HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD Background Report PL-USE-2024-000028 1
BRenegadeTowersLLCKalapanaUse.crk.9.25.24
COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT RENEGADE TOWERS LLC
USE PERMIT APPLICATION (PL-USE-2024-000028)
RENEGADE TOWERS LLC is requesting a Use Permit to allow the establishment of a multi-
carrier telecommunication facility with a 150-foot-tall monopole tower and related equipment
and improvements within a 15,423 square foot portion of a larger 32.721-acre parcel. The subject
property is located at 12-4375 Pāhoa Kalapana Road, approximately 1,050 feet north of its
intersection with Old Kalapana Road, Kīkala-Kēōkea Homesteads, Puna, Hawai‘i, TMK:
(3) 1-2-007:034 (por.).
APPLICANT’S REQUEST
1. Request: Renegade Towers LLC is seeking a Use Permit to construct a 150-foot-tall
steel monopole tower with 24 panel antennas and associated equipment and
improvements on a 15,423-square-foot section of a larger 32.721-acre parcel. The facility
will include a 2,880-square-foot (36’x80’) equipment area and a 12,423-square-foot
access road. To blend with the surrounding environment, the monopole tower will be
painted to match the tall trees along the road and designed to accommodate the co-
location of multiple carriers. In addition to the monopole, the project will include ground-
level facilities such as outdoor equipment cabinets, a utility H-frame, internal systems
(including an air conditioner), and a diesel-powered emergency generator, all enclosed
within a 6-foot-tall chain link security fence with locked gates. The tower will be
constructed of structural galvanized steel and built to withstand a 137-mph wind load.
The proposed facility would be unmanned, and maintenance and repair activities will be
performed by a technician on a periodic basis. The applicant will comply with all Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rules.
Additionally, the monopole will not interfere with the County’s public safety radio
system.
2. Reason for the Request: In 2019, the Windward Planning Commission granted Verizon
Wireless a Use Permit (USE-19-00079) to construct a tower aimed at improving mobile
2
coverage in the Kalapana Sea View Subdivision, contingent upon securing legal access
from Highway 130. However, Verizon encountered challenges using a paper road, and
the County did not authorize improvements. As a result, Verizon began discussions with
the Department of Transportation to obtain direct access from Highway 130. Due to the
high cost and extended timeline associated with this option, Verizon requested the permit
be revoked and the Planning Director revoked the permit in a letter dated October 21,
2024. Currently, at the request of County Civil Defense, Verizon Wireless and AT&T
have deployed temporary Cell on Wheels (COWs) near the Star of the Sea Painted
Church to provide cell coverage for emergency services related to a nearby lava viewing
site. Although the lava viewing area has since closed, the COWs remain in place to meet
ongoing service needs. Once the proposed permanent tower is built and reliable service is
established for residents and emergency personnel, these temporary COW sites will be
decommissioned.
3. Landowner: Renegade Towers, LLC.
4. Supportive Information: The applicant has submitted the attached in support of the
request (Planning Department Exhibit 1 –Use Permit Application accepted on
September 9, 2024).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
5. Telecommunications Act of 1996: The Telecommunications Act of 1996, Section 704,
which amended portions of the 1934 Act, limits the state or local authorities from
regulating the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless service
facilities on the basis of environmental effects of radio frequency emissions, as long as
such facilities/towers comply with the FCC’s regulations concerning such emissions.
The applicant will adhere to FCC guidelines.
6. Co-Location: The applicant has designed the proposed monopole to accommodate at
least two (2) other wireless service providers. Verizon Wireless has committed to be the
anchor tenant with the other carriers to follow sometime in the future. The Applicant will
make this tower available to any carrier licensed in this market by the FCC.
STATE AND COUNTY PLANS
7. State Land Use District: Agricultural.
3
8. General Plan LUPAG MAP: The project site is in an area designated Extensive
Agriculture.
9. County Zoning: Agricultural 3-acre (A-3a).
10. Puna Community Development Plan (CDP): The Puna CDP was adopted by the
Hawai‘i County Council, Ordinance 08 116, on September 10, 2008. Under Public
Safety and Sanitation Services in the plan, Action 3.4.3(e) states “Encourage
enhancement of cell phone service to expand coverage to more remote areas.”
11. Special Management Area: The Special Management Area is a part of the Coastal
Zone Management Program and regulated by the County. The property is not located
within the Special Management Area and is approximately 1.5 miles from the nearest
coastline.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA
12. Description of Property: The subject 32.721-acre property is irregularly shaped,
heavily forested, and vacant of any buildings and improvements, but the archaeological
field inspection and aerial photographs indicate several abandoned vehicles. The
proposed project site is situated on the makai (south) side of the parcel near the eastern
border.
13. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses: Most of the surrounding properties are similarly
zoned A-3a, with some A-1a and Forest Reserve (FR) zoning in the vicinity. Land uses
consist of scattered dwellings, agricultural uses and vacant land. The closest dwelling to
the proposed project area is approximately 670 feet to the west, across Pāhoa Kalapana
Road.
14. Flood Zone: The subject property is in an area designated as Zone X on the Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Zone X is an area determined to be an area of minimal flood hazard.
15. Flora and Fauna Resources: The application included a document entitled; “Natural
Resources Assessment” dated June 10, 2024, conducted by Ace Environmental LLC. The
assessment found that the surveyed area is dominated by non-native vegetation, and its
biological resources have been significantly altered due to human activities and the
introduction of invasive species. No threatened, endangered, or sensitive species were
observed at the site, and no critical habitats were identified. Recommendations for
4
protecting potential rare species include measures for the Hawaiian Hawk and Hawaiian
Hoary Bat, such as pre-construction surveys and restrictions on clearing vegetation
during sensitive periods to avoid disrupting these species. Additionally, precautions to
minimize harm to nocturnally flying seabirds are advised, including proper lighting
management to prevent disorientation and collisions. The area does not contain habitat
for species such as the nēnē or Blackburn’s Sphinx Moth, and no significant impacts to
native vegetation like ʻōhiʻa lehua trees are expected, though care should be taken to
prevent the spread of Rapid ʻŌhiʻa Death (ROD). The project’s construction should
follow best practices for communication tower siting and design to minimize ecological
impacts, adhering to guidelines established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
16. Archaeological/Historic/Cultural Resources: The application included a document
entitled “Cultural Resources Review and Field Inspection” dated June 14, 2024,
conducted by Ace Environmental LLC, which found that there would be no impacts on
historic or cultural resources caused by the proposed project. In a letter dated August 31,
2023, the Department of Land and Natural Resources-State Historic Preservation
Division (SHPD) made a determination of, “No historic properties affected” from the
proposed project.
17. Public Access: There is no known public access to the mountains or the shoreline that
runs through the proposed building site. However, there is an existing trail approximately
1,000 feet from the project site which will not be affected by the proposed project. The
Cultural Resources Review and Field Inspection, done by ACE Environmental LLC,
identifies the trail. SHPD reviewed this document and determined that this is not a
historic trail.
18. Noise/Air/Visual Impacts: According to the applicant, the only source of emitted noise
may be from an air conditioner necessary to maintain the correct temperature and
humidity in the equipment cabinets and a generator to be operated during emergencies
and routine maintenance. The air emissions will meet federal guidelines. The existing
environment surrounding the subject property is partially developed, with overhead
utility lines and poles. According to the applicant, the property is densely forested with
very tall trees that will mask much of the view of the lower part of the tower, the tower
will be painted to blend with the surrounding area, and no lighting is proposed for the
5
tower. The applicant provided a photo simulation of the proposed site from four points
along the highway looking makai. The applicant notes that a ‘monopine’ tower design
has not been considered because the branches on a 150’ monopine are very heavy,
making it difficult to comply with the County’s structural/wind requirements without
having to design a massive pole and foundation.
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES
19. Roadway Access: Access to the property will be via an existing 480-foot-long,
approximately 16-foot-wide compacted dirt access road from Pāhoa Kalapana Road. The
access road is gated near Pāhoa Kalapana Road and will be used for construction traffic
and for periodic equipment/tower maintenance.
20. Water: Water is not required for the proposed use.
21. Wastewater: This use will not generate wastewater.
22. Utilities: Electrical and telephone services are available to the site.
23. Police/Fire Services: The nearest Police and Fire facilities are located in nearby Pāhoa
town.
AGENCY COMMENTS
24. State of Hawaii Department of Health: (PD Exhibit 2 – September 26, 2024 Memo).
25. Police Department: (PD Exhibit 3 – September 27, 2024 Letter).
AGENCY - NO RESPONSE
26. Department of Public Works – Engineering, Civil Defense, Fire Department, Department
of Land and Natural Resources.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
27. The Planning Department has not received any comments from the public since the
application was submitted.
PROPERTY:
TMK (3) 1-2-007:034
ADDRESS: 12-4375 Pahoa Kalapana Road, Pahoa, HI 96778
AREA: 15,423 s.f on 32.7210 acres
APPLICANT: RENEGADE TOWERS LLC
OWNER: RENEGADE TOWERS LLC
AGENT: DANETTE MARTIN, (808) 895-3569
USE PERMIT
1 | P a g e
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 3
WRITTEN STATEMENT .................................................................................................................................. 3
1. DETAILED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED USE, A STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES AND
REASONS FOR THE REQUEST ................................................................................................................ 3
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL TO PRECISELY LOCATE THE
PROPERTY. DESCRIBE EXISTING USES, STRUCTURES AND TOPOGRAPHY ........................................... 6
3. STATE/COUNTY PLANS AFFECTING THE SUBJECT REQUEST: STATE LAND USE BOUNDARY
DESIGNATION, ZONING, SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANS .. 6
4. SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES ........................................................................................ 7
5. FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM) DESIGNATION ..................................................................... 7
6. FLORAL AND FAUNA RESOURCES .................................................................................................... 7
7. DESCRIPTION OF ACCESS(S) IN THE AREA ........................................................................................ 7
8. TRAFFIC IMPACTS ............................................................................................................................. 7
9. AVAILABILITY OF UTILITIES: WATER, TELEPHONE, ELECTRICITY, SEWAGE DISPOSAL .................... 8
10. A. WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE REQUEST MEETS WITH THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS 8
B. THE GRANTING OF THE PROPOSED USE SHALL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE
PUBLIC WELFARE NOR CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE COMMUNITY’S
CHARACTER OR TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES .......................................................................... 11
C. THE GRANTING OF THE PROPOSED USE SHALL NOT UNREASONABLY BURDEN PUBLIC
AGENCIES TO PROVIDE ROADS AND STREETS, SEWERS, WATER, DRAINAGE, SCHOOL
IMPROVEMENTS, POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION AND OTHER RELATED INFRASTUCTURE ........ 12
TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS ATTACHMENT TO USE PERMIT
1. What is your schematic plan for tower development on the Big Island? Provide a map and
written description of these sites. Justify how this particular subject site plays an integral part in
this overall plan .............................................................................................................................. 13
2. Building plans for the tower, certified by a structural engineer licensed in the State of Hawaii,
verifying that the tower, together with initial antennas and other equipment proposed to be
installed thereon for co-location, are structurally sound and wind resistant ................................ 13
3. A design plan for the tower and appurtenant structures, including discussion on tower
selection and antennas, visual impacts, color, lighting, landscaping and safety ........................... 13
2 | P a g e
4. A statement from the applicant that the request complies with the Federal Aviation
Administration that the application has not been found to be a hazard to air navigation ........... 14
5. A statement from the applicant that the request complies with the regulations of the Federal
Communications Commission, including requirements on radio frequency emissions, or a
statement that no such compliance is necessary ........................................................................... 14
6. A statement from the applicant that the proposed use will not interfere with the County of
Hawaii public safety radio system .................................................................................................. 14
7. A statement from the applicant that space on the tower for co-location of antennas or
attachments will be made available to other providers, if this can be done without substantial
interference to the applicant's use of the tower. If you are an infrastructure company, a
commitment from a minimum of two service providers shall be identified in the application .... 14
8. A statement from the applicant that diligent, but unsuccessful efforts to install or colocate the
applicant's telecommunication antennas on existing towers or feasible antenna support
structures have been made. Identify those sites that you have investigated and explain how
those sites are inadequate and how the site selected is the least obtrusive ................................. 15
9. Provide justification for the height of the proposed tower by including propagation maps for
the coverage area at proposed height and at a lower height if the proposed tower is more than
100-feet tall. If the site involves increasing the height of an existing tower, provide propagation
maps to show analysis of signal quality at the existing and proposed height ................................ 15
10. Have you met with adjacent landowners and/or community regarding the development?
Provide information regarding those meetings .............................................................................. 15
SCHEMATIC PLAN ...................................................................................................................................... 17
FCC CONSUMER FACTS – HUMAN EXPOSURE TO RADIO FREQUENCY FIELDS ......................................... 21
PHOTO SIMULATIONS ................................................................................................................................ 23
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER LETTER ....................................................................................................... 29
FAA NOTICE CRITERIA CLEARANCE ............................................................................................................ 31
SHPO LETTER ............................................................................................................................................... 32
VERIZON’S REQUEST TO CANCEL USE PERMIT .......................................................................................... 34
3 | P a g e
"This is a broadband-related permit issued pursuant to section 46-89, Hawaii Revised Statutes."
INTRODUCTION
The Applicant, Renegade Towers LLC ("Renegade Towers) is requesting a Use Permit to allow the
development of an unoccupied Multi-Carrier Telecommunications Facility. The proposed Telecommunication
Facility consists of 2,880 s.f. equipment space and 12,543 s.f. existing access road on 32.7210 acres. The
total area for this requested use is 15,423 s.f. The Applicant is proposing a 150' monopole with equipment
for its anchor tenant Verizon Wireless which includes equipment cabinets, utility h-frame and diesel
emergency generator. The facility will be completely enclosed by a 6’ fence in the County’s Agriculture 1-acre
zone district (“the Project”).
Renegade Towers owns, operates and develops towers specifically for the wireless community.
Renegade Towers has principles and dedicated consultants in Hawaii, Oregon, California and Nevada.
WRITTEN STATEMENT
1. DETAILED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED USE, A STATEMENT OF
OBJECTIVES AND REASONS FOR THE REQUEST, INCLUDING HOURS OF OPERATION
AND NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES/CLIENTELE.
The Applicant proposes an unoccupied Multi-Carrier Telecommunication Facility on these 32,7210 acres
of land at 12-4375 Pahoa Kalapana Road, Pahoa, Hawaii 96778. TMK (3) 1-2-007:034 in the County’s
Agriculture 3-acre zone district (“the Facility”). The proposed Facility is 36’ x 80’ or 2,880 s.f. with an
access road 16’ wide and approximately 12,543 s.f. The proposed will occupy a total of 15,423 s.f. The
remainder of the property will be left vacant with its current landscape to mitigate any aesthetic concerns.
The remainder of the property might be used for agricultural purposes sometime in the distant future.
The objective is to improve the existing cell phone coverage surrounding the tower location, along Pahoa
Kalapana Road.
The subject property is more than 32 acres located east of Pahoa-Kalapana Road, between mile maker 17
and 18, and is zoned A-3A. The Hawaii County's zoning code permits telecommunications in the A-20
zoned district if a Use Permit is obtained for such use.
The Applicant proposes the use of a 150’ monopole painted to blend with the surrounding area. The
Applicant is proposing to paint the monopole a color to blend with the tall trees fronting the road. Dunn-
Edwards Shaker Gray (DE6231) is used in the photo simulations attached. The property is densely
forested with very tall trees that will mask much of the view of the lower part of the tower. A monopine
has not been considered because the branches on a 150’ monopine are very heavy, making it difficult to
comply with the County’s structural/wind requirements without having to design a massive pole and
foundation. It should be noted that several monopoles have been previously approved in more visible
areas, for example the closest tower to the proposed site on TMK (3) 1-3-36-41 approved is a 150’
monopole, not a monopine.
4 | P a g e
The Project will meet the minimum setback requirements of 30 feet for a freestanding pole, will
be designed to meet the 2018 International Building Code, adopted by the County of Hawaii, and will
have a hard survivability for sustained winds of one hundred miles per hour in accordance with Section
25-4-12, Hawaii County Code.
The anticipated noise emitted from this Project will be limited to the internal air conditioner
necessary to maintain the correct temperature and humidity in the equipment cabinets and an emergency
generator. The noise output of the air condition unit is substantially less than any number of permitted
uses in the zone, such as generators, farm equipment, vehicles and farm animals.
The Project is designed to accommodate multiple carriers, consistent with the Hawaii County Planning
Department policies, to avoid a proliferation of towers in the community.
Verizon Wireless has committed to be the anchor tenant with the other carriers to follow sometime in the
future.
Verizon Wireless applied for a Use Permit in 2019 (USE-19-00079) for a tower to provide similar
coverage to this area. The Use Permit’s approval was conditioned upon proving legal access from
Highway 130. There is a paper road located behind the parcel, but the County would not authorize the
improvement of the road. Verizon then worked with the Department of Transportation to obtain access
directly from Highway 130. The DOT process is long with an expected cost of more than $100,000 just
for the entitlement, plus the construction costs. Please see Page 32 - letter from Verizon Wireless
requesting the cancellation of USE-19-00079.
There is little to no coverage in or around the Kalapana Sea View Subdivision in Puna. Verizon Wireless
and AT&T have operated temporary Cell on Wheels (“COWs”) next to the Star of the Sea Painted
Church across from the Noni Factory. The temporary site was placed there at the request of Civil
Defense to provide service near the lava view area. The antennas only provide a small footprint of
coverage. Additionally, fiber optics are not available to this area and there is not a clear microwave path
to bring it to the location. The carriers only received permission to operate until the viewing area was
closed. The viewing area has closed, but authorities have not forced the removal of the temporary site
because of the need for service in the area. Upon construction of the proposed tower, the temporary
tower will be decommissioned.
The maps below clearly show that the residents in and around Sea View Estate will finally be able to use
their phones in their homes, in their yards, and in their car. EMS will be able to use their phones to call
the hospital to let them know when a patient is coming to provide them expedited care when needed.
Currently, the residents must walk to or park in front of the COWs to place calls or use it for broadband
services.
5 | P a g e
Without Proposed Site
With Proposed Site
1The lower number provides better service. Red colored areas will transmit/receive at a maximum speed; blue colored areas mean most wireless
devices will be unlikely to transmit and receive service at all.
6 | P a g e
Enlarged Maps on Pages 30 and 32
This Facility is not occupied. Approximately once per month or during an emergency outage, a
technician will visit the site for maintenance work. The technician’s vehicle will park on the access road
in front of the fenced compound.
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL TO PRECISELY
LOCATE THE PROPERTY. DESCRIBE EXISTING USES, STRUCTURES AND
TOPOGRAPHY. IF ONLY A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS TO BE USED, STATE THE
USE OF THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY.
The proposed Facility located on a parcel east of Highway 130 / Pahoa Kalapana Road between mile
markers 17 and 18, Kīkala-Kēōkea Ahupua‘a, Puna District, Island of Hawai‘i, Hawai‘i.
The subject parcel had a residence constructed upon it some time ago. The County’s records show a
demolition permit was issued in 1994. Since then, the property remained vacant. The Applicant
purchased the property from the bank last year for the purpose of developing a multiple carrier
telecommunication facility. There are no plans to develop the rest of the property.
The location of the proposed tower on a large parcel far away from homes in the area. The property is
lined with tall trees which will help the aesthetic view of the monopole.
3. STATE/COUNTY PLANS AFFECTING THE SUBJECT REQUEST: STATE LAND USE
BOUNDARY DESIGNATION, ZONING, SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
State Land Use Boundary Designation. The subject property is designated as both EA (Extensive
Agriculture) and IAL (Important Agricultural Lands) by the State's Land Use Boundary map.
Telecommunication towers are a permitted use by the State's Land Use Ordinance.
General Plan Designation. The subject property is designated agriculture in the County's General Plan.
County Zoning Code. The subject property is situated in the County's Agricultural 3-acre (A-3A)
zoned district The Zoning Code does allow Telecommunications as permitted use if a Use Permit is
obtained for such use.
Community General Plan. The subject property is governed by the Puna Community Development
Plan (CDP).
Surrounding Zoning. The surrounding lands A-3a (Agricultural-3 acres), FR (Forest Reserve), A-1a
(Agricultural-1 acre), and A-20a (Agricultural-20 acres).
Special Management Area (SMA). The subject parcel is outside of the County’s Special Management
Area.
Archaeological Resources.
Ace Environmental cultural resources review and field inspection of the property. Their report dated
August 1, 2023, is included with this Application. The report concluded that:
7 | P a g e
“The archival research and literature search indicate that there are no historic properties located within the
0.5 mile radius APE of the current project area. The archaeological field inspection conducted by SCS
confirmed there will be no direct impact to any archaeological sites and that there will be no added
indirect visual impacts to sites from the construction of the proposed cellular tower.”
The State’s Historical Preservation Office concurred with the determination of no historic properties
affected in their letter dated August 15, 2024.
4. SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES.
The surrounding properties are similarly zoned: A-3a (Agricultural-3 acres), FR (Forest Reserve), A-1a
(Agricultural-1 acre), and A-20a (Agricultural-20 acres). The proposed tower is set back approximately
300’ from Highway 130 from to preserve the scenic corridor. The lot is heavily wooded, hiding the
bottom half of the tower with the existing trees. There is a six-lot subdivision located south of the subject
property. The closest home in that subdivision to the tower is more than 450 ft. away.
5. FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM) DESIGNATION
State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Flood Hazard Assessment Tool determined
that the FIRM designation is "X" - Areas determined to be outside 500-year floodplain determined to be
outside the 1% and 0.2% annual chance floodplains.
6. FLORAL AND FAUNA RESOURCES
The general area is currently characterized by a disturbed ʻōhiʻa lehua Forest.
The project area is populated by two ʻōhiʻa lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha) trees, up to 50
feet in height, scattered sparsely with a variety of dominant non-native tree and shrub species.
Soils are classified as Hakuma highly organic hydrous loam [662] (USDA 2024). Uneven
pāhoehoe flows covered with organic material and an abundance of cobbles, stones, and
boulders scattered along the access road and project site were observed.
7. DESCRIPTION OF ACCESS(S) IN THE AREA (E.G. WIDTH, TYPE OF SURFACE AND
CONDITION OF ROADWAY). IF A PRIVATE ROADWAY, SUBMIT EVIDENCE OF ACCESS
RIGHTS
The access road from Highway 130 exists as shown on the Topographical Survey provided by
Independent Hawaii Surveyors (included in as the second page of the drawings submitted herewith).
8. TRAFFIC IMPACTS – ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS,
ANTICIPATED INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM PROPOSED USE
(A FORMAL STUDY MAY BE REQUESTED BY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS OR
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS)
A traffic study was not performed for this Project, as this is not an occupied-type facility. Only service
personnel who must visit the location on an as needed basis will have access to the facility. Construction
traffic will be limited to delivering of material and construction workers to construct the
telecommunication facility. The time period will be approximately 6 weeks from the date of construction
8 | P a g e
start. Parking for the maintenance vehicle is provided within the Property in front of the fenced
compound on the existing dirt road.
9. AVAILABILITY OF UTILITIES: WATER, TELEPHONE, ELECTRICITY, SEWAGE
DISPOSAL
Water and sewage disposal will not be required for this Facility because it will not be occupied-type
Facility. Electricity is readily available on power poles lining Highway 130. The Applicant has not yet
discovered if fiber optics are available to this neighborhood. If fiber optics are not available or cost
prohibitive, a microwave dish will be installed by the carrier(s) on the tower to bring such service.
10.
A. WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE REQUEST MEETS WITH THE FOLLOWING
STANDARDS
The granting of the proposed use shall be consistent with the general purpose of the zoned district, the
intent and purpose of the Zoning Code and the County General Plan;
Hawaii County Zoning Code, Section 25-5-72(b)(1) Permitted Uses of the Agriculture zoned district,
states in part:
"The following uses may be permitted in the A district, provided that a use permit is issued for
each use:
(1) Golf courses and related golf course uses, including golf course driving ranges, golf
maintenance buildings and golf club houses;
(2) Telecommunication antennas and Towers."
Section 25-4-12. Telecommunication antennas or towers states:
(a) A telecommunication antenna or tower shall be permitted in the V, CN CG, CV, MCX,
ML, MG and CDH districts; provided that the antenna, tower, and its use are not hazardous or dangerous
to the surrounding area and the director has issued plan approval for such use. A telecommunication
antenna or tower may be permitted in the RS, RD, RM, RCX, RA, FA, A, IA and O districts if a use
permit is obtained for such use. Where there is an existing telecommunication tower, co-location of
additional antenna or equipment will be permitted provided the director has issued plan approval for such
use.
(b) The minimum setbacks for a telecommunication antenna and tower are as follows:
(1) Freestanding antennas and towers supported by guy wires shall be set back from
every property line a minimum of one foot for every five foot of antenna or tower height.
(2) Telecommunication antennas and towers supported by guy wires shall be set
back from every property line a minimum of one foot for every one foot of antenna or tower height."
(c) The tower, together with the initial antennas or other equipment proposed to be installed
thereon, shall have a hard survivability for sustained winds of at least one hundred miles per hour."
This Project is located in the A district, and accordingly requires that a Use Permit be obtained for
such use. The proposed freestanding tower setback complies with the minimum setback requirement of
9 | P a g e
30' or one foot for every five foot of tower. And, the tower will be designed to meet the 2018
International Building Code, adopted by the County of Hawaii as their governing building code, and will
have a hard survivability for sustained winds of one hundred miles per hour.
An analysis was conducted by Airspace Federal Airways and Airspace who determined that the
150’ tower does not require FAA notice prior to construction.
The Applicant’s tenants will operate only on licensed frequencies and will not interfere with the
County of Hawaii radio system.
GENERAL PLAN
The General Plan states in part:
11. PUBLIC UTILTIES
11.3 Telecommunications
“11.3.1 Introduction and Analysis The telephone is an essential means of voice communication for the
majority of residents in Hawaii County. However, over the last decade, the County has seen an
acceleration in the development of telecommunication technology and a transformation of the
telecommunications industry. In addition to traditional phone communication, the telecommunications
industry now includes technologies such as wireless cellular and digital mobile phones, the internet and
world wide web. During the last decade, wireless telecommunications has experienced a dramatic
decrease in cost and a phenomenal increase in availability. Changes in technology and competition in the
industry have made wireless communication more affordable to the general public. The wired
infrastructure that was once used to connect a telephone to the phone system has evolved to include the
world wide web and internet. The world wide web and internet uses the telephone infrastructure to
transfer digital data from one computer to another. Thus, everything from simple text messages to high
level banking and commerce transactions can be conducted almost instantaneously. In the near future, the
changes in technology and the wireless industry may make wireless access to the internet more widely
affordable and/or available. As of August 7, 1998, the entire island of Hawaii had 100 per cent digital
switching. Digital switching is significant because it enables the existing telephone infrastructure to
accommodate high-speed data transfers and access to many of the latest telecommunication services and
features. Currently, every region on the island has access to phone service. In 1998, the last rural areas
restricted to party line service were upgraded with additional telephone cables allowing single line
services island wide. Advances in fiber optic technology provide the backbone for the island's high-
capacity broadband requirements and the necessary services for specialized users such as the telescopes
atop Mauna Kea. Furthermore, frame relay, Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) and internet services
are transmitted via Verizon Hawaii's fiber optic network. Currently, high speed internet connections such
as Digital Subscriber Lines (DSL) are only available in certain areas on the island. However, these
services are bound to expand. Advances in telecommunications are not without cost or concerns. One
such concern is the construction and location of telecommunication towers. Telecommunication towers
are the physical structures to which antennas are attached to facilitate wireless communication. Because
of the need for a clear line-of-site, telecommunication towers are usually located in areas with minimum
obstructions between the tower and its area of service. Line-of-site refers to the imaginary line between a
mobile phone antenna and a telecommunication tower. If there are impediments between the mobile
phone antenna and the telecommunication tower, there may be signal degradation or signal loss. For
10 | P a g e
example, the loss of line-of-sight occurs when a person uses a mobile phone while driving through a
tunnel. Most often, communication is lost or unclear. The line-of-sight requirement often necessitates the
conspicuous location of many telecommunication towers. Consequently, the telecommunications tower is
usually much taller than the surrounding structures or vegetation and may negatively impact the scenic
nature of a given area. Currently there are over 95,000 switched telephone connections in service on the
island. The State Public Utilities Commission regulates telephone service statewide.
11.3.2 Policies (a) Encourage underground telephone lines where they are economically and technically
feasible. (b) Work with the telecommunications industry to increase the availability of emergency
telephones throughout the island. (c) Develop standards for the construction of wireless
telecommunication facilities. (d) Work closely with the telephone company to provide all users with
efficient service.
11.3.3 Standard (a) In the development and placement of telephone facilities, such as lines,
telecommunications and cellular towers, poles, and substations, the design of the facilities shall consider
the existing environment, and scenic view and vistas shall be considered and preserved where possible.”
This application is consistent with the intent and purpose of the County’s Zoning Code and General Plan.
“3-15 PUNA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
3.4.3 Actions
a. Develop permanent fire stations at Hawaiian Beaches/Shores, Hawaiian Paradise Park, lower Volcano,
and Mountain View, with emergency paramedical services. See, also, Section 3.3.3, Action a, relating to
emergency medical facilities.
b. Provide additional volunteer fire stations and expanded programs for training community
emergency/readiness volunteers in all large subdivisions as suitable sites become available and the growth
in the subdivision warrants.
c. Promote free wireless internet services to Puna’s subdivisions, starting with those that lack cable
service. Refer to Section 4.1 for related discussion and Action c.
d. Provide more emergency call boxes along State highways.
e. Encourage enhancement of cell phone service to expand coverage to more remote areas.
f. Boost the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) recycling budget to develop an economy
and to create more jobs related to recycling.
g. Increase County resources to handle the abandoned/derelict car removal program.
h. Provide public financial support for the development of utility and potable water connections, and
wastewater treatment facilities, within approved village/town centers where they are desired by residents
or needed to support planned and approved development.” Emphasis added.
11 | P a g e
B. THE GRANTING OF THE PROPOSED USE SHALL NOT BE MATERIALLY
DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE NOR CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE
IMPACT TO THE COMMUNITY’S CHARACTER OR TO THE SURROUNDING
PROPERTIES
(a) The Project Enhances the Public Welfare
The proposed Facility improves and broadens communications access for a larger number of residents and
where there is currently NO service. The ability for area residents to have access to the internet will permit
children and students of all ages to easily obtain and submit information for educational purposes, and
individuals will be provided the opportunity to easily transact business locally, statewide, nationally, and
internationally from their homes. The Facility will also provide E911 emergency service. Quality
telephone and broadband communications clearly enhances the public’s welfare.
(b) The Project does not Adversely Affect the Surrounding Property
RF Emissions: The operation of the antenna does not present health hazards or cause interference with
other electronic appliances and equipment. Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C.
332(c), as amended) recognizes the absence of health hazards from wireless radio wave transmissions and
prohibits local authorities from regulating the placement of such towers based on environmental effects, as
long as those towers comply with the Federal Communication Commission’s guidelines. The Project will
be designed to strictly comply with those guidelines. A copy of the FCC Consumer Facts – Human
Exposure to Radio Frequency Fields: Guidelines for Cellular & PCS Sites is attached as Pages 20 and 21.
Noise Impacts: The only source of noise that may be emitted from the Project results from an air
conditioner necessary to maintain correct temperature and humidity in the equipment cabinets and a
generator to be operated during emergencies and routine maintenance. The resulting noise from the air
conditioner is virtually inaudible from farther than 100 feet except under extraordinarily quiet conditions,
and the occasional use of a generator during maintenance or power outages is not a substantial negative
impact in this area.
Visual Impacts: Pursuant to the standards set forth in the General Plan, “In the development and placement
of telephone facilities, such as lines, telecommunications and cellular towers, poles, and substations, the
design of the facilities shall consider the existing environment, and scenic view and vistas shall be
considered and preserved where possible” The existing environment surrounding the Property is mostly
undeveloped lands with few homes located more than more than 500 ft away from the tower. The tower
will be painted a color that will blend with the surrounding community. The tower will be surrounded by
the tall trees to minimize any impact to the surrounding community. Photo simulations of the tower very
various locations are attached as Pages 22-26.
12 | P a g e
C. THE GRANTING OF THE PROPOSED USE SHALL NOT UNREASONABLY BURDEN
PUBLIC AGENCIES TO PROVIDE ROADS AND STREETS, SEWERS, WATER, DRAINAGE,
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENTS, POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION AND OTHER RELATED
INFRASTUCTURE
Only electrical and fiber optics are required for the proposed use. Electricity is located on the overhead
utility poles are located on Highway 130. Unless it is cost prohibitive, Verizon Wireless will attempt to
bring fiber optics to this neighborhood as an added benefit. No public expenditures for road, street,
sewer, water, drainage, or schools or increased police or fire protection are required. The Project
enhances police and fire protection by affording wireless voice and data services to remote land areas so
that emergency and crime-fighting officials can be contacted in the event of an emergency.
13 | P a g e
TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS
ATTACHMENT TO SPECIAL PERMIT OR USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS
In addition to the requirements for submitting a Special Permit or Use Permit
Application, please provide the following additional information when applying for a
telecommunication tower:
1. What is your schematic plan for tower development on the Big Island? Provide a map and
written description of these sites. Justify how this particular subject site plays an integral
part in this overall plan.
Verizon Wireless prepared a schematic map showing the existing coverage without the proposed
Facility and the coverage expected with the new Facility. The maps clearly shows that the
proposed Facility will provide solid coverage in and around the proposed Facility as well as
extending coverage along Highway 130 and as far as Sea View Estates subdivision. This Facility
will provide E911 services in areas that currently have little or no coverage. Full-sized maps are
on Pages 17 to 19.
2. Building plans for the tower, certified by a structural engineer licensed in the State of
Hawaii, verifying that the tower, together with initial antennas and other equipment
proposed to be installed thereon for co-location, are structurally sound and wind resistant.
Christopher P. Sekol, a structural engineer licensed in the State of Hawaii, provided a letter
dated September 28, 2023 states that: “DaVinci Engineering intends to design this 150-ft
monopole to withstand the basic wind speed of 139 Vmph per the ANSI/TIA-222-H. The wind
speed is a design within the specifications for limit-state as defined by the Load and Resistance
Factor Design (LRFD) methodology.” The letter is attached to this report as Page 27 and 28.
3. A design plan for the tower and appurtenant structures, including discussion on tower
selection and antennas, visual impacts, color, lighting, landscaping and safety.
The Applicant proposes the use of a 150’ monopole painted to blend with the surrounding area.
The monopole will be painted a color that will blend with the surroundings. Dunn-Edwards
Shaker Gray (DE6231) is proposed by the Applicant and used in the photo simulations of the
tower attached. The property along Highway 130 is lined with very tall trees, providing the best
visual mitigation for this area. A monopine aka faux tree pole is not proposed for this location.
The tower is too tall for the weight of the branches. That type of tower is cost prohibitive
because of the large foundation and stout monopole required to meet the County’s wind speed
requirement. The existing trees and other foliage will minimize the visual impact. Only the top
of the tower will be visible at a distance. Lighting is not proposed on the tower. Security lighting
mounted somewhere near the ground equipment will comply with the County of Hawaii Lighting
Ordinance.
Photo simulations of the monopole created using 3 different vantage points. In these
simulations, Dunn-Edwards Shaker Gray (DE6231) is used. Another option would be to paint
the monopole a brownish green color to match the trees. The simulation taken from the closest
vantage point is shown on the following page. Please see the others photo simulations on Pages
22 to 26.
14 | P a g e
4. A statement from the applicant that the request complies with the Federal Aviation
Administration that the application has not been found to be a hazard to air navigation.
The FAA Notice Criteria Tool was used to determine if notice was required by the FAA. The
site is not near an airport and does not require FAA notice. See the report on attached Page 29.
5. A statement from the applicant that the request complies with the regulations of the
Federal Communications Commission, including requirements on radio frequency
emissions, or a statement that no such compliance is necessary.
The Applicant is a tower infrastructure company and is not required to be licensed by the
Federal Communications Commission. As an infrastructure company, it does not operate the
antennas and equipment. The tenants are required to operate on licensed frequencies and abide
by all rules and regulations related to their licensed frequencies/operation.
6. A statement from the applicant that the proposed use will not interfere with the County of
Hawaii public safety radio system.
The Applicant will not operate the radio equipment. However, its tenants are required to operate
on licensed frequencies and may not interfere with the County’s public safety radio system. The
tenants are required to operate on licensed frequencies and abide by all rules and regulations
related to their licensed frequencies/operation.
7. A statement from the applicant that space on the tower for co-location of antennas or
attachments will be made available to other providers, if this can be done without
substantial interference to the applicant's use of the tower. If you are an infrastructure
company, a commitment from a minimum of two service providers shall be identified in the
application.
Verizon Wireless has committed to locate on the tower. AT&T and T-Mobile have expressed a
strong interest in collocating on the tower. T-Mobile standard antenna array is shown on the
drawings. The Applicant will make this tower available to any carrier licensed in this market by
the FCC.
15 | P a g e
8. A statement from the applicant that diligent, but unsuccessful efforts to install or colocate
the applicant's telecommunication antennas on existing towers or feasible antenna support
structures have been made. Identify those sites that you have investigated and explain how
those sites are inadequate and how the site selected is the least obtrusive.
There are no towers or tall buildings in this area that would provide enough height to mount
antennas to cover the target area. This proposed tower will complement the existing coverage
by expanding the coverage footprint as seen on the propagation maps prepared by Verizon
Wireless and submitted herewith.
9. Provide justification for the height of the proposed tower by including propagation maps
for the coverage area at proposed height and at a lower height if the proposed tower is
more than 100-feet tall. If the site involves increasing the height of an existing tower,
provide propagation maps to show analysis of signal quality at the existing and proposed
height.
Wireless antennas are generally located at or near the top of towers, water tanks, or buildings.
The electromagnetic energy emitted from the antennas lose power rapidly the farther you get from
the transmission point. This requires the position of the monopoles and antennas at strategic
points in an area to obtain the largest coverage with the minimal antennas to ensure the highest
level of quality service.
In general, the antennas must have line of sight to its intended coverage area. Topography and
tall trees are the main factor in establishing the necessary height needed for the antennas. The
antennas cannot be too tall because it would cause interference at existing sites. The antennas
cannot be too short because they wouldn’t provide the necessary coverage.
The radio frequency engineers at Verizon Wireless propagated the expected coverage taking into
account the many factors including the location of existing sites, topography, trees, etc. The
results are provided in the schematic maps provided on Pages 17 to 19.
The propagation maps shows coverage along Highway 130 and reaching as far as Sea View
Estates subdivision where there is no current service.
If the tower’s height would be reduced, it would reduce the coverage footprint for future
colocators who will be eventually install their antennas below the height proposed for Verizon
Wireless.
10. Have you met with adjacent landowners and/or community regarding the development?
Provide information regarding those meetings.
No meetings were held concerning this proposed location. During the Verizon Wireless’
application for a tower nearby, many residents sent letters of support demanding cell phone service.
16 | P a g e
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIALLY BLANK
Verizon confidential and proprietary. Unauthorized disclosure, reproduction or other use prohibited.
Coverage Plots Proposed cell site -Kalapana
Need -Expand Service to unserved areas
VERIZON Network Performance, PNW - Hawaii
11/7/2023
17 | Page
Verizon confidential and proprietary. Unauthorized disclosure, reproduction or other use prohibited.
Kalapana 700 LTE Coverage
Power on
proposed site
only
700 LTE
provides
largest
coverage area
18 | Page
Verizon confidential and proprietary. Unauthorized disclosure, reproduction or other use prohibited.
Kalapana Area Coverage with all Verizon on-air sites Today
700 LTE Coverage
19 | Page
Verizon confidential and proprietary. Unauthorized disclosure, reproduction or other use prohibited.
Kalapana Area Coverage with all Verizon on-air sites & Proposed Kalapana Site
700 LTE Coverage
20 | Page
1
1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322). TTY: 1-888-TELL-FCC (1-888-835-5322) Fax: 1-866-418-0232 . www. gov/ fcc.cgb.Federal Communications Commission Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau 445 12th St., SW Washington, DC 20554. ....
Background
Primary antennas for transmitting wireless
telephone service, including cellular and Personal
Communications Service (PCS), are usually
located outdoors on towers, water tanks and other
elevated structures like rooftops and sides of
buildings. The combination of antenna towers
and associated electronic equipment is referred to
as a “cellular or PCS cell site” or “base station.”
Cellular or PCS cell site towers are typically 50-
200 feet high. Antennas are usually arranged in
groups of three, with one antenna in each group
used to transmit signals to mobile units, and the
other two antennas used to receive signals from
mobile units.
At a cell site, the total radio frequency (RF)
power that can be transmitted from each
transmitting antenna depends on the number
of radio channels (transmitters) that have
been authorized by the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) and the power of each
transmitter. Although the FCC permits an
effective radiated power (ERP) of up to 500 watts
per channel (depending on the tower height), the
majority of cellular or PCS cell sites in urban and
suburban areas operate at an ERP of 100 watts
per channel or less.
An ERP of 100 watts corresponds to an actual
radiated power of 5-10 watts, depending on the
type of antenna used. In urban areas, cell sites
commonly emit an ERP of 10 watts per channel or
less. For PCS cell sites, even lower ERPs are
typical. As with all forms of electromagnetic
energy, the power density from a cellular or PCS
transmitter rapidly decreases as distance from the
antenna increases.
Background (cont’d.)
Consequently, normal ground-level exposure is
much less than the exposure that might be
encountered if one were very close to the
antenna and in its main transmitted beam.
Measurements made near typical cellular and
PCS cell sites have shown that ground-level
power densities are well below the exposure
limits recommended by RF/microwave safety
standards used by the FCC.
Guidelines
In 1996, the FCC adopted updated guidelines
for evaluating human exposure to RF fields
from fixed transmitting antennas such as those
used for cellular and PCS cell sites. The
FCC’s guidelines are identical to those
recommended by the National Council on
Radiation Protection and Measurements
(NCRP), a non-profit corporation chartered by
Congress to develop information and
recommendations concerning radiation
protection. The FCC’s guidelines also
resemble the 1992 guidelines recommended
by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (IEEE), a non-profit technical and
professional engineering society, and
endorsed by the American National Standards
Institute (ANSI), a nonprofit, privately-funded
membership organization that coordinates
development of voluntary national standards in
the United States.
(More)
21 | Page
2
1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322). TTY: 1-888-TELL-FCC (1-888-835-5322) Fax: 1-866-418-0232 . www. gov/ fcc.cgb.Federal Communications Commission Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau 445 12th St., SW Washington, DC 20554. ....
Guidelines (cont’d.)
In the case of cellular and PCS cell site
transmitters, the FCC’s RF exposure guidelines
recommend a maximum permissible exposure
level to the general public of approximately 580
microwatts per square centimeter. This limit is
many times greater than RF levels typically
found near the base of cellular or PCS cell site
towers or in the vicinity of other, lower-powered
cell site transmitters.
Calculations corresponding to a “worst-case”
situation (all transmitters operating
simultaneously and continuously at the
maximum licensed power) show that, in order to
be exposed to RF levels near the FCC’s
guidelines, an individual would essentially have
to remain in the main transmitting beam and
within a few feet of the antenna for several
minutes or longer. Thus, the possibility that a
member of the general public could be exposed
to RF levels in excess of the FCC guidelines is
extremely remote.
When cellular and PCS antennas are mounted
on rooftops, RF emissions could exceed higher
than desirable guideline levels on the rooftop
itself, even though rooftop antennas usually
operate at lower power levels than free-standing
power antennas. Such levels might become an
issue for maintenance or other personnel
working on the rooftop. Exposures exceeding
the guidelines levels, however, are only likely to
be encountered very close to, and directly in
front of, the antennas. In such cases,
precautions such as time limits can avoid
exposure in excess of the guidelines. Individuals
living or working within the building are not at
risk.
For More Information
For more information on RF exposure, you can
visit the FCC’s RF Safety website at
www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety. For further
information about this issue or any other
telecommunications-related issues, visit the
FCC’s Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
website at www.fcc.gov/consumer-
governmental-affairs-bureau, or contact the
FCC’s Consumer Center by calling 1-888-CALL-
FCC (1-888-225-5322) voice or 1-888-TELL-FCC
(1-888-835-5322) TTY; faxing 1-866-418-0232;
or writing to:
Federal Communications Commission
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Consumer Inquiry and Complaints Division
455 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554.
###
###
For this or any other consumer publication in an
accessible format (electronic ASCII text, Braille, large print
or audio) please write or call us at the address or phone
number below, or send an email to FCC504@fcc.gov.
To receive information on this and other FCC consumer
topics through the Commission's electronic subscriber
service, click on
www.fcc.gov/cgb/contacts.
This document is for consumer education purposes only
and is not intended to affect any proceeding or cases
involving this subject matter or related issues.
22 | Page
23| Page
24 | Page
25| Page
26| Page
27 | Page
28 | Page
DaVinci Engineering, Inc.
191 S. House Rock Dr.
Cedar City, Utah 84720
Turning Creativity into Reality
www.davinci-engineering.com
191 S. House Rock Dr.
Cedar City, Utah 84720
(805) 922-5221
29| Page
Turning Creativity into Reality
www.davinci-engineering.com
191 S. House Rock Dr.
Cedar City, Utah 84720
(805) 922-5221
simon.leland@davinci-engineering.com
30 - Page
31 | Page
JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR | KE KIAʻĀINA
SYLVIA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR | KA HOPE KIAʻĀINA
August 31, 2023
STATE OF HAWAII | KA MOKUʻĀINA ʻO HAWAIʻI DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA ‘OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI ʻĀINA
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD, STE 555 KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707
DAWN N.S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
LAURA H.E. KAAKUA FIRST DEPUTY
M. KALEO MANUEL DEPUTY DIRECTOR - WATER
AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS
IN REPLY REFER TO: Kerry N. Willoughby, CEM Project No.: 2023PR00936
ACE Environmental, LLC Doc. No.: 2308NM05 9976 Peak Lookout Street Archaeology
Las Vegas, NV 89178 kerrywilloughby@aceenvironmentalllc.com
Steven Pause, Director County of Hawaii Department of Public Works 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 7 Hilo, HI 96720
public_works@hawaiicounty.gov
Dear Kerry N. Willoughby and Steven Pause:
SUBJECT: Chapter 6E42 and National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Review – FCC Tower Construction Notification – TCNS ID 267116 Project Name/Number – Kalapana 12-4375 Pahoa Kalapana Road Pahoa – Construction of Telecommunications FacilityKīkala 1-2, Kēōkea Ahupua‘a, Puna District, Island of HawaiʻiTMK: (3) 1-2-007:034
This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division’s (SHPD’s) review of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Tower Construction Notification received from ACE Environmental LLC (ACE), on behalf of Renegade Towers. The project is subject to historic preservation review in accordance with HRS §6E-42 and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The SHPD received this submittal on August 2, 2023 (initial documents)
and August 29, 2023 (additional information), which included the following:
[X]Letter dated August 28, 2023, from ACE requesting historic preservation review and the State Historic PreservationOfficer’s (SHPO’s) concurrence with a project effect determination of no historic properties affected on behalf of
Renegade Towers. and the FCC;[X]FCC Form 620;
[X]Construction plans, photographs, and other supporting documentation[X]Cultural Resources Report titled Cultural Resources Review and Field Inspection, Renegade Towers LLC Site
Kalapana 12-4375 Pahoa Kalapana Rd. Pahoam Hawaii County, HI 96778 (Escott 2023)
ACE determined that this project is an undertaking as defined in 36 CFR 800.16(y) and that the HRS 6E project area/federal area of potential effects (APE) are synonymous and comprise a 10,569-sq.-ft. portion of the parcel. The subject parcel is
currently owned by Renegade Towers, LLC. The applicant proposes to grub and grade for a cell tower facility pad and the construction of a cell tower facility within an 80 ft. by 36 ft. area.
A review of SHPD records indicates that no archaeological inventory survey has been completed for the subject property.
The subject parcel is located in a relatively undeveloped area although the parcel itself had three buildings on it and was
32 | Page
Kerry N. Willoughby and Steven Pause August 31, 2023 Page 2
used for small scale farming. No historic properties have been previously identified within the project area/APE or nearby. area.
Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. (Escott 2023) conducted a records search and a field inspection of the subject property. No historic properties were identified within the project area/APE or within a 0.5-mile surrounding area. Thus, no significant historic properties will be impacted by the proposed project.
Based on the scope, and findings, the SHPD’s determination is “No historic properties affected” pursuant to HAR §13- 284-7(a)(1), for the current project.
The SHPO concurs with a project effect determination of no historic properties affected pursuant to 36 CFR 800.4(d)(1).
SHPD hereby notifies ACE (on behalf of the FCC) and the County of Hawaiʻi that the permit issuance process may continue.
Attach to the permit: In the unlikely event that subsurface historic resources, including human skeletal remains, structural remains, cultural deposits, artifacts, sand deposits, or sink holes are identified during the demolition and/or construction work, cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find, protect the find from additional disturbance, and contact the State Historic Preservation Division, at (808) 933-7651.
ACE and FCC are the offices of record for this undertaking. Please maintain a copy of this letter with your environmental review record.
The cultural resources report serves to facilitate project planning and supports the historic preservation review process. Please send one hard copy of the document, clearly labeled Library Copy, along with a text-searchable PDF copy of the document and a copy of this letter to the SHPD Kapolei office, Attn. SHPD Library and one hard copy of the document, clearly marked Library Copy, and a copy of this acceptance letter to the Hilo SHPD office, attention Sean Nāleimaile. Additionally, please upload a text-searchable PDF copy of the report to HICRIS Project 2023PR00936 using the Project Supplement option, and a PDF copy of the report to lehua.k.soares@hawaii.gov
Please contact Nicole A. Mello, Hawaiʻi Island Archaeologist IV, at Nicole.Mello@hawaii.gov for any questions or concerns regarding this letter.
Aloha, Alan Downer
Alan S. Downer, PhD Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
33 | Page
GENERAL DYNAMICS
76-6357 Kololia Street, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740
November 15, 2023
Planning Department
County of Hawaii
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
RE: USE PERMIT NO. USE 19-00079
APPLICANT: Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless
Permitted Use: Allows a 155-Foot Tall, Non-Manned Monopine Telecommunication Facility
TMK: 1-2-007:081
Verizon Wireless received conditional approval to construct a 155-foot tall monopine on a portion of the
above-mentioned property.
Condition No. 2, requires “Prior to submittal of an application for Plan Approval, the applicant,
successors or assigns shall provide evidence of legal access from Highway 130 to the subject parcel.”
-
Verizon researched the access issue. It was determined that the property was landlocked. The adjacent
property owners were not in favor of this location for the tower and refused to provide an access
easement.
Verizon also requested that the County construct the paper road to the owner’s and applicant’s use.
Unfortunately, the County does not have funding that could pay for the improvement.
The State’s Department of Transportation might allow access off on Highway 130, however, the process
is long and expected to costs hundreds of thousands of dollars, just for the road.
Renegade Towers has agreed to construct a tower for Verizon’s use at another location that will provide
the necessary coverage.
-
It is for that reason that Verizon is requesting that the Use Permit issued above be voided. If you have
any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808-895-3569.
Sincerely,
Danette Martin
Danette Martin
Consultant to Verizon Wireless
cc: Renegade Towers
34 | Page
9976 Peak Lookout Street, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89178
Phone: 702-614-4431; Fax: 702-614-4171
www.aceenvironmentalllc.com
Cultural Resources Review and Field Inspection
June 14, 2024
Prepared for:
Renegade Towers, LLC
6710 Elverton Drive
Oakland, California 94611
Renegade Towers Wireless Site
Kalapana
12-4375 Pahoa Kalapana Road
Pahoa, Hawaii County, Hawaii 96778
ACE project no. 24-464-125-099
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1
METHODS ........................................................................................................................................ 1
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ..................................................................................................... 8
HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS .......................................................................... 8
HISTORIC ACCOUNTS OF PRE-CONTACT ERA PUNA ................................................. 10
TRADITIONAL ACCOUNTS (MO‘OLELO) OF PUNA ...................................................... 12
HISTORIC ACCOUNTS OF CONTACT ERA PUNA .......................................................... 13
NATIVE TESTIMONY BEFORE THE COMMISSION TO QUIET LAND TITLES ...... 16
POST-CONTACT HISTORY ................................................................................................... 18
MODERN HISTORY OF THE PROJECT AREA LANDS .................................................. 18
PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ......................................................... 18
RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS .................................................................................................. 20
FIELD INSPECTION .................................................................................................................... 20
IMPACT ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 20
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 31
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: 5,500 K-Series Map of Hawai‘i Showing Location of Project Area (National ........................................... 2
Figure 2: USGS Topographic Map (2017; Kalapana Quad) Showing Location of Parcel 034, Project Area. ........ 3
Figure 3: Tax Map Key (TMK) Graphic Showing Project Area Location. ................................................................ 4
Figure 4: Aerial Photograph Showing Location of Project Area (Google Earth 2024). .......................................... 5
Figure 5: Proposed Facility Plans Showing Existing Driveway, Proposed Cell Tower Facility and Proposed
Power Line. .............................................................................................................................................................. 6
Figure 6: Project Area Site Plan with Access Area. ..................................................................................................... 7
Figure 7: Aerial Photograph of Project Area (Google Earth 2024) and Project Area Soil Series (rMAD series). . 9
Figure 8: Portion of Hawai'i Ahupa'a Map Showing Puna Ahupua'a..................................................................... 11
Figure 9: Portion of Hawai 'i Island Map Showing Ellis' Route Along the Puna Coastal Trail, Ahupua'a with
Known Heiau, and the Project Area (Donn 1901). ............................................................................................. 14
Figure 10: Portion of Puna Forest Reserve Map Showing Kikala-Keokea Homestead Lots, Parcel ..................... 17
Figure 11: USGS Map (2017) Showing Previous Archaeological Work in the Region............................................ 19
Figure 12: Photograph of Existing Driveway and Gate. View to Northeast. ............................................................ 21
Figure 13: Photograph of Existing Driveway and Gate. View to Southwest. ........................................................... 22
Figure 14: Photograph of Existing Driveway towards Proposed Cell Site. View to Northeast. .............................. 23
Figure 15: Photograph Overview of Project Area. View to Southwest. .................................................................... 24
Figure 16: Photographic Overview near Proposed Cell Site. View to Southwest. ................................................... 25
Figure 17: Photographic Overview Near Proposed Project Location. View to Southwest. .................................... 26
Figure 18: Photographic Overview Near Proposed Project Location. View to West. ............................................. 27
Figure 19: Photographic Overview of Proposed Cell Site Area. View to Northwest. .............................................. 2 8
Figure 20: Photograph of Driveway Leading to Proposed Cell Site. View to South. ............................................... 29
Figure 21: Photograph of Abandoned Vehicles near Project Area. View to West. ................................................. 3 0
1
INTRODUCTION
At the request of Ace Environmental, LLC, Scientific Consultant Services (SCS) conducted
a cultural resources records search and archaeological site inspection for a proposed 80.0 foot long
(NE/SW) by 36.0 foot (2,880.0 square feet; 0.066 acres) wide wireless telecommunications facility
and monopole, and 480.0 foot long (E/W) by 16.0 foot wide (7,680.0 square feet; 0.176 acres) access
road within the southeast quadrant of TMK: (3) 1-2-007:034 located at 12-4375 Pāhoa-Kalapana
Road in Kīkala-Kēōkea Ahupua‘a, Puna District, Island of Hawai‘i, Hawai‘i (Figures 1 through 6).
The informal access road is an existing driving lane through Parcel 034. The archaeological site
inspection pedestrian survey was conducted on a 0.40-acre area including and surrounding the
proposed cellular tower project area (see Figures 3, 4 and 5). The pedestrian survey was larger than
the proposed cell tower facility and access road footprint.
The project area occurs at an average 590 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and is bordered
to the northwest by Pāhoa-Kalapana Road and the three remaining flanks by currently undeveloped
land. The overall Parcel 034 land is undeveloped, consisting of a 32.721-acre property owned by
Renegade Towers, LLC.
The cultural resources records search was conducted within a 0.5 mile radius of the proposed
tower location to identify historic properties (including archaeological sites, buildings, structures,
objects, or districts) listed in or eligible for listing in the regulations implementing Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. The Scope of Work is in compliance of
Federal statutes for a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licensing of telecommunications
towers.
METHODS
The cultural resources records search was conducted at two State Historic Preservation
Division libraries, one located in Hilo, Hawai‘i and the other in Kapolei, O’ahu to locate any historic
properties on or near lands of the proposed cell tower property. In accordance with Section 106
regulations and HRS §6E-2 Historic Preservation Program definitions, the term ‘Historic Property’
minimally “means any building, structure, object, district, area, or site … which is over 50 years
old.” The search included a review of all recorded pre- Contact (prior to 1778) and post-Contact
(after 1778) historic properties located within a one-half mile (0.5 mile) radius of the project area.
2
Figure 1: 5,500 K-Series Map of Hawai‘i Showing Location of Project Area (National
3
Figure 2: USGS Topographic Map (2017; Kalapana Quad) Showing Location of Parcel 034, Project
Area.
4 Figure 3: Tax Map Key (TMK) Graphic Showing Project Area Location.
5 Figure 4: Aerial Photograph Showing Location of Project Area (Google Earth 2024).
6 Figure 5: Proposed Facility Plans Showing Existing Driveway, Proposed Cell Tower Facility and Proposed Power Line.
7 Figure 6: Project Area Site Plan with Access Area.
8
A search for archaeological reports documenting archaeological resources within the 0.5
mile radius (1320 feet, or 402 meters) of the project parcel, as well as in the general area, are
included in this review. In addition, SCS examined the National Register of Historic Places and
the Hawai‘i Register of Historic Places to determine whether any registered sites were located
within the 0.5 mile radius. The proposed cellular tower site was surveyed by SCS Archaeologist
Tess Arriola, B.A., under the direction of project Principal Investigator M. Dega, Ph.D., on June
5, 2024, along with Maya LaGrande, the project biologist. A full 100% pedestrian survey of the
project area and surrounding land was completed.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project area lies at an average 590 ft. amsl. and is level to gently sloping (to the
southeast) land. The ground surface is a Kīlauea lava flow dated between 200 and 400 years before
present (Wolfe and Morris (1996). The ‘a‘a lava flow is covered with Malama series extremely
stony muck (rMAD Series) (Sato et al.1974:37; Figure 7), although notes on silty clay sediment
being present at the surface were noted during the pedestrian survey. Drainage is to the southeast.
There are no major drainages or gulches within or near the project area parcel. Annual rainfall in
the area is 80 to 120 inches (Giambelluca et al. 2013). Vegetation is primarily introduced fruit
trees, ferns and invasive bushes including avocado (Persea Americana), guava (Psidium sp.),
mango (Mangifera indica), various palms, Asian melastoma (Melastoma septemnervium), and
melochia (Melochia umbellata) (Starr Environmental 2017). The overall appearance of the project
area lands is of single canopy with clear open ground surface.
HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL CONTEXTS
Many archaeologists believe that Hawai‘i Island was first settled around A.D. 1000 by
people sailing from the Marquesas (Athens et al. 2014; Dye 2011; Kahn et al. 2014; Kirch 2011;
Kirch and McCoy 2007; Mulrooney et al. 2011; Rieth et al. 2011; Wilmhurst et al. 2011a and
2011b). 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‘i Island occurring between A.D. 1220 and 1261 (Rieth et
al. 2011:2747).
9 Figure 7: Aerial Photograph of Project Area (Google Earth 2024) and Project Area Soil Series (rMAD series).
10
The recent studies that included Hawai‘i Island short-lived radiocarbon dating samples
assess those recovered exclusively from sites in North Kohala, South Kohala and Hāmākua (Rieth
et al. 2011) or from South Point (Ka Lae) in Ka‘ū (Dye 1992; Kirch 2011). Many of the former
region sites are rock shelters and the latter are sand dune sites. Sixteen radiocarbon samples from
North Kohala, South Kohala and Hāmākua returned conventional radiocarbon ages from 400 to
781 years before present (Rieth et al. 2011:2745). The early date is consistent with ranges of A.D.
1040-1090 and A.D. 1120-1280 from Ka Lae in South Point, Ka‘ū discussed by Kirch (2011:20).
All of the samples were recovered from sites in arid environments that have not been disturbed by
modern development or human activity. There are no radiocarbon dating samples from Hilo or
Puna where there has been a lot of development associated disturbance and where environmental
conditions for radiocarbon sample preservation is less favorable.
Historians and ethnographers have long believed that Hilo was one of the first settlements
on the Island of Hawai‘i (Handy and Handy 1972:12; Maly 1996:1). The rich marine resources of
Hilo Bay and the gently sloping forests of Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea provided abundant
resources. Fresh water was available from the Wailoa and Wailuku rivers and smaller streams
such as Waiākea, Waiolama, Pukihae, and ‘Alenaio (Maly 1996:1). While there are no streams in
Puna, there is enough rainfall so that it sometimes seeps from the ground surface at the coast and
collects in small pools.
The project area is located in Kīkala-Kēōkea Ahupua‘a, Puna District, roughly 2.65
kilometers northwest of the Pacific Ocean at Kehena (see Figure 2 and Figure 8). Puna District is
located on the eastern tip of Hawai‘i Island and extends from the ocean to the eastern edge of
Kīlauea-iki Crater (Halema‘uma‘u) at 4,000 ft amsl and Kūlani cone at 5,518 ft amsl. Puna is
translated as well-spring (Matsuoka et al. 1996:33). Kīkala and Kēōkea ahupua‘a were once
separate land divisions but were mapped as a single ahupua‘a during the early Historic era. Kīkala-
Kēōkea Ahupua‘a. Kēōkea is translated literally as “white sand” and Kīkala is translated literally
as “hip” (Pukui et al. 1974:107 and 110).
HISTORIC ACCOUNTS OF PRE-CONTACT ERA PUNA
Historical accounts pertaining to lands of the project area region are scarce but provide
some information on traditional residence patterns, land-use, and subsistence. Situated along the
windward coast of Hawai‘i Island, Puna is a verdant and abundant district with good rainfall and
rich soils. However, it is also subject to volcanic eruptions and has been covered by new lava in
many places over the last 1,000 years (Cordy 2000:17, 22). Much of the district's coastal areas
have thin soils and there are no good deep water harbors. The ocean along the Puna coast is often
rough and wind-blown.
11 Figure 8: Portion of Hawai'i Ahupa'a Map Showing Puna Ahupua'a.
12
As a result of these two factors, settlement patterns in Puna tend to be dispersed and without
major population centers, this in contrast to North and South Kona, North and South Kona, and
Hilo and Hāmākua. Villages in Puna tend to be spread out over larger areas and often are inland,
sometimes away from the coast, where the soil is better for agriculture (Cordy 2000: 45). At this
time, a strict social hierarchy and a system of kapu (taboo) regulating hierarchical social
interactions did not exist.
The lack of population centers had an effect on the development of a hierarchy of district
rulers. Puna was often not strongly tied together by a tight web of allegiances between ali‘i and
konohiki. As a result, Puna was often conquered and ruled by stronger district leaders in Hilo or
Ka‘ū (Kamakau 1992:17 and 77; Matsuoka et al. 1996:41).
The earliest written historical accounts of Puna include the arrival of Pā‘ao, a priest,
prophet, chief and navigator from Tahiti or Samoa. Pā‘ao landed in Puna sometime in the 11th
century and built his first heiau in Pulama Ahupua‘a, dedicated to ‘Aha‘ula, called Waha‘ula
(Thrum 1908:38; Kamakau 1991:100). Waha‘ula was a walled luakini heiau approximately 132 ft
by 72 ft with walls that were between eight and ten feet in height. The structure was oriented along
the cardinal points of the compass.
Puna District was famous for its valuable products, including "hogs, gray kapa cloth
(‘eleuli), tapas made of māmaki bark, fine mats made of young pandanus blossoms (‘ahuhinalo),
mats made of young pandanus leaves (‘ahuao), and feathers of the ‘ō‘ō and mamo birds" Kamakau
1992:106). Puna was also famous for its abundant ulu (breadfruit).
TRADITIONAL ACCOUNTS (MO‘OLELO) OF PUNA
There are numerous mo‘olelo and ‘ōlelo no‘eau (proverbs and sayings) that tell of Puna’s
natural beauty, its gods (akua and aumakua) and places, and its inhabitant’s practices. A detailed
list and descriptions of akua and aumakua associated with Puna can be found in Uyeoka et al.
(2014). Puna is closely associated with Kāne, god of the verdant forests of Puna and the Hawaiian
god of sun light, also known as Kāne-i-ka-nohi-o-ka-l (Kāne-in-the-eyeball-of the sun) (Maly
1999:9). Kāne is foremost among the great gods and is associated with procreation, regeneration,
the dawn, sunlight, lightning, refreshing spring water, irrigated agriculture, and fishponds (Uyeoka
et al. 2014:65-66). Kāne and Lono were the deities most commonly addressed by those who
offered prayers for the restoration of any one to health” (Uyeoka et al.2014:72).
13
One ‘ōlelo no‘eau says “Puna, ka ʻāina i ka haupo o Kāne – the land [held] in the bosom
of Kāne (Maly 1999:9). Another says of Puna “Ke one lauʻena a Kāne – the rich, fertile land of
Kāne (Uyeoka et al. 2014:173). Puna is known through traditional oral accounts and proverbs for
its groves of pū hala (pandanus trees) with their fragrant clusters of hua hala (pandanus fruit born
on the female trees) and the hīnano (blossoms of the male pandanus) (Maly 1999:9).
The traditional oral accounts of early Puna recognize the presence of a volcanic god of fire,
called ‘Ai-lā‘au (the devourer of forests) that live within Kīlauea, before the arrival of Pele to the
island (Westervelt 1916:1). While ‘Ai-lā‘au lived within Kīlauea, he also inhabited the East Rift
Zone craters for a time, before returning to his main residence within Kīlauea. It was there he
resided when Pele first arrived.
HISTORIC ACCOUNTS OF CONTACT ERA PUNA
William Ellis passed through Puna in 1823 while travelling along the coastal trail from
Kīlauea to Waiākea Ahupua‘a in Hilo (Figure 9). Ellis’ journey took him along the coast near past
the coastline below the project area. Ellis’ description of the coast between Kaimū and Kehena
Ahupua‘a recounts,
[At Kaimu], we passed through their plantations, and groves of coconut trees… We had been sitting in the house about an hour, when a small hog, baked under- ground, with some good sweet potatoes, was brought in for dinner, of which we
were kindly invited to partake. As there was also plenty of good fresh water here,
we found ourselves more comfortably provided for than we had been since leaving Kapapala on Thursday last.
At six o'clock in the evening, we sent to collect the people of the village to hear preaching. Between three and four hundred assembled, under a clump of shady
cordia trees, in front of the house, and I preached to them from Psalm xxii. Verses 27 and 28.
In the afternoon, Messrs. Thurston and Bishop walked over to Makena, a pleasant village about a mile to the southward of Kaimu, where they collected about one hundred people, to whom Mr. Thurston preached in one of their houses. A greater
number would probably have attended, but for the rain which fell during most of the afternoon. Mr. Bishop numbered the houses in the village, and found them, including Makena, to be 145.
Kaimu is pleasantly situated near the sea shore, on the S. E. side of the island, standing on a bed of lava considerably decomposed, and covered over with a light
and fertile soil. It is adorned with plantations, groves of cocoa-nuts, and clumps of kou-trees. It has a fine sandy beach, where canoes may land with safety; and, according to the houses numbered to-day, contains about 725 inhabitants.
14 Figure 9: Portion of Hawai 'i Island Map Showing Ellis' Route Along the Puna Coastal Trail, Ahupua'a with Known Heiau, and the Project Area (Donn 1901).
15
Including the villages in its immediate vicinity, along the coast, the population would probably amount to 2000; and, if water could be procured near at hand, it
would form an eligible missionary station.
There are several wells in the village, containing brackish water, which has passed from the sea, through the cells of the lava, undergoing a kind of filtration, and is collected in hollows scooped out to receive it.
The natives told us, that, at the distance of about a mile there was plenty of fresh
water.
After travelling nearly two hours, we arrived at Keouohana, where we sat down to rest beneath the shade of some cocoa-nut trees.
Makoa, our guide, spoke to the head man, and he directed the people to collect near his house. About 100 soon assembled, and when we had explained to them in
few words, the object of our visit, we requested them to sit down, and listen to the tidings we had brought. They immediately obeyed.
The head man brought us some ripe plantains, of which we ate a few, and then proceeded on our way, leaving them busy in conversation about the news they had heard; which, in all probability, were strange things to their ears.
After travelling a mile and a half along the shore, we came to Kehena, a populous village; the people seemed, from the number of their canoes, nets, &e. to be much engaged in fishing. Their contrivance for launching and landing their canoes, was curious and singular.
The bold coast is formed of perpendicular or overhanging rocks, from forty to
sixty feet high, against which, this being the windward part of the island, the swell beats violently.
In one place, where there were a few low rocks about thirty feet from the shore, they had erected a kind of ladder. Two long poles, one tied to the end of the other,
reached from these rocks to the top of the cliffs. Two other poles, tied together in
the same manner, were fixed parallel to the first two, and about four or five feet distant from them. Strong sticks, eight or ten feet long, were laid across these at right angles, and about two or three inches apart, which being fastened to the long poles with ie, (the tough fibrous roots of a climbing sort of plant, which they find
in the woods), formed the steps of this ingenious and useful ladder.
The canoes of the place were light and small, seldom carrying more than one man in each. A number were just landing, as we arrived at the place. Two men went down, and stood close to the water's edge, on the leeward or southern side of the rock.
The canoes were paddled up one at a time. The person in each, then watching a
16
convenient opportunity, rowed swiftly to shore, when the rolling billow carried the canoe upon the rock, and it was seized by two men who stood there to receive
it. At the same instant that it was grasped on each side by the men on the rock, the one in the canoe, who steered it, jumped into the sea, swam to the shore, and assisted them in carrying it up the ladder to the top of the cliff, where they placed
it upon curiously carved stools, made of the wood of the erythrina, and returned to the rock to await the arrival of another canoe. In this way five or six were brought
up while we stood looking at them, and I took a sketch of their useful contrivance. [Ellis 2004:204-207]
NATIVE TESTIMONY BEFORE THE COMMISSION TO QUIET LAND TITLES
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. The Māhele (1848-1850) established
a board of five commissioners to oversee land claims and to issue patents and leases for valid
claims. Many scholars believe that Kauikeaouli (Kamehameha III) was forced to establish laws
in order to protect Hawaiian sovereignty and crown lands from foreigners who had already begun
claiming ownership of land they were granted permission to use for homes and business interests
(Daws 1968:111; Kame‘eleihiwa 1992: 169-70, 176; Kelly 1983: 45; Kuykendall 1938(1): 145
footnote 47, 152, 165-6, 170). Among other things, the foreigners were demanding private
ownership of land to secure their island investments (Kuykendall 1938(1): 138, 145, 178, 184,
202, 206, 271; Kame‘eleihiwa 1992: 178).
As legal statutes defining the Māhele continued to evolve (up to 1850), the lands of the
kingdom of Hawai‘i were divided among the king (crown lands), the ali‘i and konohiki, and the
government. Once lands were thus divided and private ownership was instituted, the maka`āinana
(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 (1849). These claims,
however, could not include any previously cultivated or presently fallow land, okipu‘u, stream
fisheries, or many other resources traditionally necessary for survival (Kame‘eleihiwa 1992:295;
Kelly 1983:45-76; Kirch and Sahlins 1992 vol.1:3, 135-137, and vol.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 was then awarded a patent for the property, subsequently called Land
Commission Awards (LCAs) (Chinen 1961:16).
There were no LCAs awarded in Kīkala or Kēōkea Ahupua‘a. The land surrounding the
project area was divided into lots and sold as the Kīkala-Kēōkea Homestead Lots. Parcel 034 is a
large portion of Lots 12 and 13 (Figure 10).
17
Figure 10: Portion of Puna Forest Reserve Map Showing Kikala-Keokea Homestead Lots, Parcel
18
POST-CONTACT HISTORY
Between 1845 and 1900, traditional land-use and residential patterns changed drastically.
In particular, the regular use of Hilo Bay by foreign vessels, including whaling merchant and inter-
island vessel, the growth of tourism, the establishment of missions in the Hilo area, the legalization
of private land ownership, the introduction of cattle ranching, the introduction of sugar cane
cultivation, and the construction of Government Roads and railroad lines all brought about changes
in settlement patterns and long-established land-use patterns (Kelly et al. 1981:111-112).
Much of the change in residential location and the growth of towns in Puna District were
driven by the availability of arable land suited to commercial crops and the location of newly
constructed roads. Though cattle ranches and commercial sugarcane plantations were established
and in large areas of Puna, the project area lands were not, and are far from Historic era commercial
centers.
MODERN HISTORY OF THE PROJECT AREA LANDS
Parcel 034 has been privately owned, with three formerly used buildings. The lot was
utilized for small scale farming. The buildings were abandoned sometime in the 1980s to 1990s
and have collapsed. There is a driveway and secondary road that leads to the remnants of these
modern structures.
PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS
There are no previous archaeological studies within a 0.5-mile radius of the current project
area. The closest study within Kīkala-Kēōkea Ahupua‘a is 2.5 an archaeological reconnaissance
survey (Bevacqua and Dye 1972) km south of the project area, along the coast (Figure 11). A
second survey (Sweeney and Burtchard 1995) occurred further away to the northwest. A small
number of habitation and agricultural sites have been recorded along the coast in the ahupua‘a (see
Bevacqua and Dye 1972). No sites have been recorded within the current project area, a theme that
carried through the archaeological field inspection.
19
Figure 11: USGS Map (2017) Showing Previous Archaeological Work in the Region.
20
RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS
The results of the extensive records search indicate that there are no sites listed on the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or on the Hawaii Register of Historic Places (HRHP)
located within a half mile of the project area. A search was made for previously recorded
archaeological sites and architectural structures within the half-mile APE that are eligible for
listing on the NRHP and HRHP. Based on the above review of previous archaeological studies,
there are no previously recorded sites or structures within the current half-mile APE eligible for
listing.
FIELD INSPECTION
On June 5, 2024 SCS archaeologist Tess Arriola, B.A., under the direction of project PI
Michael Dega, Ph.D., conducted an archaeological field inspection of the proposed cellular tower
facility project area and existing access easement (Figures 12 through 21). The 100% full
pedestrian survey was conducted within a larger area surrounding the proposed cellular tower
project area and existing access easement road. The existing road will not be impacted by
construction of the proposed facility.
The pedestrian survey was conducted via north-south grid sweeps at 5 m intervals (Note:
the project biologist was also on site and conducting pedestrian survey together with the SCS
worker). Visibility of the surface and surrounding area was good as the area had recently been
cleared (no grading or grubbing occurred, just clearing of some overgrown secondary growth
vegetation). Notes and photographs of the project area were taken during the survey. Automobile
parts were scattered through the project area, with three more complete, abandoned vehicles
occurring closer to the roadway on the western flank of the project area. The surface consisted of
hard packed silty clay, with a’a lava common across the parcel. Full survey did not reveal the
presence of any historic properties inclusive of architectural features, artifacts, or other cultural
deposits.
IMPACT ANALYSIS
The archival research and literature search indicate that there are no historic properties
located within the 0.5-mile radius of the current project area. The archaeological field inspection
conducted by SCS confirmed the absence of any historic properties. As such, there will be no direct
impact to any historic properties during the project. There will also be no indirect visual impacts
to historic properties from construction of the proposed cellular tower.
21 Figure 12: Photograph of Existing Driveway and Gate. View to Northeast.
22 Figure 13: Photograph of Existing Driveway and Gate. View to Southwest.
23
Figure 14: Photograph of Existing Driveway towards Proposed Cell Site. View to Northeast.
24
Figure 15: Photograph Overview of Project Area. View to Southwest.
25 Figure 16: Photographic Overview near Proposed Cell Site. View to Southwest.
26
Figure 17: Photographic Overview Near Proposed Project Location. View to Southwest.
27
Figure 18: Photographic Overview Near Proposed Project Location. View to West.
28
Figure 19: Photographic Overview of Proposed Cell Site Area. View to Northwest.
29 Figure 20: Photograph of Driveway Leading to Proposed Cell Site. View to South.
30 Figure 21: Photograph of Abandoned Vehicles near Project Area. View to West.
31
REFERENCES
Athens, J., T. Reith, and T. Dye 2014 A paleoenvironmental and archaeological model-based age estimate for the colonization of Hawai‘i. American Antiquity, 79(4):144-55.
Bevacqua, R., and T. Dye 1972 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Proposed Kapoho-Kalapana Highway, District of Puna, Island of Hawai‘i.
Chinen, J.J.
1961 Original Land Title in Hawaii. Published privately in Honolulu, Hawaii. Cordy, R. 2000 Exalted Sits the Chief. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu.
Daws. G. 1968 Shoals of Time: A History of the Hawaiian Islands. Macmillan Publishers, Ltd., NY.
Dye, T.
1992 The South Point radiocarbon dates thirty years later. New Zealand Journal of
Archaeology 14:89–97. 2011 A model-based age estimate for Polynesian colonization of Hawai‘i.
Archaeology in Oceania, 46:130-38. Ellis. W. 2004 Journal of William Ellis: A Narrative of an 1823 Tour Through Hawai‘i. Mutual Publishing. Honolulu.
ESRI 2013 Arc GIS Explorer. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, Ca.
Giambelluca, T.W., Q. Chen, A.G. Frazier, J.P. Price, Y.-L. Chen, P.-S. Chu, J.K. Eischeid, and
D.M. Delparte 2013 Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawai‘i. American Meteorology Society 94, 313-316, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00228.1.
Google Earth
2024 Google Earth Imagery. Google Earth. Mountain View, Ca.
32
Handy, E.S., and Handy E.G.
1972 Native planters in old Hawaii: their life, lore, and environment.
Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu, Hawai‘i.
1991 Native Planters in Old Hawaii. Bernice P. Bishop Bulletin 223. Bishop Museum
Press, Honolulu. Handy, E.S.C. and M.K. Pukui 1972 The Polynesian Family System in Ka’-u (orig. 1958). Rutland, Vermont.
Kahn, J., Rieth, P. Kirch, J. 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(1):67-90.
Kamakau, S. 1992 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. The Kamehameha School Press. Honolulu. Kame‘eleihiwa, L.
1992 Native Land and Foreign Desires: Pehea La E Pono Ai? Bishop Museum Press.
Honolulu. Kelly, M. 1980 Majestic Ka‘ū: Mo‘olelo of Nine Ahupua‘a. Number 80-2 in Departmental
Report Series. Anthropology Department, Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. 1983 Na Mala o Kona: Gardens of Kona, A History of Land use in Kona, Hawai`i. B.P. Bishop Museum Anthropology Departmental Report Series, 83-2.
Kelly, M., B. Nakamura, and Dorothy Barrère
1981 Hilo Bay: A Chronological History, Land and Water Use in the Hilo Bay
Area, Island of Hawai‘i, Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Kirch, P.V.
2011 When did the Polynesians settle Hawai‘i? 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
Hālawa dune site (MO-A1-3), Moloka‘i Island. Journal of the Polynesian
Society, 116:385-406. Kirch and Sahlins 1992 Anahulu. Vol. 1 and 2. University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
33
Kuykendall, R.S.
1938 The Hawaiian Kingdom. Vol. 1. University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu. 1966 The Hawaiian Kingdom, Volume II: 1854-1874, Twenty Critical Years. University of Hawai‘i Press.
Maly, Kepa 1996 Historical Documentary Research and Oral History Interviews: Waiakea
Cane Lots (12, 13, 17, 18, 19,20, and 20-A). Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo,
Hawai'i. On file at State Historic Preservation Division, Kapolei, Hawai‘i. 1999 The Historical Puna Trail- Old Government Road (Kea‘au Section)
Archival-Historical Documentary Research, Oral History and
Consultation Study, and Limited Site Preservation Plan Ahupua‘a of
Kea‘au, Puna District, Island of Hawai‘i. Copy on file at Department of Land and Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Division, Kapolei, Hawai‘i. Matsuoka, J K; Minerbi, L ; Kanahele, P; Kelly, M; Barney-Campbell, N; Saulsbury, Trettin, L
1996 Native Hawaiian Ethnographic Study for the Hawaii Geothermal Project
Proposed for Puna and Southeast Maui. Mulrooney, M, S. Bickler, M. Allen, and T. Ladefoged 2011 High-precision dating of colonization and settlement in East Polynesia.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108:E192-E194. National Geographic, Topo! 2003 Seamless USGS Topographic Maps on CD-ROM, Hawai‘i. National Geographic Holdings, Inc. Washington, D.C.. Pukui, M.K., S.H. Elbert, and E.T. Mookini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Rieth, Timothy M., Terry L. Hunt, Carl Lipo, and Janet M. Wilmshurst
2011 The 13th Century Polynesian Colonization of Hawai‘i Island. Journal of
Archaeological Science 38:2740-2749. Sato, H., W. Ikeda, R Paeth, R Smythe, and M. Takehiro Jr. 1973 Soil Survey of Island of Hawaii, State of Hawaii. United States
Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. Washington D.C. Starr Environmental 2017 Botanical and Faunal Surveys in the State of Hawai‘i. Makawao. www.starrenvironmental.com.
34
Sweeney, M. and G. Burtchard 1995 Archaeology in the Kilauea East Rift Zone Part II: A Preliminary Sample Survey,
Kapoho, Kama’ili & Kilauea Geothermal Subzones, Puna District, Hawai’i Island.
International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu.
Thrum, T. G. 1908 Heiau and Heiau Sites Throughout the Hawaiian Islands. Hawaiian
Almanac and Annual for 1908, pages 38-47. Uyeoka, K., M. Wheeler, L. Mahi, L. Brandt, H. Kapuni-Reynolds, and P. McGuire
2014 E Nihi Ka Helena I Ka Uka O Puna (Travel carefully in the uplands of Puna):
An Ethnohistorical Study of Wao Kele O Puna Moku o Puna, Hawaiʻi Island.
Kumupaʻa Cultural Resource Consultants, LLC report prepared for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Honolulu.
Waihona ‘Aina Corporation
2023 The Mahele Database, www.waihona.com Wall, W. 1927 Puna Forest Reserve Map. Hawaii Territory Survey. Registered Map
2753. Westervelt, W.D. 1916 Hawaiian Legends of Ghosts and Ghost-Gods. W.D. Westervelt, Honolulu.
Wilmhurst, J., T. Hunt, C. Lipo, and A. Anderson 2011a High-precision radiocarbon dating shows recent and rapid colonization of East Polynesia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108:1815-20.
2011b Reply to Mulrrooney et al.: Accepting lower precision radiocarbon dates results in longer colonization chronologies for East Polynesia. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 108:E195.
Wolfe, E.W., and J. Morris
1996 Geological Map of the Island of Hawai‘i. U.S.G.S. Miscellaneous Investigations Series. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
9976 Peak Lookout Street, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89178
Phone: 702-614-4431; Fax: 702-614-4171
www.aceenvironmentalllc.com
Natural Resources Assessment
June 10, 2024
Prepared for:
Renegade Towers, LLC
6710 Elverton Drive
Oakland, California 94611
Renegade Towers LLC Site Kalapana
12-4375 Pahoa Kalapana Rd.
Pahoa, Hawaii County, HI 96778
ACE project number 24-464-125-099
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 3
GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION 3
RESULTS OF LITERATURE REVIEW 3
RESULTS OF FIELD SURVEY 4
DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 5
LITERATURE CITED 8
Appendix
Site photographs 11
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 3
INTRODUCTION
This report includes the findings of a plant and animal inventory conducted at the revised location
for the proposed project location for the Kalapana 150-foot high steel monopole with associated
panels and equipment at 12-4375 Pāhoa Kalapana Road [TMK: (3) 1-2-007:034], located in the
Pāhoa District on the island of Hawaiʻi. The previous tower location was surveyed on July 21, 2023
on the same parcel but to the west of the current proposed location. LeGrande Biological Surveys
Inc. conducted a literature review and carried out an updated field survey to document resident
plant and animal species at the new tower location on the 30th of May 2024 for Ace
Environmental LLC. The primary objectives of the literature review and field studies were to:
1) inventory the flora and fauna;
2) provide a general description of the vegetation on the project site;
3) search for threatened and endangered species as well as species of concern; and
4) evaluate the impacts to Threatened & Endangered Species and migratory birds as
outlined in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Federal and State of Hawaiʻi listed species status follows U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS 2015,
2023).
GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
The proposed tower site is located on private property at approximately 590-foot elevation.
The area proposed for the monopole and associated equipment is located on a 33 acres lot
which is bounded to the north, east, and south by private lands and to the west by Pāhoa-
Kalapana Road. The general area is currently characterized by a disturbed ʻōhiʻa lehua Forest.
The project area is populated by two ʻōhiʻa lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha) trees, up to 50
feet in height, scattered sparsely with a variety of dominant non-native tree and shrub species.
Soils are classified as Hakuma highly organic hydrous loam [662] (USDA 2024). Uneven
pāhoehoe flows covered with organic material and an abundance of cobbles, stones, and
boulders scattered along the access road and project site were observed.
RESULTS OF LITERATURE REVIEW
Prior to undertaking the field studies, a search was made of the pertinent literature to familiarize
the principal investigator with other plant and animal studies conducted in the general area. An
informal IPaC was created (USFWS 2023) to determine the listed plant and animal species with
possible ranges within the current project area. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife database (USFWS 2024)
was reviewed in order to determine if any Threatened or Endangered plant taxa are known to
reside within the study area or in close proximity. The search results were that no known
proposed or listed threatened or endangered species are currently known to reside within the
project area. Furthermore, no Critical Habitat has been delineated for the site (USFWS 2024).
Topographic maps were examined to determine terrain characteristics, access, boundaries, and
reference points.
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 4
RESULTS OF FIELD SURVEY
Methods
A walk-through survey method was conducted; notes on plants and animals within the proposed
cell tower location and surrounding lands within the subject property, along with the access road
and any areas that may be affected by construction of the tower. Notes were made on plant
associations and distribution, disturbances, topography, substrate types, exposure, drainage, etc.
Birds and mammals were identified by sight using the naked eye and Cabela’s 10 x 42 binoculars,
and by calls, scat, or tracks.
Vegetation
Vegetation is characterized as a highly disturbed ʻōhiʻa lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha) forest
dominated by non-native plant species. The most prevalent trees are Christmas Berry (Schinus
terebinthifolius), strawberry guava (Psidium cattleyanum), Java plum (Syzygium cumini),
Melochia umbellata, avocado (Persea americana), autograph tree (Clusia rosea), and mango
(Mangifera indica). Trees reached up to 50 feet in height, with the tallest being the two ʻōhiʻa
lehua. At the edges of the project area the introduced common staghorn fern (Platycerium
bifurcatum) was observed growing in several of the trees. Scandent shrubs, ferns, and vines
observed in the understory included; lauaʻe (Microsorum grossum), Asian swordfern
(Nephrolepis brownii), kī (Cordyline fruticosa), Blechnum appendiculatum, sourbush (Pluchea
carolinensis), and Christella parasitica. Other weedy shrubs and herbs included comb hyptis
(Mesosphaerum pectinatum), broad-leaved plantain (Plantago major), milkwort (Polygala
paniculata), Spanish needle (Bidens pilosa), partridge pea (Charmaecrista nictitans), Sida spp.,
rattlepod (Crotalaria spp.), Kosterʻs curse (Miconia crenata), Dissotis rotundifolia, broomsedge
(Andropogon virginicus), lantana (Lantana camara), tick clover (Grona triflora), Phillipine ground
orchid (Spathoglittis plicata), and Chinese ground orchid (Phaius tankarvilleae).
Species observed along the proposed access road included grasses such as, Bermuda grass
(Cynodon dactylon), basket grass (Oplismenus hirtellus subsp. hirtellus), natal redtop (Melinis
repens), Guinea grass (Megathyrsus maximus), Hilo grass (Paspalum conjugatum), and smutseed
(Sporobous africanus). The highly invasive false ʻawa (Piper auritum) was observed growing near
the abandoned vehicles to the west of the project area. Few native species were observed other
than the endemic ʻōhiʻa lehua trees. Two indigenous species, the Pākahakaha fern (Lepisorus
thunbergianus) observed occassionally growing epiphytically in trees and ʻuhaloa (Waltheria
indica) shrubs were scattered in open areas.
Birds
Five species of non-native birds were observed or heard during the survey. Warbling white-eye
(Zosterops japonicus) and Zebra doves (Geopelia striata) were the most prevalent followed by
House finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), Nothern Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), and Yellow-billed
Cardinal (Paroaria capitata). None of the bird species observed during the survey of the project
area were native.
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 5
Although native `io or Hawaiian hawk (Buteo solitarius) were not observed during the survey at
the immediate project area, one hawk was observed flying over the Pāhoa Kalapana Road as we
left the survey area. The project area harbors a few trees, namely the ʻohiʻa lehua, of heights that
the hawks may select for roosting or nesting.
Mammals
Numerous signs, scat and tracks, of feral pigs (Sus scrofa) were observed at the project area. No
other mammals were observed within the property, but no doubt one or more rodents found on
Hawaiʻi Island, European house mice (Mus musculus domesticus), roof rat (Rattus r. rattus),
brown rat (Rattus norvegicus), or possibly Polynesian rats (Rattus exulans hawaiiensis) use
various resources found within the general project area. Feral cats (Felis catus) and mongoose
(Urva auropunctata) most likely also utilize the general area for foraging. All of these introduced
species are deleterious to native ecosystems and the native faunal species dependent on them.
DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
The survey area is dominated by non-native trees and shrubs. The biological resources of the area
have been altered by construction of roads, housing, and most impactfully, the introduction of
invasive plant and animal species. None of the plant or animal species observed on the project
site is listed as a threatened, endangered, or a species of concern (USFWS 2024; Wagner et al.
1999). None of the listed Endangered species (one mammal, seven birds, and eleven plants)
provided by the informal IPaC were located during the survey (USFWS 2023). No sensitive or
otherwise regulated habitats (e.g., wetlands, Critical Habitat) were found on the project site
(USFWS 2024b). The following are recommendations for the protection of possible rare taxa that
could potentially be effected by habitat alteration at the project site and continued use as a
telecommunicaiton facility.
Hawaiian Hawk
The Hawaiian Hawk or `Io has been delisted as Endangered by Federal agencies (USFWS 2020)
but is still listed by the State of Hawaiʻi as Endangered. The hawks can be found from sea level to
above 8,990 feet (Pyle and Pyle 2009). Hawaiian Hawks construct their nests approximately 2
months before laying eggs. Nest trees range from 32 to 79 feet in height and the nests are
typically located 11 to 60 feet above the ground. Nests are constructed on stable platforms such
as on the top of birds-nest ferns or crotches within the branches of the trees (Griffin 1998).
Although no hawks were observed during the survey at the project site itself, one hawk was seen
flying over the Pāhoa Kalapana Road as we exited the access road. It is a possibility that hawks
may untilize the taller trees within the project area for roosting or nesting.
The following measures are recommended prior and during construction to avoid impacts to the
Hawaiian Hawk:
• A nest survey is recommended of the immediate area around the construction site during
the Hawk breeding season (March through September) at least 10 days prior to start of
construction. The survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist using appropriate
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 6
survey methods and should focus on the large trees that could provide nesting habitat
(Gorressen et al 2008, USFWS 2008)
• If active nest(s) are located, no construction should occur within 1600 feet of the nest
until the chicks fledge or the nest is abandoned.
• If Hawaiian Hawk individuals are detected in the area during construction, all activities
within 100 feet of the bird should cease. Work may continue when the bird has left the
area on its own.
Hawaiian Hoary Bat
Listed Endangered Hawaiian hoary bats, or ‘ōpe‘ape‘a (Lasiurus semotus) (Pinzari et al. 2020), are
known to occur from sea level to upper elevations across a wide range of relatively undisturbed
and highly modified habitats, and may roost in both native and introduced tree species (Mitchell
et al 2005). The potential for bats to collide with cell towers is considered to be negligible largely
because such structures are immobile and should be readily detectable by the bat’s echolocation.
No bats have been found to have collided with guyed meteorological towers in forested areas
known to harbor bat populations (SWCA 2010, 2011). In accordance with current USFWS
guidance, pre-construction clearing of vegetation higher that 15 ft. in stature should be
prohibited from June 1 to September 15 to help ensure that non-volant bat pups are not harmed
by land clearing activities. Barbed wire should not be used in order to limit entanglement.
Seabirds
It is possible that the endangered Hawaiian Petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis), Band-rumped
Storm-Petrel (Hydrobates castro), and the threatened Newell’s Shearwater (Puffinus newelli)
over-fly the project area between April and the middle of December each year in small numbers.
(The most current names for all avian species following: AOU Check-List of North and Middle
American Birds 2021, and the 63rd supplement to the checklist (Chesser et al., 2021, 2022). The
primary cause of mortality in Hawaiian Petrels, Newell’s Shearwaters and Band-rumped Storm-
Petrels in Hawai‘i is thought to be predation by alien mammalian species at the nesting colonies
(USFWS, 1983; Simons and Hodges, 1998; Ainley et al., 2001). Collision with man-made
structures is considered the second most significant cause of mortality of these seabird species
in Hawai‘i. Nocturnally flying seabirds, especially fledglings on their way to sea in the summer
and fall, can become disoriented by exterior lighting. Disoriented seabirds may collide with man-
made structures and, if not killed outright, become easy targets of opportunity for feral mammals
(Hadley, 1961; Telfer, 1979; Sincock, 1981; Reed et al., 1985; Telfer et al., 1987; Podolsky et al.,
1998; Ainley et al., 2001; Hue et al., 2001). No suitable nesting habitat exists within or close to
the PA for any of these three seabird species.
The principal potential impact that current habitat modifications or changes pose to protected
seabirds is an increased threat that birds will be downed after becoming disoriented by lights.
Two ways outdoor lighting can pose a threat to nocturnally flying seabirds is if: 1) during
construction it is deemed expedient or necessary to conduct night-time construction activities;
or, 2) following build-out, security lighting is operated during the seabird nesting season.
• If night-time construction activity or equipment maintenance is proposed during any
construction phases of the project, all associated lights should be shielded, and
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 7
when large flood/work lights are used, they should be placed on poles that are high
enough to allow the lights to be pointed directly at the ground (Reed et al., 1985;
Tellfer et al., 1987). Deleterious impacts to transiting seabirds can be avoided if
construction occurs during daylight hours and all outdoor lighting installed is fully
“dark sky compliant” (HDLNR-DOFAW, 2016). DLNR recommends avoiding
construction-related night-time lighting between September 15 and December 15
(DLNR, 2016).
Habitat for the State listed nēnē or Hawaiian Goose (Branta sandvicensis) is not present in or
around the project site. No host plants for the State listed Blackburnʻs Sphinx Moth (Manduca
blackburni) were observed in or around the project area.
Rapid Ohia Death (ROD)
Two ʻōhiʻa lehua trees are located at the project area. If any ʻōhia lehua trees are slated for
trimming or removal the following discussion describes prevention of ROD spread: A recently
documented fungal disease, Ceratocystis, killing native ʻōhiʻa trees is prevalent on Hawaiʻi Island.
The College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR) provide practices to help
prevent the spread of the fungus to new trees or populations. The recommendations include;
Avoiding injuring ʻōhiʻa, not moving wood or other parts of the tree locally or inter-island;
cleaning gear and tools, including shoes and clothes, before and after entering work areas; and
washing tires, and machinery to remove all soil and mud. For futher information visit:
https://cms.ctahr.hawaii.edu/rod/
Critical Habitat
There is no USFWS Critical Habitat (habitat designated to support recovery of listed species)
designated within the survey area at present (USFWS 2024b). The proposed installation of a new
150-foot-tall tower, equipment building, and access roadway would result in vegetation
clearance at the build site and along the access roadway and is not expected to impact listed
native vegetation as none were located within the vicinity during the current surveys.
Guidelines for communication towers
The tower and additional equipment should follow the guidelines outlined in the USFWS
Guidelines for Recommended Best Practices for Communication Tower Design, Siting,
Construction, Operation, Maintenance, and Decommissioning (USFWS 2021).
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usfws-communication-tower-guidance.pdf
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 8
LITERATURE CITED
Ainley, D. G, R. Podolsky, L. Deforest, G. Spencer, and N. Nur. 2001. The Status and Population Trends of
the Newell’s Shearwater on Kaua’i: Insights from Modeling, in: Scott, J. M, S. Conant, and C.
Van Riper III (editors) Evolution, Ecology, Conservation, and Management of Hawaiian Birds:
A Vanishing Avifauna. Studies in Avian Biology No. 22. Cooper’s Ornithological Society, Allen
Press, Lawrence, Kansas. Pp. 108-123.
Chesser, R. T., S. M. Billerman, K. J. Burns, C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, B.E. Hernández-Baños, A. W. Kratter, I. J.
Lovette, N. A. Mason, P. C. Rassmusen, J. V. Remsen Jr., D. F. Stotz, and K. Winker. 2021.
Check-list of North American Birds. American Ornithological Society. Available online at URL:
http://checklist.aou.org/taxa.
Chesser, R. T., S. M. Billerman, K. J. Burns, C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, B.E. Hernández-
Baños, R. A. Jiménez, A. W. Kratter, N. A. Mason, P. C. Rassmusen, J. V. Remsen Jr., D. F. Stotz,
and K. Winker. 2022. Sixty-third supplement to the American Ornithological Society’s Check-
list of North American Birds. Ornithology, Volume 138, 2022, pp. 1-13.
Evehuis, N.L. and L.G. Eldredge, editors. 1999-2002. Records of the Hawaii Biological Survey. Bishop
Museum Occasional Papers Nos. 58-70.
Federal Register. 2002. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 50 CFR 17. Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Review of Species That Are Candidate or Proposed for Listing
as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Recycled Petition; Annual
Description of Progress on Listing Actions. Federal Register, 67 No. 14 (Thursday, June 13,
2002): 40657-40679.
Gorressen M.P., R.J. Camp, J.L. Klavitter, and T.K. Pratt. 2008. Abundance, Distribution, and Population
Trend of the Hawaiian Hawk: 1998-2007 (HSCU-009). Hawaii Cooperative Studies Unit, Hilo.
Griffin, C.R., P.W.C. Paton, and T.S. Baskett. 1998. Breeding Ecology and Behavior of the Hawaiian Hawk.
Condor 100:654-662.
Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (HDLNR). 1998. Indigenous Wildlife, Endangered And
Threatened Wildlife And Plants, And Introduced Wild Birds. Department of Land and Natural
Resources. State of Hawaii. Administrative Rule §13-134-1 through §13-134-10, dated March
02, 1998.
HDLNR. 2015. Hawai‘i Administrative Rules, Title 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources,
Subtitle 5 Forestry and Wildlife, Part 2 Wildlife, Chapter 124, Indigenous Wildlife, Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife, Injurious Wildlife, Introduced Wild Birds, and Introduced Wildlife.
February 27, 2015. 16 pp.
Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources-Division of Forestry and Wildlife (HDLNR-DOFAW).
2016. Wildlife Lighting. PDF available at URL:
http://dlnr.hawaii.gov/wildlife/files/2016/03/DOC439.pdf; last retrieved February 21, 2020.
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 9
Hue, D., C. Glidden, J. Lippert, L. Schnell, J. MacIvor and J. Meisler. 2001. Habitat Use and Limiting
Factors in a Population of Hawaiian Dark-rumped Petrels on Mauna Loa, Hawai‘i. Pp. 234-
242, in: Scott, J. M, S. Conant, and C. Van Riper III (eds), Evolution, Ecology, Conservation,
and Management of Hawaiian Birds: A Vanishing Avifauna. Studies in Avian Biology No. 22.
Cooper’s Ornithological Society, Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas.
Imada, C. T. 2019. Hawaiian Naturalized Vascular Plants Checklist (February 2019 update). Bishop
Museum Tech. Rept. 69. 209 pp.
Mitchell, C., C. Ogura, D. Meadows, A. Kane, L. Strommer, S. Fretz, D. Leonard, and A. McClung. 2005.
Hawaii’s Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Department of Land and Natural
Resources. Honolulu, Hawaii. 722p.
Natural Resource Conservation Service. 2024. Accessed May 28, 2024.
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
Palmer, Daniel D. 2003. Hawaii’s Fern and Fern Allies. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu.
Pratt, H. D., P. L. Bruner, and D. G. Berrett. 1987. The Birds of Hawaii and the Tropical Pacific. Princeton
University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Pinzari, C., L. Kang,L, P. Michalak, L. S. Jermiin, D.K. Price, and F.J. Bonaccorso. 2020. Analysis of Genomic
Sequence Data Reveals the Origin and Evolutionary Separation of Hawaiian Hoary Bat
Populations. Genome Biology and Evolution. 12(9): 1504-1514.
Pyle, R.L., and P.Pyle. 2009. The Birds of the Hawaiian Islands: Occurrence, History, Distribution, and
Status. Honolulu, Hawaii: B.P. Bishop Museum. Version 1.
Ranker, T.A., C.T. Imada, K. Lynch, D.D. Palmer, A.L. Vernon, and M.K. Thomas. 2019. Taxonomic
Nomenclature Updates to the Fern and Lycophyte Fora of the Hawaiian Islands. American
Fern Journal 109(1):54-72. Published on 30 April 2019.
Reed, J. R., J. L Sincock, and J. P. Hailman 1985. Light Attraction in Endangered Procellariform Birds:
Reduction by Shielding Upward Radiation. The Auk, 102: 377-383.
Scott. J. M., S. Mountainspring, F. L. Ramsey, and C. B. Kepler. 1986. Forest Bird Communities of the
Hawaiian Islands: Their Dynamics, Ecology, and Conservation. Cooper Ornithological Society –
Studies in Avian Biology No. 9. 431 pp.
Simons, T. R., and C. N. Hodges. 1998. Dark-rumped Petrel (Pterodroma phaeopygia). In A. Poole and F.
Gill (editors). The Birds of North America, No. 345. The Academy of Natural Sciences,
Philadelphia, PA. and the American Ornithologists Union, Washington, D.C.
Staples G. W. and D. R. Herbst. 2005. A Tropical Garden Flora: Plants cultivated in the Hawaiian Islands
and other tropical places. Bishop Museum Press.
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 10
SWCA. 2010. Kahuku Wind Power Habitat Conservation Plan. Contract report prepared for Kahuku
Wind Power LLC, March 2010. 119p.
SWCA. 2011. Final Environmental Assessment Kawailoa Wind Power Facility Habitat Conservation Plan.
Contract report prepared for the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources,
September 2011. 151p + appendices.
Sincock, J. L. 1981. Saving the Newellʻs Shearwater. Pp 76-78 in: Proceedings of the Hawaii Forestry and
Wildllife Conference, 2-4 October 1980. Department of Land and Natural Resources, State of
Hawaii, Honolulu.
Telfer, T. C. 1979. Successful Newell’s Shearwater Salvage on Kauai. ‘Elepaio, 39:71
Telfer, T. C., J. L. Sincock, G. V. Byrd, and J. R. Reed. 1987. Attraction of Hawaiian seabirds to lights:
Conservation efforts and effects of moon phase. Wildlife Soc. Bull., 15:406-413.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1983. Hawaiian Dark-Rumped Petrel & Newell’s Manx Shearwater
Recovery Plan. USFWS, Portland, Oregon. February 1983.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1998. Recovery Plan for the Hawaiian Hoary Bat (Lasiurus
cinereus semotus). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Portland, OR.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and plants; Removing
the Hawaiian Hawk from the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. 85 FR 164.
U.S. fish and Wildlife Service.2021. Recommended Best Practices for Communication Tower Design,
Siting, Construction, Operation, Maintenance, and Decommissioning. March 2021.
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usfws-communication-tower-
guidance.pdf
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2023. Information for Planning and Consultation.
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/. Informal IPaC created July 23, 2023.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2024. USFWS Endangered Species. Available online at URL:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/ last retrieved June 2024.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2024b. Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species.
https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe09893
cf75b8dbfb77
Wagner, W.L. and D.R. Herbst. 1999. Supplement to the Manual of the flowering plants of Hawaii, pp.
1855-1918. In: Wagner, W.L., D.R. Herbst, and S.H. Sohmer. 1990. Manual of the flowering
plants of Hawaii. Revised Edition. 2 vols. University of Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum
Press, Honolulu.
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 11
Appendix: Site Photographs
Figure 1. Gated access road leading to proposed cell tower site.
Figure 2. Entrance roadway looking west towards Pāhoa Kalapana Road.
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 12
Figure 3. Beginning of access road is slightly overgrown and proceeds along the right fork.
Figure 4. Access road lined with strawberry guava. Build site is to the right after the stand of guava.
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 13
Figure 5. View of build site looking northeast with scrub vegetation and ʻōhia lehua trees.
Fig 6. Tallest tree is ʻōhiʻa lehua approximately 40 feet tall.
2024. LeGrande Biological Surveys, Inc 14
Figure 7. Looking north in vicinity of build site.
Figure 8. Abandoned vehicles near the proposed access road.
Mitchell D. Roth
of ',
Benjamin T. Moszkowiez
Mayor Police Chief
t
Reed K. Mahuna
Deputy Police(laid
County of Hawai' i
POLICE DEPARTMENT
349 Kapi'olani Street • I lilu,Ilawai'I 96720-3998
808)935-3311 • Fax(808)961-2389
September 27, 2024 CDH PLR: ING DEFT
SEP 30 2024 P. 12.L
REM.) HAND .DEL=VERE 3
TO ZE DO KE N, PLAN G DIRECTOR
FROM SSISTANT POLICE CHIEF
REA I OPERATI NS BUREAU
SUBJECT: USE PERMIT APPLICATION (PL-USE-2024-000028)
APPLICANT: RENEGADE TOWERS, LLC
REQUEST: TO ESTABLISH A MULTI-CARRIER
TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY WITH A 150-FOOT-TALL
MONOPOLE TOWER AND RELATED EQUIPMENT
TAX MAP KEY: (3) 1-2-007:034 (POR.) KALAPANA, PUNA,
HAWAI'I
Staff, upon reviewing the provided documents, does not anticipate any
significant impact to traffic and/or public safety concerns.
Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment.
If you have any questions, please contact Captain Todd Pataray, Puna Patrol, at
965-2716 or via email at Todd.Pataray@hawaiicounty.gov.
I lawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Cmplo cr"