0.4 D.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 51.5 19.4 50,2 24.4 12.4 34,4 1,5 31.7 30.7 6.3 LOS D B t} C B C A C C A Appicauh Letay 39,4 29,9 3019 27.3 Approach LOS 0 C C C Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih:114 Actuated Cycle Length;96.7 Natural Cyde: 110 Control TyDe,Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum We Ratio:0,86 Intersectian Signal Delay: 29.8 Intersectlan LOS:C Intersection Capacity UGiization 86,3% ICU Level of Senvlcc E Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases; 7.Lako Street 05 0 07 03 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 H M 6til Signalized Intersection Surnmary 2019 PM Protected Left Turn T; Lako Strut 11112f2021 Nbyement EBB. EBT EER WBL W'BT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 14 T V t I T � Traffic Volume(vehfh) 12T 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Future Volume;vehlh) 127 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.00 1.00 Uo 1.00 1,0C, 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.Do 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1841 1870 1670 1870 1826 1626 1855 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 132 31 0 65 41 0 39 7B5 0 189 914 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0,96 0,96 0,96 O,�6 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.06 D.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Gap,vehlh 173 178 107 103 277 10H 373 1119 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.06 0.06 0A0 0.04 0.57 0.00 0.07 0.60 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1670 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 132 31 G 65 41 D 39 795 0 189 914 0 Grp Sat P1ow(s),veh!hiln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 Q Serve{s-s),s 6.3 1.3 0.0 3.0 1.8 0.0 0.8 27.1 0.0 3.7 32-7 0.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),5 6.3 1.3 0.0 30 1,8 0.0 0.8 27.1 0.0 3.7 323 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 OX 1.00 O.N 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-110 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veN b 173 178 107 103 277 1050 373 1119 VJC Ratio(X) 0.76 0A 7 0.61 0.40 0,14 0.75 0.51 0.82 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 370 395 376 286 316 105D 426 1119 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.x 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1100 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.O0 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 37A 35.5 0.0 39.1 38_8 0.0 12_6 13.9 f7.L' 12.4 13.5 0,0 hor Delay(d2).siveh 61 0.5 0.0 6.5 2.5 0.0 0.2 4.9 0,0 1.1 6.6 U In!t at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 G1 0.0 0,0 110 +0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.O We BacictDftn(54°l9),vehfln 3.0 D.6 0.0 1.6 0.9 0.0 D.3 11.5 0.0 1.3 13.9 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 44.2 35.9 0.0 44.E 41.3 0.0 12.8 18.8 0.0 13.4 20.1 0.0 LnGrp LOS D D D D B B B C Appfcauh Val,veil h 163 A 106 A 824 A 1103 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 42.6 43.3 18.5 19.0 Approach LOS D D B B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 10.3 52.7 9.6 12.6 7.5 55.5 12.9 9.3 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 8.3 473 1810 18.0 5.0 51.0 18.0 18.{l Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.7 29.1 5.0 3.3 2.8 34.7 8.3 3.8 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.1 5.6 0.1 011 OX 6.6 U 0.1 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrs Delay 213 HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectiol)delay. 5,00 Yrr- Bnsc;;,°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Timings 2019 PM Permissive Left TUm T; Lake Street 11!12.202'I t Large Group EBL EBT WBL WBT N8L NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane CDnfiguratians I 1� T4 + iN t Traffic Volume(vph) 12T 30 52 39 37 764 64 101 577 170 Future Volume(vph) 127 30 52 39 37 754 54 181 877 170 Turn Type Perm NA Perm. NA pm+pt NA Perm pm-�pt NA Perm Protecled Phases 4 $ 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 4 8 2 2 5 6 Qetectad Phase 4 4 6 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 0 Minimum Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22,5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 24.0 24.0 24,0 24.0 9,5 54.4 54.4 11,6 56,5 56.5 Total SPlit(%) 26.7% 26.7% 26.7% 26.7% 10.6% EGA% 60.4% 12.90 62.8°!� 6Z8°'7 Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 110 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1,0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 U 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 Lead1ag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag€ a nlze? Yes Y Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Name None None None Max PAax None Max Max Act Effut Green(s) 18.0 18.0 18.0 1 H 55.0 50.0 50.0 60.0 55.9 55.9 Actuated grC Ratio 0.20 0.20 D.20 0.20 H2 0.56 0.56 0.68 0.63 0.63 vie Ratio OX 0.21 0.24 0,50 0.15 0.75 0.07 0,57 0.78 0.17 Control Delay 97.9 15.5 32.0 11.3 6.2 20.9 2.4 12.2 19.8 1.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 6.0 0.0 0.0 D.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 Total Delay 97.9 15.5 32,0 11,3 6,2 20,9 2,4 12.2 19.5 1_8 LOS F B C B A C A B E A App, cauh Delay 66,5 15.7 18.9 1b.2 Approach LOS E 8 S E3 Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih:90 Actuated Cycle Length;88,5 Natural Cyde:90 Control Type;Semi Act-Llncoord Nlaximum We Ratio:0.94 Inteiseclian Signal Nlayr 2 1.0 Intersectlan LOS:C Inter lion Capacity Utilization 86,3% ICU Level of'Senvice E Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 71 Lako Street NO 3E t02 p � F35 �6 7 �it3 qpl-----E-- - 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 PM Permissive Left Turn T; Lake Strut 11112f2021 Nbyement EBB. EBT EER WBL W'BT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 14 T V t 1 1 T � Traffic Volume(vehfh) 12T 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 C41 181 877 170 Future Volume;vehlh) 127 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.c0 1.00 1.Go 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.Do 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04$at Row,veh1hin 1841 1870 1670 1870 1826 1626 1855 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Flour Rate,.vehlh 132 31 a 65 41 0 39 7B5 0 189 914 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.D6 0,96 0,96 0,96 0,96 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.06 D.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 3 2 3 2 2 Cep.vehlh 257 268 268 262 347 1159 440 1218 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.14 O.110 0.G4 0.52 O.00 U6 045 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 134-4 1870 0 1378 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1761 1670 1585 Grp Valume(v;.vehfh 132 31 G 65 41 0 39 785 0 1" 914 0 Grp Sat P1ow(s),veh!hiln 1344 1870 0 1378 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 7.6 1.2 0.0 3.4 1.G 0.0 0.6 22.0 0.0 3.0 25.6 0.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 9.2 1.2 0.0 4.6 1,6 0.0 0.6 22.D 0.0 3.0 26.6 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 b.N 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-110 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh-b 257 268 268 262 347 11% 440 1218 VJC Ratio(X) 0.51 0.12 a,24 0 TG 0.11 0.68 0,43 0.75 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 302 457 407 446 393 1159 486 1216 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1,00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 J10 1.Q0 1.00 1,G0 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00, 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 34.0 29.8 0-0 31.8 30.0 0.0 8.7 9.8 0.0 8.5 9,5 0,0 Moo Delay(d2).siveh 1.6 0.2 0.0 0.5 03 0.0 GA 3.2 0,0 0.7 4.3 U In!t at Q Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Back=(54°lo),vehfln 2.5 0.5 0.0 1.2 07 0.0 0.2 8A 0.0 0.9 10.1 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 316 30.0 0.0 32.3 30.2 0.0 8.9 12.9 0.0 9.2 13.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D C C C A B A B Appfcauh Val,veil h 163 A 106 A 924 A 1103 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 34.5 31.5 12.7 13.0 Approach LOS C C B B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 5 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rq s 9.5 54.4 16.0 7.4 56.5 16.01 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 7.1 49.9 19.5 5.0 52.0 19.5 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.0 24.1] 11.2 2,6 28.6 6.6 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.1 6.4 0.3 0.0 7.8 0.2 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrs Delay 15A HChA nth LOS B N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBRI is exdWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc;;,°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Timings 2019 PM Pra'tPerrn LDft Tern T; Lako Street 11:12.202I t Large Group EEL EBT WBL 'WET NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configuratians I 1� T4 + r t Traffic Volume(vph) 12T 30 52 39 37 764 64 181 577 170 Future Volume(vph) 127 3O 52 39 37 754 64 181 877 170 Turn Type pm+pt IAA pm-pt NA Dm+pl NA Perm prn+pt NA Perm Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permibd Phases 4 B 2 2 5 6 Qetectad Phase 7 4 3 8 5 2 2 1 6 ,h Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 9.5 22.5 95 22.5 9.5 22.5 22,5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 9•5 22.5 9.5 22.5 9,5 46•8 46.8 11,2 46,5 48.5 Total Split(%) 28.V?1 10.6% 25.0% 10.6% 52.0% 52.0% 12.4°/o 53.9% 53.9% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1J) 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tatar Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 44 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 Lead1ag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lies 'yes Recall Mode None None None None None Max Max None Max Max Act Effut Green(s) 14.8 10.9 13.9 8.9 47A 42.4 42.4 62.0 48.0 48.0 Actuated grC Ratio 0.18 0.13 0.17 9.11 0.59 0.52 0.52 0.64 0.59 0,59 vie Raba 0.70 0.30 025 0.69 016 0.81 0.08 0.66 OI.83 0.18 Control Delay 47.9 18.8 27.3 19.0 7.9 25.7 0.4 20.4 24.4 2.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 G,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 47.9 18.8 27.3 119,0 7.9 25.7 0.4 20.4 24.4 2.7 LOS D B C B A C A C C A App, cauh Letay 36.9 20A 23.0 20,8 Approach LCS D C C C Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih.90 Actuated Cycle Length;81 Natural Cyde:90 Control Type;Semi Act-Uncoord N'laximum We Ratio:0.83 Inteisecllan Signal delay: 22.8 Intersectlan LOS:C Intersection Niiacity Utilization 86,3% ICU Level of Smvice P Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 77:Lako Street Iro p 4- 05 � 06 �107 06 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 PM ProtPerm Left Turn 7; Lako Strut 11112f2021 Nbyement EBB. EBT EER WBL W'BT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 14 T V t 1 1 T � Traffic Volume(vehfh) 12T 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 C41 181 877 170 Future Volume;wehth) 127 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Initial Q(0b),veto 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.c0 1.00 1.Go 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.a0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1841 1870 1670 1870 1826 1626 1855 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 132 31 0 65 41 0 39 7B5 0 189 914 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.D6 0,96 0,96 0,96 0A 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.06 D.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 ? 2 3 2 2 Gap,vehlh 267 149 270 114 287 1042 384 1113 Arrive On Green 0.07 0.06 {i.00 0.05 0.06 0A0 0.04 0.5E O.CC 0A7 -D.59 0.00 Sat Fiotia,veh h 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1670 1585 Grp Volume(v .vehfh 132 31 G 65 41 D 39 795 0 1" 914 0 Grp Sat P1ow(s),veh!hiln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1856 1585 1767 1870 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 5.0 1.2 0.0 2.5 1.0 0.0 0.7 24.2 0.0 3.3 29.2 0.0 Cycle fD dear(g_c),s 5.0 1.2 0.0 2.5 1,6 0.0 0.7 24.2 0.0 3.3 29.2 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-110 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},vehdh 26T 149 270 114 287 1042 384 1113 VJC Ratio(X) 0.49 0,21 0,24 0.36 0.14 0.75 0,49 0.82 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 267 447 300 436 339 1042 417 1113 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 J10 1.Q0 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.X 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.D0 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 31,0 32A 0.0 30.8 33_8 0.0 11.2 12.5 0'C 11.1 12.1 0,0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 1 A 0.7 0.0 0.5 1.9 0.0 0.2 5.0 0,0 1.0 6.9 U In!r at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1) .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacic=(54°l9),vehrfln 2.3 0.5 0.0 1.1 0.8 0.0 0.2 10.0 0.0 1.1 12.1 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp C3elay{d),slveh 32.4 33.1 0.0 31.3 35.7 0.0 11.5 17.6 0.0 12.1 18.9 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C C D B B B B Appfcauh Vol,veil h 153 A 106 A 924 A 1103 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 32.6 33.0 17.3 17.8 Approach LOS C C B B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 9.8 46.8 8.2 10.5 7.3 49.3 9.5 9.2 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 6.7 42.3 5.0 1&0 5.0 44.0 5.0 18.0 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.3 26.2 4.5 3.2 2.7 31.2 7.0 3.6 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.1 5.3 0,4 011 0.0 5.7 0.0 0.1 tntefsection Summary ,. HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 19.A HChA nth LOS P N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exdWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bras.,;;,°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Timings 2019 PM 4-Lane T; Lako Street 11!12.202'I - r " 1 1* Large Group EBL El3T WBL WET l4EL NBT NBIR SK SET S3R Lane Configuratians I � '� T4 TT tt Traffic Volume(vph) 12T 30 52 39 37 7-54 64 181 577 170 Future Volume(vph) 127 30 fit 39 37 754 64 181 877 170 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA Perm pm-�pt NA Perm Protecled Phases 4 4 8 a 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 2 5 6 Qetectad Phase 4 4 $ a 5 2 ? 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.10 Minimum Spli#(s) .22.5 22.5 22,5 2Z5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(8) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 9,5 24.6 24.6 10A 25.5 25.5 Total Split(%) 26.1% 28.1% 28.1% 28.1% 11.9% 30.8% 30.13"A 13.G°fo 31.9% 31.9% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 160 1.0 I'D 1:0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.1) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tatar Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 LeadIag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnlze? Yes Y Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Norse Ncne Norse None Max Max None Max Max Act Effut Green(s) 10.0 10.0 8.7 8.7 25.8 20.7 20.7 3p.1 28.0 28.0 Actuated grC Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.14 9.14 0.42 0.34 0.34 0.49 0.46 0.46 vie Ratio 0.46 0.25 0.26 0.61 0,13 0.66 0.11 0,59 0.56 0.22 Control Delay 30.6 14.4 27.3 14.0 12.2 23.3 0.4 22.9 18.8 4.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 G,0 D o 6.0 0.0 D.0 O.G 0.0 11.0 Total aolay 30.5 14.4 27.3 14,0 12.2 23,3 0.4 22.9 16.8 1.5 LOS C E C E E C A C E A App, cauh Letay 24.4 16.8 21.1 17.4 Approach LOS it 8 C B Intersedan Summary Cycle Length:80 Actuated Cycle Length,61,E Natural Cycle:80 Control Type;Semi Ac#-Unroord N'laximum vac Rana:0.66 Inteisection Signal Celay.19.1 Intersection LOS.B Intemdon C avity Utilization fib, A ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 771 Lake Street �f31 1 02 4U4 4�8 05 � 06 5:00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 1 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2019 PM 4-Lar1e T; Lako Strut 11112f2021 Nbyement EBB. EBT EER WBL W'BT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 14 T V ft 1 1 tT i!` Traffic Volume(vehfh) 12T 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Future Volume;wehlh) 127 30 48 62 39 193 37 754 64 181 877 170 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.c0 1.00 Uo 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.Do 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1841 1870 1670 1870 1826 1626 1855 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 132 31 0 65 41 0 39 7B5 0 189 914 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0,96 0,96 0,96 0A 0,96 0,96 0.96 0.06 D.96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 4 2 2 2 5 5 3 ? 2 3 2 2 Cap,vehlh 187 200 133 137 355 1346 444 1546 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.07 0,07 •0.00 0.04 0.38 0.0Q Q.09 0.43 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 3526 1585 1767 3554 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 132 31 G 65 41 0 39 795 0 189 914 0 Grp Sat Flavv(s),veh!hiln 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1763 1585 1767 1777 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 3.B 0.8 0.0 1.8 1.1 0.0 0-7 9.3 0.0 3.3 10-3 0.0 Cycle fD dear(g_c),s 3.8 0.8 0.0 1.8 1,1 0.0 07 9.3 0.0 3.3 10.3 D.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veO 187 200 133 137 355 1346 444 1546 VJC Ratio(X) 0.70 0.16 D,49 0.30 0.11 0.58 0,43 0.59 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 600 640 609 624 450 1346 475 1546 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,x 1.00 1.00 1 J10 1.Q0 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.D0 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 22.7 21.3 0.0 23.4 230 0.0 9.5 12.9 0.0 9.1 111 O'D hor Delay(d2).siveh 4S DA 0.0 2.7 1.2 0.0 GA 1.9 0,0 0.6 1.7 0.0 In!r at 0 Delay(Q)siveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 U .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Back=(541/9),vehlln 1.7 0.3 0.0 0.8 0.5 0.0 0.2 3.5 0.0 1.1 17 0,C1 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 27.5 21.7 0.0 26.1 24.3 0.0 9.7 14.8 0.0 9.8 13.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C .4 B A B Appfcauh Val,veil h 163 A 106 A 824 A 1103 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 26.4 25.4 14.5 12.4 Approach LOS C C B B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 9.5 24.6 10.1 6.7 27.4 8.4 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.9 20.1 18.0 5.0 21.0 1$.D Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 5.3 11.3 5.8 2.7 12.3 3.8 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 3.5 0.4 0.0 4.1 03 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrs Delay �4.9 HChA nth LOS P N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exdWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc;;,°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 2 Appendix D Analysis Reports — Future 'Without Project Conditions (2424) Tinilr-gS 202,1 AM "10 t Falaili Rd & Qt_�i%G-tl KaL 11LW-1ai-1u AWY 1;,12 2K1 -' ,l '- ",- t 1* 4 .V Large Group EBL EBT EBR IVVBL VVBT WET NBL NBT NOR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations M tt r M +'t e 1) +t ' tt r Traffic Volume(vph) 71 512 218 1154 754 33 243 192 117 21 321 177 Future Volume(vph) 71 512 218 164 754 33 243 192 117 21 321 177 Turn Type Prat NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prat NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 Permitlad Phases 4 0 2 6 Qetectad Phase 7 4 4 3 $ 8 5 2 2 1 6 O Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MinimumSplit(s) 9.5 30.5 38.5 9�5 38.5 38.5 9,5 42.5 42,5 9.5 42,5 �42.5 Total Split(s) 11.0 39.0 39,G 1&0 44.0 44,0 20.0 54.8 54,8 10.2 45,0 45.0 Total SPlit(%) 9.2% 32.5% 32.5% 13.3% 36.7% 38.7% 16.7% 45.7% 45.7% 37.5% 37.5% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.0 0.0 Q.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lies Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max Nome Max Max None Ncne None None Name None Act Effct Green(s) 6.4 36.2 36.2 A,fi 41.8 41.8 11.9 30.1 30.1 5.8 17.3 17.3 Actuated grO Ratio 0.07 0.39 0,39 0.10 0.45 0.45 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.06 0.19 0.19 vie Raba 0:33 0.41 a32 GAB 0,50 0.04 0.58 0.17 0.20 0.19 9.50 0.41 Control Delay 49.9 24.4 5.2 46.7 22.6 0.1 45.8 23.4 3.9 51.4 36,3 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 6.0 6.0 0.0 D.0 O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total aolay 49.9 24.4 5.2 4�.7 22.8 0.1 45.8 23.4 3,9 61.4 36.3 7,6 LOS D C A D C A D C A D D A Appicauh Letay 2.1.4 26A 29,1 27.1 Approeuh LOS C 0 C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length;93.3 Natural Cycle: 100 Control TyDe,Semi Act-Llncoord Nlaximum u c Ratio.0.58 Intersection Signal D] lay: 25.6 Intersectlan LOS-C Intersection Capacity U61ization 613% ICU Level of 5eNce B Analysis Period[min) 15 Splits and Phases; 1.Palani Rd &Queen Kaahumariu Hwy l � . 05 ■ �07 03 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM +nth Signalized Ir,ttorsection SUn-trna{y 2024 AM WO 1, Palani Rd & Queen KaahUn�anu Hwy 11:1212021 -"-- t 1* 1, ._ arrtent EBL EBT E.BR wBL WBT WBR NIL NOT MR SEL f $,OR Lane Configurations �1 tt r )I tt 1) ++ r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 71 512 218 1644 754 33 243 192 117 21 321 177 Future Volume;wehih) 71 512 `�18 164 754 33 243 192 117 21 321 177 Initial Q(02b),veal 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0a 1.00 120 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.01) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1737 1767 1737 1841 1811 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1870 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 72 522 0 167 769 0 248 1% 0 21 328 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.96 0,98 0,98 0.98 0.88 0.98 0,98 0.98 0.98 D.98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cep.vehlh 159 1554 250 1676 344 775 41 498 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.46 {i.00 0,07 0.49 •0.00 0.10 0.22 UQ 0.02 0.14 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1550 3401 3554 1572 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v .vehfh 72 .922 C, 167 769 0 246 1K 0 21 :328 0 Grp Sat F1ow(s),veh!hiln 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1585 Q Serve{s-s),s 1.8 8.0 0.0 3.9 12.0 0.0 5_7 3.7 0.0 0.9 7.1 0,0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 1.8 8.0 0.0 3.9 12.0 0.0 5.7 3.7 0.0 0.9 7.1 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 110 1.D0 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh ih 169 1554 260 1676 344 775 41 498 VJC Ratio(X) 0.45 0.34 0.67 0.46 0.72 0.25 0,51 0 R Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 257 1554 482 1676 660 2205 125 1775 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0,00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),cMh 37.5 13.a 0_0 36.6 13.7 0.0 35.3 26.2 0'c 39.1 310 0,0 hor Delay(d2).siveh 2.0 0.6 0.0 3.1 0.9 0.0 2.8 0.2 0,0 9.3 1.5 U In!t at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 0.7 2.9 0.0 1.7 4.4 0.0 2.5 1,15 0.0 0-5 11 0:0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 39.5 14A 0.0 39A 14.6 0.0 38.2 26.4 0.0 48.4 34.5 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D 13 D C D C Appfcauh Vol,veb!h 594 A 9N A 444 A 349 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 17.5 19.1 33.0 35.3 Approach LOS B B C D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 6.4 22.2 10.5 42,0 12.7 15.5 8.5 44.0 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.7 513 11.5 34.5 15.5 40.5 6.5 39.5 Max 0 Cleat Time(9_c+i1).s 2.9 5.7 5.9 10,U 7.7 9,1 J.8 14.0 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 1.4 0.2 3.5 0.5 2.0 0.0 5.8 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 21B HCl`A 6th LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectiol)delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Reporl Page 3 Timings 2024 AM WO 2: Henry St & Our-,en Kaahur-laaPLI HWY 1V12.202'I --I' t 1. 4 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NIT SBL SBT Lane Configurations M tt r tlt 0 4T Traffic Volume(vph) 10T 418 124 57 683 607 146 337 47 403 339 Future Volume(vph) 107 418 124 57 683 507 146 337 47 403 339 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Porrn Split NA Psrm Split NA Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permibd Phases 4 8 2 Qetectof Phase 7 4 4 3 $ 8 2 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#W 9.5 30.5 30.5 9,5 30.5 30.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.3 35,5 Total Split(s) 12.0 36.9 367 9 10.1 35.0 35.0 37.0 37.0 31.0 36.0 36-,0 Total SPIrt(%) 10.0% 30.8% 30,13% 8.4% 29.2% 29.2% 30.8% 30. % 30.8% 30,0%, 30.0% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tatar Lost Time(s} 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max None flax Max None Ncne None None None Act Effct Green(s) 7.4 35.1 35.1 5.7 31.0 31.0 18.1 18A 18.1 25.0 25.0 Actuated grC Ratio 0.07 0.35 0.35 0,06 0.31 0.31 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.25 0.25 vie Ratio 0.48 0.37 0.21 0,31 0.67 0.62 0.48 0.60 0.14 0.75 0.73 Control Delay 55.3 28.7 6.5 54.3 35.6 6.7 43.0 41.9 1.1 47.9 39.0 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 G,0 D.0 0.0 0,0 o.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 55.3 2&.7 6.5 54,3 35.8 6.7 43.0 41.9 1.1 47.9 39,0 LCS E C A D D A D a A D D App, cauh Letay 28.8 24.8 38.6 42,0 Approach LOS C C 0 0 Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih: 124 Actuated Cycle Length:99.8 Natural Cyde: 115 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Llncoord Nlaximum We RaW-.0.75 Intersection Signal delay: 32.3 Intersectlan LOS:C Intersection Capacity U61ization 69,8¢A ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits r�and Phases: 2:HenrySt &Queen Kaahmanu Hwy #f�} 07 06 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysts 2024 AM WO 2. Henry St & Queer! Kaahurnaanu Hwy 11;12.202'l t 4 "arneiit EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL h1BT NBR SBL SBT SER Dane Configurations M +t r )I 'f' 1 4+ r 4T Traffic Volume(vph) 107 418 124 57 683 607 146 337 47 403 339 124 Future Volume(vph) 107 418 124 57 683 507 146 337 47 403 339 124 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1 Wl 1900 1900 19M 1900 19M 1900 19N 1900 190€0 19M 1900 Total Lost lime(s) 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane 4ttil. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.DO 0.97 0,95 1.OU, Q.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 Frpb,ped;bikes 1,00 1.00 D.99 1,00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 0,95 1.00 1.00 Flpb,pedtbikes 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 i,00 Frt I M 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0,85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protecled 0,95 1,00 1.DO 0,95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1,0f} UQ 0,95 U9 Sald, Flaw(p;otf 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1467 1595 3175 FR Permitted 9.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.04 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Setd, Flg4(perrr') 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1.564 3348 1487 t595 3175 Peat[-hour factor,PHF 0.97 0.97 0.97 9,97 0,97 0,97 0.97 0,97 0.97+ 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow(vph) 110 431 128 59 704 523 151 347 48 415 349 128 RTOR Reductkx�(0) 0 0 83 0 0 356 0 0 39 0 20 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 110 431 45 59 704 167 136 362 9 299 573 0 Confl.Peels.(#(hr) 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl, Bikes(thr) 1 Heavy Vehlcles °Ya 13% 10% 5% 6% 6% 3% 5A 3% 7% 3% 4% 51/0 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm spit NA Perm SPA NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 a 2 2 6 6 Pgrmitled Phases 4 S 2 Actuated Green.G (s} 7.4 35.1 35.1 4.3 32.0 32.0 18A 18.1 18.1 25.0 25.0 Effective Green, g(s) T4 35.1 35.1 4,3 32.0 32.0 18.1 18.t 18.1 25.0 25.0 Actuated g C Ratio 0.07 0.35 0.35 0,04 0.32 0.32 0.18 0.18 0118 0125 0.25 Clearance Time(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 V'ehde Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 10 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 10 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 228 1146 529 141 1084 492 281 602 267 396 789 v+s Ratio Prot c0.04 c0.13 0,02 cO.21 0.09 GO.11 c0.19 0.18 Vs Ratio Perm CAM 0.11 0.01 Oc:Ratio 0,48 0.38 HE 9.42 0.65 0.34 0.48 0.60 0,03 0.76 0,73 Uniform DF-4ay, d1 44.7 24.5 21,9 46.9 29.4 26.2 37,0 37,9 X0 34.9 34.6 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.H 1,00 1= 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.0Q 1.00 1.00 Inc'emental Delay,d2 1.6 0.9 0.3 2.0 3.0 1 a 1,3 1.7 O.C. 3.0 3.4 Delay(s) 46.3 25.4 212 48.9 32,4 28.0 38.3 39.6 34.0 42.9 38.0 Level of Service D C C p C C D D C D D Apprua; th Delay(sl 20.3 31.4 38,8 39.6 Approach LA'S C C D D Intarsection Summary HDA 2000 Control Delay 34.1 HCM M Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.65 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.5 Sum of Bost erne tsj 18.0 Intamecflon Capacity Utiliaatim 69.5% ICU Level of Service C Analysts Period train) 15 c CrOical Lane Croup 5.00 pm BasA-fine Synchro 10 Report Page 5 FICIVI 6th TWSC 2C24, AM WO I Hualalai Rd 4North) 1 12.2021 Intersection Int DelFy.siveh 10.3 Movement EEL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR LdnC-Gonliguretions r t + ` Traffic Vol,v&Vh 44 54 156 1132 903 30 Future Vol,vehlh 44 54 166 1132 903 30 CeniticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 D 1 Sign Control Slop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channeiazed - Free - None - YAd Storage Length 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Mediae Storage,# 0 - - 0 D Grade,% 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Faclor g3 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 MAvint Flow 47 58 188 1217 971 32 MajorftvT Minex2 Majcrl k1ainr2 Conflicting Flovu AJI 2525 972 - Stage 1 S72 - - - - Stage 2 1553 - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.42 4.12 Critical t4dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 2.218 - - - Pol CW1 Maneuver -31 0 709 - Stage 1 367 0 - - Slage 2 192 0 Platoon blocied,% - - - Mau Cap-1 Maneuver -24 - 70 - - tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar -24 - - - - - Stage 1 280 Stage 2 192 - - - - - Appraaoh E5 N6 SB HCM Control Delay,s$798.8 1.4 4 HCM LOS F Mh16r LarifelMWO Mvmt NIBL NBT EBLrt9 E$ $T SEIR Capacity(veh?h) 708 24 HGM Lane V.'C Ratio D.237 - 1.971 - - - MGM Contrd Delay(s) 11,7 798.8 0 HGNI Lane LDS B - F A - - HCM 95th°Mile 0(vah) 0.9 - 6.9 Notes Vdume exceeds capacity S; Delay exceeds 300s +:CompuWon Not Defined `;Ara]major value ire ptattson 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 7 FICIVI 6th TWSC 2C24, AM WO 4; Hualaiai Rd (South) 1 12.2021 Inlerseclion Inf 'e.Ny s.v9h I. movement WBL WBIR NBT NBR SBL SBT Ldno Gonfigurations r T t Traffic Vol,v&Vh 9 140 1146 15 73 870 Future Vol,vehlh 0 140 1146 15 73 879 ConiticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - 'Ykdd - None Storage Langlh fl 0 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 Grade.% fl - 0 Peale Hour Faclor k 93 83 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 13 6 5 MAvint Flow 10 151 12S2 16 7F 945 Mejor"Oa Minorl Majorl MajoI Conllicbng Flovu PJI 2341 0 0 1232 0 Stage 1 124fl - - - - - Stage 2 110 t - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 65.42 - - 4.16 Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - - - ?.254 - Pol CW1 Maneuver 44 0 - - 552 Stage 1 273 0 - - 5lage 2 318 0 _ _ - Platoon bluGied, 'k - - - Mau Cap-1 Maneuver 34 - - - 552 tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 34 - - - - - Stage 1 273 Stage 2 273 Approach m NO HGM Control Delay,s 148.6 0 1 HCM LOS F Minor Corm maidr Mvmt Nf NBRWBLnlWBLrk2 SOL SBT Capacity(veh?h) - - 34 - 552 HGM Lane V.'C Rat#o - - 0.285 - 0.142 - MGM Control Delay(s) - 148.E 0 12.6 - HCtwf Lane LDS - IF A $ - H M 95th%file 0(veh) - - 19 - U 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 8 Timings 2024 AM WO 5; Puapuaanui St 11!12.202'I ---I. t • ,� -01 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SEIR Lane Configuratians t r I t t '� + r Traffic Volume(vph) 193 9 75 110 59 140 104 841 24 43 780 68 Future Volume(vph) 193 9 75 110 59 140 104 841 24 43 780 fib Turn Type Perm NA Perm. Perm NA Perm pm+p# NA Perm prn+pt NA Penn Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 1 Permitted Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detectad Phase 4 4 4 6 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Soli#('s) 22.5 22.5 22,5 2Z5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5 22,5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 215 22.5 9.5 40.0 46,0 9.5 48,0 48.0 Total SPIit(%) 26.1% 28.1% 28.1% 28.1% 28.1% 26.1% 11.904 60.0°!n 160.0% 11.9% CO.0% 60.0% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.6 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? Yes Yes 'Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None Nor Max Max None Max Max kt Eflut Green(s) 15.8 15.6 15.$ 15,6 15.6 15Z 49.1 46,2 46.2 48.2 44.3 44.3 Actuated grC Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.64 0.61 0.61 0.63 0.5a 0.58 vie Ratio 0.77 0.03 a21 0.41 0,17 0.34 0.39 0.80 0.03 0.17 0.79 0.06 Control Delay 49.5 24.4 8.1 31,5 26.4 7.2 8.9 21.2 0.0 6.3 21.4 2.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 6.0 6.0 0.0 D.0 O.a 0.0 0.0 ox 0.0 Total aolay 49.5 24.4 6,1 31.5 26.4 7,2 8.9 21.2 0.0 f.3 21.4 2,2 LOS D C A C C A A C A A G A App, cauh Delay 37.4 19.5 19,4 19.1 Approach LOS 1) 8 B B Intersection Summary Cycle Length:80 Actuated Cyde Length:76.3 Natural Cycle:80 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Llncoord Nlaximum ulc Ratio:0.80 Inteisectlan Signal delay;21.4 Intersectlan LOS:C Inter don Capacity UUlizatian 77,0% ICI Level of SeNce D Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Pua aanui 5; �} i l 1'b2 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page*9 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Sun-lmi+ary 2024 AM WO 5; Puapulaanui St 11!12.202'I ---w , .- t 4 Nbyement EBI_ EBT EBR VVBL VVFBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I t r I t + t r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 193 9 75 110 59 140 104 841 24 43 78C 66 Future Volume,vehih) 193 9 75 110 59 140 1'04 841 24 43 780 68 Initial Q(02b),vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 1-CIO 1,00 1.DO 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.D0 1,00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04$at Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1870 1$70 1870 1870 1855 1870 1870 1826 187� Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 210 10 D 117 64 0 113 895 0 46 830 0 Peak Hour Factor €,1.92 0.92 0.D2 0,94 0,92 0.94 0.92 0.94 D,94 0,94 0.94 0,92 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 i 2 2 2 3 2 2 5 2 Gap,vehl11 333 389 379 369 324 1D72 279 1022- Arrive On Green 0.21 0.21 0.00 9.21 0.21 0.00 0.06 0.58 U OQ Q.04 D.55 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1338 1870 1595 1405 1870 1585 1781 1856 1585 1781 1826 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 210 10 G 117 54 D 113 895 0 46 830 0 Grp Sat Flavu(s),veh!h.1n 1338 1870 1S85 1405 1870 1585 1781 1858 1585 1781 1826 1595 0 Serve{s_s),s 11.9 0.3 Q.G 5.6 2.2 0.0 2.0 30.6 U-0 0.8 28.5 0,0 Cycle fD dear(g_c),s 14A 0.3 0.0 8.0 2,2 0.0 2.0 30.6 OX 0.8 28.5 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.DG 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 L.ai1e Grp Cap(c},veA 333 389 379 389 324 1072 2n 1022 VJC Ratio(X) 0.63 0.03 D.31 0.16 0,35 0.83 0,16 0.81 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 365 433 412 433 334 1072 322 1022 HOM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.G0 1.00 1.00 1 J10 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 31,0 24.5 0.0 X9 252 0.0 12.4 13.4 U 12.3 13.8 0,0 her Delay(d2).siveh 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.6 7.7 0,0 0.3 7.0 U In!t at Q Delay(Q)siveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1) .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 0.0 We Bac1(=(54°lo),vehlln 4.0 0.1 0.0 1.9 1,0 0.0 0.7 13,1 0.0 0.3 12.1 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 34.0 24.5 0.0 27.3 25.4 0.0 13.0 21.1 0.0 12,6 20.9 10 LnGrp Los C C C C B C B C Apprcauh Vol,veil h 220 A 181 A 1 DD5 A 876 A Approach Delay,s�veh 33.6 26.7 2r7.2 20.4 Approach LOS C C C C Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 '# a Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 7b 49.4 20 9.1 48.0 20.7 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 1.5 4.5 4,5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.0 43.5 18.0 5.0 43.5 I&D Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11).s 2.8 32.6 16.1 4,0 30.5 8.0 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 5.0 0.1 0.0 5.1 0.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 22,1 HCl`A nth L S C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectiol)delay. 5,00 Pr- arse;,°:c� Synchro 10 Report Pagh 11 FICIVI 6th TWSC 2C24, AM WO 6. Kuakini Street 1 12.2021 Intersection h t FlyY s.veh n Moveme,I EEL EBB NBL N3T SBT SBR LdnC-Gonfiiguralions r t t Traffic Vol,v&Vh 0 159 602 900 905 0 Future Vol,vehlh 0 159 602 900 905 0 ConiticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Slop Slop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - Nome - YWd Storage Lcnglh 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% C - - 0 0 - Peaak Hour Faclor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 7 PAvint Flow 0 1171 647 968 973 0 Major'w W02, MOM majo'l Conllic6ng Flaw AJI 3235 - 973 0 - 0 Stage 1 073 - - - - Stage 2 2262 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.42 4.12 Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 2.218 - Pol CW1 Maneuver 11 0 709 - - - Stage 1 366 0 - - 5lage 2 84 0 Platoon bluGied, ?k - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1 - 709 - - tJlav Cup-2 Maneuvar I - Stage 1 32 Stage 2 84 - - Approach m ND SB HGM Control Delay,s 0 16.1 0 HCM LOS A MinorLanielMajor Mvmt NBL NBT EBLra1 EBLn2 5BT SBR Capacity(veh?h) 709 - HGM Lane V.'C Ratio 0.913 - - - - MGM Contrd Delay(s) 40.2 - 0 0 HGNI Lane LDS F - A A - - HCM 95th%file 0(veh) 12.2 - - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 12 Timings 2024 AM WO T; Lake Street 11!12.202'I Large Group EBI_ EBT W8L 'WBT NBL NU NBR SBL SBT S3R Lane Configuratians I 1 T4 ' + t Traffic Volume(vph) 278 48 59 36 33 918 55 110 769 142 Future Volume(vph) 278 48 fig 36 33 918 55 180 769 142 Turn Type Split NA Spli# NA pm+pt NA Perm pm#pt NA Perm Protecled Phases 4 4 8 a 5 2 1 a Permitlad Phases 2 2 5 6 Qetectcx Phase 4 4 8 a 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Soli#('s) .22.5 22.5 2Z5 2Z5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 25.2 25.2 22.5 22,5 9,5 69.3 69.3 13.0 72.8 72.8 Total Spl€t(%) 19A% 19.4% 17.3% 17.3% 7.3% 53.3% 53.3% 10.F/o 56.0% 56.0% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.{1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tatar Lost Tirt1le(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 Lead1ag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Gptirnlze? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None NGne Norse None Max. Max None Max Max Apt Eftct Green(s) 20.7 20.7 18.0 1&0 69.8 664.8 E4.8 7T2 72.1 72.1 Actuated grC Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.14 0.54 0.50 0.50 0.59 0.55 0,55 vie Ratio 1.05 0.40 0.30 1.04 0,17 1.05 0.07 1.94 0.80 0.16 Central Delay 120.4 34.4 54.2 93.6 13.0 76.8 1.5 113.4 31.5 4.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 Total Delay 120.4 34.4 $4.2 93.6 13.0 70,a 1.5 113A 31,5 4_8 LOS F C a F B E A F C A Apprcauh De!ay 95.0 86,9 70.6 40.2 Approaeh LOS ;F F ER 13 Intersedan Summary Cycle Lenglih: 130 Actuated Cycle Length; 130 Natural Cycle: 130 Control Ty:ae:Semi Act-Llncoord N'laximum ulc Ra#o:1.05 Inteisectlan Signal Nlay:64.9 Intersectlon LOS E Intersection Capacity 1 JUlizatioD 107.E ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period(min) 15 S plb and Phases: 7:Lako tree" 1 t8 05 4 DE 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page,13 Hi;M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 AM WO T; Lako Street 11:12.2021 Nbyement EBB. EBT M VVBL VVBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 14 1 T4 t r T r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 278 48 59 59 36 296 33 915 55 160 769 142 Future Volume;vehih) 278 46 69 69 36 296 33 918 55 160 769 142 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0D 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.DO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1856 1870 1870 1870 1870 1841 18?1 1656 1870 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 296 51 0 73 38 0 35 977 0 170 818 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0.94 0.94 D.94 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 6 3 2 Cap,vehlh 314 330 105 111 282 1032 198 1050 Arrive On Green 0.19 0_18 0.00 0.06 0.06 •0.00 0.03 0.55 O.OQ Q.05 0.58 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 296 51 G 73 38 0 35 977 C 170 818 0 Grp Sat P1ow(s),veh!hiln 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 Q 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 19.3 2.7 Q.a 4.8 2.3 0.0 1,0 57.5 0.0 4.9 38,7 0,0 Cycle fD dear(g_c),s 19.3 2.7 0.0 4.8 23 0.0 1.0 57.5 4.0 4,9 38.7 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 O.DG 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},vehih 314 330 105 111 282 1032 198 two VJC Ratio(X) 0.94 0.15 0.69 0.34 0.12 0.95 0,66 0.76 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 314 330 271 287 306 1032 221 1080 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1 J10 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 OX 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),even 47,8 40.9 (1_0 54.2 b3.0 0.0 16.1 24.7 U 27.1 1&4 0,0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 35.8 0.2 0,0 7.9 1.8 0.0 G.2 17.9 0.0 25A 6.0 0.6 In!t a1 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0_0 0.0 0.0 We BacirtDftD(54°l9),vehfln 11.6 1.3 0,0 23 1.1 0.0 0.4 29.1 0.0 4.0 17.2 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 83.6 41.2 0.0 62.1 54.8 0.0 16.3 42.4 0.0 527 23.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS F D E D B D D C Apprcauh Vol,veb!h 347 A 111 A 1012 A 988 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 77.4 59.6 41.5 28.4 Approach LOS E E D C Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 $ Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 11.4 69.3 29.2 7.9 72,8 11.5 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 8.5 64.8 4,7 5.0 68.3 113.D Max Q Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 6.9 59.5 21.3 3.0 40.7 6.8 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.1 3.2 U 0.0 6.9 0.2 tntarsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 12.1 HChA nth LOS G N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectiol)delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Phgh 15 Timings 2024 AM WO 8, Kamehamehe III Read & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 11112l2021 Large Group EBT EER WBT NBL NBT 8BL SET Lane CDnfiguratians 4 r 4:4 1 J + Traffic Volume(vph) 5 26 12 76 562 16 490 Future Volume(vph) 5 26 12 76 562 16 u90 Turn Type NA Perm NA Prot NA Prot NA Protecled Phases 2 6 3 8 7 4 Permibd Phases 2 Qetectad Phase 2 2 6 3 8 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 95 23.5 9.5 23.5 Total Split(s) 30.5 30.5 30,0 11.0 35,0 9.5 315 Total SPIrt(%) 29.0°la 29.E 28.6% 10.5% 33.3% 9.0% 31.9% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 A l-Red Time(s} 1.0 1.0 1J) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Gptirnlze? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None Ncne None Max None Max Act Effut Green(s) 13.7 13.7 7.1 61 39.4 5.1 29,8 Actuated grO Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.10 0,09 0.56 0.07 0.42 vie Ratio 0,59 0,08 a26 0,53 0.62 0.13 0.61 Control Delay 34.6 0.4 27.3 49.1 19,4 38.4 17.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 07 0 6.0 0.0 0,0 o.0 Total aolay 34.6 0.4 27.3 49.1 19,4 38,4 17,4 LOS C A C D E a App, cauh Le!ay 30.4 27.3 22.9 17.8 Approeah LOS C C 0 8 Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglth:105 Actuated Cycle Length:70,7 Natural Cycle: 105 Control Type;Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum u c Ratio:0.62 Inteisectlan Signal Delay;21.5 Intersectlan LOS:C Inter aon C avity UWizalion 62.7°A ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 8.Kameharneha III.Road {queen Kaahumlanu Hw at VIA 03 T 04 a7 tos 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 16 HGM 6th Signalized Ir,ttorsectien SUn-trna{y 2024 AM WO 8; Kanieharneha III Read & QUe(-;n Kaahurnanu Hwy 11.12-2021 -_* " t 1* 4 NbVement EBL DST EBR WBL WBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SK SBT SOR Lane Configurations 4 r :k V T. +T Traffic Volume(vehfh) 179 5 26 16 12 17 76 552 15 16 490 320 Future Volume;vehih) 179 5 25 16 12 17 76 552 15 16 490 320 Initial Q(02b),vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0D 1.00 0.9ta 1.00 0.98 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.40 1.00 1.Do 1,00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1811 1870 1722 1870 1781 1796 1752 1811 1870 1870 1811 1811 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 192 5 D 17 13 1a 82 G04 1G 17 527 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 OX 0,93 0,93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0,93 0.93 0,93 D.93 Percent Heavy Veh,% 6 2 12 i a 7 10 6 2 2 G 6 Cep.vehl11 260 7 26 20 27 102 877 23 36 1579 Arrive On Gruen 0.15 0.15 O.Oa 0.05 0.05 iD.05 0.06 0.50 a,50 0.02 D.45 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1738 45 1459 570 436 604 1668 1755 46 1781 3532 0 Grp Volume(v .vehfh 197 0 a 48 0 D 82 0 620 17 527 0 Grp Bat F1ovu(s),veh!h.In 1783 0 1459 1611 0 00 1668 0 1802 1781 1721 0 Q Serve{sus},s t3.T 0.0 0.0 1,9 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 1G.6 0.6 5.2 0.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 6.7 O'D 0.0 1.9 0A 0.0 3.1 0.0 16.6 0.6 6,2 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.97 1.00 0.35 0.37 1.00 0.03 1.00 0-CIO L.ai1e Grp Cap(c},veh h 26T 0 73 0 0 102 a 901 36 1579 VJC Ratio(X) 0.74 HO 0.66 0.06 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.69 0,47 0.33 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 734 0 6501 0 0 172 0 901 141 1579 HOM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,(]0 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1100 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 25.7 0.0 (1_0 20.7 0.0 10.0 29.3 0.0 12,0 30.6 10,9 0.0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 4.0 0.0 0,0 9,8 0.0 0.0 13.3 0.0 4.3 9.0 0.6 0.0 In!t al 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 1.0 0.0 0,0 CA 0.0 0.0 1.5 0,0 6.0 0.3 2.0 0,0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 29.6 0.0 E0 39.5 0.0 O.0 42.6 0.0 16.3 39.7 11.5 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A D A A D A B D B Appfcauh Vol,veil h 197 A 48 702 544 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 29.6 a9.5 19.4 12.4 Approach LOS C D B B Timer-Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 5 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 14.0 8.4 33.5 7.3 5.8 36.1 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 26.0 6.5 2H 25.5 5.0 30.5 Max 0 Cleat Time(g_c+11).s 8.7 5.1 8.2 3.9 2.6 18.6 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 1.0 0.0 311 0.2 0.0 3.0 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay HChA nth LOS 0 N otes Unsignaiized De'16y fn? [EBR SBR(is excluded from calculalioas of the a;,ptAch delay and intersect!ar7 delay, 5,00 Pr- Brasc::,':c� Synchro 10 Report Page 18 Tin7ir(lS 2024 PM "10 t Palalli Rd & Ot-cotl KaalW,1-1al-1U I f\,Vy 1 If 7KI -1, *.- I � 'V Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations �1 tt r ' +� ++ r ' +t r Traffic Volume(vph) X0 978 503 226 682 56 227 283 263 54 313 107 Future Volume(vph) 260 976 503 226 682 56 227 253 263 54 313 107 Turn Type Prat NA berm Prot NA Perm ?rot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 4 8 2 6 Qetectc,r Phase 7 4 4 3 $ 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MinimumSplit('s) 9,5 38.5 38.5 9,5 38.5 U.5 9.5 42.5 42,5 9.5 42,5 42.5 Total Split(s) 19.9 44.0 44,0 16,0 40.1 40.1 15.0 46,2 46, , 13.8 44,0 44.0 Total SPlit(%) 16.6% 36.7% 36.7% 13.3% 33.4% 33A% 13.3% 38.5.fD 38.5% 11.F% 36.7% 36.7% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 160 1.0 1.01 1.0 1.G 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lies Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max None Max Max Nave Ncne None Norio None None Act Effct Green(s) 12.3 40.0 40.0 10.7 38A 38.4 10.6 22.4 22.4 7.9 17.2 17.2 Actuated grC Ratio 0.13 0.41 0.41 0.11 0.40 0.40 0.11 0.23 0.23 0.O8 0.18 6,18 role Ratio 0.61 0.69 0.53 0,61 0,51 0.08 0.62 0.35 0,47 0.38 O.51 O.30 Control Delay 48.0 28.4 10.0 50.3 26.0 1.8 50.5 33.0 6.6 53.2 35.2 8.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 07 0 6.0 0.0 0.0 t}.0 0.4 0.0 L1.0 0,0 0.0 Total aa:lay 4B.0 28.4 10.0 50,3 26.0 1.B 50,5 3310 6,6 53.2 38.2 8,2 LOS D C B 0 C A 0 rJ A D D A App, cauh Letay 26.0 303 29,2 33.2 Approach LOS C 0 C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length;96.9 Natural Cycle: 100 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum u c Ratio:0.69 Inteisectlan Signal Delay;28.5 Intersectlan LOS-C Intersection Capacity Utilizalion 66.61A ICU Level of SeNcc C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1;Palani Rd &Queen Kaahurnariu Hwy 01 1 0a 43 1 --*0-4 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM +nth Signalized Intersection SUn-lrna{y 2024 PM WO 1, Palani Rd & Queen KaahUn�anu [Avvy * 11:12.2021 I -01 I'4layarnerrt EBL EBT EBR WOL WBT VVBR NEL NBT NBR SEL SBT SEE Lane Configurations �1 tt r )I + ++ t+ r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 2Gil 978 503 Z26 682 56 227 283 263 54 313 107 Future Volume;wehih) 260 978 503 226 682 56 227 283 263 54 313 107 Initial Q(0b),veto 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.Ca 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1,a0 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04$at Row,veh1hin 1855 1856 1870 1870 1841 1870 1855 1870 1870 1870 1870 1M Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 265 996 0 231 696 0 232 289 0 55 319 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 D.08 0,98 0,98 0,98 198 0.98 0,98 0.98 0,98 (1,98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 3 3 2 i 4 2 3 2 2 2 2 C Gap,vehl11 357 1635 316 1577 316 678 76 502 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.46 {i.00 0.09 0.45 •D.00 0.09 0.19 U OQ 0.04 -D.14 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 3428 3526 1585 3456 3497 1585 3428 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v;.vehfh 265 998 0 231 696 0 232 289 0 55 319 0 Grp Bat F10w(s),veh!hiln 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 15H 1714 1777 1585 1781 1777 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 6.4 18_D 0.D 5.5 11.5 0.0 5.6 6.1 0.0 2.6 7.2 0.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 6.4 18.0 0,0 5.5 11.6 0.0 5.6 6.1 0.0 2.6 7.2 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 Lar1e Grp Cap(c},vehdh 357 1635 316 1577 316 678 76 502 VJC Ratio(X) 0.74 0.61 0,73 0.44 0.73 0.43 0,72 0 64 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 620 1635 467 1577 463 1740 194 1648 1-10M Platoon Ratic 1,00 1.00 1,x 1.00 1.00 1 J10 1.Q0 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 37.0 17.1 0.0 37.7 16.0 0.0 37,6 30A 0,0 40.3 34,5 0,0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 3.0 1.7 0.0 3.3 0.9 0.0 3.3 0.4 0,0 12.1 1.3 0.0 In!r at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.1) .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehrfln 27 7.1 0.0 2A 4.5 0.0 2.5 2.6 0.0 1.4 3.1 6:0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 40.1 18.8 0.0 40.9 16.9 0.0 41.0 30.8 0.0 52A 36..8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B D C D D Approach Vol,veil h 1263 A 927 A 521 A 374 A Approach Delay,s+veh 23.3 22.9 35.3 38.3 Approach LOS C C D L Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 8.1 20.8 12.3 44.0 12.4 16.5 13A 42A Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 9.3 413 11.5 39.5 11.5 39.5 15A 35,6. Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 4A 8.1 7.5 20,U 7.6 9.2 8.4 13.6 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 2.0 0.3 6.9 0.3 2,2 04 43 Intersection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrs Delay 27,D HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [NBR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exdWed from cal culatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Yrr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Reporl Page 3 Timings 2024 PM WO 2; Henry St & Our-,en Kaahumanu Hwy 1V12.202'I , *--- t 4 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NOR SOL SK Lane CDnfiguratians �1 tt r tt 1 0 0 Traffic Volume(vph) 190 772 2R1 80 636 348 126 318 38 388 342 Future Volume(vph) 190 772 291 80 636 348 126 318 38 388 342 Turn Type Prat NA Perm. Prot NA Pena Split NA Perm SO A NA Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitted Phases 4 8 2. Qetectad Phase 7 4 4 3 a a 2 2 2 & 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#(s) 9.5 30.5 30.5 9,5 30.5 30,5 35,5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35,5 Total Split(s) 14,0 36.0 36X 10.0 32.0 32.0 37,0 37.0 31.0 37.0 37,0 Total SPIrt(°I) 11.7% 30.D113 30.0% 8.3% 26.7% 26.7% 30.8% 30. % 318% 30.8% 30.8% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3,5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 110 160 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tirt!1e(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 LeadLag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max Norge Max Max None Ncne None None None ActEflut Green(s) 9.3 34.1 34A 16 28.0 2&,0 17,3 17.3 1T.3 26.2 26.2 Actuated grO Ratio 0.09 0.34 D.34 0.06 0.28 0.28 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.26 0.26 vie Rabo 0.62 0.65 0,40 0:42 0.66 0.51 0.42 0,57 0.11 0.74 9.70 Control Delay 55.1 33.7 5,6 5a,3 37.5 6.7 41.8 41.7 0.7 45.9 35.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,4 D.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total aolay 55.1 33.7 5.0 56.3 37.5 6.7 41,8 41,7 0.7 45.9 35.1 LOS E C A E D A 10 D A D D App, cauh Letay .30A 28.9 38.5 38.8 Approe5h LOS C 0 1) I) Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih: 124 Actuated Cycle Length;99.1 Natural Cyde: 115 Control Type;Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum vlc Ra#o:0.74 Inteiseclion Signal Delay: 33.1 Intersectlan LOS:C Intention iCapaci#y Utilization 73.4% ICU Level of Smvice D Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits rnand Phases: 2:HenrySt &Queen�anu Hwy 31 TJ� --1434 07 03 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2024 PM WO 2. Henry St & Queer! Kaahumanu Hwy 1111212021 --I' ---W t 41 I' oamerrt EEL EBT EBR WOL VVBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL W SBR Lane Configurations �1 tt Or )) tt 4+ ' 04 Traffic Volume(vph) 190 772 2R1 80 636 348 126 318 38 388 342. 190 Future Volume(vph) 190 772 291 80 636 348 126 318 38 388 342 190 !deal Flow(vphpl) 1 Wl 1900 1900 1900 1900 19M 1900 1900 1900 190€1 1800 1900 Total Lost lima(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane Ubl. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.a0 0.97 0,95 1.00 Q.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 Frpb,pedlblkes 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.90 0,98 1.00 -199 Flpb,peftikes 1M 1.00 1.Do 1100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.0 Frt I 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0,85 1.00 1.D0 0.85 1.00 0.95 Flt Protected 0.95 1,00 1.DO 0,95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1,00 1.G0 0,95 0,99 Saud, Flaw(p;otf 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1510 3195 FR Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.04 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Setd, Flow{Gerrnf 3335 3539 15K 3433 3471 1561 1.595 3382 1537 1510 3195 Peal[-hour IaCtor,PH'F 0.98 0-98 D.98 9.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0,98 D.98 0.98 0.9a 0.98 Adj. Flow(vph) 1R4 788 297 82 649 355 129 324 39 396 349 194 RTOR Reductknr (vph) 0 0 196 0 0 252 0 0 32 0 40 0 Lane Group Flow(vphl 194 788 101 82 649 193 116 337 7 317 582 0 Gonfl,Peels.(Nhr} 1 1 4 7 7 4 Confl. Bikes(A'hr) 1 1 1 Heavy Vehicles(°e 5% 21% 2% 2% 4% 2% 3"gym 2% 3% 2 M Zit• 2% Turn Type Prat NA pear Prct NA Perim split NA Perm 3o i NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 a 2 2 6 6 Pgrmitled Phases 4 a Actuated Green,G (s} 9.3 34.1 34.1 4.3 29.1 29.1 17.3 17.3 17„3 26.2 26.2' Effective Green, g(s) 9.3 34A 34.1 4,3 29.1 29.1 17.3 17.3 17.3 26-2 26.2 Actuated g C Raga 0.09 0.34 0.34 0,04 Q.29 Q. 0-17 0.17 i1,17 0,26 0.2b Clearance Time(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehde Extension_ 3.0 3.0 3.0 10 3.0 3.0 3.0 3 1 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lana Grp Cap(vphf 310 1208 54G4 147 1011 454 -776 5 a 5 2,96 422 8:37 V+9 Ratio Prat cO.ID6 0.22 0,02 0,19 0.%1J c(1,10 c0.20 0.18 Vs Ratio Perm HE 0.07 0.00 v.'c Ratio 0.63 13_65 0.19 9.56 0,64 0,23 0.42 0.58 0,03 0.75 0.70 Uniform Belay, d1 43.6 27.9 23.2 46.9 W.9 26,9 36.8 37,9 34.3 33.9 33.3 Progression Factor 1. 1.00 1.a0 Lilo 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 Ufo 1.00 7.00 Inc'ernental Delay,d2 3.9 2_7 0.8 4.,5 3.1 1.2 1,0 1A 9,c 7.4 2.5 Delays) 47.5 30.6 219 51A 34,0 28.0 37.9 39.3 34,3 41.2 35,8 Level of Service D C C 1) C C 0 D C D D Appfuach Delay i t 31.6 33,4 38.6 37.6 Approach LOS C C L' D tntatsection Summary HDA 2000 Control Delay 34.5 HCM 7b00 level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 99.9 Sum of lost tirna IN 18.0 intamectlon Capacity Utiliaatim 73.4% ICU Level of Service D Analysts Period tmin) 15 c Grttical Lane Croup 5.00 pm BasA-fine Synchro 10 Report Page 5 FICIVI 6th TWSC 2C24, PM WO I Hualalai Rd 4North) 1 12.2021 Intersection h t FlyY s.veh 1.3 10lovemenI EEL EBR NBL N13T SBT SBR LdnC-Gonfiiguralions r t t r Traffic Vol,v&Vh 10 83 83 1072 1175 17 Future Vol,vehlh 1fl 83 83 1072 117,E 17 CcniticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - Norge - YWd Storage Lcnglh 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% fl - - 0 0 Peak Hour Faclor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 4 2 6 PAvint Flow 10 85 86 1105 1211 18 Majo!-Urnr Mirlcr2 Majorl Majo4 Conflicting Flovu PJI 2488 1211 0 - 0 Stage 1 1211 - - - - Stage 2 1 277 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 8.42 4.12 -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 _ 2.218 Poo CW1 Mammar 32 0 576 - Stage 1 282 0 - - Slage 2 262 0 - Platoon bluGied,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 27 - 576 - - tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 27 - - - - - Stage 1 240 Stage 2 262 Approach Fs No 813 HCM Control Delay,s 204,E 0.9 U HCM LOS F Mhtor Lori eNaidr Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 'SST SBR Capacity(veh?h) 576 - 27 HGM Lane V.'C Ratio 0.W - 0.382 - - - MGM Control Delay(s) 12.3 - 204.8 0 HGNI Lane LDS B - F A - - FI M 95th%file 0(veh) 0.5 - 1.2 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 7 FICIV1 6th TWSC 2C24, PM WO 4; Hualaiai Rd (South) 1 12.2021 Inlerseclion Inf 'e.Ny s.v9h 1.7 movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT LdnC-Gonfigurations r 1 Traffic Vol,v&Vh 14 71 10H 4 61 1198 Future Vol,vehlh 14 71 1089 4 61 1198 ConiticOng Peds,Or 0 0 a 0 0 0 Sign Control Slop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - 'Yield - None Storage Langlh 0 0 - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade.% fl - 0 - - 0 Peale Hour Faclor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 8 2 MAvint Flow 14 73 1123 4 63 1235 MajorfMio hor Wpm MOM WA.1 Conflicting Flow'AJI 2486 - 0 0 1173 0 Stage 1 1125 - - - - - Stage 2 135i - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.47 - - 4.18 Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.47 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.47 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.563 - - - 2.272 - Pol Cap-1 Mammar 31 0 - - 600 Stage 1 303 0 - - 5lage 2 233 0 Platoon bluGied,% - - - Mou Cap-1 Maneuver 2S - - - 600 tAGv Cup-2 Maneuver 28 - Stage 1 303 Stage 2 209 Approach `A� N6 SB HGM4 Control Delay,s 228.8 0 0.6 HCM LOS F mhor La*major MMlvmt NBT NBRWBLnIWBLn2 SBT Capacity(veh?h) - 28 - 600 HGM Lane V.'C Rat#o - 0.515 - 0.105 - MGM Control Delay(s) - 228A 0 11.7 - HCtwf Lane LDS - F A B - H M 95th%file 0(veh) - - 1.6 - 0.3 - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 8 Timings 2024 PM WO 5; Puapt_laanui St 1V12.202'I t .1 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NIT SBL SBT SBIR Lane CDnfiguratians + r t r V + ' ' + r Traffic Volume(vph) 199 23 115 50 23 104 105 7T3 58 142 973 100 Future Volume(vph) 199 23 116 50 23 104 105 773 58 142 973 100 Turn Type Perm NA Perm. Perm NA Perm pm+p# NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protecled Phases 4 8 5 2 1 Permitted Phases 4 4 a 6 2 2 6 6 Detectod Phase 4 4 4 8 $ 8 5 2 2 1 n 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 22.5 22.5 22,5 22,5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5 22,5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 57.9 57,9 9.6 58,0 5G.O Total SPlit(%) 25.0% 25.D% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 10.6114 64.3°7n 64.3% 10.7% 64.4% 64.4% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 110 160 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Trt!1e(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes 'Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Norse None None Noire None Nor Max Max None Max Max Aat Eftct Green(s) 110.8 16.6 16.E 16,6 16.6 16.6 56.4 53.4 53.4 58.6 53.5 53.5 Actuated grO Ratio 0.19 0.19 D.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.66 0.60 0.60 0.66 0.60 0.60 vie Ratio 0,84 0,07 0.32 0,20 0,07 0.29 0.61 0.72 0,06 0.44 9.89 0.11 Control Delay 62.6 30.0 8.3 32.4 30.0 8.6 25.2 17.3 1.7 8.8 27.7 1.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 O.D 0.0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 62.6 30.0 8.3 32.4 30.0 8.5 25,2 17.3 1,7 8,8 27,7 1.9 LCS E C A C G A C B A A C A App, cauh Letay 41.7 18.2 17.3 23.3 Approach LOS 1] S S C Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih:90 Actuated Cycle Length;88.6 Natural Cyde:90 Control Type;Semi Act-13ncoord Nlaximum We Ratio:0.89 Intersecllan Signal delay;23.3 Intersectlan LOS:C Intemdon Capacity Utilization 86,011,E ICU Level of SeNcc E Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases:} 5. Pua aanui st F3 7 06 0;3 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page*9 HOM 6th Signalized Intcorsection SUn-ima{y 2024 PM WO 5; Puapulaanui St 11:12.2021 ---w t 1* Nbyement EBB. EBT EBR '4VBL VVBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations I t iif I I t ji' � + r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 199 23 116 50 23 104 105 77� 58 142 973 100 Future Volume,vehih) 199 23 116 50 23 104 105 773 58 142 973 1 D0 initial Q(02b),vets 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0D 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No Act Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1870 1$70 1626 1870 1856 1641 1870 1870 1870, Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 216 25 0 52 25 0 114 797 0 146 1003 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0,97 0,92 0,97 0.92 0,97 0,97 0.97 0,97 D,92 Percent Heavy Veh,°!c 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 3 4 2 £ 2 Gap,vehi11 326 350 326 350 262 1122 389 1135 Arrive On Green 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.19 0.19 •0.00 0.05 0.60 100 Q.06 0.61 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 13W 1870 1595 1386 1870 1547 1781 1856 1560 1781 1670 1585 Grp Volume(v;.vehfh 216 25 G 52 25 0 114 797 0 146 1003 0 Grp Sat F1ovv(s),veh!hiln 1386 1870 1'S85 1386 1870 1547 1781 1856 1560 1781 1870 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s 13.4 1.0 D.G 2.8 1.0 0.0 2.1 25.3 0.0 2.7 40,1 0,0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 14.4 1.0 0.0 3.8 1,0 0.0 2.1 26.3 0.0 2.7 40,1 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.DD 1.00 1.00 1_00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh h 326 380 326 350 262 1122 389 1135 VJC Ratio(X) 0.66 0.07 0.16 0.07 0,44 0.71 0,38 0.88 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 349 381 349 381 268 1122 394 1135 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.On Uniform Delay(d),c'veh 35.5 29.6 0_0 31.1 29.6 0.0 16.9 12.1 0,0 10.5 14,7 0.0 hor Delay(d2).siveh 4.3 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.1 3.8 0,0 0.6 10.1 0.0 In!t a1 0 Del ay(d3),siveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 4.8 0A 0.0 1.0 0.4 0.0 1.3 M7 0.0 0.9 17.8 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 392 29.6 0.0 31A 29.6 0.0 118A 15.9 0.0 11.1 24.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS D C C C B B B C Appfcauh Vol,veil h 241 A 77 A 911 A 1149 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 38.7 30.8 16.2 23.1 Approach LOS D C B C Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 9.4 57.9 21.0 9.2 58.1 21.0 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.1 53.4 1H 5.0 53.5 1$.D Max Q Cleat Time(9_c+i1).s 4.7 28.3 16.4 4.1 42.1 5.8 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 6.5 0.1 0.0 6.0 0.1 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 22,3 HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exdWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Phgh 11 FICIV1 6th TWSC 2C24, PM WO 6. Kuakini Street 1 12.2021 Intersection h t FlyY s.veh ?6 10lovemenI EEL EBR NBL N13T SBT SBR LdnC-Gonfiiguralions r t + r Traffic Vol,v&Vh 0 325 340 938 1109 0 Future Vol,vehlh 0 325 340 936 1100 0 ConiticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - '�''reld Storage Lcnglh 164 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage,9 0 - - 0 0 Grade.% fl - - 0 0 - Peaak Hour Faclor 98 96 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 5 2 2 3 2 6 PAvint Flow 0 332 347 957 1132 0 majorlKha W02, Ma]6r1 Maio, Conllicbng Flaw AJI 2783 - 1132 0 - 0 Stage 1 1132 - - - Stage 2 lfiai - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.48 4.12 -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.48 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.48 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.572 2.218 - - - Pol CW1 Mammar 2fl 0 617 - - Stage 1 299 0 - - 5lage 2 166 0 Platoon bluGied, ?k - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 9 - 617 - - tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 9 - - - - Stage 1 131 Stage 2 166 . Approach m NH SB HGM Control Delay,s 0 4.8 G HCM LOS A mhor Larne maidr M vmt NBL NBT EBLrr1 EBLn2 'SST SBR Capacity(veh?h) 617 _ _ _ - HGM Lane V.'C Raba 0.562 - - - - - MGM Contrd Delay(s) 18.1 - 0 D HGNI Lane LDS C - A A - - HCM 95th%file 0(veh) 3.5 - - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 12 Timings 2024 PM WO T; Lako Street 11!12.202'l t Large Group EBL EBT WBL VV T NBL NBT NW SOL SBT SBR Lane Configuratians 1� ' T4 ' + r Traffic Volume(vph) 143 30 52 39 37 888 64 200 1015 188 Future Volume,wphj 143 31) 52 39 37 888 64 200 1015 188 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pl NA Perm pm+pt PEA Perm Protecled Phases 4 4 8 8 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 2 2 6 6 D9tectad Phase 4 4 6 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 22.5 22.5 22,5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(8) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 9,5 69.2 69.2 115,E 75,5 75-5 Total Split(%) 17.3% 17.30/a 1T.A 17.3% 7.3% 53.2% 53.2% 12.2°l* 58.1% 58,1% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 160 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Trt11e(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 Lead1ag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag€ a nlze? Yes Y Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Norse None None None Max Max None Max Max Act Effct Green(s) 14.7 14.7 12.5 126 70.0 65.0 65.0 80.9 75.4 75.4 Actuated grC Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.57 0.53 0.53 0.66 0.62 0.62 vie Rabo 0.71 0.33 0,36 0.83 0,30 0.94 0.08 0.94 0.92 0.19 Control Delay 71.1 26.5 56.4 40.3 15.E 4U 0.2 79.5 36.8 5.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 6.0 0.0 0.0 o.0 0.0 0.0 11,0 Total delay 71.1 26.5 56.4 40,3 15.E 46.0 0.2 79.5 36.8 5.7 LOS E C E D B D A E D A Apprcauh Letay 55,4 43.4 41.9 38.7 Approaeh LOS E D D 0 Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 130 Actuated Cycle Length; 121.8 Natural Cy+de: 130 Control Tyne;,rtotuated-Unc�ofdinated Nlaximum 0c Ratio:0.94 Inteisecllan Signal Delay.41,E Intersectlon LEIS.D Inter son Capacity Utilization 96.2% ICU Level of S-fvico F Analysis Pariad[min) 15 Splits and Phases, 7:Lako Street } 10, 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Pagh 13 H M 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 PM WO T; Lako Street 1 U12.202'I Nbyement EBB. EBT EBR >1WBL W'BT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 14 T V t T r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 143 30 48 62 39 218 37 883 64 200 1015 188 Future Volume;vehih) 143 30 48 62 39 218 37 888 64 200 1015 188 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1-CIO 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.Do 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1841 1870 1670 1870 1826 1626 1855 1856 1870 1856 1870 1870 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 149 31 0 65 41 0 39 925 0 208 1057 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0,96 0,96 0,96 0.0 0,96 0,96 0.96 0,06 0,96 Percent Heavy Veh,% 4 2 2 i 5 5 3 3 P 3 2 C Cap,vehlh 182 194 96 99 221 1143 316 1210 Arrive On Green 9.10 0.10 0.00 9.05 0.05 9A0 0.03 0.52 J.00 U6 0.65 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 18M 1585 1767 1670 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 149 31 G 65 41 D 39 925 0 208 1057 0 Grp Sat P1ow(s),veh!h.1n 1753 1870 0 1781 1826 0 1767 1K6 1585 1767 1870 1585 Q Serve{s_s),s 9.1 1.7 Cr.O 3.9 2.4 0.0 0.9 41.111 0.0 4.6 50.4 0.0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 9.1 1.7 0.0 3.9 2.4 0.0 0.9 41.9 0.0 4,6 50A 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 b.N 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-110 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veW h 182 194 96 99 221 1143 316 1210 VJC Ratio(X) 0.82 0.16 0.68 0.42 0.1 B 0.81 0,66 0.87 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 287 307 292 299 245 1143 388 1210 H O M Platooh Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,GD 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 O.DO 1.00 1.001 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),duet 48.2 44.B CIO 51.0 50_3 0A 17.8 16.1 U 18.9 15,8 0,0 hor Delay(d2).siveh 9.3 0.4 0.0 8.0 2.8 0.0 0A 6.2 0,0 2.9 &9 U In!t at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 +0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 4.5 0_8 0.0 2.0 1.2 0.0 0.5 18.3 0.0 3.1 22.2 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 58.0 45.2 0.0 59.0 53.0 O.0 152 22.3 0.0 21.8 24.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS E D E D B C C C Appfcauh Val,veil h 180 A 106 A 964 A 1265 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 55.8 56.7 22.2 24,2 Approach LOS E E C C Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 3 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 11.3 72.2 15.9 8.0 75.5 10.4 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 11.3 64.7 18.0 5.0 71.0 1$.0 Max 0 Clear Time(g_c+11).s 6A 43.9 11.1 2.9 52.4 5.9 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.2 7.6 0.3 0.0 8.8 0.2 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrs Delay 27,D HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectiol)delay. 5,00 Yrr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Pagh 15 Timings 2024 Pm Wo 8, Kamehamehe III Read & Queen Kaahumanu Hwy 11112f2021 Large Group EBT EER WBT N'BL NBT 8BL Sl3T Lane Configurations 4 r 4:� T I +�, Traffic Volume(vph) 11 52 11 64 579 19 595 Future Volume(vph) 11 52 11 64 579 10 595 Turn Type NA Perm NA Prot HA Prot NA Protected Phases 2 6 3 8 7 4 Permitlad Phases 2 Qetectof Phase 2 2 6 3 8 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 95 23.3 9.5 23.5 Total Split(s) 30.5 30.5 30,0 n,8 35,0 9.5 34.7 Total SPI€t(°I) 29.0°la 29.E 28.6% 9.3% 33.3% 9.0% 33.Ylq Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 All-Red Time(s} 1.0 1.0 1J) 110 1,0 I'D 1:0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 U 0.0 Q.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Gptirnize? Yes 'des Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None Nave Max None Max Act Eff.t Green(s) 20.4 20.4 6.8 5.5 35.7 5.2 31.6 Actuated grC Ratio 0.27 0.27 0.a9 0,07 0.46 0.07 0.42 vie Ratio 0.74 0.11 0123 0,52 071 0.15 0.65 Control Delay 36.6 1.0 26.2 54.9 27.0 42.0 21.4 Queue Delay 0.0 Q.O Q,0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Do4ay Xu 1.0 26.2 54.9 27,0 42,0 21,4 LOS ♦D A C D C Q C Appicauh De!ay 31.8 26,2 29,7 21.8 Approach LOS C C 0 C Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglth:105 Actuated Cycle Length;75 Natural Cycle: 105 Control TyDe:Semi Act-1lncoord Nlaximum u c Ratio:0..74 Inteisectlan Signal Delay 26.4 Intersectlan LOS-C Inter con Capacity LJOiization 71.81A ICU Level of SeNcc C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases; 8.Kameharneha III.Road Clueen Kaahulmanu Hw at I6 03 T 04 a7 tos 5.00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 16 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 2024 P'M WO 8; Kamehameha III React & QU(-,,(-;n Kaahur 1anU HWY 11112f2021 --*� " t 1` Nbyement EBIL EBT EBB 1NBL WBT WBR, NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR. Lane Configurations 4 r :k 1� I +T. Traffic Volume(vehfh) 325 11 52 7 11 20 64 579 11 19 695 316 Future Volume;wehth) 325 11 52 7 11 20 64 579 11 19 595 316 Initial Q(02b),vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0a 1.00 1.0fl 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1856 1767 1 B11 1870 1$70 1870 1856 1856 1870 1870 1870 187� Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 342 12 D 7 12 21 67 6l?g 12 20 6.26 0 Peak Hour Factor €,1.95 0.95 a.D5 0,95 0,95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0,95 0,95 Percent Heavy Veh,% 3 9 5 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 Cap,vehlh 403 14 11 19 34 90 804 16 41 1476 Arrive On Gruen 0.25 0.25 OM 0.04 0.04 i7.04 0.05 0.44 0.44 Q.02 •0.42 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1628 57 1535 297 509 890 1767 1813 36 1781 3647 0 Grp Volume(v;.vehfh 354 0 Pr 40 0 0 67 r0 621 20 626 0 Grp Sat F1ow(s),veh!hiln 1685 0 1535 1695 4 0 1767 0 1849 1781 1777 0 0 Servefs-s),s 143 0.0 D.Q 1.7 0.0 0.0 2,7 0.0 20.6 0.8 9,1 0,0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 145 0.0 H 1.7 0.0 0.0 2.7 a.0 20.5 0.8 9.1 10 Prop In Lane 0.97 1.DD 0.17 0.52 1.00 0.02 1.00 0.00 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veWh 418 0 65 0 0 90 D 82f) 41 1476 VJC Ratio(X) 0.85 0,00 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.00 0.76 0,49 0.42 Avail Cap(c_a),veil+h 603 0 505 0 0 129 D 820 123 1476 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1X 1.00 1.00 1,(]0 1.00 1.00 1,170 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.DO 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 O.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slued 26.0 0.0 0.0 34.4 0.0 0.0 24.0 0.0 16.9 35.1 15A 0.0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 7Z 0.0 0.0 9.3 0.0 0.0 12.9 0.0 6,6 8.9 .19 0.0 In!t al 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.C, 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1A 0,0 8,7 0.4 3.3 0,0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 33,7 0.0 0.0 43.7 0.0 0.0 46.9 0.0 23A 44,0 16.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A D A A D A C D B Apprcauh Vol,veil h 354 A 40 688 646 A Approach Delay,s�ve, 3J.7 43.7 25.7 16.8 Approach LOS C D C B Timer-Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 22.5 8.2 34.7 7.3 6.2 36.7 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4-5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 26.0 5.3 30.2 25.5 5,0 30.5 Max 0 Cleat Time(9_c+i1).s 16.5 4.7 11.1 3,7 2.8 22.5 Green Ext Tonne f p c),s 1.5 0.0 3.7 0.1 0.0 2.3 Intersection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 24.4 HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De'16y in? [EBR SBR(is excluded from calculalioas of the a;,ptAch delay and intetsect!ar7 delay, 5,00 Yrr- Bass;;°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 18 HCM 2010 Roundabout 2324 AM WO Roundabout 3, Hualalai Rd (North) 1 H09.2021 lrb(wUon Interseclion Dday slveh 125.2 lnterseclion LOS F ApPrWh EB N8 3B Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 M Approach Flaw,vebih 105 1385 1003 Derrand F1awRate,vehlh 107 14t2 1062 Vehicles Cireulaling,vehlh t029 48 171 3lehic;le5 Exiling,vehih 204 1988 1289 Follow-lip Headway,s 3.186 3,186 3.186 Pert Vol Cross;ng Leg,Alh 1 0 0 Flea Cap Actj 1.000 1,0W 1.000 Apprc-ach Delay,s.rveh 13.7 161.5 86.7 Approach LOS B F F Lane Lot koLett' De&i natEd Moves LR LT TR ,Assumed Moves LR LT TR RT Chmnneiized Lane U01 1.000 1.000 1.000 Crltica111eadwny,s 5.13 5.193 5.193 Entry Flay,vehlh 107 1412 1062 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 404 1077 952 Entry HV Adj F2clor 0"I'V 0.981 0.944 Flow Entry,.vehlh 105 1385 1003 Cap Entry,veh.h 396 1056 899 VIC Ratio 1265 1.311 1.115 Control Delay,siveh 13,7 161.5 86.7 LOS B F F 951h Vile Que4e,veh 27 5.00 pm Basetine Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 Roundabout 2024 AM WO Roundabout 4; Hualalai Rd (South) 1 H09.2021 Irrtiiort Interseclion Dday slveh 83.0 intersection LOS F ApprWh WB NB BB Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 M Approach Flaw,vebih Al 1248 1023 Derrand Flow Rate,vehlh 164 1275 1075 Vehicles Circulating,vehlh 1257 83 1 G 3lehic;le5 Exiling,vehih 101 IN2 '1411 Follow-lip Headway,s 3.186 3,186 3.186 Pert Vol Cross;ng Leg,Alh 0 0 0 Peet Cap AAdj 1.000 1,0W UOU ApToach Delay,slveh 25.3 125.7 38.6 Approach LOS 0 IF E Lane Lot 1 f1 sett De&i natEd Moves LR TR LT Assumed Moves LR TR LT RT Chmnnelized Lane U01 1.O00 1.000 1.000 Critical headway,s 5.193 5.193 5.193 Entry Flay,vehlh 164 1275 1075 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 321 1040 1119 Entry HV Adj Faclor 0.1.62 0.079 0.951 Flow Entry,.vehlh 161 1248 1023 Cap Entry,veh;h 316 1018 1064 VIC Ratio 4.610 1.226 0.961 Control Delay,siveh 25.3 1263 38,6 LOS D F E 951h%tile Que4o,veh 3 40 17 5-00 pm BaselinL- Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 2010 Roundabout 2024 AM WO Roundabout 6, Kuakini Street 1 H09.2021 llrbfwc on Interseclion Dday slveh 267.2 tnterseclian LOS F Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes, 1 t 1 M Approach Flaw,vebih 171 1615 973 Derrand Flow Rate,vehlh 178 1676 1022. Vehicles Cireulafing,vehlh t022 0 660 3lehic;Ie5 Exiling,vehih 660 1200 1016 Follow-lip Headway,s 3.186 3.186 3.186 Pert Vol Crass-ng Leg,Alh 0 0 0 PW Cap Adi 1_000 1,0W 1, OU Apprc-ach Delay,s.Iveh 18.4 235.5 363.4 Appfoach LOS C F F Lane Left t o left' De&i natEd Moves LR LT TR Assumed Moves LR LT TR RT Ch nneiized Lane U01 1.O00 1.000 1,000 Critical Headway,s 5.193 5,193 6.193 Entry Flay,vehlh 178 1676 1322 Cap Entry Lane,vehitr 407 1130 594 Entry HV Adj Faclor 0"i61 0.063 0_W Flow Entry,.vehlh 171 16615 973 Cap Entry,veh.h 391 1089 556 VEC Ratio 4.438 1A83 1,750 Control Delay,siveh 18.4 235.5 363.4 LOS C F F 951h Vile Que4e,veh 2 74 58 5.00 pm Basetine Synchro 10 Report Page 3 HCM 2010 Roundabout 2024 PM WO Roundabout 3, Hualalai Rd (North) 1110912021 Irbirwdort IMerseclion Delay slveh 97.4 interseclian LOS 1" ApprO h EB NB BB Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 M Approach Flaw,vebih 96 1191 1229 Derrand Flaw Rate,vehlh 98 1237 1254 Vehicles Circulating,vehlh Q35 14 88 3lehic;Ie5 Exiling,vehih 107 1323 1159 Follow-Up Headway,s 3.186 3.186 3,186 Pert Vol Crass-ng Leg,Alh 0 0 a PW Cap Adi 1_000 1,0W 1.000 Apprc-ach Delay,s.lveh 17.4 79.4 121.1 AWoach LOS C F F Lane Lot koLett' De&i natEd Moves LR LT TR ,Assumed Moves LR LT TR RT Chmnneli,ed Lane U01 1.000 1,000 LOGO Crlticel bear vey,s 5.1 3 SAN 5.193 Entry Flay,vehlh 98 1237 1254 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 329 1119 1035 Entry HV Adj Faclor {l.IK) 0.963 0.980 Flow Entry,.vehlh 98 1191 1229 Cap Entry,veh.h 322 1077 1-014 VIC Ratio 1298 1106 1.212 Control Delay,siveh 174 79.4 12f.1 LOS C F F 951h Vile Que4e,veh 1 29 39 5.00 pm Basetine Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM 2010 Roundabout 2024 PM WO Roundabout 4; Hualalai Rd (South) 1110912021 Irbirwdort Interseclion Delay,zdveh 93.7 lnterseclion LOS F ApprWh WB NB BB Entry Lanes 1 1 1 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 M Approach Flaw,vebih 87 1127 1298 Derrand Flaw Rate,vehlh 89 1161 1a28 Vehicles Cireulaling,vehlh 1157 88 15 3lehic;Ie5 Exiling,vehih 72 1276 1231 Follow-Up Headway,s 3.186 3.186 3,186 Pert Vol Cross;ng Leg,Alh 0 0 a Ped Cap Actj 1.000 1,0W 1.000 Apprc-ach Delay,s.rveh 15.0 78.3 112.3 Approach LOS C F F Lane Lot i Left' De&i nalEd Moves LR TR LT ,Assumed Moves LR TR LT RT Chmnneli,ed Lane U01 1.000 1.000 1,O00 Critical Headway,5 5.193 5.193 9.1 3 Entry Flay,vehlh 89 1161 1328 Cap Entry Lane,vehih 355 1.056 1113 Entry HV Adj Factor 0A78 0.071 0.978 FIDw Entry,.vehfh 87 1127 1298 Cap Entry,veh.h 347 1025 1888 VEC Ratio 0,251 1,100 1.193 Control Delay,siveh 15.0 73.3 112,3 LOS C F F 951h Vile Que4e,veh 1 28 39 5.00 pm Basetine Synchro 10 Report Page 2 HCM 201O Rourdabout 2024 PM WO Roundabout 0: Kuakini Street 11109-2021 Ir&(wdon Interseclion Delay,zdveh 153.6 lnterseclion LOS F Apormh EB NB BB Entry Lanes 1 1 11 Conflicting Circle Lanes 1 1 1 M Approach Flaw,vebih 332 1304 1132 Derrand Flaw Rate,vehlh 339 1340 1155 Vehicles Cireulaling,vehlh 1155 4 354 3lehic;Ie5 Exiling,vehih 354 1494 986 Follow-Up Headway,s 3.186 3,186 3,186 Pert Vol Cross;ng Leg,Alh 0 0 a Fled Cap Actj 1.000 1,0W 1.000 Apprc-ach Delay,s.rveh 71.7 109.2 228.B Approach LOS F F F Uwe LOR Left' De&i natEd Moves LR LT TR ,Assumed Moves -R LT TR RT ChmnnOiaed Lane U01 1.000 1,000 1.000 Critical headway,s 5.193 5.193 5.193 Entry Flay,vehlh 339 1340 1155 Cap Entry Lane,vehil7 W 1130 793 Entry HV Adj Faclor 0,979 0.973 0.080 Flown Entry,.vehfh 332 1304 1132 Cap Entry,veh.h 349 1100 778 VEC Ratio 0.952 1,186 1.466 Control Delay,siveh 71,7 109,2 228.8 LOS F F F 951h Vile Que4e,veh 10 38 52 5.00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 3 Appendix. E Analysis Reports — Future With Project Conditions (20 4) Tinilr-gS 2024 AM 1: Falaili Rd ROLJ-,0 11 1 If 7021 '# t ► 4 .V Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL W8T WBR NBL NBT NOR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations M tt r tt r ' ++ r ' tt r Traffic Volume(vph) 71 51 G 218 1155 775 38 243 192 118 22 321 177 Future Volume(vph; 71 516 218 165 775 38 243 192 118 22 321 177 Turn Type ".'rot NA Perm Rot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prat NA Perm Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 1 Permibd Phases 4 8 2 6 Qetectad Phase 7 4 4 3 $ 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MinimumSplit(s) 9.5 30.5 38.5 95 38.5 38.5 9,5 42.5 42,5 9.5 42,5 �42.5 Total Split(s) 11.0 39.0 39,G 1&0 44.0 44,0 20.0 54.8 54,8 10.2 45,0 45.0 Total SPlit(%) 9.2% 32.5% 32.5% 13.3% 36.7% 367% 16.7% 45.7% 45.7% 8.5 f; 37.5% 37.5% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.0 0.0 Q.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s} 4.5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lies Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max NcmL, max Max None Ncne None None Name None Act Effct Green(s) 6.4 36.2 36.2 9,7 41.8 41.8 11.9 30.1 30.1 5.8 17.3 17.3 Actuated grO Ratio 0.07 0.39 0,39 0.10 0.45 0.45 0.13 0.32 0.32 0.06 0.19 0.19 vie Ratio 0:33 0.41 a 32 (1.48 0,52 0.05 0.58 0.17 0.20 0.20 9.50 0.41 Control Delay 49.9 24.5 5.2 46.6 23.0 0.1 45.8 23.4 4.0 51.5 36,3 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 07 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 49.9 24.5 5.2 45.6 23.0 0.1 45.8 23.4 4,0 61.5 36.3 7,6 LOS D C A D C A D C A D D A Appicauh Letay 2.1.5 26A 29,1 27.1 Approeah LOS C 0 C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:93.3 Natural Cycle: 100 Control TyDe,Semi A•t-Llncoord Maximum u c Ratio:0.58 Intersection Signal D] lay: 25.6 Intersectlan LOS-C Intersection Capacity Lt6lization 63.3% ICU Level of 5eNce B Analysis Period[min) 15 Splits and Phases; 1.Palani Rd &Raute 11 ''aa 1 005 ■ OE 07 0� 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM kith Signalized Ir,ttorsection Sun-tma{y 2024 AM W 1, Palani Rd & RoLite 11 11112f2021 t 1, arrrent EBL EBT E.BR WBL dlBT VVBR NEL Na MR SEL f SIB Lane Configurations �1 tt r tt r ++ r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 71 515 218 165 775 38 243 192 118 22 321 177 Future Volume;vehlh) 71 516 `�18 165 775 38 243 192 118 22 321 177 Initial Q(0b),vets 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0a 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.Do 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No Act Sat Row,veh1hin 1737 1767 1737 J B41 1011 1841 1841 1870 1856 1870 1870 1 M Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 72 527 D 168 791 0 248 1% 0 22 328 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 0.96 0,98 0,98 0.98 198 0.98 0,98 0.98 0.98 0,98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 11 9 11 4 6 4 4 2 3 2 2 2 Cep.vehlh 159 1553 251 1676 344 772 43 498 Arrive On Green 0.05 0.46 0.00 0,07 0.49 •0.00 0.10 0.22 D.00 0.02 0.14 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 3209 3357 1472 3401 3441 1M9 3401 3554 1a72 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v .vehfh 72 527 C, 168 791 0 246 1m C' 22 :328 0 Grp Sat Flovv(s),veh!hiln 1605 1678 1472 1700 1721 1560 1700 1777 1572 1781 1777 1585 0 Serve{s-s),s f.8 8.1 0.0 3.9 12.4 0.0 5_7 3.7 0.0 1_0 7.1 0,0 Cycle 0 clear(g_c),s 1.8 &1 0.0 3.9 12A 0.0 5.7 3.7 0.0 1.0 7.1 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.b0 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},vehtlh 159 1553 261 1676 344 772 43 498 VJC Ratio(X) 0,45 0.34 0.67 047 0.72 0.25 0.5 t 0-R Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 257 1653 482 1676 660 LAD 125 1775 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1,00 1.00 1.OD 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.04 O.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slued 373 13.9 0_0 36_6 13.8 0.0 35.3 26_3 0'C 30.1 310 0,0 hor Delay(d2).siveh 2.0 0.6 0.0 3.1 1.0 0.0 2.8 0.2 0,0 9,1 1.5 U In!r at 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0A 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 0.7 2.9 0.0 1.7 4.6 0.0 2.5 1.5 0.0 0.5 11 0:0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 39.5 14.5 0.0 39A 14.8 0.0 38.2 26.5 0.0 48.2 34.5 0.0 LnGrp LOS D B D B D C D C Appfcauh Vol,veil h 699 A 959 A 444 A 350 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 17.5 19.2 33.0 35.4 Approach LOS B B C D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 6.5 22.1 10.5 42.0 12.7 15.9 8.5 44.0 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.7 50.3 11.E 34.5 15.5 40.5 6.5 39.5 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 3.0 5.7 5.9 10.1 7.7 9,1 J.8 14.4 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 1.4 0.2 3.6 0.5 2.0 0.0 5.8 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 21B HCl`A nth LOS C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Yrr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Reporl Page 3 Timings 2024 AM W 2: Henry St & Routo 11 1V12.202'I t 4 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NIT SBL SH' Lane Configurations M tt r M +� 0 4T Traffic Volume(vph) 10T 423 124 59 710 5N 146 337 47 408 339 Future Volume(vph) 107 423 124 59 71.0 529 146 337 47 408 339 Turn Type Prot NA Perm. Prot NA Porrn Split NA Psrm Split NA Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitlad Phases 4 8 2 Qetectof Phase 7 4 4 3 $ 8 2 2 2 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#W 9.5 30.5 30.5 9,5 30.5 30.5 35.5 35.5 35.5 35.3 35,5 Total Split(s) 12.0 36.9 367 9 10.1 35.0 35.0 37.0 37.0 31.0 36.0 30.0 Total SPIrt(%) 10.0% 30.8% 30,8% 8.4% 29.2% 29.2% 30.8% 30. % 30.8% 30,0%, 30.0% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TOW Lost Tim s} 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max None Max Max None Ncne None None Norge ActEflut Green(s) 7.4 35.1 35.1 5.7 31.0 31.r7 18.2 1U 18.2 25.5 25.5 Actuated grO Ratio 0.07 0.35 0.35 0,06 0.31 0.31 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.25 0.25 vie Raba 0.48 0.38 0.21 0,33 0,70 0.64 0.48 0.60 0.14 0.74 9.73 Control Delay 55.6 29.0 6.5 54A 36.9 6.8 43.2 42.1 1.1 47.1 38.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 G,0 D.0 0.0 0,0 o.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 55.5 29.0 6.5 54,8 36.9 6.5 43.2 42.1 1.1 47.1 36.8 LCS E C A C D A 0 D A D D App, cauh Delay 29.1 25.5 38.8 41,6 Approe5h LOS C 0 I} I) Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih: 124 Actuated Cycle Length; 100.3 Natural Cyde: 115 Control Type;Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum We Ratio:0.74 Intersection Signal Delay: 32.5 Intersectlan LOS:C Intersection iCaPaci#y U61izaatiorh 69.7°k ICU Level of SeNce C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits r�and Phases: 2:Henty St &RaIUW 1,,1 JO 06 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HI;M Signalized lnte section Capacity Analysts 2024 AM VV 2. Henry St & Route 11 1V12.202'I t 4 Nbverneiit EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR fNBL h1BT NBR S13L SBT SER Lane Configurations M ++ r M + r 1 4+ 0 Traffic Volume(vph) 107 423 124 59 M 529 146 337 47 408 339 124 Future Volume(vph) 107 423 124 59 710 529 146 337 47 408 339 124 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1 Wl 1900 1900 1900 1900 19M 1900 19N 1900 190€1 19M 1900 Total Lost lima(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lane 4ttil. Factor 0.97 0.95 1.DO 0.97 0,95 1.00 Q.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 Frpb,ped;bikes 1,00 1.00 Q.99 1,00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.Oti 0,99 1.00 1.00 Flpb,pe ikes 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1100 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 i,00 Frt 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0,85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.97 Flt Protecled 0,95 1,00 1.DO 0,95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1,0f} tM, 0,95 0,99 Said, Flaw(p;otf 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1467 1595 3175 FR Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1 M 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Satd. Flow ' errr' 3099 3282 1516 3303 3406 1548 1564 3348 1487 1595 3175 Peat[-hour factor,Pict= 0.97 0.97 D.97 9.97 0,97 0,97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Adj. Flow(vph) 110 436 128 61 732 545 151 347 48 421 349 128 RTOR Reductkxr (vph) 0 0 34 0 D 372 0 0 39 0 19 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 110 436 44 61 732 173 136 362 9 299 W 0 Confl,Peels.(Nhr} 2 2 4 3 3 4 Confl. Bikes(R?hr) 1 Heavy Vehides.�'Xgj, 13% 10°'i 5% 6% 6% 3% 5% 3% 7% 3% 4% 61/0 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Pe-m Split NA Perm SPA NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 a 2 2 6 6 Pgrmitled Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green,G (s) 7.3 35.1 35.1 4.3 32.1 32.1 113.2 18.2 18.2 25.5 25.5 Effective Green, g(s) 7.3 35.1 35.1 4,3 32A 32.1 18.2 18.2 18.2 25.5 25,5 Actuated g)C Ratio 0.07 0.35 0.35 0,04 0.32 0.32 0.18 0.18 0,18 0,25 0.25 Clearance Time(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 V'ehde Extension s} 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 10 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 223 1139 526 140 1081 491 281 6 12 267 402 800 v+s Ratio Prot ctl.O4 C0.13 0,02 cO.21 0.09 GO.11 c0.19 0.18 Vs Ratio Perm OM 0.11 0.01 Oc Ratio 0.49 0.38 ME 9,44 OM 0.35 0.48 0.60 3.03 0.74 0.72 Uniform DF-4ay, d1 45.1 24,8 22.2 47.2 30,0 26,5 37.2 38.1 34.2 34.8 3C6 Progression Factor 1.110 1.00 1.00 1,00 1= 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.GO 1.00 1.M Inc'emental Delay,d2 1.7 1.0 0.3 2.2 3.4 Zo 1.3 1.7 0.0 7.3 3.3 Delay(s) 46'.8 25,8 215 49.4 33,4 28.5 38.5 39.8 34.2 42.1 37.9 Level of Service D C C D C C D D C D D Appfua; th Delay i.sl 28.6 32.1 39,0 39.3 Approach LA'S C C L' D tntatsection Summary HDA 2000 Control Delay 34.4 HCM M Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.66 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 101,1 Sum of EQst erne;s) 18.0 Intamecflon Capacity Oliaation 69.7% ICU Level of Service C Analysts Period(min) 15 c CrOical Lane Croup 5.00 pm BasA-fine Synchro 10 Report Page 5 FICIV1 61:h TWSC 2024 AM W I ROUtO 11 & Hualaiai Rd (North) 1 12.2021 IntmwilJon Int Delay.siveh 20,2 movement ML EBR NBL N13T SBT SBR Lane Gontigurations r ' t + r Traffic Vol,v&Vh 44 55 164 1183 914 30 Future Vol,vehih 44 55 164 1163 914 30 ConllicOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 1 Sign Control Slop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelazed - Free - Nome - YAd Storage Length 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Mediae Storage,# 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% 0 - - 0 0 - Pelak Hour Faclor g3 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 6 2 MAvint Flow 47 59 176 IM 983 32 Majorl'rrior M1111 MOM Maio,.1 Conlaic6ng Flaw AJI 2608 - 964 0 - 0 Stage 1 W - - - - - Stage 2 1624 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6A2. 4.12 -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 2.218 - - - Pol Cap-1 Maneuver -27 0 702 - Stage 1 362 0 - - 5lage 2 177 0 - Platoon blocied,% - - - Mou Cap-1 Maneuver -20 - 71]1 - - tJ1av Cup-2 Maneuvar -20 - Stage 1 271 Stage 2 177 Approach M N8 aB HGM Control Delay,$102Y-1 1.4 0 HCM LOS F Mhor La*Maipr MMlvmt NIBL NBT EBLn1 EBLn2 SBT SBR Capacity(veh?h) 701 - 20 _ - HGM Lane V.'C Ratio 0,252 - 2.366 - - MGM Contrd Delay(s) 11.9 $1027.1 0 HCtwf Lane LDS B - F A - - HCM 95th°Mlle Q(veh) 1 - 6„3 Notes Vdume exceeds capacky S; Delay exceeds 300s +:CompuWon Not Defined `;Ara]major value ire ptattson 5:00 pm Baseaine Synch re 10 Report Page 7 HCM 6th TWSC 2024 AM 1N 4: Route 11 & Hualalai Rd (South) 1111212021 Inlerseclion Inf 'e.Ny s.v9h 1. movemem Y4'BL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT LdnC-Gonfigurations r T f Traffic Vol,v&Vh 9 140 1206 15 73 891 Future Vol,vehlh 9 140 1206 15 73 891 ConiticOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - 'Yield - None Storage Langlh fl 0 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade.% fl - 0 - - 0 Peaak Hour Faclor g3 93 83 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 13 a 5 MAvint Flow 10 151 1297 16 78 958 Majormhor M r"i MOM MajoI ConllicUng Flow'All 2419 0 0 1297 0 Stage 1 1305 - - - - Stage 2 1114 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.42 - - 4.16 Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 _ _ _ 2.254 Poo Cap-1 Ma aver 36 0 - - 521 Stage 1 254 0 Stage 2 314 0 - - - - Platoon bluGied, 'k - - - Mou Cap-1 Maneuver 31 - - - 521 tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 31 - - - - - Stage 1 254 Stage 2 267 Approach we SIB 813 HCM Control Delay,s 167 0 1 HCM LOS F mhor La*i41aidr Mvmt Nff N8RW8Ln11BLn2 81, SBT Capacity(veh%) 31 - 521 HGM Lane V.'C Ralb - 0.312 - 0.151 - MGM Control Delay(s) - 167 p 13.1 - HCtwf Lane LDS - F A $HCM 95th%file 0(veh) - - 1 - 15 - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 8 Tin7ir(I,b 2024 AM W b: Route: 1 & P1,1al:}L1aallUl St 1 12.2021 t -01 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WEL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NOR SOL #T SER Lane CDnfiguratians t r I t f + r Traffic Volume(vph) 193 9 75 111 59 140 104 901 26 43 792 68 Future Volume(vph) 193 9 75 111 59 140 104 901 26 43 792 fib Turn Type Perm NA Perris Perm NA Perris pm+p# NA Perm pm+pt NA Perris Protecled Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permibd Phases 4 4 8 8 2 2 6 6 Detectad Phase 4 4 4 8 $ 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Soli#( ) 22.5 22.5 22,5 2Z5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5 22,5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 8,6 58.0 58,C 9.5 5T, V.9 Total SPlrt(%) 25.0% 25.D% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 10.7% 64.4°/a 64.4°ie 1+.6% C4.3°f: 154.3% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.6 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 160 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None Ncrii3 Nc.ne None None Nare Max Max None Max Max ActEffct Green(s) 16.4 16.4 16.4 1EA 16.4 1&4 58.7 55.T 55.7 57.7 53.8 53,8 Actuated grC Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.1� _.,19 0.19 0.19 0.68 0.64 0.64 0.67 0.62 0.62 vie Ralio 0.83 0.03 0.22 0.45 0.18 0.35 0.36 0,81 0.03 0.18 075 0.07 Control Delay 62.3 29.3 9.1 37.6 31.5 8.2 7.6 20.5 0.0 6.0 18.4 2.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0. 0.0 04 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 62.3 29.3 9.1 37.13 31.5 8,2 7.6 20.5 0,0 C.0 16.4 2,2 LOS E C A D C A A C A A 5 A App, cauh Letay 46,8 23.2 18.7 16,6 Approach LOS 1) 0 B B Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih:90 Actuated Cycle Length:86.7 Natural Cyde:90 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum We Ra#io:0.83 Inteiseclian Signal Delay: 21.6 Intersectlan LOS:C Interseatian iCapacify Utilization 80,?A ICU Level of SeNce D Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5.Route 11 &Pug uaaaui St 01 I0z 05 � 06 06 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page*9 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Sun-tmi+ary 2024 AM VV 5; Route 11 & Puapuaanui St 11!12.202'I --*� .- t 4 Nbyement EBI_ EBT EBR WBL VVFBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR S13L SBT SBR Lane Configurations I t r t + �' '� + r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 193 9 75 111 59 140 104 9D1 26 43 792 68 Future Volume,wehih) 193 9 75 111 59 140 1'04 99f 26 43 792 68 Initial Q(02b),veto 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-BikeAdj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.CD 1,00 1,00 1_LI0 1,00 1.fl0 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.Du 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1870 1$70 1870 1870 1856 1870 1870 1826 1 M Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 210 10 0 118 64 0 113 959 0 46 843 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0-D2 0,94 0,92 0,94 0.92 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 D.32 Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 i 2 2 2 3 P 2 5 3 Cep,vehlh 311 376 357 376 337 1133 262 1088 Arrive On Green 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.110 0.05 0.51 O.00 0.04 0.60 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1338 1870 1595 1405 1870 1585 1781 1856 1585 1781 1826 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 210 10 G 118 64 D 113 9u;' 0 46 843 0 Grp Sat Fiow(s),veh!h.1n 1338 1870 1585 1405 1870 1585 1781 1856 1585 1781 1826 1595 0 Serve{s_s),s 13.8 0.4 O.G 6.6 2.5 0.0 2.1 37,3 U-0 0.9 31,0 O,Q Cycle fD dear(g_c),5 16.3 0.4 0.0 7,0 2,5 0.0 2.1 37.3 OX 0.9 31.0 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.DG 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 L.ai1e Grp Cap(c},veNb 311 376 3,57 376 337 1133 262 1088 VJC Ratio(X) 0.67 0.03 0.33 0.17 0.34 0.85 0,18 0.77 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 311 376 357 376 345 1133 293 1088 HOM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,x 1.00 1.90 1.i70 1.f?0 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 36.4 28.8 0.0 31.6 29.6 0.0 12.4 14.1 0,0 14.0 13.6 0,0 her Delay(d2).slveh 5.7 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.6 7.9 0,0 0.3 5.4 0.0 In!r at 0 Delay(Q)siveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Back=(54°lo),vehfln 4.9 0,2 0.0 2.3 1.1 0.0 0.8 16,0 0.0 0.4 12.8 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 42,D 28.8 0.0 32.1 29.8 0.0 13.0 2LO 0.0 14.3 19.0 10 LnGrp L05 D C C C B C B B Apprcach'Jo1,veil?h 220 A 182 A 10°: A 889 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 41.4 31.3 18.7 Approach LOS D C C B Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 a Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 7.9 59.2 22.5 9.2 57.9 2`2.5 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.0 53.5 18,0 5.1 53A 1$.D Max Q Clear Time(g_c+11).s 2.9 39.3 18.3 4.1 310 9.0 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 6.5 U 0.0 6.5 0.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 22,E HChA nth L S C N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exclWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectiol)delay. 5,00 Yrr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Pagh 11 FICIVI 6th TWSC 2024 AM W 6. ROUtO 11 & Kuakim Stroot 1 12.2021 Intersection ht ill Y s.veh 1.1 10lovemenI EEL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR LdnC-Gonfiiguralions r t f r Traffic Vol,vehrh 0 159 602 914 932 2 Future Vol,vehlh 0 159 602 914 932 2 CcnnicOng Peds,Or 0 4 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Slop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - YWd Storage Lcngih 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Meoiao Storage,9 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% C - - 0 0 - Pelak Hour Faclor 93 93 93 93 93 93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 4 2 5 5 7 MAvint Flow 0 171 647 983 1002 2 Mulajo!-Urnr Miner2 Majorl W0jqr2 Conflicting Flovu AJI 3279 1002 0 - 0 Stage 1 1 - - - - Stage 2 2277 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6A2 4.12 -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 - 2.218 - - - Pol CW1 Maneuver 10 a 691 - - Stage 1 35a 0 - - Slage 2 83 0 Platoon bluGied,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1 - 691 - - tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar i - Stage 1 23 Stage 2 83 Approach N8 S HGM Control Delay,s 0 17.9 0 HCM LOS A mhorLariieNaidrMvmt NBL NBTEBLrr1 EBLn2 'SST SBR Capacity(veh?h) 691 - HGM Lane V.'C Ratio 0.937 - - - - MGM Control Delay(s) 45 - 0 0 HGNI Lane LDS € - A A - - H M 95th%file 0(veh) 13A - - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 12 Tinilr-gs 2024 AM W (; Rt Ute 1 -�IkO Strlle:t lL kc� S€r t 1 12.2021 --p- t ! Large Group EBL EBT W8L 'WBT NBL NBT NBR S6L SBT SBR Lane Configuratians I 1 T4 ' + r t ' Traffic Volume(vph) 281 48 59 36 33 927 55 164 787 146 Future Volume,vphj 281 48 fig 36 33 927 55 164 787 146 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA Perm pm#pt NA Perm Protected Phases 4 4 B 8 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 2 2 6 6 L7etectad Phase 4 4 8 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MinimumSplit('s) ,22.5 22.5 22,5 22,5 9.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5 22.5 Total Split(s) 29.0 29.0 24.4 24.4 9.5 61.4 81.4 15.2 67,1 67.1 Total Split(%) 19.3% 19.3% 16.3% 16.3% 6.3% 54.3% 54.3% 10.1°l* 58.1% 58,1% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to IX I'D 1:0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tirt!1e(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 Lead,LaEg Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? Yes Y Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Norse Ncne None Nome Max PAax None Max Max Apt Eftct Green(s) 24.5 .24.5 19.9 19.9 81.9 76.9 76.9 92.1 B4.5 84.5 Actuated grC Ratio 0.16 0.16 D.1B 0.13 0.55 0.51 0.51 0.61 0,56 0,56 vie Ratio 1.03 0.40 0.31 1.06 0.16 1.03 0.07 1A3 0.81 0.17 Contras Delay 121.8 41.4 63.1 102.0 14.0 73.7 0.2 115.4 34.4 5.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total aolay 121,8 41.4 63,1 102,p 14.0 73.7 0.2 115A 34,4 5.8 LOS F to E F B E A F C A App, cauh Leiay 98,2 95.4 67.7 42.7 Apprc,ach LOS ;F F E* 11 Intersection Summary C�Qle LE-ogth. 150 Actualet!Cyde Length. 150 Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type;Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum vlc Ratio:1.06 Intersectian Si9ria]Dela}r;66.3 Intersection LOS E Intersection Capacity U61izalion 108.E ICU Level of Service G Analysis Period[min) 15 Splits and Phases: 7,Route 11 u Laka Street 1ako Street {gipa 01 t01 4 �u F3 7 CUSS 5:00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Pagh 13 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Srin-ima{y 2024 AM W T Route 11 & Lako Street 1i_LiIco Strect 11.12.2021 ---w '.- t 4 I'4layament EBB EBT M WBL VVBT VVBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 1 1 T4 E" Traffic Volume(vehfh) 281 48 59 59 36 299 33 927 55 164 787 146 Future Volume;vehih) 281 48 E9 69 36 299 33 927 55 164 787 146 initial Q(02b),vets 0 0 4 0 O 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0D 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1856 1870 1670 1870 1870 1641 1811 165G 1870 Adj Flour Rake,.vehlh 299 51 0 73 38 0 35 BE 0 174 837 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 0.94 O.94 0,94 0.94 0.94 D.M Percent Heavy Veh,% 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 b 3 2 Gap,vehl11 319 335 102 108 284 1D77 205 1122 Arrive On Green 0.19 0.18 0.00 9.06 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.5E UC 0.06 0.69 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 187C 1560 1725 11856 1585 Grp Volume(v;.vehfh 299 51 G 73 38 0 35 9H 0 174 837 0 Grp Sat F1cvu(s),veh!h.1n 1781 1870 0 1767 1870 0 1781 1870 1560 1725 1856 1585 0 Serve{s_s),s 22.6 3.1 D.a 5.5 2.7 0.0 1.1 64.7 U-0 5.5 44.4 O,Q Cycle 0 Gear(g_c),s 22A 3.1 0.0 15 2,7 0.0 1.1 64.7 0,0 5.5 44,4 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 O.DD 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. O Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veWh 319 335 102 108 284 1077 205 1122 VJC Ratio(X) 0.94 0,15 0,72 0.35 0.12 0.92 0.85 0.75 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 319 M 257 272 301 1077 244 11122 HOM Platooh Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.010 1.00 O.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),duel 55.3 47.3 CIO 63.3 61.9 0.0 17,3 26.0 U 30.9 10,5 0,0 hor Delay(d2).siveh 34.1 0.2 0,0 S.0 2.0 0.0 D.2 13.4 0.0 20.5 4.5 U In!r at 0 Delay(Q)siveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 13.2 i.S 0.0 IS 1.3 U DA 31.6 0.0 4_5 19.9 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 89.4 47.5 0.9 72.3 63.9 Ob 17.5 39.5 0.0 51.4 24.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS F D E E B D D C Appfoauh Vol,veil h 350 A 111 A 1 D21 A 1011 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 83.3 69.4 38.7 28.7 Approach LOS F E D C Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 5 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 12.1 83.2 20.0 8.2 87.1 12.4 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 10.7 7119 24.5 5.0 82.6 19.9 Max 0 Clear Time(g_c+11).s 7.5 66.7 24.6 11 46A 7.5 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.1 5.4 018 0.0 7.7 02 tnte-fsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 42.3 HChA nth LOS G N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is hxdWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Pagh 15 Timings 2024 AM 8, Kamehameha III Road & Route 11 11J12l2021 Large Group EBT EER WBT NBL NBT 8BL S6T '? Lane CDnfiguratians 4 r 4:4 T +T4 Traffic Volume(vph) 5 26 12 76 568 16 501 Future Volume(vph) 5 26 12 76 568 16 501 Turn Type NA Perm NA Prot HA Prot NA Protecled Phases 2 6 3 8 7 4 Permibd Phases 2 Qetectad Phase 2 2 6 3 8 7 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#('s) 30.0 30.0 30.0 95 23.5 9.5 23.5 Total Split(s) 30.5 30.5 30.0 11.0 35.0 9.5 315 Total SPIrt(%) 29.0°la 29.E 28.6% 10.5% 33.3% 9.0% 31.9% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 A l-Red Time(s} 1.0 1.0 1J) U 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 U 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Nore Ncne None Max None Max Act Effct Green(s) 13.8 13.8 TO 61 39.4 5.1 29.7 Actuated grC Ratio 0.20 0.20 D.10 0,09 0.56 0.07 0.42 vie Ratio 0.60 0.08 a27 0,53 H3 0.13 0.63 Control Delay 34.T 0.4 27.3 49.3 19,7 38.5 17.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 34.7 1]_4 27.3 49,3 19.7 38,5 17,8 LOS C A C D t3 a App, cauh Delay 30.5 27.3 23.1 18.2 Approeah LOS C C C 8 Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglth:105 Actuated Cycle Length:70,7 Natural Cycle: 105 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum u c Rath:0.63 Inteisectlan Signal Delay;21.7 Intersectlan LOS:C Inter aon C avity Utilization 63.21A ICU Level of 5eNce B Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 8.Kameharneha III.Road Rote 11 I at I6 03 T 04 o7 t08 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 16 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Sun-1mary 2024 AM W 8; Kame•harneha III React & ROL& 11 11;12.202'l --*� t 4 -01 Nbyement EBIL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR, NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4 r V I. I +T Traffic Volume(vehfh) 181 5 26 16 12 17 76 558 15 16 501 326 Future Volume;vehih) 181 5 25 16 12 17 76 569 15 16 501 328 Initial Q(02b),vets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 Peel-BikeAdj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0D 1.00 0.9ta 1_CI0 0.98 1.00 1,00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.40 1.00 1,Do 1,00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No No No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1811 1870 1722 1870 1781 1796 1752 1811 1870 1870 1811 1811 Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 195 5 D 17 13 1a 82 611 1G 17 539 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0X 0,93 0,93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0,93 0.93 0,93 D.93 Percent Heavy Veh,°!c 6 2 12 i a 7 10 6 2 2 6 6 Gap,vehlh 264 7 26 20 27 102 876 23 36 1575 Arrive On Gruen 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.05 0.05 iD.05 0.06 0,50 150 0.02 0.45 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 1739 45 1459 570 436 604 166E 17,% 46 1781 3532 0 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 200 0 D 48 0 D 82 0 627 17 539 0 Grp Sat F1ovu(s),veh!h.In 1783 0 1459 1611 0 04 1668 0 1802 1781 1721 0 0 Servefs_s),s t3.8 0.0 0.0 1,9 0.0 0.0 3.1 0.0 10 D_6 5.4 0.0 Cycle fD dear(g_c),s 6.8 0.0 0.0 1.9 0A 0.0 3.1 0.0 16.19 0.6 6,4 0.0 Prop In Lane 0,97 1.00 0.35 0.37 1.00 0.03 1.00 0-CIO Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veWh 270 0 73 0 0 102 D 899 36 1575 VJC Ratio(X) 0.74 HO 0.66 0.06 0.00 0.80 0.00 0.70 0A7 0.34 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 732 0 648 0 0 171 D 899 141 1575 HOM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,D0 1.00 1.00 1,(]0 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1100 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1,DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 25.7 0.0 CIO 20.8 0.0 10.0 29.3 0.0 12.2 30.7 11.0 0.0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 4.0 0.0 0.0 SA 0.0 0.0 13.3 0.0 4.5 9.1 0.6 0.0 In!t al 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Backf}ftD(50°lo),vehfln 1.0 D.0 0.0 0 A 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 6.2 0.3 2.0 D.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 29.6 0.0 0.0 39A 0.0 0.0 42.6 0.0 16,7 39.7 11.6 0.0 LnGrp LOS C A D A A D A B D B Appfcauh Vol,veil h 200 A 48 709 556 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 29.6 39.6 19.7 115 Approach LOS G rD B B Timer-Assigned Phs 2 3 4 7 l3 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 14.1 8.4 33.5 7.4 5.8 36.1 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 26.0 6.5 29,0 25.5 5.0 30.5 Max 0 Cleat Time(g_c+11).s 8.8 5.1 8.4 3.9 2.6 18.9 Green Ext Tome f p c),s 1.0 0.0 3,2 0.2 0.0 3.0 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 19.1' HChA nth LOS 0 N otes Unsignaiized De'16y fn? [EBR SBR(is excluded from calculalioas of the a;,ptAch delay and intetsect!ar7 delay, 5,00 Yrr- Bass;;°:c� Synchro 10 Report Page 18 I -.,M 6.11 T' VSC 202,1 AM VV 9: Rout€ 1 ' & Rayed Vistab 1° 122-il1 Intersection Int Delay.siveh 2.3 Movement W13L WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Gonligurations r t r f Traffic Vol,v&Vh 29 61 914 14 13 903 Future Vol,vehlh 20 61 914 t4 13 903 CenliicOng Peds.Or fl 0 a 0 0 0 Sign Control Slop Slap Free Free Free Free RT Channelized . YJeJd - y'lefd - Wane Storage Length fl 0 - 500 51}0 - Veh in Mediae Storage,# 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade.% fl - a - - 0 Paak Hour Faclar 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 MAvint Flow 32 66 993 15 14 982 Majcr"Oa mirlpr1 M,ajorl MajW Conflicting Flovu AJI 2003 993 0 0 993 0 Stage 1 m - - - Slage 2 1010 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 65.42 J.22 - - 4.12 - Critical t4dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.31$ - - 2.218 - Pol CW1 Marmver M 298 - - 696 - Stage 1 359 Stage 2 352 _ _ _ _ Platoon blocied,% - - Mau Cap-1 Maneuver 65 298 - 696 tAGv Cup-2 M;;neuvar 65 Stage 1 359 Stage 2 345 Approach WR N6 SB HCM Control Delay,s 47.5 0 0.1 HCM LOS E Mirror UneNaidr MMlvmt NffT NBRWBLnIWBLnZ Slat. SBT Capacity(veh?h) - - 65 299 696 - HGM Lane V.'C Rat#o - 0.485 0.222 0.02 - HGM Control Delay(s) - 104.2 M5 10.3 - HCtwf Lane LDS - F C S FILM 95th%file 0(veh) - - 1.9 0.8 0.1 5.00 pm Baseline Synchre 10 Report Page 19 Tin7ir(lS 2024 PM 1: Falaili Rd R0LI`r; 11 1 IE:77 * 21 -1, I -01 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL W8T WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configuratians �1 tt r tt e 1� ++ +t r Traffic Volume(vph) X0 997 503 227 695 61 227 283 268 55 313 107 Future Volume(vph; 2160 997 503 227 695 61 227 253 268 55 313 107 Turn Type ;'Tct NA Perm Peat NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prat NA Perm Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 5 2 1 6 Permitlad Phases 4 8 2 6 Detector Phase 7 4 4 3 a 8 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MinimumSplit('s) 9,5 30.5 38.5 9,5 38.5 38.5 9.5 42.542.5 9.5 42,5 42.5 Total Split(s) 19.9 45,0 45,0 1H 411 41.1 15.0 45.2 45,2 131.8 410 43.0 Total SPlit(%) 16.6% 37.5% 37.5% 13.3% 34.3% 34.3% 13.3% 37.7°7n 37.7% 11.547 35.8% 35.8% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 3.5 A l-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 to 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 41,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes lies Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max None Max Max None Ncne None None None None Act Effct Green(s) 12.4 41.0 41.0 10,8 39.4 39.4 10.6 22.5 22.5 7.9 17.3 17.3 Actuated grC Ratio 0.13 0.42 0.42 0.11 0.40 0.40 0.11 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.18 D.18 vie Ralio 0.62 0.69 0.59 0.62 0,51 0.09 0.62 0.36 0,48 U9 0.51 0.30 Control Delay 48.6 28.4 10.2 51.1 25.9 2.4 51.3 33.5 6.7 54.3 35,8 8.3 Queue Delay 0.0 4.0 G,0 0.0 6.0 0.0 D.0 0.0 4.0 L1.0 0,0 0.0 Total Delay 4B,U 28.4 10.2 51.1 25.9 2.4 51,3 33,5 6.7 54.3 38.8 8.3 LOS ED C E D C A D C A D D A App, cash Delay 26.2 303 29,5 33.7 Approeah LOS C 0 C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:98.1 Natural Cycle: 100 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum u c Ratio:0.69 Inteisectlan Signal Delay;28.7 Intersectlan LOS-C Intersection Capacity Utilization ss e% ICU Level of SeNce C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1:Palani Rd &Route 11 ID 102 1l,03 -W04 05 06 07 08 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 1 HCM kith Signalized Intersection SUn-trna{y 2024 PM W 1, Palani Rd & RoLite 11 * 11:12.2021 '# .w--- I -01 I'4layamefrt EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT VJBR NBL NET NBR SBL 'SBT SBR Lane Configurations �1 tf r M t� ft r tt r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 2Gil 997 503 227 695 61 227 283 268 55 013 107 Future Volume;wehih) 2K 997 �G3 227 695 61 227 283 268 55 313 107 Initial Q(0b),veto 0 0 C! 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.0c 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.00 Parking Elus.Ad} 1.00 1.00 1,a0 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04 Sat Row,veh1hin 1855 1856 1670 1870 1841 1870 1855 1870 1870 1870 1870 1 M Adj Ploy Rake,.vehlh 265 1017 0 232 709 0 232 283 0 56 319 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.98 0.98 US 0,98 0,98 0,98 198 0.98 0,98 0.98 0,93 0.98 Percent Heavy Veh,% 3 3 2 2 4 2 3 2 P 2 f 2 Cap,vehlh 356 1651 315 1594 315 673 76 499 Arrive On Green 0.10 0.47 CAD 0.09 0.46 9.00 U9 0.19 UQ 0.04 0.14 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 3428 3526 1595 3456 3497 1585 3428 3554 1585 1781 3554 1585 Grp Volume(v;.vehfh 265 1017 G 232 709 0 232 289 0 56 319 0 Grp Bat Flovv(s),veh!hiln 1714 1763 1585 1728 1749 1585 1714 1777 1585 1781 1777 1595 0 Serve{s-s),s 616 18.5 0.G 5.7 12.0 0.0 5_7 6.2 0.0 2.7 7.3 0,0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 6.5 18.6 0,0 5.7 12,0 0.0 5.7 6.2. 0.0 2.7 7.3 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.OG 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veWh 356 1651 315 1594 315 673 76 4 VJC Ratio(X) 0.74 0_62 174 0.44 0.74 0.43 0,74 0.64 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 611 1661 460 1594 456 1672 192 1582 1-10M Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,x 1.00 1.00 1 J10 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.0 1.00 Upstream Fiter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.170 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.DO 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 37,6 17.2 0-0 33.3 16.1 0.0 38.3 30.9 0,0 40.9 35.1 0,0 hor Delay(d2).slveh 3.1 1.7 0.0 3.4 0.9 0.0 3.6 0.4 0,0 12.8 1.4 0.0 In!r a1 0 Del ay(d3),srveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1) .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 2.8 7.3 0,0 2.5 4_6 0.0 2.5 2.6 0.0 1.4 3.2 0.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 40.7 18.9 0.0 41.7 17.0 0.0 41.8 31.4 0.0 53.7 36.5 10 LnGrp LOS D B D B D C D D Appfcauh Vol,veil h 1282 A 941 A 521 A 375 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 23.4 23.1 36.{ 39.0 Approach LOS C C D D Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 8.2 20.9 12.4 45.0 12.4 16.6 13.5 43.9 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 9.3 403 11.E 40.5 11.5 38.5 15A 36.6 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 4.7 8.2 7.7 20,6 7.7 9.3 B.5 14.0 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 2.0 0.3 711 0.3 2.2 0.5 4.9 tntefsection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 27.a HChA nth LOS C; N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exdWed frorn cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in tersectioo delay. 5,00 Yrr- Bnsc;;,°:c� Synchro 10 Reporl Page 3 Timings 2024 PM W 2: Henry St & Routo 11 1V12.202'I --,, --* t 4 Large Group EBL EBT EBR VVBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NOR SOL WIF Lane Configuratians �1 tt Or )I tt r 1 0 4T Traffic Volume(vph) 190 798 231 82 655 360 126 318 39 401 342 Future Volume(vph) 190 798 291 82 655 360 126 318 39 401 342 Turn Type Prat NA Perm Prot NA Perm Will NA Perm SO A NA Protecled Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Permitlad Phases 4 8 2. Di3tectad Phase 7 4 4 3 6 a 2 2 2 6 n Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#(s) 9.5 30.5 30.5 9,5 30.5 30.5 35.5 35.5 35,5 35,5 35,5 Total Split(s) 14.0 37.0 37,G 9,5 32,5 3f,5 37.5 37,5 37,5 36.0 36-,0 Total SPlit(%) 11.711/0 30.8% 30.8°et 7.9% 27.1% 27,1% 31.3% 31.3% 31.3% 30.0%, 30.0% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tirne(s} 1.0 1.0 1.{t to 1.0 11,0 1.0 1.G 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.G 4,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 LeadLag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? 'Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Max Max None Max Max None Ncne None Nano Nano Act Effct Green(s) 9.3 34.9 34.9 11 28.4 28.4 17,3 17.3 17.3 26.2 26.2 Actuated grC Ratio 0.09 0.35 D.35 0,05 029 0.29 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.26 0.26 vie Ratio 0,62 0.66 a40 0.48 0,67 0.52 0.42 0,57 0.12 0.75 9.72 Control Delay 55.4 33.3 5.4 59,3 37.6 6,8 41.8 41.8 0.7 46.9 36,3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 o.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 55.4 33.3 5.4 59,3 37.6 6.5 41,8 41,$ 0,7 46.9 36.3 LCS E C A E D A 0 D A D D App, cauh Delay 30.3 29A 38.5 39,9 Approach LOS C C 1) 0 Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih: 124 Actuated Cycle Length:99.5 Natural Cyde: 115 Control Type;Semi Act-Uncoord Nlaximum vlc Ratio:0.75 Inteiseclion Signal Delay: 33,3 Intersectlan LOS:C Intersection iCapaci#y Utilization 116% ICU Level of SeNce D Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2:Henry St &RaIUW 11 'c ts3� fo o3 04 07 Fr6 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page 4 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2024 PM W 2. Henry St & Route 11 11!12.2021 '# - t I'41oamerrt EEL EBT EtBR 'W6L WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBG W SBR Lane Configurations �1 tt r )I tt 1* 1 0 04 Traffic Volume(vph) 190 798 291 a2 655 360 126 318 39 401 342 190 Future Volume(vph) 190 798 291 82 655 360 126 318 39 401 342 190 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1 Wl 1900 1 W 1904 1900 19M 1900 1900 19DO 1900 1800 1900 Total Lost lima(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 C5 Lana Ubl. Facer 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.97 4.95 1.OU, Q.91 0.91 1.00 0.91 0.91 Frpb,ped;bikes 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.90 0,98 1.00 -199 Flpb,pedfbikes 1M 1.00 1.Do 1100 1100 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.0 Frt I M 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0,85 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.95 Flt Protected 0.95 1,00 1.DO 0,95 1,00 1.00 0.95 1,00 1.G0 0,95 0,99 Said, Flaw(p;otf 3335 3539 1583 3433 3471 1561 1595 3382 1537 1510 3195 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 9.95 1.00 1 M 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.99 Setd, Flow(Gerrl1f 3335 3539 15K 3433 3471 1561 1.595 33B2 1537 1510 3195 Peal[-hour IaCtor,PH'F 0.98 0-98 D.98 9.98 0.98 0M 0.98 0.98 D.98 0.98 0.98 i7.98 Adj. Flow(vph) 1R4 814 297 84 668 367 129 324 40 409 349 144 RTOR Reductknr (vph) 0 0 194 0 0 259 0 0 33 0 38 0 Lane Group Flow(vph) 194 814 103 84 f68 We 116 337 7 319 595 0 Confl,Peels.(Nhr} 1 1 4 7 7 4 Confl. Bikes(A'hr) 1 1 1 Heavy Vehicles(°e 5% 21% 2% 2% 4% 2% 311/3 2% 311t10 2% 2% 2% Turn Type Prat NA Perry Prct NA Perri spilt NA Perm SPA NA Protected Phases 7 4 3 8 2 2 6 6 Pgrmitlad Phases 4 8 2 Actuated Green,G (s) 9.3 34.8 34.9 3.9 29.5 29.5 17.4 17.4 17.4 26.2 26.2' Effective Green, g(s) 9.3 34.9 34.9 3.9 29.5 29.5 17.4 17A 17.4 26-2 26.2 Actuated g C Ratio 0.09 0.35 0.35 9.04 0,29 0.29 0-17 0.17 0,17 0,26 0.26 Clearance Time(s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vehde Extension(_) 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.9 M 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap(vph) 308 1230 550 123 1019 458 276 586 266 420 833 v+s Ratio Prot d7.06 c4.23 0,02 OA9 0.07 cO.10 c020 0.19 Vs Ratio Perm 0.07 0.07 0.00 v.'c Ratio 0.63 13_66 0.19 9.63 0.66 0,24 0.42 0.58 0,03 0.76 0.71 Uniform DF-4ay, d1 43.9 27.7 22.0 47.5 31.0 26,9 37.0 38.1 34,5 34.2 33.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.a0 1.00 1M 1,00 1.00 1.00 UfO 1.00 1.09 Inc'ernental Delay,d2 4,0 2.8 0.8 9.4 3.3 1.2 1'0 1A 0.0 7.7 2.9 Delay(s) 47A 30.6 216 56.9 AA 28.1 38.0 39.5 34.5 41.9 36,6 Level of Service D C C E" C C D D C D D Appfuach Delay(.sl 31.6 34.0 38.7 38A Approach LA'S C C D D tntatsection Summary HDA 2000 Control Delay 34.9 HCM M Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.69 Actuated Cycle Length(s) 100.4 Sum of Bost erne tsj 18.0 Intemecflon Capacity Utiliaatim 73.6% ICU Level of Service D Analysts Period(miry) 15 c CrOical Lane Croup 5.00 pm BasA-fine Synchro 10 Report Page 5 FICIVI 6th TWSC 2024 PM W I RaUtO 11 & Hualaiai Rd (North) 1 12.2021 Intersection h t Fly)' s•veh 1.4 10lovemenI EEL EBR NBL N3T SBT SBR LdnC-Gonfiiguralions r t t r Traffic Vol,v&Vh 10 85 86 1105 1215 17 Future Vol,vehlh U 85 86 1105 121,E 17 CcniticOng Peds,Or 9 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - None - YWd Storage Lcngih 140 0 650 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% 0 - - 0 0 Peak Hour Faclor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 4 2 6 MAvint Flow 10 88 89 1139 1253 18 Major-MJ)ira Mirlar2 Major1 majol Conflicting Flovu AJI 257� 1253 0 - 0 Stage 1 1253 - - - Stage 2 1317 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.42 4.12 -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 _ 2.218 Poo CW1 Maneuver 29 0 555 - Stage 1 269 0 - - 5lage 2 254 0 - Platoon bluGied,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 24 - 555 - - tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 24 - Stage 1 228 Stage 2 2H Approach m N8 HCM Control Delay,s 239.9 0.9 U HCM LOS F Minor UneNaidr Mvmt NBL NBT EBLrr1 EBLn2 'SST SBR Capacity(veh?h) 566 - 24 HGM Lane V.'C Rath 0.16 - 0.43 - - - MGM Contrd Delay(s) 12,7 - 239.9 0 HGNI Lane LDS B - F A - - H M 95th%file 0(veh) DA - 1.3 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 7 HCM 6th TWSC 2024 PM 1N 4: Route 11 & Hualalai Rd (South) 1111212021 Inlerseclion Inf 'e.Ny s.v9h l.� movemem Y4'BL WBI, NBT NBR SBL SBT LdnC-Gonfigurations r 1 f Traffic Vol,v&Vh 14 71 1126 4 61 1241 Future Vol,vehlh 14 71 1126 4 61 1241 ConiticOng Peds,Or 0 a 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Step Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - Free - 'Yl dd - None Storage Langlh fl 0 - - 0 - Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - a - - 0 Grade.% fl - 0 - 0 Peak Hour Faclor 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, % 7 2 3 2 8 2 PAvinl Flow 14 73 1181 4 63 1279 Mejor"Oa Minorl Majw mojol Conflicting Flovu AJI 2568 - 0 0 1161 0 Stage 1 1163. - - - - Stage 2 1405 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6A7 - - 4.18 Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.47 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.47 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3,568 _ _ _ 2.272 _ Poo Cap-1 Ma aver 28 0 - - 581 Stage 1 291 0 - - Slage 2 221 a _ _ _ Platoon bluGied,% - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 25 - - - 581 tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 25 - - Stage 1 201 Slage 2 197 Approach m NO HGM Control Delay,s 269.4 a 0.6 HCM LOS F MhorLarawMaiiarMvmt NBT NBRWBLnIWBLn2 SK SBT Capacity(veh?h) - - 25 - 581 HGM Lane V.'C Rol#o - - t1.577 - 0.108 - MGM Control Delay(s) - 263.4 0 11,9 - HCtwf Lane LDS - IF A B HCM 95th%file 0(veh) - 1.8 0A - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 8 Tin7ir(1,b 2024 PM W :n: Rc Llte} 1 & Puapuaarlui St 1 12;2021 , *--- t .1 Large Group EBL EBT EBR WBL VVBT WBR NBL NBT NOR SOL #T SBR Lane CDnfiguratians + r t r V + + r Traffic Volume(vph) 199 23 115 51 23 104 105 814 60 142 1016 100 Future Volume(vph) 199 23 116 51 23 104 105 810 60 142 1016 100 Turn Type Perm NA Perm. Perm NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Protecled Phases 4 8 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 a 8 2 2 6 6 Deterctad Phase 4 4 4 b $ 8 5 2 2 1 n 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Minimum Spli#( ) 22.5 22.5 22,5 2Z5 22.5 22.5 9.5 22.5 22,5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 9.5 57.9 57,9 9.6 58,0 58,0 Total SPlit(%) 25.0% 25.D% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 10.6114 64.3°1/n 64.3% 10.7% 64.4% 64.4% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 3.5 3.5 All-Red Tim(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 160 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 O.a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time(s} 4.5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 4,5 4,5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes 'Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Norse None None None None Nare Max Max Nane Max Max Aat Eftct Green(s) 16,6 16.6 16.E 16,6 16.6 16.6 55A 58.4 53.4 58.6 53.5 53.5 Actuated grC Ratio 0.19 0.19 0,1e3 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.66 0.60 0.60 0.66 0.60 0,60 vie Ratio 0,84 0,07 0.32 0,21 0,07 0.29 0.62 0.75 0,07 0.48 0.93 0.11 Control Delay 62.6 30.0 8.3 32.4 30.0 8.6 26.7 18.6 1.8 10.0 32.6 1.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 G,0 6.0 6.0 0.0 o.0 0.4 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 62.6 30.0 8.3 32.4 30.0 8.5 25.7 18,6 1,8 10_0 32.5 1.9 LOS E C A C C A C B A A C A App, cauh Delay 41.7 183 18.5 27.5 Approach LOS D B B C Intersection Summary Cycle Lenglih:90 Actuated Cycle Length:88.6 Natural Cyde:90 Control TyDe:Semi Act-Llncoord Nlaximum We Ratio:0,93 Inteisecllan Signal Delay 25.5 Intersectlan LOS-C Intersection iCapacity Utilization 88,21A ICU Level of Service P Analysis Period(min) 15 S life and Phases:} 5:Route 11 &Pua uaanui St 01 1€ Z 05 7 06 0;3 5:00 pm Baseline Synchro 10 Report Page*9 H M 6til Signalized Intersection Surnmary 2024 PM VV 5; Route 11 & Puapuaanui St 11!12.202'I Nbyement EBB. LBX EBR '4VBL VVBT VVBR NBL NBT 14BR SBL SBT SBiR Lane Configurations I t iif I t t r Traffic Volume(vehfh) 199 23 116 51 23 104 105 610 60 142 1016 100 Future Volume{vehih) 199 23 116 51 23 104 105 810 60 142 1016 100 initial Q(02b),veal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 Peel-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1,00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Elus.Ad} I.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 A0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zane On Approach No No NO No 04$at Row,veh1hin 1870 1870 1670 1870 1$70 1626 1870 1856 1641 1870 1870 187� Adj Ploy Rate,.vehlh 216 25 0 53 25 0 114 835 0 146 1047 Ci Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0,97 0,92 0,97 0.92 0.97 0,97 0.97 0,97 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh,°!c 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 ? 4 2 £ 2 Cap,vehlh 326 350 326 350 234 1122 365 1135 Arrive On Green 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.19 0.19 •O.00 0.05 0.50 100 Q.06 0.61 0.00 Sat Flow,veh h 13W 1870 1595 1386 1870 1547 1781 1856 1560 1781 1670 1585 Grp Volume(,.,,.vehfh 216 25 G 53 25 0 114 835 0 146 1047 0 Grp Sat F1cvu(s),veh!h.1n 13BG 1870 1585 1386 1870 1547 1781 1856 1560 1781 1870 1595 0 Serve{s-s),s 13.4 1.0 D.G 2.9 1.0 0.0 2.1 28.5 U-0 2.7 44.1 0,0 Cycle 0 dear(g_c),s 14.4 1.0 0.0 19 1,0 0.0 2.1 28.5 0.0 2.7 44,1 10 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.D0 1.00 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 Lai1e Grp Cap(c},veh h 326 350 326 350 234 1122 365 1135 VJC Ratio(X) 0.66 0.07 0.16 0.07 0,49 0.74 0,40 0.92 Avail Cap(c_a),vWh 349 381 349 381 240 1122 370 1135 HCM Platuon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1,00 1,00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1,00 0.00 1.00 1.00 O.DO 1.00 1.00 0.f➢0 Uniform Delay(d),slueh 35.5 29.8 0_0 31,2 29.6 0.0 19.3 12.5 U 11.5 15,5 0.0 hor Decay(d2).siveh 41 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.6 4,5 0,0 0.7 13.6 0.0 In!t at 0 Del ay(d3),siveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 We Bacir=(54°l9),vehfln 4.8 0A 0.0 1.0 0.4 0.0 1,5 11.7 0.0 1.0 20.4 0.0 Unsig, Movement Delay,slveh LnGrp Delay{d),slveh 39.8 29.6 0.0 31A 29.6 0.0 20.9 17.0 0.0 12.2 29.1 0.0 LnGrp LOS D C C C C B B C Approach Vol,veil h 241 A 78 A 94R A 1193 A Approach Delay,s.,veh 38.7 30.8 17.5 27.0 Approach LOS D C B C Timer-Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 B Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc),s 9.4 57.9 21.0 9.2 58.1 21.0 Change Period(Y*Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Man Green Salting(Gmax},s 5.1 53A 18.0 5.0 53.5 1$.0 Max 0 Clear Time(9_c+i1).s 4.7 30.5 16.4 44.1 46.1 5.9 Green Ext Tome(pc),s 0.0 6.7 0.1 0.0 4.5 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th.Ctrl Delay 21.L HChA nth LOS C; N otes Unsignaiized De716Y fn? [k,BR, EBR,OiBR,SBR}is exdWed from cal eulatrans of the approa01 delay and in terseIAOI)delay. 5,00 Pr- Bnsc:;e°:c� Synchro 10 Report Phgh 11 FICIV1 6th TWSC 2024 PM W 6. ROUtO 11 & Kuakim Stroot 1 12.2021 Intersection h t FlyY s.veh 10lovemenI EEL EBR NBL N3T SBT SBR LdnC-Gonfiiguralions r t + r Traffic Vol,v&Vh 0 325 340 979 1120 0 Future Vol,vehlh 0 325 340 979 1120 0 ConllicOng Peds,Or 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channe!Ized - Free - None - YWd Storage Lcnglh 160 0 630 - - 700 Veh in Median Storage,# 0 - - 0 4 Grade.% C - - 0 0 - Peaak Hour Faclar 98 96 98 98 98 98 Heavy Vehicles, % 5 2 2 3 2 6 MAvint Flow 0 332 347 999 1143 0 majorlKha 61111 MOM Mai Conllicbng Flaw AJI 2836 1143 0 - 0 Stage 1 1143 - - - - Stage 2 1893 - - - - - Crltical Hdwy 6.48 4.12 - -Critical 14dwy Stg 1 5.48 - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.0 - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.572 - 2.218 - - - Pol CW1 Mammar 18 0 611 - Stage 1 296 0 - - 5lage 2 158 0 Platoon bluGied, 'k - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 8 - 511 - - tAGv Cup-2 Maneuvar 8 - - - - Stage 1 128 Stage 2 158 Approach m N6 so HGM Control Delay,s 0 4.7 0 HCM LOS A mhorLariieNaidrMvmt NBL NBTEBLrr1 EBLn2 'SST SBR Capacity(veh?h) 611 - HGM Lane V.'C Ratio 0,568 - - - - MGM Contrd Delay(s) 18.3 - 0 0 HGNI Lane LDS C - A A - - H M 95th%file 0(veh) 3.6 - - 5.00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Page 12 Tin7ir4l,b 2024 PM (; Rc �lte} 1 -mks trr ! lL kc� S`r et 1 12.7721 Large Group iEBL EBT WBL WET NBL NBT- NW S6L SBT SBR Lane Configuratians 1 1 T4 + r t Traffic Volume(vph) 148 30 52 39 37 917 64 202 1023 190 Future Volume(vph) 148 30 52 39 37 917 64 202 1023 190 Turn Type Split NA Split NA pm+pt NA Perm pm4pt PEA Perm Protecled Phases 4 4 8 a 5 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 2 2 5 6 Detected Phase 4 4 6 a 5 2 2 1 6 6 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5,G 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MinimumSplit('s) 22.5 22.5 22,5 2Z5 9.5 22.5 22_5 9.5 22,5 22.5 Total Split(8) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22,5 9,5 78.0 78.0 17,0 85,5 85.5 Total Split(%) 16.15 16.1% 16.1% 16.1% 6.89!4 55.7% 55.7% 12.1% 61.1% 61.1% Yellow Time(s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 15 3.5 A l-Red Time(s} 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 110 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Tim(s} 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,6 4,5 4.5 4.5 4,5 4,5 4.5 Lead,Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optirnize? Yes Y Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None Max PAax None Max Max Act Effut Green(s) 15.7 15.7 14,0 14,0 78:8 73.7 73.7 9€1.8 83.4 83.4 Actuated grC Ratio 0.12 0.12 a.10 9.10 0.59 0.55 0.55 H8 0,62 0.62 rile Ratio 0.76 0.34 0.35 0.87 0,33 0.94 0.07 0.37 0.92 0.19 Control Delay 81.3 30.0 61.3 50.1 17,5 47.0 0.3 91.2 38,5 5.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total af�lay $1,3 3D.0 61.3 50,1 17.5 47.0 4.3 91.2 3a,5 5.5 LOS F C E D E ID A F D A App, cauh Delay 63.0 52.3 43.0 41.6 Approach LOS F D 0} C Inters on Summary Cycle Length:14Q Actuated Cycle Length: 134 Natural Cycle: 140 Control Type;,Actuated-Uncoordinaled Maximum vac Ratio:0.97 Inteisectlan Signal Nlay:44.9 Intersection LOS.Q Inter lion C acity Utilization 98.6% ICU Level of Service F Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 7:Route 11 u Laka Street )Lake Street 5:00 pm Baseline Synch re 10 Report Pagh 13