Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PD Background Report (PL-SMA-2025-000083)
-1- -1- BBurns_Puueo_SMA_2026 COUNTY OF HAWAIʻI PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT HAUNANI KANE, PH.D., CLIFF KAPONO, PH.D., AND JOHN H.R. BURNS, PH.D. SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION (PL-SMA-2025-000083) Haunani Kane, Ph.D., Cliff Kapono, Ph.D., and John H.R. Burns, Ph.D. have submitted an application for a Special Management Area Use Permit to allow for the development of an educational and research facility consisting of a hālau, cabins, an on-site caretaker residence, accessory mixed-use support buildings, along with 20 parking stalls, internal access driveways, pedestrian pathways, riverfront walking paths, a floating pier, and related improvements on three (3) parcels totaling 1.97 acres within the Special Management Area. The subject property is located along Puʻueo Street, approximately 300 feet makai of its intersection with Wailuku Drive, and approximately 70 feet mauka of Hawaiʻi Belt Road (State Highway 19) near the Wailuku River crossing, Puʻueo, South Hilo, Hawaiʻi, TMKs: (3) 2-6-002:001, 002, and 003. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1. Request: The applicant is requesting a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit to allow for the phased development of the “Puʻueo Project,” an educational, research, and cultural facility on approximately 85,674 square feet (1.97 acres) of land across three parcels (TMKs: (3) 2-6-002:001, 002, and 003). The proposed development is planned to occur in three phases over an anticipated buildout period of approximately five to fifteen (5–15) years, and will include a combination of residential, educational, and accessory structures, along with supporting site improvements. Phase I of the project includes the construction of a 2,730-square-foot single-family residence to serve as an on-site caretaker/security dwelling, as well as a garage, internal walking trails, several pavilion structures, and a temporary floating pier to facilitate access and program activities along the Wailuku River. Phase II improvements include the construction of a 2,990-square-foot hālau -2- -2- (large gathering structure), a 1,280-square-foot restroom facility, and a 12-stall covered parking structure will be provided along with 8 uncovered parking areas totaling 20 parking stalls for the project. Phase III includes the development of two (2) cabins, each approximately 630 square feet in size, intended to support overnight stays or program-related uses. In addition to the primary structures, the project includes accessory improvements such as internal circulation paths, landscaped open spaces, and site infrastructure necessary to support the proposed uses. The development is intended to be low impact in nature, with structures distributed across the site to maintain open space and minimize disturbance to existing conditions. The project area has been previously subject to grading, vegetation clearing, and debris removal activities under prior SMA Minor Use Permits and currently remains largely vacant. The proposed project is designed to function as a multi-use facility incorporating residential, educational, and gathering components, with development occurring incrementally over time based on funding and operational needs. While the application identifies the scope and scale of proposed improvements, no specific total project valuation was provided within the submitted materials. Full buildout of the project is anticipated to occur over a period of five to fifteen years following receipt of all necessary permits and approvals. 2. Project Objectives: The objective of the proposed Puʻueo Project is to develop a multi-use facility that accommodates residential, educational, and gathering functions through a phased approach. The project is intended to establish a site capable of supporting science education, research activities, community-based programming, and cultural engagement, while utilizing the subject properties in a manner consistent with their size, location, and surrounding land uses. 3. Cost/Time of Project: The application indicates that the total project cost is anticipated to be somewhere between $4,000,000 and $5,000,000, however a specific valuation has not been set. Based on funding and other attributes the -3- -3- development is proposed to occur in phases over an anticipated period of approximately five to fifteen (5–15) years, subject to the issuance of all required permits, approvals, and adequate project funding. 4. Landowner: I&A Burns Joint Trust / John Robert Henrik Burns. 5. Supportive Information: The applicant has submitted the attached in support of the request: (Planning Department Exhibit 1 – SMA Use Permit Application Packet dated January 26, 2026). BACKGROUND INFORMATION 6. Chapter 343, HRS: The proposed improvements are not subject to the requirements of Chapter 343, Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes regarding Environmental Impact Statements as there is no trigger identified. 7. Previous SMA Approvals/Permits: April 14, 1978 – Special Management Area (SMA) Minor Permit No. 78-42 was issued for the subdivision of TMK 326002001 into 2 parcels, minor vegetative clearing, grubbing, grading, and the construction of a paved roadway. Staff notes that the subdivision was never pursued due to the fact that parcels 001 and 002 were considered to be pre-existing legal lots of record. May 21, 1991 – Special Management Area (SMA) Minor Use Permit No. 91-12 was approved by the Planning Director for clearing of vegetation, removal of abandoned vehicles, minor structures and other debris on TMK 326002001 and 002. No work on 326002003 occurred under this approval. June 7, 1993 – SMA Use Permit No. 340 was approved by the Planning Commission for the construction of a 24-unit condominium and related improvements on TMK 326002001 and 002. No work on 326002003 was proposed. July 16, 1999 – Due to the applicant’s inability to develop the project approved under SMA Use Permit No. 340, the Planning Commission voted to revoke SMA Use Permit No. 340. Therefore, SMA No.340 is no longer valid. -4- -4- July 25, 2022 – SMA Minor Use Permit No. PL-SMM-2022-000021 was approved by the Planning Director for tree removal, grubbing, and grading on TMKs 326002001, 002 and 003. STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 8. State Land Use District: Urban. 9. General Plan LUPAG MAP Designation: Medium Density Urban (mdu). 10. County Zoning: Resort-Hotel 750 square feet (V-.75). 11. Hilo Community Development Plan (HCDP): The Hilo CDP was adopted by Resolution No. 1 on May 21, 1975. 12. Special Management Area (SMA): The project is located within the Special Management Area and therefore, the proposed development is subject to the SMA review. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREAS AND SURROUNDING AREA 13. Land Area: The subject project area consists of three parcels totaling approximately 85,674 square feet (1.97 acres), including Parcel 001 (approximately 65,327 square feet), and Parcel 002 and 003 (together total 20,347 square feet). 14. Subject Project Area: The subject project area consists of three contiguous parcels totaling approximately 85,674 square feet (1.97 acres) located in the ahupuaʻa of Puʻueo, South Hilo District, Hawaiʻi Island. The parcels are irregular in shape and are situated along Puʻueo Street, extending makai toward the Wailuku River. The site is characterized by generally gently sloping to moderately uneven topography that follows the natural contours of the riverbank, with portions of the property exhibiting previously disturbed conditions due to historic uses, vegetation clearing, and prior grading activities. The makai portions of the site border the Wailuku River, where the terrain becomes more variable and constrained by the riverbank, while the mauka areas are relatively more level and accessible. Existing conditions consist largely of cleared land with scattered vegetation and remnants of past land impacts. -5- -5- 15. Surrounding Land Zoning/Uses: The subject project area, identified as TMKs: (3) 2-6-002:001, 002, and 003, are all zoned Resort-Hotel (V-.75) and are located within the Puʻueo area of South Hilo. Surrounding properties along Puʻueo Street and in the immediate vicinity are also predominantly zoned Resort-Hotel (V-.75), with nearby areas transitioning to Multi-Family Residential (RM) and Commercial (CG/CS) zoning districts further mauka along Wailuku Drive and toward downtown Hilo. Existing development in the area reflects these zoning designations and includes a mix of apartment complexes (including multi-unit residential buildings along Puʻueo Street), small-scale commercial structures, and scattered single-family residences. The subject property is situated makai of Wailuku Drive and in close proximity (approximately 200 to 300 feet) to the Wailuku River and the Wailuku River Bridge, which serves as a key access point between the Puʻueo area and central Hilo. Lands immediately makai and adjacent to the project site are characterized by the Wailuku River corridor, which remains largely undeveloped and functions as a natural riparian and open space feature. The surrounding area reflects a developed urban setting with a mix of residential and commercial uses consistent with the zoning pattern and the Medium Density Urban designation. 16. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM): A review of FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) indicates that the subject project area is located primarily within Flood Zone X (Area of Minimal Flood Hazard), with portions of the property along the Wailuku River corridor potentially falling within Flood Zone AE (Special Flood Hazard Area). Flood Zone X represents areas outside of the 100-year (1-percent annual chance) and 500-year (0.2-percent annual chance) floodplains, while Flood Zone AE identifies areas subject to inundation by the 1-percent annual chance flood event where base flood elevations have been determined. 17. Flora/Fauna Resources: No professional flora surveys were conducted for the project site; however, the subject project area is characterized by previously disturbed urban land with secondary vegetation typical of lowland Hilo environments. Existing vegetation consists primarily of non-native and -6- -6- ornamental species interspersed with remnant native and coastal plants. Identified species within the project area include naupaka (Scaevola taccada), wedelia (Sphagneticola trilobata), autograph tree (Clusia rosea), ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia), coconut palm (Cocos nucifera), dwarf umbrella tree (Schefflera arboricola), and various common grasses. Vegetation is generally sparse to moderate in density due to prior clearing and grading activities, and the site does not contain intact native ecosystems or any noted designated critical habitat. No formal faunal surveys were conducted as part of the application; however, the disturbed condition of the site and surrounding urban land uses suggest limited habitat value. The Wailuku River corridor adjacent to the project area provides a more ecologically functional riparian environment, which may support a greater diversity of flora and fauna compared to the project site itself. Although no threatened or endangered plant species were identified on-site, the broader area may provide habitat for native fauna. Potential species that could occur in the vicinity include the Hawaiian hawk (‘Io, Buteo solitarius), Hawaiian short-eared owl (Pueo, Asio flammeus sandwichensis), Hawaiian coot (Fulica alai), Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), and Hawaiian duck (Anas wyvilliana), particularly in association with nearby riparian and wetland environments. 18. Archaeological Resources: The subject project area is located within the ahupuaʻa of Puʻueo, South Hilo District, Hawaiʻi Island, and has been previously studied in part through an Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) conducted by Goodfellow (1991), which covered Parcels 001 and 002. The AIS identified Site 50-10-35-15415 within the project area, consisting of two features, including pre- contact hearths, historic refuse, and remnants of more recent structural remains. The site was evaluated under Criterion D (information content). The project area is also located within the boundaries of the historic Puʻueo District (State Inventory of Historic Places [SIHP] #50-10-35-07442), where historic features including a boathouse and shoreline boat davits along the Wailuku River have -7- -7- been documented. Historical records indicate that the Puʻueo area functioned as a residential community dating back to the late 18th century, with multiple residences and associated uses present in the early 1900s. The subject parcels were also previously used for commercial and residential purposes, including operation of the Puʻueo Poi Factory until approximately 1965, as well as various residences and small businesses. The application indicates that the project area has undergone prior disturbance, including vegetation clearing, grading, and debris removal under previous SMA Minor Use Permits. These activities have reportedly removed most visible remnants of earlier structural foundations associated with historic uses of the parcels. Parcel 003 has not been previously subject to an Archaeological Inventory Survey. The project was submitted to the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) for its Ch. 6E-42 review. According to the SHPD letter dated March 4, 2026, while portions of the project area have been previously surveyed through an Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS), the entirety of the three parcels has not been fully investigated, and SHPD has determined that there is insufficient information to assess potential impacts to historic properties; therefore, SHPD has requested that an archaeological field inspection (FI) be conducted across the entire project area by a qualified archaeologist, and, if additional historic properties or sites are identified, that a new AIS be prepared and submitted to SHPD for review and acceptance prior to the initiation of any land-altering activities (Planning Department Exhibit 2 – SHPD response letter dated March 4, 2026). 19. Cultural/Historic Resources: The subject project area is located within the ahupuaʻa of Puʻueo, South Hilo District, an area with documented cultural and historic significance. Historical records indicate that Puʻueo functioned as a residential and community area dating back to the late 18th century, with multiple residences present by the early 1900s. The area has also supported a range of historic land uses, including residential development, small businesses, and operation of the Puʻueo Poi Factory until approximately 1965. The project site is situated within the boundaries of the historic Puʻueo District (State Inventory of -8- -8- Historic Places [SIHP] #50-10-35-07442), where features such as a boathouse and shoreline boat davits along the Wailuku River have been previously identified. Portions of the subject parcels have been previously evaluated through an Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) conducted by Goodfellow (1991), which documented archaeological Site 50-10-35-15415 consisting of pre-contact hearths, historic refuse, and remnants of more recent structural features. The project area has been subject to prior disturbance, including vegetation clearing, grading, and debris removal under previous SMA Minor Use Permits, which have removed most visible remnants of earlier structural foundations. However, as noted in correspondence from the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD), the project area remains within a culturally significant district, and not all parcels have been fully surveyed for archaeological resources. 20. Recreational/Scenic and Open Space Resources: The subject project area is located adjacent to the Wailuku River and is situated within an urbanized portion of Puʻueo in South Hilo. The Wailuku River corridor serves as a natural open space feature and contributes to the scenic character of the area, providing views of the river and surrounding vegetation. The project site itself, however, does not function as a formal recreational area and is not designated for public recreational use. The parcels are privately owned and have historically been utilized for residential and commercial purposes. The surrounding area includes informal recreational and scenic resources associated with the Wailuku River and nearby infrastructure such as the Wailuku River Bridge (“Singing Bridge”), which offers visual access to the river and is commonly used for sightseeing and passive enjoyment of the landscape. The river corridor may support activities such as informal fishing and viewing; however, access within the immediate project site is limited and not formally established for public use. The project area has experienced prior disturbance, including overgrowth of non-native vegetation and use by a homeless population, which resulted in the accumulation of debris and degraded site conditions. Subsequent clearing and cleanup activities have improved site conditions but also reflect the altered state of the property. As -9- -9- such, the site currently does not provide maintained recreational facilities or organized open space amenities. Overall, while the Wailuku River corridor contributes to the scenic and open space character of the surrounding area, the subject property itself does not serve as a significant recreational or open space resource. While some localized changes to views across the site may occur due to the introduction of new structures, the project is not expected to obstruct significant public view corridors or scenic vistas associated with the Wailuku River or surrounding landscape. The overall visual impact is anticipated to be consistent with the existing mixed-use and moderately developed character of the Puʻueo area. 21. Coastal Hazards: The subject property is located within the Special Management Area (SMA) and is situated adjacent to the Wailuku River, a major fluvial system that ultimately discharges to Hilo Bay. While the site does not front the ocean shoreline, its proximity to the river places it within an area that may be subject to fluvial flooding and related hazards. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) indicate that portions of the project area may be within or near designated flood hazard zones associated with the Wailuku River, while other areas of the site are outside mapped flood hazard areas. The project site is not subject to coastal erosion hazards associated with marine shorelines; however, localized bank instability and flooding along the river corridor may occur during high flow events. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 22. Access: Access to the subject property is provided via Puʻueo Street, a County- maintained roadway, which connects to Wailuku Drive. 23. Water: The Department of Water Supply (DWS) indicated that potable water service is available to the project via an existing 6-inch waterline; however, its support is conditioned upon several requirements, including submission of engineered water demand calculations, payment of any applicable water commitment and facilities charges, installation of appropriate backflow -10- -10- prevention, and coordination of any necessary system improvements or relocations. DWS also noted that the existing system does not meet minimum fire flow standards, requiring consultation with the Fire Department for alternative fire protection measures, and emphasized the need to reduce potable water use for irrigation through conservation and alternative sources. In response, the applicant has acknowledged and agreed to comply with all DWS conditions, including preparation of water usage studies, installation of required infrastructure, and coordination on fire protection measures, and has committed to incorporating water conservation strategies—such as exploring alternative irrigation sources and low-water landscaping—in alignment with DWS recommendations. 24. Wastewater: According to the Department of Environmental Management, the proposed project area is within 300-linear feet of an existing sewer system. The applicant shall install sewer lines as required by Section 23-85 of the Hawaii County Code. 25. Other Essential Utilities and Services: Electricity, telephone, and internet services are available to the site. AGENCIES' COMMENTS 26. Hawaii County Police Dept.: (Planning Department Exhibit 3 – February 25, 2026, Memo). 27. Department of Health: (Planning Department Exhibit 4 – February 18, 2026, Memo). 28. Department of Environmental Management: (Planning Department Exhibit 5 – February 25, 2026, Memo). 29. Department of Public Works – Building: (Planning Department Exhibit 6 – February 24, 2026, Memo). 30. Hawaii County Fire Dept.: (Planning Department Exhibit 7 – February 18, 2026, Email). 31. Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD): (Planning Department Exhibit 8 – March 12, 2026, letter). -11- -11- 32. County Department of Water Supply (DWS): (Planning Department Exhibit 9 – March 25, 2026, letter). AGENCIES - NO RESPONSE 33. County Dept. of Public Works – Engineering, DLNR-OCCL/DOFAW/ENG, Civil Defense, State DOE. PUBLIC COMMENTS 34. The Department has not received any comments or objections from the public or adjacent landowners on this application. APPLICANTS RESPONSE 35. Applicants Response to Comments: (Planning Department Exhibit 10 – March 25, 2026, letter). 36. Applicants Response to Comments: (Planning Department Exhibit 11 – April 4, 2026, Letter). January 26, 2026 Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Director County of Hawai 'i Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Director Darrow: Subject: SMA Use Permit Application Applicants: Haunani Kane, Ph.D.; CliffKapono, Ph.D.; John H.R. Burns, Ph.D. Request: "Pu'ueo Project", an educational, research and collaborative/gathering space that will promote science education, outreach and cultural engagement TMKs: 2-6-002: 001. 002 & 003: Pu'ueo. South Hilo. Hawai'i Island Accompanying this letter, we present for your consideration and processing before the Windward Planning Commission the request for a Special Management Area Use Permit to allow for the development of the "Pu'ueo Project", an educational, research and collaborative/gathering space that will promote science education, outreach and cultural engagement. The subject properties are located along the northern embankment of the Wailuku River, between Puueo Street and Highway 19 in the City of Hilo. Pursuant to your application requirements to be filed via the EPIC system, please find accompanying this letter the following: a. Original of the completed SMA Use Permit application form and accompanying environmental report that includes a location map and site plan; b. Completed application form with landowners' authorizations c. List of the surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. Should you have questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. Sincerely, ~· Daryn Arai Pfenning Dept. Exhibit 1 copy via email: Applicants-Dr. Kane, Dr. Kapono & Dr. Burns P.O. BOX 4501, HILO HAWAII 96720 PHONE: (808) 895-3218 EMAIL: January 2026 SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION Prepared on Behalf of Applicants Haunani Kane, Ph.D. Cliff Kapono, Ph.D. John H.R. Burns, Ph.D. Pu'ueo Project An educational, research and collaborative/gathering space that will promote science education, outreach and cultural engagement Tax Map Keys: (3) 2-6-002:001, 002 & 003 Pu'ueo, South Hilo District Hawai'i Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION COUNTYOFHAWAl'I PLANNING COMMISSION (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT(S): H aunani Kane, Ph.D./ Cliff Kapono, Ph.D./ John H .R. Burns, Ph.D. APPLICANT'S SIONA TURE: (see attached authorization letter) DATE: August 2 6, 2025 ADDRESS: c/o John H . R. Burns PO Box 57 8 Papaikou, HI 9 67 81 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST (if not owner):Scientific and community-based program coordinators PHONE: (Bus.) 808-85 4-4057 Burns (Res.) _______ (Email) REQUEST: "Pu'ueo Project", an educational, research and colla borative/gathering space that will promote science education, research and cultural engagement. TAXMAPKEY: 2-6-002:001, 002 & 003 ZONING: ____ R _es_o_rt _-H_o_t _el __ (_V_-._75 __ ) __ _ SIZE OP PROPERTY/ AREA OP REQUESTED USE:_to_tal_85_,6_7_4 _± __ .._/ __ to_tal_85_,6_7_4 _± __ LANDOWNER(S): __ Jo_h_n_R_o _b_e_rt _H_e_n _ric_k_,(..._H_.R ....... ) .... B_u_rn_s_a_n_d_th_e_l_&_A_B_u_rn_s_J_o i_n t_T_r_u_st ____ _ PEE SIMPLE LANDOWNER(S) WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION (may be provided by letter with the below statement included): ______ -(s_e _e _atta_c _he_d_a_u_th_o_ri_za_t _io_n _le_tt_e_r) __________ DATE: 8/26/2025 __________________________ DATE�=---- AGENT: ______ D _aryn ___ Ar_ru_· ___________________ _ AGENT ADDRESS: ___ P_O_B_o_x_4_5 _0_.1,_H _il_o _H_I_96_7_2_0 _____________ _ PHONE: (Bus.) 808-895 -3218 (Res.) _______ (Email) Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Applicants via COPIBS: Agent ____ ;;...._ ________ -- TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The undersigned below are the owners of those properties consisting of a total of approximately 85,674 square feet and identified as TMK: 2-6-002:001, 002 & 003 located in Pu'ueo within the District of South Hilo. As owners of these subject properties, we hereby authorize the filing of a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit application to allow for the development of the "Pu'ueo Project", an educational, research and collaborative/gathering space that will promote science education, outreach and cultural engagement. By this letter, we also authorize Haunani Kane, Ph.D.; Cliff Kapono, Ph.D. and John H.R. Burns, Ph.D. as our representatives in regards to this matter and Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant, to assist us with the filing and processing of this application before the County of Hawai'i. John Robert Hendrick (H.R.) Burns PO Box 578 Papaikou, HI 96781 l&A Burns Joint Trust 279 Puia Road Hilo, HI 96720-2261 August 26. 2025 Date August 26. 2025 Date LISTING OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF PROJECT SITE TAX MAP KEY LANDOWNER ADDRESS 230040070000 230040080000 230040080000 230050040000 260010050000 260010070000 260010190000 260010200000 260020040000 260020050000 260020050000 260020060000 260020070000 260020080000 260020120000 260020140000 260020170000 260020180000 260020190000 260020210000 260020220000 260030090000 260030090000 260030220000 260030220001 260030220002 260030220002 260030220003 260030220004 260030220005 260030220006 260030220007 260030220008 260030220009 260030220010 260030220011 260030220012 260030220013 260030220013 260030220014 260030220015 260030220016 260030220017 260030220017 260030220018 260030230000 260030240000 260030360000 260030370000 260030380000 260030390000 260030400000 260030430000 260030440000 260030450000 260030460000 260030470000 January 2026 BACKGROUND INFORMATION REPORT IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION for the proposed PU'UEO PROJECT Tax Map Keys: (3) 2-6-002:001, 002 & 003 Pu'ueo, South Hilo District Hawai'i Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant Table of Contents A. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USE / DEVELOPMENT ...............................................................................1 1. Applicant .............................................................................................................................1 2. Landownership and Partnership ...........................................................................................1 3. ..............................................................................................................2 4. Location of Properties ..........................................................................................................2 5. Statement of Objectives and reasons for the request ............................................................3 6. Proposed Project Details .......................................................................................................3 7. Facility and Property Use and Management ..........................................................................5 8. Site Development Concept ...................................................................................................7 9. Timeframe and cost ..............................................................................................................8 B. HISTORICAL PROPERTY INFORMATION .........................................................................................8 C. REGULATORY HISTORY ............................................................................................................... 13 D. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS .............................................................. 14 22. State Land Use Designation ................................................................................................ 14 23. Current County Zoning ........................................................................................................ 14 24. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map ............................................ 14 25. Hilo Community Development Plan .................................................................................... 15 26. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A ................................................................... 15 27. Special Management Area (SMA) ........................................................................................ 15 E. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA .............................................................. 16 28. Subject Property ................................................................................................................. 16 29. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses ........................................................................................... 16 30. US Soil Survey .................................................................................................................... 16 31. FIRM .................................................................................................................................. 17 32. Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report (2017) .................................................. 18 33. Flora/Fauna Resources ....................................................................................................... 18 34. Archaeological Resources ................................................................................................... 18 35. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights ..................................................................................... 19 36. Public Access ...................................................................................................................... 19 F. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES ................................................................................................. 19 37. Access: ............................................................................................................................... 19 38. Water ................................................................................................................................ 19 39. Wastewater ....................................................................................................................... 19 41. Essential Utilities and Services ............................................................................................ 19 F. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SMA USE PERMIT REQUEST ............................................................ 20 G. ANTICIPATED EFFECTS UPON THE SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA ................................................. 21 H. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF CHAPTER 205A AND SMA GUIDELINES .......................................... 23 I. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 26 Table of Conte1n1ts Applicant's Request 1 | P a g e COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED PU UEO PROJECT Affecting Tax Map Keys: (3) 2-6-002: 001, 002 & 003;Pu ueo, South Hilo A. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USE / DEVELOPMENT 1. Applicants The Applicants (Dr. Cliff Kapono, Dr. Haunani Kane, and Dr. John H.R. Burns) are Hawai i- based scientists and educators dedicated to advancing ocean science, Indigenous knowledge, and community-based conservation through innovative research, storytelling, and education. Haunani Kane, Ph.D. o First Native Hawaiian woman to receive her doctorate in geology from the University of Hawaii at Manoa. Her work primarily focuses on low lying island resilience as a result of climate change. She was an integral part of the worldwide voyage, lending her services as both a traditional navigator as well as the director of sciences. She has been featured in publications such as The New York Times, New Scientist, LA Times and Hawaii Business Magazine. Cliff Kapono, Ph.D. o Professional surfer, chemist and journalist. Born on the eastern shores of Hawai i, his life involves equal parts science as it does surf. While contributing several peer-reviewed publications to the fields of molecular bioscience, he has also produced a handful of award-winning films that discuss indigenous activism, ocean conservation, global food security and virtual reality. He has been profiled in publications such as The New York Times, NBC, CBS, Surfer Magazine and more. John H.R. Burns, Ph.D. o Specializes in coral reef ecology and data science. His research uses novel modeling techniques to characterize some of the most resilient reefs on the planet. His work has been highlighted by Rolex, National Geographic, Forbes and Surfer Magazine. He has also contributed to award-winning documentaries such as Chasing Coral, Reefs at Risk, and Island Earth. 2. Landownership and Partnership The subject properties are owned by John Robert Henrick (H.R.) Burns and the I&A Burns Joint Trust, both of whom have authorized the filing of this SMA application. The Burns Family will collaborate with the Applicants on running the proposed science and community-focused events as well as fundraising efforts. These collaborative efforts will also extend to other community and educational groups and organizations that share the mission of the landowners and the applicants. • Polynesian Voyaging Society's • • 2 | P a g e 3. Applicants Request The Applicants Pu ueo as a meeting facility that will provide a collaborative/gathering space that promotes science education, outreach and cultural engagement. The mission is to create an inspiring environment that fosters learning and collaboration. By developing the property in phases, the Applicants aim to balance sustainability, accessibility, and functionality, ensuring it serves as a hub for scientific retreats, educational programs and community gatherings. 4. Location of Properties The approximately 1.97-acre Project Site, consisting of three (3) separate properties, is situated within the City of Hilo and basically framed by the Wailuku River along its southern boundary, Puueo Street along its western or makai boundary, the private Kou Lane along its northern boundary, and one parcel removed (about 70 feet) from the Hawaii Belt Road (State Highway 19) the defines the mouth of the Wailuku River and its connection with Hilo Bay. (refer to Figure 1 - Location Map and Figure 2 - Tax Map below). Figure 1 - Location Map wish to develop the " Project" Pikake Apartments Mokupane Point q ~ ft '; Dodo Monuary, Inc T 't First Church of ft Chnst Scientist Y Amauulu Rd </J Clem Akina Park Amauulu Rd / H1l0Un1tedft Methodist Church Y Waipahu Communrty School for Adults-Hilo. q enterpnse rent A car Hilo val-Hala Apanments ' \l1•hiS\ Q Dolphin Bay 44.14"1) •-$ta·buel ' Wild Ginger 37.,119 2·starh0ttl Paradise Island Tour ' The Naha Stone ' Kozm1c Cones Ta I Jactoe Rey's Ohana Gnll 1-illo Unrted States Postal Service ' •• I The Booch Bar Ta Nltl • Cle very ' East Hawa11 Cultural Center Creatrve spo w 1h piograms & ~ 'Otkr.hops TexacoQ _/ 9 1111 9 v,.,!C Hrlo Unron School MakanisMagc P1nea ,le Sr Tak HILO 5AY PROJECT AREA 9 Poke Market, LLC SO~r,eryon ,,. Fust Ofders 'Alenaio Stream Puka Puka Kitchen McDonalds Ta • ellYt' T ut .. Cafe Pesto H lo Bay Ta t·O v-e 9 Hilo Fanmers Market Tak~! • Takata Dental 9 't Sack N Save Hilo \ KOJr s Bento Korner q Health Cemer, Inc Hilo Terrace Assocra1Ion ~!~~~~:u"! nati,eculture Go gle </J L&L Hawa,1an Barbecu~ Ta I Lams Garden 3 | P a g e Figure 2 - Tax Map 5. Statement of Objectives and reasons for the request The Pu ueo Project aims to create a unique meeting facility that supports science education, outreach, and cultural engagement through a partnership with the Applicants to create an inspiring environment that fosters learning and collaboration. By developing the property in phases, the Applicant seeks to balance sustainability, accessibility and functionality, while ensuring the proposed project serves as a hub for scientific retreats, educational programs, and community gatherings. The Applicants commit to creating a space that minimizes environmental impact and supports scientific exploration. 6. Proposed Project Details (see Figure 3 Proposed Site Plan) and Exhibit A - Pu ueo Project Plans a. Phase 1 Establish a Presence and Install Infrastructure (first 5 years) Construction of a 1-1/2 story, 2-bedroom single-family residential dwelling approximately 2,370 gross square-foot in size that will serve as an on-site presence for security, property maintenance, and landscaping. A 2-car garage will be constructed proximate to the proposed dwelling. Development of walking trails and small sitting areas (170 square foot pavilions), allowing visitors to explore and connect with the land in an immersive way. Property access will be limited to pre-approved visitors, ensuring minimal environmental impact and controlled use. Temporary floating pier, anchored to the property, removed when not in use. i,__ , l \ ' ~ (!~ \,;,,_\!~ PLAT d4 PUUeo. 5 HILO HAWAII . • • • • • ~ ti".. ::.~ . .,,8,, ~ ..... ,,t /' 4 | P a g e Figure 3 Proposed Site Plan o, _ , , , s r R t ~ ' ' ' ' ~ '- - - - - - 1. Ha 1 a u 2. Ba t h r o o m s 3. Re s i d e n c e f. Ga r a g e 5. Fu t u r e Ca b i n s 6. Sh a d e / P Y St r u c t u r e 7.Ar t M u r a l Wa l l 8. Pa v i l i o n ( s ) 9. Ar t / S c u l p t u r e 10 . Te m p o r m y Flo a No h o Wo r k s h o p I E ie ~ ~ $ {!, V, f2 ;:, i2 \~ > , _ ~ ~ :~ · 10 l / / - ..J / / I - - - - - - - - - - - - - -_ ;: - : ? _ !_ ' ] )) " { . . t . . f . . I f ~ _- ; -~ ,~ 't C_ . / ~ ~ "' " , __ _ , ~ ~ ( .~ ~ ~ =-= - ~ --1 / WA I L U K U !IVE ! Pu ' u e o Pr o j e c t I SM A Sit e Pl a n , Floo r Plan s & Ex t eri o r El e v a t i o n s Hi l o , Ha w a i ' i Ja n u a r y 26 t h , 2 02 6 / / / / / r, - ~ ~ ~ -- 1 - , 13) 2 - 6 -00 2 { ) ( ) 3 '-. _ ~~L~~y ~~~~ " ' 13 1 2 - 6 - 0 0 2 - ( ) ( ) 2 28 <O U l A N E HILO H I 96 7 2 0 scr 100 · © '- - 0 g ~ 1 1. Qc :;; / Sit e Pla n 4 5 | P a g e b. Phase 2 (Year 5 to Year 10) meetings, educational programs and retreats. The halau structure will be approximately 1-1/2 stories in height and approximately 2,990 gross square feet in size, and will include a kitchen. Programs will be educational in nature, aligning with mission of science outreach and learning. A restroom facility, approximately 1,280 gross square feet in size. A 12-stall covered parking structure will be provided along with uncovered parking areas able to accommodate a total of 8 stalls. Noise and traffic control measures will be in place to respect the surrounding area. All parking associated with project activities will be maintained on-site. The will be made available for use by other educational programs and organizations programs. No special events, such as fairs, fundraising or concerts, will be held on the Project Site. c. Phase 3 Development of cabins (Year 10 to Year 15) Small cabins will be constructed to provide short-term rental opportunities that will help generate revenue to maintain the meeting facility and support its related operations. These cabins will not be promoted as part of the meeting facility. These cabins will consist of two studio units approximately 630 gross square feet in size. The proposed project will remain low-density in design, maintaining an emphasis on natural integration and sustainability. 7. Facility and Property Use and Management a. Target Audience Science educators, students, and researchers seeking a dedicated space for learning, collaboration, and knowledge-sharing. Local community members and organizations looking to engage in science outreach, environmental education, and community-focused programs. Visitors attending retreats and workshops focused on STEM education, conservation, and traditional knowledge integration. The proposed meeting facility will function like a conference room to promote collaboration through the sharing of ideas and information. This facility will not be operated like a social hall where socialization and entertainment are the priorities. The Applicant plans to host a limited number of community-focused programs each year (around 4) that align with their mission of conservation, education, and cultural connection. These programs will not be commercial or recreational in nature but rather focused on outreach and engagement. Examples of these programs include: o Educational presentations by scientists, conservationists, cultural practitioners, and community leaders to share knowledge and inspire stewardship. -Building the Halau and parking solutions • Construction of a halau (large gathering space) to accommodate organizational • • • • • • halau • • • • • • • the Applicant's to generate revenue that will help sustain the Applicant's 6 | P a g e o Film nights and creative media events, such as surf film premieres or keiki- focused environmental documentaries. o - quarterly events that pair scientists with local community members to highlight career pathways and sustainable practices. b. Hours of Operation The property will operate on a reservation-only basis, meaning that access will be restricted to pre-approved guests, scheduled programs, and community partners. Maximum attendance on the project site during any program/activity will be limited to 100 people. Regular open hours are not anticipated, as most uses will be event-based and controlled through advance scheduling. Applicant anticipates that use of the meeting facility will be limited to the hours of 7:00am to 10:00pm on any given day. c. Staffing & Maintenance The only permanent occupants will be residents of the on-site home, who will assist in security, property maintenance, and landscaping. Additional staffing will be event-specific, with volunteers or temporary personnel hired as needed for larger gatherings, retreats, or maintenance projects. -use buildings will be maintained by the resident caretakers and serviced as needed for activity preparation and upkeep. d. Traffic and Parking Management Daily traffic flow will be minimal, as the property is not intended for high-volume public access due to reservation-based use of the meeting facility. The Applicant agrees to limit attendees to any program or activity on the Project Site to no more than 100 people. A total of 20 parking stalls are proposed, complying with the parking ratio of 1 parking stall/7 people and the gross floor The site will have internal pedestrian trails and gathering spaces, promoting walkability and minimizing vehicular impact on the landscape. e. Environmental & Community Considerations The development will prioritize sustainability, ensuring that structures and landscaping blend with the natural surroundings. The space will respect environmental values, incorporating native plants, eco- friendly design, and land stewardship principles into its development 8. Site Development Concept The proposed Pu ueo Project is designed to minimize the need for extensive land alteration activities in order to accommodate the proposed project components. This is reflected in the design of smaller structures rather than a single larger, multi-story facility as well as the use of post and beam construction for the h lau and residence. Due to the meandering interface of the subject properties with the Wailuku River, all -of- floating pier. A proposed grassed pedestrian pathway, approximately 5 feet wide, will be provided along the banks of the Wailuku River will follow the existing topography in order to minimize the need for any hand-grading. "Roots and Research" series • • • • • The halau and mixed • • area of the halau, exclusive of the exterior lanai. • • • a proposed structures will be situated along the "top bank", with the exception of the as a "nature walk" whose alignment 7 | P a g e 9. Best Management Practices The subject properties have been extensively cleared of very heavy vegetation in 2023. During this clearing period, bio-socks and filter fencing were placed along the top of the Wailuku River embankment to control the sedimentation into the Wailuku River until such time sufficient groundcover was restored through the application of quick-growing annual rye grass or similar groundcover that minimized erosion and sedimentation. The Applicant will take the same cautious approach towards the development of the proposed Pu ueo Project by implementing a project that is integrated with the existing landform rather than extensive reshaping. This will be accomplished through the use of post and beam construction where possible and the design of smaller building components rather than large, multi-level facilities. The Applicant will also adhere to the following requirements: Prior to the commencement of any land altering or construction activities, sedimentation barriers (silt fences) shall be implemented on downhill slope of the project site to minimize potential run off or sedimentation and shall remain in place until final inspection has been granted for all proposed construction activities. All earthwork and grading activity shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control of the Hawai i County Code All construction and maintenance activities on the subject parcel shall comply with Chapter 27, Floodplain Management, of the Hawai i County Code. To protect any Hawaiian Hoary Bats in the vicinity of the subject properties, barbed wire fencing shall not be used anywhere within the project site and woody vegetation over 15 feet in height shall not be removed during bat breeding season of June 1st to September 15th. If any state-listed waterbirds such as the Hawaiian Duck, Hawaiian Stilt, Hawaiian Coot the Applicant shall immediately cease all activities within 100 feet of the bird. Work may continue after the bird leaves of its own accord. If a nest is discovered at any point, the Hawai i Island Branch DOFAW Office shall be contacted. If the State endangered Hawaiian Monk Seal and threatened Green Sea Turtle are present during any construction activities, the Applicant shall immediately cease all activities within 100 meters of the animal. Work may continue after the animal leaves of its own accord. Artificial light from exterior lighting fixtures, including, but not necessarily limited to floodlights, up-lights or spotlights used for decorative or aesthetic purposes shall be prohibited if the light directly illuminates, or is directed to project across property boundaries toward, the shoreline and ocean waters, except as may otherwise be permitted pursuant to Section 205A-71(b), Hawai i Revised Statutes. In the event that surface or subsurface historic resources, including human skeletal remains, structural remains (e.g., rock walls, terraces, platforms, etc.), cultural deposits, marine shell concentrations, sand deposits, or sink holes are identified during the demolition and/or construction work, the Applicant shall cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find, protect the find from additional disturbance and • • • • • or Hawaiian Goose (Nene) are present during any construction activities, • • • 8 | P a g e contact the State Historic Preservation Division at (808) 933-7651. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from DLNR-SHPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. 10. Timeframe and cost Upon issuance of an SMA Use Permit, the Applicants will submit a detailed site, elevation and landscaping plans for Plan Approval Review, likely within a six (6) month period. Upon issuance of Final Plan Approval, it will likely take about a year to prepare the necessary construction drawings and secure building permits for the Phase 1 residential dwelling and detached garage. The hope is to complete construction of the Phase 1 residential dwelling within 3 years from the date of SMA approval. Development of subsequent phases will be dependent upon securing the necessary financing, but the Applicant anticipates that the entire Pu ueo Project, as presented within this application, could be completed within 12 years. Anticipated cost for the construction of the Pu ueo Project is anticipated to range somewhere between $4 to $5 million dollars. B. HISTORICAL PROPERTY INFORMATION 11.As confirmed by the pre-existing lot determination for Parcels 1 and 2, the Project Site consist of 3 individual lots of records resulting from Land Commission Awards dating back to the 1850s. In the late nineteenth century, the Pu ueo area established itself as a residential community, along with various dryland agricultural activities. Stores such as Serrao serviced this community until the later twentieth century when it was cleared for the construction of the existing Riverside Apartment complex across Puueo Street and mauka of the Project Site. The Project Site, while currently vacant of any use, has historically accommodated the former Puueo Poi Factory up to its relocation in 1965. There were also a few homes built on the property. These historical photos of the Project Site show the extent of development and activities that once inhabited these properties and immediately surrounding area. Figure 4 E.D. Baldwin Survey 1891 a section of a government survey map from 1891 that depicts the then- that is also depicted in the photograph identified as Figure 5 Photo by Brother Bertram, circa 1883 to 1905 existing structures on the Project Site, including the "Store House" 9 | P a g e Figure 4 E.D. Baldwin Survey 1891 Figure 5 Photo by Brother Bertram, circa 1883 to 1905 below looks northwest from the foreground along with a number of homes and the extensively cleared and managed landscaped that also includes taro lo i. Grt:7/71 Z.3 .-Pi/ma-a S,4QC/"~ ·-.ll __.--;;; N1akaolan ~kilo. --~;..,-· /-" • ..,. ... ----.,o_~e Ho L.CA.43.().'1 d/7-I LtJ • / the southern bank of Wailuku River towards the Project Site. Note the "Store House" in 10 | P a g e Figure 5 Photo by Brother Bertram, circa 1883 to 1905 11 | P a g e Figure 6 Photo by Orville Magoon, April 1946 looks mauka toward the Project Site situated on the right (north) side of the Wailuku River and between the two bridges. This photo was taken shortly after the 1946 Tsunami that collapsed a section of the railroad bridge that spanned the Wailuku River. Figure 6 Photo by Orville Magoon, April 1946 12 | P a g e Figure 7 below shows the property shortly after the April 1946 tsunami, looking makai at Pu ueo Bridge with the mauka portion of the Project Site located on the upper left portion of this photo. Figure 7 Photo by NOAA, April 1946 12. 1940s to 1960s The Project Site previously hosted the original Puueo Poi Factory that was located along the Wailuku River stream bank, as well as several homes. The poi factory operated during the period from 1941 to 1965, with all active occupation of the property ceasing sometime during the late 1960s. 13. 1980s to 2020s More recent clearing of the Project Site, somewhere around the late 1980s, almost completely destroyed the majority of foundations associated with the poi factory and homes that once existed. Ornamental trees were left behind, such as breadfruit, guava, hibiscus, mango, castor bean, avocado, banana and palm trees. Over decades, the vegetation has grown unmanaged and a dense ground cover of Hilo, California and Wainaku grasses now intertwines between the trees, which now includes the dangerous Albizia and banyan along with scattered populations of laua e and bamboo 13 | P a g e 14. July 25, 2022 Due to the extensive vegetative canopies that dangerously occupied the project site, promoted, the prior landowner secured SMA Minor Use Permit PL-SMM-2022-000021 (see Exhibit B) to allow for tree removal, grubbing and minor grading activities. These vegetation clearing activities were completed in mid-2023. C. REGULATORY HISTORY 15. April 14, 1978 SMA Minor Use Permit No. 78-42 issued for area now identified as Parcels 1 and 2 to allow for minor clearing and grading activities as well as the construction of a 12-foot wide paved road to service both lots. (see Exhibit C-SMM 78- 42) 16. May 21, 1991 SMA Minor Use Permit No. 91-12, issued for Parcels 1 and 2, to allow for clearing of vegetation, removal of abandoned vehicles, minor structures and other debris as well as for work associated with a topographic survey, archaeological and soil testing. (see Exhibit D SMM 91-12) 17. June 30, 1992 Board of Land and Natural Resources certifies shoreline survey along Wailuku River frontages of Parcels 1 and 2. (see Exhibit E Shoreline Survey) 18. May 27, 1993 Planning Commission approves SMA Use Permit No. 340 to allow for the construction of a 24-unit condominium (Noelani Gardens) complex and related improvements within that area identified as Parcels 1 and 2. (see Exhibit F SMA 340). At the request of the previous landowner and applicant, this permit was subsequently revoked by the Planning Commission on July 16, 1999 19. January 7, 2019 Determination of Pre-existing Lot confirming Parcel 1 consists of two (2) existing legal lots of record. (see Exhibit G Pre-Existing Lot Determination) 20. May 24, 2019 State Department of Land and Natural Resources confirms that Parcels 1 and 2 are not subject to the shoreline certification process according to Chapter 13-222, Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR). As Parcel 3 is similarly situated inland along the Wailuku River, the Project Site is not located along the shoreline. (see Exhibit H DLNR Letter to Peter Kubota) 21. September 9, 2019 Tentative Subdivision Approval issued for proposed consolidation and re-subdivision of three (3) existing lots of record comprising both Parcels 1 and 2. This subdivision action has been deferred by the Applicant has they have recently purchased the adjoining Parcel 3 and will reassess their options once the Project Site has been cleared. (see Exhibit I Tentative Approval dated September 9, 2019. 22. July 25, 2022 SMA Minor Use Permit PL-SMM-2022-000021 issued to allow clearing of excessive vegetation from project site. (see Exhibit B) and the squatting, littering and other illicit activities that the project site's condition 14 | P a g e D. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 23. State Land Use Designation: Urban. The project site is situated within an area designated for Urban uses by the State Land Use Commission. 24. Current County Zoning: Resort-Hotel-750sf of land area per unit (V-.75) The Project Site is situated within an area designated for Urban uses by the State Land Use Commission and for Resort-Hotel (V-.75) uses by the County Zoning Code. (see Figure 8 - Current Area Zoning) Figure 8 Current Area Zoning 25. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: Medium Density Urban The County of Hawai i General Plan is the policy document for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawai i. The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map suggests this area of Pu ueo for Medium Density Urban uses, which consist of village and neighborhood commercial and single family and multiple family residential and related functions (multiple family residential -- up to 35 units per acre). The proposed Pu ueo Project will introduce uses that are consistent with the LUPAG map classification. 15 | P a g e 26. Hilo Community Development Plan The Hilo Community Development Plan (HCDP), adopted in 1975, recommends that the Project Site and lands to the west along the Wailuku River be rezoned from Resort Hotel (V-.75) to Multiple Family Residential (RM). The reason for this recommendation is based on the finding that: The Puueo shore area is desirable for hotel development because of the attractive views across Hilo Bay and the proximity to downtown (both for the convenience of visitors and to assist in revitalization of downtown). This are is currently zoned for resort use but is being developed with multi=family residential. It is unfortunate that this multi-family development may pre-empt potential hotel sites for which there will be demand in the future. This plan recommends that the resort zoning be retained (except for the small wedge of resort-zoned land adjacent to Wailuku River) in order to encourage hotel development. The strip of resort-zoned land along Wailuku River is too small for proper resort development, especially for high-rise buildings, and should be rezoned to RM 4. In addition to potential hotel sites being pre-empted by multi-family development, the high density character for such development is likely to overload this infrastructure and public facilities designed for this area. In order to mitigate this problem and still encourage one or a few hotels being developed, it was recommended in a previous section of this report that the zoning ordinance be revised, requiring a lower density multi-family use in the resort zone than is now allowed 27. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A The entire State of Hawai i lies within the Coastal Zone Management area. The intent of the Coastal Zone Management Program is to guide and regulate public and private uses in the coastal zone management area with respect to recreational resources, historic resources, public access to the shoreline, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems, marine resources, economic uses, coastal hazards, managing development, public participation, and beach protection. 28. Special Management Area (SMA) The Special Management Area (SMA) is a part of the Coastal Zone Management Program that is regulated by the County preserve, protect, and where possible, to restore the natural resources of the coastal zone of Hawai i. Therefore, special controls on development within the area along the shoreline are necessary to avoid permanent loss of valuable resources and the foreclosure of management options, and to ensure that adequate public access is provided to public-owned or used beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves, by dedication or other means. The project site is situated within the SMA due to its proximity to the coastal area of Hilo. An SMA Use Permit is required from the Windward Planning Commission in order to support the proposed Pu ueo Project. " II , established to promote the State's policy to 16 | P a g e E. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 29. Subject Property The Project Site is currently vacant of any uses or structures and gently slopes towards Hilo Bay and the Wailuku River, with that section immediately adjacent to the river dropping off sharply in a cliff or bank about 20 feet high in some sections. As previously mentioned, the project site was recently grubbed which removed the extensive canopy of Albizia, banyan, avocado, gunpowder, plumeria, mango, bamboo and palms, as well as the understory of grasses such as California, Hilo and Wainaku grasses. 30. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses The Project Site resides in an area that historically has been, and currently is, extensively developed primarily with residential uses. The Project Site is framed by the Wailuku River to the south and Puueo Street to the west (mauka), and the privately owned pedestrian lane known as Kou Lane to the north. To the east are small vacant parcels that also adjoin the Hawaii Belt Road (State Highway 19) and like the Project Site, is heavily overgrown with various trees and undergrowth. Across of Kou Lane to the north is a 14-unit apartment complex as well as a collection of single-family dwellings along the private Arruda Lane. Both Kou Lane and Arruda Lane are narrow private lanes that are not accessible by vehicles and remain exclusively pedestrian. Across of Puueo Street to the west (mauka) is the much larger 74-unit Riverside Apartment complex and a neighborhood of single-family homes and condominium apartments. Figure 7 below shows the Zoning pattern within this particular section of Puueo, reflecting the Resort-Hotel zoning that includes the Project Site and lands up and down along the Wailuku River as well as along the Hawaii Belt Road. Much of the remaining lands shown are zoned for commercial uses (CN-10) or apartment complexes (RM-1). 31. US Soil Survey: Hilo Hydrous silty claim loam (903) The subject property is comprised entirely of Hilo series soil, which consists of deep, well drained soils that formed in material weathered from volcanic ash. Hilo soils are on ashfields that are on low-elevation windward slopes of Mauna Kea volcano at elevations of 15 to 335 meters (50 to 1100 feet). The soils formed in material weathered from volcanic ash underlain by 100- to 300-thousand year-old pahoehoe and a a lava flows. This soil is well drained, with medium to high runoff and high saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) in the surface and moderately high Ksat in the subsurface. These soils are used for forest, wildlife habitat, building site development, recreation, orchard crops, agroforestry, and livestock grazing. Common vegetation is hilograss (Paspalum conjugatum), guinea grass (Urochloa maxima), California grass (Urochloa mutica) and strawberry guava (Psidium cattleianum). ' ' 17 | P a g e 32. FIRM The majority of the Project Site is situated outside of the 500-year frequency floodplain and not subject to coastal inundation, with the exception of that portion that forms the embankment of the Wailuku River which are subject to both the 100-year frequency flooding (AE) and coastal flooding (VE) with a base flood elevation of approximately 16 feet, as shown in Figure 9 DLNR Flood Hazard Assessment. As no habitable structures or uses are proposed within these portions of the Project Site subject to potential inundation, no adverse effects from flooding from Hilo Bay or along the Wailuku River is expected. Figure 9 DLNR Flood Hazard Assessment 18 | P a g e 33. Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report (2017) a state-wide assessment of Hawa vulnerability to sea level rise and offered recommendations to adapt. One such recommended practice is that the magnitude and rate of sea level rise warrants planning for 3.2 feet of sea level rise by 2100. Towards that end, the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA) shows that only a small portion of the subject property will be impacted by 3.2 feet of expected sea level rise by 2100, and would inundate generally the same area subject to flooding as shown below; and for similar reasons, the proposed activities are not introducing any uses or structures that will be impacted by sea level rise anticipated within the next 75 years. 34. Flora/Fauna Resources No professional flora or faunal surveys were conducted of the subject property due to its extensively altered nature, especially after the recently approved grubbing activities. The Applicant has not identified any endangered species of plants or animals within the project site. While no endangered species of fauna were observed, its location and shoreline proximity could see threatened or endangered species such as the Hawaiian Hoary Bat, Hawaiian (koloa) Duck, Hawaiian (Nene) Goose, Hawaiian Petrel, Hawaiian Coot, Band-rumped Storm-petrel and the Hawaiian Stilt. The Hawaiian Monk Seal and the threatened Green Sea Turtle may occur in the vicinity of the subject properties. 35. Archaeological Resources An archaeological inventory survey of the Project Site currently identified as Parcels 1 and 2 was performed in 1991 (see Exhibit J) as part of the now-defunct Noelani Gardens project and which identified one prehistoric site (Site 15415) consisting of prehistoric hearths, historic refuse and recent structural remnants located along the Wailuku River frontage of the project site. At the time of review by the State Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division (SHPD), they found that adequate documentation for all of the components except for the prehistoric hearths, dating back between AD 1400 to 1670, with a recommendation that it be preserved until its historical significance is determined. The survey concluded that these hearths were most likely associated with temporary occupation within the Project Site and likely associated with exploitation of riverine and marine resources. Based on the result of the archaeological investigation, Site 15415 was evaluated as significant solely for information content and is not recommended for further work. Due to historic and more recent occupation of the Project Site, and the interim preservation of Site 15415 until a significance determination is made by SHPD, the Project Site does not present itself as an area containing significant cultural, historical or natural resources that would be compromised by the proposed activities. Therefore, the Applicant finds that the proposed grubbing and grading activities will not have a significant adverse impact upon any cultural, historic or natural resources. No archaeological survey was conducted for Parcel 3, although this property has been partially cleared. The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report ("report") provides ii's reduce the exposure and sensitivity to sea level rise and increase the State's capacity to 19 | P a g e 36. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights Due to historical occupation of the property for commercial and residential uses until the mid-1960s, and the absence of any known native Hawaiian flora, the Project Site is not known to be a resource for the practice of any native Hawaiian traditional or customary rights. 37. Public Access The Project Site is situated at least 70 feet mauka of State Highway 19 as it crosses the Wailuku River, and therefore not directly fronting the shoreline as confirmed by the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, and therefore not anticipated to have any significant adverse impact upon coastal recreational resources. The Applicant is not aware of any resources within the property that provides direct coastal recreational opportunities to the residents of this island. Wailuku River itself, especially that portion that fronts the Project Site, is not known to offer any recreational opportunities. Furthermore, no identified public access to the shoreline or mountain areas existing within the Project Site. Therefore, the proposed grubbing and grading activities, by and of itself, will not have an adverse impact to any coastal recreational resources. F. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 37. Access: Access to the subject property is from Puueo Street, a County-maintained, two-lane roadway. Within the project site, access to the proposed 20-stall parking areas will be provided by an internal paved driveway. 38. Water County water is available to support the proposed project. 39. Wastewater The project site can be served by the municipal sewer system, with all Hilo wastewater treatment system. The Applicant believes that a 10-inch sewer line runs along Puueo Street directly fronting the subject properties. There is also a sewer line makai of the subject properties along Highway 19. The Applicant will likely required to prepare a sewer capacity study for review and approval by the Department of Environmental Management that will ultimately determine where and how to connect the Pu 40. Solid Waste Solid waste will be handled through commercial haulers or disposal by the landowner into authorized landfill sites or transfer stations. 41. Essential Utilities and Services Other utilities, such as electrical, cable and telephone services, will be made available to the project site. County's wastewater pumped to the County's 'ueo Project to the County's sewer system. 20 | P a g e F. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SMA USE PERMIT REQUEST The approval of the Applicants request to develop the project site as an educational, research and collaborative/gathering space that will promote science education, outreach and cultural engagement will not be contrary to the standards and policies of Chapter 205A, Hawai i Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The propose Pu ueo Project will consist of a series of relatively small, one to one and a half- story buildings that will be sited so as to not be subject to any coastal hazard nor anticipated to have any adverse impact upon coastal resources. The project site does not provide access to the shoreline. The project site itself and been recently and extensively grubbed of invasive vegetation. Therefore, development of the project site as presented within this application will not have any significant adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area or upon any endangered species of plants or animals. In view of the Hawai i State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa akai O Ka Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. It is unlikely that there are any valued cultural, historic and natural resources to be found within the property, given that it has been extensively utilized for commercial and residential purposes since the late 1800s. For these reasons, the Applicants could find no evidence of any possible adverse effects or impairments that will occur to any valued resources should the proposed Pu ueo Project be allowed to proceed. Should the Applicants inadvertently encounter any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials, the Applicants agree to cease any work in the immediate area and contact the Department of Land and Natural Resources-State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR- HPD), resuming activities only upon securing archaeological clearance from DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. Approval of the request to construct and establish the Pu ueo Project will not be contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawai i Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management nor the guidelines for approval of an SMA Use Permit as prescribed by Planning Commission Rule No. 9 regarding the Special Management Area. The project site is situated within the Special Management Area, but does not share a direct frontage with the shoreline. It does, however, front the bank of the Wailuku River. The Applicants will site all habitable structures in a manner that will not be subject to any coastal hazard nor the effects of sea-level rise. The project site has been utilized for almost 150 years for commercial and residential purposes, and has most recently been cleared of an extensive canopy of invasive trees and thick undergrowth. Squatters, and the litter that is left behind, have been removed from the project site. The Applicants consist of scientists focusing their efforts on the protection of our oceans. Therefore, the development of the 21 | P a g e proposed Pu ueo Project on the subject properties is not anticipated to have any adverse impact upon coastal resources such as coastal recreational and marine resources, coastal ecosystems or the public use and recreational use of any beach. The subject properties were recently and extensively grubbed under the review and approval of SMM-2022-000021 issued by the Planning Director. Upon review of the propose grubbing activity by the Department of Public Works, it determined that the scope of the proposed grubbing activity did not warrant a grubbing permit. A previous archaeological survey identified one prehistoric site (Site 15415) consisting of prehistoric hearths, historic refuse and recent structural remains. Based on the result of the archaeological investigation, Site 15415 was evaluated as significant solely for information content and is not recommended for further work. Therefore, it is not anticipated that development of the proposed Pu ueo Project will have any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area as this area has already been extensively altered and disturbed over the course of more than 150 years. The subject properties, zoned Resort-Hotel (V-.75), are similarly designated as those properties to the west (mauka) and to the north along Puueo Street. The subject properties and the surrounding area within this part of Pu ueo is designated for Medium Density Urban uses by the General Plan, which consist of village and neighborhood commercial and single family and multiple family residential and related functions (multiple family residential -- up to 35 units per acre). The proposed Pu ueo Project will introduce uses that are consistent with the LUPAG map classification as witness by uses such as the 74-unit Riverside Apartments, 14-unit apartment complex at 66 Pu ueo Street and a one-story commercial building directly across Pu ueo Street. Finally, in terms of the public participation objective, this is generally a public agency function. This is achieved through the Marine and Coastal Zone Management Advisory Group (MACZMAG) and the public hearing process required pursuant to the gs on this application. Notices of this application will become available through the posting of a sign on the property, as well as sending two (2) notices to surrounding property owners, one at the time the application is filed and again, prior to the public hearing. G.ANTICIPATED EFFECTS UPON THE SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA a. Relationship of proposed action to land use plans, policies and control The subject properties are situated within the State Land Use Urban District and zoned for Resort-Hotel (V-.75) uses. The V (Resort-Hotel) zoning district applies to areas that accommodate the needs and desires of visitors, tourists and transient guests. It applies to specific areas where public roads and public utilities are available or where suitable alternate private facilities are assured. It may apply to a single isolated hotel or resort with or without a commercial mall or shopping section. In this case, the proposed Pu ueo Project is envisioned as a place-based initiative rooted in conservation, science, Planning Commission's Rules and County Council's meetin 22 | P a g e storytelling, community gathering, and education. Its mission is to foster meaningful connections between people and place by supporting community-driven science, sharing knowledge through storytelling, and advancing ocean protection through culturally grounded outreach and innovation. People, both residents and visitors alike, will be invited to participate in the discussions that will foster learning and collaboration. By developing the property in phases, the Applicant seeks to balance sustainability, accessibility and functionality, while ensuring the proposed project serves as a hub for scientific retreats, educational programs, and community gatherings. The Applicants commit to creating a space that minimizes environmental impact and supports science and education. b. Description of how project will affect area and surrounding lands The subject properties lie within a long-established single- and multiple-family residential area that is also host to scattered commercial uses, such uses that also occurred on the subject properties for most of the last 150 years. During more recent years, the subject properties became overgrown with non-native plants and weeds that sheltered a homeless community that resulted in the area being littered with garbage and illicit activities. The subject properties have been recently cleared, reminding one of what this area looked like in the past when the land was cared for while being used as homesites and business establishments. The Pu ueo Project is envisioned as a meeting space for science and educational programs while also accommodating select community gatherings that align with the learning and collaborative environment that the Applicant wishes to promote. The Applicant will manage traffic to the proposed facility as well as operational hours, as the Applicant is well-aware of the many neighbors living nearby. c. Description of impacts that cannot be avoided and applied mitigation measures The construction of the proposed Pu ueo Project will cause some temporary noise impacts upon adjoining properties. The Applicant and their contractors will apply best management practices and common sense when undertaking the construction work, such as limiting construction activities to daylight hours only with appropriate dust and runoff control measures implemented. All construction material will be promptly and properly disposed of throughout the construction process and upon completion of the project. Wastewater generated by the project will be sewer system. Runoff will be minimized through the use of on-site drainage systems as well as minimizing the overall footprint of the project and limiting the extent of impervious surfaces and capturing roof runoff and diverting it to small drainage basins. accommodated within the County's 23 | P a g e d. Alternatives to the proposed project Alternatives to the proposed Pu ueo Project is to leave the property undeveloped or to construct a single-family dwelling or a multiple-family residential complex. There are various uses and activities permitted within the Resort-Hotel zoning district, many of which may introduce must higher levels of impact upon adjoining and surrounding properties. The Applicants wish to establish a learning and collaboration meeting space on these properties who collectively wish to minimize environmental impacts and support scientific exploration. Their mission is to empower communities through meaningful science, educational outreach, conservation, and storytelling rooted in place-based knowledge and values. How appropriate that this proposed facility and its mission will be situated along the Wailuku River at its overlooks Hilo Bay. The purpose of the SMA is to ensure that development will not have a substantial adverse effect upon coastal resources, and the Applicant believes that they have accomplished this goal with the information provided within this application. The Applicants will not bring harm to the very resources that they wish to protect. It really is that simple and clear. e. Irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources Given the limited and focused scope of the proposed project, the Applicant is not able to identify any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of cultural, historical, recreational or ecological resources as a result of the proposed project. Public facilities and services are available to support the proposed project. This will be a community- focused meeting facility with collaborative programs centered around scientific exploration and building relationships with our community. The Applicant hopes that their initiative will be viewed as a great opportunity and a valuable resource. This property was once extensively utilized as homesites and a community resource. The Applicant wishes to restore the historic value of these properties once more. H. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF CHAPTER 205A AND SMA GUIDELINES a. Recreational resources The subject properties are not known to accommodate any coastal recreational or public access opportunities. While the subject properties are located along the banks of the Wailuku River, the nearby Hilo Bay provides a more direct access to the bay, where recreational opportunities occur. 24 | P a g e b. Historic resources An archaeological inventory survey of the subject properties was performed in 1991 as part of the now-defunct Noelani Gardens project and which identified one prehistoric site (Site 15415) consisting of prehistoric hearths, historic refuse and recent structural remnants located along the Wailuku River frontage of the project site. At the time of review by the State Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division (SHPD), they found that adequate documentation for all of the components except for the prehistoric hearths, dating back between AD 1400 to 1670, with a recommendation that it be preserved until its historical significance is determined. The survey concluded that these hearths were most likely associated with temporary occupation within the Project Site and likely associated with exploitation of riverine and marine resources. Based on the result of the archaeological investigation, Site 15415 was evaluated as significant solely for information content and is not recommended for further work. Based on this determination, the subject properties do not present themselves as an area containing significant cultural, historical or natural resources that would be compromised by the proposed activities. Therefore, the Applicant finds that the proposed Pu ueo Project will not have a significant adverse impact upon any cultural, historic or natural resources. No archaeological survey was conducted for Parcel 3, although this property has been recently grubbed and cleared. c. Scenic and Open Space resources The subject properties are not identified as an area of natural beauty by the General Plan. The subject properties are located along the banks of the Wailuku River at a location mauka of Hilo Bay. However, these properties are highly visible from makai vantage points near Hilo Bay. The Applicant believes that this proposed action will improve scenic and open space opportunities along this particular section of the Wailuku River, especially when compared with the heavily overgrown state of the properties that existed only a couple of years ago. But as far as viewplanes makai towards Hilo Bay, such visual intrusions are considered minimal, especially when compared with adjoining multi-level apartment complexes. d. Coastal ecosystems The subject properties do not have a direct shoreline frontage, but is situated along the banks of the Wailuku River. The small and limited scale of this project will further manage the effects that activities and improvements upon these lands will have upon nearby coastal ecosystems. The Applicant will comply with all applicable government regulations to mitigate the effects of the project upon coastal resources, such as prompt disposal of demolition- and construction-related material, property erosion and sedimentation control, air quality management and the effects of excessive noise. The Applicant understand that they are located within an established residential community 25 | P a g e surrounded by neighbors, and will be in how they and their contractors proceed with the construction activities. e. Economic uses Economic benefits associated with the proposed Pu ueo Project are limited to the skilled contractors who will build the new facility. As a non-profit organization, the Applicant is interested in promoting scientific endeavors geared towards ocean conservation. What is envisioned as a world-class science meeting facility will hopefully attract interested members of the local and worldwide science community to Hilo and showcasing the ongoing efforts of the Applicant. f. Coastal hazards The majority of the Project Site is situated outside of the 500-year frequency floodplain and not subject to coastal inundation, with the exception of that portion that forms the embankment of the Wailuku River which are subject to both the 100-year frequency flooding (AE) and coastal flooding (VE) with a base flood elevation of approximately 16 feet. As no habitable structures or uses are proposed within these portions of the Project Site subject to potential inundation, no adverse effects from flooding from Hilo Bay or along the Wailuku River is expected The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report provide a state-wide assessment of Hawa vulnerability to sea level rise and offered recommendations to adapt. One such recommended practice is that the magnitude and rate of sea level rise warrant planning for 3.2 feet of sea level rise by 2100. Towards that end, the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA) shows that only a small portion of the subject property will be impacted by 3.2 feet of expected sea level rise by 2100, and would inundate generally the same area subject to flooding as shown below; and for similar reasons, the proposed activities are not introducing any uses or structures that will be impacted by sea level rise anticipated within the next 75 years. g. Cultural resources Pa akai O Ka Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. The Applicant has not witnessed or encountered any activities that would recognize the subject properties as being host to any valued cultural, historical, and natural resources. The Applicant understand that should they inadvertently encounter any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials, all work in the immediate area will cease and the Department of Land and Natural Resources- State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD) immediately contacted, resuming ii's reduce the exposure and sensitivity to sea level rise and increase the State's capacity to In view of the Hawai'i State Supreme Court's" PASH" and "Ka 26 | P a g e activities only upon securing archaeological clearance from DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. In the absence of any evidence of traditional or customary Native Hawaiian rights being practiced on the subject property and the existence of any known valued cultural, historical or native resources, the Applicant believes that the proposed project would have no adverse impact relative to the cultural and historical resources of the area. To the extent to which traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights. Based on the above findings, the Applicant maintains that the proposed project as presented within this application will not have any substantial adverse impacts on the surrounding area, nor will its approval be contrary to the objectives and policies of Chapter 205A, HRS, relating to Coastal Zone Management and Rule No. 9 of the Planning Commission relating to the Special Management Area. I. CONCLUSION Based on the discussion above, the Applicant finds that approval of an SMA Use Permit to allow for the construction and establishment of the proposed Pu ueo Project and related improvements on the subject properties will conform to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan and will not have a significant adverse impact upon coastal resources; and would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. Pu’ueo Project Hilo, Hawai’i SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations January 26th, 2026 EXHIBIT A A sense of place. Hilo, 1907. Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 3Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Mega Lab ││Hilo, HawaiʹiConcept ExplorationJanuary 16th, 2026 Scale: 1ʺ =100ʹ 9Noho Workshop Site Plan 123456789101112 131415161718192021 0 50ʹ100ʹ200ʹ N (3)2-6-002:001 50 PUUEO STREET HILO HI 96720 (3)2-6-002:002 28 KOU LANE HILO HI 96720 (3)2-6-002:003 44 KOU LANE HILO HI 96720 W A IL U K U DRIV EWAILUKU RI V E R S H IPM A N S T REET O HAI ST R EE T P U ' U E O S T R E E T K OU LA NE R T - 1 9 H A W AII B E L T R O A D KE A W E R O A D K A M E H A M E H A A V E N U E Site PlanSite Plan .,I r- 1 I/ ;/ 1/ // // r /// / / " / "\ ' " '\ -'\ "" \ E9 Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 4Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Mega Lab ││Hilo, HawaiʹiConcept ExplorationJanuary 16th, 2026 Scale: 1ʺ = 50ʹ 10Noho Workshop Site Plan 1ʺ=50ʺ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 0 20ʹ50ʹ100ʹN (3)2-6-002:001 50 PUUEO STREET HILO HI 96720 (3)2-6-002:002 28 KOU LANE HILO HI 96720 (3)2-6-002:003 44 KOU LANE HILO HI 96720 WAILUKU RIVER OHAI STREET PU'UEO STREET KO U LA N E RT-19 HAWAII BELT ROA D WAILUKU BRIDGE Site PlanSite Plan Site KeySite Key 1. Halau1. Halau 2. Bathrooms2. Bathrooms 3. Residence3. Residence 4. Garage4. Garage 5. Future Cabins5. Future Cabins 6. Shade/PV Structure6. Shade/PV Structure 7. Art Mural Wall7. Art Mural Wall 8. Pavilion(s)8. Pavilion(s) 9. Art/Sculpture9. Art/Sculpture 10. Temporary Floating Pier10. Temporary Floating Pier 77 33 1 1 22 55 55 66 44 77 77 88 88 88 1010 99 99 99 / / / l / / - J / / / / / / / ---- Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 5Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Halau Floor Plan & Exterior ElevationsHalau Floor Plan & Exterior Elevations Mega Lab ││Hilo, HawaiʹiConcept ExplorationJanuary 16th, 2025 2Noho Workshop Halau Floor Plan & Exterior Elevation 2 1 4' - 0 " 4' - 0 " 26 ' - 0 " 6'-0"72'-0"12'-0" 90'-0" 34 ' - 0 " B.O.H. Covered Lanai 1,095 sq ft Kitchen 464 sq ft Community Halau 1,436 sq ft 3:12 F.F.L. ±0" TOP PLATE +8'-0" ROOF RIDGE +32'-0" 16.5:1216.5:12 AREAS (SF) UTILITY OPEN DECK I E IO Kitchen Community Halau Covered Lanai 464 1,436 1,900 ft² 1,087 1,087 ft² Floor Plan 1 South Elevation 2 East Elevation ,~---1-__ --! ~ I I I I --I I -1- ~~-===----1- ---t I 0 0 Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 6Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Bathroom Structure Floor Plans & Exterior ElevationsBathroom Structure Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Mega Lab ││Hilo, HawaiʹiConcept ExplorationJanuary 16th, 2025 3Noho Workshop Bathroom Floor Plan & Exterior Elevation 4 3 6'-0" 6'-0"9'-6"36'-0"10'-0" 61'-6" 4'- 0" 4'- 0" 18'- 0" 26'- 0" Kane Wahine Outdoor Showers Covered Lanai 686 sq ft Bathrooms 591 sq ft 3:12 F.F.L. ±0" TOP PLATE +8'-0" ROOF RIDGE+20'-6" 14:1214:12 AREAS (SF) COVERED LANAI Bathrooms Covered Lanai 591 591 ft² 686 686 ft² Floor Plan 3 South Elevation 4 East Elevation I ,-=-- 1 -- t I I I t I I I t I --L--=_ - I -I - I I -- ---1--I -0 I I 0 Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 7Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Residence Floor Plans & Exterior ElevationsResidence Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Mega Residence │ Hilo, Hawai'i Concept Exploration January 16th, 2025 Scale: 3/32" = 1'-0", 1' = 1'-0" 2Noho Workshop Floor Plans DN 4 2 1 3 12'-2"11'-10" 6'-0" 6'-0"24'-0"10'-0" 60'-0" 4' - 0 " 4' - 0 " 8' - 2 " 13 ' - 1 0 " 7'-0"13'-7 1/2"9'-6" 7'-3 1/2" 5'-7"24'-0"10'-0" 22 ' - 0 " Living Primary Bedroom Bedroom 1 Ba t h r o o m Co a t / S h o e s W.I.C.Primary Bathroom Dining Kitchen WC Entry Pantry RF RG W/D Linen Linen Linen Linen 12345678910 15'-0"12'-0" Mech/ Storage La n a i4 2 1 3 AREAS (SF) INTERIOR Entry Hall KDL Primary Bed Guest Bedroom Primary Bath WIC Bathroom Utility Mech/Storage 143 528 199 122 111 76 65 76 1,320 ft² 293 293 ft² 1,613 ft² COVERED LANAI Lanai Lanai 359 397 756 ft² Residence Floor Plan Basement Floor Plan 0 0 0 0 - -- -4 7 - - - -'µ__ - - -,;~===---_-_--::;;;,;-;;;J,---,---,-~:;-i__-_ ---=-----_ --=(-..c--+=-= ==-I-- -- -- L ~ L ~ L ~ I I I 0 1 I 0 0 ----: -----I------I-----.: -----1--~ : ~ :---1------0 I I I I I I I I ----11= ---=~ ---= p ----l_hiii!·~~~.,-,,..,-i-ji'__J----------=---_j_-----i __ _,_ _l_=-= ==-1-- - - - - I I I I 0 1 Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 8Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Residence Exterior ElevationsResidence Exterior Elevations Mega Residence │ Hilo, Hawai'i Concept Exploration January 16th, 2025 Scale: 3/32" = 1'-0" 3Noho Workshop Exterior Elevations & Section LOWER LEVEL -10'-0" F.F.L. ±0" TOP PLATE +10'-8" ROOF RIDGE +20'-6" 9:12 9:12 LOWER LEVEL -10'-0" F.F.L. ±0" TOP PLATE +10'-8" ROOF RIDGE +20'-6" 9:12 9:12 North Elevation South Elevation West Elevation East Elevation • t t t t t t Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 9Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Garage Floor Plan & Exterior ElevationsGarage Floor Plan & Exterior Elevations Mega Lab ││Hilo, HawaiʹiConcept ExplorationFebruary 16th, 2025 2Noho Workshop Garage Plan & Elevation 4 3 2 1 32'-0" 24 ' - 0 " Garage 768 sq ft F.F.L. ±0" TOP PLATE +11'-2" ROOF RIDGE +21'-8" 9:12 9:12 AREAS (SF) Garage 768 768 ft² F.F.L. ±0" TOP PLATE +11'-2" ROOF RIDGE +21'-8" 9:12 9:12 Floor Plan 4 East Elevation3 South Elevation 2 West Elevation1 North Elevation ~ 0 __ --7 ~ I I r I ~--I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I I 0 f-----1 -----1 I I I I I I I I I I I I j I I I ~--I L I I I ----1 0 r ----- _t ~ Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 10Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Future Cabin Floor Plan & Exterior ElevationsFuture Cabin Floor Plan & Exterior Elevations Puako │ Hanalei, Kaua`i Concept Design January 27th, 2025 Cabin Floor Plan & Elevation 2Noho Workshop 1 2 26'-2"26'-2"52'-4" 5' - 6 " 1 2 ' - 0 " 12 ' - 0 " 5 ' - 6 " 24 ' - 0 " Studio 1 314 sq ft Studio 2 314 sq ft Studio 3 314 sq ft Studio 4 314 sq ft AREA (SF) Studio 1 Studio 2 Studio 3 Studio 4 314 314 314 314 1,256 ft² First Floor ±0" Top Plate +9'-0" Roof Ridge +17'-2"6:12 6:12 2 East Elevation1 South Elevation Floor Plan _________________________ ______, I I \ \ L 0 I I I I I I I I 0 Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 11Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Parking Shade / PV Structure Floor Plan & Exterior ElevationsParking Shade / PV Structure Floor Plan & Exterior Elevations Mega Lab ││Hilo, HawaiʹiConcept ExplorationJanuary 16th, 2026 4Noho Workshop Parking Shade Structure 123456789101112 6 5 109'-0" 9'-0"9'-0"9'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0"9'-0" 17 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " Parking Shade Structure 2,160 sq ft 6 PARKING GRADE±0" B.O. BEAMS+7'-7" T.O. STRUCTURE+15'-0"3:12 AREAS (SF) COVERED DECK Parking Shade Structure 2,160 2,160 ft² Floor Plan South Elevation Parking Shade Structure Section I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I !,__ -r I I I I I r "\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I C ~\~1/' ~' 1/1 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I 'c 'c I I I I I I I I I I I u u I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ----1----I 1---I I I ---1----I 1----r ~-- --"---~ ------1~ ~---- I I I I I \_ j I I I I I I r-I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 12Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Pavilion Structure Floor Plan & Exterior ElevationsPavilion Structure Floor Plan & Exterior Elevations Puako │ Hanalei, Kaua`i Concept Design January 27th, 2025 Hut Floor Plan & Elevation 2Noho Workshop 1 2 12'-0" 12 ' - 0 " Pavilion (Covered Deck) 169 sq ft AREA (SF) LANAI COVERED Pavilion (Covered Deck) 169 169 ft² 1 First Floor ±0" 2 Top Plate +9'-0" 3 Roof Ridge +14'-10" 9:129:12 2 East Elevation1 South Elevation Floor Plan ~ -~ LJ -- I I I L + CJ 3/ w- LJ -- I I Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 13Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 View from Pu’ueo BridgeView from Pu’ueo Bridge Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 14Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Overhead of Master PlanOverhead of Master Plan Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 15Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 Overhead of Master PlanOverhead of Master Plan Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 16Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 View from HalauView from Halau Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 17Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 View from HalauView from Halau Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 18Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 View from Wailuku RiverView from Wailuku River Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 19Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 View from Pu’ueo StreetView from Pu’ueo Street Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 20Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 View from Guest ParkingView from Guest Parking Noho WorkshopNoho Workshop 21Pu’ueo ProjectPu’ueo Project | | SMA Site Plan, Floor Plans & Exterior Elevations Hilo, Hawai’i January 26th, 2026 View of Parking Entry from Pu’ueo StreetView of Parking Entry from Pu’ueo Street Mitchell D. Roth Mayor LeeE. Lord Managing Director West Hawai'i Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole HwyKailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740Phone(808)323-4770Fax (808) 327-3563 July 25, 2022 Daryn Arai P.O. Box 4501 Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 County of Hawai 'i PLANNING DEPARTMENT ZendoKem Director Jeffrey W. Darrow Deputy Director East Hawai'i Office l O l Pauahi Street, Suite 3Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 Phone (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 Email: Dear Mr. Arai: SUBJECT: Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2022-000070) Special Management Area (SMA) Minor Permit Applicant: Landowner: Request: Tax Map Keys: (PL-SMM-2022-000021) Daryn Arai Aloha Kou, LLC Proposed Tree Removal, Grubbing and Minor Grading Activities (3)2-6-002:001, 002 & 003, South Hilo, Hawai'i We have reviewed the subject Special Management Area Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-22-000070) received by this office on March 30, 2022. The total land area of approximately 1.97-acres is zoned Resort-Hotel-7,500 square feet (V-.75) by the County and designated as Urban by the State Land Use Commission (LUC). The subject parcel is designated as "Medium Density Urban" (mdu) by the Hawai'i County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map. The entire subject parcel is located within the Special Management Area (SMA); however, it is not considered a "shoreline parcel" as defined by Section 205A-41, Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS). Existing Land Uses: Special Management Area Minor Permit No. 78-42 (April 14, 1978) and Special Management Area Minor Permit No. 91-12 (May 21, 1991) were previously issued for various improvements on the subject parcel. Additionally, Special Management Area Use Permit 340 was granted by the Plarming Commission on May 27, 1993, which was issued for the construction of a 24-unit www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov Hawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning@hawaiicounty.gov EXHIBIT B Daryn Arai July 25, 2022 Page 2 condominium complex and related improvements. SMA Use Permit 340 was revoked by the Planning Commission on July 16, 1999. Proposed Proiect: The applicant is proposing tree removal, gubbing and minor grading activities. Purpose of Proiect: The purpose of the tree removal is to remove heavy and extensive overgrowth in order to establish a scheduled maintenance program that will deter unpermitted activities, such as squatting, littering and other illicit activities. Hawai'i Revised Statutes {HRS) Ch. 343 Determination: The proposed project does not meet any of the triggers for environmental review in Hawai'i Administrative Rules (HAR) Section 11-200.1-9 (Applicability of Chapter 343, HRS, to applicant actions) and HRS Chapter 343-5, thus an environmental document is not required. Additional Agency Reviews Conducted: Based on the style and scope of the proposed project, the Planning Department solicited comments from other agencies that may have concerns or recommendations for the proposed project. The following outlines the agencies contacted and their comments: State Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR): The following Divisions were contacted; DAR, Engineering, DOFAW, CWRM, OCCL, and Land Division (Hawai'i District). Comments were received from Engineering Division and DOF AW. According to the Department of Land and Natural Resources Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOF AW), the Hawaiian Hoary Bat or 'Ope'ape'a (Lasiurus cinereus semotus) could potentially occur in the vicinty of the project area and may roost in nearby trees. Bat birthing and pup rearing season spans from June 1st through September 15th. DOF AW reported that the Hawaiian Duck, Hawaiian Stilt, Hawaiian Coot, Hawaiian Goose (Nene) and the Hawaiian Hawk ('Io) as possibly occuring in the vicinty of the project area. It is against State law to harm or harass this species. Lastly, the State listed Hawaiian Hawk or 'Io may occur in the vicinity as well as the Hawaiian Monk Seal and threatened Green Sea Turtles. Furthermore, DOF AW has provided guidance on measures to avoid and minimize impacts to the listed species, in addition to guidance on avoiding the spread of invasive species and pathogens. Based on the preceding, the Planning Department will add this condition as well as standard conditions that the applicant comply with the requirements of DOF AW. Special Management Area Determination: According to Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 205A-44 and Planning Commission (PC) Rule No. 9-4(e)(l)(E), "development" includes "Grading, removing, dredging, mining or extraction of any materials. " Therefore, the proposed tree removal, grubbing and minor grading Daryn Arai July 25, 2022 Page 3 is considered to be development and will require a review against the Special Management Area rules and regulations. We find that the proposed project is not exempt from the definition of "development;" however, the project will not have a cumulative impact or a significant adverse environmental or ecological effect on the SMA. Therefore, pursuant to Planning Commission Rule Section 9-l0(e), Special Management Area Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2022-000021 is hereby issued for the project as described above. It is the applicant's responsibility to read and comply with the conditions listed in the enclosed permit. While further review of the proposed project against the Special Management Area rules and regulations will not be required, all other applicable Zoning Code and Building Code requirements must be satisfied. Additionally, any future development or activities not included in this approval shall require further review and approval as provided under Chapter 205A, HRS and Rule 9, Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure. If you have questions regarding this document, please contact Tracie-Lee Camero of this office at (808) 961-8166 or via email at Tracie-Lee.Camero@hawaiicounty.gov. Sincerely, ZENDOKERN Planning Director TC:jaa \\coh0 l \planning\public\wpwin60\czm\smm\2022\pl-smm-2022-00002 l l_ alohakou.doc Enclosure: SMA Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2022-000021 Cc (via email): Shichao Li, State-OPSD Lisa E. Webster, State-OPSD GIS Section Mitchell D. Roth Mayor LeeE. Lord Managing Director West Hawai'i Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole HwyKailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740Phone(808)323-4770Fax (808) 327-3563 County of Hawai 'i PLANNING DEPARTMENT ZendoKem Director Jeffrey W. Darrow Deputy Director East Hawai'i Office l O l Pauahi Street, Suite 3Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 Phone (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 Special Management Area Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2022-000021 Project: Applicant(s): Landowner(s): TMK(s): Location: Land Area: Grading, Grubbing and Tree Removal Daryn Arai Aloha Kou, LLC (3)2-6-002:001, 002, and 003 South Hilo District, Island of Hawai'i 1.4997 acres Applicant's Request 1.Project Description: This Special Management Area (SMA) Minor Use Permit is being pursued for the tree removal, grubbing and minor grading activities. 2.Purpose of Project: The purpose of the tree removal is to remove heavy and extensive overgrowth in order to establish a scheduled maintenance program that will deter unpermitted activities, such as squatting, littering and other illicit activities. 3.Project Valuation: $150,000. 4.Determination: According to Chapter 205A-22, Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS), and Planning Commission (PC) Rule No. 9-4(e)(l) relating to Special Management Area (SMA): "grading, removing, dredging, mining or extraction of any materials" as defined as "development," Therefore, the proposed land clearing and vegetation removal of the subject parcels is considered "development" and requires a review against the Special Management Area rules and regulations. Our review has resulted in the issuance of a SMA Minor Permit. State and County Plans 5.State Land Use District: The subject parcel is within the State Land Use Urban District. 6.General Plan: The parcel is designated as "Medium Density Urban" (mdu) by the Hawai'i County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map. 7.County Zoning: The parcel is currently zoned as both Resort-Hotel (V-.75). www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov Hawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning@hawaiicounty.gov Aloha Kou July 25, 2022 Page2 8.Special Management Area: The project parcel is located within the SpecialManagement Area (SMA); however, no portion of the parcel is located within the "shoreline area" as defined by section 205A-41, Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS). 9.Flood Zone: Zone X, AE, and VE (Coastal areas with a 1% or greater chance offlooding and an additional hazard associated with storm waves). Compliance with Objectives and Policies of Chapter 205A, Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS), Regarding the Special Management Area Check all objectives and policies found to be consistent with proposed development. Issuance of SMA Minor Permit requires that activity be consistent with all objectives & policies. The proposed development is consistent with the following objectives and policies: l:&l Development will not have any significant adverse environmental or ecological effect, except as any adverse effect is minimized to the extent practicable and clearly outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling public interest. Those adverse effect shall include but not be limited to the potential cumulative impact of individual developments, each of which taken by itself might not have a significant adverse effect and the elimination of planning options. l:&l The proposed development is consistent with the Hawai'i County General Plan, community plan, and zoning; provided that a finding of consistency shall not preclude concurrent processing where a general plan, community plan, or zoning amendment may also be required. l:&l The proposed development does not conflict with the following objectives of Chapter 205A, HRS (as amended), to: l:&l Provide coastal recreational opportunities accessible to the public. l:&l Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore those natural and man-made historic and pre-historic resources in the coastal zone management area that are significant in Hawaiian and American history and culture. l:&l Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore or improve the quality of coastal scenic and open space resources. l:&l Protect valuable coastal ecosystems, including reefs, beaches, and coastal dunes, from disruption and minimize adverse impacts on all coastal ecosystems. Aloha Kou July 25, 2022 Page 3 l:&l Provide public or private facilities and improvements important to the State's economy in suitable locations. l:&l Reduce hazard to life and property from coastal hazards. l:&l Improve the development review process, communication, and public participation in the management of coastal resources and hazards. l:&l Stimulate public awareness, education, and participation in coastal management. l:&l Protect beaches and coastal dunes for: Public use and recreation; The benefit of coastal ecosystems; Use as natural buffers against coastal hazards; and coordinate and fund beach management and protection. l:&l Promote the protection, use, and development of marine and coastal resources to assure their sustainability. l:&l The proposed development is consistent with the following policies of Chapter 205A, HRS, relating to: [8] Recreational Resources [:&I Historic Resources [:&I Scenic and Open Space Resources [:&I Coastal Ecosystems [:&I Economic Uses [:&I Coastal Hazards [:&I Managing Development [:&I Public Participation [:&I Beach and Coastal Dune Protection [:&I Marine and Coastal Resources l:&l The proposed development conforms to the requirements of Chapter 343, HRS, regarding Environmental Impact Statements. Aloha Kou July 25, 2022 Page4 Findings 1.As discussed above, the conducted activities will not have any significant adverseenvironmental or ecological effect, except as such adverse effect is minimized to theextent practicable and clearly outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling publicinterest. 2 The proposed development is consistent with the objectives, policies, and SMA guidelines of Chapter 205A, HRS. 3.The estimated project cost of $150,000 is not in excess of $500,000. Approved Uses, Activities and Operations Pursuant to Planning Commission Rule Section 9-lO(e), Special Management Area Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2022-000021 is hereby approved for tree removal, grubbing and minor grading activities, subject to the applicants' compliance with the conditions of approval as specified below. Conditions of Approval The Planning Director has approved SMA Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2022-000021, subject to the following conditions: 1.The applicant(s), its successor(s), or assign(s) (Applicant) shall be responsible for complying with all stated conditions of approval. 2.The applicant shall secure all necessary approvals and permits from other affectedfederal, state, and county agencies as necessary to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, including the Department of Land and Natural Resources Commission on Water Resource Management and/or the Department Land and Natural Resources Officeon Conservation and Coastal Lands. 3.Prior to the commencement of any land altering or construction activities, sedimentationbarriers (silt fences) shall be implemented on downhill slope of the project site to minimize potential run off or sedimentation and shall remain in place until finalinspection has been granted for the proposed tree removal, grubbing and minor gradingactivities. 4.All earthwork and grading activity shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control of the Hawai'i County Code. Aloha Kou July 25, 2022 Page 5 5.All construction and maintenance activities on the subject parcel shall comply withChapter 27, Floodplain Management, of the Hawai'i County Code. 6.To protect any Hawaiian Hoary Bats in the vicinty of the property, barbed wire fencingshall not be used on the property and woody vegetation over 15 feet in height shall not be removed during bat breeding season of June 1st to September 15th. 7.If any state-listed waterbirds such as the Hawaiian Duck, Hawaiian Stilt, Hawaiian Cootor Hawaiian Goose (Nene) are present during any construction actitivities, cease allactivities within 100 feet of the bird. Work may continue after the bird leaves of its own accord. If a nest is discovered at any point, the Hawai'i Island Branch DOFAW Officeshall be contacted. 8.If trees are to be cut, particulary during the breeding season from March to September,the area shall first be surveyed to ensure no Hawaiian Hawk ('Io) nests are present. 9.If the State endangered Hawaiian Monk Seal and threatened Green Sea Turtle are presentduring any construction activities, cease all activities within 100 meters of the animal.Work may continue after the animal leaves of its own accord. 10.Artificial light from exterior lighting fixtures, including, but not necessarily limited tofloodlights, up-lights or spotlights used for decorative or aesthetic purposes shall beprohibited if the light directly illuminates, or is directed to project across propertyboundaries toward, the shoreline and ocean waters, except as may otherwise be permittedpursuant to Section 205A-71(b), Hawai'i Revised Statutes. 11.In the event that surface or subsurface historic resources, including human skeletalremains, structural remains (e.g., rock walls, terraces, platforms, etc.), cultural deposits,marine shell concentrations, sand deposits, or sink holes are identified during the demolition and/or construction work, the Applicant shall cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find, protect the find from additional disturbance and contact the StateHistoric Preservation Division at (808) 933-7651. Subsequent work shall proceed uponan archaeological clearance from DLNR-SHPD when it finds that sufficient mitigationmeasures have been taken. 12.Any further development, including but not limited to, the construction of structures orimprovements not included in this determination shall require further review andapproval as provided under Chapter 205A, HRS, and Rule 9, Planning Commission Rulesof Practice and Procedure. 13.That in issuing this permit, the Department has relied on the information and data that the applicant has provided in connection with this permit. If, subsequent to issuance of thispermit, such information and data prove to be false, incomplete or inaccurate, this permit Aloha Kou July 25, 2022 Page 6 may be modified, suspended, or revoked, in whole or in part, and/or the Department may, in addition, institute appropriate legal proceedings. 14.The Planning Director shall initiate procedures to revoke this permit should any of theconditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Tracie-Lee Camero at (808) 961-8166 or via email at Tracie-Lee.Camero@hawaiicounty.gov. APPROVED: ZENDOKERN Planning Director TC:jaa July 25, 2022 Date \ \coh0 I \planning\public\wpwin60\czm \smm \2022\pl-smm-2022-000021 _ alohakou.doc Enclosure: Exhibit A, Site Plan ··--- ------:..F -:----== .. ------ Figure 3 -Extent of Proposed Grading activities 71Page EXHIBIT A, Site Plan PLANNING DEPARTMENT - PLANNING COMMISSION COUN'r'.l OF HAWAII Hilo, Hawaii PERMIT NO. SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA MINOR PERMIT The Planning Director completed on April 14, 1978 78-42 an assessment on the application of New World Investment for a Special t-lanagement Area (SMA) Minor Permit pursuant to Section 9.7.C, Rule No. 9 of the Planning Commission Rules Relating to Administrative Procedures, as amended. The permit request is for: the subdivision of parcel TMK: 2-6-02:01 into two lots and to perform minor clearing and grading and the construction of a paved roadway in Puueo, South Hilo, Hawaii. As indicated on the attached report, the Director finds that the proposed development is: (1) not in e½cess of $25,000; and (2)will not i::ignificantly affect the SMA. Therefore, with the concurrence of the Chief Engineer, the Director hereby grants to the applicant a minor permit under the authority vested in him by Section 9.7.C of said Rules, with th� following condition(s) that: lo The applicant comply with the requirements of the County of Hawaii Grading Ordinance (No. 168); 2.The requirements for subdivision be complied with; and 3.All other rules, regulations and requirements becomplied with. Should any of these conditions not be met, this SMA Minor Per(;"t �hJl be deemed null and voido Ir Chi�%KE�g1Il<P.�Jt.- Pl&Ag �"'"r_c_c_t_·_o_r _____ _ Attachment P.D. 6/77 IEXHIBIT C BACKGROUND New World Investment, Inc. is requesting a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit for the subdivision of parcel TMK: 2-6-02:01 into two lots and to perform minor clearing and grading, and the construction of a paved roadway in Puueo, South Hi1o, Hawaii. More specifically, the proposed area to be subdivided is located along the Hamakua side of the Wailuku River approximately 200 feet from the Wailuku Bridge and fronting Kou Lane and Puueo Street. The subject parcel will be subdivided into two parcels of 44,830 square feet (Lot A) and 18,889 square feet (Lot B) each. A 16-foot wide road easement and a 12-foot wide pavement extending approximately 150 feet from Puueo Street will traverse Lot A to Lot B. The area to be improved is presently zoned for multi-family (RM.-7.5) residential use and was previously used for residential purposes. In support of the request, the applicant states, in part: "Anticipated potential impacts of the project will be basically confined to minor clearing and grading which would re.sull ln slight changes of the existing terrain and to a slight increase in surface runoff due to impervious pavements. There will be little or no effect on water quality or endangering of wildlife. None of the anticipated impacts are expected to have significant adverse effects." The total cost of the proposed activities will be approximately $10,000. ASMA Minor Use Permit is hereby approved based upon the following considerations: 1.The total cost/fair market value of the proposal will not exceed $25,000; 2. Nonstructural activities will consist of minor clearing and grading and the placement of boundary markers. Struc tural activity will consist of construction of a paved • roadway; and 3.The proposal will not significantly conflict with Rule 9.1B, 9.3, 9.4, or 9.7D. It has been determined that the proposed activities will have no significant adverse impact on the SMA or SMA resources. The construction of the roadway and the grading and clearing of land will result in minor alteration to the existing topography which will increase surface runoff but should not significantly affect existing drainage or erosion pattern provided the applicant complies with existing rules and regulations pertaining to this requirement. Further, it will not result in the destruction of native or endemic species of plants or animals since the area had been previously improved for residential use. The proposal will not impact on any existing public access routes to the shoreline nor will it detract from the line of sight towards the ocean from the nearest highway. ASMA Minor Permit is further approved with the conditions that: l.The applicant comply with the requirements of the County of Hawaii Grading Ordinance (No. 168): 2.The requirements for subdivision be complied with; and 3.All other rules,1 regulations and requirements be complied with. Should any of these conditions not be met, this SMA Minor Permit shall be deemed null and void. - - 2 - Planning Department 25 Aupuni Street, Rm. 109 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • (808) 961-8288 . Daniel Livingston, GenE,- ri:, l M c r CRL De ve 1 opmE, nt, I nc . 85 Kapiolani Boulevard, 01300 ., o no l u 1 u , l-J 1 9 6 Hl i; Dear Mr. Livingston: f,1:'_E(:lA.L f·/.JiN/\C AI<E_/j., (SfLl\) l•\Iic1(JR I.Jf:;E! 1? �'AI>I> J� i ('.: (:.\ nt. :. C'F(,L 1 r.1 \/f· !) trn�;�-r\ t r If;(: 4' {ID,Y:fa2 }�.01_ :_, __ 2-·6-2-: 1 ar�{) 2 'l NC. 91-12 Upon c&reful review 0f your SMA Minor Use Permit request, we br)'VC': fc;u tbt�it it C<)rnr;=1i-;zf�; ,t,,i,tl:: tl·1t? re::,t�Ivir-t..�:rnc.,r;tg f<>r a. vii.nor ·Fe:rrr;5.t set fortt in Rule 9.7 of thP Planning Com ssion's Rcles and Regulations Relating to Special Man ement Area. Accordingly, plc&se find enclo an SMA Minor Use Permit Ne. �:J..-12 fer cli:if'-.rir.g cf V<',9ctet.ior,, t:crncv.:,J of t;_; nc'cnc( v�:liclr:r, c1n(·; rni.r�or t)tr:uc-turf:f� c,n(: rc·rncva1 f;f C)t:l·�c:.-r ,5 rif; fc,r to1;c.:,9rz:J;)!·::1.c eurvey, archaeological inve2ti ion anci soil investigationr :�E��f�;ai��r o 2iir!:;t a��0 ;o�h�a�:i !��uaf:�;g���m:::!��! :��e of Wailuku Fiver, Puueo, Scutt Eilo, Bavaii, Tax Mep K0y 2-6-2-:l end 2. Pl.(:::&s,:::-r1ot1:� t t tl·:,:;;' ·pQ=rrnit t1.[)prcvaJ. is E)J EC1 r;et;-':t:'·ct tc> tte f lowing conditions: 1.�he applicant, its succee£ors or assigis shall beresponsible for ccn�lying vith all c itions of approval. 2.A Grubbing Perroit shall Public �otkf vittin cne be secured from tt0 Department oft.e cf EXHIBIT D ,; r-, \ nd mi o.l 'ffi 2J r l 'JJ. eb l I l f I l r Mr. Daniel Livingston, General Maniiger CRL Development, 11,c. May 21, 1991 Page 2 3.Prior to clearing act!vitie•, n 40-foct transverse linealong the shoreline of Wailuku. River must be marked clearlywith colored flagging and ieentifie� to t�e persona doingt b,: g rt:b t, f ng. 4.The project ie to be carried out •�actly us described inthiF-$MA Minor UBt! P€-!Tdt l\nd att�cbeo Bacl<.grn•Ut)Cstatement. A1� aeviations from tbe �escribecl oper8ticns"f.iill nE:ed to r€2ceive i':ldvancE: eipproval fr<>rr th€' PJirnr,'.ing De:pl\ltl!itd"'t. 5.All otb:H e.pplict,ble rul©S, regulatior;f} �no HH;!,UintHP'-:l"lt$;shell be complied with. 6.An extension of time for tte perforwa�ce of contitionswithin the J?<in.ndt mr,y be grc.nt.iid ty tbe Planning Di.rf,,ctc·rupon the following circumstance&: a) th@ ron-performanceiA the rPsult of confitiont that coulf not h2v� hPenfcn:<s:siz:Bn <.H a,n: bE::}'C<ncl th<-, control of t b:-applicant,succeasors or assigns, and thet are not the result of tteirfen.1 1.t .:,-.r; r:"tgl.i.91,•n<.'.it:,; t) gren·,Ung of the timf:' e:xt{,,'f•.f:'Jon�ould not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code;c)grenting cf the time extensicn �ou16 not be contrary toU:,i:1.· crigiral r£i'.1£Cnk? fc,r tr,c grr.;.tYtirc.<J cf tL,2 pE,nrit; u,d 6)the time e�te�eion grantet sh&ll be for a pericd not toe}:ut�,(1 t U1 t:,t: ri 0<3 ct i 9J i·;a] 1�1 9 n:.r:t it'6 for pt-: rf c rtNH-.c!J:' { i. c,. , .:t, condition to bf.i• pertormE.'cJ \s,:itl:in oru?, yt•c:;r mriy be (�Xt€rnd1:Id for up to one additional year). Further, should any of the condition! net be met or subst•�tially compli�d wit� ir Rt:l.mf;•ly fasbior,, thr Di rE,ctor sl·:;;;J l :i.nitintti'• prnccderr�ti tr, :t,;;W,r-e tlll' pe:rmH. .. Mr. D•ni�l Livi�gston, Gener"' 1 Manager CRL Development, Inc. Ma�l 2.1, 1991 Page 3 Shoulo you have any questions regarciing the a�ove, please do not hesitate to contact this department at _961-8286. AK: smo 64 09d Enclosures cc: Chief Engineer NORhAN I<:. EAYAE'I-11 Planning Director v6cc: Rick Cw/background & recommendations) MAY 2 2 1991 PL;;lr!HNG DEPARTMENT - n.. ANNING COM}!ISSION COUNTY OF HAWAII Hilo, Hawaii SPECIP.L MANAGEMENT AREA MINOR USE PER.."1IT PER:•!IT NO. 91-12 The Planning Director completed on _r_•!a_Y __ 1_3 _____ , 19 91 , an assessment on the application of CRL IN\'"ESTI•Ii:JVI', INC . for a Special Management Area (SMA) Minor Use Permit pursuant to •Section 9.7.C., Rule 9 of the Planning Commission Rules Relating to Administrative Procedures, as amended. The permit request is �: to allow the clearing of vegetation, rerroval of abandoned ,tehicles, and minor structures and rerroval of other debris for tq:::ographic survey, arcf1aeolog1.cal investigation and soil investigations a9proximatelv 200 feet fran the Wailuku Bridge, makai of and fronting Puueo Street and Kou Lane and along the flaElak.ua side of vla1.luk-u River, Puueo, South Hilo, Hawaii TI,JK 2-6-2:1 and 2. As indicated on the attached report, the Director finds that the proposed development is: 1)not in excess of $65,000; �nd 2)will not significantly affect the SMA. Therefore, with concurrence of the Chief Engineer, the Director hereby grants to the applicant a minor use permit under the authority vested in him by Section 9.7.C of said Rules, with the following condition(s) that: PIEf"\SE SEE A'ITACHED ffi'l"DITICNS. -------------/• Chief Eng iheer, DPW i/ \./\ /1 l \ , .�Dire�� Attachment 6257A-5/84 I / I}_; [U• :) SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA) MINOR USE PERMIT NO. 91-12 APPLICANT: CRL INVESTMENT, INC. CONDITIONS 1.The applicant, its successors or assigns shall beresponsible for complying with all conditions of approval. 2.A Grubbing Permit shall be secured from the Department ofPublic Works within one year from the effective date ofthis permit. 3.Prior to clearing activities, a 40-foot trans�erse linealong the shoreline of Wailuku River must be marked clearlywith colored flagging and identified to the persons doingthe grubbing. 4.The project is to be carried out exactly as described inthis SMA Minor Use Permit and attached Backgroundstatement. Any deviations from the described operationswill need to receive advance approval from the PlanningDepartment. 5.All other applicable rules, regulations and requirementsshall be complied with. 6.An extension of time for the performance of conditionswithin the pe rmit may be granted by the Planning Directorupon the following circumstances: a) the non-performance 6409d is the result of conditions that could not have beenforeseen or are beyond the control of the applicant,successors or assigns, and that are not the result of theirfault or negligence; b) granting of the time extensionwould not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code;c)granting of the time extension would not be contrary tothe original reasons for the granting of the permit; and d)the time extension granted shall be for a period not toexceed the period originally granted for performance (i.e.,a condition to be performed within one year may be extendedfor up to one additional year). Further, should any of theconditions not be met or substantially complied with in atimely fashion, the Director shall initiate procedures torevoke the permit. J • •-" 4 (' ..... • tu ii iftt: JLJ;;.. 11,,:E,,Q .\ . /' -------... � .,-/_.-� L, (,., c. 1',w. !:>14 !) ./" 0 es.. a;,. 7f l"ar- ·� :,,,: .•'\�� -l SEllfflCECOPY "'"""' Stephen K. Yamashiro Mayor CERTIFIED MAIL June 7, 1993 filounf 11 of ,ctfu ctii PLANNING COMMISSION 25 Aupuni Street, Room 109 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 (808)961-8288 Fax (808) 961-9615 Stephen J. Menezes, Esq. Menezes Tsukazaki Yeh & Moore 100 Pauahi street, Suite 204 Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Menezes: Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit No. 340 Applicant: CRL Development, Inc. Request: 24-Unit Condominium and Related ImprovementsTax Map Key: 2-6-2:1 & 2 The Planning Commission at its duly held public hearing on May 27, 1993, voted to approve Special Management Area Use (SMA) Permit No. 340, to allow the construction of a 24-unit condominium project and related improvements. The property is located on the north side of the Wailuku River at the corner of Puueo street and Kou Lane, South Hilo, Hawaii. Approval of this request is based on the following: The purpose of Chapter 205-A, Hawaii Revised statutes, and Rule 9, Special Management Area Rules and Regulations of the County of Hawaii is to preserve, protect, and, where· possible, to restore the natural resources of the coastal zone areas. Therefore, special controls on development within the area along the shoreline are necessary to avoid permanent loss of valuable resources and the foreclosure of management options. One of the criteria for approving a development within the SMA is that it is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code. Although the proposed use is consistent, it should be pointed out that the complexes must meet the Zoning Code required minimum 15 feet distance between main structures. The proposed project does conform to the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map, which designates this area for Medium Density Urban development. Further, the properties' Resort-Hotel zoning designation allows for the proposed use. EXHIBIT F JUN - 8 1993 Stephen J. Menezes, Esq. June 7, 1993 Page 2 Approval of this request would complement a goal of the Housing Element of the General Plan to "Attain a diversity of socio-economic housing mix throughout the different parts of the County" and to "Maintain a housing supply which allows for a variety of choice." Another criteria in reviewing an SMA Use Permit application is that "The development will not have any significant adverse environmental or ecological effect, except as such adverse effect is minimized to the extent practicable and clearly outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling public interest. Such adverse effect shall include, but not be limited to, the potential cumulative impact of individual developments, each one of which taken in itself might not have a substantial adverse effect and elimination· of planning options." The proposed development is not anticipated to have substantial adverse ecological effects. The project site had been previously used for residential purposes and had been recently grubbed and, as such, the area is not known to contain any unique ecological systems nor provide habitats for any endangered plant or animal species. No adverse impacts on air and water quality are expected to be generated by the proposed development. Air emissions generated during the construction phase can be mitigated by existing regulations. A recent certified shoreline survey of the property places the certified shoreline along the property's boundary along Wailuku River. Any potential increase in runoff or discharge that could reach ocean waters can be handled by on-site improvements. Negative impacts on the local water quality resulting from soil erosion and runoff during site preparation and construction phases can be adequately mitigated through compliance with existing regulations. Municipal treatment of wastewater will be required to avoid impacts to coastal ecosystems. Therefore, no significant adverse impact to coastal ecosystems is anticipated. The proposed development is not expected to have an adverse impact on public access to or along the shoreline. Proposed complexes A and B will be situated a minimum of 40 feet from the certified shoreline along Wailuku River, southern portion of the property. Complexes C and D will be located a minimum of 20 to 40 feet from the certified shoreline along Wailuku River, eastern portion of the property. The landscaping improvements will be located outside of the 20-foot shoreline setback area. With the determination of this portion of the Wailuku River as a "shoreline", public access along the banks of the river must be preserved, particularly with the potential of future Stephen J. Menezes, Esq. June 7, 1993 Page 3 developments along the Wailuku River. Therefore, it is recommended that a shoreline access plan be submitted for review and approval prior to securing Final Plan Approval for the proposed development. Viewplanes will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. The buildings will be situated more than 250 feet mauka of the Hawaii Belt Road. As such, the proposed project will not affect the makai views from the Hawaii Belt Road. Although the proposed project may affect mauka views from the Hawaii Belt Road, retaining some of the existing trees along the top of the bank for landscaping and the reduction of the height of the structures to 2 stories would mitigate any adverse impact. An archaeological inventory survey of the project site identified one site (Site 15415) which consists of two components: 1) several diffuse prehistoric hearths, and 2) historic refuse and recent structural remnants. The report concluded that "The site is evaluated as significant solely for information content and is not recommended for further work." However, the Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division recommends that this site be preserved until such time its significance can be determined. According to DLNR, "Sufficient level of recordation has been performed on the site's historic component which is located outside of a 40-foot setback zone at the edge of Wailuku River.The prehistoric component still contains significant information. Also, since it is contained entirely within the 40-foot setback zone, it will be preserved. We concur that this preservation will result in a 'no adverse effect' determination for this site." In addition, the DLNR found the interim (short term) preservation measures to protect the prehistoric component during construction activities to be acceptable. Th�se measures will be included as conditions of approval which consist of the erection of construction barrier along the inland margins of the 40-foot setback area and an en-site monitoring by a qualifiedarchaeologist during the initial phase of grading and grubbingactivities along the margins of the prehistoric deposit. Also,it is recommended that the applicant prepare a mitigation planfor the review and approval of the Planning Department, inconsultation with DLNR, prior to securing Final Plan Approval orthe issuance of a grading permit. This will ensure that such amitigation plan be approved by the Department prior to any landalteration activities and for the preservation and protection(interim or permanent) of Site 15415. Stephen J. Menezes, Esq. June 7, 1993 Page 4 According to a Traffic Impact Study for the project, there would be no adverse effect on Puueo Street, the Puueo Street/Ohai Street intersection or the Puueo Street/Keawe Street intersection with Wailuku Drive. These intersections are anticipated to operate at LOS A or B with the project. However, the applicant shall provide a driveway access to Puueo Street having adequate sight distance and meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. Approval of this request is subject to the following conditions: 1.The applicant, its successors or assigns shall beresponsible for complying with all stated conditions ofapproval. 2.The required water commitment payment shall be submitted tothe Department of Water Supply in accordance with its"Water Commitment Guidelines Policy" within ninety daysfrom the effective date of this permit. 3.Consolidation of the properties shall be secured from thePlanning Department prior to Final Plan Approval. 4.Final Plan Approval of the 24-unit condominium projectshall be secured from the Planning Department. Plans shallidentify structures, the 20-foot and 40-foot shorelinesetback lines, and parking stalls associated with theproposed development. Parking shall comply with therequirements of Chapter 25 (Zoning Code). Plans shall alsoindicate appropriate landscaping, including the retentionof some existing trees along the Wailuku River frontage. 5.Construction of the proposed condominium complexes andrelated improvements shall be completed and a certificateof occupancy issued within five years from the effectivedate of the SMA Use Permit. 6.A public shoreline access plan shall be submitted forreview and approval by the Planning Department, inconsultation with the Department of Land and NaturalResources, prior to the submittal of plans for PlanApproval review. The public access plan shall include, butnot be limited to, the delineation of shoreline access toand along the length of the property; location, time ofconstruction and/or availability of public accesses;restrictions on use; and other related improvements. .,,,. .... ( Stephen J. Menezes, Esq. June 7, 1993 Page 5 7.A mitigation plan shall be submitted for review andapproval by the Planning Department, in consultation withthe State Department of Land and Natural Resources, priorto the submittal of plans for Plan Approval review. 8.The minimum 20-foot shoreline setback shall be staked anddelineated with a continuous flag ribbon by a registeredsurveyor prior to any land alterations in the affectedarea. Written confirmation shall be submitted inconjunction with requested permit{s}. No improvementsshall be allowed within the 20-foot shoreline setback areaunless approvals have been granted in accordance with Rule8 of the Planning Commission relating to Shoreline Setback. 9.The minimum 40-foot shoreline setback shall be staked anddelineated with a continuous flag ribbon by a registeredsurveyor prior to any land alterations in the area of Site15415. Construction barrier shall be erected along theinland margins of the 40-foot setback area. Writtenconfirmation shall be submitted in conjunction withrequested permit{s). To ensure the preservation of Site15415, any improvements within this area shall be approvedby the Planning Department, in consultation with the StateDepartment of Land and Natural Resources. 10.on-site monitoring shall be conducted by a qualifiedarchaeologist during the initial phase of grading andgrubbing activities along the margins of the prehistoricdeposit. 11.Should any unidentified sites or remains such as artifacts,shell, bone, or charcoal deposits, human burials, rock orcoral alignments, pavings, or walks be encountered, work inthe immediate area shall cease and the Planning Departmentshall be immediately notified. Subsequent work shallproceed upon an archaeological clearance from the PlanningDepartment when it finds that sufficient mitigativemeasures have been taken. 12.Driveway access to Puueo Street shall meet with theapproval of the Department of Public Works. Appropriate signage and roadway markings shall be provided by the applicant prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the condominium complexes. 13.An erosion and sediment control plan shall meet with theapproval of the Department of Public Works. The plan shall also include a provision that a minimum 20-foot wide Stephen J. Menezes, Esq. June 7, 1993 Page 6 vegetated buffer area along the Wailuku River boundary be maintained throughout the construction period. 14.Energy efficient appliances and other energy saving devicesshall be incorporated in the development's plans andrequirements. 15.The applicants, its successors or assigns shall indemnifyand hold the County of Hawaii harmless from and against anyloss, liability, claim or demand for property damage,personal injury and death arising out of any act oromission of the applicants, successors, assigns, officers,employees, contractors and agents under this permit orrelating to or connected with the granting of this SMA UsePermit. 16.comply with all other laws, rules, regulations andrequirements. 17.Upon compliance with all conditions of approval, inconjunction with the application for certificate ofoccupancy and prior to the selling and/or occupancy of anyof the condominium units, the applicant shall provide, inwriting, a final status report to the Planning Department. 18.An extension of time for the performance of conditionswithin the permit may be granted by the Planning Directorupon the following circumstances: a) the non-performanceis the result of conditions that could not have beenforeseen or are beyond the control of the applicant,successors or assigns, and that are not the result of theirfault or negligence; b) granting of the time extensionwould not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code;c)granting of the time extension would not be contrary tothe original reasons for the granting of the permit; and d)the time extension granted shall be for a period not toexceed the period origi�ally granted for performance (i.e.,a condition to be performed within one year may be extendedfor up to one additional year). Further, should any of theconditions not be met or substantially complied with in atimely fashion, the Director shall initiate procedures torevoke the permit. This approval does not, however, sanction the specific plans submitted with the application as they may be subject to change given specific code and regulatory requirements of the affected agencies. Stephen J. Menezes, Esq. June 7, 1993 Page 7 Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Rodney Nakano or Alice Kawaha of the Planning Department at 961-8288. Sincerely, ..... . -.•\...,:: .... ' ., -:-,-... Donald L. Manalili, Chairman Planning Commission RKN: jdk LCRLDe02.PC xc: Mr. Daniel Livingston Honorable Stephen K. Yamashiro, Mayor Planning Director Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply County Real Property Tax Division Office of State Planning, CZM Program w/background Department of Land and Natural Resources Plan Approval Section Harry Kim Mayor West Hawai'i Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole HwyKailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740Phone (808) 323-4770Fa� (808) 327-3563 January 7, 2019 Peter K. Kubota Attorney at Law SOS Kilauea Avenue, Suite B Hilo, HI 96720-3011 Dear Mr. Kubota: County of Hawai'i PLANNJNG DEPARTME T -111 .-- I DETERMINATION OF PRE-EXISTING LOT OF RECORD Being Land Commission Award 5145, Ill • Being Also a portion of Land Commission Award 4809, Apana 1, Pu'u'eo, South Hilo, Island of Hawai'i, Hawai'i Tax Map Key: (3) 2-6-002:001 Michael Yee Director Duane Kanuha Deputy Director East Hawai'i Office I OJ Paualu Street, Suite 3 flilo, Hawai'i 96720 Phone (808) 961-828 Fax (808) 961-8 742 This is in response to your correspondence of November 30, 2018, requesting a determination of a pre-existing Jots of record for the subject property. We have reviewed our department records, and those of the Department of Finance-Real Property Tax Division (RPT) in accordance with Article 11 (Pre-existing Lots) of the Subdivision Code (Sections 23-117 through 23-120)_ Our review of the records has found the following: 1.In its present configuration and land area (65,327 square feet), Parcel 001 is theresult of Land Commission Awards that date back to the lBSO's; and 2.Although land acreage has been updated over time, we have no record of the original land titles having been consolidated with any other adjacent land,_s. Given the above, and pursuant to Section 23-118. Criteria to determine a pre-existing lot; ''The lot was created and recorded prior to November 22, 1944 or the lot was create through court order [e.g. partition) prior to July 1, 1973, and the lot had never been legally consolidated, provided that TJO pre-existing lot shall be recognized based upon a lease except for a lease which complied with all other applicable laws when made, including Territorial statutes regulating the sale or lease of property by lot number orblock number, and on September 25, 2002, the proposed lot contains a legal dwelling, or has been continuously leased since January 8, 1948, as a separate unit." www .hiplanningdgit.com Hawai 'i County is an Squal Opportunity £:rovider and Employer EXHIBIT G .. I • , .-"' E ,. ~ 1 r-• I 14" •· ..... I ....... .. .-, ~ ~~ __ __. ... I • .!..,._,. Peter K. Kubota Attorney at Law December 7 i 2019 Page2 Your request is for recognition of three (3) pre-existing lots of record consisting of Land Commission Award 51451 a portion of Land Commission Awanl 4989-B, and a portion of Land Commission Award 4809, Apana 1. We find no evidence to support the recognition of a portion of Land Commission Award 4989-8. Therefore, we confirm that Parcel 001 (65,327 square feet) consists of two (2) legal pre-existing lots of record, being Land Commission Award 5145 and a portion of Land Commission Award 4809, Apana 1. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Hans Santiago or Jonathan Holmes of this department. Sincerely, #,(� MICHAEL YEE Planning Director HS:tb ■ Ut • \ \coh33\plannl ng\publlc\Admin Perm its Dlvision\PELOR(Pre-Existi nglotOfRecord)\2019\2-6-00 2-00 lKUBOTA 01-07-19.doc;x xc: Tax Maps and Records Supervisor Real Property Tax Division-Kana Manager-Chief Engineer, DWS G.Bailado, GLS Analyst (via e-mail) II: --■ j I I ii f ! .. ,._,...~,,, •i ·--. ~·? .. • I ,;rt) rirr "' !J J , • .' � I:... 4 PETER K. KUBOTA I-Attorney at Law A Law Corporation 505 Kilauea Avenue Suite B Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3011 Phone: (808) 935-2422 Facsimile: (808) 935-5999 e-mail: November 30, 2018 Michael Yee Planning Director County of Hawaii 100 Pauahi Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 RE: Lot Determination TMK (3) 2-6-002-001 Dear Mr. Yee: . ' ,, Areas of Practice Business Law Real Estate Estate Planning I am under contract to purchase Tax Map Key Nos. (3) 2-6-002-001 from the current owners, Edwin Shiroma and Frederick Zane, and Mr. Zane's company Urban Management Corp. Based on title research conducted by Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Inc., we believe that Tax Map Key No. (3) 2-6-002-001 is comprised of three pre-existing lots ofrecord, being (1)Royal Patent No. 4671, Land Commission Award 4989-B(2)Royal Patent No. 4883, Land Commission Award 5145, and (3)Royal Patent No. 4687, Land Commission Award 4809, Apana l to Lo. A copy of the Title Guaranty preliminary title report is attached as Exhibit A. Attached as Exhibit B is a certification of Joanna Kaalele of Title Guaranty of Hawaii regarding their findings as to the source of tiile and the documentation provided herein. Copies of the referenced Royal Patents and their corresponding Land Commission Awards are attached to Ms. Kaalele's certification as Exhibit C. SC1\Nt�ED ', 7D18 By:122025 f1 ? L. ')9 ,, ,, I Michael Yee Novemher 30, 2018 Page 2 These lots were acquired separately, and were never legally consolidated. As such, would you please review these materials and confirm that there are in fact three lots of record within this parcel? Please call or write if you have any questions or concerns, or require further information for your determination. Very truly yours. �tJ2w�� PETER K. KUBOTA The undersigned owners consent to the request for lot determination as set forth in this letter. Edwin Shiroma Urban Management Corp. a Hawaii corporation By ________ _ Frederick A. Zane Its President Enclosures Frederick Zane . ' Michael Yee November 30, 2018 Page 2 These lots were acquired separately, and were never legally consolidated. As such, would you please review tJ1ese materials and confirm that there are in fact three lots of record within this parcel? Please call or write if you have any questions or concerns, or require further information for your determination. Ve1y truly yours, PETER K. KUBOTA The undersigned owners consent to the request for lot determination as set forth in this letter. Urban Management Corp. a H waii corporation e Its President Enclosures [)AVID Y. IGE GOii!'� OF HAWAII ')Lid l II I' COU�lf STATE OF HAWAII SIil.A N£. D, CASI:. m lf ') ?Cll,\IRP6RSON I 'I sc6i(DoF W DANO N,'Tlr'IIALl!ESOl/RCt:S COMMISSIONO,','' AT£.Q RESOURCE I\ � ENT ul HAWAII t.Vi.-CEMENT DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND ATURAL RESO RCES LAND DIVISlO Mr. Peter K. Kubota Attorney At Law 505 Kilauea Avenue, Suite B Hilo, Hawaii 96720-301 I Dear Mr. Kubota, POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 May 24, 2019 S BJECT: Request for Shoreline Certification; TMK (3) 2-6-002:001 & 002 We are writing in response to your request to confirm whether the above referenced parcels could obtain a certified shoreline. lt is our understanding that the subject parcels are situated inland of the coastline along the Wai1uku River. As only oceanfront properties are eligible for shoreline ce1iification, parcels Jocated adjacent to a stream or river would not qualify for shoreline certification. Furthermore, we also refer you to Chapter 13-222, Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), regarding the shoreline certification process. Pursuant to Section 13-222-2 HAR, the sh_9reline is defined as "the upper reaches of the wa h of the waves, other than storm or seismic'waves, at high tide during the season of the year in which the highest wash of the waves occurs, usually evidenced by the edge of vegetation growth, or the upper limit of debris left by the wash of the waves." The aforementioned criteria for determining the location of the shoreline are unique to coastal environments and would not apply to properties located inland along a stream or river. Please feel free to contact Ian Hirokawa, Special Projects Coordinator at (808) 587-0420 if you have any further questions. Thank you. cc: DAGS Survey Sincerely, Russell Y. Tsuji Administrator EXHIBIT H ,, ,. ?Q19 r~RV ?4 r . HartyKitnMayor Wil Okabe Ma1mgi11g Director West Hawai•i Office 74-S044 Ane Keohokalole HwyJ{ailua-Kona. Hawai'i 96740Phone(808)323-4770Fax (808) 327-3563 September 9, 2019 Clyde K. Matsunaga lmata and Associates, Inc. 171 Kapi'olani Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Matsunaga: County of Hawai'i PLANNING DEPARTMENT TENTATIVE APPROVAL SUBDIVIDERS: ALOHA KOU, LLC, Peter Kubota, Manager Michael Yee Director Duane K.anuha Deputy Director East Hawai'i Office lO I Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo. Hawai 'i 96720 Phone (808) 961 ·8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 Proposed Consolidation ofA Portion of Royal Patent 4687, Land Commission Award 4809, Apana 1; Royal Patent 4883, Land Commission Award 5145; And A Portion of Royal Patent 4693, Land Commission Award 1-B; And Resubdivision into Lots 1, 2, And 3. Pu'u'eo, South Hilo, Island of Hawai'i, Hawai'i TMKs: (3) 2-6-002:001 & 002 (SUB-19-001887) Please be informed that Tentative Approval of the preliminary plat map dated March 14, 2019, is hereby granted with modifications and conditions. The subdividers are now authorized to prepare detailed drawings of the subdivision plan in accordance with Chapter 23, Subdivision Control Code, County of Hawai'i� as modified. Before final approval can be granted, the following conditions must be met: 1) Drainagea)Portions of the subdivision are located within Zone AE and VE according to thecurrent Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency (FEMA).b) Identify the Zone AE and VE boundaries and base flood elevations on the final platmap.c)Identify any other watercourses or drainageways that are not designated as a FEMAflood zone and encumber with drainage easements.d) Any construction within the designated FEMA flood zone shall comply with therequirements of Chapter 27, �loodplain Management, of the Hawai'i County code. www.hjplanningdept.com Hawai'i Co1111ty is aa Eqllal Opport1111ity Provider a11d Employer plunning@hawajfoounty.gp1· EXHIBIT I Clyde K. Matsunaga Imata and Associates, Inc. September 9, 2019 Page2 2)Access and Roadway Improvementsa)Provide a future road widening setback along the Kou Lane frontage equal to ½ the difference between the existing right-of-way width and 50 feet. b)Provide a future road widening setback along the Pu'u'eo Street frontage equal to ½ the difference between the existing right-of-way width and 60 feet. c)Kou Lane is not currently paved/accessible to yehicular traffic. Please provide discussion on subdivider's intent with regards to providing a physical access to the proposed lots. Additional or revised Tentative Approval (TA) conditions may be imposed based on the discussion provided to the Planning Department. If reconfiguration of lots is necessary, an agency review of the revised preliminary plat map may be necessary and/or may require a revised/new TA. 3)All easements affecting proposed lots shall be identified for its purpose and to whichproposed lot( s) and/ or grantee( s) the easement is in favor of. This shall be shown onthe final plat map.4)Wastewater Improvements.a)All subdivided lots shall be connected to the public sewer system located within Pu'u'eo Street. The proposed sewer system shall meet with the approval of the Department of Environmental Management (DEM). b)Submit sewer system construction plans as required by the DEM for approval by affected agencies. 5)Property Tax Certification. Submit written proof that all taxes and assessments on theproperty are paid to date.6)Surveyor's Certification. Place property markers in accordance with the final plat map.Surveyor shall submit certification upon completion.7)Final Plat Map. Submit ten (10) copies of the final plat map prepared in conformity with Chapter 23, Subdivisions, within one year from the date of tentative approval, onor befor-e September._9,2-O20.___lfnot,_tentative_approv.aLto_th.e_preliminary platmap_shall be deemed null and void. Only upon written request from the subdividers and forgood cause, the director may grant to the subdividers an extension of time within whichthe subdividers may file the final plat. As part of final plat map submittal, provide an additional copy of the final plat map as a 11 .dwg11 or 11 .dxf' diskette file preparedby CAD software. In the alternate, a digital copy of the final plat map may be emailed to the Tax Maps and Records Supervisor at planning@co.hawaii.hi.us. 8)Time Limit. Subdividers shall complete all requirements specified as conditions fortentative approval of the preliminary plat map within three (3) years of said tentativeapproval, on or before September 9, 2022. An extension of not more than two (2)years may be granted by the director upon timely request of the subdividers. Please be aware that if at any time during the fulfillment of the foregoing conditions, should concerns emerge such as environmental problems or other problems which were earlier ., Clyde K. Matsunaga Imata and Associates, Inc. September 9, 2019 Page 2 Acces and Roadway Improvements a)Pr vide a future road widening setback along the Kou Lane frontage equal to ½ the 1fference between the existing right-of-way width and 50 feet. b)Provide a future road widening setback along the Pu'u'eo Street frontage equal to½ the difference between the existing right-of-way width and 60 feet. c)Kou Lane is not currently paved/accessible to vehicular traffic. Please provide discussion on subdivider's intent with regards to providing a physical access to the proposed lots. Additional or revised Tentative Approval (TA) conditions may be imposed based on the discussion provided to the Planning Department. If reconfiguration of lots is necessary, an agency review of the revised preliminary plat map may be necessary and/or may require a revised/new TA. 3)All easements affecting proposed lots shall be identified for its purpose and to which proposed lot(s) and/or grantee(s) the easement is in favor of. This shall be shown on the final plat map. 4)Wastewater Improvements.a)All subuivic.let1 lots shall be connected to the public sewer system located within Pu'u'eo Street. The proposed sewer system shall meet with the approval of the Department of Environmental Management (DEM). b)Submit sewer system construction plans as required by the DEM for approval by affected agencies. 5)Property Tax Certification. Submit written proof that all taxes and assessments on theproperty are paid to date. 6)Surveyor's Certification. Place property markers in accordance with the final plat map.Surveyor shall submit certification upon completion. 7)Final Plat Map. Submit ten (10) copies of the final plat map prepared in conformity with Chapter 23, Subdivisions, within one year from the date of tentative approval, on or before September 9, 2020. If not, tentative approval to the preliminary plat map shall be deemed null and voi<l. Only upon written r·equest from the subdividers and for good cause, the director may grant to the subdividers an extension of time within whichthe subdividers may file the final plat. As part of final plat map submittal, providean additional copy of the final plat map as a ".dwg" or ".dxf' diskette file prepared by CAD software. In the alternate, a digital copy of the final plat map may be e mailed to the Tax Maps and Records Supervisor at planning@co.hawaii.hi.us. 8)Time Limit. Subdividers shall complete all requirements specified as conditions for tentative approval of the preliminary plat map within three (3) years of said tentative approval, on or before September 9, 2022. An extension of not more than two (2) years may be granted by the director upon timely request of the subdividers. Please be aware that if at any time during the fulfillment of the foregoing conditions, should concerns emerge such as environmental problems or other problems which were earlier Clyde K. Matsunaga lmata and Associates, Inc. September 9, 2019 Page 3 overlooked or not anticipated/accounted for in data/reports available to date, this could be sufficient cause to immediately cease and desist from further activities on the proposed subdivision, pending resolution of the problems. The Planning Director shall confer with the listed officers to resolve the problems and notify you accordingly. No final approval for recordation shall be granted until all the above conditions have been met. Land shall not be offered for sale, lease or rent until final approval for recordation of the subdivision is granted by the Planning Director or the proposed subdivision has been issued a preliminary order of registration by the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs (DCCA) in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 484, Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS). Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Hans Santiago or Jonathan Holmes of this department. Sincerely, .� MICHAEL YEE Planning Director HS:tb \ \coh33\planning\public\Admin Permits Division\Subdivision\2019\20 l 9-3\SUB-19-001887 Alohal<ouLLC TA 09-09-19.docx Enc.: PPM (03-11\--19) xc: Manager, DWS Director, DPW District Environmental Health Program Chief, DOH Wayne A. Subica, LPLS, Imata and Associates, Inc. /Aloha Kou, LLC, Peter Kubota, Manager . .. ., Report 1046-090491 Archaeological Inventory Survey Noelani Gardens Project Land of Puueo, South Hilo District Island of Hawaii 'PHRI_· ----------'----P_a_u1_H_._R_o_s_en_d_a_hI_,P_h_._o_.,_1n_c_. _______ _Archaeological• Historical• Cullural Resourct Management Studies & S.erl'icu 31lS Mohouli Slrcel • R ilo, Hawaii 96720 • (808) 969-1763 • FAX (808) !Hi 1-6998. P.O. Box·l1305 • G.M .. F., Gu.am 969H • (671) 472-3H7 • •·AX (671) 472-3131 EXHIBIT J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PHRI Report 1046-090491 Archaeologicai Inventory Survey Noelani Gardens Project Land of Puueo, South Hilo District Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-2-6-2:1,2) z&, by Susan T. Goodfellow, Ph.D. Laboratory Director Prepared for Daniel Livingston CRL Development, Inc. 1585 Kapiolani Blvd., Suite 1300 Honolulu, Hawaii 96814 September 1991 Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. Arch@ologicaJ • Historical • Cultural Resourct Management Studies & Ser,,ius 305 Mohoull Street • Hilo, Haw11.ii %720 • (808) %9-1763 • t'AX(808) %1-6998 P.O. Box 23305 • G.M.J'., Gu11m %,u • (671) 472-3117 • FAX (671) 472-3131 em I I I 1 Ud J 31 r'l I c.. '}U L I ,'L:, I 0 IN V I I r GCE?E ~ 'HI'' iW&'1f:1w4Z w·w Z?ZCG:-Y:1f%W?ff PF Fl Fi I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-09049 l At the request of Daniel Livingston, general manager, CRLDevelopment,Inc.,PaulH.Rosendahl,Ph.D.,Inc.(PHRI) conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the approximately 1.73 acre Noelani Gardens Project site, located in the Land of Puueo, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-2-6-1: 1,2). Thefieldworkfortheproject was conducted onJuly15-17, 1991 and consisted of a 100%-coverage pedestriansurvey and limited sul:surface testing. The field work includedwith the client's pennission-monitoring of foundation coring byGeolab. The monitoring was conducted July 25-30, 1991 andprimarily entailed examining coresedimentsforsamples whichcould be used for age determination analyses. A final trenchex�vation designed to test for subsurface remains in the areaofCore#6 was conducted on September 27, 1991.During .the pedestrian survey, several remnants of house foundations were identified in the central portion of the project area. The remnants were surrounded by abundant historic period to recent debris; however, clearing and subsequent bulldozing in the area have destroyed the original associations between the foundations and artifactual remains. In order to gain information on the nature of historic period and the more ii recent use of the project area, diagnostic bottles and ceramics wereoollectedfromthearea.Noprehistoricfeaturesorartifacts were encountered on the surface during the pedestrian survey. Previous examination of the cliff exposures along the Wailuk.u River side of the project area (Rosendahl 1980) noted concentrations of charcoal and fire-cracked rock in the area above the pebble beaches on the northeastern boundary of the project area. Subsurface testing of the buffer zone along the cliffs was thus undertaken to detennine the extent of these deposits. A series of 11 backhoe trenches and four test pits was placed along the buffer zone; these excavations encountered concentrations of charcoal, coral, and fire-cracked rock ( diffuse hearths) in five of the trenches. No artifacts, ecofactual remains, or distinctive subswface features were encountered in association with the hearths. As a result of the survey, one site (Site 15415) was identified. The site consists of two components: the several diffuse prehistoric hearths, and the historic refuse and recent structural remnants. The site is evaluated as significant solely for .ififoonaticn coo.tent and is not recommended for further wodc. Cover Photo: Photograph of Landing at Wailuku River (Courtesy of the Marianist Archives) • ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 iii Page :IN"TRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 Background ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Scope of Work ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Area Description ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Previous Archaeological Research ....................................................................................................................... 2 Swnmary of Historical Docwnentary Research .................................................................................................... 5Field Methods and Procedures ............................................................................................................................. 6 FffiD:IN'GS ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Surf ace Findings .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Subsurface Findings ............................................................................................................................................. 7DATA AN"ALYSES ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 AgeI>eterminations ............................................................................................................................................ 13 Portable Artifacts ................................................................................................................................................ 15 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................ 25 Discussion .......................................................................................................................................................... 25 General Significance Assessments and Recommended General Treatments ........................................................ 25 REFERENCES CITED .................................................................................................................. 26 APPENDIX A: Historical Documentary Research by Lehua Kalima, B.A. ........................................................... -.... 28 Figure Project Location Map ................................................................................................................................................ 3 2 Locations of Backhoe Trenches and Shovel Test Units .............................................................................................. 8 3 Artifact Illustrations ................................................................................................................................................. 19 4 Artifact Illustrations ................................................................................................................................................. 21 A-1 Photo of Wailuku River ............................................................................................................................................ 30 A-2 Wailuku River Portion of an 1891 Map of Hilo ........................................................................................................ 31 A-3 Photograph of Landing at Wailuku River .................................................................................................................. 36 Table 1 Summary of Backhoe Trench Excavations ............................................................................................................... 10 2 Summary of Shovel Test Units ................................................................................................................................. 11 3 Swnmary of Radiocarbon Age Detenninations ......................................................................................................... 14 4 I>etailed Distribution of Portable Artifacts ................................................................................................................ 16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-()<)()491 BACKGROUND This report presents the results of an archaeological inventory survey conducted at the 1.73-acre Noelani Gardens project area, located north of Lower Wailuku Bridge, along Puueo Street, in the Land of Puueo, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-2-6-2: 1,2). The survey was conducted by Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D, Inc. (PHRI) at the request of Daniel Livingston, general manager for CRL Development The overall objective of the survey was to provide information sufficient for satisfaction of all historic preservation regulatory review requirementsof the Hawaii County Planning Department (HCPD) and the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). The survey consisted of a 100% pedestrian survey and limited subsurface testing. An initial 100% pedestrian survey of the project area bad been conducted by PHRI in 1980 (Rosendahl 1980); nevertheless, the area was surveyed again during the current project. The current survey was conducted on July 15, 1991 and includedsurfacecoUection of diagnostic artifacts and basic mapping of foundation remnants that bad been noted during the earlier survey. The limited subsurface testing was conducted July 15-17, 1991 and consisted of placing 11 systematically spaced backhoe trenches and four shovel test units. All field work was conducted by PHRI Laboratory Director Susan T. Goodfellow,Ph.D,andPHRI Lab Assistants Varda Zamir, B.A., and Patricia Zuccaro, B.A.. Dr. Paul H. Rosendahl provided overall guidance for the project. Approximately 45 labor-hows were expended conducting the field work. SCOPEOFWORK The basic purpose of the inventory survey was to identify all sites and features of potential archaeological significance present within the specified project area. An inventory survey comprises an initial level of archaeological investigation and is conducted basically to determine the presence or absence of archaeological resources within a specified project area. It indicates both the general nature and variety of archaeological remains present, and the general distribution and density of such remains. Finally, it permits a general significance assessment of the archaeological resources, and facilitates foanulation of realistic recommendations and estimates for such further work as might be necessary or appropriate. Such work could include further data collection (further recording of sites and features,andselected limited excavations) and possibly l subsequent mitigation-data recovery research excavations, construction monitoring, interpretive planning anddevelq:ment, and/or preservation of sites and features with significant scientific research, interpretive, and/or cultural values. Thebasicobjectivesofthepresentsurvey werefourfold: (a) to identify all sites and site complexes within the projectarea; (b) to evaluate the potential general significance of allidentified archaeological remains; (c) to determine thepossible impacts of proposed development upon theidentified remains; and (d) to define the general scope ofany subsequent further data collection and/or othermitigation work that might be necessary.Based on a review of readily available background literature, and based on familiarity with the project area and its vicinity (PHRI conducted a surface reconnaissance survey of the project area in 1980 [Project ARA-80-91), and based on discussions with CRL Development, Inc. representatives and with Dr. Ross Cordy, chief archaeologist with the DLNRSHPD, and based on extensive familiarity with the current requirements of review authorities, the following specific tasks weredeterminedtoconstituteanadequatescopeofworkforthe proposed inventory survey: 1.Review archaeological and historical literaturerelevant to the project area, and conduct limitedhistoricaldocwnentaryresearch(empbasisonreadilyavailable literature and documentary sources) andinterviews with any appropriate and available localinformant sources;2.Conduct a 100%-<:overage. high-intemity pedestriansurvey of the Jro.iect area (already completed in 1980);3.Conduct limited subsurface testing by means of abackhoe in the project area in order to (a) detenninethe presence or absence (and general distribution) ofpotentially significant buried cultural features or deposits, and (b) obtain suitable samples for agedetermination analyses; and4.Analyze field and historical research data,and prepareappropriate reports.The inventory survey was carried out in accordance with the guidelines currently used by the DLNR-SHPD for the review and evaluation of archaeological inventory survey reports submitted in conjunction with various development I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-()()()491 INTRODUCTION 2 pennit applications. The significance of all archaeological remains identified within the project area was assessed in terms of the National Register Criteria contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 60) and criteria for the evaluationoftraditionalculturalvaluespreparedbytheNational Advisory Council on Historic PreseNation. These criteria are used by the DLNR-SHPD and Hawaii County Planning Department for the evaluation of cultural resources and to evaluate eligibility for the Hawaii St.ate and National Register of Historic Places. To further facilit.ate client management decisions regarding the subsequent treatment of resources, the archaeological remains were also evaluated in tenns of PHRI Cultural Resource Management (CRM) value modes, which are derived from the above federal criteria. All significance criteria are discussed in <let.ail in the Conclusion section. PROJECT AREA DESCRIYTION The project area consists of two adjoining parcels of land (Figure 1). Parcel 1 comprises 65,323 square feet (1.5 acres) and includes all of Land Commission Award (LCA) 5145 (Royal Patent 4883) to Kauhiahiwa and a portion of LCA 4809 (Roya1Patent4687)toLoandMoses. Parcel2comprises9,893 sql.larC feet (0.23 acres) and includes a portion of LCA 1-B (Royal Patent 4693) to Wahine. The project area is on the north side of the Wailuku River, betweenPuueo Street to the west and Bayfront Highway to the east. Both parcels are between the WailukuRiver andKouLane,andarelocatedsouthwestofKou Lane (Figure l). The terrain in the project area slopes down to the Wailuku River, with the put immediately adjacent to the river drq_Jping off sbarplyin anearthenbankorcliffthatisasmuchas20feethigh. Tue project area was occupied until about the early 1960s. During the 1980 survey (Rosendahl 1980) the remains of this occupation werefoundovergrown withthickgrasses. The area has since been cleared and bulldozed in preparation for construction; however evidence of the occupation still exists in the form of scattered ornamental trees and shrubs (principally introduced species)suchasbreadfruit,guava,hibiscus,mango, cas tor bean, avocado, banana, and palm trees, and ground cover such as philodendron and laua 'e. Other vegetation in the area includesdensestandsofbamoooneartheedgeof the WailukuRiver. The project area cont.ains Hilo Series soils, primarily Hilo silty clay loam. This soil type is present on 0-20 percent slopes on the lower windward side of Mauna Kea and is dissected by deep, narrow gulches (Sato et al 1973). The color of tbe soil type ranges from brown or dark reddish brown to dark grayish brown, depending on depth and moisture, while pH readings indicate that all horizons are typically acidic. Normal depth to bedrock is five feet or mote, and roots are found throughout the soil profile to bedrock Soil permeability is good, and there is little evidence of soil erosion. There is abundant pennanent fresh water in the project area, provided primarily by Wailuku River and its tribut.aries. Hilo Bay is the largest water resource in the area, with the many inlets along the bay providing places to practice aquiculture, as well as sheltered places to dock canoes. The bay itself would have provided both brackish and marine water resources. PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH Archaeological research concerning the windward side of the island of Hawaii has been notably scarce. The earliest archaeological survey of the Hilo region was performed by Hudson in the l 93Q<; (Hudson Ms.) during his larger insr,ecti.on of archaeological resources throughout east Hawaii. He noted that: No archaeological remains are to be found in the city of Hilo itself except a few stones which are said to have been taken from heaius. It is }XlSSible, however, togather afair amountofinfonnationfromtraditional and historical sources about former structures, and in the region east of Hilo toward Lilei wi Point there are numerous sites still sufficiently well preserved to be measured and described (Hudson 1932:226). Among the better preseNed sites noted east of Hilo were agricultural terraces along the banks of streams, used primarily for growing t.aro; andafew probablehabitation platfonns (Sites 31-36). Hudson explains the lack of archaeological sites in Hiloas the product of development in the area, and draws upon earlyhistoricalsourcestoprovideinformationconcerninglanduseinthe bay area. His synthesis, as well as other information fromhistorical accounts, is presented in the Summary of HistoricalDocument.acy Research section.Hudson's contention that no archaeological remains were present in the city of Hilo has been largely supported by archaeological field work undertaken in the South Hilo District during the last decade. In 1982, Kelly and Athens conducted a survey of the Alenaio Stream Flood Damage reduction project area (Kelly and Athens 1982) on behalf of the Bishop Museum, for the Anny CorpsofEngineers. The survey, which investigated two alternate project routings around Alenaio Stream, failed to locate prehistoric or early historic remains, although it did identify the remains of a historic cane house. Kelly's historical document.ary research for the project uncovered an 1825 map . -· . I .. . ' . • . , .Lo_.,, ... -··• ~ . .. ~ . .. I.,. '"'-. ., .. ' ~ . ~ ·' 4" , ... " ~ ; .; • ,. . . ' •"I i .,_ • • .. . .. . , ,. -~ ... • • . 'f ~ ~ • . •"" .. • I .. .. •. ;_ •"" . • _,.. ... L ~ l fl ' ► ~ .. , ' .... . '. ·.,. 1 " ... . . ~ , ... ; ·~. " .. ,. -{ . .. . ' \ • ' ., ,f ~ • It . • ~ ~ ,ol • i . ., r· ,. .. ., u • . } r "' 'lo • ,J '.,.. .. .. ' .•• ~ ... • . ! " r "" ? . .. ... ..., '• . . .. .. ~ . .. . . . • , . ,• • . C ~ .. ~ .. _,. • -.. .. . . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 INTRODUCTION 0 H Al STREET "' 0 "' "' PROJECT AREA 2• 7• no mo 4• 5f' 1?° I i 1 10 20 30 __.--1.! E A W E ----- \TREE e FOUNOATlON CORE Figure 1. Project Location Map 3 TIIK:3-2-0-02: "' 3• J ~ I ll WAILUICU RIYER I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 INTRODUC110N 4 of the Hilo area by C.R. Malden which showed extensive taro pondfields extending from Hilo Bay inland to Halai Hill. The map did not show any villages in the Hilo area, leading Kelly to suppose that house sites were situated throughout the cultivated lands (Kelly and Athens 1982: 12). Based on the findings, Athens recommended subsurface testing to determine the presence/absenceofburieddeposi ts; however, archaeological reports archived at the DLNR-SHPD and HCPD indicate that no subsurface archaeological testing has been conducted in the Hilo area. Cox (1983) conducted a survey of the Honolii Stream Hydropower Study areas as part of a feasibility study for the Anny Corps of Engineers. Cox examined two areas, a gauging station site and the northern crest of Honolii Stream. No sites were identified within the weir location, but one site was identified on thenorthemstream bank. TI1esite, an agricultural terrace in fair condition, was located approximately a quarter mile downslope of the present landing field, at an elevation of 1,300 ft above mean sea level, part way down a stream bank. No portable remains were coUected at the site. A series of three reconnaissance surveys was conducted in theHiloareainl987-88byPHRI(RosendahlM.L.K. 1988a,b,c; Rosendahl and Telea 1988). The first of these, a survey of the Hilo Judiciary Complex site, was conducted during December 1987 on behalf of William Okamoto and Associates, Inc .. Five parcels ofland in downtown Hilo were investigated (Rosendahl 1988a). The survey failed to locate archaeological sites, noting that "Candidate sites 1-5 have aU undergone profound transfonnation as the city of Hilo has evolved; no traces of prehistoric or early historic land use patterns were present on the ground surface of the sites tt (Rosendah 1 l 988a:8). Based on the map uncovered by Ke.lly during the earlier Bishop Museum survey (Kelly and Athens 1982), however, Rosendahl recommended that limited subsurface testing be undertaken to determine the presence/absence of buried deposits in the project area. The second PHRI survey was conducted in South Hilo, at the proposed Irradiation Plant site, for Westec Services (Rosendahl and Telea 1988).Again, the site had been substantially disturbed during the growth of Hilo, leaving no surface traces of prenistoric or early historic sites. The results of the third survey, conducted in the Land ofWa ia kea at the Hilo Wastewater Treatment Facility site (Rosendahl 1988b), were similarly unproductive. The third survey, conducted in the Lands of Kikala and Paukaa at the Honolii Hydroelectric Plant project area (Rosendahl 1988c), identified three historic sites in the seaward portion of the project area. The sites-a terrace, a wall alignment, and a complex-based on size, location, and portable remains, were interpreted as habitation and boundary/agricultural sites. Rosendahl concluded: Based on an initial examination of the banks of Honolii Stream within the project area and onhistorical documentaryresearch,itis likely that the banks of the stream in the project area once supported taro cultivation. Documentary research indicates that there was at least one habitation complex in the area of the stream during th.emid-1800s; this corresponds roughly to the Kiyan residences [the habitation complex] noted above (Rosendahl 1988c:14). Most recently, PHRI conducted a field inspection (Rosendahl 1990) and inventory survey (Jensen 1991) of the Komohana Golf Course, located in the Lands of Ponahawai and Punahoa 1-2. Both projects were conducted for the KTA Consulting Group. No archaeological remains of any kind were observed during the field inspection. The inventory survey, led by Jensen, located two sites: Site 14946, a possible former residential site and associated animal shed; and Site 14947,aditch system with one primary channel partiaUyintact. No other surface remains were noted, and no evidence for prehistoricorearly historic use of the project area was recovered. ln 1980 PHRI conducted a 100%-coverage pedestrian survey of the project area (Rosendahl 1980 [Project ARA-80- 9]) on behalf of Kuuipo Resort Condominiums, Inc. The findings of the 1980survey, whichform the basis for the current investigation, noted that : The only surface structural remains found during the archaeological reconnaissance survey were those resulting from the recent historic period occupation of the project area. Both structural remains and modem portable cultural debris and rubbish from this recent occupation were abundant. No evidence of any surface structural remains from any prehistoric or early historic period archaeological sites was found (Rosendahl 1980:5). During the Rosendahl (1980) survey the exposed face of the cut bank along Wailuku River was inspected. Pcrtions of a possibl y undisturbed subsutfacecultural deposit were identified in the cut bank immediately behind the existing pebble beach. Theapparentdepositextendedalongthebankforapproximately 50-55 meters, along the cut face, and was restricted to the uppermost SO cm of the face. The deposits were marked bynumerous pieces of fire-cracked rock, pieces of several species ofmarinemolluscs,candle-nut(ku/wz)shell,andafewfragments . . . .... . ., ~ .. -~ -. -~,:• .... ~" . •. f• .... • .-' • ' .. lo ·. ,f ~ , . . t . , ~ ~ , . I' .. I. .. , • C ' . tr .. .. \ .. . ' .. ~ . , • . ~ ... . . ... . ,. . ... .. ' .. l .. .. ,. . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-o<XJ49 l INTRODUCTION 5 artifacts were associated with the deposit. Two possible features were noted in theexpo:;ed bank: a small hearth or ft.replace and a pavement of small, waterwom cobbles and pebbles. SUMMARY OF HISTORJCAL DOCUMENTARY RESEARCH As part of the current project, PHRI Historical Researcher LehuaKalimacooductedfunitedhistoricdocumentary research on the project area (Appendix A). Included in Kalima 's report are quotations from historical versions of Hawaiian legends and oral histories concerning Puueo and the Wailuku River area of South Hilo. Also included are excerpts from various ethnohistories and reports, early photographs and maps of the project area, transcripts of native testimonies for claimed lands in Puueo ahupua ·a, and transcripts of informant interviews conducted as put of the 1980 recamaissance survey (Ra;endahl 1980). The following summarizes infonnaticnin Kalima 's report, and information from other sources, including Hudson (Ms.). Puueo literally translates as '"Victory Hill." In Place Names of Hawaii Puueo is described as an '"elevated place in Hiloqd., whereKalaniopu'u built theheiauofKanao (Pukuiet al. 1974;Appendix A). In native histories, Puueo is mentioned in two proverbs and several legends (Appendix A), most of which center on WailukuRiver as thehomeofHina, the mother of the demigod Maui, and describe Maui's victory over the Long &I, Kuna Loa. Farly historical references to the inhabitants of the Hilo area are numerous. The Reverend William Ellis, who travelled throughout much of Hawaii during the 1820s, estimated that Hilo Bay contained 400 houses, and ·probably not less than 2000 inhabitants" (Ellis 1827:337-338) at the time of his visit. Menzies, another early traveler to Hawaii, provided more infonnation concerning the location of native habitations when he wrote "round the bottom of this [Hilo] bay was a tract oflow land that extended a considerable distance to the eastward and presented themostexuberantappearance, being well cultivated and adorned with beautiful groves of cocoanut palms and breadfruit trees amongst which were scattered the habitations of the natives" (Menzies 1920). Stewart also observed the nativehabitations,notingthat'"thehabitationsofthenativesareseen, not in a village, but among the plantations, like farmhouses in a thickly inhabited country" (Stewart 1830:362). Based on these and his own observations, Lyman later suggested that in 1846 there were three of four thousand inhabitants in the . region between Hilo and Keaau (1924:94).Early inhabitants of Hilo apparently cultivated taro in areas along stream banks. Handy andHandy ( 1972) write: "On the lava-strewn plain of Waiakea and the Wailuku River, dry taro was formerly planted wherever there was enough soil ... " (Handy and Handy 1972:539). Bloxam, a naturalist aboard the Blonde in 1824-25, noted that "the taro is cultivated here in great quantities, not in ponds as at Woahoo [Oahu] but on dry land" (Bloxam 1925:52)-an observation which contrasts with the taro pondfields depicted in C.R. Malden 's 1825 map of Hilo (Kelly and Athens 1982). A second set of subsistence activities apparently revolved around fishponds, formed by damming streams or by building walls across coastal inlets (Hudson 1932:230). Coulter wrote that" coral reefs in Hilo Bay furnished an environment suitable to aquiculture, and fishponds there contributed to the food supply of people on this part of the coast" (Coulter 1931 :28). Hudson presented the same quotation from Coulter in his book, and noted that the statement implied that fishponds were built out into the bay, which was erroneous. He further commented �There is no archaeological evidence of, and no historical reference to, any ponds built offshore. There is still much fishing in the bay from canoes and along the coast with casting nets and spears ... most of the ponds seem to have been built in1andinthestreams"(Hudsonl932:230).Ellisalsocommented on fishponds; saying that Wailama and Waiakea Streams " ... at a short distance from the shore, fill several large fishponds, and afterwards empty themselves into the sea" (Ellis 1831:337). Ellis noted that there were plenty of ducks in the ponds and streams as well as fish. Stewart similarly mentioned Waiakea Fishpond, visiting it two years after Ellis, calling it: ...a large fishpond, of which the creek or river is the outlet. It is a pretty sheet of water in its natural state,excepting strong stone dams, to prevent the escape of the fish. • These are tabu to all but high chiefs; and no one of rank having lived here lately, the whole pend is literallyalivewiththefinestofmullet" (Stewart 1830:365). Finally, Lyman wrote: ... just after leaving the village [Hilo] we passed the royal fishponds on the left. These are connected with the bay, and contain the finestmullet in large quantity. They are tabu to the natives & fish from the ponds cannot be purchased at any price. The ponds are navigatedbylightcanoesmadeofoork (Lyman 1924:87). According to Hudson·s observations in the 1930s, the Waiakea fishponds had been rebuilt so frequently it was impa;sible todetennine their original fonn (Hudson 1932:232) . In addition to the subsistence activities noted above, Ellis observed that trading took place in Puueo, on the banks of the Wailuku River. Trading involved goods ranging from mats and tapa to food and would took place at certain times of the year .. " . . ... " • ~ -~ ,. ,,. .. ',; .... ~ • • .. 'I < ... . ; . ,.. . '• ' .. • ·- • .. .. F .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 INTRODUCTION 6 so that people from all areas ineastemHawaiicould participate. According to Ellis there was a toll bridge on the Wailuku Rivet during the reign of King Kamehameha I. The amount of the toll depended on the desire of the collector, who would then detennine whether a person could cross the rivet (Ellis 1963). Land tenure documents indicate that Kamehameha held many of the Hilo lands, supporting the historic observations that royal fishponds existed in the Hilo area.. Upon his death, the Hilo lands, including Pi· ihonua, Punahoa and Waiakea, were passed to hissonandheir, Liholiho, while Puueo ahupua 'a went to a favorite wife, Kaheiheimalie (Kelly et aL 1981: 11). In 1842 Puueo was handed down to her daughter, Kekauluohi, the mother of Kamehameha V. Upon Kekauluohi's death in 1845, the lands preswnably went to the crown. During the. Great Mahele parcels in Puueo were sold to various claimants by Commissioners of Crown Lands (Kelly et al. 1981 :40). FIELD1\1ETHODSANDPROCEDURES A 100%-coverage pedestrian survey of the project area was conducted by PHRI in 1980 (Rosendahl 1980). Due to recent clearing and initial bulldozing in the central portion of Parcel 1, however, the area was surveyed again during the current project. The second survey, which included surface collection, was conducted on July 15, 1991 by Laboratory Director Susan T. Goodfellow, Ph.D., and Laboratory Assistants Varda Zamir, B.A., and Patricia Zuccaro, B.A. The survey commenced at the edge of the parcel defined by Puueo Street and continued to the edge of the shoreline buffer zone along Wailuku River. The survey proceeded in sweeps oriented parallel to Puueo Street, and was accomplished in conjunction with a surface collection of diagnostic bottles and ceramic artifacts which could potentially aid in dating the various historic period uses of the parcel. The subsurface testing was conducted July 15-17., 1991 and consisted of placing 11 systematically spaced backhoe trenches and four shovel tests witbin the shoreline buffer zone. The 1980 survey report had noted concentrations of charcoal and fire-cracked rock exposed along the river cut on the northern and western edges of the project area (Rosendahl 1980); placement of the subsurface tests was thus oriented to determine the extent and distribution of these deposits. Historic photographs of the project area (Figures A-1, A-3 in Appendix A)had indicated that several houses, as well as the Puueo PoiFactory, bad been located along the shoreline of the projectarea, and it was hoped that subsurface testing might alsoconfiim the locations of past historic occupation. Generally,the trenches were placed at intervals of approximately 25 ft,along the northern shoreline, above the pebble beaches, thechosen interval being based on expected size of historic periodhouse foundations. The backhoe could not gain access to some areas, thus in these areas the intervals were adjusted. The trenches were generally numbered consecutively, beginning at the northwestern end of the shoreline and continuing to the northeastern end. The backhoe trenches measured 1.0 wide by 2.0 m long. The trenches were excavated to depths of 1.29-2.07 m, and were discontinued on reaching sterile river clay. The trencbing wasmonitoredforsignsofculturaldebrisand/ordatingsamples, withtrenchexcavationhaltedincaseswherenaturalorcultural layers were noted. Depth ranges, thickness, and general color and texture were noted for each layer encountered; layers were recorded on standard PHRI Soil Stratigraphy forms. Soil descriptions were supplemented by notes on depositional history and the specific setting of each trench. A representative soil column, of five strata encountered in the majority of the trenches, was taken from Trench l and underwent laboratory analysis and description. Samples oflayersexhibiting different characteristics from those encountered in Trench 1 were also collected where appropriate. All trenches were backfilled upon completion of the stratigraphy forms and completion of collection of cultural material and dating samples. Four shovel test units were placed along the shoreline buffer zone, on the western edge of the project area (Figure 2). The units were placed at approximately 60 ft intervals along the shoreline access path to test for possible prehistoric remains and to determine whether an intact substrate relating to historic occupation existed in the uncleared portion of the project area. The units measured 50 by 50 cm. Excavation was conducted by natural layers in all units, with characteristics of each stratum being recorded on standard PHRI excavation fonns. Final depths of the units ranged from 1.03-1.74 meters below datum; two of the units were terminated upon reaching a sterile clay layer, one was terminated for practical reasons (the unit became too deep to excavate from the surface), and the final unit was tenninated on bedrock. Soil samples were taken from clay layers in two units and underwent laboratory analysis and description. The units were photographed, were recorded on excavation forms, and were then backfilled. Five of the trenches and all four of the shovel units contained charcoal. Bulk samples of soil and charcoal were taken from concentrations in the trenches, and charcoal fragments were collected throughout the upper layers of the shovel test units. The samples were placed in aluminum foil packages to reduce potential contamination. The samples were then labelled with provenience information, including project number, trench number, stratum, depth, recovery code, and recorder's initials. Both soil column and dating samples were accessioned and were submitted to the PHRI laboratory at the end of the field work portion of the project. {. • ... .. .. ,. .. -:l • , .. . . ... I ' ~ ". • . \, . . , ' ~ . •• • , .. "' . . ~ .: . . ~ _ ,_ ' .. " I• .. ' ... ... .. . .. .. \. .. . . . . .: ... -. ,- • .. ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-09049 l SURFACE FINDINGS As noted, structural remains corresponding to the recent historic occupation in the project area were encountered during the Rosendahl survey (1980). Asoociated with the remains was abundant cultural debris. No evidence of prehistoric or early historic occU{Xition was encountered. During the current survey, it -..wsnotedtbatclearingandbulldozingtoprqmeforconstruction had almost completely destroyed the evidence for the early occupation; the majority of the foundations mapped during the 1980 survey report had been destroyed (Rosendahl 1980). Only a few structural remnants of the recent historic occupation remain. Portions of three foundations were encountered at the edge of the shoreline buffer wne; these were recorded on the excavation map presented as Figure 2. The cleared surface of the project area was then inspected for structural or cultural debris indicative of prehistoric or early historic period occupation. No evidence for this was found; however,recenthistoricculturalrcmainswcrcpresent,although they had been displaced during the clearing and bulldozing. To provide additional information concerning the length of recent occupation, and to determine whether any portable artifacts dating to the early historic period were present in the debris, diagnostic bottles and ceramic artifacts were collected from the surface of the cleared and bulldozed areas. Many artifacts were collected; several onlookers, however, informed us that the area has been a popular hunting ground for bottle collectors since its abandonment in the 1960s; the current assemblage thus may not adequately reflect the range of materials originally present in the project area. It is likely that the earlier (and thus more valuable) artifacts from the parcel have been removed. In general, the remains found in the cleared portions of the project area reflect habitation. Most of the remains consist of glassware-liquor bottles, fo:xl jars, drinking glasses, ca;metic jars, and medicine bottles. Also present werece..unics, including porcelain plates, bowls, and cups; plastic cartons; phonograph records; nails; wood; concrete fragments; and miscellaneous paper items. The most recent debris was found at the eastern edge of Parcel 1, along Kou Lane, where local South Hilo residents have utilized the land for refuse disposal. Debris in this area ranges from liquor bottles to pieces of children's toys to fragments of shoes and clothing. In addition to the above remains,several concentrations of recent historic remains were encountered in the shoreline 7 buffer zone. A shoreline access path was discovered along the western edge of Parcel l; this path skirts the banks of the WailukuRiverandhasslwnped inseveralareasdue toslopewash from heavyrains. Concentrations of debris were noted primarily in theseslwnp zones and consisted of abundant liquor and soda bottles, as well as miscellaneous metal fragments. Other than in theslumpedareas, surface debris was fairly rare as compared to the central portion of the project area. A surface collection was conducted along the shoreline buff er zone. The collection was limited to bottles or other debris not encountered in the central portion of the project area. SUBSURFACE FINDINGS Backhoe Trenches Eleven backhoe trenches wereexcavatedacross the project area (see Table 1 for sutnmary of trench findings)(Figure 2.). The majority of the trenches exhibited a thick root mat in the upper layer; below this layer was disturbed soil, either fromclearing, recent dumping, or slope erosion. One general profile type, consisting of 4-6 strata, was observed (Strata 1-V, Table l); variations on this profile were noted primarily in the trenches excavated furthest from the cut bank Cultural deposits, in the form of charcoal concentrations, were encountered in Trenches 1, 3,4,5,and lOand were given horirontal feature(HF-)designations. The deposits are described as follows: Horizontal Feature 1 (Irench 1, Stratum Ill)-The deposit was first noted as loose fragments of charcoal in the soil matrix of Stratum m. With increasing depth. however, the deposit exhibited greater integrity and was found to be associated with reddened soil and fire-cracked rock. The outline of the feature was traced within the trench and was determined to represent an oval measuring approximately 0.75 m wide by 1. 10 m long. No artifacts or ecofacts were encountered in association with the feature. Given the general correspondence of the trench with the area of the cut bank noted to contain a probable hearth feature(Rosendahl 1980:5), this feature is interpreted as the hearth feature noted previously. Horizontal Feature 2 (Trench 3, Stratum IV) -As with HF-I, the deposit in Trench 3 was first noted as loose fragments of charcoal in the matrix of Stratum • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 ·,.:: :t �IBISCUS f ; ' RE'BLE &EACH. /, OVERHANGING ROSE APPLE / /FOUNI •.!>< � " ·-, AVOCADOQTE LOCATION OF '.. !IT REIINENT 8 ftO I===========;::===:::::;' mo 50 100 'BREADFRU 'EPLACE 10 20 l¾i."' .. �"•.'"•�V __ •: .. iJ.· •.· APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF ,-�� EXPOSED CULTURAL DEPOSIT 30 .,•·· : :;.::, .\\::: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 104fr090491 FINDINGS 9 IV.As excavations into Stratum IV continued, theconcentration became more dense and was found tobe associated with several fragments .of waterwomcoral and some reddened soil. The outlines of thefeature could not be well established as the featurecontinued to be somewhat dispersed; the portionexposed in the trench measured 0.94 m wide by 64 mlong. The red soil graded into a red clay layer(Stratum V) at 1.40 cm below the surface. Noartifacts or ecofactual remains were associated withthe feature.Horizontal Feature 3 (Trench 4, Stratum ill-IV Interface) -The deposit was noted first in the lower matrixofStratumIIlan_dcontinuedforapproximately l O cm into Stratum IV. The feature consists of a fairlydense concentration of charcoal fragments and ash,but is not associated with the types of remains notedinHF-1 andHF-2above. Due to the dispersed natureof the deposit, the outlines of the feature could be onlygenerally ascertained; the feature appeared to beroughly oval and measured 0.8 m wide by 1.2 m long.No artifacts or ecofactual materials were associatedwith the feature.Horizontal Feature 4 (Trench 5, Stratum IV) -An oval-shaped deposit of ash and charcoal was encountered at a depth of 1.5 meters below the surface. The majority of the feature was exposed in the trench and measured 0. 70 m wide by 0.95 m long; measurements may be somewhat inaccurate due to backslide of material into the trench from the upslope end. No other cultural materials were associated with the deposit. Horizontal Feature 5 (french 10, Stratum ill) The soil in Stratum III of the trench was mixed with a fairly dense concentration of charcoal from a depth of 0.88 m to 0.95 m. No discernible outline for the feature was noted either in profile or plan view; general measurements of the feature area exposed within the trench were 0.65 m wide by 1.20 m long. No cultural material was associated with the deposit. In addition to the charcoal concentrations noted above, loooe charcoal fragments were encountered in Strata I and Il ofTrench 1, Stratum IT of Trench 2, and Stratum ID of Trench 9. Samples of all charcoal deposits were submitted to the PHRI laboratory for sample preparation. Samples determined to be of sufficient size and integrity for aoalysis were then submitted to Beta Analytic of Coral Gables, Florida for age determination analysis. The results of the analysis are presented in the Data Analysis section. Cobble layers were encountered in three of the trenches, providing the opportunity to determine whether the cobble layers noted in the cut bank during the 1980 survey (Rosendahl 1980) repi;esented pavements ornatural rock layers. The layers were encountered in Stratum IV of Trench 4, Stratum m of Trench 7, and Stratum IV of Trench 8. The cobble layer in Trench 4 overlaid the sterile red-brown clay noted in all of the trench units(seeTable 1) andrangedfrom0.35-0.65 m thick(l-5 cobbles thick). The rocks were generally waterwom, resembling the rocks of the pebble beach below, and were of various sizes. The cobble layer was exposed primarily in the northwest face of the trench and was fair! y irregular in profile. No cultural materials were associated with the layer. Due to its presence immediately above the pebble beach, and the lack of cultural associations, the layer is interpreted as a natural formation, most likely an earlier layer of pebble beach. The remaining two cobble layers overlaid a layer of brown humus. Both layers were loosely consolidated and were intermixed with the reddish soil matrix from the previous layer, in amanner similar to that noted for soil/rock layers in other trenches. No cultural material was associated with either of the layers. Given the overall similarity of these two ll\yer., to stratigraphy noted in other trenches, as well as the lack of cultural material associated with the cobbles, it is most likely that both layers are natural, and simply represent coarser versions of the stratigraphy noted elsewhere in the project area. Portable remains, in the form of recent historic debris, wereencountered inStratalandilinTrenches 1,2,4,5, 10,and 11 and consisted of the same types of materials noted in the surface findings above. The remaining strata were found to be sterile insofar as no portable remains were present. No portable remains dating to the prehistoric or early prehistoric periods wereencounteredinthetrenchexcavatioos. E.cofactualremains, in the form of a dense concentration of opihi shells, were encountered in the upper 10 cm of Trench 5. A sample was collected for analysis; however, the deposit is interpreted as a recent deposit due to recent historic debris in the same stratum.Finally, waterwomcoral fragments wereeoc0tmtered in Stratum II of Trench 2, Strata III and IV of Trench 3, and in several areas of the shoreline buffer zone between the trenches. Only the coral fragments from Stratum IV of Trench 3 were found in direct association with other cultural material (HF-2); the other coral fragments were generally isolated. Shovel Test Units Four shovel test units were excavated in the shoreline buffer zone along the western portion of Parcel I. As noted in the Field Methods and Procedures section, the tests were placed to determine the nature of the stratigraphy underlying the more disturbed central portion of the project area, and to • .. • ... • • I ,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-o<J049 l Tr No. Strat 1 I II m HF-I IV V 2 I II m IV V 3 I II III IV HF-2 V 4 I II m HF-3 IV V 5 I II III IV HF-4 V 6 I II m IV V 7 I IA II m IV V VI Depth (cmbs) 0-3030-5656-117102-110117-160160-190+0-24 24-4646-8383-110110-129+0-2323-3333-122122-163123-140163-189+0-3535-5858-135132-13595-170170+0-3232-4242-8282-156150-156156-1900-1818-3737-6767-140140-161+0-2828-3737-5555-8080-128128-173173-195+FINDINGS Table 1. SUMMARY OF BACKHOE TRENCHES Soil 1ype Comments sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); charcoal fragments, recent debris l Dark yellowish brown ( lOYR 3/4 moist), charcoal fragments, w/w cobbles sicl Very dark brown (l0YR 2/2 moist); charcoal fragments, recent debris cl Dark reddish brown (2.5YR2.5/4 moist); diffusehearthfroture with fire-<:rackedrocks cl Dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4 moist); sterile C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); sterile sic! Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); recent debris 1 Dark yellowish brown ( lOYR 3/4 moist); charcoal fragments, coral, recent debris sicl very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); sterile cl dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4 moist); sterile C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); sterile sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); sterile l Dark yellowish brown (IOYR 3/4 moist); sterile sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); coral, recent debris cl Dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4 moist); sterile C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); charcoal, coral sil Black (lOYR 2/ l moist); charcoal sicl Very dark brown (l0YR 2/2 moist); recent debris L Dark yellowish brown (IOYR 3/4 moist); sterile sicl Very dark brown (l0YR 2/2 moist); sterile cl Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); charcoal concentration k Waterwom cobble layer; sterile C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); sterile sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); midden, recent debris l Dark yellowish brown (lOYR 3/4 moist); sterile sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); sterile cl Dark reddish brown (2.5YR 2.5/4); sterile sicl Very dark brown ( 1 0YR 2/2 moist); ash/charcoal concentration C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); sterile sic) Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); sterile g Dark brown (IOYR 3/3 moist); sterile cl Dark reddish brown (5YR 3/3 moist); sterile cl Dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4 moist); sterile C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); sterile sicl Very dark brown (IOYR 2/2 moist); sterile g Very dark gray (lOYR 3/1 moist); sterile 1 Dark yellowish brown (IOYR 3/4 moist); sterile k Waterworn cobble layer; sterile sil Very dark brown (l0YR 2/2 moist); sterile sicl Very dark grayish brown (lOYR 3/2 moist); sterile C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); sterile 10 • .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ]046-()()()491 FINDINGS 11 Table 1. (cont.) Tr Depth Soil No. Strat (cmbs) Type Comments 8 I 0-23 sicl Very dark brown (IOYR 2/2 moist); sterile II 23-83 I Dark yellowish brown (lOYR 3/4 moist); sterile m 83-104 sic Dark brown (7.SYR 3/2moist); sterile 104-138 k Waterwomcobble layer; sterile V 138-163+C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2); sterile 9 I 0-15 sicl Very dark brown (l0YR 2/2 moist); sterile II 15-20 I Dark yellowish brown (IOYR 3/4 moist); sterile m 20-83 C Dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4 moist); charcoal IV 83-119+C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); sterile 10 I 0-38 sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2moist); recent debris II 38-88 I Dark yellowish brown (lOYR 3/4 moist); sterile m 67-150 sicl Very dark brown (IOYR 2/2 moist); sterile HF-5 67-75 sicl Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); charcoal concentration IV 150+kcl Dark reddish brown (2.5YR 3/4 moist); sterile 11 I 0-40 sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2moist); recent debris II 40-113 1 Dark yellowish brown (l0YR 3/4 moist); recent debris m 113-181 sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); sterile IV 181-207 C Dusky red (2.5YR 3/2 moist); sterile Table 2. SUMMARY OF SHOVEL TEST EXCAVATIONS Depth Soil Unit Strat (cmbd) Type Comments ST-1 I 46-87 sicl Very dark brown (l0YR 2/2 moist); charcoal, recent debris II 85-120 1 Dark yellowish brown (lOYR 3/4 moist); charcoal, recent debris 113-135+sic Very dark grayish brown (l0YR 3/2 moist); sterile ST-2 I 42-69 sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); charcoal, recent debris II 58-103 l Dark yellowish brown (l0YR 3/4 moist); charcoal, recent debris 95-103+sic Very dark grayish brown (l0YR 3/2 moist); sterile ST-3 I 87-126 sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); charcoal, recent debris II 116-174+1 Dark yellowish brown (lOYR 3/4 moist); charcoal, recent debris ST-4 I 108-134 sicl Very dark brown (lOYR 2/2 moist); charcoal, recent debris II 128-134+BR Bedrock IV m m I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 FINDINGS 12 disturbed central portion of the project area, and to ascertain whether any prehistoric or early historic period remains werepresent in this portion of the project area. A summary of the shovel test units is presented in Table 2. Excavation of all four units revealed the same Strata I and II noted for the backhoe trench units above, and contained recent historic debris and scattered fragments of charcoal throughout the strata. Shovel Test Units 1 and 2 were terminated wh.en a sterile mottled clay layer was encountered; this clay appears to be a C-horizon produced by decomposition of the underlying bedrock. Shovel Test Unit 3 was terminated in Stratum II at a depth where charcoalandrecen.tdebris wereno longerpresent,and when the depth of the pit made further excavation of it difficult. Shovel Test Unit 4 was tem,inated on bedrock. No cultural remains from the prehistoric or early .historic period were encountered in the shovel test units. Those cultural layers which were encountered contained the same type of recent debris encountered elsewhere in the project area, and appeared to the result of secondary deposition from slopewash and slumping. As with the trenchunits,samplesof the soil layers and charcoal were collected for analysis. All artifacts were collected by stratum, were recorded on the excavation form, and were submitted to the PHRilaboratoryforanalysis. The results of the analysis are presented in the Data Analysis section. Monitoring of Foundation Coring Operations In addition to conducting the inventory survey, PHRI monitored a coring project conducted by Geolab, Inc. The coring, requested by the client, was done to test for foundation stability. The purpose of the monitoring was to determine presence/absence of additional subsurface cultural remains in the area. The cores were placed primarily in those areas already tested by PHRI during the inventory survey, and were designed to take samples ooly to depths of 5-6.5 ft, 10-11.5 ft, and 15-16.5 ft below surface (Figm-e 1). Cultural material in the fonn of a single charcoal sample was encountered in Core #6 (see map) at 10-15 ft below surface, indicating the potential for deeper remains beneath the untested portions of the project area. Unfortunately, the sample was too small to submit for age determination analyses. The remaining core samples were culturally sterile. In order to determine the presence /absence of subsurface cultural remains associated with the sample taken from Core #6, and to obtain a larger sample if possible, a final backhoe trench was excavated in the immediate are.a of the core. The trench was oriented perpendicular to Puueo St. and extended approximately 2.5 meters to either side of the core hole. Excavation revealed a layer of disturbed, compacted clay and recent debris, extending from the current ground surface to a depth of 2.1 meters, underlain by an intact natural grey day layer. This lower layer contained increasing amounts of decomposing bedrock with depth, and was heavily mottled in places. The excavation terminated at a depth of 4.4 meters and was determined to be sterile. based on the findings of this excavation, the charcoal sample encountered in Core #6 is interpreted as intrusive. t .. ... • • • ' . t . " ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-0')()49 J AGE DETERMINATIONS Objectives and Methods The purpose of age determination analysis is to provide initial chronological data to aid in assessing the relative significance of sites in the project area. Six samples of charcoal were chosen from discrete cultural deposits within Site 15415 for age determination using radiocarbon analysis. Samples were selected based on the amount and nature of datable material present, stratigraphic context, and overall distribution within the project area The samples were submitted for radiocarbon analysis to BetaAnalyticlnc. of Coral Gables,Florida Using standard procedures, the samples were pretreated with an acid, alkali, acidseriesof soakings to remove carbonates and humic acids. After pretreatment, samples were combusted to fonn carbon dioxide gas, were combined with lithium to separate the carbon, and were hydrolized for conversion to liquid fonn. The liquid was then catalyzed to form benzene and was placed in a liquid scintillation counter to determine the amountsofcarbon-l3andcarbon-l 2. Duetosmallsarnplesize, three of the samples were given extended counting to reduce statistical errors associated with small samples. The isotope values obtained during the counting process were then used to calculate the carbon-13 carbon-12 ratio for each sample, withthe final result being determined relative to international standards in order to reduce errors produced by carbon isotope fractionation. Processing of the samples proceeded normally. Results The results of the radiocarbon age determination analyses are summarized in Table 3. The age for each sample is reported as a range corresponding to the calendric age+/-two standard deviations. Ages were calibrated using the tables provided in Stuiver and Pearson (1986), which correct for variations in atmospheric carbon over time. According to Table 3,samples RC-1174,-1175,-1173,and -1172 yielded definitive age ranges after calibration, whilesamples RC-1169 and -1170 produced multiple age ranges.Multiple ranges are caused by "flat" regions in the calibrationcurve, which correspond to periods when atmospheric carbondecreased at a rate greater than 1.2 ppm 10 years, resulting in more than one possible fit of a sample to the calibration curve.While multiple age ranges are more difficult to interpretarchaeologically, detailed examination of the statistical curves,combined with evidence from artifactual material and featurestratigraphy, generally provides a means of selecting one age 13 range as more probable than the others. Based on these criteria, the most likely age range for samples RC-1169 and -1170 are AD 1390-1950 and AD 1400-1670, respectively. With the exception of the result for RC-1175, which is discussed in more detail below, the results of the age determination analysis are generally consistent with the stratigraphic relationshi� of the samples. Two of the four age ranges derived from the hearth features (RC-1173 and -1170) fall between AD 1400-1670; an age range which is consistent with the depth of the samples and the apparent prehistoric nature of the hearth features. The results for RC-1169 (Horizontal Feature 1, Backhoe Trench 1) provided a much larger error range for the sample; however, examination of the one-sigma values for RC-l 169indicatesthat thereisa90% probability that the actual age of the sample falls between AD 1440-1670; the samplethereforeprovidesanagerangeconsistentwiththeother hearth features. The age range for the fourth hearth feature (HF-4, Backhoe Trench 5) is potentially later than. the others, indicating occupation of the project area at sometime between AD 1640-1822 (69% probability at the one-sigma level), although there is a potential overlap of the four age ranges betweenAD 1640-1670. The age range for RC-1174 (Layer 1/Il of Shovel Test 1) is consistentwiththesampledepth,andprovidesagelimits for the disturbed material overlying the majority of the project area. The one-sigma values indicate that there is a 67% probability that the sample is post-Contact in age (A D 1803-1950); suggesting that historic period occupation of the area may predate the recent debris encountered on the surface. Finally, the age range for RC-1175 represents the onlyinconsistent result of the age determination analysis. The sample, which was collected throughoutLayer II of Shovel Test 3, was associated at all levels in the layer with historic debris; suggesting that the layer had been deposited primarily by the actionofslopewash. Theagerangeof 8350-8630BCindicated by the age determination analysis is thus inconsistent with the interpretation of the layer as well as with theAD 1650-1950age range provided by RC-1174, from a depositionally similar context Based on this information, the age range may be interpreted in one of two ways: (I) the sample is not associated with human activity, but instead dates an earlier event (e.g., a forest fire); or (2) the sample has been contaminated in some manner;therebyprovidingan anomalouslyearlyresultin tenns of artifactual associations and stratigraphic position. Without further information concerning potential sources of contamination and/or a natural history of the project area, however, both of these explanations remain speculative. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 DA1it ANALYSES Table 3. SUMMARY OF RADIOCARBON AGE DETERMINATIONS PHRI Lab. C-14 AgeLab.No. No. Provenience Yrs. B.P. RC-BETA-(one sigma) SITE15415 1174 46369 ST-1, 180 ± 70 Layer 1/Il, 39-89cmbi1175 46370 ST-3, 10440 ± 70 Layer II, 29-101 cmbs1173 46368 BT-10, 440± 80 HF-5, Layer ill, 88 cmbs 1169 46364 BT-1, 350 ± 130 HF-1, Layer ill, 102cmbs 1170 46365 BT-3, 440 ± 90 HF-2, Layer IV, 123cmbs 1172 46367 BT-5, 180 ± 70 I-Ill-4, Layer IV, 150cmbs • Calibrated according to St1aver and PearSon ( 1986). Range at iwo sigmas. 1 Denotes influence of bomb C-14.C-13/C-13 AdjustedC-U C-14AgeRatioYrs. B.P-28.7 120 ± 70 -25.2 10440 ± 70 -28.6 380 ± 80 -26.9 320 ± 130 -29.3 370 ± 90 -26.5 160 ± 70 14 ·ca1endricRangeYrs.AD1650-1955# 8350-8630 BC 1410-1660 1328-1333 1390-1950 1400-1670 1773-1793 1948-1953 1640-1950 . . ,• . . . . • L p I. • . J., p . . • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l04fr()')()49J DATA ANALYSES 15 PORTABLE ARTIFACTS A total of 264 artifacts, including one possible basalt flake and 263 non-indigenous artifacts of ro;enl historic age were encountered in the project area during thecU1Tentinvestigation. The assemblage, which includes a range of construction materials, tools, domestic and recreational items, items of personaladomment,and miscellaneous items, derives from the di sturbed surface and su�urface portions of the project area. A detailed tabulation of non-indigenous artifacts by provenience is presented in Table 4. Construction Materials 1\venty items related to construction were encountered in the project area. The assemblage includes a metal binge, 11 metal nails or nail fragments, three porcelain insulators, and three porcelain fixtures. The hinge, which derives from Layer !of Shovel Test l,measures35.2mmby27. l mmandisslightlycorroded. It appears to be a door hinge. The nails vary in sizeand condition, with the largest nail measuring 11.8 cm in lengthand 1.5 cm in bead diameter. The nails appear to be commonflat headed nails, and are generally corroded. The insulators areidentical in size, measuring 4.2 cm by 3 cm by 7 cm, and aremanufactured of industrial grade white porcelain. All of theinsulators are in good condition. Finally, the fixtures includetwo fragments of a wall mount light fixture and one fragmentof a probable bathroom fixture. The light fixture measures 9 cmin diameter and was manufactured of industrial grade porcelainby the Bryant Co. (U.S.A.). Thefucture is embo.5sedwith �660w 250 v" to indicate maximum voltage limits and has aregistration number incised on the back. Together, the twofragments representapproximately 80% of the complete fixture.Theremainingfixturefragmentisalsomanufacturedofindustrialgrade porcelain. The fragment is highly glazed/polished on theupper surface and sides, indicating that these were visible whenthe fixture was installed; the remaining face is unglazed. Theundamaged portion of the fragment exhibits a bevelled comerand an in.5et area with a hole for a screw or nail. The inset areais squared on the outer face of the fucture and circular on theopposite face. The fixture has no other diagnostic features. Itmeasures 8 cm by 5.2 cm by 3.1 cm.Domestic Items A totalof215 items potentiallyrelatedtodomesticactivities were encountered in the project area. The assemblage, which includes glassware, porcelain, other ceramics, and a range of metal items, was derived primarily from the disturbed portions of the project area as part of the surface collection. Bottle and glassware classification systems and descriptive terminology areadaptedfromseveralsources,includingFike(l987),Carter (1976), and Munsey (1971). Ceramic and porcelain classification systems are adapted from Burton (1904), Bemrose (1950), and Shepard (1968). The assemblage is described by material type below. Gl�are Glassware is the largest category of materials in the domestic assemblage, and consist of 14 bottles, 30 bottle fragments, four cosmetic jars, one bowl fragment, three dish fragments, a flask, three jars and three jar fragments, alight bulb, two plate fragments, two bottle stcwers, two drinking glass fragments, and 106 glass fragments from unidentified vessels. By type, the bottle inventory includes three soda bottles, two beer bottles, a wine bottle,a large wine jug, three prescription bottles, four specialty bottles, and one bottle of uncertain function. All of the bottles were manufactured using an Automatic Bottle Machine, and thus date to post-AD 1900. Specimen #23 is a perfume bottle manufactured of clear glass. It has an excelsior base which is slightly concave in cross section, and has squared shoulders, four side panels, and a patentneckfinishrequiring astopper. Thebottleis undecorated and measures 6.1 cm by 3.1 cm wide by 2 cm thick. Specimen #44 is a cologne bottle manufacrured of clear glass. In plan view, the base is a monarch oval with a slightly concave cross section. The bottle has squared shoulders and four side panels, two of which are indented, and a small mouth external thread finish. The base is embossed with "Mennen .. 4 .. W . .50"; the bottle is also decorated with a series of raised lines parallel to the base. It measures 12.6 cm by 8.5 cm by 3 cm. Specimen #62 is a 6 oz soda bottle manufactured of pale green glass. It has a round base which is slightly concave in cross section, and has low shoulders and a crown neck finish. The shoulders are embossedwiththeCoca-Colatrademarkandpatentinfonnation; the neck and skirt of the bottle are fluted. The bottle measures 19.5 cm high by 6 cm in diameter at base. Specimen #64 is a small 4 oz soda bottle manufactured of clearglass. lthasaroundbasewhichis slightly concaveincross section, and a crown neck finish. It is embo.5sed with a L,. on the base, but is otherwise undecorated. It measures 14.1 cm by 5 .1 cm in diameter at the base. Specimen #68 is a Clorox bottle manufactured of brown glass. It has a round base which is sligbtlyconcavein cross-section, and has high rounded shoulders, straight sides, and a variant of the stacked ring neck finish. It is embo.5sed with the manufacturer name and� 16oz."around the shoulders and base; the base is embossed with the manufacturer's trademark and registration, and with patent information. The bottle measures 20 cm by 7.6 cm in diameter at the base. Specimen #73 isa two liter wine jug manufactured of pale green glass. It has a round base which is flat in cross section, a wide-• . . • ; I ( .... .. * .. . ' ":> . ~ I ' .. j .. ., . ' 4 .. ,. 't .... .. ~ ~ , "\ - - t ~ -.. ., '. .. • ' . , . • r ... ,._ - - - CA T E G O R Y NO N - I N D I G E N O U S PE R S O NA L AD O R N M E N T Glass &n o n , Plosue Co m b Fr o g r n e n l S Hai r l l r u , h - - - - - - - - - - - Ta b l e 4. DE T A I L E D DI S T R I B U T I O N OF PO R T A B L E AR T I F A C T S 1! 4 1 5 Ba c k h o e Su r t . c e . Tr t b t b Col l < a i o o II T - 1 I UJ Sub l'f . l To t & I I 0 0 0 II Il l Sb o m T ... Sub BT • l BT ◄ BT - S II T - 1 0 BT - I I 8 T ST- I Sf - l ST - l Ti , t a l Ul I I I I To t a l JI II I 0 0 0 0 0 I -II - S.. b ST ◄ ST c; , . , To t & I I To t & I To t & I 0 0 0 I 0 Wo o d ®.�'i ' ' f l i � � < : g ""-�� ' l ! ��� -2 fi '.Y:�� .!,¾.fA:kt �� � > ., .. .; ., ,,�'. .J.,9 ... 1·•· · ... J. , .. •.·1,, · ..... , ,: , ·I·• · · .L.JL ·I J J .• ·I ·,-=I. a_ J 0.,1 • J, J ... L�L �l i f § B &19.D �J�J!�lr 0Btn�m li ' 1 r : �i- '. } r i ! ' f U f i l ; ! B �at�-�� -�- il f 's';Ur��� ' CO N S T R U C T I O N MA T E ' R I A L S ' Md a l Hi n g e Na i l s Pa < : c l a i n F"o o l W C Li g h l Fi . X I " " ' f<l'ili o � � , , ; ; : i l , i l , \ t j i ' i f ilit-. , " • " - =l' �f , . 1 . t t . t � � - H : i - U : : . . TO O L S Ca r t > o l \ U X l u m Wl o e s s t o n e Ma a l l#J a � J' f! ? Q E $ ,_"' 0 0 0 3 • 0 • I I 2 I I · J O • ilii l i ; i - � i--:)�n•- 'i I ,w� �� � t 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 .. .J"-" i'-¥...jJW6FllW j1,!t%7J& jJj �jw:.3-� �· X & l : � .# ' � � t :� � � ., . • • • �· �:i-,. "J ;s';f' ,S- : 1 - ; ., . , , . _ ""' " · 1 � ... . . � • • f .,d>.)¼..d ,., ;,;o.%'"' , �, o-, .. . . ii:"�9 .. • --� -��-.:..��::& l� .. �- -: - 1 .. .. -� � � ;; , , t + - · e · �rf : 0 0 ru♦,W#,lt wil' \ �-W i w ��� � �; 3 0 4 0 I 8 0 I 11 I 2 o l 1 1��1�, -.... � � � � � .... °' • 0 __ _ .; _ . . ; . ; . . . . . . ; ; . . . . ; , . . . . ; ; . ; ; . . . _ . . , . , . _~,, .-"'·' "'--""~i i . ~ J§ ' A; • ~~ " ,, . . ' 0 0 2 . ; ~~ I} ~ ~, t . 0 I 0 0 . • - - - CA T E G O l l Y DO M E S T I C fJ ' E M S C. , , . , n i c Bo w l Fn i g m e n r s C. . , fl l l g l l l d l l S Pl a m e r Pr a s , n e o t s Pl a t e � Un i d o n l i f i e d Pr a g , n e n i s G! u s s Bo o l e Bo u l e R- a g n , e n a . s Bo w l fl l O g m • • " " Cu ; , n e c i , ; l a r Di s h Fs a gme n & • Fbsk Jar Jar f , a g m , : n i s Ju g Li g h l Bu l b Pl a t e Fr a g m e n t s Stopper Un i d e r • l f i e d Fr a s m e , u y. . . , Wa i c r G l a s s P n , g m e n c s M< U I Ja , Li d Po r c e l a i n Bo w l f., . g i n e t • Un i d < , i t l & x l Pm g m , a t s - - - - 15 4 1 5 llodhoc Su r i i u � Tr . t . n d a Co l l , d " ' ° BT - 1 5 19 2 2 j 6 I ll l Su b IT - l T' " a l I 0 0 0 0 0 2 I 2 0 I I 0 l 0 l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - u Il l - - - - - - Ta b l e 4. (c o n t . ) Sl i o v d T . , . Su b BT - 3 rf- 4 ff . S BT - I t BT - 1 1 IT ST - I ST - l ST - 3 I Tb C a l Il l I I I I To t o l U 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 l 0 0 2 l I 4 s 2 2 I 6 2 I I I 3 I 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I 0 0 I 0 I l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I 32 29 7 0 l I 0 l I 0 0 0 0 I I I I 0 0 2 I I - - - Su b S f -4 ST Cr a o d u To e . i I To e al Ta u l 0 2 6 0 0 I I I 2 2 0 0 I 3 J Ii' 16 I I J 14 6 7 II 31 0 0 l 0 0 4 0 0 2 0 0 I 2 2 2 4 I I 2 3 0 0 I I I I I 0 0 2 0 0 2 34 41 10 2 10 6 0 0 I I l I 2 I I 0 I I l. l � Ba k e l i t e Kn o b ; lirm:tA U.QOO� � 0 lii&:. �{l(;!f l @ l z j �•l�ivl�1WtJ.4ifi��v.f�IJtlu•� 0 I - I O I 0 )t&lfr4a'w ' � l}, ' . S � f � a 'W.!¥Jt t� t,��1l »¼m I RE C R E A T I O N Gl a s s M& b l c s I 2 I Pl a s t i c , .. (! � 9 r i p , . , " - . . ' R , tlv t . m t llil ttf l l \ � N : &" � \ I,. WE A P O N S Me l a ! &ll e t s !;$ Jl i ' m 1 � � MI S C ! j U . A N E O U S Or a p h ) l e &uery Me t ; l l Cl w n p Frr, ilf0'%llS Rubbtt Pn , g , r , a u 0 ½l•"'""""".l,.,.�,.1,..,;. ,,, m,j�,. , , J,,,ni «"SG l�,. , , , , ,,"".,i,-..,,J ... :.""•l w,i,.,; 1i I ;;, , ;.w& t 1,., � �;, ,re,,j,.,,.1..- , . , .j.., r-�� � 1 � . ¥ � : l l " ¼ � �lf �t ll�im r : �1 t � . �;. J& oj�lt.�· J . I; 1 - l%: ' . @ ! ' e �,i§iw Ji� �t�� ��:.it:m.I 1 I o I . . �i� ,'!i..�l1lil 0 0 0 o I •°f f i ' J ; : t law,tu �l b 0 0 l rl t � �I 0 0 0 l 3, 6 .. "'.·i iv,, I._�, , m J,, . , ,.;,.,,,.,)� =I= ·1;.,,.,,; I ,, . . M , i , . ' ¾ W � 5 %.1U < 1 i h , > ' , ; r = .;0i;,1= • • 1. , . . 2 . J - ,�l�iml&t�� ilB X i \ 1 l• J � { B I 3 l 2 l 6 -..... � � � � ..... '- l - • I • I I .. I A I 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-09049 l DA'.Dt ANALYSES 18 mouth external thread, and high rounded shoulders. There is no decoration except for a handle on the upper body. The specimen is em bossed on the base with the manufacturel'S trademark, and measures 30 cm by 16 cm in diameter. Specimen #78 is a probable soda bottle manufactured of clear glass. It has a round base which is slightly concave in cross-section, a crown neck finish and low shoulders. It is embossed on the base with .. Dura glass" plus patent information, and has a painted label with the words "Suqi Soda works ... " on thefront. The bottlemeasures25hi_ghcmby5.8cmindiameter. Specimen #79 is a cologne bottle manufactured of clear glass. The base is a variant of a Union oval in plan view and is flat in cross section. The neck has a small mouth, external thread finish. The bottle is decorated with raised parallel lines on the shoulders and skirt and is embossed on tbe base with the word "Wtldroot."Itmeasures 10.5cmby5.7cmby2.4cm. Specimen #83 is a perfume bottle manufactured of clear glass. It is four sided. with a Hopkins square base profile and a small mouth, external thread neck fmish. The bottle is undecorated, and is embossed with a "23" on the base. It measures 3.7 cm by 2.3 cm by 2.3 cm. Specimen #84 is a bottle of unknown function which may have contained beer or oil. It is manufactured of dark brown glass, and hasa round base with a pontile. The neck is finished with a small mouth external thread, and the shoulders are high and rounded. It is emboosed with "4/5 quart" around the shoulders, and with the manufacturers trademark on the base. The bottle is decorated with raised vertical lines on the neck and upper shoulders, as well as double horizontal bands parallel to the base at the shoulder below the embossing and againatbaseofskirt. Itmeasures28.5cm by8.l cm in diameter. Specimen #85 is a prescription bottle manufactured of clear glass. The base is a Buffalo Oval in plan view, and is flat in cross section. The neck has a small mouth, external thread finish and ends in high squared shoulders. The bottle is embossed with measuring lines and volwne (ounces) notations on the front and sides, and with the manufacturers trademark "Owens" on the base. It measures 8.4 cm by 3.8 cm by 2.5 cm (Figure 3). Specimen #104 is a beer bottle manufactured of brown glass. Morphologically, it has a round base which is slightly concave in cross section, a crown neck finish, high rounded shoulders, and a jointed neck. The bottle is em bossed with a manufacturers trademark and patent information on the base, and measures 17.5 cm in height by 7 cm in diameter. Specimen# 105 is a also a beer bottle, manufactured of amber glass. It has a round base which is flat in cross section, a crown neck finish, and low shoulders. The body is textured and embossed around the shoulder.; with the words "no deposit, no return, not to be refilled." The trademark and patent information are embossed on the base. The bottle measures 17.5 cm by 7 cm in diameter. Finally, Specimen #143 is a prescription/iodine bottlemanufacturedofbrownglass. ThebaseisaFrenchsquare in plan view and is slightly concave in cross section. The neck is finished with a small mouth external thread and ends in high rounded shoulders. The base is embc:&sed with the manufactureJ: 's trademark. The bottle measures 7. 7 cm by 3.1 cm by 3.1 cm. Seven of the bottle fragments are portions of mouths, necks; or shoulders; 17 are base portions, and six are body fragments. Basefragments include oneovaland 12 round base profiles; where enough of the base is retained to determine cross-sectional shape, bases are flat or slight! y concave. Mouth/ neck fragments include one crown neck, two wine necks, and two unknown neck finishes. Twenty of the fragments are embossed-one on the bi.ck, one on the front, fivehoriz.ootally, two vertically, and four on the oose. The fragments are clear (14), pile green (3),olivegreen(3), blue(5),andamber(5). The fragments vary in shape and size. Four of the fragments are from soda bottles, five are from beer bottles, and one is from a wine bottle. The remainder of the fragments could not be matched with bottle types. The four cosmetic jars were collected from the disturbed portion of the project area during the surface collection. The first cosmetic jar is complete and is madcof clear glass. The jar baseis footed, witharoundplanviewandslightlyconcavecroos section. The neck is finished with a wide-mouth, external thread. The jar was decorated with paint, as there are remnants of pale green paint between the neck and foot. The Jar is also elaborately fluted between the neck and foot. Mold lines extending from the neck to the base indicate that the jar was manufactured by an automatic bottle machine, thus placing the age of the jar after AD 1903. The jar most likely containedcream orpowder. Itmeasures4.5cmhighand5. l cmincircumfetence. The second cosmetic jar is of opaque white glass and is complete and in good condition. The jar base is plain oval in plan view and has a single-piece molded foot. "Pond's 31-8" is embossed on the base, indicating the manufacturer's name. The neck is finished with a wide-mouth, external thread, while the shoulders are slightly squared. The vessel is undecorated, and measures 4. 7 cm by 4.6 cm by 3.8 cm. It most likely contained facial cream. The third and fourth specimens are essentially identical except for size; the third measures 2.8 cm by 5 .2 cm in diameter, while tbe fourth measures 2 cm by 4.4 cm in diameter. Both ate made of opaque white g)3$ and are in good condition. The jar necks are finished with wide-mouth external threads; the bases are round in plan view and are slightly concave in cross section. Neither of the jars are embossed or decorated. The larger of the two probably contained facial cream, while the smaller could have contained any one of a number of cosmetics. The glass bowl fragment is from Layer I of Backhoe Trench 1. The specimen is of clear glass and appears to be a I ..... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . 1. ~ ~ ... .. . , ""' ~ .. ' .. • ~ ,. .. " " .... -.. • ... • '\ "' .. ,. .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1()4.6..09()4.91 DA1A ANALYSES 19 ALL ARTIFACTS 3/4 ACTUAL SIZE GLASS PRESCRIPTION BOTTLE BOTTOM VIEW GLASS FRAGMENT (POSSIBLE COVER) BOTTOM VIEW Figure 3. Artifact fllustrations I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-09049 l DA1A ANALYSES 20 fragment of a large decorative bowl. The exterior surface is deco.rated with a series of raised floral design.5 on a stippled background; the interior is undecorated. The fragment measures 20 cm in diameter. One of the two dish .fragments was collected from the disturbed portion of the project area as part of the general surface collection, while the second fragment is from Layer ill of Backhoe Trench I. Thefonnerisa fragmentofacandy disb, and may represent either a portion of the dish base or the dish cover. It is manufactured of clear glass and has several molded segments (see Figure 3). It measures 13 cm in diameter at the top/base and tapers to a diameter of 4.2 cm at the opposite end. The second dish fragment is also of clear glass, and appears to be a portion of a candy dish cover. The base of the specimen is decorated with a frosted/sandblasted band parallel to the base, whiletheoppositeendofthespecimenismoldedand scalloped. It measures 5.2 cm high and 10.1 cm in diameter at the base. The flask was collected from the disturbed portion of the project area as part of the general surface collection. The specimen, which is a portion of a chemist's :flask, includes the base, body and neck portions but lacl<s the upper neck and mouth. The portion is made of clear glass and measures 7.4 mm in height and 4.6 cm in diameter at the base. The flask holds approximately 2 ounces of fluid. The complete jars are all made of clear glass. One of the jars is from Layer I of Backhoe Trench 1, while two are from Layer II of Shovel Test 3. Two of the jar bases are oval with flat cra;s sections, while the third is round with a flat cross section. All are straight-sided; two have squared shoulders and one has rounded shoulders. All three also have wide-mouth external thread neck finishes. One of the jars is embossed with a trademark on the base. As with the bottles, all of the jars were manufactured in an Automatic Bottle Machine sometime after AD 1903. The jars range in height from 4.5-9.1 cm and from 4.3-7.6 cm in diameter. The jar fragments includeamouth/neckfragment,a mouth/ neck/shoulder fragment, and a body fragment. The fragments vary in size and shape. Two are made of clear glass while the thirdismadeofopaquewhiteglass. Themouth/neck fragments exhibit wide-mouth, extemal thread finishes; the fragments are otherwise morphologically non-diagnostic. The light bulb is from Layer II of Shovel Test 3. It is complete except for a threaded base, and appears to be a low wattage, decorative bulb, similar to those used in wall sconces or chandeliers. It is widest at the base and tapers to a point at the opposite end. The• bulb is fluted from base to point. It measures 5 cm in height and 1. 7 cm in diameter at the widest point. The two glass plate fragments were collected as part of the general surface collection. One of the fragments is an opaque yellow rim sherd, with a rim diameter of 11 cm. The interior of the sherd is slightly fluted and has an incised band around the rim. The fragment is otherwise undecorated. The second plate fragment is of white opaque glass, and includes portions of the rim, body, and base. The fragment is undecorated,andhasarim diameter of 22.5 cm. Both fragments are from utilitarian rather than special occasion ware. 1\vo glass stoppers were collected from the disturbed surface of the project area during the general surface collection. One stopper is made of translucent pale green glass and is complete. It is fairly thick and short, indicating that it was used for a wide-mouthe,d vessel. It is flat-topped and undecorated, and measures 1.3 cm high by 4.3 cm in diameter. The secondstopper is made of clear glass and is complete. It bas a knob or globe on the top and twosm.all knobs on the base, which may have acted as threads when inserted into the bottle. Thestopperismadeusingathree-piecemold,andmeasures2.5 cm high by 3.2 cm in diameter. One of the drinking glass fragments is from Layer I of Backhoe Trench 5. The specimen is in good condition and includes a portion of the rim and the body. It is manufactured ofthinclearglass. Judgingbythecurvatureofthefragment,the diameter of the original glass was 7 cm. The original height and volwneof the glass cannot be determined from the fragment. A second drinking glass fragment is from Layer II of Shovel Test 3 and is more complete, consisting of the entire rim and approximately 40% of the body. It is manufactured of mediwn strength clear glass and has a rim diameter of 6. 7 cm. The original height and volume of the glass are indeterminate. The non-diagnostic glass fragments are all body fragments whichcannotbeclassifioofurther. Seventy-oneofthefragments are of clear glass, three areof green glass, three are of blue glass, 18 are of amber glass, three are of lavender glass, and nine are of opaque white glass. The fragments vary in size and shape. Ceramics The ceramic inventory includes six bowl fragments, a cup fragn1ent,a jar fragment, two planter fragrnents,a plate fragment, and 17 fragments from unidentified vessels. The bowl fragments, whichare from four vessels, are manufactured from a fine white paste. Specimens 11 and 38 are rim sherds from the same vessel Both fragments are finished with a high gloss white glaze on the interior and exterior surfaces, and have a painted wheat sheaf design on the exterior. The rim curvature of the fragments indicates an original vessel diameter of 8.2 cm. ,. ... I I f • •" " I ,t:. • • .. .. .. ._ .. , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-09049 l DA'.ZA ANALYSES BAKELITE-TYPE PLASTIC KNOB :\ ·.·:-x: ·•·"_ .?/;-, .· .··; :::::.:)t� .. :_.. FRAGMENT OF HAND PAINTED PORCELAIN CUP PORCELAIN VA SE. HAND DECORATED BOTTOM VIEW BOTTOM VIEW .{�''i��� i, ri JAPAN / .• ���/ BOTTOM VIEW Figure 4. Artifact lllustrations 21 ALL ARTIFACTS 3/4 ACTUAL SIZE .#,~~~..,,..~. ,::•· .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-0904,91 DATA ANALYSES 22 Specimen 39 is from a small bowl with a restricted mouth (diameter 6 cm). The exterior is textured to resemble a woven basket and is finished with a brown glaze, while the interior is finished with a high gloss white glaze which is cracking with age. Specimen 51 is a rim sherd from a bowl which measured 8 cmin diameter. The exterior surface of the sherd is decorated with a blue transferprint design which depicts an abstract to geometric motif along the rim and a landscape scene on the body. Theinteriorsurfaceisfinishedwithawhiteglazetbathas crackled with age. Finally, Specimen 120consistsof arimsherd and a small body fragment from a bowl which measured 8.5 cm in diameter. The fragments are decorated with a raised floral design parallel totheexteriorrim; the subsequent weathering of the fragments has made the actual pattern indistinct, however. Both the interior and exterior surfaces of the fragments are finished with a pale ivory glaze that has crackled with age. The cup fragment constitutes approximately 60% of a china teacup manufactured by Trilby & Sons of England. The cup measures 6. 7 cm in diameter, and is slightly fluted around the base. The handle of the cup has broken off, leaving a small fragment that indicates the handle was attached to the cup rather thn.nmolded asonepi.ocewith thecup.Agreenfloraldesignhas been painterl on both the interior and exterior of the cup (Figure 4). The cup is finished with a high glossclearglazeon allsurfaces. The jar fragmentconstitutes approximately 50% of a small jar or container. The specimen (#32) is manufactured from a fine white paste and is finished on both interior and exteriorsurfaceswithahighglosswhiteglaze. Thebaseofthespecimen is unglazed and exhibits faint concentric circles indicative of wheelmanufacture. Thelipofthevesselisindented,suggesting thatthe vessel was used along with a lid of some sort. The vessel is undecorated and measures 5 cm in diameter. One of the planter fragments (# 150) constitutes approximately 50% of the base of a two-piece planter. The specimen is manufactured of a medium textured tan paste, and is finished on the interior and exterior with a high gloss ivory glaze. The lip of the specimen is unglazed, as is the portion of the body immediately under the rim; the rest of the vessel has crackled with age. The specimen measures 21 cm in diameter and 4 cm high. The second planter fragment is a rim sherd of an undecorated terra cotta planter. The fragment is too small to determine the original vessel diameter and does not include sufficient portions of the body to indicate whether it derives from a planter or a planter base. The plate fragment is a base and body fragment from a plate of indeterminate size. The fragment is manufactured from a fine white paste and is finished on both surfaces with a high gloss white glaze which has crackled with age. The specimen is footed with a single-piece molded foot, but is otherwise undecorated. The unidentified vessel fragments include six rim sherds and 11 body sherds, three of which are extremely waterwom. Three of the rim sherds and four of the body sherds are manufactured of fine white paste; two of the rim sherds and seven of the body sherds are manufactured from a medium textured tan paste; and one rim sherd is manufactured from a coarser tan earthenware. The majority of the sherds are glazed on the interior and exterior surfaces. The glazes range in color from white/ivory (10), tan (1), brown(l),aodgreen andbrown ( 1 ), and indeterminate ( 4); most exhibit age cracks. Two of the sherds are painted, one with an abstract blue design on the exterior, and one with a pink floral design and green bands parallel to the interior rim. Athirdsherdisdecorated with a blue geometric transferprint on the interior surface. The remaining sherds are undecorated. Vessel diameters, as indicated by rim sherd measurements, range from 8-20.5 cm. The body sherds range from 1.5-10.l cm in length. Metal The single metal item in the domestic assemblage is a metal jar lid from Layer II of Shovel Test 2. The lid is fragmentary and extremely corroded. It measures 2.6 cm high by 6.7 cm in diameter. Porcelain The porcelain inventory consists of seven bowl fragments and five fragments from unidentified vessels. All of the bowl fragments and four of the five unidentified fragments are manufactured from a medium grade white porcelain which is finished with a high gloss clear glaze on both interior and exterior surfaces. Specimen #35 is comprised of two body/ base/foot fragments and one rim sherd, all from the same bowl. An abstract leaf design has been painted on both exterior and interior rims; a series of parallel blue lines extend from the vessel rim to above the base on both the interior and exterior surfaces. The rim is irregularly shaped, preventing accurate measurement of the original vessel diameter. Specimen 3, a body/base/foot fragment, is decorated with brown and green transferprint designs. The exterior exhibits both colors in a series of abstract patterns, while the interior is marked by a simpler brown geometric design. A brown transferprinted maker's mark is visible on the base, and retains portions of Japanese characters; suggesting a Japanese origin for the vessel. Specimen #95, a rim sherd, exhibits an abstract design in blue paint beneath the glaze on the exterior of the rim, and a complex blue floral transferprint on the interior. Based on the curvature of the remaining rim fragment, the original bowl ~ • • . ~ .. ... ,. ,T .._ ,. . 't -.,_ ... . ..... .. .. l .. .• C ~ • • . ,. , ~ . t-... / . . ' . ; • .. , ' . ,, 'I- ' .. .. -- ,i ♦ . . .,. . . I • .. • '-t. 'l "• . . • ... ~ .. ~ -. ' _.a,. .. 1 .,._ "'· "' • ,.. • . . "- ... .. . .. \ ·. r ·• • • . . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l046-o<J04.91 DA1A ANALYSES 23 diameter measured 13.5 cm. Specimen 49 constitutes approxirnalely 20% of a shallow, footed bowl with a rim diameterof 13 cm. Thee.xteriorofthefragmentis undecorated, while the interior is decorated with an aa;tract floral red and grey transferprinL The final bowl specimen, #26, constitutes approximately 35% of a shallow bowl (diameter s 13 cm) and is undecorated. The wri.dentified porcelain fragments consist of one rim sherd and three body fragments made of the white porcelain noted above; and one bodyfragmentmadeof pale gray porcelain. A blue, aa;tract design is painted on the rim sherd (Specimen #9), along the interior rim. The exterior of the sherd displays a series of stipple marks used to create a negative floral design.Based on the curvature of the sherd, the original vessel rim measured 12.5 cm in diameter. One of the body sherds (# 121) is decorated with a blue floral transferprint on the interior; the rest of the body sherds are undecorated. Bakelite A knob made of a translucent dark brown material, perha� bakelite, is complete except for a small portion of the top surface. It is basically cylindrical (see Figure 4) with slightly wider sections near the base and top. The top of the knob is rounded. Theinteriorof the knob, from the oose to approximately two-thirds its height, is hollow and incised with regularly spaced vertical threads,suggesting that the knob was connected to aprotrusionof somesort. The knob is decorated withaseries of incised circles placed parallel to the crown and base; several of the circles retain white pa.int in the incised portions. The stopper measures 5.3 cm high and 2.8 cm in diameter. Personal Adornment Five items used for personal adornment were encountered in the project area. The assemblage, which includes two glass buttons, a wood button, and plastic fragments from a comb and a hairbrush, was derived from the surface collection, Backhoe Trench 5, and from Shovel Tests 2 and 3. The glass buttons are made of opaque white glass, while the wood button is made of a light-grained wood. All three buttons are sew-through buttons with four holes and exhibit mold lines indicative of machinemade buttons. In plan view the buttons are all round; in cross section the glass buttons are lenticular while the wooden button is convex-concave. Nooe of the buttons are decorated. The three buttons are complete and are in good condition, and range from 1. 7-1.8 cm in diameter. The comb fragment constitutes approximately 30% of a complete comb and is a weathered tan color. It measures 5.3 cm by 3.5 cm. The hairbrush is complete, except for brush bristles, and is dark green. Writing incised on the grip indicates that it was a .. Empire Wave-Maker Professional'" hairbrush manufactured in the U.S.A. It measures 20.2 cm by 3 cm. Recreation Seven items related to recreation were encountered in the project area. The assemblage includes si.x glass marbles and a plastic handgripfragment from a toy pistol. The marbles are all complete and are in good condition. They range in diameter from 1.4-1.8 cm and exhibit a range of colors including orange, blue/gray /white swirled, amber/white swirled, lavender/whiteswirled, blue/tan/whiteswirled,and yellow/orange/clear swirled. The plastic hand grip fragment is made of textured black plastic andisinfaircondition. Itmeasures9.5cmby5.6cmby 1.9cm. Tools Two tools, a carborundum stone and a metal wedge, were encountered in the project area. The carborundum stone (whetstone)isbrokenatbothends,andexhibitsseveralareasof use-wear along the sides and both faces. It is rectangular in cross section and measures 8.8 cm by 3.4 cm by 1.3 cm. The wedge is complete, but is extremely corroded from exposure to rain and groundwater. It measures 8 cm by 5 cm by 5.5 cm. Weapons Asinglebulletwasencounteredinl.ayerllofShovel Test 1. It is 28 mm long by 7 mm in diameter at the base, and appears intact. The bullet shell is green with corrosion. Miscellaneous Thirteen miscellaneous items were encountered in the project area. The assemblage consists of a battery fragment, a metal clamp,five corroded metalfragments,twometalitemsof unknown function, and six fragments from rubber bumpers or tires. The battery fragment consists of the graphite center of a battery and measures 5.7 cm long by 0.9 cm in diameter. The metal clamp is comprised of a small complete wood clamp and a straight-headed screw which have been corroded together as one piece. It measures 2.7 cm by 0.9 cm by 0.2 cm. The metal fragments consist of pieces of metal wire, aluminum cans, etc. that have been corroded by rain and salt air beyond the point of recognition. The rubber fragments are pieces of rubber bumpers or tires left to decay in the project area, and range in size and shape. One of the metal items of unknown function is a composite of two different types of metal. The upper portion of the I I • .. • • ... . 0: ~ . , .. f'. ., r .. .. • . . • .. ~ .. ..,,.. ,. r .. .. .. 1 -. ~. .,_ , " .. L . .. . .. .. . . '\ .. ♦ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-0')()491 DAui ANALYSES 24 specimen resembles a tab or punch key in shape and is incised with lifi "M" in a circle on both sides. It appears to be composed of a resistant material, as it has only changed color with time. The lower portion of theartifactis corroded beyond recognition. The artifact measures 1.9cm by 1.3cm by 1.1 cm. Thesecond metal specimen appears to be part of a casing or fixture. It is roughly rectangular and has screw/nail holes in several places. It is badly corroded and measures 5.3 cm by 4.6 cm by 0.3 cm. Summary Most of the artifacts from the project area were collected from disturbed areas during the general surface collection. In those instances where artifacts were from subsurface excavations, stratigraphic and local depositional relationships indicatedthatthe artifactsWeredepa;itedbyfrequentslq,ewash; their contexts are thus interpreted as disturbed. Excepting a possible flaked stone artifact, all of the artifacts encountered were associated with historic use of the area. Diagnostic artifacts, such as oottles and some ceramic items, which were examined as a means of identifying specific phases of historic occupation, generally suggested that most of the artifacts were manufactured during the early twentieth century or later. However, it must be kept in mind that collectors had removed oottles from the project area prior to the current investigation, so the assemblage may be biased. In general, the content of the assemblage is consistent with the data generated as part of the Historical Documentary Research (Appendix A). I .. .. ... . ... " ... ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 DISCUSSION During the current investigation one site (Site 15415) was identified. Site 15415 consists of two components: (a) several diffuse prehistoric hearths, and (b) historic refuse and recent structural remnants. As the latter is withi.n the upper layers of the entire project area, the boundaries of the site are the same as project area boundaries. The prehistoric component is apparently restricted to the40 ft beach access area immediately above and behind the pebble beaches (c. 9,600 sq ft in area). The findings of the current investigation indicate the project area has been the locus of periodic human activity for about 550 years. Prehistoric occupation of the project area has been placed between AD 1400-1670, based on age ranges derived from four hearths (three hearths yielded age ranges between AD 1400-1670 and one hearth yielded an age range of AD 1650-1950). This places the occupation in Kirch's Expansion Period (AD 1100-1650) (Kirch 1985). This period is characterized by a rapid increase in population and intensified agriculture, which led to the creation of new social, religious, and political forms. Based on the current evidence, the occupation was most likely temporary: excepting a possible flaked stone artifact, no additional structural, ecofactual, or artifactual remains were encountered in association with the hearths. The occupation may have been in conjunction with exploitation of riverine and marine resources. Historic occupation of the project area has been placed between AD 1650-1950. This is based on the age determination analysis and the artifact analyses, which indicated that the majority of the materials in the historic assemblage were manufactured after AD 1900. Historic maps and photos confirm that the project area was the site of several private residences as well as the Puueo Poi Factory during the late 1800s through early 1900s, and suggest that the area was occupied prior to the Great Mahe le of 1848. No intact structural remains associated with this latter occupation were noted on the surface of the project area. GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENTS AND RECOMMENDED GENERAL TREATMENTS 25 General significance assessments and recommended generaltreatmentsforSite 15415arediscl6Sedbelow. Significancecategories usedinthesiteevaluation process are basedontheNational Register criteria forevaluation,asoutlined in theCodeofFederal Regulations (36CFRPart60). TheDI.NR-SHPDusesthesecriteriafa:evaluating cultural resources. Sites determ ined to be potentially significant for infoanationcontent fall underCriterionD, whichdefinessignificant resources as ones which .... .have yielded , ct" may be likely to yield, infonnation important in prehistcry or history." Sites potentially significant as representative examples of site types are evaluated under Criterion C, which defines significant resources as those which ..... eml:xxly the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction ... or thatrepresentasignificant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction". Sites with potential culh1r.:1l significance are also evaluated under guidelines prei:;nred by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), entitled "Guidelines for Conservation of Traditional Cultural Values in Historic Preservation Review" (Draft Report, August 1985). The guidelines define cultural value as .. the contribution made by an historic property to an. ongoing society or cultural system. A traditional cultural value is a cultural value that has historical depth." The guidelines further specify that "[a] property need not have been in consistent use since antiquity by a cultural system in order to have traditional cultural value". Based on the results of the current investigation, Site 15415 is evaluated as significant solely fcr infcnnation content and is not recommendedf<rlurtherwork.Itshouldbenotedthattheassessments and recommendations presented here have been based oo the findings of recently completed survey and test excavations. There is always the pcssibility, howeverremote, that potentiallysignificant unidentified subsurface cultural remains could be encountered in the course of subsequent development activities. In such situations,archaeologicalconsultatiooshouldbesoughtimmediately. :•: ,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046--()<)()491 REFERENCES CITED Bemrose, G. 1952 Nineteenth Century English Pottery and Porcelain. London: Faber and Faber Bloxam,A. 26 1925 Diary, Naturalist of the Blonde ... , 1824-1825. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publications 10. B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Burton, W. 1904 A History and Description of English Earthenware alld Stoneware (to the beginning of the 19th cemury) Londons: Cassell and Company, Ltd. Carter, L. 1979 Appendix C: Analysis of Historic Artifacts from Kapuahilua and Keae IN Late Prehistoric and Early Historic Settlement-SubsistenceSystemson theAnahuluVa1Jey,O'ahu.DepactmentalReportSeries79-2,Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum. Coulter, J.W. 1931 Cox, D. Population and Utilization of Land and Sea in Hawaii, I 853. B. P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 88. B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. 1983 Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Wailuku River and Honoli 'i Stream Hydropower Study Areas, Puhahoa, South Hilo, Hawaii. U.S. Am1y Corps of Engineers. Ellis, W. 1826 Journal of a Tour Through Hawaii. Boston: Crocker and Brewster. Fike,R.E. 1987 The Boule Book: A Comprehensive Guide to Historic, Embossed Medicine Bottles. Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith Books. Handy, E.S.C., and E.G. Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore and Environment. B.P. Bishop Museum Bullecin 233. B.P. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Hudson, A.E. Ms. Archaeology of East Hawaii. Manuscript, B.P. Bishop Museum Library, Honolulu (1932). I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ()4.6-0904,91 REFERENCES CITED 27 Jensen, P. 1991 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Komohana Golf Course, Lands of Ponahawai and Punahoa 1-2, South.Hilo District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-2-3-44:09). PHRI Report 998-021091. Prepared for KTA Consulting Group c/o The Keith Companies-Hawaii. Kelly, M., and J.S. Athens 1982 Archaeological and Historical Studies for the Alenaio Stream Flood Damage Reduction Study, Hilo, Hawaii. Prepared for U.S. Army Engineer Division, Pacific Ocean, Honolulu. Kirch,P.V. 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii. Lyman, C.S. 1924 Around the Hom to the Sandwich Islands and California, 1845-1850. New Haven. Men.zies,A. 1920 Hawaii Nei, 128 Years Ago. Edited by William F. Wilson. Honoll.llu: The New Fre.edom Press. Munsey, C. 1971 The Illustrated Guide to Collecting Bottles. New York: Hawthorn Books. Rosendahl, M.L.K. 1988a Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey for Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Hilo Judiciary Complex Sites, Hilo, District of South Hilo, Island of Hawaii PHRI Report 356-020588. Prepared for Wilson Okamoto &Associates, Inc. 1988b Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey for Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Hilo Wastewater Treatment Facility Site, Land of Waiakea, District of South Hilo, Island of Hawaii (TMK:2-1-13:Por.2). PHRI Report 415-050588. Prepared for M & E Pacific, Inc.1988c Archaeological Survey for Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Honolii Hydroelectric Project Area (TMK:3-2-6: Var; 3-2-7: Var.), Lands of Kikala and Paukaa, District of South Hilo, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 466-081988. Prepared for Mauna Kea Power, Inc. c/o DHM, Inc. Rosendahl, P.H. 1980 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Kuuipo I Resort Condominium Site (TMK: 3-2-6-02:1,2,3,4), Hilo, Island of Hawaii. Report ARA-9-052080. Prepared for Kuuipo Resort Condominiums, Inc. 1990 Field Inspection Survey, Komohana Golf Course Project. Letter Report 912-082690. Prepared for KTA Consulting Group, c/o The Keith Companies-Hawaii. (Dated August 27, 1990) I I I .. " .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 28 Rosendabl, M.L.K., and L. Telea 1988 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey for Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Proposed Irradiation Site, District of South Hilo, Island of Hawaii (TMK:2-1-12:106 [Potential Site A]; 2-1-12:Var. [Potential Site BJ; 2-1-25:Por.86 [Potential Site C]). PHRI Report 352-040888. Prepared for Westec Services.Sato, H.B., W.Ikeda, R.Paeth, R.Smythe, and M. Takehiro, Jr. 1973 Soil Survey of the Island of Hawaii, State of Hawaii. U.S. Department of Agriculture-Soil Conservation ServiceandUniversityofHawaiiAgriculturalExperimentStation. Washington,D.C.: GovemmentPrintingOffice. Stewart, C.S. 1830 JournalofaResidenceinthe Sandwichlslands,Duringthe Years 1823, 1824,and 1825. (London,3rd edition) Stuiver, M. and G.W. Pearson 1986 High-Precision Calibration of Radiocarbon Tune Scale, AD 1950 to 500 BC. Radiocarbon 28:805-838. -.. . . ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ()4.6-()')()49 J IDSTORJCAL DOCUMENTARY RESEARCH by Lehua Kalima, B.A. Toe project area is in the ahupua 'a of Puueo, in the South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii. In Place Names of Hawaii Puueo is described as an Melevated place in Hilo qd., where Kalaniopu'u built the heiau of Kanoa" (Fukui et al. 1974). No translation for the name is given; the name, however, may be broken into two words pu 'u and eo. Pukui and Elbert (1986) translate eo as Mwinning or victorious .. , and pu 'u as Mhill'". Puueo, then, would translate as MVictory Hill," a name which fits in well with historic events associated with the area. Legends Pu'ueo is mentioned in two Hawaiian proverbs found in Mary Pukui's 'Olelo No'eau. The first deals with the Pu'ueo area in general, while the second deals with a part of Pu· ueo that is part of the project area: Le'a ka 'ai aka 'iole, ua nui ka 'iii. The rats joy<>llily eat their fill, there are many skins [remaining]. There were two Hilo brothers who lived at Kukuau and Pu 'ueo. The latter was very prosperous but neglectful of his needy brother. One day tbe Kukuau man decided to visit bis wealthy brother and found many friends eating. After watching them for a while he made this remark. It was overheard by someone who reported it to their host When he came to see who it was he found that it was his own brother. Sadly he realized then how he had neglected his own kin while outsidersenjoyedhiswealth. Thissayingissometimes used for one who does for outsiders but neglects his own (Fukui 1983:1963). Piha 'opala ke one o Ha 'akua. The sand ofHa'akua is filled with rubbish. Said of one who is untidy, or who talks nonsense. Ha• akua is ooder the Pu· ueo end of the railroad bridge that spans the Wailuku River in Hilo, Hawai'i (ibid:2631). SeverallegendsmentionPu'ueo. One deals with thedemigcxl Maui, his mother Hina, and their encounter with a gcxl named Kuna Loa. Kuna Loa was a huge eel who lived in the Wailuku River, in the area near Rainbow Falls known today as Boiling Pots. Hina-of-the-fire lived in a cave that the waters of the riverstrearnedover,acave that al ways had a beautiful rainbow glimmering across it. While her sons wereaway no enemy could come to Hina in this cave, for the walls of it went straight and smooth. .. In the river below there was one who was an enemy to Hina. This was Kuna Loa, the Long Eel. Once Kuna Loa had seen Hina on the bank of the river, and he had wanted her to leave her cave and come to his abcxle. But Hina-of-the-fire would not go near the Long Eel. Then he had gone to her, and he had lashed her with his tail, covering her with the slime of the river. She told about the insults be bad given her,and Maui drove the Long Eel up the river, where he took shelter in the deep pools. Maui broke down the oonks of the deep pools with thrustsofhisspear, but Kuna.Loo, the Long Eel, was still able to escape from him. Now Maui had gone away, and his mother ... kept within th.ecave. The Long Eel came down the river. He saw Hina sitting in the mouth of the cave ... and be was filled with rage and a wish to destroy her. He took a great rock andheputit across thestream, fillingit fron oonktooonk. She looked down and she saw that the water was nearer to the mouth of the cave than she had ever seen it before. Higher and higher it came ... and Hina-ofthe-fire cried, "alas,alas," as she watched the waters mount up and up .... But even ·as she lamented, something was happening to aid Hina. For Maui had placed above her cave a cloud that served her-" Aoopua," �e Warning Cloud." Over the cave it ra;e now, giving itself a strange shape: Maui would see it and be sure to know by its sign that something dire was happening in his mother's cave. He was then on the mountainHale-a-ka-la, the House of the Sun. He saw the strangely shaped cloud hanging over her cave, and he knew that some danger threatened his mother, Hina-of-the-fire. He dashed down the side of the mountain, bringing with him the magic ax that his grandmother had given him for his battlewiththesun. Hesprangintohiscanoe. With two strokes of his paddle he crossed the channel and was at the mouth of the Wailuku River. The bed of the river was empty of water and Maui left his canoe oo the stooes and went up toward Hina ·s cave (Colum 1937:55-58). 29 .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-09049 l APPENDIX A A large rock formation which lies in the Wailuku River mauka of the project area is namedNamauuapaao but is locally known as Maui's canoe. The fonnatioo is believed to be the canoe that Maui left behind on his way to battle KW1a Loo. FigureA-1 is a photoofthe WailukuRiver. Maui'scanoeis the rock formation on the right bank. This photo is undated, but appears to have been taken in the late 1800s or early 1900s. Figure A-2 shows Namauuapaao. Another tale concerns a kupua, a god who can take on an animal fonn, in this case, the fonn of a lizard. The name of the kupua is Piliamoo, which is also the name of a place in the project area (see Figure A-2). The tale is entitled "Keaunini," which is the name of another kupua in the story. In this passage, Keaumiki, Keaunini ·s uncle, travels from Waipio Valley to Hilo, attempting to find a suitable wife for his nephew. Keaumiki is travelling with his brother, Keaukai,and they encounter many obstacles, Piliamoo being one of them: The Hilo palis were nothing to this man as he sped swiftly over the gulches until he came to the Wailuku River guarded by the kupua Pili-a-mo-o, who concealed the path so that none could find it until a price was paid. The dragon covered the path with its rough skin. Ke-au-miki stood looking for a path, but could only see what seemed to be pahoehoe lava. The tail of the dragon was like a kukui-tree-trunk lying in the water. He saw the tail switching and rising up to strike him. Then he knew that this was a kupua. The tail almost struck him on the head. He called to Kahuli in Kuaihe-lani, who sent a mighty wind and hurled aside the waters, caught up the body of the dragon and let it fall, smashing it on the rocks, breaking the beds of lava (Westervelt 1963: 198). Early Historical Accounts In 1823 Reverend Wtlliam Ellis, a missionary from New England, visited the Hawaiian Islands and kept a journal of his travels. The following are his impressions of trading that took place in Pu'ueo on the banks of the Wailuku River: As soon as the rain had ceased, and the fog cleared off ... I therefore walked on to Pueo, on the western shore, where, for six dollars, I hired on of Kapapa, chief of the place, to take us between twenty and twenty-ft ve miles. Returning from Pueo, I visited Wairuku, a beautiful streamof water flowingrapidlyoverarockybed, with frequentfalls,andmanyplaceseligiblefortheerection of water-mills of almost any description. Makoa and the natives pointed out a square rock in the middle of the stream, on which, during the reign ofTamehameha, and fom1er kings, a toll used to be paid by every traveller who passed over the river. Whenever any one approached the stream, he stood on the brink, and called to thecollectorof the toll, who resided on the opposite side. He came down with a broad piece of board, which he placed on the rock above mentioned. Those who wished to cross met him there, and deposited on the board whatever articles had been brought; and if satisfactory, the person was allowed to pass the river. It did not appear that any uniform toll was re.quired; the amount, or value, being generally left to the collector. The natives said it was principally regulated by the rank or number of those who passed over. In order the better to accommodate passengers, all kinds of permanently valuable articles were received. Some paid in native tapa and mats, or baskets, others paid a hog, a dog, some fowls, a roll of tobacco, or a quantity of dried salt fish (Ellis 1963:229).The river of Wairuku was also distinguished by the markets or fairs held at stated periods on its banks. At those times the people of Puna, and the desolateshores of Kau, even from the south point of the island, broughtmats,and mamaketapa, whichisaremarkably strong black or brown native cloth, for the manufacture of which the inhabitants of Ora,andsomeof the inland parts of Puna, are celebrated throughout the whole group of the Sandwich lslands .... The people of Hiro and Hamakua, as far as the north point, brought hogs, tobacco, tapa of various kinds, large mats made of the pandanus Leaves, and bundles of ai pa, which were collected on the north bank ... From bank to bank the traders shouted to each other, andarrange.d the preliminaries of their bargains. From thence the articles were taken down to the before mentioned rock in the middle of the stream, which in this place is almost covered with large stones. Here they were examined by the parties immediately concerned, in the presence of the collectors, ( of the toll for crossing the river) who stood on each side of the rock, and were the general arbiters, in the event of any disputes arising. To them also was committed the preservation of good order during the fair, and they, of 30 ~ • -'!. • < ► ., ~ .. .. • .. -• ""' -= -a . . , '\, . ~ .. > I•, .. ~ • . . .,. .• ' -~ • . , -I < ,) ~ .. .. • . • I. " ~ . . ... -• ,,, .. L ' • • ,.: ., ., ... .,. .. ~ . . . . . .. . . ~ "' •► ..1. ., , t,;. • ... • ~ , • ·-J-w . ~ . . ' .. .. l .. .J .. r f .. :-.. • .. ' ,· • ,.. , . ' .. . .. , ... • L ' . ,c •• I I 1()4.6..090491 APPENDIXA 31 I I I I I - � I ;: .::;--.s � I �� .s i: .:c·c"'( �� I -....... s? ...·-���::: � I �.::: �"'::-,-·5 C �� I �� SQ j�Q.; I I -�� I I I I ,( ,-.., I • ... "i;,•. i ...; I ~ J ' • ~ ::: ml - - - - - - - - - - - - - "1 ! • - • · # f r ' ' ... ,. ' " f � , f : ' · • •• , • • • , ',� .:; , ( , . - .• ,..:·-, • '" �, , 1 , · · t - ·: .. J' -Y- ' 1 ° ••'"'f., -, . ' j . ' ) i • "' r t • ) •1 J, C • • l _ _ _ , •.: !Y' "' • I � l ··· ! ( 5 l .._ •• 1.' t f f • ,!F , ' J : 7 1 1 \ , : ",-, \\• ( -... ." ... . . . <� 1 _ � - -�·- n -- ,- c _ . . , . . ( I - . • , - = - - , i ; ; , - _ , , . . t h ' '.�·wt�1i � .-·�� f < ; � ; , - : � � . h • . ; . ' � f - ; ; : : : . 1 • ,. : ! . - " ' : . , '" • • : : . . t -.".t'l l ' , -l. - ✓• �.,.. :t1 ... if . . \ , , . , .. ,, f r lf,1 � , ,41 .. ,;, , F , . . : ' , 1,. . , . I l < , t 1 1 , , , �� f � �- ! . . \. , , � 1 1 " : i.,,.: : : - r : : . � ; � • 1 � . : $ • � t� •,..- � !" '' : -;.-.. ,-,,... , I «.1,fr • � , - . i t ' ff/# Jl • ,1 1/, ' '•< I ' �, 1 / 1 ' , . . , ■ - �, ., • '=i i ' � - : 1 t ...... \-�� tc o \ .. .,. ,,. , � ir . , . . _ . , , . ,I ' ., , . . , . . � ·· --··- - -... I • . • MI i - • : ,. _ _ ' �ir • " f l · · - , , , � � · - \-- • -- • I ' f "If W/ 1 ' � I -�I l l ' ' ' ! . \ ,� , I r . , '" " " " - l • V , t t ,, I I / A , . . - �; , -:;, , ,·¼ ,- , I -� , , · · ,,, .. · -,,. ,·· ...._ � ,., · ·---,"'1_,. '' 711\· � __ �•n \ ) " • ...... _ .. ·· � il• 7 1 , � ., ... .. -'<t .; . I I •• - � 1 ,1 1 " ' ' i .. , f l •• t [ / " 1h r �· ' ) , .. 1r • ... Jt t ; ,,1 • ', , l. >r , , , :-,t I , . .. ' - ' ;� , . l ,, . ,, , , a,.,i .. . ,. ., ' I f ' .- .,1 - / 1 1 , . , , f., • I O > ( ( , • • , I �, _ .,._. •• • - c" I - ' r , . , , , . , . , , £p - M / . s 1 " r Spl' h c a - - 1. , � 3,, A, - 6 . U t - -1 •. '.! Y : . • , . . , i-� (( ' A . . . H - !'., I- ;-·-· -------- , ... - i. ( . � - - �, . .' f t � r• \ H -I , l \ ; �- .� ; � • .. ;, , � - _ - r'• .;I- ·" • 3 1 1 1 ! • ' " ' ' ' - " ' • ' 01L � I t r • - � ' f l ' -·--- --- - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 - " - , . ,.....,, • .. - - - . • I _7 . � ! " � "P» ,I� - - C9 �- e: � � • i t ·�' . 'j ' t J . � � - - : : : i,h ·: • -_ ..... - (" j •• , . , , I • � El .. • �· ·:J a . � , • .z_ ; � � ' . t �� !� . U' . . � � .;,; ' ,, ; , I f ; . � , .. , . TO W N , AN D VI C I N I T Y . �?¼- � l -·� - �\ f 1� 1 1 ·\ e, t . t·; , :� - . � ➔ �.� : · -.:'. ; J I � \ �4 - : . . Vi ' " ' "f l / . ) ! _ .1. ·: - . • , � � 'i Jh � - � - - : , ,,.·, . \ 1' - 1 ; ' . : , . .J ; - 0 r- � ; . :; ; - " ·,- � \� i i , \ f '> = : : • 1 1 , � : , ; , : • , \ \ . \ _ \ Ir- > · . • • ·. , , ; i ' . . T I - �� , - � - t ) w ; , , , · • _/ ''/ , •• 1, ,-' I\\ o-,� ' ' r: u-, / -� \ •. l . � . \"". J\. . 1 a p an d S1 ; 1 r v e y by E. D. 8°al d w , n Pu u e o Se c t i o n fr o m MO n ! l a r r a t � Wa i n a k u Ma p 18 9 1 :) c . o l o I 2 4 0 0 Tr o c e d from Go v ' ! . 5v r v e y Re s .Mo p No . lt : 5 6 1 by .I µ I, , o. , • � i Fi g u r e A- 2 . Wa i l u k u Ri v e r Po r t i o n of an 18 9 1 Ma p of Hi l o (S t a t e Su r v e y De p L Re g . Ma p No . 15 6 1 ) -..... ...., N - • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l ()4.6-()<)04.91 APPEND!XA 33 course, received a suitable remuneration from the different parties. On the above occasions, the banks of the Wairuku must often have presented an interesting scene, in the bustle of which these clerks of the market must have had no inconsiderable share. According to the account of the natives, this iMtitution was in force till the accession of Rihoriho, the late king, since which time it has been abolished (ibid:230). Handy and Handy (1972) write about native Hawaiian agriculture in the Hilo area, and vegetation in the Hilo area: The population of Hilo was anciently as now concentrated mostly around and out from Hilo Bay, whicbisstilltheisland'sprincipalport. TheHiloBay region is one of lush tropical verdure and beauty, owing to the prevalenceof nightly showers and moist warmth which prevail under the northeasterly trade winds into which it faces. Owing to the latter it is also subject to violent oceanic storms and has many ti mes in its history suffered �midevastation from tidal waves unleashed by earthquake action in the Aleutian area of the Pacific. In lava-strewn South Hilo there were no streams whose valleys or bands were capable of being developed in terraces, but cuttings were stuck into the ground on the shores and islets fcr many miles along the course of the Wailuku River far up into the forest zone ... On the lava-strewn plain of Waiakeaand on the slopes between Waiakeaand the Wailuku River, dry taro was fonnerly planted wherever there was enough soil. There were forest plantations in Pana'ewaand in all the lower fem-forest zone above Hilo town and along the cow-se of the Wailuku River (Handy and Handy 1972:538-9). John Papa I'i, a native Historian� notes that Pu'ueo once hadafamoussurfingarea known as Paula, but its location is not docwnented (Ii 1959: 134). Land Tenure In 1848,duringthereign ofKamehameha ill, the traditional Hawaiian land ownership system was replaced with a more Westem-stylesystem. lbisradicalrestructuringwascalledThe Great Mahele (division). The Great Mahele defined the land interests of the King, the high-ranking chiefs, and.the konohiki, who were originally thooe in charge of tracts ofland on behalf of the king or a chief (Chinen 1958:vii and Chinen 1961:13). More than 240 of the highest-ranking chiefs and konohiki in the kingdom joined Kamehameha ill in this division. The first mahele was signed on Jan. 27, 1848 by Kamehameha ill and Princess Victoria Kamarnalu, and by her guardiaM Mataio Kekuanaoa and lone Ii. The last mahele was signed by the King and E. Enoka on March 7, 1848 (Chinen 1958:16). TheMaheledidnotconveytitletoanyland. Thechiefsand konohiki were required to present their claims to The Land Commission to receive a wards for lands quitclaimed to them by KamebamehaIII. Theywerealsorequiredtopaycommutations to the government in order to receive royal patents on their awards. Until an award was issued, title remained with the government The lands awarded to the chiefs and konohiki became known as Konohiki Lands. Because there were few surveyors in Hawaii at the time of the Mahele, the lands were identified by name only, with the understanding that the ancient boundaries would prevail until the land could besurveyed. 1bis expedited the work of the Land Com.mission and speeded the transfers (Chinen 1961:13). During this process all land was placed in one of three categories: Crown Lands (for the occupant of the throne), Government Lands, and Konohiki Lands. These were all �subject to the rights of native tenants" (Laws of Hawaii 1848:22). Native tenants were the common Hawaiian people who lived on the land and worked it for their suooistence. Questions concerning the nature of these rights began to arise as the King, the government, and konohiki began selling parcels ofland. On December 21, 1849 the Privy Council attempted to clarify the situation by adopting four resolutions intended to protect the rights of native tenants referred to in the 1848 law (Chinen 1958:29). These resolutions authorized the Land Commission to award fee simple title to all native tenants who occupied and improved any portion of Crown, Government, or Konohiki Jands. Theseaward<iweretobefreeofcanmutationexceptforhouse too located in thedistrictsofHonolulu,Lahaina, and Hilo (ibid.). Before receiving their awards from the Land Commission, the native tenants were required to prove that they cultivated the land for a living. They were not permitted to acquire wastelands or lands which they cultivated �with the seeming intention of enlarging their lots." Once a claim was conftnned,asurvey was required before the Land Commission was authorized to issue any award. These lands became known as .. Kuleana Lands" (ibid:30). Until its dis.solution on March 31, 1855, the Land Commission issued thousands of awards to the native tenants for their kuleana; even so, less than 30,000 acres of land were awarded to the native tenants as Kuleana Lands. , ,. . •' I • -I .. -> ' I • ' f ... .• ... ,. .. "-. .. -; f- .. . . .. .-~ .. . .. .. ' •. ... .... . ' • ..., • . ' ., ,, " .... ,,,.,,-. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 APPENDIX A 34 Kamehameha personally held many of the Hilo lands and upon hisdeaththeselands-includingPi'ihonua,Punahoaand Waiakea-descended to Liholiho, his son and heir to the kingdom (Kelly et al. 1981:11). Kamehameha had given the 'iii kuponoof Pi'opi'o to his favorite wife Ka'ahumanu and he had given the two Kukuau to his haole chiefs John Young and Isaac Davis. Pu'ueo Aupua'a went to another favorite wife, Kaheiheimalie (ibid.). Kaheiheimalie was the sister of Ka• ahumanu and a cousin ofBoki,ahighchiefandgovemorofO'ahuatthetime. In 1828 the ahupua 'a of Pu 'ueo remained in her possession but by then Kaheiheimalie had become Hoapili-wahine, wife of Ulwnaheihei Hoapili (ibid:40). Ho'olulu, Hoapili's brother, was given charge of Pu 'ueo. Kaheiheimalie died in 1842 and the land descended to her daughter Kekauluohi. Kekauluohi was the mother of Lunalilo, Kamehameha V. When she died in 1845, it was presumed that the land went to Lunalilo; however, Pu'ueodoes not appear as an ahupua 'a award to anyone in the Indices to Quiet Land Ti.ties (Board of Commissioners 1929). Land parcels in Pu'ueo, however, were sold by the Commissioners of Crown Lands (Kelly et al. 1981:40). The following passage tells of a store in the Pu'ueo area that would have been located close to the project area. It also mentions Kino' ole Street, which runs through downtown Hilo. We find in the memoirs of a physician, son of the Lymans, a notice of the first merchant to open a store inHilo. Thestorebelonged toBenjaminPitman, who arrived in 1837. He was joined by his son the following year. The store was located near the Wailuku river and was .. a neat thatched house, surrounded by coffee plants". It had a floor and glass windows, and two apartments, one of which had a counter across it and shelves piled with cotton cloth .. and all manner of curious articles". Theson marriedKino 'ole,daughter of the chief Ho 'olulu who had the charge of Pu 'ueo ahupua 'a. The original .. Pitman Street•· was renamed Kino 'ole Street in 1916 (Kelly et al. 1981:49).As mentioned, several land parcels were sold by the Commjssioner of Crown lands at the time of the Great Mahele. The following are testimonies given by people who claimed land parcels in Pu'ueo. The claims are located within or closeto the project area. L.C.A. 5145 to Kauhiahiwa; Native Testimony, Vol. 4:427Nov. 15, 1848 Haalou sworn he has seen in Makaolanakila ili of Puueo ahupuaa in Hilo, Hawaii: Section 1 -House site Mauka Lo 's land Hamakua Kaili 's land Makai Wahine's landPuna ditch/stream Section 2 -Keamoalii Mauka Konohiki Harnakua and Makai street Puna Stream l cultivated kihapaiInterest from Lo in 1842, no one bad objected. Kauhiahiwa, foreman under Hoolulu. Kaili sworn he bas seen this land just as Haalou has st.ited here. LC.A. 4809 to Lo, Moses; Native Testimony, Vol. 4:418 Mahi sworn he has seen in Puuoo ahupuaa of Hilo, a land section. Mauka street Hamakua Britinan 's lot Makai beach Puna Wailuku 2 houses for Lo, 2 for Honai, 1 each for Kapapa, Kaneelaa and Kaehuaku, they have no claim. Land from Hoolulu in 1829. Mio section Mauka Kamakapalupalu's house Hamakua idle land Makai Laanohala 's land Puna ditch l cultivated kihapai. .. .. I .. . .. .. • . . • , ' •• co, • ~ \ .. .. ... .. f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 APPENDIX A 35 Section 3 Makai Laauohala 's land Mauka idle land Hamakua ditch Makai Kaiohe 's house Puna street 1 partially cultivated kihapai. Mauka and all around this kihapai is idle land. NewKihapai Mauka Kaenaena's land Hamakua Kauhiahiwa 's land makai Haleki 's land Puna stream 1 cultivated kihapai Land from Hoolulu in 1829, no one has objected. Wahine sworn he has seen this land exactly as Mahi has seen it. L.C.A. 1-b to Wahine; Foreign Testimony, Vol. 5:47Baranaba sw. dep. he wrote and sent this with many other claims to Honolulu. OClearysworndep. known this cl. tobe in ahupuaaof Puueo in 3 lots. Lot l Is in Ili ofKahalauwlau (?) - 1 field-N. is edge of pali & stream of Waipilopilo-E. house lotof PupuS. loot of Kahiahiwa -W. Kaili 's lot. -Cl. has l house on it, it is not fenced, it is cultivated -he had it from Kapapa when Konohi.ki of Puueo. Lotll l field inlliHooheo-N. is road to woods,-.E. Konohiki. -S. Str. Auwai -W. Konohiki. Cultivated no fence, CL. had this lot from W. Pi(???) -Konohiki ih exch. for his field situated on the lot purchased by B.Pitman-Lot 3. Ili Nalomalu - l field. N. Makupau ili.-E. Paapukai lot. -S. Paapuaa str. -W. is a horse road running across the ahupuaa. Cultivated partly -not fenced. Cl. had this lot from Hoolulu 20 years since then Konohiki, and has ever since held it I believe undisputed. Kuamakalani sw. knew the above to be true. The locatioos of these awaitl; can be found on FigureA-2. FigureA-2 alsoshowsastorehouse betweenMakaolanakila and Piliamoo. Figure A-3 is a photograph of what is believed to be the storehouse. No date is given; however, because the storehouse is on the 1891 map, the pbQtograph was probably taken in the late 1800s or early 1900s. The area shown in the photo is within the project area, however, this area looks very different today. No housesarepresentandtheareaisovergrown with bamboo and other vegetation. The rock formation in the photograph, however,is identical to formation in the area today. Informant Interviews During a previous study (Rosendahl 1980) several women familiar with the Pu'ueo and Wailuku River areas were interviewed and a summary of their testimony was given to Councilwoman Merle.Lai. The women's testimony noted the historical value of the Wailuku River area and mentioned several heiau in the area. One of the women, "Aunty" Edith Kanakaole, spoke of a stone in the WailukuRiverwhichfunctioned asa natural bridge. The story of this stone had been handed down through the generations and had been told to Kanakaole by her mother. The story appears to tie in with the legend about Piliamo 'o related earlier in this report. "Mo 'o" is the Hawaiian name for lizard. The lizard inthis story is in the form of a flat black rock. This lizard or mo 'o would help people cross the Wailuku River and served as a stepping stone. It has been said that when one crossed over the lizard at low tide, it moved. Intheolddays,therockwassignificanttotheHawaiian people and they would throw food below to feed the lizard. (The lizard is Located midway and below of the Dahlberg's Coooominium and the JX>wethouse, the last bridge and near two waterfalls) (Ra;endahl 1980:A-l ). According to Kanakaole, the Wailuku River area and the Mo'o stone are historically important (Rosendahl 1980:A-l). Kanakaole said that there was once a heiau on the Pu'ueo side of the river, along the banks, in the wooded bamboo area. She noted that ali • i used to hold counsels of war in the area and park their canoes behind the heiau (ibid.). She said that everyone knew preparations for war were being made when canoes were gathered there (ibid.). Mrs. Eleanor Ahuna, a student of Kanakaole, verified the vicinity of the heiau; however, its exact location is not known (ibid:A-2). .... ., I. ; .. ' .,. ' • .. • ... •. • • ... \ , . -: • ,. ... ~ " . " ' .. ,, • . 'r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-09049 l APPENDIXA 36 "" .... ... �tS � i] .... �,: � a.o-.s-� "1::j i:: �-� � �� -::: Cl) s,'5 ::� e,00 .s� ��<"'>o.� � ........ -�� I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l046-0<J0491 APPENDIX A 37 Historical records mention several heiau in the Pu'ueo area, one of which is Kanoa Heiau. This heiau was a luakini heiau used for hwnansacrifice. Every distriet on the island had at least one luakini and Kanoa was the one for Hilo. Kanoa Heiau is not within the project area. Figure A-2 shows the approximatelocationoftheheiau,ascanbeestimatedfromthe following directions: Heiau of Kanowa [Kanoa], Land of Puueo, Hilo -At the eastern end of Kanoa Street, near the sea-cliff. Isabelle Point 339*54, 1295 feet A heiau for hwnan sacrifice entirely destroyed (Stokes n.d.:578). Another source notes Kanoa Heiau as: Probably the most prominent temple in this section was that of Kanoa, ( or Kanowa as fonrterly known), thatused toexistatPuueo,near thesiteofL. Severance ·s present residence. The time of its erection is not stated, butKalaniopuu consecrated it to the service of his war-god, Kaili, when he set out to subdue the rebel chieflmakakaloa, in Puna. This indicates it as a war heiau of the pookanaka class, though it was but of medium size, some 60 x 80 ft. Luupule was said to have been its priest, and Kane and K.analoa was its dieties, in latter years. Its walls were thrown down prior to 1850, and entirely destroyed and its stones taken for road work in 1898. It figures also as the threatened place of sacrifice of Umi and his three companions, in the early part of his reign, while residing incog in Hilo, for some slight to the daughter of the alii of the district, but from which predicamenttheywerereleasedthroughhisretinue,at Waipio, proving good his claim (Thrum 1907:55-6). While Kanoa Heiau is said to be near the site of the L. Severance home, FigureA-2 shows the home as being across the Wailuku River on the Hilo side. Anotherheiau,Kaipalaoa, wassaidtobe locatedon thesite of the Hilo Armory. Thrum notes that it was said to be the place where Keoua sacrificed Keawaemauhili (Rosendahl 1980:A-2). Accordingl011u:wn 1.his W'dS the place Umi was tohavebeen sacrificed if he failed to produce his royal ivory necklace at the proper time ( other references say Kanoa Heiau was the place where this was tohappen[ibid]). Theheiauisalsosaidtobeone of several places where Kamehameha is said to have proclaimed theMamalahoaLaw-TheLawoftheSplinteredPaddle(ibid). Noted native Hawaiian historian Samuel Kamakau notes Kaipalaoa Heiau as the place where Liholibo 's wnbilical cordwas cut off, a sacred andimportantHawaiian practice. Liholiho, Kamehameha II, became heir to his father's kingdom. Liholiho was born in November (Hanaia'ele'ele), 1797, in Hilo, Hawaii. His mother was K.a-lani-kaui-ka-'alaneo Ke-opu-o-lani,andsbegave birth to him at the age of seventeen and a half years. He was her firstborn and he was given the name Ka-lani-KuaLiholiho. Many signs appeared at his birth. He was taken to the heiau of K.aipalaoa, and the sacred rite of the cutting of his navel cord was performed by the kahuna (Kamakau 1961:220) The houses of some chiefs were said to have stood along the beach below the siteof Kaipalaoa Heiau (Rosendahl 1980: A-2). Mrs. Violet Nahaku Ulii Brown Nathaniel, a well-known kama 'aina who was raised at the mouth of the Wailuku River on thePu'ueoside believes that a heiau was once situated in the bamboo grove between Pu'ueo Bridge and Makaolanakila. This would place the heiau within the project area; however, no evidence of the he iau exists. In summary, the project area and its vicinity definitely have historical and cultural value. This is indicated by the many historical references to the project area, and the legends concerning the area. The area is well documented by early visitors as a home to chiefs, and as a well-visited market place. The testimony of several local infonnants suggests a heiau may haveexisted inthearea atonetime,andthatthisareawas known even in recent history as a special and sacred place. I • .. ► • .. I' .. A .. .. . . " • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 38 Board of Commissioners 1929 Indices of Awards made by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Star Bulletin Publishers, Honolulu. Chinen,JJ. 1958 The Great Mahele: Hawaii's Lllnd Division of 1848. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. 1961 Original Lllnd Titles in Hawaii. Honolulu: privately published. Colum, P. 1937 Legends of Hawaii. Forge Village: Yale University Press, Inc. Ellis, W. 1963 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of a Tour of Hawaii, or Owhyee ... Honolulu: Advertiser Publishing Co. Handy, E.S.C., E.G. Handy, with M.K. Pukui 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii. B.P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Ii, J.P. 1959 Fragments of Hawaiian History. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. Kamakau, S. 1961 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. Honolulu: The Kamehameha Schools Press. Kelly, M., B. Nakamura, and D.B. Barrere 1981 Hilo Bay: A Chronological History, Land and Water Use in the Hilo Bay Area, Island of Hawaii. Dept.Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for U.S. Army Engineer District, Honolulu. Puku'i, M.K. 1983 'Olelo No'eau. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 71. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. Pukui, M.K. and S.H. Elbert 1986 Hawaiian Dictionary. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Pukui, M.K., S.H. Elbert, and E.T. Mookini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1046-090491 APPENDIX A 39 Rosendahl, P.H. 1980 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Kuuipo I Resort Condominium Site, Hilo, Island of Hawaii, (TMK:3-2-6-02:1,2,3,4). PHRI Report ARA-9-052080. Prepared for Kuuipo Resort Condominiums, Inc. Stokes, J.F.G. n.d. Survey of Heiaus of Hawaii. Manuscript in Dept. Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum (1919). Thrum, T.G. 1907 Tales from the Temples. Part II. Hawaiian Almanac and Annual 1908. T.G. Thrum, Honolulu. Westervelt, W.D. 1963 Hawaiian Legends of Ghosts and Ghost-Gods. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Company, Inc. •• • JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR I KE KIA'AINA SYLVIA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA March 4, 2026 STATE OF HAWAl'I I KA MOKU'AINA 'O HAWAl'I DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA 'OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI 'AINA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION KAKUHIHEW A BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BL VD, STE 555 KAPOLEI, HAW All 96707 DAWN N.S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT RYAN K.P. KANAKA'OLE FIRST DEPUTY CIARA \V.K KAHAHANE 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: Jeff Darrow, Director County of Hawaii Department of Public Works 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 plan ni ng@hawaiicou nty .gov Dear Jeff Darrow: Project No. 2026PR00143 Doc. No. 2603SN01 Archaeology SUBJECT: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) §GE-42 Historic Preservation Review -County of Hawai'i SMA Use Permit Application Pu'ueo Project Pu'ueo Ahupua'a, South Hilo District, Island of Hawai'i TMK: (3) 2-6-002:001, 002, and 003 This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) review of the subject County of Hawaii SMA Use permit application received by our office on February 12, 2026. The submittal included construction plans, a TMK map, a County of Hawaii SMA permit application, an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) report (Goodfellow, 1991) and an aerial photo of the project area. The submittal indicates that the SMA Use Permit request will allow for the development of an educational, outreach and cultural space called the Pu'ueo Project. The application indicates that the combined acreage for the proposed project totals 1.97 acres across the three subject parcels. The proposed project consists of three construction phases to occur over the course of five to fifteen years for full build. Phase 1 improvements include: •Construct a 2,730-sq.-ft. residence for on-site security, maintenance, and landscaping.•Construct a garage, walking trails, several pavilions, and a temporary floating pier. Phase II improvements include: •Construct a 2,990-sq.-ft. halau (large gathering place)•Construct a 1,280-sq.-ft. restroom facility•Construct a 12-stall covered parking structure Phase Ill improvements include: •Construct two 630-sq-ft. cabins A review of SHPD records shows that parts of the proposed project area were included in the Goodfellow (1991) AIS, covering Parcels 001 and 002. The AIS links the project area to three Land Commission Awards and notes that Pu'ueo originated as a residential community dating to the late 18th century. Submittal information indicates the Pu'ueo Poi factory operated within the subject parcel until 1965, along with several residences and other businesses. The current project area is vacant and has, over the years, been subject to SMA Minor Use Permits issued by the County of Hawaii for vegetation clearing, grading, and debris/junk SHPD requests If any archaeological sites are present and/or unrecorded historic properties are identified, SHPD will request that a new AIS be completed, SHPD looks forward SHPD requests C.Kimo Alameda, Ph.D.Mayor William V. Brilhante, Jr. Managing Director County of Hawai' i POLICE DEPARTMENT 349 Kapi'olani Street • Hilo, Hawai'i 96720-3998 (808) 935-3311 • Fax (808) 961-2389 Reed K. Mahuna Chief of Police REC'D HAND DELR.IERED February 25, 2026 TO FROM , ASSISTANT POLICE CHIEF, REA I OPERATIONS BUREAU SUBJECT: SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION (PL-SMA- 2025-000083) APPLICANT: HAUNANI KANE PHD, CLIFF KAPONO PHD, AND JOHN H.R. BURNS PHD REQUEST: TO ESTABLISH AN EDUCATIONAL, RESEARCH AND GATHERING SPACE TO PROMOTE SCIENCE EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND CULTURAL ENGAGEMENT TAX MAP KEY: (3) 2-6-002:001-003, SOUTH HILO, 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 our South Hilo District Commander, Captain Aaron Carvalho, at (808) 961-2316 or via email at aa ron.carvalho@hawaiipolice.gov. AC:ws/26HQ0142 "Hawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer" JOSH GREEN, M.D. KENNETH S. FINK, M.D, MGA, MPH GOVERNOR OF HAWAII DIRECTOR OF HEALTH KE KIA’AINA O KA MOKU’AINA O HAWAI’I KA LUNA HO’OKELE STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH P.O. BOX 916 HILO, HAWAII 96721-0916 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 18, 2026 TO: Mr. Jeffrey W. Darrow Planning Director, County of Hawaii FROM: Eric Honda District Environmental Health Program Chief SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2025-000083) Applicant: Haunani Kane PhD, Cliff Kapono PhD and John H.R. Burns PhD Request: To Establish an Educational, Research and Gathering Space to Promote Science Education, Research and Cultural Engagement TMK: 2-6-002:001-003, South Hilo, Hawaiʻi In most cases, the District Health Office will no longer provide individual comments to agencies or project owners to expedite the land use review and process. Agencies, project owners, and their agents should apply Department of Health “Standard Comments” regarding land use to their standard project comments in their submittal. Standard comments can be found on the Land Use Planning Review section of the Department of Health website: https://health.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/. Contact information for each Branch/Office is available on that website. Note: Agencies and project owners are responsible for adhering to all applicable standard comments and obtaining proper and necessary permits before the commencement of any work. General summary comments have been included for your convenience. However, these comments are not all-inclusive and do not substitute for review of and compliance with all applicable standard comments for the various DOH individual programs. Clean Air Branch 1.All project activities shall comply with the Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Chapters 11-59 and 11-60.1. Jeffrey W. Darrow February 18, 2026 Page 2 of 4 2. Control of Fugitive Dust: You must reasonably control the generation of all airborne, visible fugitive dust and comply with the fugitive dust provisions of HAR §11-60.1-33. Note that activities that occur near existing residences, businesses, public areas, and major thoroughfares exacerbate potential dust concerns. It is recommended that a dust control management plan be developed which identifies and mitigates all activities that may generate airborne and visible fugitive dust and that buffer zones be established wherever possible. 3. Standard comments for the Clean Air Branch are at: https://health.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/ Clean Water Branch 1. All project activities shall comply with the HAR, Chapters 11-53, 11-54, and 11-55. 1. The following Clean Water Branch website contains information for agencies and/or project owners who are seeking comments regarding environmental compliance for their projects with HAR, Chapters 11-53, 11-54, and 11-55: https://health.hawaii.gov/cwb/clean-water-branch-home- page/cwb- standard-comments/. Hazard Evaluation & Emergency Response Office 1. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and Phase II Site Investigation should be conducted for projects wherever current or former activities on site may have resulted in releases of hazardous substances, including oil or chemicals. Areas of concern include current and former industrial areas, harbors, airports, and formerly and currently zoned agricultural lands used for growing sugar, pineapple or other agricultural products. 2. Standard comments for the Hazard Evaluation & Emergency Response Office are at: https://health.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/. Indoor and Radiological Health Branch 1. Project activities shall comply with HAR Chapters 11-39, 11-45, 11-46, 11-501, 11-502, 11-503, and 11-504. 2. Noise may be generated during demolition and/or construction. The applicable maximum permissible sound levels, as stated in Title 11, HAR, Chapter 11-46, “Community Noise Control,” shall not be exceeded unless a noise permit is obtained from the Department of Health. 3. Construction/Demolition Involving Asbestos: If the proposed project includes renovation/demolition activities that may involve asbestos, the applicant should contact the Asbestos and Lead Section of the Branch at https://health.hawaii.gov/irhb/asbestos/. Safe Drinking Water Branch Jeffrey W. Darrow February 18, 2026 Page 3 of 4 1. Agencies and/or project owners are responsible for ensuring environmental compliance for their projects in the areas of 1) Public Water Systems; 2) Underground Injection Control; and 3) Groundwater and Source Water Protection in accordance with HAR Chapters 11-19, 11-20, 11-21, 11-23, 11-23A, and 11- 25. They may be responsible for fulfilling additional requirements related to the Safe Drinking Water program: https://health.hawaii.gov/sdwb/. 2. Standard comments for the Safe Drinking Water Branch can be found at: https://health.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/. Solid & Hazardous Waste Branch 1. Hazardous Waste Program - The state regulations for hazardous waste and used oil are in HAR Chapters 11-260.1 to 11-279.1. These rules apply to the identification, handling, transportation, storage, and disposal of regulated hazardous waste and used oil. 2. Solid Waste Programs - The laws and regulations are contained in HRS Chapters 339D, 342G, 342H, and 342I, and HAR Chapters 11-58.1 and 11-282. Generators and handlers of solid waste shall ensure proper recycling or disposal at DOH-permitted solid waste management facilities. If possible, waste prevention, reuse, and recycling are preferred options over disposal. The Office of Solid Waste Management also oversees the electronic device recycling and recovery law, the glass advanced disposal fee program, and the deposit beverage container program. 3. Underground Storage Tank Program – The state regulations for underground storage tanks are in HAR Chapter 11-280.1. These rules apply to the design, operation, closure, and release response requirements for underground storage tank systems, including unknown underground tanks identified during construction. 4. Standard comments for the Solid & Hazardous Waste Branch can be found at: https://health.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/. Wastewater Branch For comments, please email the Wastewater Branch at doh.wwb@doh.hawaii.gov. Sanitation / Local DOH Comments: 1. According to HAR §11-26-35, No person, firm, or corporation shall demolish or clear any structure without first ascertaining the presence or absence of rodents that may endanger public health by dispersal from such premises. Should any such inspection reveal the presence of rodents, the rodents shall be eradicated before demolishing or clearing the structure. A demolition permit is required prior to demolition. Jeffrey W. Darrow February 18, 2026 Page 4 of 4 Other 1. CDC - Healthy Places - Healthy Community Design Checklist Toolkit recommends that state and county planning departments, developers, planners, engineers, and other interested parties apply these principles when planning or reviewing new developments or redevelopment projects. 2. If new information is found or changes are made to your submittal, DOH reserves the right to implement appropriate environmental health restrictions as required. Should there be any questions on this matter, please contact the Department of Health, Hawaii District Health Office, at (808) 933-0917. County of Hawai‘i DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 345 Kekūanāoʻa Street, Suite 41 · Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720 · cohdem@hawaiicounty.gov Ph: (808) 961-8083 · Fax: (808) 961-8086 Hawai‘i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Daniel Girvan, P.E. Director Craig Kawaguchi Deputy Director C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D.Mayor William V. Brilhante Jr. Managing Director MEMORANDUM Date : February 25, 2026 To : Jeffrey Darrow, Director Planning Department From : Daniel Girvan, Director Department of Environmental Management Subject : PL-SMA-2025-000083 ______________________________________________________________________________ The Wastewater Division has reviewed the subject application and offers the following comments and/or recommendations: ☐No Comments ☐The proposed subdivision is accessible to a sewer. The applicant is required to connect all existing and proposed structures to the public sewer in accordance with Section 21-6 and Division 2 of theHawaii County Code. ☒The proposed subdivision is within 300-linear feet of an existing sewer system. The applicant shall install sewer lines as required by Section 23-85 of the Hawaii County Code. Sewer lines shallcomply with Chapter 21, Division 2☐Extensions of the public sewer system: The applicant shall submit a letter application to the director detailing where and why the sewerextension is being requested, and a payment mechanism:☐The applicant constructs and pays full cost for the extension and may receive for 10 years after completion one-half of all sewer charges collected by the County from other properties thatconnect to the extension, provided the reimbursement does not exceed the cost incurred by theapplicant.☐County constructs the extension (the County has yet to create a program to allow this):☐The applicant pays the full cost for the extension and may receive for 10 years after completion one-half of all sewer charges collected by the County from other properties thatconnect to the extension, provided the reimbursement does not exceed the cost incurred bythe applicant.☐The applicant pays one-half the cost and the County pays the other half of the extensioncost. The applicant shall submit sewer engineering plans and sewer study to the WastewaterDivision for review. Jeffrey Darrow, Planning Director February 25, 2026 Page 2 ☐ The applicant shall submit a study documenting proposed additional sewer flows so the director can evaluate the capacity of the existing system to handle them. Contact Wastewater Division staff for Sewer Study requirements. ☐ The proposed subdivision may be subject to existing or future federal, state, or county regulation under Title 40 CFR 403. Contact the Wastewater Division Pretreatment Group for information regarding pretreatment standards and requirements. ☐ The proposed subdivision is about ** miles from nearest Hawaiʻi County Sewer. The applicant shall comply with Department of Health requirements, and all other applicable federal, state, and county regulations. The applicant shall submit plans for treatment facilities to the Department of Health and to the Department of Environmental Management director for review as required by Section 21-11. For sewers in private roadways: ☐ Sewers will be dedicated to the County in accordance with Section 21-19. Contact the Wastewater Division for sewer and easement details and requirements. Applicant shall hold the County harmless for any damage to roadway corridors during or caused by the construction. Contact Wastewater Division for Permit to Perform Work on the Public Sewer System. ☐ Sewers will be private and will not be dedicated to the County. The applicant shall comply with all Department of Public Works requirements. Contact the Wastewater Division for Permit to Perform Work on the Public Sewer System. ☐ Other: WRS:Initials Wastewater Staff Disclaimer: Data provided and maintained by the Hawaii County Wastewater Division are subject to change at any time. The County of Hawaii does not guarantee the positional or thematic accuracy of the GIS data. Current Time: 2/25/2026 11:00 AM Scale: 1:2,257 1 inch equals 0 miles Location Map - TMK 2-6-002-001 Sources: Esri, Vantor, Airbus DS, USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR, N Robinson, NCEAS, NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat, GSA, Geoland, FEMA, Intermap, and the GIS user community, Sources: Esri, USGS, Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community COH_Parcels_TMK Treatment Plants and Pump Stations Custom County Pump Station Non-County Pump Station County Treatment Plant Non-County Treatment Plant Laterals Custom County Lateral Non-County Lateral Flow Direction Mains Custom County Gravity Main Non-County Gravity Main County Force Main Non-County Force Main County Outfall Non-County Outfall County Siphon County Stub Non-County Stub County Treatment Non-County Treatment Manholes Custom County Dropline Manhole County Manhole Non-County Dropline Manhole Non-County Manhole Service Connections Service Connections Connected Assumed Connection Failed Inspection Permit Pending Proposed Connection Exemption Not Connected Hawai’i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer BD-10 BUILDING DIVISION – DPW COUNTY OF HAWAI'I – 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 7 – Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720 Hilo Office (808) 961-8331 · Fax (808) 961-8410 Kona Office (808) 323-4720 · Fax (808) 327-3509 February 24, 2026 TO: Alex Roy - County of Hawaii – Planning Dept. County Of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi St. Ste. #3 Hilo, HI. 96720 SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2025- 000083) Applicant: Haunani Kane PhD, Cliff Kapono PhD and John H.R. Burns PhD Request: To Establish an Educational, Research and Gathering Space to Promote Science Education, Research and Cultural Engagement Tax Map Key: (3) 2-6-002:001-003, South Hilo, Hawaiʻi This is to inform you that our records on file, relative to the status of the subject discloses that: No Building permit was issued for work done on the premises. No building permit was issued for the change of occupancy. At the time of completion, the subject complied with all Building Code regulations that were in effect. Variance from any building regulation (Building, Electrical, Plumbing, or Sign) was/was not granted. The following violations(s) still outstanding: Building Electrical Plumbing Sign Others: Owner shall acquire and complete the necessary Building Permit(s) to construct and occupy the proposed building(s) and structure(s) as required per Hawaii County Code – Chapter 5 Construction Administration Code, Section 5-3-1. Multiple/separate Building permits are required per Section 5-3-5. -https://www.hawaiicounty.gov/our-county/legislative/office-of-the-county- clerk/county-code -https://www.hawaiicounty.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/14/6387436 34861870000 Hawai’i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer BD-10 Proposed floor plan(s) appear to be consistent with Assembly, Residential, and Multi-unit Residential occupancy types by Building Code definitions. Owner shall ensure that all Building permit documents and plans reflect the applicable occupancy and use types per Building Code definitions and requirements. Should you have any questions regarding matters contained herein, please feel free to contact Joel Fitzgerald at phone no. (808) 961-8488. From:Henderson, Royd To:Planning Internet Mail Subject:Re: Request for Comments | PL-SMA-2025-000083 | Haunani Kane PhD, Cliff Kapono PhD and John H.R. Burns PhD | TMK: (3) 2-6-002:001-003 Date:Wednesday, February 18, 2026 8:47:57 AM Attachments:image001.png Good morning, Our comments are as follows: 1: Fire Department access and water supply per The Hawaii State Fire Code NFPA1 Thank you, Royd From: Miller, Shantel <Shantel.Miller@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2026 2:29 PM To: DPW Eng <dpweng@hawaiicounty.gov>; DWS <dwsengineeringreview@hawaiidws.org>; Civil Defense Distribution Group <civildefense@hawaiicounty.gov>; HCPDOne <hcpdone@hawaiipolice.gov>; DLNR - Land Division (dlnr.land.hawaii@hawaii.gov) <dlnr.land.hawaii@hawaii.gov>; DLNR OCCL <sharleen.k.kuba@hawaii.gov>; DOE <robyn.loudermilk@k.12.hi.us>; DEM (COH) <cohdem@hawaiicounty.gov>; OP <dbedt.stateplanning@hawaii.gov>; DLNR - Engineering Division <DLNR.ENGR@hawaii.gov>; DLNR - DOFAW <dlnr@hawaii.gov>; Building Division Internet Email <cohbuild@hawaiicounty.gov>; Spielman, Aaron <Aaron.Spielman@hawaiicounty.gov>; Morrison, Bethany J <Bethany.J.Morrison@hawaiicounty.gov>; Palma, Maryam <Maryam.Palma@hawaiicounty.gov>; DOH Wastewater Branch <doh.wwb@doh.hawaii.gov>; Honda, Eric <eric.honda@doh.hawaii.gov>; Une, Michael Y. <michael.une@doh.hawaii.gov>; Baybayan, Clinton <Clinton.Baybayan@hawaiicounty.gov>; Henderson, Royd <Royd.Henderson@hawaiicounty.gov>; Kawasaki, Edward <Edward.Kawasaki@hawaiicounty.gov>; Kato, Norren <Norren.Kato@hawaiicounty.gov>; Santiago, Hans <Hans.Santiago@hawaiicounty.gov>; Dane Hiromasa <dane.hiromasa@doh.hawaii.gov> Cc: Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov>; Dacayanan, Melissa <Melissa.Dacayanan@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Request for Comments | PL-SMA-2025-000083 | Haunani Kane PhD, Cliff Kapono PhD and John H.R. Burns PhD | TMK: (3) 2-6-002:001-003 Good Afternoon, Please see the attached memo requesting your review and comments on the subject matter. No hard copy will be provided. We apologize for the inconvenience; the application packet referenced in the memo was not attached. However, you may review the application packet using the following link PUUEO PROJECT SMA USE PERMIT APPLICATION REV 2026.01.26_V1_FINAL_Redacted.pdf After opening the link, click on the bookmark icon to navigate through the individual documents. We kindly ask that you submit your comments to planning@hawaiicounty.gov by Thursday, March 19, 2026. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Planner Alex Roy (cc’d herein) at 808-961-8140. Mahalo, Shan Shan (Shantel) Miller Planning Division Staff County of Hawaii – Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Direct: (808)961-8148 / Main: (808)961-8288 Email: shantel.miller@hawaiicounty.gov Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any review, use, disclosure, or distribution by unintended recipients is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Hawaiʻi County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Coastal Zone Management Program Environmental Review Program Land Use Commission Land Use Division Special Plans Branch State Transit-Oriented Development Statewide Geographic Information System Statewide Sustainability Branch STATE OF HAWAl'I OFFICE OF PLANNING JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR SYLVIA LUKE LT. GOVERNOR & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 235 South Beretania Street, 6th Floor, Honolulu, Hawai'i 96813 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2359, Honolulu, Hawai'i 96804 Mr. Jeffrey W. Darrow, Director Department of Planning County of Hawai' i East Hawai 'i Office 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 Attn: Alex Roy Dear Mr. Darrow: March 12, 2026 Telephone: Fax: Web: MARY ALICE EVANS (808) 587-2846 (808) 587-2824 https://planning.hawaii.gov/ DTS202602 l 808 l 8MO Subject: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2025- 000083) to establish an educational, research, and gathering space to promote science education, research and cultural engagement Pu'u'eo, South Hilo, Hawai'i; Tax Map Keys: (3) 2-6-002: 001, 002 and 003 Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Special Management Area (SMA) Use Pennit Application (PL-SMA-2025-000083), transmitted via memorandum dated February 17, 2026, to establish an educational, research and gathering space to promote science education, research and cultural engagement in Pu'u'eo, South Hilo, Hawai'i. The 1.97-acre property consists of three contiguous parcels within the SMA and zoned V-7.5 Resort Hotel District. These parcels are situated within the State Urban Land Use Classification District and are abutted on the south side by the Wailuku River, which is within the State Conservation Land Use District. According to the subject SMA Use Permit application, the applicants propose to develop a meeting facility that will accommodate scientific retreats, educational programs, and community gatherings to include: o A one-and-a-half story, single family residence of approximately 2,370gross square feet with 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, a kitchen, dining room,living room, and storage spaces to serve as an on-site residence for staffwho provide security, property management, and landscaping. o A detached 2-car garage, approximately 768 square feet, proximate to theproposed dwelling. Mr. Jeffrey W. Darrow March 12, 2026 Page 2 o Walking trails and 3 covered pavilions of 170 square feet each to provide shadedseating areas at different points along the Wailuku River side of the property. o A temporary floating pier, anchored to the southern side of the property and located in the W ailuku River. o A one-and-a-half story halau of approximately 2,990 gross square feet in size,including a community halau room, kitchen, back of house area, and covered lanaito be used for organizational meetings, educational programs, and retreats, including revenue generating events. o A restroom facility located near the halau of approximately 686 gross square feet insize, including outdoor showers and a covered lanai. o Paved parking stalls for 20 vehicles including a 12-stall covered parking structure and 8 uncovered stalls. o Two cabins, consisting of two studio units, for short-tenn rental to generate revenueto maintain and support the meeting facility. The proposed development will limit attendees to any program or activity on the project site to no more than 100 people. Construction is anticipated to be completed in three phases over a 15-year period: Phase I (years 1 through 5) -constructing the residence, 2-car garage, walking trails, pavilions, and floating pier; Phase II (years 5 through 10)-building the halau, restroom facility, covered parking structure, and uncovered parking stalls; and Phase III (years 10 through 15) -constructing the two cabins. The total construction cost for the proposed project is anticipated to range from four to five million dollars. All or portions of two pavilions are situated within the "AE" or "VE" Flood Zones, which are subject to 100-year frequency flooding and coastal flooding. A portion of the southwest comer of the residence may lie within or directly abut Flood Zone "AE." Most of the proposed structures are situated within the Flood Zone "X", areas outside of the 500-year flood plain. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) has reviewed the subject SMA Use Permit Application, and has the following comments to offer: 1.The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map suggests the subject property be used for Medium Density Urban use. The County of Hawai 'iPlanning Department should respond to the applicant's assertion that the proposed Mr. Jeffrey W. Darrow March 12, 2026 Page 3 development is consistent with the LUPAG map classification, and determine whether a single-family residence intended for occupancy by watchmen or custodians is an allowable land use within the county designated Resort-Hotel zoning district, and the proposed gathering space and short-tenn rental uses of cabins are consisent with the requirements of section 25-1-5, Hawai'i County Code of 1983 for a "meeting facility", which may include a kitchen but has no public commercial transient accommodations. 2.On page 5 of the application, the applicant states that the rental cabins "will consist oftwo studio units approximately 630 gross square feet in size." On page 4 of Exhibit A, the site plan shows two structures identified as "future cabins." On page 10 of Exhibit A, the floor plan and exterior elevation drawing for the "future cabin" shows a structureof 1,256 square feet that contains 4 studio units, each including an ensuite bathroomand what appears to be a wet bar. The applicant should clarify and describe the size ofthe rental studio cabin structures, the number of rental units within each structure, and whether the studio units include kitchen facilities. 3.The application proposes the construction of a temporary floating pier in the WailukuRiver but does not discuss the purpose and duration period of the floating pier. Theapplication should address the purpose of the proposed floating pier and anticipatedduration of so-called temporary floating pier. OPSD recommends that the County Planning Department assess and determine whether the proposed floating pier is anallowable land use. 4.In enacting Act 224, Session Laws of Hawaii 2005, the legislature found that light pollution in Hawaii's coastal areas and artificial lighting illuminating the shoreline andocean waters can be disruptive to avian and marine life. All exterior lighting and lampposts associated with the proposed development shall be cut-off luminaries to providethe necessary shielding to mitigate potential light pollution in the coastal areas, andlessen possible seabird strikes. No artificial light, except as provided in HRS § 205A- 30.5(b ), shall be directed to travel across the property boundaries toward Hilo Bay and ocean. 5.OPSD concurs that prior to the commencement of land altering and construction,sedimentation barriers should be implemented on downhill slope of the project site to minimize potential runoff or sedimentation and be remained until final inspection has been granted for all proposed construction activities. Drywells and/or catch basinsshould be constructed onsite to capture and infiltrate stonnwater runoff, and sitespecific Best Management Practices should be prepared and implemented to preventany runoff, sediment, soil and debris potentially resulting from associated constructionactivities from adversely impacting the coastal ecosystems and the State waters as specified in Hawai'i Administrative Rules Chapter 11-54. Mr. Jeffrey W. Darrow March 12, 2026 Page 4 If you respond to this comment letter, please include DTS202602 l 808 l 8MO in the subject line. For any questions regarding this letter, please contact Rebecca Anderson of our office at (808)587-2846 or by email at rebecca.anderson@hawaii.gov. Sincerely, •f\r\or� A\ l u_ GJQnsMary Ali� Evans Director TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY • COUNTY OF HAWAl'I 345 KEKUANAO'A STREET, SUITE 20 • HILO, HAWAl'l 96720 TELEPHONE (808) 961-8050 • FAX (808) 961-8657 Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Director Planning Department March 25, 2026 Keith K. Okamoto, Manager-Chief Engineer COH PLANNING DEPTMAR 25 2026 pi,;3:31 REC'D HAND DELIVERED Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2025-000083) Applicant: Haunani Kane Ph.D., CliffKapono Ph.D., and John H.R. Burns Ph.D. Request: To Establish an Educational, Research and Gathering Space to Promote Science Education, Research and Cultural Engagement Tax Map Key 2-6-002:001, 002, and 003 We have reviewed the subject application and have the following comments and conditions. Water can be made available from an existing 6-inch waterline within Pu'u'eo Street, fronting Tax Map Key 2-6-003 :040. in accordance with the Department's existing water availability conditions. which are subject to change without notice. The Depattment has no objection to the proposed application. subject to the applicantunderstanding and accepting the following conditions: I.The Department requests that the applicant submit estimated maximum daily water usage calculationsfor the proposed development, for review and approval. The water usage calculations shall be prepared by a professional engineer licensed in the State of Hawai'i, and should include the estimated peak-flowin gallons per minute (GPM), and the total estimated m<1ximum daily water usage in gallons per day, including all irrigation/landscaping use. 2.Upon receipt of the water usage calculations above, the Department will make a detennination as to thewater commitment deposit amount and prevailing facilities charge (subject to change) to be paid, if necessary. Based on the water demand calculations, the Depattment will detem1ine the appropriate service lateral and meter size required for the proposed development. 3.The proposed use will require the installation of a reduced pressure-type backflow prevention assembly,within five (5) feet of the meter on private prope1ty. If a larger or additional meter is required, a backflow prevention assembly wit I also be required for that meter. The installation of the backflowprevention assembly must be inspected and approved by the Depaitment before the commencement/ continuation of water service. 4.The Department's Water System Standards require that a minimum flow of2,000 GPM be available at the site for fire protection use. Please be informed that the existing 6-inch waterline within Pu·u'eoStreet is inadequate to provide the required fire flow. The applicant should contact the Fire Department to determine any other fire protection requirements or alternatives . . . . Water; Our :Most Precious <]¼source ... 1(a Wai Jl_ 1(iine ... The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer. Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Director Page 2 March 25, 2026 5.Subject to other agencies' requirements to construct improvements within the project area, the applicantshall be responsible for the relocation and adjustment of the Department's affected water systemfacilities, should they be necessary. Please note that the Department of Water Supply acknowledges that potable water is Hawai'i Island's most precious resource and encourages our communities to promote water conservation and reserve the highest quality of water for the most valuable end-use, which is the sustenance of life. We request that the developer address the demand for drinking water for landscape irrigation use by reducing the demand, such as: •Supplying water by alternate methods (i.e. rainwater catchment, reclaimed or reuse water). The Countyof Hawai'i, Department of Public Works, and/ or the State of Hawai'i, Department 6f Health hasguidelines, recommendations, or regulations regarding these types of systems. •Design landscape to use water efficient plants that are drought-tolerant, native, or appropriate to thelocal environment, principles of Xeriscape. •Select appropriately-sized turf areas, use healthy soils with the appropriate grading to reduce storm water runoff, including shaded areas, and limit the use of high water using plants, such as turf grass. The Department recommends using water efficient plants that are drought tolerant, native, or appropriate to the local environment, using the principles of xeriscaping, and/or propose to supply landscape irrigation water by alternate methods ( i.e. rainwater catchment, reclaimed or reused water). The County of Hawai' i, Department of Public Works, and/or the State of Hawai'i, Department of Health has guidelines, recommendations, or regulations regarding these types of systems. Should there be any questions, please contact Ms. Robyn Matsumoto of our Water Resources and Planning Branch at (808) 961-8070, extension 255. RM:dfg copy -Mr. Daryn Arai Mr. John H.R. Burns !&A Burns Joint Trust Sincerely yours, Keith K. Okamoto, P.E. Manager-Chief Engineer Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant P.O. BOX 4501, HILO HAWAII 96720 PHONE: (808) 895-3218 EMAIL: March 25, 2026 Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Planning Director County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Director Darrow: Subject: Response to Agencies’ comments regarding Special Management Area Use Permit Application PL-SMA-2025-000083 Applicants: Haunani Kane Ph.D., Cliff Kapono Ph.D. and John H.R. Burns Ph.D. TMK: 2-6-002:001 thru 003, Puʻueʻo, South Hilo, Hawaiʻi Thank you for providing the Applicant with comments received from the various reviewing agencies regarding the subject application, to which we provide the following responses for your consideration. DLNR--Historic Preservation Division (memo dated March 4, 2026) The DLNR’s Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) notes that the SMA application indicates the Puʻueo Poi factory operated within the subject parcel until 1965, along with several residences and other businesses. It also noted that the project area is vacant and has, over the years, been subject to SMA Minor Use Permits issued by the County of Hawaiʻi for vegetation clearing, grading, and debris/junk removal, with that past clearing activities have removed most remnant foundations from previous uses of the parcels. However, their comments do note that Parcel 003 has not been subject to an AIS. SHPD records show the proposed project area lies within the historic Puʻueo District where a boat house and shoreside boat davits were identified along the Wailuku River. In 1901, the area contained sixteen private residences. The Goodfellow (1991) AIS records noted an archaeological site comprising two features, several precontact hearths, and remnants of historic refuse and newer structures. Goodfellow (1991) evaluated the historic property under Criterion d (information content) and recommended no further work. SHPD has determined that the project site is identified as culturally significant based on its history and has insufficient information to determine the potential of the proposed project to impact any undocumented historic properties that may remain. SHPD requests that an archaeological field inspection be conducted of the entire subject project area by a qualified archaeologist to determine the presence or absence of any additional Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Planning Director County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department Page 2 of 3 March 25, 2026 undocumented historic properties in the current project area. If any archaeological sites are present and/or unrecorded historic properties are identified, SHPD will request that a new AIS be completed for review and acceptance prior to initiation of land altering activities. The Applicant understands the necessity of initially performing an archaeological field investigation (FI) prior to conducting any land alteration activities. The Applicant will also agree to perform an FI and complete any subsequent studies, reports or plans required by SHPD prior to applying for Final Plan Approval and/or building permits or conducting any land alteration activity. Department of Health (memo dated February 18, 2026) The Applicant acknowledges the Department of Health no longer provides individual comments to agencies or project owners to expedite the land use review process. This being said, the Applicant anticipates that this project will not present any environmental health concerns with regulatory implications. The proposed Puʻueo Project will connect to the County’s sewer system to transport and process all wastewater generated by the proposed facility. Potable water will be made available by the County via an existing waterline located along the Puueo Street frontage of the project site. As presented within the SMA application, the proposed Puʻueo Project is designed to minimize the need for extensive land alteration activities in order to accommodate the proposed project components. This is reflected in the design of smaller structures rather than a single larger, multi-story facility as well as the use of post and beam construction for the halau and residence. Less grading will mean less potential for dust and runoff onto nearby properties or waterways. All contractors to be utilized for this project will deploy construction best management practices to ensure proper air and water quality is maintained. Therefore, the Applicant anticipates no compliance issues relating to clean air, safe drinking water, and sanitation issues. The subject properties are not situated within proximity to a public water well and resides below the Underground Injection Control line. Therefore, the proposed project will not compromise groundwater resources or public water systems. Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Planning Director County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department Page 3 of 3 March 25, 2026 Department of Environmental Management (memo dated February 25, 2026) As required by the Department of Environmental Management, the Applicant will connect the proposed Puʻueo Project to the existing sewer line that runs along the Puueo Street frontage of the project site. Department of Public Works-Building Division (memo dated February 24, 2026) As required by the Building Division, the Applicant will acquire and complete the necessary multiple/separate building permits necessary to construct and occupy the proposed Puʻueo Project building(s) and structure(s) as required by Chapter 5 (Construction Administration Code) of the Hawaiʻi County Code. The Building Division noted that the proposed floor plans appear to be consistent with Assembly, Residential, and Multi-unit Residential occupancy types by Building Code definitions. The Applicant will ensure that all building permit documents and plans reflect the applicable occupancy and use types per Building Code definitions and requirements. Fire Department (email dated February 18, 2026) The Applicants acknowledge that design and construction of the proposed Puʻueo Project must conform to the Fire Department access and water supply requirements pursuant to The Hawaii State Fire Code (NFPA1). Police Department (memo dated February 25, 2026) The Applicant acknowledges the response from the Police Department that it does not anticipate any significant project-related impact to traffic nor does it have any public safety concerns. We hope that we have adequately responded to comments offered by the respective agencies. Please feel free to contact me should there be any questions or need for additional information. Sincerely, DARYN ARAI Land Use Planning Consultant copy via email: John H.R. Burns, Ph.D. etal Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant P.O. BOX 4501, HILO HAWAII 96720 PHONE: (808) 895-3218 EMAIL: April 4, 2026 Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Planning Director County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Director Darrow: Subject: Response to Department of Water Supply’s comments regarding Special Management Area Use Permit Application PL-SMA-2025-000083 Applicants: Haunani Kane Ph.D., Cliff Kapono Ph.D. and John H.R. Burns Ph.D. TMK: 2-6-002:001 thru 003, Puʻueʻo, South Hilo, Hawaiʻi Thank you for providing the Applicant with comments received from the Department of Water Supply regarding the subject application, to which we provide the following response for your consideration. The Applicants agree to comply with the requirements and seriously consider the recommendations from the Department of Water Supply in its comments on the subject application dated March 25, 2026. More specifically, the Applicants are researchers whose mission is to advancing ocean science, Indigenous knowledge, and community-based conservation through innovative research, storytelling and education. The proposed Puʻueo Project will be a gathering space that promotes science education, outreach and cultural engagement. The Applicants, and the fundamental purpose of the Puʻueo Project, clearly embraces the Department of Water Supply’s mission statement that potable water is Hawaiʻi Island's most precious resource and its desire to encourage our communities to promote water conservation and reserve the highest quality of water for the most valuable end-use, which is the sustenance of life. The Applicants appreciate the Department of Water Supply (DWS) statement that it has no objection to the proposed project and its ability to support the potable water needs of the proposed project via an existing 6-inch waterline within Puueo Street, to which the Applicants understand and accept the following conditions: l.Should the SMA application be approved, the Applicants will prepare and submit estimated maximum daily water usage calculations for the proposed development, as prepared by a professional State of Hawaiʻi-licensed engineer, for review and approval by the DWS. The Applicants will ensure that such a study include the Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Planning Director County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department Page 2 of 2 April 4, 2026 estimated peak-flow in gallons per minute (GPM), and the total estimated maximum daily water usage in gallons per day, including all irrigation/ landscaping use. 2. A reduced pressure-type backflow prevention assembly will be installed within five (5) feet of the existing water meter on the subject property. If a larger or additional meter is required, the Applicants understand that a backflow prevention assembly will also be required for that meter, both of which must be inspected and approved by the DWS before the commencement/ continuation of water service. 3. The Applicants acknowledge that the existing 6-inch waterline within Puueo Street is inadequate to provide the required 2,000 GPM of minimum fire flow required at the project site for fire protection use. The Applicants will contact the Fire Department to determine any other fire protection requirements or alternatives that can be integrated within the proposed project to address this fire flow deficiency. 4. The Applicants acknowledge that it will be responsible for the relocation and adjustment of the Department's affected water system facilities should they be necessary based upon the requirements of other agencies. 5. To reduce the use of potable water for landscape irrigation use, the Applicants will explore alternative methods to reduce this demand for irrigation during the design of the proposed project. As mentioned earlier, the Applicants are resource conservation researchers whose mission is to promote community conservation efforts in order to protect our oceans and the environments that mutually sustain each other. Their collective wish is for the Puʻueo Project to be a gathering space to promote this resource conservation effort, and it can only achieve this by implementing the conservation standards and practices that it wishes to promote. We hope that we have adequately responded to comments offered by DWS. Please feel free to contact me should there be any questions or need for additional information. Sincerely, DARYN ARAI Land Use Planning Consultant copy via email: John H.R. Burns, Ph.D. etal