2022-04-12 Planning Commission Agenda PacketPLANNING COMMISSION TELECONFERENCE MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA
Tuesday, April 12, 2022
9:00 a.m. or shortly thereafter
To Join by Phone:
US: +l 720 707 2699 or +l 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or
+1 646 558 8656 or +l 301 715 8592 or +l 312 626 6799
Webinar ID: 932 6783 6491
Participant ID:#
To Join by ZOOM Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/93267836491?pwd=N0NTQUIQREtkQ1Y1WitJSGJ BMkgyZz09 Webcast Link: https://www.kauai.gov/Webcast-Meetings
A.CALL TO ORDER
B.ROLL CALL
C.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
D.MINUTES of the meeting(s) of the Planning Commission
E.RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD
F.HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT. The Planning Commission will accept written testimony for any
agenda item herein. Written testimony indicating your 1) name, and if applicable, your
position/title and organization you are representing, and 2) the agenda item that you are providing
comment on, may be submitted in writing to planningdepartment@kauai.gov or mailed to the
County of Kaua'i Planning Department, 4444 Rice Street, Suite 473, Llhu'e, Hawai'i 96766. Written
testimony received by the Planning Department before 9:00 a.m. on Monday, April 11, 2022, will
be distributed to all Planning Commissioners prior to the meeting. Written testimony received after
9:00 a.m. on Monday, April 11, 2022, will be summarized by the Clerk of the Commission during the
meeting and added to the record thereafter.
Oral testimony will be taken during the public hearing portion of the meeting in-person at the public
meeting location, via Zoom link, or using the "join by phone" number listed on the agenda. After
oral testimony has been taken, members of the public may continue watching the meeting via the
live stream link found at www.kauai.gov/webcastmeetings.
1.Continued Agency Hearing
a.None for this Meeting
PLANNING COMMISSION -APRIL 12, 2022 PAGE 2
1
MCCORRISTON MILLER MUKAI MACKINNON LLP
LAUREL LOO 4806
4357 Rice Street, Suite 102
Lihu`e, Kaua`i, Hawai`i 96766
Telephone No.: (808) 632-2267
Facsimile No.: (808) 524-8293
Attorney for Applicants
IP2 LLC dba The Beach House Restaurant
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMISSION
OF THE
COUNTY OF KAUA`I
In the Matter of the Application ) SMA PERMIT NO. ________________
)
Of ) APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL
) MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT;
IP2 LLC dba THE BEACH HOUSE ) SMA (U)-2021; EXHIBITS “A” – “E”
RESTAURANT, affecting real property )
at Koloa, Island and County of Kaua`i, )
State of Hawai`i, more particularly )
Identified as Tax Map Key No. )
(4) 2-6-005:011, containing an area of )
34,900 square feet, more or less )
_________________________________ )
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT
I. APPLICANTS AND OVERVIEW
A.. Applicants: The Applicants are IP2 LLC, dba The Beach House
Restaurant, which has authorized Laurel Loo of McCorriston Miller Mukai MacKinnon,
LLC, to file this Application.
2
B. Property: The Property is located at 5022 Lawai Road, Koloa, Kauai,
Hawaii, and is more particularly identified as Tax Map Key (4) 2-6-005:011. A legal
description of the Property is described in the Deed to the Property, attached hereto as
Exhibit “A”.
C. Overview of Application: The Applicants are seeking to change their
temporary Special Management Area (“SMA”) Emergency Permit into a permanent
SMA permit under the same terms and conditions as allowed under the existing SMA
Emergency Permit. The existing SMA Emergency Permit is attached as Exhibit “B”.
The temporary tent is important to allow outdoor dining options during the pandemic. It
is generally taken down every two days and its use is sporadic, as addressed below in
Section IV.
II. LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS
A. SLUC: The State Land Use is designated Urban.
B. County zoning: County zoning is C-N, Neighborhood Commercial, for
approximately .56 acres, and Open along the coastline, or approximately .25 acres.
The Property is located in the Visitor Destination Area.
C. The General Plan Designation: The General Plan designation is Natural.
D. Special Management Area: The Property is in the Special Management
Area.
E. Shoreline Setback Area. The Property is located on the shoreline and a
Shoreline Setback Determination has been filed with the Planning Department on
September 28, 2021.
3
F. Flood: The Property is designated VE, along the coastline in the Open
zone. Zone VE is the flood insurance rate zone which corresponds to areas within the 1
percent annual chance coastal floodplain that have additional hazards associated with
storm waves. Mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements apply. The remainder
of the Property is designated AE, the flood insurance rate zone that corresponds to the
1 percent annual chance floodplains that are determined in the federal Flood Insurance
Study by detailed methods of analysis. Mandatory flood insurance purchase
requirements also apply.
III. COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE
A. Neighborhood Commercial. The majority of the parcel is designated
Neighborhood Commercial. According to Section 8-6.2 of the CZO, “Neighborhood
Commercial shall include uses and services which are frequently required and utilized
by residents of all ages and which can be compatibly located in close proximity to
residential districts.”
B. Open. The coastal edge of the Property is designated as Open zoning.
Pursuant to Section 8-9.1 of the CZO:
The Open District is established and regulated to create and maintain an
adequate and functional amount of predominantly open land to provide
for the recreational and aesthetic needs of the community or to provide
for the effective functioning of land, air, water, plant and animal systems
or communities.
(a) To preserve, maintain or improve the essential characteristics of land and
water areas that are:
(1) of significant value to the public as scenic or recreational resources;
(2) important to the overall structure and organization of urban areas
and which provide accessible and usable open areas for
recreational and aesthetic purposes;
4
(3) necessary to insulate or buffer the public and places of residence
from undesirable environmental factors caused by, or related to,
particular uses such as noise, dust, and visually offensive
elements.
(b) To preserve, maintain or improve the essential functions of physical and
ecological systems, forms or forces which significantly affect the general health, safety
and welfare.
(c) To define and regulate use and development within areas which may be
potentially hazardous.
(d) To include areas indicated on the County General Plan as open or as parks.
Under the Neighborhood Commercial zoning, clearly a restaurant is a service
which is frequently required and used by residents of all ages and which can be
compatibly located in close proximity to residential districts. The Beach House
Restaurant is located next to and across the street from hundreds of apartment units,
many of which are owned or rented by frequent guests of the restaurant.
As to the Open District Portion of the Property, along the coastline, a temporary
tent certainly is important to the “organization of urban areas and which provide
accessible and usable open areas for recreational and aesthetic purposes. The open-
sided tent will not substantially affect the open area along the coastline.
IV. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT AND SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA
RULES AND REGULATIONS
The Special Management Area Rules and Regulations of the County of Kaua`i
state:
No development shall be approved unless the Director or the Planning Commission
has found that:
1) The development will not have any substantial,
adverse environmental or ecological effect except as such adverse
effect is minimized to the extent practicable and clearly outweighed
5
by public health, safety, and welfare, 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 the
elimination of planning options;
2) The development is consistent with the
objectives and policies, as enumerated in HRS Chapter 205A and as
referred to in Section 3.0 above, and the Special Management Area
guidelines set forth in these Rules and Regulations; and
3) The development is consistent with the county
general plan and zoning ordinances. Such a finding of consistency
does not preclude concurrent processing where a general plan or
zoning amendment may also be required.
Chapter 205A of the Hawai`i Revised Statutes lists as its objectives: recreational
resources, historic resources, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems,
economic uses, coastal hazards, managing development, public participation, beach
protection, marine resources, recreational resources, historic resources, scenic and open
space resources, coastal ecosystems, economic uses, coastal hazards, managing
development, public participation, beach protection and marine resources.
This application is for a temporary tent, which measures 30 feet by 40 feet, with
open sides, not easily visible from Lawai Road unless you are approaching the restaurant
from the south. The tent was used to add dining area to allow the restaurant to serve
patrons in a socially distant, safe manner outdoors and was frequently used for wedding
receptions and other functions particularly during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic in
2020 and 2021. It continues to be a popular venue for residents and visitors who want a
socially distant venue for celebrations. As Covid-19 variants may come and go, the
Applicant views the tent as a necessary tool in allowing it to provide a venue for its
customers with an unknown course of Covid-19. A photo of the tent that was used on the
6
Property in 2020 is attached as Exhibit “C,” and circled in red. A more current photo of the
new tent that has replaced the old tent is attached as Exhibit “D”. The new tent is see-
through from the side and top. For weddings, chairs may be placed on the lawn as
depicted on Exhibit “D.”
The tent is taken down after each use, unless another use is planned within the
next day or two. It is never left up longer than two weeks at a time; though more frequently
it is taken down every two days to eliminate weathering to the tent.
While the tent is visible from all sides, the fact that it has no sides and a transparent
top means there is little or no obstruction of view from any direction, particularly from public
spaces toward the ocean as the restaurant blocks most of the view of the tent when
viewed from Lawai Road.
Because of the foregoing, the development will not have any substantial or adverse
environmental or ecological impact; in fact, the majority of the parcel is not affected by the
tent. As such, the development is consistent with the objectives and policies of HRS
Chapter 205A and the SMA guidelines adopted by the County.
V. PRIOR PERMITS
A. The Beach House Restaurant existed at this Property since approximately
1961, although there are no records that appear to exist today relating to a 1961-era
permit. In 1983, however, after the restaurant was heavily damaged by Hurricane Iwa in
1982, the then-owner of the restaurant and property, C. Paul Sandifur Sr., applied for a
zoning permit to reconstruct the Beach House Restaurant and shops.
7
The Planning Department staff report for that 1982 zoning permit application stated
“[t]he Beach House Restaurant and Shops operated for 22 years on this site prior to
destruction due to Hurricane Iwa.”
The 1983 staff report also noted there were no known sites of historic significance
within the parcel and no known ecological resources of significance.
On June 29, 1983, the Kauai County Planning Commission approved SMA and
Use permits for the reconstruction of the Beach House Restaurants and shops on the
property, which is the permanent structure that exists today. Copies of the 1982 approval
letter and staff report are attached as Exhibit “E.”
VI. NATIVE HAWAIIAN AND CULTURAL USES
The Applicant is unaware of any current traditional and customary rights
practiced in the immediate vicinity. Applicant has never received any requests for access
to the property from individuals claiming a traditional use. There are no visible trails or
evidence of other uses on the property as the property has been in commercial
development since at least 1961.
Applicant has interviewed kupuna in the area, including Julie Souza, who was born
and raised about 1/3 of a mile away and still lives in her ancestral home. She states she is
unaware of any cultural or traditional practices on the Property. Ms. Souza remembers Mr.
Sandifur as a developer who was “one of the good guys” who would have addressed
cultural concerns, if there were any raised at the time. Souza notes she is only aware of
cultural resources in the area as being located at Prince Kuhio Park, which is about 350
feet from the Property and across Lawai Road. The park is a tribute to Prince Jonah
8
Kuhio Kalaniaole, who was born in Koloa. The park is a cultural gathering place, and
contains a heiau (shrine) and other artifacts.
Applicant has also written to the State of Hawai`i Historic Preservation Division and
the Burial Council, advising them of this application, and has received no comments or
concerns.
VII. OTHER LAND FEATURES
A. Threatened and Endangered Species. According to the University of Hawaii
Rare Species database, there are no known or reported threatened and endangered
species within or adjacent to the Property.
B. Critical Habitat. According to date from the Department of Land and Natural
Resources and the Division of Forestry and Wildlife, there are no known or reported critical
habitats within or adjacent to the Property.
C. Soils. The entire parcel consists of Wet soil
(Waikomo rocky silty clay).
D. Constraints District: The Property is designated SH (Shore) and ST
(Tsunami).
E. Public Beach Access: Although the area adjacent to Lawai Road of the
Property is customarily trafficked by pedestrians as it is located next to a small sandy
beach, there are also two existing public beach access easements near the property at the
County beach and along the rocky coastline adjacent to the Property.
VIII. IMPACT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT
As stated in Sections IV. And V. above, there are no known historic or ecologic
impacts this proposed use would bring.
9
Outdoor use may affect beachgoers in terms of visibility and noise; however, the
temporary tent has been in use under the emergency permits since last year, and there
have been no formal complaints from neighbors since then. All music stops at 10 p.m.
Any trash or other impacts caused by usage of the tent will be combined with the
permanent restaurant. Patrons of the outdoor tent are allowed use of parking valet and
restrooms provided by the main restaurant.
Traffic is not expected to increase dramatically as the use is occasional and not
nightly.
IX. CONCLUSION
Applicant respectfully requests the granting of a SMA Use permit to allow the
permanent use of a temporary tent and fixtures for outdoor dining, as depicted in the
attached exhibits.
DATED: Lihu`e, Kaua`i, Hawai`i, January 14, 2022.
Respectfully submitted,
Laurel Loo
Attorney for Applicant IP2 LLC, dba
The Beach House Restaurant
EXHIBIT D
Ka'aina S.Hull
Dlrector of Plaiining
COUNTY OF KAUA'I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Jodi A.Higuchi Sayegusa
Deputy Director of Planning
I.SUMMARY
Action Required by
Planning Commission:
Consideration for an amendment of the pennits to allow operation
of outdoor dining and conduct special event activities on the
parcel.
Permit Application Nos.Class IV Zoning Pennit Z-IV-1983-27 (Amendment)
Use Permit U-1983-17 (Amendment)
Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)-1983-4
(Amendment)
Name of Applicant(s)IP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
II.PERMIT INFORMATION
PERMI'KREQUIRED^
Use Permit
I1 Project Development Use
Permit
Variance Permit
1I Special Permit
I1 Zoning Permit Class
rv
Dm
Special Management Area
Permit
Use
DMinor
Pursuant to Section 205A of the Hawaii Revised Statutes
(HRS)and the Special Management Area Rules and
Regulations of the County of Kaua'i,the change in intensity
of use of land,including but not limited to the division or
subdivision of land;which constitutes "Development".
Therefore,a SMA Use Permit is required as defined in
Section 7.3 ofthe SMA Rules.
AMENDMENTS
[_]Zoning Amendment
V:\1983 Master Files\Regulatory\Zoimig PemiitsVClass IV\Z-rV-1983-27\Amendmeiit\CorTesspoiidence\Report-l Amendment 3.15.22_Z-rV-
1983-27_U-1983-17_SMA(U)-83-4_BcachHouse.docx
Date ofReceipt of Completed
AppUcation:February 7 ,2022
Date of Director's Report:March 15,2022
Date of Public Hearing:April 12,2022
Deadline Date for PC to Take Action
(60 Day):June7,2022
III.PROJECTDATA
Z-IV-1983-27,U-1983-17,SMA(U)-1983-4;Director's Rcpon
IP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
March 15,2022
2|Page
I1 General Plan Amenilment
State Land Use District
Amendment
PROJECTINTORMATION
Parcel Location:The project is located on the makai portion ofLawa'i Road adjaceut to
the Lawa'i Beach Resort.
Tax Map Key(s):(4)2-6-005:011 Area:0.8012 acres
ZONING &DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Zoning:Commercial Neighborhood (C-N)/Open (0)
State Land Use District:Urban (U)
General PIan Designation:Natural
Height Limit:Commercial Neighborhood (C-N):
No building within a Neighborhood Commercial
District shall exceed thirty-five (35)feet in height
measured from the ground level of the primary
buildmg entrance nor shall the building contain
more than two (2)stories.
Open (0):
No single family detached,or single family
attached dwelling,or accessory structure shall be
more than two (2)stories above and one (1)story
below from the fmished grade at the main entry,
over twenty (20)feet measured from the finished
grade at the main entry to the highest exterior wall
plate line,and over thirty (30)feet to the highest
point of the roof measured at each point along the
building from the finished grade at the main entry.
The finished grade at the main entry shall not be
elevated more than a maximum of four (4)feet
from the existmg grade.
Z-FV-1983-27,U-1983-17,SMA(U)-1983-4;Dircctor's Report
IP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
March 15,2022
3|Page
No multiple family buildings,hotel,or motel,shall
be more than ten (10)feet higher than any
residential building located within thirty (30)feet of
the building,or shall not exceed four (4)stories nor
exceed forty (40)feet from finished grade at each
point along the building to the highest wall plate
line.Gables and roof height shall not exceed one-
half (1/2)the wall height or fifteen (15)feet,
whichever is less.
Max.Land Coverage:Commercial Neighborhood (C-N):80%max.
Open (0):10%maximum
Front Setback:Commercial Neighborhood (C-N):
The miaimum distance of any building &om the
right-of-way line of a public or private street or the
pavement line of a driveway or parking lot used by
the public shall be five (5)feet unless the building
is entered from that side by motor vehicles in which
case the minimum distance shall be fifteen (15)
feet.
Open (0):lO'-O"mmimum
Rear Setback:Commercial Neighborhood (C-N):
The minimum distance of any building to a rear
property line when adjacent use district is
commercial shall be zero.When the adjacent rear
use district is other than commercial,the mmimum
distance to the rear property line shall be ten (10)
feet.
Open(0):
Five feet (5')or '/2 the wall plate height whichever
is greater.
Side Setback:Commercial Neighborhood (C-N):
The minimum distance of any building to a side
property line when the adjacent use district is
commercial shall be zero.When the adjacent use
district is other than commercial,the minimum
distance to the property line shall be the same as
that required for residential use.
Open(0):
Five feet (5')or '/2 the wall plate height whichever
is greater.
Community Plan Area:N/A
IV.LEGAL REQmREMENTS
Section 8.0,9.0,and 10.0 of
the Special Management
Area Rules and Regulations:
This report is being transmitted to the Applicant and
Planning Commission in order to satisfy the
requirements ofSections 8.0,9.0 and 10.0 ofthe Special
Management Area Rules and Regulations.The
application was received on February 7,2022 and the
Applicant,through its authorized agent,was notified
accordmgly of the Planning Department's mtent to
commence pennit processmg.
PubUcHearingDate:APRIL 12,2022
V.PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND USE
The subject property has dual county zoning designations of Commercial-Neighborhood
(C-N)and Open (0).The Kaua'i Beach House Restaurant and Shops have been in
operation for the past twenty (22)years prior to suffering the destructive forces of
Hurricane Iwa in 1982.On June 29,1983,the Kaua'i Plarming Commission approved the
reconstraction ofthe Beach House Restaurant and shops.The Beach House Restaurant and
Shops are constmcted entirely within the Commercial-Neighborhood (C-N)zouing area of
the property.The proposed development involvmg the outdoor dining area and place for
special events occurs on the makai lawn,which is situated m the County Open (0)zone.
During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020,safety protocols such as safe
social distancing had become a challenge for the applicant m order to allow in-door dining
and hold special events.As a result,tthe applicant applied for a Special Management Area
Use Emergeucy Pemiit (SMA (E)-2022-l to expand the dining area of the restaurant onto
the makai lawn area with a temporary tent and temporary fumiture fixtures (see exhibit "C"
and "D").The thirty (30)feet by forty (40)feet tent and fumiture fixtures will be taken
down as needed and not be left up for more than a period of fourteen (14)consecutive days
in duration durmg any three (3)month period.The activities will cease no later than 10:00
p.m.nightly.
VI.APPLICANT'S REASONS/JUSTIFICATION
The proposed amendment will allow the applicant to continue the operation of the outdoor
dining and conduct special event activities in perpetuity.(Refer to Application)
VII.ADDITIONAL FINDINGS
Z-rv-1983-27,U-1983-17,SMA(U)-I983-4;Director's Report
IP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
Maich 15,2022
4|Page
Community Plan Land Use
Designation:
N/A
Deviations or Variances Requested:N/A
1.The project site is located on the makai area ofLawa'i Beach road across Lawa'i Beach
Resort,approximately 0.79 miles east ofthe Kukui'ula Boat Harbor.
2.The State Land Use District (SLUD)designation is "Urban"which allows for urban
growth in a specified area.
3.The proposed development is a shoreline property and is within the 500 foot shoreline
setback threshold,pursuant to the County's shoreline setback requirements contained in
Chapter 8,Article 27 ofthe Kaua'i County Code (1987),as amended.A Shoreline
Setback Determination Application (SSD-2022-12)was submitted and presented to the
Planning Commission on October 16,2021.
4.The commercial zoned portion of the subject property is located within the Visitor
Designation Area (VDA),whereas the open zoned area is not.As such,ovemight
accommodations withm the makai lawn area are not permissible.
5.The General Plan designation (GP)is "Natural".According to the GP,areas designated
as Natural have limited development due to topography,hazards vuluerability,sensitive
resources,and other constraints.They mclude State Land Use Conservation District
lands and some County Open Zoning Districts.
6.The subject parcel area where the existing Kaua'i Beach House Restaurant and Shops is
located is withm the Zone 'AE'of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)FIood Insurance Rate Map and is susceptible to 1%annual chance offlooding
hazards.The makai lawn area is in the Zone "VE"coastal hazard area and the entire
parcel is within the tsunami evacuation zone.
7.The topography is relatively flat and no grading of the project area will be done.
8.Soecial Management Area (SMA)
In addressing the issues ofthe Special Management Area and its objectives and
policies,the following aspects will be considered and evaluated:
a.Recreational Resources
b.Cultural/Historic Resources
c.Scenic resources
d.Coastal Hazard
e.Coastal Ecosystem
Furthennore,the proposal does not:
Z-FV-1983-27,U-1983-17,SMA(U)-1983-4;Director'8 Report
IF2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
Marcll 15,2022
5|Page
•Involve dredging,filling or otherwise altermg any bay,salt marsh,river
mouth,slough,or lagoon;
•Reduce the size of auy beach or ofher area usable for public recreation;
•Reduce 01 impose restrictions upon public access to tidal and submerged
lands,beaches,rivers,and streams within the SMA;and
•Adversely affect water quality,existiug areas of open water free of visible
structures,existing and potential fisheries and fishing grounds,wildlife
habitats,estuarine sanctuaries,potential or existing agriculture uses of land.
9.CZO Development Standards
The proposed development is subject to standards prescribed in Section 8-4.3 and
Section 8-9.2.
a.Setback Requirements:Front property line setbacks are ten feet (10'-0")and rear
property line setback of five feet (5'-0")or half the distance of the plate height.
Given the temporaiy use of the tent and placement of fumiture fixtures,setback
requirements are not applicable.
b.Lot Coverage:Lot coverage within county Open (0)zoning designation of the
makai lawn area is not to exceed 10%of the parcel or lot area.Given the temporary
use of the tent and temporary placement of fumiture fixtures,lot coverage
requirements are not applicable.
c.Building Height:Pursuant to Sec.8-4.5(b)of the Kaua'i County Code (KCC)1987
as amended,the allowable height for any dwellings and accessory stmctures shall
not be over thirty (30)feet to the highest point of the roof measured at each point of
along the building from finished grade at main entry.Given the temporary use of
the tent and temporary placement of fumiture fixtures,building height requirements
are not applicable.
VIII.AGENCY COMMENTS
See attached Exhibit "A"
IX.PRELIMINARYEVALUATION
In evaluating the Applicant's request to allow the expansion of the dining area of the
restaurant onto the makai lawn using a temporary tent and temporary fixture placement,the
following are being considered.
6|Page
Z-IV-1983-27,U-I983-17,SMA(U)-I983-4;Dicector's Report
IP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
March 15,2022
1.General Plan
The proposed development satisfies the following policies of the General Plan,as taken
from Section 1.3 and 1.4:
A.1.3,entitled "VISIONS AND GOALS"
1)Goal #1 "Sustainable Island"-The proposed expansion of the dming area for
the Kaua'i Beach House Restaurant will utilize temporaiy stmctures such as the
30'X 40'tent and the temporary placement of fixtures.These will not be
intended to be left in place for an extensive period.There will be no permanent
stmctures built along the shoreline.
2)Goal #2 "Unique and Beautiful Place"-The temporary tent and fixtures
would be taken down as needed and not be left in place permanently or for an
extended period.The proposed use should have mmimal impacts to the rural
character of the area.
3)Goal #3 "A Healthy and Resilient People"-The proposed expansion of the
diiiing areahelps promote safe social distancing during the COVID-19
Pandemic for tourists and local residents.
4)Goal #4 "An Equitable Place,with Opportunity for All"-The applicant
intends to use the expansion area on the makai lawn for weddings,family
parties,and other special events.This operation can potentially provide jobs for
these types of services.
B.Section 1.4,entitled "POLICIES TO GUIDE GROWTH"
1)Policy #8 "Protect Kaua'i's Scenic Beauty"-Kaua'i is home to distinctive
natural views and landmarks.No permanent structures are proposed along the
shoreline.The 30 foot by 40 foot tent will be open at all sides and have a
transparent top.
2)Policy#9 "Uphold Kaua'i as a Unique Visitor Destination"-The Kaua'i
Beach House Restaurant is located withm a resort aiea.The temporary use of
the tent and fixture placement will have minimal impacts on existing
infrastmcture and existing communities.This use will not add any transienf
vacation rentals to the area.
2.Native Hawaiian Traditional and_Cultural Rights
The subject property has been fully developed and in operation since 1961.The
applicant has interviewed kupuna in the area and is unaware of any current traditional
and customary practices on the subject property.Prince Kiihio Park which is located
across the street from Lawa'i Beach Road is a cultural gathering place and contains a
heiau and other artifacts.
Z-IV-1983-27,U-1983-17,SMA(U)-1983-4;Dircctor's Rcport
EP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
March 15,2022
7|Page
After the Applicant consulted with a kupuna who are familiar with the area and
evaluating historical information that was available to the department,the department
finds that the proposed Project involving a developed parcel should have no impact on
any known Hawaiian traditional or customary practices for the following reasons:
o There are no known traditional or customary practices of native Hawaiians that
are presently occurring within the Project Site.
o There are no special gathering practices taking place within any portion of the
Project Site.
o The Project will not detrimentally affect access to any streams;access to the
shoreline or other adjacent shoreline areas;or gathering along any streams,the
shoreline or in the ocean.
o There are no kaown religious practices takmg place within the Project Site.
o There are no known pre-contact cultural or historic sites or resources located
within the Project Site.
o There are no known burials within the Petition Area.
3.SMA Rules and Reeulations
The COK SMA Rules and Regulations contain objectives,policies and guidelines
designed to protect coastal resources.Within the SMA,special consideration is given
to recreational opportunities,cultural aad historic resources,scenic qualities and open
space,coastal ecosystems,and coastal hazards.In evaluating the proposed
development relative to the goals and objectives ofthe SMA Rules and Regulations,the
following aspects are taken into consideration:
a.Public Access and Coastal Recreation -The project area has two public beach
accesses along its westem and eastem boundaries that traverses along the rocky
coastline of adjacent to the property.The Applicant would be advised that the
temporary tent placement and conduct of special activities should not impede use
of the non-exclusive access easement.
b.CulturaV Historical Resources -The project site has been previously
developed and in operation smce 1961.During the (1983)reconstmction of
the restaurant and shops,it was noted that no known sites of historic
significance are within the subject site.
c.Scenic and Orien Space Resources -The project is a shoreline parcel.The area of
proposed development is an expansion of the existing restaurant and utilizes a
temporary tent with temporary fixture placements.The tent will be open and all
Z-IV-1983-27.U-1983-17,SMA(U)-I983-4;Dh-ector's Report
IF2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
March 15,2022
8|Page
sides and have a transparent top.It is visible from the shoreline and adjacent beach.
Minimal visual impacts are expected from Lawa'i Road when approaching the
restaurant from the south.
d.Coastal Hazards -It is noted that the parcel is a shoreline property.A portion of the
subject parcel where fhe development is being proposed is located within the Zone
'VE'of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)Flood Insurance Rate
Map.The tent and fixtures will not be left on the makai lawn during any storm event
or natural disaster.
e.Coastal Ecosvstems -The applicant has contacted the Department of Land and
Natural Resources (DLNR),Division of Porestry and Wildlife (DOFAW),there are
no known or reported critical habitats within or adjacent to the property.
X.PRELIMEMARY CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing,it is concluded that through proper mitigative measures,the proposed
development can be considered,and it complies with the policies and guidelines of the Special
Management Area Rules and Regulations in that:
1.The development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological
effect.
2.The development is consistent with the objectives/goals/policies of fhe County
General Plan,the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance,and other applicable ordinances.
Furthennore,fhe proposal DOES NOT:
a.involve dredging,filling,or otherwise altering any bay,estuary,salt marsh,river
mouth,slough,or lagoon;
b.reduce the size of any beach or other area usable for public recreation;
c.reduce or mipose restrictions upon public access to tidal and submerged lands,
beaches,rivers,or streams within the special management area;and
d.adversely affect water quality,existing areas of open water free of visible structures,
existing and potential fisheries and fishing grounds,wildlife habitats,estuarine
sanctuaries,or existing agricultural uses of land.
Furthermore,through proper mitigation measures the proposed development would not have
any detrimental impact to the enviromnent or the surrounding area and is in compliance with
the criteria outlined for the granting of a Special Management Area Use Permit.
The Applicant should institute the "Best Management Practices"to ensure that the operation of
this facility does not generate impacts that may affect the health,safety,and welfare of those in
the surrounding area of the proposal.
9|Page
Z-W-1983-27,U-1983-17,SMA(U)-1983-4;Director's Report
IP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
March 15,2022
The Applicant shall implement to the extent possible sustainable building techniques and
operational methods for the project.
XI.PBELMINARY RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing evaluation and conclusion it is hereby recommend that the amendment to
Class IV Zomng Pemiit Z-IV-1983-27,Use Permit U-1983-17,and Special Management Area Use
Permit SMA(U)-1983-4 to be APPROVED.If approved,the following conditions shall be added to
the existing conditions of approvals for the subject pennits:
13.The proposed improvements under the 2022 ameudments to the subject permits
shall be constructed as represented.Any changes to said development shall be
reviewed by the Plamiing Director to detemiine whether Planning Commission
review and approval is warranted.
14.The tent and fumiture fixtures will be taken down as needed and not be left up for
more than a period of fourteen (14)consecutive days in duration during any three
(3)monfh period.The activities will cease no later fhan 10:00 p.m.nightly.
15.The Applicant is advised fhat the temporary tent placement and conduct of special
activities shall not impede use of the non-exclusive access easement to the
shoreline area.
16.The Applicant is advised that should any archaeological or historical resources be
discovered during ground disturbing/constmction work,all work in the area of the
archaeological/historical findings shall immediately cease and the Applicant shall contact
the State Department of Land and Natural Resources,Historic Preservation Division at
(808)692-8015 and the Plaiming Department at (808)241-4050 to detemrine mitigation
measures.
17.In order to minimize adverse impacts on the Federally Listed Threatened Species,
Newell's Shearwater and other seabirds,ifextemal lightmg is to be used in connection
with the proposed project,all extemal lighting shall be only of the following types:
downward-facing,shielded lights.Spotlights aimed upward or spotlighting of stmctures
shall be prohibited.
18.The Applicant shall develop and utilize Best Management Practices (B.M.P's)during
all phases of development in order to minimize erosion,dust,and sedimentation
impacts of the project to abutting properties.
19.The Applicant shall resolve and comply with the applicable standards and requu'ements
set forth by the State Health Department,State Historic Preservation Division-DLNR,
and the County Departments of Public Works,Fire,Transportation,and Water.
Z-IV-1983-27,U-1983-17,SMA(U)-1983-4;Dircctor's Report
IP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
Maich 15,2022
io|P ag e
20.To the extent possible wifhin the confines of union requu'ements and applicable legal
prohibitions against discrimination in employment,the Applicant shall seek to hire
Kauai contractors if fhey are qualified and reasonably competitive with other contractors
and shall seek to employ residents of Kauai in temporary construction and permanent
resort-relatedjobs.It is recognized fhat the Applicant may have to employ non-Kauai
residents for particular skilledjobs where no qualified Kauai residents possesses such
skills.For the purposes of this condition,the Commission shall relieve the Applicaut of
this requirement if fhe Applicant is subjected to anti-competitive restraints on trade or other
monopolistic practices.
21.The Planning Commission reserves fhe right to revise,add,or delete conditions of
approval in order to address or mitigate unforeseen unpacts the project may,create,or to
revoke the pennits through the proper procedures should conditions of approval not be
complied with or be violated.
22.Unless otherwise stated in fhe pemiit,once pemiit is issued,the Applicant must make
substantial progress,as determined by the Director,regarding the development or
activity within two (2)years,or the permit shall be deemed to have lapsed and be no
longer in effect.
The Planning Commission is furfher advised that this report does not represent the Plamung
Department's final recommendation in view of the forthcoming public hearing process
scheduled for APRIL 12,2022,whereby the entire record should be considered prior to
decision-making.The entire record should include but not be limited to:
a.Pending govenunent agency comments;
b.Testimony from the general public and interested ofhers;and
c.The Applicant's response to staff's report and recommendation as provided
herein.i^
~\
By 'J-^-
ROMIO IDICA
Planner
Approved &Recommended to Commission:
KA'AINA S.AULL
Director of Plarmmg
Date:3//fc IA'1-1-
Z-FV-1983-27,U-1983-17,SMA(U)-1983-4;Director's Repon
IP2 LLC DBA THE BEACH HOUSE RESTAURANT
March 15,2022
ii|P ag e
EXHIBIT"A"
(Agency Comments)
For reference
COUNTYOFKAUA'I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
4444 RICE STREET,SUITE A473 LlHU'E,HAWAI'I 96766
(808)241-4050
FROM:Kaaina S.Hull,Director (Romio)Febroary 7,2022
SUBJECT:
TO:
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-1983-27,Use Permit U-1983-17,Special
Management Are Use Pemiit SMA(U)-1983-4,Accessory Stmcture
Tax Map Key:(4)2-6-005:011,Ip2,Llc Dba The Beach House Restaurant,
Applicant
D Department of Transportation -STP DPW-Engineering
D DOT-Highway,Kauai(info only)a DPW-Wastewater
D DOT-Airports,Kauai (info only)D DPW-BuildingaDOT-Harbors,Kauai (infoonly)D DPW-SolidWaste
State Department of Health D Department ofParks &Recreation
D State Department of Agriculture
D State Office of Planning County Housing-Agency
D State Dept.ofBus.&Econ.Dev.Tourism D County Economic Development
D State Land Use Commission D KHPRC
State Historic Preservation Division Water Department
D DLNR-Land Management Kaua'i Civil Defense
DLNR-Foresty &Wildlife U.S.Postal DepartmentnDLNR-Aquatic Resources UH_Sea_Grant
DLNR-OCCL County Transportation AgencyuOther:
FOR YOUR COMMENTS (pertaining to your department):
No comments or concerns from Fire
This matter is scheduled for a public hearing before the County of Kauai Planning Commission on
4/12/2022 at the Lihue Civic Center,Moikeha Building,Meeting Room 2A-2B,4444 Rice Street,
Lihue,Kauai,at 9:00 am or soon thereafter.If we do not receive your agency comments within one (1)
month from the date of this request,we will assume that there are no objections to this pemiit request.
Mahalo!
St. Catherine Preschool
Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit
Kapa‘a, Kaua‘i, Hawai‘i
TMK: (4) 4-6-015:058
Applicant:
Kamehameha Schools
Authorized Agent:
Wilson Okamoto Corporation
October 2021
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Standard Zoning Permit Application
Attachment
Exhibit A – Landownership Documentation
Exhibit B – Letter of Authorization
Exhibit C – Supporting Figures
Exhibit D – Preliminary Design Drawings
Exhibit E – Reconnaissance Level Survey Form
Exhibit F – Letter dated October 20, 2021 from Mr. Sean Chun
Exhibit G – Traffic Impact Report
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
1
ATTACHMENT
I. Summary
Kamehameha Schools (“KS” or “Applicant”) proposes to lease the existing structure on the southern
portion of TMK (4) 4-6-015:058 (“Subject Property”) for use as a preschool. The Subject Property is
an approximately 1.09-acre lot located in Kapa‘a, Kaua‘i, Hawai‘i that is currently owned by the
Roman Catholic Church (“Landowner”). Various interior and exterior improvements, as well as
onsite improvements are proposed to accommodate the new use (“Project”). The Applicant is
requesting that the Planning Commission issue a Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit for the
proposed Project pursuant to CZO requirements.
KS has 29 preschools statewide that enroll over 1,600 keiki (children). Each classroom typically
consists of about 20 keiki ages three and four years old, a qualified teacher, and a teaching
assistant. Upon completion of the proposed Project, keiki currently attending KS’ preschool in
Anahola will be relocated and the Anahola location will be closed. The purpose of the Project is to
provide educational facilities in alignment with KS’ mission to fulfill Bernice Pauahi Bishop’s desire to
create educational opportunities in perpetuity to improve the capability and well-being of people of
Hawaiian ancestry.
II. Applicant & Property Information
Recorded Fee
Owner: Roman Catholic Church
P.O. Box 1550
Honolulu, HI 96806-1550
Contact: Rev. Nicholas Apetorgbor
Phone: (808) 266-0622
Landownership documentation is included in Exhibit A.
Applicant: Kamehameha Schools
567 South Street, Suite 617
Honolulu, HI 96813
Contact: Laura Takahashi, Senior Capital Program Manager
Phone: (808) 534-8108
Agent: Wilson Okamoto Corporation
1907 South Beretania Street, Suite 400
Honolulu, HI 96826
Contact: Rebecca Candilasa, Senior Planner
Phone: (808) 946-2277
A Letter of Authorization from the Landowner is included in Exhibit B.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
2
Tax Map Key: (4) 4-6-015:058
Lot Area: Approximately 1.09 acres
Project Site: Approximately 0.40 acres
State Land
Use District: Urban
General Plan
Designation: Residential Community
County Zoning: Residential (R-4) / Special Treatment-Public Facilities (ST-P)
III. Graphic & Schematic Requirements
Supporting figures are attached hereto as Exhibit C.
Preliminary design drawings of the proposed Project are attached hereto as Exhibit D.
IV. Project Description
A. Description of the proposed project and proposed uses, operations and management of the
proposed use which includes, but is not limited to, proposed employee housing plan, hours
of operation;
1. Project Location: The Subject Property is located in Kapa‘a on the east side of Kaua‘i. It is
bound by Kawaihau Road to the north, Hauaala Road to the east, St. Catherine School to the
south, and a parking lot and park/playground area to the west. Improvements are proposed to
occur on approximately 0.40 acres of land situated on the southern half of the Subject Property
(“Project Site”). See Figures 1 and 2 of Exhibit C.
2. Existing and Surrounding Uses: The Subject Property is entirely developed with a church and
its accessory facilities. Existing structures onsite include St. Catherine Parish situated on the
northern half of the property and a Parish Center situated on the southern half of the property.
Parking for the facilities is located on an adjacent parcel to the west identified as TMK: (4) 4-1-
015:067.
St. Catherine Parish is open to the public and provides facilities for worship and other religious
activities. The Parish Center is used for multiple purposes including offices, meeting rooms, a
gift shop, and storage, all of which are accessory to the primary church-related activities
occurring at St. Catherine Parish. Since the usage of the Parish Center is based on need, it is
not consistently occupied.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
3
The proposed Project involves improvements to the existing Parish Center, which consists of
one (1) single-story, U-shaped building with the open side of the U-shape oriented to the south.
The existing structure encompasses approximately 4,300 square feet (sf) of the 0.40-acre
Project Site. Landscaping and a grass/gravel parking area with a driveway providing ingress
and egress from Hauaala Road make up the remainder of the Project Site.
Other surrounding land uses in the vicinity include St. Catherine School, single-family
residences, neighborhood businesses, Kapa‘a Elementary School, and Kapa‘a High School.
See Figure 1 of Exhibit C.
3. Proposed Project and Proposed Uses: The Applicant proposes to lease the existing structure at
the Project Site for use as a preschool. Project improvements consist of various interior and
exterior improvements to the existing structure, as well as on-site improvements needed to
accommodate the proposed use.
The proposed interior improvements include reconfiguring the interior layout to accommodate
two (2) classrooms, toilets, offices, a meeting space, and a reception area. The existing kitchen
space will remain, but the existing interior finishes, casework, and fixtures are proposed to be
replaced. All existing electrical systems will be replaced with code compliant systems including
updated electrical infrastructure, LED lighting, and a new fire alarm system. New plumbing
systems will also be provided throughout the building.
Proposed improvements to the exterior of the building include repairing the existing roof and
installing new gutters, windows, and doors to replace the existing components. Repair of the
roof will consist of installing new asphalt shingles similar in color and character to the existing
roof. The existing glass jalousie windows will be replaced with vinyl jalousie windows and new
metal and sliding glass doors will be installed. The existing plaster exterior finish is proposed to
remain and will be repainted in a color scheme consistent with the existing condition and
character of St. Catherine Parish. A new covered walkway will be constructed along the south
wall of the existing structure to allow children and staff to move between spaces while also
providing protection from the elements and shading. The walkway structure will be constructed
of the same materials as the building including wood framing and asphalt shingle roofing. An
exterior play yard is also proposed in this area and will consist of a new concrete slab enclosed
with a 6-foot-high chain-link fence along the perimeter.
Other onsite improvements include paving the existing grass/gravel lot and driveway with
asphalt concrete to meet accessibility and fire access requirements. A new ADA-compliant
walkway will also be constructed along the north facing side of the building to provide access
from the parking area. In addition, the existing cesspool located onsite will be replaced with a
new septic system and leach field.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
4
Preliminary design drawings of the proposed Project are attached hereto as Exhibit D.
Construction of the proposed Project is expected to be initiated upon approval of the necessary
permits and approvals with anticipated completion by 2022.
4. Operations and Management: The preschool is expected to accommodate a maximum
enrollment of 40 students and will be staffed with six (6) full-time employees with an additional
one (1) to two (2) staff present onsite to provide support as needed. Hours of operation for the
preschool will be Monday through Friday from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm with staff expected to be
onsite between 6:45 am and 5:30 pm. It is anticipated that the school will be closed on
weekends and holidays.
Primary access to the project site will be provided via the existing driveway for St. Catherine
Parish off Kawaihau Road with secondary access provided via the existing driveway off
Hauaala Road. The existing parking lot adjacent to St. Catherine Parish accessed via the
driveway off Kawaihau Road will serve as parking for the preschool’s pick-up and drop-off
operations. This parking lot has 33 paved parking stalls, 3 ADA-accessible stalls, 34 unpaved
parking stalls (total of 70 stalls) and a turnaround area. Use of these stalls will be formalized in
the terms of the lease agreement. It is anticipated that the Applicant will also have use of the
existing grass/gravel parking area at the Project Site for use by staff and visitors. Access to this
lot is provided via the driveway off Hauaala Road.
B. Summary of Permits (i.e. Use Permit, Variance Permit, Special Permit, Class IV Zoning etc.)
or Land Use Amendments requested, and the application section of the Kauaʻi County Code
or regulation citing the specific standards and criteria for granting of the permit or
amendment being requested;
1. County Zoning Designation: The County of Kaua‘i Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (CZO)
lists within each zoning district of the County, those uses, development, and activities, that
are “generally permitted” and those which may be allowed only after obtaining a Use Permit.
The Subject Property is located within both the County’s Residential (R-4) and Special
Treatment-Public Facilities (ST-P) District. Special Treatment Districts may overlap any Use
District, thereby creating accumulated regulations which more nearly relate to the conditions
of the specific location where the development or use may occur. Allowable uses within the
R-4 District consist of residential dwelling units constructed to a density of up to four (4)
dwelling units per acre. Allowable uses within the ST-P District include:
All public and quasi-public facilities, other than commercial, including schools,
churches, cemeteries, hospitals, libraries, police and fire stations, government
buildings, auditoriums, stadiums, gymnasiums, which are used by the general
public or which tend to serve as gathering places for the general public; and
those areas which because of their unique locations are specially suited for
such public and quasi-public uses.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
5
2. Existing Use and Conformance with the CZO: The Parish Center was first built in 1952 and
was historically used as a home for nuns (“nunnery”) of St. Catherine Parish. With the
departure of the nuns in 2005, the nunnery was re-purposed into a Parish Center, which is
an accessory use to the church much like the nunnery. Since the building was constructed
in 1952 prior to the adoption of the County’s CZO in 1972, the building and its use are
considered nonconforming. As stated in CZO Section 8-13.2(a):
A non-conforming use of land, buildings, or other structures may continue to the
extent that the use existed on September 1, 1972 or any amendment hereto, as
provided in this Section 8-13.2 […]
Moreover, CZO Section 8-13.1(b) states nonconforming structures may be “repaired,
maintained, or altered in any manner which does not increase nonconformity.” Based on the
foregoing reasons, and because the existing use presents no substantial danger to public
health or safety, the existing use and structures are in compliance with prevailing land use
regulations.
3. Proposed Use and Conformance with the CZO: Under the proposed Project, the Applicant
will convert the Parish Center into a preschool that will provide educational programs for keiki
between the ages of three and four. Pursuant to CZO Section 8-13.1(b), “[a]ny
nonconforming structure, except as otherwise regulated, may be enlarged or expanded
provided that any enlargement or addition shall conform to the regulations for the district in
which it is located.” Schools are a permitted use in the R-4/ST-P District with a Use Permit
consistent with CZO Sections 8-2.4(f)(13) and 8-11.4(a).
4. Permits Requested and Required: The Applicant is requesting that the Planning
Commission issue a Use Permit pursuant to CZO Section 8-3.2 for the proposed Project.
This permit application is intended to fulfill the requirements for project review in accordance
with CZO Section 8-3.2. Likewise, the proposed Project requires issuance of a Class IV
Zoning Permit as a condition of the Use Permit approval pursuant to CZO Section 8-8.4(4).
Therefore, this permit application submittal also fulfills requirements for project review
pursuant to CZO Section 8-3.1(f) pertaining to Class IV Zoning Permits.
5. Use Permit and Zoning Permit Considerations: The primary purpose of the Use Permit
process is to assure that a particular activity or use of land can be integrated into and be
compatible with its immediate surroundings. Section 8-3.2(e)(1) of the CZO specifies a Use
Permit may be granted only if the Planning Commission finds that the use meets the
following criteria:
a. the use must be a compatible use;
The Project Site is located in a residential neighborhood in the vicinity of several other
schools and neighborhood businesses. The proposed use of the Project Site as a
preschool will satisfy an essential community need by providing educational programs
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
6
and activities that support the growth and development of children in the region. It can
be reasonably expected that with education these children will go on to make meaningful
contributions to society later in life. The placement of schools within residential
neighborhoods and/or in a centralized location further enhances convenience for
residents and allows residents to take advantage of available educational opportunities,
as evidenced by the location of other schools in the area such as St. Catherine School
(Grades K to 5), Kapa‘a Elementary School (Grades K to 6), and Kapa‘a High School
(Grades 9 to 12). For the reasons mentioned, the proposed use is compatible with the
uses in its immediate surroundings and would not be detrimental to the health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort, and the general welfare of persons residing and working in the
neighborhood.
b. the use must not be detrimental to persons or property in the area;
Operation of the preschool will be within normal working hours. The proposed Project
improvements will be in conformance with the development standards applicable to the
R-4/ST-P District in the County’s CZO and as conditioned by the Planning Commission
with approval of the subject Use Permit. Construction and operation of the Project is not
anticipated to be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the
neighborhood or to the general welfare of the community.
c. the use must not cause substantial environmental consequences; and
Construction of the proposed project will not result in any substantial harmful
environmental consequences. Project improvements are the minimum necessary to
convert the use of the existing structure to a preschool and to ensure the structure is
compliant with all prevailing building code requirements and safety regulations.
Mitigative measures—such as standard best management practices (BMPs) for
construction and adherence to applicable federal, State, and County rules and
regulations—will be incorporated into the design to ensure there will be no substantial
harmful environmental consequences on the land or on other lands or waters. Following
construction, the proposed use is not anticipated to result in any significant
environmental consequences beyond what would have previously existed under the
former use of the Project Site as a nunnery. A more detailed discussion on potential
environmental impacts of the Project by topic is provided below.
Climate and Climate Change: The climate in the project area is characterized as semi-
tropical with two seasons: wet and dry. During May through September, it is generally
warm and relatively dry, with predominantly northeast trade winds. October through April
is associated with lower temperatures and higher rainfall, and less prevalent trade winds.
Long term data collected at the Līhuʻe Airport indicated that the northeast wind direction
prevails throughout the year with a mean annual wind speed of 20 miles per hour. The
average daytime maximum temperature ranges from about 78 degrees in the winter to
85 degrees in the summer. Average annual rainfall is about 43 inches.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
7
Construction and operation of the project is anticipated to result in the release of
greenhouse gas emissions. However, these emissions are anticipated to be minimal
since the proposed Project involves renovation of an existing structure and trips
generated by the project are likely to occur without construction of the Project. In
addition, the Project design will incorporate energy efficient fixtures and will aim to utilize
passive cooling to avoid energy demands associated with air conditioning.
Topography: No significant changes in topography are proposed. The Project Site sits
about 140 feet above mean sea level; see Figure 3 in Exhibit C. It is generally flat and
was graded for construction of the existing building onsite. Project improvements involve
renovating the existing structure, which would not require any mass grading. Although
some grading is proposed to construct the new walkways and play yard area, topography
of the site is expected to remain similar to existing conditions.
Soils: According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation
Services Web Soil Survey, soils underlying the Project Site are classified as Lihue silty
clay (LhB); see Figure 4 in Exhibit C. The Lihue series consists of deep, well drained
soils that formed in material weathered from basic igneous rock and influences by
tropospheric dust. Lihue soils are on uplands and have slopes of 0 to 40 percent.
Surface Water: There are currently no natural surface water resources, such as streams,
rivers, lakes, wetlands, reservoirs, and creeks in the vicinity of the Project Site. No
impacts to surface waters are anticipated with the proposed Project.
Coastal Waters: The Project Site is located inland and away from the coast. Additional
runoff generated by the proposed project will be retained on-site. No impacts to coastal
waters are anticipated with the proposed Project.
Drainage: A portion of the project site is already developed with impervious surfaces.
Increases in runoff will be minimal and any additional runoff generated by the proposed
project will be retained on-site.
Flood Hazard: The Project Site is located within FEMA Flood Zone X, areas determined
to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain; see Figure 5 in Exhibit C. No impacts
to the flood zone and to downstream properties are anticipated with the proposed
Project.
Sea Level Rise: The Project Site is not located in an area vulnerable to sea level rise.
Flora: The project site is entirely developed with vegetation at the site consisting
primarily of grass, a plumeria tree, and ornamental plants commonly used for
landscaping. No trees are proposed to be removed with the proposed project and no
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
8
habitats of state or federally listed, threatened or endangered species will be affected by
construction and operation of the proposed Project.
Fauna: The Subject Property is entirely developed and does not serve as a habitat for
any state or federally listed, threatened or endangered species. To minimize any
potential harm to seabirds that may overfly the project site, the Applicant will utilize
downward facing lighting to the maximum extent possible to avoid attracting these birds;
and/or to reduce any possible attractive lighting to the extent reasonably possible during
the critical two-week period before and after the new moon each October. No significant
impacts on fauna within the project site are anticipated from either the construction or
operation of the proposed Project.
Noise: Ambient noise in the vicinity of the Project site is predominantly attributed to
vehicular operations on the surrounding roadways. Temporary increases in noise levels
associated with construction related activity for the proposed project are not anticipated
to substantially affect nearby uses due to the temporary and intermittent nature of
construction activities. All equipment used during construction will be properly muffled,
housed and maintained. Any potential impacts on noise receptors in the area will be
mitigated with the implementation of BMPs and by complying with the applicable
provisions of State DOH Administrative Rules, Title 11, Chapter 46, “Community Noise
Control.”
Air Quality: Air quality within the project site is generally considered to be good due to
sparse development surrounding the subject property and the absence of point-source
pollutant generators in the vicinity. Temporary increases in fugitive dust are anticipated to
have negligible impacts on air quality in the project vicinity as the emissions would be
relatively small and readily dissipated. Any potential air quality impacts will be mitigated
by implementing BMPs to control fugitive dust and by complying with the applicable
provisions of State DOH Administrative Rules, Tile 11, Chapter 60 “Air Pollution Control.”
No long-term impacts to air quality are anticipated with the proposed Project.
Archaeological/Historic Resources: The existing structure at the Project Site was
originally constructed in 1952 making it a historic property as it is over 50 years old in
age. The building itself is made up of original materials consisting of CMU block walls
finished on the exterior with plaster. The asphalt shingle roof and glass jalousie windows
were more recently replaced in 1992 following damage sustained during Hurricane Iniki.
The existing building is not listed on the State or National Register of Historic Places.
The National Park Service’s guidance document titled How to Apply the National
Register Criteria for Evaluation states that ordinarily properties owned by religious
institutions or used for religious purposes are not considered eligible for the National
Register. However, such properties will qualify for eligibility if they fall within the following
categories:
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
9
• A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or
artistic distinction or historical importance; or
• A building or structure removed from its original location but which is
significant primarily for architectural value, or which is the surviving
structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or
• A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if
there is no appropriate site or building directly associated with his or her
productive life; or
• A cemetery which derives its primary significance from graves of persons
of transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or
from association with historic events; or
• A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable
environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration
master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same
association has survived; or
• A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition,
symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or
• A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of
exceptional importance.
This historic property does not fall into any of the foregoing categories and is therefore
not considered eligible for listing. It is not associated with any significant event or person
of interest and the building architecture is not unique to the period it was constructed, nor
does it appear to have any historic significance. A Reconnaissance Level Survey
prepared by Ushijima Architects is attached hereto as Exhibit E.
There are no other known historic properties within the Project Site. Some ground
disturbance is proposed for construction of the new walkways and play yard area, as well
as for replacement of the cesspool with a septic tank and leach field. Should there be
any inadvertent discoveries, all work in the area of the archaeological/historical findings
shall immediately cease and the Applicant shall contact the State Department of Land
and Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division and the Planning Department to
determine mitigation measures.
Cultural Resources: The proposed Project involves renovation of an existing
development and will have no impact on any known traditional or customary practices of
native Hawaiian for the following reasons:
• There are no known traditional or customary practices of native Hawaiians that
are presently occurring within the Project Site.
• There are no special gathering practices taking place within any portion of the
Project Site.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
10
• The Project will not detrimentally affect access to any streams; access to the
shoreline or other adjacent shoreline areas; or gathering along any streams, the
shoreline or in the ocean.
• There are no known religious practices taking place within the Project Site.
• There are no known pre-contact cultural or historic sites or resources located
within the Project Site.
• There are no known burials within the Petition Area.
By letter dated October 20, 2021, Mr. Sean Chun of Wailua, Kaua‘i, a known cultural
practitioner and kumu of various Hawaiian arts, noted that there are no cultural sites or
relevance that would inhibit Hawaiian cultural practices. A copy of the letter is provided
in Exhibit F.
A discussion on potential impacts related to visual resources, public services and
facilities, traffic, parking, water, wastewater, and solid waste is provided in Sections IV.F.
to IV.I. of this application.
d. the use must not be inconsistent with the intent of the CZO and General Plan.
The proposed Project will be designed and developed in conformance with the
development standards applicable to the R-4/ST-P District as established in the CZO and
as conditioned by the Planning Commission with approval of the subject Use Permit.
The proposed use is an allowable use with issuance of a Use Permit, which is the subject
of this permit application. Discussion of the project’s consistency with the General Plan
is discussed in the following sections.
C. Policies and Objectives of the General Plan; the provisions of the Community Development
Plan applicable to the application (including design standards and application
requirements); the provisions of the applicable zoning district; and an analysis of the extent
to which the application, if granted, conforms to these provisions of the applicable district;
and an analysis of the extent to which the application, if granted, conforms to these policies,
objectives and provisions;
1. County of Kaua‘i General Plan (2018): The General Plan Vision & Goals for Kaua‘i are
series of statements that express the community’s values and desired outcomes in the year
2035. The proposed Project is consistent with the following applicable Vision & Goals of the
Kaua‘i General Plan:
Goal 4: An Equitable Place, with Opportunity for All
The proposed use of the Project Site as a preschool will contribute to the goal of creating
an equitable place, with opportunity for all by providing opportunities for and access to
early education. Location of the facility in the context of a residential neighborhood will
enhance convenience for residents in the community and improve quality of life.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
11
Policies and actions of the Kaua‘i General Plan flow from the Vision & Goals. There are
nineteen policies to address the issues most important to Kaua‘i residents in the face of
existing issues and future growth. These policies articulate the County’s path forward toward
meeting the community’s vision and goals of sustainability, unique character, resilience and
equity. The proposed Project is consistent with the following applicable policies of the Kaua‘i
General Plan:
Policy 1: Manage Growth to Preserve Rural Character
This policy aims to preserve Kaua‘i’s rural character by limiting the supply of developable
land to an amount adequate for future needs, prohibit development not adjacent to
towns, and ensure new development occurs inside growth boundaries and is compact
and walkable. The proposed Project involves renovation of an existing structure for use
as a preschool, which would not require the development of vacant land and open space.
Additionally, the Project Site is located within an established neighborhood in Kapa‘a
adjacent to residences and other compatible uses.
Policy 4: Design Healthy and Complete Neighborhoods
This policy aims to ensure new and existing neighborhoods have safe roads, functional
parks, as well as access to jobs, commerce, transit, and public services. As mentioned
previously, the Project Site is located within an established neighborhood in Kapa‘a
adjacent to residences and other compatible uses. Location of the facility in the context
of a residential neighborhood will enhance convenience for residents in the community
and improve quality of life. In addition, the County of Kaua‘i Department of Public Works
(DPW) is proposing several Complete Streets and Safe Routes to School improvements
in the vicinity. Design of the project will provide appropriate connection to these facilities
as appropriate and as coordinated through consultation with DPW.
Policy 17: Nurture Our Keiki
This policy aims to value youth as Kaua‘i’s most treasured resource. It also aims to
provide youth with safe communities, great schools and facilities, and financially
sustainable jobs, housing, and transportation opportunities so they are able to seek
livelihoods on Kaua‘i. The proposed Project involves renovation of an existing structure
for use as a preschool that will provide early education opportunities for keiki between
the ages of three and 4. It can be reasonably expected that with education these
children will go on to make meaningful contributions to society later in life.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
12
Policy 19: Communicate with Aloha
This policy notes that Kaua‘i’s residents care about planning and decision-making.
Therefore, the government must share information, encourage input, improve public
processes, and be responsive. The scheduling of this Application before the Planning
Commission will allow the public to participate in the planning and decision-making
process for the proposed Project.
Future Land Use and Community Planning
As shown in Figure 6 of Exhibit C, the Project Site is designated within Residential
Community. This designation indicates existing areas that are primarily residential with
few to no other uses. The Project Site is also designated within the community planning
district of East Kaua‘i. One of the preliminary vision and priorities for East Kaua‘i
residents include the ability of residents to enjoy a high quality of life in a rural setting.
The proposed use of the Project Site as a preschool will satisfy an essential community
need and allow residents to have convenient access to early education opportunities.
Along with future land use and community planning, there are ten sectors that represent
important areas to be addressed when planning Kaua‘i’s growth and development. The
proposed Project is consistent with the following applicable sectors and their actions:
Sector X. Opportunity & Health For All
One of the identified issues in this sector is access to quality education and training. As
outlined in the Kaua‘i General Plan, the objective for this issue is to support educational
programs that foster cultural knowledge, employability, and civic participation of local
residents. Some of the implementing actions associated with this objective include
increasing access to early education and care and supporting the language, culture, and
knowledge of Kaua‘i. The preschool will accommodate the same number of students as
their location in Anahola. The Hawaiian cultural values of aloha, mālama, and kuleana
are an integral part of the KS preschool program experience. KS strives to nurture these
values while continuing to provide a learning environment that is safe, educational,
culturally-grounded, enjoyable and enriching. By providing a preschool facility, the
Project fulfills the purpose of the proposed Project to provide educational facilities in
alignment with KS’ mission. Approval of the Use Permit will not only allow for the use
and development of these facilities, it will also directly implement the permitting and code
changes outlined in the Kaua‘i General Plan, specifically the following:
Support the use, expansion, and development of family childcare homes,
preschools, parent/child kindergarten readiness programs, and charter
schools.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
13
2. Kapa‘a-Wailua Development Plan (1973): The adopted version of the Kapa‘a-Wailua
Development Plan dates back to 1973. Although efforts were made to update the plan in
more recent years, that plan was never officially adopted. Therefore, the goals and
objectives of the 1973 Kapa‘a-Wailua Development Plan are still active even though they
may not necessarily reflect the current goals and objectives of the residents in the region. It
is understood that the more recent, comprehensive community planning process undertaken
as part of the development of the Kaua‘i General Plan (2018) more accurately reflects the
vision for the East Kaua‘i Community. Therefore, reference should be made to the “Future
Land Use and Community Planning” discussion provided in Section IV.C.1. of this
application. Nevertheless, the following is a discussion on the Project’s compliance with the
applicable goals and objectives of the 1973 Kapa‘a-Wailua Development Plan.
Objective II. Education & Recreation
The educational objective states that “[t]he educational program should be separated into
three levels—kindergarten to sixth, seventh to ninth, and tenth to twelfth grades—
corresponding to the three “social” levels of attitude.” Although preschool is not
specifically mentioned, it is acknowledged that early education at the preschool level is a
part of the broad spectrum of educational pursuits, thereby making the proposed Project
consistent with the educational objectives of the Kapa‘a-Wailua Development Plan.
3. County of Kauaʻi Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance: Compliance with the use standards of
the CZO are the subject of this application and are discussed throughout. Pursuant to CZO
Section 8-4.9 pertaining to development of other uses in a residential district:
All permitted uses, all uses requiring a use permit, and all uses allowed by
variance other than residential:
(a) Shall conform to development standards established for the district in
which they are normally permitted provided that:
(1) the minimum distance from property lines shall be the same as that
required for Single Family Detached Dwellings; and
(2) the maximum building heights shall be the same as that required for
Single Family Detached Dwellings; or
(b) Shall conform to the requirements and conditions imposed by the
Planning Commission in granting the use permit or variance permit.
A Use Permit is required for schools in any district. Therefore, the Project will be
designed and constructed in conformance with the requirements of the CZO and the
conditions imposed by the Planning Commission in granting the subject Use Permit.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
14
D. Detailed land use history of the parcel, which includes but is not limited to, former and
existing State and County land use designations, violations and uses;
The Parish Center on the Subject Property was first built in 1952 and was historically used as a
nunnery for the nuns of the St. Catherine Parish. Around 2005, the nunnery was re-purposed as
a Parish Center, which is accessory to the primary use of the subject property as a church. The
existing State land use designation of the site is Urban and the existing County land use
designation of the site is R-4/ST-P. Since the building was constructed in 1952 prior to the
adoption of the County’s CZO in 1972, the building and use are considered nonconforming. In
1992, repairs to the existing roof and windows were made following Hurricane Iniki. No major
modifications to the structure have been undertaken which would have increased its
nonconformity and the use presents no substantial danger to public health or safety.
Additionally, there are no known land use violations related to the subject property and its
existing uses.
E. Status reports of all Zoning Amendment ordinance conditions, existing Land Use Permit
conditions, and Subdivision Application conditions pertaining to the project site;
There are no known Zoning Amendment ordinance conditions, existing Land Use Permit
conditions, and Subdivision Application conditions pertaining to the project site. There are
currently no known violations related to the subject property and its existing uses.
F. Analysis of the secondary impacts of the proposed use on the surrounding area, which
includes but is not limited to, increases in property value, population, housing, community
services and facility needs, secondary jobs and employment generated, and compatibility
with the surrounding uses;
The Project Site is located in an established neighborhood with little to no vacant land available
for development. The proposed use fulfills an essential community need and is not likely to
induce population growth that would have secondary impacts on the surrounding area, such as
an increase in demand for housing or community services and facilities. The Project is also not
likely to significantly increase property values as there are already several educational facilities
in the area.
It is anticipated that converting the use from the Parish Center, which is not consistently
occupied, to a preschool will generate additional traffic in the area. A Traffic Impact Report for
the St. Catherine Preschool was prepared in July 2021 to assess the traffic impacts resulting
from the Project. A copy of the report is provided in Exhibit G. Based on the assessment, traffic
operations along Kawaihau Road are generally expected to remain similar to without project
conditions. The following recommendations were made for consideration to incorporate into the
Project design:
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
15
1. Verify sufficient sight distance for motorists to safely enter and exit all project
driveways including the driveways off Kawaihau Road and Hauaala Road.
2. Verify adequate on-site loading and off-loading service areas and prohibit off-site
loading operations.
3. Verify adequate turn-around area for service, delivery, and refuse collection vehicles
to maneuver on the project site to avoid vehicle-reversing maneuvers onto public
roadways.
4. Verify sufficient turning radii at all project driveways to avoid vehicle encroachments
to oncoming traffic lanes.
5. Ensure that the existing grass/gravel lot off Hauaala Road that is expected to be used
as the preschool’s staff parking lot is made accessible in conformance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
6. Ensure that pedestrian connections to and from the existing parking area off
Kawaihau Road are accessible in conformance with ADA requirements. This lot is
expected to be designated as the parking lot for pick-up/drop-off for the preschool.
7. Consider providing signage near the project driveway off Hauaala Road to inform
students and parents of the preschool where the designated parking for pick-up/drop
off is located. In addition, provide information to indicate that the parking lot off
Hauaala Road is for staff parking only.
8. Coordinate with the County of Kauai to ensure that appropriate modifications for the
project driveways are incorporated into their complete streets project and that
sufficient sight distances and turning radii are maintained for vehicles entering/exiting
the project site.
DPW is expected to construct a five-legged peanut-shaped roundabout at the intersections of
Kawaihau Road with Hauaala Road and Mailihuna Road. These improvements are anticipated
to facilitate traffic flow through the intersection and accommodate site-generated trips. Also, with
adequate parking available through the lease agreement with the Landowner, no additional
parking is anticipated to be required for this Project.
Secondary impacts on visual resources are also not anticipated with the proposed Project as the
project will not significantly increase the height of the existing building, nor will it significantly
expand the existing development footprint. In addition, all materials and finishes used will be in
consonance with the character of the surrounding uses.
G. Water source, supply and distribution system analysis, which includes but is not limited to,
methods of irrigation that exists on the parcel and proposed for the application, location
and use of groundwater and non-potable water sources;
The proposed project will install a new plumbing system within the building and will use the
existing water service provided by the County of Kauaʻi Department of Water Supply (DWS).
The Applicant will coordinate with DWS regarding the availability of water and any improvements
needed to support the proposed use.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
16
H. Sewage Disposal Analysis – A description of a proposed method of sewage disposal;
Wastewater generated by the subject property is collected by an existing cesspool located on-
site. Proposed project improvements will include installation of a new septic tank and leach field
sized and designed for the collection and treatment of wastewater generated by the proposed
use. Closure of the existing cesspool and construction of the new wastewater system will be
constructed in compliance with applicable federal, State, and County rules and regulations
pertaining to wastewater systems.
I. Solid Waste Disposal Analysis – A description of a proposed method of solid waste
disposal, including methods for recycling, reclamation and waste stream diversion; and
During construction, the contractor will be responsible for the disposal of all construction and
demolition waste. Following construction, solid waste will continue to be collected by a private
contractor. The Applicant will incorporate recycling, reclamation and waste stream diversion
practices in day-to-day activities at the preschool to the maximum extent practicable. Additional
solid waste that may be generated by the construction and operation of the proposed project is
not anticipated to place significant demand on existing solid waste facilities and will have not
have a significant impact on future capacity.
J. Description of environmentally sensitive areas, habitat and botanical features, which
includes but is not limited to, wetlands, streams, rock outcroppings, endangered plants and
animals, and exceptional trees.
1. Surface Water
There are currently no natural surface water resources, such as streams, rivers, lakes,
wetlands, reservoirs, and creeks in the vicinity of the project site. Additional runoff generated
by the proposed project will be retained on-site. No impacts to surface waters are
anticipated with the proposed Project.
2. Coastal Waters
The proposed project is located inland and away from coastal waters. Additional runoff
generated by the proposed project will be retained on-site. No impacts to coastal waters are
anticipated with the proposed Project.
3. Flora
The project site is entirely developed with vegetation at the site consisting primarily of grass,
a plumeria tree, and ornamental plants commonly used for landscaping. The proposed
Project involves renovation of an existing structure that will be slightly expanded to
accommodate new walkways and a new play area. No trees are proposed to be removed
with the proposed project. Furthermore, no habitats of state or federally listed, threatened or
endangered species will be affected by construction and operation of the proposed Project.
St. Catherine Preschool Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit Application
17
4. Fauna
The Subject Property is entirely developed and does not serve as a habitat for any state or
federally listed, threatened or endangered species. To minimize any potential harm to
seabirds that may overfly the project site, the Applicant will utilize downward facing lighting to
the maximum extent possible to avoid attracting these birds; and/or to reduce any possible
attractive lighting to the extent reasonably possible during the critical two-week period before
and after the new moon each October. No significant impacts on fauna within the project site
are anticipated from either the construction or operation of the proposed Project.
EXHIBIT A
Landownership Documentation
Show Historical Assessments
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
qPublic.net - Kaua'i County, HI - Report: 460150580000 https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=986&Laye...
1 of 2 8/6/2021, 12:08 PM
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
qPublic.net - Kaua'i County, HI - Report: 460150580000 https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=986&Laye...
2 of 2 8/6/2021, 12:08 PM
EXHIBIT B
Letter of Authorization
EXHIBIT C
Supporting Figures
LOCATION AND VICINITY MAPFIGURE 1
PROJECT VICINITY
ST. CATHERINEPARISH
KAPA'AHIGH SCHOOL
KAPA'AELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ST. CATHERINESCHOOL
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOLKAPA'A, KAUA'I, HAWAI'I
²1 inch = 200 feet
0 200 400100Feet
SOURCE: Esri (Imagery)
PROJECT SITE
H A U A A L A R D
SILVA RD
MA I L I H U N A R D
KOLOHALA RDANNIE RDHASSARD RDKAWAIHAU RD
ELEHU RD
LOKENE ST
IOANA ST
HEKILI RDMOA RDOHU RD PELEHU RDNUNU RDHAUAALA RDIIWI RD
LhB
PnE
LhE2
PnB
PnB
PnC
rRR
PnE
HrB
SOILS MAPFIGURE 4
LhB
PnB
LhE2
PnC
PnE
rRR
Lihue silty clay, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Lihue silty clay, 25 to 40 percent slopes, eroded
Puhi silty clay loam,3 to 8 percent slopes
Puhi silty clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
Puhi silty clay loam, 25 to 40 percent slopes
Rough broken land
PROJECT SITE ST. CATHERINEPARISH KAPA'AHIGH SCHOOL
ST. CATHERINESCHOOL
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOLKAPA'A, KAUA'I, HAWAI'I
HrB Hanalei silty clay, deep water table, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Legend
TMK Parcel
²1 inch = 200 feet
0 200 400100Feet
SOURCE: Esri (Imagery), State of Hawai'i Office ofPlanning (TMK, Soils), U.S. Department of Agriculture
KALIKA ST ANNIE RDH A U A A L A R D
SILVA RD
MA I L I H U N A R D
KOLOHALA RD
PELEHU RDNUNU RDHAUAALA RDHEKILI RDMOA RDHASSARD RDKOME ST
ELEHU RD
IIWI RDOHU RD
KAWAIHAU RD
LOKENE ST
IOANA ST
X
AEAE
FLOOD HAZARD ZONESFIGURE 5
Legend
TMK Parcel
FEMA Flood Zones
Zone AE
Zone X
ST. CATHERINEPARISH
KAPA'AHIGH SCHOOL
KAPA'AELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ST. CATHERINESCHOOL
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOLKAPA'A, KAUA'I, HAWAI'I
²1 inch = 200 feet
0 200 400100Feet
SOURCE: Esri (Imagery), State of Hawai'i Office of Planning(TMK), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)Flood Insurance Rate Maps: Panel Number 1500020202E,revised September 16, 2005; Panel Number 1500020204F,revised November 26, 2020; and Panel Number1500020210F, revised November 26, 2020.
PROJECT SITE
ANNIE RD
H A U A A L A R D
KOLOHALA RD
SILVA RD
MA I L I H U N A R D
KAWAIHAU RDHASSARD RDHEKILI RDMOA RDNUNU RDHAUAALA RDPELEHU RDBase Flood Elevations determined.
Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain.
GENERAL PLANFIGURE 6
²
Legend
TMK Parcel
Agricultural
Residential Community1 inch = 200 feet
0 200 400100Feet
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
PROJECT SITE ST. CATHERINEPARISH
KAPA'AHIGH SCHOOL
KAPA'AELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ST. CATHERINESCHOOL
KAPA'A, KAUA'I, HAWAI'I
SOURCE: Esri (Imagery),State of Hawai'i Office of Planning (TMK, General Plan)
ANNIE RD
H A U A A L A R D
KAWAIHAU RD
KOLOHALA RD
NUNU RD
SILVA RD
MA I L I H U N A R DHASSARD RDHEKILI RDMOA RDHAUAALA RDPELEHU RD
EXHIBIT D
Preliminary Design Drawings
5021 KAWAIHAU ROAD, KAPAA, KAUAI, HAWAIIT.M.K.: 4-6-15:58KAPAA, KAUAI, HAWAIIUSHIJIMAARCHITECTSFORKAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLSST. CATHERINE'S PRESCHOOL BUILDINGA004
1 NORTH DEMOLITION ELEVATION
A004 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
LEGEND GENERAL NOTES
2 SOUTH DEMOLITION ELEVATION
A004 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
A005
1 EAST DEMOLITION ELEVATION
A005 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
GENERAL NOTES
5021 KAWAIHAU ROAD, KAPAA, KAUAI, HAWAIIT.M.K.: 4-6-15:58KAPAA, KAUAI, HAWAIIUSHIJIMAARCHITECTSFORKAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLSST. CATHERINE'S PRESCHOOL BUILDINGLEGEND
2 WEST DEMOLITION ELEVATION
A005 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
5021 KAWAIHAU ROAD, KAPAA, KAUAI, HAWAIIT.M.K.: 4-6-15:58KAPAA, KAUAI, HAWAIIUSHIJIMAARCHITECTSFORKAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLSST. CATHERINE'S PRESCHOOL BUILDINGA008
1 ROOF PLAN
A006 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"
NORTH
LEGEND GENERAL NOTES
EXHIBIT E
Reconnaissance Level Survey Form
RLS Form 2/2018
State Historic Preservation Division
Reconnaissance Level Survey – Survey Form
Instructions: Submit this completed form with the completed SIHP request form and 6E Filing Fee Form
electronically. For details on how to submit to us electronically please visit our website.
https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/shpd
For additionally guidance on completing this form, please see the Architecture Branch Survey Guidelines available on
the SHPD website.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
1.Review Type: Indicate which review process this survey was requested under
HRS 6E-08, HAR 13-275 HRS 6E-42, HAR 13-284
2.Project Information: Indicate the document in which this survey was requested
2.1) Log No. [e.g. 2017.1234]
2.2) Doc No. [e.g. 1708MB27]
2.3) Other:
3.Contact Information:
3.1) Name: 3.2) Company:
3.3) Street Address:
3.4) County: 3.5) State: 3.6) Zip Code:
3.7) Phone: 3.8) Email:
4.Property Location:
4.1) TMK [e.g. (3) 1-2-003:004]:
4.2) Street Address:
4.3) County: 4.4) State: 4.5) Zip Code:
5.Property Classification:
5.1) Ownership:
Private Public
5.2) Classification
Building District Site Structure Object
6.Property Function:
6.1) Current:
6.2) Historic:
RLS Form 2/2018
7.Property Description:
7.1) Date of Construction:
7.2) Provide a description of the property, including the character defining features, summarize alterations to
the property, and provide an evaluation of the property’s integrity of materials, design, feeling, location,
association, workmanship, and setting.
RLS Form 2/2018
8.Eligibility Recommendation:
8.1) Provide a recommendation of eligibility to the Hawai‘i Register of Historic Places including applicable
criteria and areas of significance.
RLS Form 2/2018
9.Attach Photographs: provide sufficient photographs to illustrate the property’s main features. At a minimum
provide the following:
Quantity Description
1-2 Street view(s) of the resource and setting
1-2 Main Facades
1-2 interior photos(s) if applicable
10.Attach Map showing the location of the property
CHECKLIST
Reconnaissance Level Survey Form (this form)
Photographs
Map
Filing Fee Form
SIHP Request Form
138' - 2"23' - 4"38' - 1 1/4"14' - 1 1/4"18' - 0 5/8"104' - 1 1/8"16' - 0"A1.14A1.1219' - 4"14' - 9"14' - 7 3/4"23' - 0 5/8"16' - 2"14' - 9"9' - 6"3' - 8 3/4"9' - 6"6' - 7"16' - 9 1/2"11' - 0"47' - 4"29' - 2 3/4"7' - 2 1/2"12' - 10"1' - 3 1/2"7' - 8 7/8"7' - 4 1/2"13' - 2 3/4"10' - 9 3/4"5' - 7 7/8"88' - 0"ROOF LINE ABV.KITCHENMEETINGRMCHURCH SIDEHALL SIDECONC. LANDING(TYP. @ ALL DOORS)EXTERIOR WALLSTUCCO ON CMU BLOCK(TYP.)A1.15A1.13MARC VENTURA, AIA, LLC4202 Rice St.Lihue, Kaua`i 96766Phone: 808 246 3936Fax: 808 246 3936MARC VENTURA, AIA, LLCREVDESCRIPTIONDATEEXP. DATE: April 30, 2020NO. 7489IIAWAHASUELICENSEDPROFESSIONALARCHITECTMARCVNTURA SignatureThis work was prepared by me or under my supervision and constructionof this project will be under observation.10/22/2018 3:09:42 PMA1.1ST. CATHERINE SCHOOLPASTORAL LIFE CENTERBUILDINGEXISTING FLOOR PLAN &ELEVATIONS 1/8" = 1'-0"1FLOOR PLAN 1" = 200'-0"6KEY PLANPROJECT LOCATION 1/8" = 1'-0"2FRONT ELEVATION (CHURCH FACING) 1/8" = 1'-0"4SIDE ELEVATION0'4'8'16'32' 1/8" = 1'-0"3REAR ELEVATION (HALL FACING) 1/8" = 1'-0"5SIDE ELEVATION (ROAD FACING)
Photo of South Elevation
Photo of North Elevation
Photo of East Elevation
View of Building from Hauaala Road
Photo of the Interior Rooms and Kitchen
EXHIBIT F
Letter dated October 20, 2021 from Mr. Sean Chun
Sean Chun
6512 Ahele Dr.
Kapaa, HI 96746
(808)635-5255
seanchun@hawaii.edu
Rebecca Candilasa
Project Manager, Planning
1907 South Beretania Street, Suite 400
Honolulu, Hawaii 96826
T (808) 946-2277 F (808) 946-2253
http://www.wilsonokamoto.com
Re : Cultural Sites at TMK (4) 4-6-015:058 October 20, 2021
Aloha,
My name is Sean Chun of Wailua, Kaua`i. I am a known cultural practitioner of various Hawaiian arts. I
am a cultural advocate for a Non-Profit, as well as a kumu of various arts. These arts include, pule
(prayer), la`au lap`au (medicinal herbs), lomilomi (massage therapy), ho`oponopono (conflict
resolution), and martial arts. I work with various Hawaiian agencies and organizations, and with public
and charter schools to educate the community about the Hawaiian culture. I was trained by various
known practitioners from Hawai`i, Maui, Moloka`i, O`ahu, Kaua’i, and Ni`ihau.
Regarding TMK (4) 4-6-015:058, a property located in Kapa`a on Kawaihau Rd., currently the St.
Catherine Parish and Preschool. There are no cultural sites or relevance that would inhibit Hawaiian
cultural practices. I am familiar with the site, and it is currently under use by St. Catherine Parish and
Preschool.
If there are any question regarding this issue, please feel free to contact me.
Mahalo,
Sean A. Chun
EXHIBIT G
Traffic Impact Report
Traffic Impact Report
St. Catherine Preschool
Prepared for:
Ushijima Architects, Inc.
Prepared by:
Wilson Okamoto Corporation
July 2021
TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
Prepared for:
Ushijima Architects, Inc.
2226 Young Street
Honolulu, HI 96826
Prepared by:
Wilson Okamoto Corporation
1907 S. Beretania Street, Suite 400
Honolulu, Hawaii 96826
WOC Ref #10470-02
July 2021
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. Introduction ………….….………………………………….………………. 1
A. Purpose of Study …………………………………………………... 1
B. Scope of Study ………………………………….…………………. 1
II. Project Description…….………………………………….………………… 1
A. Location……….…………………………………….……………… 1
B. Project Characteristics ……………………………………………... 1
III. Baseline Traffic Conditions………………………………………………… 3
A. Area Roadway System ……………………………………………. 3
B. Baseline Multimodal Facilities ……………………………………. 5
C. Traffic Volumes and Conditions …………………………………… 5
1. General ……………………………………………………... 5
a. Baseline Traffic Data ……………………………… 5
b. Capacity Analysis Methodology …………………… 6
2. Baseline Peak Hour Traffic ….…...….……………………. 6
a. General ……………………………………………... 6
b. Kawaihau Road and Hauaala Road………………… 6
c. Kawaihau Road and Mailihuna Road…….……….... 9
IV. Projected Traffic Conditions ………………………………………………. 10
A. Site-Generated Traffic……………………………………………… 10
1. Trip Generation Methodology ……………………………... 10
2. Trip Distribution …………………………………………… 11
B. Through-Traffic Forecasting Methodology ………………………... 11
C. Other Considerations ………………………………………………. 11
D. Total Traffic Volumes Without Project ……………………………. 13
E. Total Traffic Volumes With Project ………………………………... 15
V. Traffic Impact Analysis ….………………….……….……………………. 15
VI. Recommendations ….……………………….……….……………………. 17
VII. Conclusion….………………………………………………………………. 18
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page ii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 Location Map and Vicinity Map
FIGURE 2 Project Site Plan
FIGURE 3 Baseline Lane Configurations
FIGURE 4 Baseline Peak Hours of Traffic
FIGURE 5 Distribution of Site-Generated Vehicles with Project
FIGURE 6 Year 2023 Peak Hours of Traffic Without Project
FIGURE 7 Year 2023 Peak Hours of Traffic With Project
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Baseline Traffic Count Data
APPENDIX B Level of Service Definitions
APPENDIX C Capacity Analysis Calculations
Baseline Peak Period Traffic Analysis
APPENDIX D Plans for the Kawaihau–Hauaala–Mailihuna
Complete Streets Improvements
APPENDIX E Capacity Analysis Calculations
Year 2022 Peak Period Traffic Analysis Without Project
APPENDIX F Capacity Analysis Calculations
Year 2022 Peak Period Traffic Analysis With Project
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 1
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study is to identify and assess the traffic impacts resulting
from the renovation of an existing building within the St. Catherine Parish in Kapaa,
Kauai. The building previously served as a nunnery and will be converted into a
preschool.
B. Scope of Study
This report presents the findings and conclusions of the traffic study, the
scope of which includes:
1. Description of the proposed project.
2. Evaluation of existing roadway and traffic operations in the vicinity.
3. Analysis of future roadway and traffic conditions without the proposed
project.
4. Analysis and development of trip generation characteristics for the proposed
project.
5. Superimposing site-generated traffic over future traffic conditions.
6. The identification and analysis of traffic impacts resulting from the proposed
project.
7. Recommendations of improvements, if appropriate, that would mitigate the
traffic impacts resulting from the proposed project.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Location
The existing St. Catherine Parish is located adjacent to Kawaihau Road in
Kapaa on the island of Kauai (see Figure 1). The parish is bounded by Kawaihau
Road to the north, Hauaala Road to the east, Moa Road to the west, and school and
residential uses to the south. The building that will house the proposed preschool is
located near the center of the site south of the existing St. Catherine Church. Access
to the proposed project is expected to be provided via driveways off Kawaihau Road
and Hauaala Road.
B. Project Characteristics
The proposed project entails the conversion of an existing building which
previously served a nunnery within the St. Catherine Parish. The building will be
renovated to include two classrooms and other support facilities for a preschool that is
FIGURE
1LOCATION MAP AND VICINITY MAP
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
0 500 2000 Feet1000
Project
Site
Island of Kauai
Project
Site
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 3
expected to accommodate a maximum of 40 students. Primary access to the project
site will be provided via an existing driveway for the St. Catherine Parish off
Kawaihau Road with secondary access provided via an existing driveway off Hauaala
Road. Parking for the preschool’s pick-up and drop-off is expected to be provided
via an existing parking lot for the St. Catherine Parish accessed via the driveway off
Kawaihau Road. Parking for staff will be provided via an existing grass/gravel lot
near the north edge of the preschool building with access to the lot provided via the
driveway off Hauaala Road. The project is expected to be completed by Year 2022.
See Figure 2 for the proposed site plan.
III. BASELINE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
A. Area Roadway System
The St. Catherine Parish is located adjacent to Kawaihau Road, a two-way,
two-lane County of Kauai roadway generally oriented in the east-west direction
serving as a main thoroughfare through Kapaa. Northeast of the project site,
Kawaihau Road intersects Hauaala Road. At this unsignalized intersection, the
eastbound approach of Kawaihau Road includes one lane that serves all traffic
movements. The westbound approach includes one lane that serves through and
right-turn movements with a center lane that facilitates left-turn movements. Hauaala
Road is a two-way, two lane County of Kauai roadway generally oriented in the
north-south direction. At the intersection with Kawaihau Road, the northbound and
southbound approaches of Hauaala Road include a stop-controlled lane that serves all
traffic movements.
Less than 150 feet east of the intersection with Hauaala Road, Kawaihau Road
intersects Mailihuna Road. At this unsignalized T-intersection, the eastbound
approach on Kawaihau Road includes a center lane that facilitates left-turn
movements and a shared through and right-turn lane. The westbound approach has
one lane that serves all traffic movements. Mailihuna Road is a two-lane, two-way
County of Kauai roadway that starts as an east-west roadway at the intersection with
Kuhio Highway (Route 56) but transitions to a north-south roadway at the
intersection with Kawaihau Road. The southbound approach of Mailihuna Road
includes one stop-controlled lane that serves all traffic movements.
PROJECT SITE PLAN
FIGURE
2
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
K A W A I H A U R O A D
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 5
B. Multimodal Facilities
Multimodal facilities are currently limited in the vicinity of the project site.
Pedestrian facilities are limited to roadway shoulders along Kawaihau Road and
crosswalks to facilitate pedestrian crossings while there are no existing bicycle
facilities around the project site. In addition, transit services in the vicinity are
provided by “The Kaua’i Bus” (operated by the County of Kauai) with only one bus
stop located within a quarter mile of St. Catherine Parish along Kawaihau Road
adjacent to Kapaa High School.
C. Traffic Volumes and Conditions
1. General
a. Baseline Traffic Data
The traffic data used for the purpose of analysis is based on
manual turning movement counts collected in Year 2017 and included
in Appendix A. The manual turning movement count survey was
conducted during the morning peak hours between 6:00 AM and 9:00
AM and during the afternoon peak hours between 2:00 PM and 5:00
PM at the following intersections:
Kawaihau Road and Hauaala Road
Kawaihau Road and Mailihuna Road
The traffic data from Year 2017 represents the most recently
available traffic data in the vicinity of the project. More recent traffic
data could not be collected at this time due to the ongoing COVID-19
pandemic that has resulted in significantly decreased traffic volumes
and shifted travel patterns. The State of Hawaii Department of
Transportation (HDOT) Highways Division has been tracking traffic
volumes along the major regional roadways including those in Kauai.
The HDOT traffic data indicates that in general, traffic volumes on the
island of Kauai are still slightly below pre-COVID volumes. As such,
for the purpose of this report, traffic volumes based on collected in
Year 2017 were assumed to represent Year 2021 baseline conditions.
It should be noted that an assessment of historical traffic data along the
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 6
roadways in the vicinity of the project indicates that traffic volumes in
the vicinity were relatively stable pre-COVID.
b. Capacity Analysis Methodology
The highway capacity analysis performed in this study is based
upon procedures presented in the “Highway Capacity Manual”,
Transportation Research Board, 2010, and the “Synchro” software,
developed by Trafficware. The analysis is based on the concept of
Level of Service (LOS) to identify the traffic impacts associated with
traffic demands during the peak periods of traffic.
LOS is a quantitative and qualitative assessment of traffic
operations. Levels of Service are defined by LOS “A” through “F”;
LOS “A” representing ideal or free-flow traffic operating conditions
and LOS “F” unacceptable or potentially congested traffic operating
conditions.
“Volume-to-Capacity” (v/c) ratio is another measure indicating
the relative traffic demand to the road carrying capacity. A v/c ratio of
one (1.00) indicates that the roadway is operating at or near capacity.
A v/c ratio of greater than 1.00 indicates that the traffic demand
exceeds the road’s carrying capacity. The LOS definitions are
included in Appendix B.
2. Baseline Peak Hour Traffic
a. General
Figures 3 and 4 show the baseline lane uses and peak hour
traffic volumes. The AM peak hour of traffic generally occurs
between 7:00 AM and 8:00 AM. The PM peak hour of traffic
generally occurs between the hours of 2:15 PM and 3:15 PM. The
analysis is based on these peak hour time periods for each intersection
to identify the traffic impacts resulting from the proposed project.
LOS calculations are included in Appendix C.
b. Kawaihau Road and Hauaala Road
At the intersection with Hauaala Road, Kawaihau Road carries
259 vehicles westbound and 627 vehicles eastbound during the AM
BASELINE LANE CONFIGURATIONS
FIGURE
3
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
LEGEND
Study Intersection
1
2
BASELINE PEAK HOURS OF TRAFFIC
FIGURE
4
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
LEGEND
Study Intersection
XX/XX Peak Hour Volume (AM/PM)
1
2
6/251/10155/483/9
548/271
76/406/1117/1523/526/43
188/271
45/130
1
314/170
412/154101/19331/3577/83
158/251
2
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 9
peak period. During the PM peak period, traffic volumes are less with
444 vehicles traveling westbound and 320 vehicles traveling
eastbound. The westbound left-turn lane operates at LOS “A” during
both peak periods.
Hauaala Road carries 162 vehicles northbound and 46 vehicles
southbound during the AM peak period. During the PM peak period,
traffic volumes are less with 83 vehicles traveling northbound and 31
vehicles traveling southbound. The northbound approach operates at
LOS “C” during both peak periods while the southbound approach
operates at LOS “E” during the AM peak period and LOS “C” during
the PM peak period.
Marked crosswalks are provided across Kawaihau Road on the
west side of the intersection and across Hauaala Road on the south side
of the intersection. During the AM peak period, 1 pedestrian was
observed crossing Kawaihau Road on the west side of the intersection
while 11 pedestrians were observed crossing Hauaala Road on the
south side of the intersection. During the PM peak period, 2
pedestrians were observed crossing Kawaihau Road on the west side
of the intersection while 3 pedestrians were observed crossing Hauaala
Road on the south side of the intersection. In addition, although there
is not a marked crosswalk provided across Hauaala Road on the north
side of the intersection, 9 pedestrians were observed crossing at this
location during the AM peak period. No pedestrians were observed
crossing at this location during the PM peak period.
c. Kawaihau Road and Mailihuna Road
At the intersection with Mailihuna Road, Kawaihau Road
carries 726 vehicles eastbound and 235 vehicles westbound during the
AM peak period. During the PM peak period, the overall traffic
volume is less with 324 vehicles traveling eastbound and 334 vehicles
traveling westbound. The eastbound left-turn lane operates at LOS
“A” during both peak periods.
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 10
The Mailihuna Road approach of the intersection carries 132
vehicles during the AM peak period and 228 vehicles during the PM
peak period. The southbound approach operates at LOS “C” during
both peak periods.
Marked crosswalks are provided across Kawaihau Road on the
east side of the intersection and across Mailihuna Road on the north
side of the intersection. During the AM peak period, 7 pedestrians
were observed crossing Kawaihau Road on the east side of the
intersection while no pedestrians were observed crossing Mailihuna
Road on the north side of the intersection. During the PM peak period,
there were no pedestrians observed crossing at this intersection.
IV. PROJECTED TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
A. Site-Generated Traffic
1. Trip Generation Methodology
The trip generation methodology used in this study is based upon
generally accepted techniques developed by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) and published in “Trip Generation, 10th Edition,” 2017. The
ITE trip generation rates are developed empirically by correlating vehicle trip
generation data with various land use characteristics such as the number of
vehicle trips generated per number of students. Table 1 summarizes the trip
generation characteristics related to the proposed project applied to the AM
and PM peak hours of traffic.
Table 1: Peak Hour Trip Generation
DAY CARE CENTER (PRESCHOOL)
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: Number of students = 40
PROJECTED TRIP ENDS
AM PEAK ENTER
EXIT
TOTAL
17
14
31
PM PEAK ENTER
EXIT
TOTAL
15
17
32
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 11
2. Trip Distribution
Figure 5 shows the distribution of site-generated traffic during the AM
and PM peak periods. Primary access to the project site will be provided via
an existing driveway off Kawaihau Road with secondary access to be
provided via an existing driveway off Hauaala Road. The driveway off
Kawaihau Road is expected to provide access to parking for the preschool’s
parking for pick-up/drop-off while the driveway off Hauaala Road is expected
to serve staff parking. It should be noted that trips associated with the
preschool staff are expected to access the project site prior to the peak hour in
the morning and depart after the end of the school day. As such, for the
purpose of analysis, all site-generated trips were distributed to the project’s
primary driveway off Kawaihau Road. The directional distribution of all
additional site-generated vehicles was based upon the relative distribution of
traffic between the surrounding roadways. As such, 35% of trips were
assumed to be traveling to/from the west via Kawaihau Road while 25% while
trips to the east were split between Kawaihau Road and Mailihuna Road with
25% assumed to travel to/from Kawaihau Road and 25% of trips to travel
to/from the project site via Mailihuna Road. 15% of trips were assumed to be
traveling to/from the south via Hauaala Road. The distribution of all site-
generated vehicles at the study intersections was based upon their assumed
origin/destination and the relative convenience of available routes.
B. Through Traffic Forecasting Methodology
The travel forecast is based upon historical traffic count data obtained from
the State DOT, Highways Division at survey stations in the vicinity of the project site.
The historical data indicates relatively stable traffic volumes in the project vicinity.
As such, an annual traffic growth rate of approximately 1.0% was conservatively
assumed in the vicinity. Using 2021 as the Base Year, a growth rate factor of 1.01
was applied to the existing through traffic demands along the project roadways to
achieve the projected Year 2022 traffic demands.
C. Other Considerations
A roundabout is planned to be installed at the intersection of Kawaihau Road
with Mailihuna Road and Hauaala Road by the County of Kauai. Currently, there are
DISTRIBUTION OF SITE-GENERATED VEHICLES WITH PROJECT
FIGURE
5
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
LEGEND
Study Intersection
XX/XX Peak Hour Volume (AM/PM)3/24/4
4/4
2/3
4/4
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 13
two separate intersections along this stretch of Kawaihau Road with the approaches
from the minor roadways stop-controlled. The proposed Kawaihau–Hauaala–
Mailihuna Complete Streets project will convert these intersections into a five-legged
peanut-shaped roundabout. In conjunction with this project, new sidewalks will be
installed through the roundabout and along a portion of the connecting roadways
including Hauaala Road adjacent to St. Catherine’s Parish. In addition, new curb
ramps and modified crosswalks will be provided to facilitate pedestrian circulation in
the vicinity. The proposed project is expected to be completed by the Year 2022 and
as such, is incorporated into projected without project conditions. Plans for the
Complete Streets improvements at the intersection of Kawaihau Road with Mailihuna
Road and Hauaala Road are included in Appendix D.
D. Total Traffic Volumes Without Project
The baseline levels of service are shown in Table 2 while the projected Year
2022 AM and PM peak period traffic volumes and operating conditions without the
completion of the proposed project is shown in Figure 6 and summarized in Table 3.
The analysis incorporates ambient growth in traffic, as well as the completion of the
roundabout construction at the intersections of Kawaihau Road with Mailihuna Road
and Hauaala Road. LOS calculations are included in Appendix E.
Table 2: Baseline Year 2021 LOS Traffic Operating Conditions
Intersection Approach/
Critical Movement
AM
Baseline
PM
Baseline
Kawaihau Rd/
Hauaala Rd/
Westbound (LT) A A
Northbound C C
Southbound E C
Kawaihau Rd/
Mailihuna Rd
Eastbound (LT) A A
Southbound C C
* LT = Left-turn
YEAR 2022 PEAK HOURS OF TRAFFIC WITHOUT PROJECT
FIGURE
6
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
LEGEND
Study Intersection
XX/XX Peak Hour Volume (AM/PM)
*Roundabout Configuration 6/251/1092/2565/233/9
215/143
338/130
77/405/1117/1513/210/378/84
4/11
139/209
16/33
*
*
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 15
Table 3: Projected Year 2022 (Without Project)
LOS Traffic Operating Conditions
Intersection Approach/
Critical Movement
AM
w/o Project
PM
w/o Project
Kawaihau Rd/
Hauaala Rd/
Mailihuna Rd*
Eastbound B A
Westbound A A
Northbound A A
Southbound A A
Southbound A A
*Complete Streets improvements implemented
Under Year 2022 without project conditions, traffic operations along
Kawaihau Road are expected to improve from baseline conditions. The conversion of
the two closely spaced intersections with Hauaala Road and Mailihuna Road into a
five-legged peanut-shaped roundabout intersection is expected to facilitate traffic
flow through the intersection and improve the levels of service for all approaches.
The eastbound approach of Kawaihau Road is expected to operate at LOS “B” and
LOS “A” during the AM and PM peak periods, respectively, while the westbound
approach is expected to operate at LOS “A” during both peak periods. At the
Hauaala Road approaches of the intersection, traffic operations are expected to
operate at LOS “A” during both peak periods. Similarly, the Mailihuna Road
approach of the intersection is also expected to operate at LOS “A” during both peak
periods.
E. Total Traffic Volumes With Project
Figure 7 shows the projected Year 2022 cumulative AM and PM peak hour
traffic conditions resulting from the proposed project. The cumulative volumes
consist of site-generated traffic with the proposed preschool superimposed over Year
2022 projected traffic demands. The traffic impacts resulting from the proposed
project are addressed in the following section.
V. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The projected Year 2022 cumulative AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions
resulting from the proposed project are summarized in Table 4. The projected Year 2022
(Without Project) operating conditions are provided for comparison purposes. LOS
calculations are included in Appendix F.
YEAR 2022 PEAK HOURS OF TRAFFIC WITH PROJECT
FIGURE
7
ST. CATHERINE PRESCHOOL
LEGEND
Study Intersection
XX/XX Peak Hour Volume (AM/PM)9/271/1092/2565/233/9
219/147
342/134
79/435/1117/1513/210/378/84
4/11
143/213
16/33
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 17
Table 4: Projected Year 2022 (Without and With Project) LOS
Traffic Operating Conditions
Intersection Approach/
AM PM
w/o
Proj
w/
Proj
w/o
Proj
w/
Proj
Kawaihau Rd/
Hauaala Rd/
Mailihuna Rd
Eastbound B B A A
Westbound A A A A
Northbound A A A A
Southbound A A A A
Southbound A A A A
Under Year 2022 with project conditions, traffic operations along Kawaihau Road are
generally expected to remain similar to without project conditions. As previously discussed,
the conversion of the two closely spaced intersections with Hauaala Road and Mailihuna
Road into a five-legged peanut roundabout intersection is expected to facilitate traffic flow
through the intersection and accommodate site-generated trips. The eastbound and
westbound approaches of Kawaihau Road are expected to continue operating at LOS “B” or
better and LOS “A” during the AM and PM peak periods, respectively, whereas the
northbound and southbound approaches of Hauaala Road are both expected to continue
operating at LOS “A” during both peak periods. The Mailihuna Road approach of the
intersection is also expected to remain similar to without project conditions.
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the analysis of the traffic data, the following are the recommendations of
this study to be incorporated in the project design.
1. Verify sufficient sight distance for motorists to safely enter and exit all project
driveways including the driveways off Kawaihau Road and Hauaala Road.
2. Verify adequate on-site loading and off-loading service areas and prohibit off-site
loading operations.
3. Verify adequate turn-around area for service, delivery, and refuse collection vehicles
to maneuver on the project site to avoid vehicle-reversing maneuvers onto public
roadways.
4. Verify sufficient turning radii at all project driveways to avoid vehicle encroachments
to oncoming traffic lanes.
Traffic Impact Report for St. Catherine Preschool
Page 18
5. Ensure that the existing grass/gravel lot off Hauaala Road that is expected to be used
as the preschool’s staff parking lot is made accessible in conformance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
6. Ensure that pedestrian connections to and from the existing parking area off
Kawaihau Road are accessible in conformance with ADA requirements. This lot is
expected to be designated as the parking lot for pick-up/drop-off for the preschool.
7. Consider providing signage near the project driveway off Hauaala Road to inform
students and parents of the preschool where the designated parking for pick-up/drop
off is located. In addition, provide information to indicate that the parking lot off
Hauaala Road is for staff parking only.
8. Coordinate with the County of Kauai to ensure that appropriate modifications for the
project driveways are incorporated into their complete streets project and that
sufficient sight distances and turning radii are maintained for vehicles entering/exiting
the project site.
VII. CONCLUSION
The proposed project entails the conversion of an existing building within the St.
Catherine Parish to a preschool that is expected to accommodate a maximum of 40 students.
Primary access to the project site will be provided via an existing driveway off Kawaihau
Road with secondary access to be provided via an existing driveway off Hauaala Road. The
proposed St Catherine preschool is expected to be completed by Year 2022. With the
implementation of the aforementioned recommendations, traffic operations are generally
expected to remain similar to without project conditions. Improvements along Kawaihau
Road at the intersections with Hauaala Road and Mailihuna Road to convert those
intersections into a five-legged peanut roundabout intersection is expected to facilitate traffic
flow in the vicinity of the project and accommodate site-generated trips. Although traffic
operations in the vicinity are generally expected to remain similar to without project
conditions, consideration should be given to ensuring that the pedestrian connections to/from
the designated parking areas are accessible in conformance with the American with
Disabilities Act requirements.
APPENDIX A
BASELINE TRAFFIC COUNT DATA
File Name : KAW MAI AMSite Code : 00000001Start Date : 10/26/2017Page No : 1Counted By: HMCounters: D4-3888Weather: ClearGroups Printed- Bank 1Mailihuna RoadSouthboundKawaihau RoadWestboundPedestriansStart TimeLT ontoKawaihauRd.RT ontoHauaalaRd.RT ontoKawaihauRd.Thru onHauaalaRd.App. TotalLT ontoHauaalaRd.Thru onKawaihauRd.RT ontoMailihunaRd.RT ontoHauaalaRd.App. TotalMailihunaRd. SBKawaihauRd. WBApp. TotalInt. Total06:00 AM1112 51720 1000 01506:15 AM1112 52940 1500 02006:30 AM3347 1721261 2111 24006:45 AM7456 2212082 3100 053Total1291117496482037711212807:00 AM9 3 4 10 2642321 2 5000 07607:15 AM8597 2963622 1 6506 610007:30 AM76126 3134617 1 6701 19907:45 AM78256 4633317 0 5300 099Total312250291321613877423507737408:00 AM10594 2841730 2400 05208:15 AM1486 1922511 1 3900 05808:30 AM34125 2453262 4500 06908:45 AM2464 1642810 3300 049Total161735198715102213141000228Grand Total59 48 96 65 26837 288 118 10 45318 9730Apprch %22 17.9 35.8 24.3 8.2 63.6 26 2.2 11.1 88.9 Total %8.1 6.6 13.2 8.9 36.75.1 39.5 16.2 1.4 62.10.1 1.1 1.2Mailihuna RoadSouthboundKawaihau RoadWestboundPedestriansStart TimeLT ontoKawaihauRd.RT ontoHauaala Rd.RT ontoKawaihauRd.Thru onHauaala Rd.App. TotalLT ontoHauaala Rd.Thru onKawaihauRd.RT ontoMailihunaRd.RT ontoHauaala Rd.App. TotalApp. TotalInt. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM07:00 AM93410 2642321 2 5007607:15 AM8597 2963622 1 6509407:30 AM76126 3134617 1 6709807:45 AM78256 4633317 0 53099Total Volume31225029132161387742350367% App. Total23.516.737.922 6.858.732.81.7 PHF.861.688.500.725.717.667.750.875.500.877.000.927Wilson Okamoto Corporation1907 S. Beretania Street, Suite 400Honolulu, HI 96826
File Name : KAW MAI PMSite Code : 00000001Start Date : 10/26/2017Page No : 1Counted By: HMCounters: D4-3888Weather: ClearGroups Printed- UnshiftedMailihuna RoadSouthboundKawaihau RoadWestboundPedestriansStart TimeLT ontoKawaihauRd.RT ontoHuaala Rd.RT ontoKawaihauRd.Thru onHauaalaRd.App. TotalLT ontoHauaalaRd.Thru onKawaihauRd.RT ontoMailihunaRd.RT ontoHauaalaRd.App. TotalMailihunaRd. SBKawaihauRd. WBApp. TotalInt. Total02:00 PM4 5 11 16 3602866 4000 07602:15 PM5 7 8 14 3404117 1 5913 49702:30 PM20 15 32 45 11217 80 43 2 142128 2928302:45 PM4 6 12 18 4073711 3 5820 2100Total333363932222418677122994313555603:00 PM6 4 12 20 4294912 5 7500 011703:15 PM3 5 10 18 3654092 5600 09203:30 PM6 3 16 26 5115260 5900 011003:45 PM5 7 10 22 4453252 4410 189Total201948861732017332923410140804:00 PM5 7 12 32 5644185 5801 111504:15 PM6 8 14 26 5462785 4610 110104:30 PM3 7 14 25 4935182 6401 111404:45 PM2 6 9 19 3625091 6210 199Total162849102195151693313230224429Grand Total69 80 160 281 59059 528 142 34 763733 401393Apprch %11.7 13.6 27.1 47.6 7.7 69.2 18.6 4.5 17.5 82.5 Total %5 5.7 11.5 20.2 42.44.2 37.9 10.2 2.4 54.80.5 2.4 2.9Mailihuna RoadSouthboundKawaihau RoadWestboundPedestriansStart TimeLT ontoKawaihauRd.RT ontoHuaala Rd.RT ontoKawaihauRd.Thru onHauaala Rd.App. TotalLT ontoHauaala Rd.Thru onKawaihauRd.RT ontoMailihunaRd.RT ontoHauaala Rd.App. TotalApp. TotalInt. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 02:00 PM to 04:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 02:15 PM02:15 PM57814 3404117 1 5909302:30 PM20 15 32 45 11217 80 43 2 142025402:45 PM4 6 12 18 4073711 3 5809803:00 PM6 4 12 20 4294912 5 750117Total Volume353264972283320783113340562% App. Total15.41428.142.5 9.96224.93.3 PHF.438.533.500.539.509.485.647.483.550.588.000.553Wilson Okamoto Corporation1907 S. Beretania Street, Suite 400Honolulu, HI 96826
File Name : KAW HAU AMSite Code : 00000001Start Date : 10/26/2017Page No : 1Counted By: JKCounters:D4-5674Weather: ClearGroups Printed- UnshiftedHauaala RoadSouthboundKawaihau RoadEastboundHauaala RoadNorthboundPedestriansStart TimeLTontoMailihuna Rd.LTontoKawaihau Rd.ThruonHauaala Rd.RTontoKawaihau Rd.App. TotalLTontoHauaala Rd.LTontoMailihuna Rd.ThruonKawaihau Rd.RTontoHauaala Rd.App. TotalLTontoKawaihau Rd.ThruonHuaalaRd.RTontoMailihuna Rd.RTontoKawaihau Rd.App. TotalHauaala Rd.SBHauaala Rd.NBKawaihau Rd.EBApp. TotalInt. Total06:00 AM3511 1051536 3 592013 6000 07506:15 AM1151 822848 9 870011 2000 09706:30 AM1130 52 38 58 10 1080011 2100 111606:45 AM2410 73 39 75 21 1383024 9000 0154Total711102301212021743392505919100144207:00 AM2251 100 55 78 15 1481156 13410 517607:15 AM58101 240 61 114 11 1863 0 16 13 32061 724907:30 AM2204 80 32 73 23 1280 0 29 20 49220 418907:45 AM1120 43 65 70 27 1652 0 41 25 68320 5242Total10131764632133357662761916416291112185608:00 AM0022 40 56 42 12 1103086 17140 513608:15 AM0121 41313714 831163 11110 210008:30 AM1320 623533 9 794042 10211 49908:45 AM1442 1133231 3 690054 9010 190Total28105256154143383418123154747112425Grand Total19 32 37 13 10121 487 695 157 136019 2 119 88 22814 18 2 341723Apprch %18.8 31.7 36.6 12.9 1.5 35.8 51.1 11.5 8.3 0.9 52.2 38.6 41.2 52.9 5.9 Total %1.1 1.9 2.1 0.8 5.91.2 28.3 40.3 9.1 78.91.1 0.1 6.9 5.1 13.20.8 1 0.1 2Hauaala RoadSouthboundKawaihau RoadEastboundHauaala RoadNorthboundPedestriansStart TimeLT ontoMailihuna Rd.LT ontoKawaihau Rd.Thru onHauaalaRd.RT ontoKawaihau Rd.App. TotalLT ontoHauaalaRd.LT ontoMailihuna Rd.Thru onKawaihau Rd.RT ontoHauaalaRd.App. TotalLT ontoKawaihau Rd.Thru onHuaalaRd.RT ontoMailihuna Rd.RT ontoKawaihau Rd.App. TotalApp. TotalInt. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 06:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:00 AM07:00 AM2251 100557815 1481156 13017107:15 AM58101 240 61 114 11 1863 0 16 13 32024207:30 AM2204 80327323 1280 0 29 20 49018507:45 AM1120 43657027 1652 0 41 25 680237Total Volume1013176463213335766276191641620835% App. Total21.728.33713 0.53453.412.1 3.70.656.239.5 PHF.500.406.425.375.479.250.819.735.704.843.500.250.555.640.596.000.863Wilson Okamoto Corporation1907 S. Beretania Street, Suite 400Honolulu, HI 96826
File Name : KAW HAU PMSite Code : 00000001Start Date : 10/26/2017Page No : 1Counted By: JKCounters: D4-5674Weather: ClearGroups Printed- UnshiftedHauaala RoadSouthboundKawaihau RoadEastboundHauaala RoadNorthboundPedestriansStart TimeLTontoMailihuna Rd.LTontoKawaihau Rd.ThruonHauaala Rd.RTontoKawaihau Rd.App. TotalLTontoHauaala Rd.LTontoMailihuna Rd.ThruonKawaihau Rd.RTontoHauaala Rd.App. TotalLTontoKawaihau Rd.ThruonHuaalaRd.RTontoMailihuna Rd.RTontoKawaihau Rd.App. TotalHauaala Rd.SBHuaalaRd. NBKawaihau Rd.EBApp. TotalInt. Total02:00 PM0021 31361913 693356 17000 08902:15 PM0010 14453013 928265 21040 411802:30 PM1066 133313513 824 2 7 10 23119 4 2414202:45 PM1223 803227 4 633132 9000 080Total2211102581441114330618821237012342842903:00 PM1062 92343710 8310596 30020 212403:15 PM3240 94333711 856264 18010 111303:30 PM4320 90233310 664242 12001 18803:45 PM3210 61323410 776287 23001 1107Total117132337122141413112611271983032543204:00 PM0131 513333 6 734184 17000 09504:15 PM1043 812730 5 6310580 23000 09404:30 PM0051 633634 3 7612296 29001 111204:45 PM1135 1042922 3 5842127 25001 194Total2215102991251191727030103717940022395Grand Total15 11 39 22 8724 391 371 101 88774 29 85 59 247126 8 351256Apprch %17.2 12.6 44.8 25.3 2.7 44.1 41.8 11.4 30 11.7 34.4 23.9 2.9 74.3 22.9 Total %1.2 0.9 3.1 1.8 6.91.9 31.1 29.5 8 70.65.9 2.3 6.8 4.7 19.70.1 2.1 0.6 2.8Hauaala RoadSouthboundKawaihau RoadEastboundHauaala RoadNorthboundPedestriansStart TimeLT ontoMailihuna Rd.LT ontoKawaihau Rd.Thru onHauaalaRd.RT ontoKawaihau Rd.App. TotalLT ontoHauaalaRd.LT ontoMailihuna Rd.Thru onKawaihau Rd.RT ontoHauaalaRd.App. TotalLT ontoKawaihau Rd.Thru onHuaalaRd.RT ontoMailihuna Rd.RT ontoKawaihau Rd.App. TotalApp. TotalInt. TotalPeak Hour Analysis From 02:00 PM to 04:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 02:15 PM02:15 PM0010 14453013 928265 21011402:30 PM1066 133313513 8242710 23011802:45 PM1223 803227 4 633132 908003:00 PM1062 92343710 8310596 300122Total Volume3215113191421294032025102523830434% App. Total9.76.548.435.5 2.844.440.312.5 30.11230.127.7 PHF.750.250.625.458.596.563.789.872.769.870.625.500.694.575.692.000.889Wilson Okamoto Corporation1907 S. Beretania Street, Suite 400Honolulu, HI 96826
APPENDIX B
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
“Highway Capacity Manual,” Transportation Research Board, 2010.
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
LEVEL-OF-SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA FOR AUTOMOBILES AT A TWO-WAY STOP
CONTROLLED (TWSC) INTERSECTIONS
LOS for a TWSC intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay.
For motor vehicles, LOS is determined for each minor-street movement (or shared movement) as
well as major-street left turns by using criteria shown below. Major-street through vehicles are
assumed to experience zero delay. LOS F is assigned to the movement if the volume-to-capacity
ratio for the movement exceeds 1.0, regardless of the control delay.
The following lists the LOS criteria for a TWSC intersection:
LOS A describes operations with a control delay of 10s/veh or less and a volume-to-capacity
ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS B describes operations with a control delay between 10s/veh and 15s/veh and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS C describes operations with a control delay between 15s/veh and 25s/veh and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS D describes operations with a control delay between 25s/veh and 35s/veh and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS E describes operations with a control delay between 35s/veh and 50s/veh and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS F describes operations with a control exceeding 50s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no
greater than 1.0 or when the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0, regardless of the measurement
of the control delay.
“Highway Capacity Manual,” Transportation Research Board, 2010.
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
LEVEL-OF-SERVICE (LOS) CRITERIA FOR AUTOMOBILES AT A ROUNDABOUT
Roundabouts are intersections with a generally circular shaped, characterized by yield on
entry and circulation around a central island (counterclockwise in the United States). For a
roundabout, LOS is based solely on control delay. The LOS criteria for automobiles in
roundabouts is shown below. Roundabouts share the same basic controlled delay formulation
with two-way and all-way stop-controlled intersections, adjusting for the effect of yield control.
LOS F is assigned to the movement if the volume-to-capacity ratio for the movement exceeds
1.0, regardless of the control delay.
The following lists the LOS criteria for a roundabout:
LOS A describes operations with a control delay of 10s/veh or less and a volume-to-capacity
ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS B describes operations with a control delay between 10s/veh and 15s/veh and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS C describes operations with a control delay between 15s/veh and 25s/veh and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS D describes operations with a control delay between 25s/veh and 35s/veh and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS E describes operations with a control delay between 35s/veh and 50s/veh and a volume-to-
capacity ratio no greater than 1.0.
LOS F describes operations with a control exceeding 50s/veh and a volume-to-capacity ratio no
greater than 1.0 or when the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0, regardless of the measurement
of the control delay.
APPENDIX C
CAPACITY ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS
BASELINE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
AM Peak Baseline Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 3 548 76 45 188 26 6 1 155 23 17 6
Future Vol, veh/h 3 548 76 45 188 26 6 1 155 23 17 6
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - 25 --------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 3 637 88 52 219 30 7 1 180 27 20 7
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 249 0 0 725 0 0 1039 1040 681 1116 1069 234
Stage 1 ------687687-338338-
Stage 2 ------352353-778731-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1317 - - 878 - - 209 230 450 185 221 805
Stage 1 ------437447-676641-
Stage 2 ------665631-389427-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1317 - - 878 - - 183 216 450 105 207 805
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------183216-105207-
Stage 1 ------435445-673603-
Stage 2 ------600594-232425-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0 1.6 20.1 42.1
HCM LOS C E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 424 1317 - - 878 - - 149
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.444 0.003 - - 0.06 - - 0.359
HCM Control Delay (s) 20.1 7.7 0 - 9.4 - - 42.1
HCM Lane LOS C A A - A - - E
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 2.2 0 - - 0.2 - - 1.5
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
PM Peak Baseline Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 3.8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 9 271 40 130 271 43 25 10 48 5 15 11
Future Vol, veh/h 9 271 40 130 271 43 25 10 48 5 15 11
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - 25 --------
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222222222
Mvmt Flow 10 301 44 144 301 48 28 11 53 6 17 12
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 349 0 0 345 0 0 971 980 323 988 978 325
Stage 1 ------343343-613613-
Stage 2 ------628637-375365-
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 1214 - - 232 250 718 226 250 716
Stage 1 ------672637-480483-
Stage 2 ------471471-646623-
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1210 - - 1214 - - 194 218 718 181 218 716
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------194218-181218-
Stage 1 ------665631-475426-
Stage 2 ------392415-582617-
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 0.2 2.4 19.3 19.8
HCM LOS C C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 344 1210 - - 1214 - - 277
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.268 0.008 - - 0.119 - - 0.124
HCM Control Delay (s) 19.3 8 0 - 8.4 - - 19.8
HCM Lane LOS C A A - A - - C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.1 0 - - 0.4 - - 0.4
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
AM Peak Baseline Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.7
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 314 412 158 77 31 101
Future Vol, veh/h 314 412 158 77 31 101
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 - - - 0 50
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 338 443 170 83 33 109
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 253 0 - 0 1331 212
Stage 1 - - - - 212 -
Stage 2 - - - - 1119 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1312 - - - 170 828
Stage 1 - - - - 823 -
Stage 2 - - - - 312 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1312 - - - 126 828
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 126 -
Stage 1 - - - - 611 -
Stage 2 - - - - 312 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 3.8 0 17.9
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h) 1312 - - - 126 828
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.257 - - - 0.265 0.131
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.7 - - - 43.5 10
HCM Lane LOS A - - - E B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 - - - 1 0.5
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
PM Peak Baseline Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 5.6
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 170 154 251 83 35 193
Future Vol, veh/h 170 154 251 83 35 193
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 50 - - - 0 50
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 80 80 80 80 80 80
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 22222
Mvmt Flow 213 193 314 104 44 241
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 418 0 - 0 985 366
Stage 1 - - - - 366 -
Stage 2 - - - - 619 -
Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.42 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.42 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1141 - - - 275 679
Stage 1 - - - - 702 -
Stage 2 - - - - 537 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1141 - - - 224 679
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 224 -
Stage 1 - - - - 571 -
Stage 2 - - - - 537 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 4.7 0 15
HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1SBLn2
Capacity (veh/h) 1141 - - - 224 679
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.186 - - - 0.195 0.355
HCM Control Delay (s) 8.9 - - - 24.9 13.2
HCM Lane LOS A - - - C B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.7 - - - 0.7 1.6
APPENDIX D
PLANS FOR KAWAIHAU–HAUAALA–MAILIHUNA
COMPLETE STREETS IMPROVEMENTS
FOR REFERENCE ONLY
APPENDIX E
CAPACITY ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS
PROJECTED YEAR 2022 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
ANALYSIS WITHOUT PROJECT
HCM 2010 Roundabout
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
AM Peak Without Project Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.5
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1111
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1111
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 633 237 164 45
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 646 242 167 45
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 118 333 622 278
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 205 456 142 30
Follow-Up Headway, s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0000
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 13.2 7.9 9.7 4.8
Approach LOS BAAA
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves L LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves L LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway, s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h 646 242 167 45
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 1004 810 607 856
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.980 0.980 0.982 0.988
Flow Entry, veh/h 633 237 164 44
Cap Entry, veh/h 984 794 596 846
V/C Ratio 0.643 0.299 0.275 0.053
Control Delay, s/veh 13.2 7.9 9.7 4.8
LOS BAAA
95th %tile Queue, veh 5110
HCM 2010 Roundabout
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
AM Peak Without Project Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach SW
Entry Lanes 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 133
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 136
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 172
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 403
Follow-Up Headway, s 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 5.2
Approach LOS A
Lane Left
Designated Moves R
Assumed Moves R
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000
Critical Headway, s 5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h 136
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 951
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.981
Flow Entry, veh/h 133
Cap Entry, veh/h 933
V/C Ratio 0.143
Control Delay, s/veh 5.2
LOS A
95th %tile Queue, veh 0
HCM 2010 Roundabout
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
PM Peak Without Project Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.7
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1111
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1111
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 322 337 83 31
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 329 344 85 31
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 190 218 329 474
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 315 194 190 63
Follow-Up Headway, s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0000
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.8 8.4 5.6 5.6
Approach LOS AAAA
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves L LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves L LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway, s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h 329 344 85 31
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 934 909 813 703
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.979 0.979 0.974 0.989
Flow Entry, veh/h 322 337 83 31
Cap Entry, veh/h 915 890 792 695
V/C Ratio 0.352 0.379 0.105 0.044
Control Delay, s/veh 7.8 8.4 5.6 5.6
LOS AAAA
95th %tile Queue, veh 2200
HCM 2010 Roundabout
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
PM Peak Without Project Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach SW
Entry Lanes 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 230
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 235
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 302
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 260
Follow-Up Headway, s 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.5
Approach LOS A
Lane Left
Designated Moves R
Assumed Moves R
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000
Critical Headway, s 5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h 235
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 835
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h 230
Cap Entry, veh/h 819
V/C Ratio 0.281
Control Delay, s/veh 7.5
LOS A
95th %tile Queue, veh 1
APPENDIX F
CAPACITY ANALYSIS CALCULATIONS
PROJECTED YEAR 2022 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC
ANALYSIS WITH PROJECT
HCM 2010 Roundabout
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
AM Peak With Project Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.7
Intersection LOS B
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1111
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1111
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 643 241 167 45
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 656 246 170 45
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 118 340 630 289
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 216 460 144 30
Follow-Up Headway, s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0000
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 13.5 8.1 9.9 4.8
Approach LOS BAAA
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves L LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves L LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway, s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h 656 246 170 45
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 1004 804 602 846
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.980 0.980 0.982 0.988
Flow Entry, veh/h 643 241 167 44
Cap Entry, veh/h 984 788 591 836
V/C Ratio 0.653 0.306 0.282 0.053
Control Delay, s/veh 13.5 8.1 9.9 4.8
LOS BAAA
95th %tile Queue, veh 5110
HCM 2010 Roundabout
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
AM Peak With Project Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach SW
Entry Lanes 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 137
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 140
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 179
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 407
Follow-Up Headway, s 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 5.3
Approach LOS A
Lane Left
Designated Moves R
Assumed Moves R
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000
Critical Headway, s 5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h 140
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 945
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.981
Flow Entry, veh/h 137
Cap Entry, veh/h 927
V/C Ratio 0.148
Control Delay, s/veh 5.3
LOS A
95th %tile Queue, veh 1
HCM 2010 Roundabout
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
PM Peak With Project Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 7.8
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1111
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1111
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 333 341 85 31
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 340 348 87 31
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 190 225 337 485
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 326 198 193 63
Follow-Up Headway, s 3.186 3.186 3.186 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0000
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 8.0 8.5 5.7 5.7
Approach LOS AAAA
Lane Left Left Left Left
Designated Moves L LTR LTR LTR
Assumed Moves L LTR LTR LTR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Critical Headway, s 5.193 5.193 5.193 5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h 340 348 87 31
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 934 902 807 696
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.980 0.979 0.975 0.989
Flow Entry, veh/h 333 341 85 31
Cap Entry, veh/h 916 883 786 688
V/C Ratio 0.364 0.386 0.108 0.045
Control Delay, s/veh 8.0 8.5 5.7 5.7
LOS AAAA
95th %tile Queue, veh 2200
HCM 2010 Roundabout
1: Hauaala Road & Kawaihau Road & Mailihuna Road 06/24/2021
St Catherine Preschool Synchro 10 Report
PM Peak With Project Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh
Intersection LOS
Approach SW
Entry Lanes 1
Conflicting Circle Lanes 1
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 234
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 239
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 309
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 264
Follow-Up Headway, s 3.186
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 7.6
Approach LOS A
Lane Left
Designated Moves R
Assumed Moves R
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000
Critical Headway, s 5.193
Entry Flow, veh/h 239
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 830
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h 234
Cap Entry, veh/h 813
V/C Ratio 0.288
Control Delay, s/veh 7.6
LOS A
95th %tile Queue, veh 1
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
KA'AINA HULL.DIRECTOR
JODI A.HIGUCHI SAYEGUSA.DEPUTY DIRECTOR
DEREK S.K.KAWAKAMI,MAYOR
MICHAELA.DAHILIG,MANAGING DIRECTOR
DIRECTOR/S REPORT
I.SUMMARY
Action Required by
Planning Commission:
Consideration of Class IV Zoning Permit and a Use Permit to
facilitate conversion of an existing building into a pre-school
facility containing classrooms,offices,a meeting room,and
reception area.
Permit Application Nos.Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2022-6
Use Permit U-2022-6
Name ofApplicant(s)KAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLS
Rebecca Candilasa,Senior Ptanner
Wilson Okamoto Corporation
PERMIT INFORMATION
An Equal Opportunity Employer
https://kauaicounty-my.sharepoint.com/personal/dcua_kauai_gov/Documents/dcua.files/Regulatory Files/Zoning/Class IV/Z-IV-2022-6/Reports/l(eport-13.14.2022_Z-IV-2022-6_St [atherine_Preschool
Fadlity.docx
Use Permit Pursuant to Section 8-2.4 ofthe KCC,1987,as amended,a
Use Permit is required since the project site is within the
Special Treatment -Public District (ST-P).
I1 Project Development Use
Permit
11 Variance Permit
I1 Special Permit
K]Zoning Permit Class
Kliv
a iii
Pursuant to Section 8-8.4 ofthe KCC,1987,as amended,a
Class IV Zoning Permit is a procedural requirement for
obtaining a Use Permit.
I1 Special Management Area
Permit
DUse
D Minor
AMENDMENTS
Date of Receipt of Completed February 1,2022
Application:
Date of Director's Report:March 22,2022
Date of Public Hearing:APRIL 12,2022
Deadline Date for PC to Take Action May 13,2022
(60TH Day):
PROJECT DATA
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
2 1 P age
I1 Zoning Amendment
I1 General Plan Amendment
State Land Use District
Amendment
pRo^w^oifiMm^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^t^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Parcel Location:The project site is located on the St.Catherine's Church/School campus,
situated atthe Kawaihau Road/Haua'ala Road intersection.
Tax Map Key(s):4-6-015:058 Area:1.09 acres (approx.)
ZONING &DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Zoning:Residential District (R-4)/Special Treatment-
Public Facilities (ST-P)
State Land Use District:Urban
General Plan Designation:Residential Community
Height Limit:30 feet
Max.Land Coverage:60%
Parking Requirement:1 parking stall for every 3 employees =3
1 parking stall for every 200 sf of office space =3
Total stalls required =6 (minimum)
Front Setback:N/A
Rear Setback:N/A
Side Setback:N/A
Community Plan Area:Kapa'a-Wailua Development Plan
Community Plan Land Use Designation:N/A
Deviations or Variances Requested:N/A
IV.LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
Section 8-3.1(f),KCC:This report is being transmitted to the Applicant and
Planning Commission in order to satisfy the
requirements of Section 8-3.l(f),relating to the
provision ofthe Planning Director's report and
recommendation on the subject proposal within sixty
(60)days of the filing of a completed application.The
apptication was received on February 1,2022,and the
Applicant,through its authorized agent,was notified
accordingly ofthe Planning Department's intent to
commence permit processing.
Public Hearing Date:APRIL12,2022
V.PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND USE
As represented,the Applicant is seeking permits to allow conversion of an existing
building into a pre-school facility containing classrooms,offices,a meeting room,and
reception area.The existing building is identified as the Parish Center,originally built in
1952,and was historically used as a home for nuns ("nunnery").With the departure ofthe
nuns in 2005,the nunnery was re-purposed into a Parish Center,which was utilized for
multiple purposes that served as an accessory to the religious activities associated with St.
Catherine's Church.
The Parish Center is a single-story,U-shaped building with the "open side"ofthe U-shape
facing to the south.The existing structure encompasses approximately 4,300 square feet
(SF).The proposed preschool is expected to accommodate a maximum enrollment of
forty (40)students and will be staffed by six (6)full-time employees with an additional
one or two staff members to provide support as needed.Hours of operation will be
Monday to Friday,7:00 am.to 5:00 pm.It is anticipated that the school will be closed on
weekends and holidays.
Kamehameha Schools (KS)intends to lease the structure and utilize it as a preschool
facility.KS has 20 preschools statewide that enroll over 1,600 keiki (children).Each
classroom typically consists of about 20 keiki ages three and four years old,a qualified
teacher,and a teaching assistant.Upon completion ofthe proposed Project,keiki
currently attending KS/preschool in Anahola will be relocated and the Anahola location
will be closed.The purpose ofthe Project is to provide educational facilities in alignment
with KS/mission to fulfill Bernice Pauahi Bishop's desire to create educational
opportunities in perpetuity to improve the capability and welt-being of people of
Hawaiian ancestry.
3 |Page
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
Parking for the facilities is located on an adjacent parcel to the west identified as TMK:(4)
4-6-015:067.Primary access to the project site will be provided via the existing driveway
for St.Catherine Church off Kawaihau Road with secondary access provided via an existing
driveway off Haua'ala Road.The existing parking lot adjacent to St.Catherine Church is
accessed through a driveway off Kawaihau Road that presently serves as parking for the
preschool's pick-up and drop-offoperations.This parking lot has 33 paved parking stalls,3
ADA-accessible stalls,34 unpaved parking stalls (total of 70 stalts)and a turnaround area.
Use ofthese stalls will be formalized in the terms ofthe lease agreement.It is anticipated
that the Applicant will also have use ofthe existing grass/gravel parking area at the
Project Site for use by staff and visitors.Access to this lot is provided via the driveway off
Haua'ala Road.
(Please refer to the application for further description)
VI.APPLICANrS REASONS/JUSTIFICATION
Please refer to sections of the application.
VII.ADDITIONAL FINDINGS
1.Propertv Information/Surrounding Uses
The subject property is located at 5021 Kawaihau Road.The site has been designated
Special Treatment/Public District as the site is used as a church with a school and
accessory uses.The proposed improvements occur on approximately 0.40 acres of
land situated on the southern half ofthe subject parcel.
Other surrounding land uses in the vicinity include St.Catherine School,single-family
residences,neighborhood businesses,Kapa'a ElementarySchool,and Kapa'a High
School furtherto the east ofthe project site (referto Figure 1,Exhibit 'C ofthe
Application).
2.Project Description/Site improvements
As represented in Exhibit /D/ofthe Application,the extent ofthe improvements is
limited to the Parish Center situated on the norther portion ofthe parcel that is
immediately adjacent to the existing church.
The Applicant,Kamehameha Schools,plans to lease the existing church building for a
preschool operation.Interior and exterior improvements are being proposed to
accommodate the preschool use.As represented,the improvements invotve:
a.Proposed Exterior Improvements
1)Roof
o Replacement of existing shingle roofing with new similar materials
4 |P ag e
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
o Newgutters
o New extension of the roof for the covered walkway
2)Windows
o Removal of all existing jalousie windows and reptacement with new vinyl
jatousie windows
o Conversion of window openings to doors where required
3)Doors
o Removal of all existing doors and replacement with new metal doors (front
entry and back)and new sliding doors (back).
4)NewPlayArea
o New fenced in play area with concrete pad on the south end of the building
5)New Covered Walkway
o New concrete pad and roofline extension to create a covered walkway
alongthe south wall ofthe building
6)NewSeptic System
7)Paving Existing Driveway
8)New ADA walkway on the northern side of the building
9)Other miscellaneous repairs to the building including but not limited to
spalling,framing,etc.
b.Proposed Interior Improvements
1)Reconfiguration ofthe Interior Layout
o Demolition ofthe existing dormitory style layout
o Installation of new partitions to create two classrooms,restrooms,offices,
meeting space,and a reception area
2)New Plumbing to replace the existing entirely
3)Replacement of electrical system to replace the existing entirely
4)Structural improvements to existing roofing trusses to accommodate
3.Flood Zones
The generat topography of the project site is relatively flat,containing a gentle slope
from west to east,in the direction of Haua'ala Road.The Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA)Flood Insurance Map shows the project site is situated
within the flood zone identified as Zone /X\FEMA has identified those areas within
the Zone "Y!'are determined to be outside the 0.2%annual chance floodplain.
4.KaualGeneral Plan (GP)
The General Plan designation for the subject property is "NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL."
This designation is intended for medium intensity mixed-use environments that
support the town core with housing,services,parks,civic/institutional,home
occupation,and commercial uses.Buildings in this designation are mostly detached,
with some attached,1-2 stories in height that can accommodate a range of multi-
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
5|Page
family housingtypes.
VIII.AGENCY COMMENTS
(See Exhibit 'A")
IX.PRELIMINARY EVALUATION
In evaluating the proposed development,the following aspects are being considered:
1.GeneralPlan
The applicable Goals and Policies,pursuant to Sections 1.3 &1.4 ofthe General Plan,
are noted asfollows:
a.SECTION 1.3 VISION AND GOALS
1)Goal#l-ASustainable Island
The proposed pre-school extends all young Keiki opportunities to satisfy
their aspirations for a better life through early education.The curriculum
will,on an elementary level,include teachings of self-reliance for food,
energy and other resources through drawings and limited gardening.
They will be taught the value of air,water,soil,and living organisms that
supports life.The Keiki themselves are a resource that the pre-school will
continue to nourish by education to sustain a population that will
contribute to a Sustainable Island.
2)Goal #2 -A Unigue and Beautiful Place
The proposed pre-school will have a curriculum that will,on an
elementary level,be taught ofthe irreplaceable qualities and features of
our island that deserve protection.
3)Goal #3 -A Healthy and Resilient People
Emphasis,on an elementary level,will made on the importance of
strengthening our community's health by growing our own food/by
creating healthy walking communities,development of affordable
housing and the preservation ofour natural areas.The importance of
preparing for the aftermath of a weather disaster will also be learned by
the students.
4)Goal #4 -An Eguitable Place with ODDOrtunitv for All
The proposed pre-school,though early education,will foster the keiki to
become responsible young adults who can contribute to our communities
towards the goal of becoming diverse and equitable.The school fulfills
the goal by providing opportunities for and access to early education.The
location of the facility in the context of a residential neighborhood will
6 1 P age
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
KamehamehaSchools
03.14.2022
enhance convenience for residents in the community and improve quality
of life.
b.SECTION 1.4 POLICIES TO GUIDE GROWTH
1)Policy#l:Manage Growth to Preserve Rural Character
This policy aims to preserve Kauai's rural character by limiting the supply of
developable land to an amount adequate for future needs,prohibit
development not adjacent to towns,and ensure new development occurs
inside growth boundaries and is compact and walkable.The proposed Project
involves renovation of an existing structure for use as a preschool,which
would not require the development ofvacant land and open space.
Additionally,the Project Site is located within an established neighborhood in
Kapa'a adjacent to residences and other compatible uses.
2)Policy#4:Design Health and Complete Neighborhoods
The Project Site is located within an established neighborhood in Kapa'a
adjacent to residences and other compatible uses.Location ofthe facility in
the context ofa residentiat neighborhood will enhance convenience for
residents in the community and improve quality of life.In addition,the
County of Kaua'i Department of Pubtic Works (DPW)is proposing several
Complete Streets and Safe Routes to School improvements in the vicinity.
Design ofthe project will provide appropriate connection to these facilities as
appropriate and as coordinated through consultation with DPW.
3)Policv#17:Nurture OurKeiki
The This policy aims to value youth as Kauai's most treasured resource.It
also aims to provide youth with safe communities,great schools and
facilities,and financially sustainable jobs,housing,and transportation
opportunities so they are able to seek livelihoods on Kaua'i.The proposed
Project involves renovation of an existing structure for use as a preschool
that will provide early education opportunities for keiki between the ages of
3-4.It can be reasonably expected that with education these children will go
on to make meaningful contributions to society later in life.
4)Policy#19:Communicate with Aloha
This policy notes that Kauai's residents care about planning and decision-
making.Therefore,the government must share information,encourage
input,improve pubtic processes,and be responsive.The scheduling ofthis
Application before the Planning Commission will allow the public to
participate in the planning and decision-making process for the proposed
Project.
c.SECTION 3.0 ACTIONS BY SECTOR
7|P ag e
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
1)Sector I.-Economy.Strengthening Existing Town Centers and Mixed-Use
Environments.Through a directed growth policy,ourtown centers can
support a mix of uses that appeals to our millennial and baby boomer
population.
2)Sector X.-ODportunity &Health for Atl.A positive educational experience
encourages children to become lifelong learners who contribute to their
communities and world.
2.Use Permit
a.Pursuant to Article 3 of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (CZO),Chapter 8 of
the Kauai county Code (1987),the purpose ofthe Use Permit Procedure is to
assure the proper integration into the community of uses which may be suitable
only in specific locations of a district,or only under certain conditions,or only if
the uses are designed,arranged or conducted in a particular manner,and to
prohibit the uses if proper integration cannot be assured.Section 8-3.2 of the
CZP specifies a Use Permit may be granted only ifthe Planning Commission finds
that the use meets the following criteria:
1)The use must be a compatible use;
2)The use must not be detrimental to persons or property in the area;
3)The use must not cause substantial environmental consequences;and
4)The use must not be inconsistent with the intent ofthe Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance (CZO)and General Plan.
b.Based on the foregoing,the following aspects are taken into consideration:
1)As noted in the Application,the Project Site is in a residential
neighborhood in the vicinity of several other schools and neighborhood
businesses.The proposed use ofthe Project Site as a preschool will satisfy
an essential community need by providing educational programs and
activities that support the growth and development of children in the
region.It can be reasonably expected that with education these children
will go on to make meaningful contributions to society later in life.The
placement ofschools within residential neighborhoods and/or in a
centralized location further enhances convenience for residents and allows
residents to take advantage of available educationat opportunities,as
evidenced by the location of other schools in the area such as St.Catherine
School (Grades K to 5),Kapa'a Elementary School (Grades K to 6),and
Kapa'a High School (Grades 9 to 12).For the reasons mentioned,the
proposed use is compatible with the uses in its immediate surroundings
and would not be detrimental to the health,safety,peace,morals,
comfort,and the general welfare of persons residing and working in the
neighborhood.
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
8|Page
2)Operation ofthe preschool will be within normal working hours.The
proposed Project improvements will be in conformance with the
development standards applicable to the R-4/ST-P District in the County's
CZO and as conditioned bythe Planning Commission with approval ofthe
subject Use Permit.Construction and operation ofthe Project is not
anticipated to be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in
the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the community.
3)Construction ofthe proposed project will not result in any substantial
harmful environmental consequences.Project improvements are the
minimum necessary to convert the use of the existing structure to a
preschool and to ensure the structure is compliant with all prevailing
building code requirements and safety regulations.Mitigative
measures—suchas standard best management practices (BMPs)for
construction and adherence to applicable federal,State,and County
rules and regulations—willbe incorporated into the design to ensure
there will be no substantial harmful environmental consequences on
the land or on other lands or waters.Following construction,the
proposed use is not anticipated to result in any significant
environmental consequences beyond what would have previously
existed under the former use of the Project Site as a nunnery.
4)The proposed Project will be designed and developed in conformance with
the development standards applicabte to the R-4/ST-P District as
established in the CZO and as conditioned by the Planning Commission
with approval ofthe subject Use Permit.The proposed use is an allowable
use with issuance of a Use Permit,which is the subject ofthis permit
application.Discussion ofthe project's consistency with the General Plan is
discussed in the preceding section.
3.Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 8 ofthe KCC)
The project is consistent with the development standards contained in the CZO in
that:
a.The number of parking spaces as proposed exceeds the minimum required by
the CZO.As noted in the Application,there are a total of 70 off-street parking
stalls (paved &unpaved)available.Based on the parking standards prescribed by
the CZO,a total of 6 stalls is required.There are many parking stalls that are
underutilized and as such,it is anticipated that there will be no issues attributed
to parking.However,should parking become an issue,the Planning Director can
require additional parking pursuant Section 8-6.3(e)(3)(E).The Planning Director
reserves the right to review this requirement if complaints arise from the
neighboring property owners.
b.The project as proposed could be considered to be a compatible use and not
detrimental to the health,safety,peace,morals,comfort and general welfare of
9 1 P age
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
c.
persons residing or working in the area.Additionally,the use should not cause
substantial environmental consequences.
The project as proposed meets the lot coverage,building height and setback
requirements as outlined in the CZO.
Finally,it is uncertain as to whether the Applicant has made provisions for night
illumination with the project,based on the preliminary plans that have been
submitted.Ifso,night illumination should be designed to minimize adverse impacts
on the Federally Listed Threatened Species,Newell's Shearwater and other seabirds.
Night lighting should be shielded from above and directed downwards and shall be
approved bythe U.S.Dept.ofthe Interior Fish and Wildlife Service.Ifexternal lighting
is to be used in connection with the proposed project,all external lighting should be
only of the following type:downward-facing shielded lights.Spotlights aimed upward
or spotlighting of structures is prohibited.
4.Traditional Native Hawaiian Cultural Resources
After the Applicant consutted with a known cultural practitioner and kumu of various
Hawaiian arts and evaluating historical information that was available to the
department,the department finds that the proposed Project involving the renovation
of an existing development should have no impact on any known Hawaiian traditional
or customary practices for the following reasons:
o There are no known traditional or customary practices of native Hawaiians that are
presentty occurring within the Project Site.
o There are no special gathering practices taking place within any portion ofthe
Project Site.
o The Project will not detrimentally affect access to any streams;access to the
shoreline or other adjacent shoreline areas;or gathering along any streams,the
shoreline or in the ocean.
o There are no known religious practices taking place within the Project Site.
o There are no known pre-contact cultural or historic sites or resources located
within the Project Site.
o There are no known burials within the Petition Area.
Agency Comments -The Applicant should resolve and comply with allagency
requirements as recommended in the permit application review,including but not
limited to the fire code requirements as imposed by the County Fire Department,
drainage requirements for DPW-Engineering Division,wastewater requirements for
the State Department of Health (DOH),and the archaeological/historical
requirements ofthe State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD).
10 1 P age
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
X.PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
Based on the information contained in the Staff Report Findings and Evaluation,the
Planning Department concludes that the proposed development should not have any
detrimental impact to the environment or the surrounding area.The proposed use should
not be detrimental to persons,property,or the environment in the surrounding area.
The proposal is generally in compliance with the criteria outlined for the granting of a Use
Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit.Additionally,the proposal aligns with the goals and
policies outlined in the General Plan,as well as the development standards prescribed by
the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance.
The Applicant should institute the //Best Management Practices"to ensure that the
operation ofthis facility does not generate impacts that may affect the health,safety,and
welfare ofthose in the surrounding area ofthe proposal.
XI.PRELMINARY RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing evaluation and conclusion it is hereby recommended that subject
request to facilitate conversion of an existing building into a pre-school facility and
associated site improvements through Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2022-6 and Use Permit
U-2022-6 be approved subject to the following conditions:
1.The proposed facility shall be constructed as represented.Any changes to said
structures and/or facilities shatl be reviewed by the Planning Department to
determine whether Planning Commission review and approval is warranted.
2.The Planning Director reserves the right to increase parking requirements when
particular uses cause unusual traffic congestion.
3.In order to minimize adverse impacts on the Federally Listed Threatened Species,
Newell's Shearwater and other seabirds,all external lighting shall be only ofthe
following types:downward-facing shielded lights.Any spotlights aimed upward or
spotlighting of structures,landscaping,or the ocean shall be prohibited.
4.The applicant shall develop and utilize Best Management Practices (B.M.P's)during all
phases ofdevelopment in orderto minimize erosion,dust,and sedimentation impacts
ofthe project to abutting properties.
5.The applicant is advised the should any archaeological or historical resources be
discovered during ground disturbing/construction work,all work in the area ofthe
archaeological/historical findings shall immediately cease and the Applicant shall
contact the State Department of Land and Natural Resources,Historic Preservation
Division and the Planning Department to determine mitigation measures.
11 |P ag e
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
6.The Applicant shall comply with the fire code requirements as imposed by the County
Fire Department,drainage/flood requirements for DPW-Engineering Division,
wastewater requirements forthe State Department of Health (DOH),traffic related
analysis &requirements for the County DPW &State Highways Division,and the
archaeological/historical requirements ofthe State Historic Preservation Division
(SHPD).
7.Prior to operation/occupancy ofthe proposed facility,written confirmation of
compliance with the requirements from all reviewing agencies shall be provided to the
Planning Department.
8.The applicant shall implement to the extent possible sustainable building techniques
and operational methods for the project,such as Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (L.E.E.D.)standards or another comparable state-approved,
nationally recognized,and consensus-based guideline,standard,or system,and
strategies,which may include but is not limited to recycling,natural lighting,extensive
landscaping,solar panels,low-energy fixtures,low-energy lighting and other similar
methods and techniques.All such proposals shall be reflected on the plans submitted
for building permit review.
9.The Applicant is advised that prior to construction and/or use,additional government
agency conditions may be imposed.It shall be the Appticanfs responsibility to resolve
those conditions with the respective agency(ies).
10.The Planning Commission reserves the right to revise,add,or delete conditions of
approval in order to address or mitigate unforeseen impacts the project may,create,
or to revoke the permits through the proper procedures should conditions of approval
not be complied with or be violated.
The Planning Commission is further advised that this report does not represent the
Planning Department's final recommendation in view ofthe forthcoming public hearing
process scheduled for APRIL 12,2022 whereby the entire record should be considered
priorto decision-making.The entire record should include but not be limited to:
a.Pending government agency comments;
b.Testimony from the general public and interested others;and
c.The Applicanfs response to staffs report and recommendation as provided
herein.
DALEA.CU4,Planner
12 1 P age
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
Kamehameha Schools
03.14.2022
Approved &Recommended to Commission:
KA'AINAS.H<JLL
Director of Planning
Date:^
»^/Z<^A
13 l P age
Z-IV-2022-6,U-202-6;Director's Report
KamehamehaSchools
03.14.2022
//A //EXHIBIT"A
(Agency Comments)
For reference
DAVID Y.IGE
GOVERNOR OF
HAWAI1
^^^^^
•^•a^ofH^i3
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION
KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING
601 KAMOKILA BLVD.,STE 555
KAPOLEI,HI 96707
SUZANNE U.CASE
CIIAIRPERSON
BOARD OF LANR AND NATURAL RESOURCKS
COMMISSION ON WATER RKSOURCE MANAORMENT
ROBERT K.MASUDA
FIRST DHPUTl'
M.KALEO MANUEL
DEI'UTl'DIRECTOR -WATER
AOUATIC RESOURCES
BOATINO AND OCEAN RECRliATION
BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES
COMM1SSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMKNT
CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS
CONSERVATION AND RHSOURCES ENFORCKMENT
RNOINEKRINO
FORESTR'.'AND WII-UI.IFE
IIISTOMC PRESKRVATION
KAIIOOI.AWK IS1-AND RKSERVK COMMISSION
1.AND
STATK PARKS
January 7,2022
Ka'aina S.Hull,Director
CountyofKaua'i
Planning Department
4444 Rice Street,Suite A473
LThu'e,Hawai'i 96766
khull(%kauai.gov
Dear Mr.Hull:
W REPLY REFER TO:
Project No.2021PRO 1071
Doc.No.2111 DB06
Archaeology,Architecture
SUBJECT:HRS Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review -
St.Catherine's Catholic Church Preschool Improvements Project
County ofKaua'i Class IV Zoning Permit Application Z-IV-2022;Use Permit U-2022-1
Applicant:Kamehameha Schools
Kapa'a Ahupua'a,Puna District,Island ofKaua'i
TMK:(4)4-6-015:058
This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's)§6E-42,HRS,review of the County of
Kaua'i Class IV Zoning Permit Application Z-IV-2022 and Use Pemiit U-2022-1 for the St.Catherine's Catholic
Church Preschool Improvements Project at 5021A Kawaihau Road,Kapa'a.The project area comprises a 0.40-acre
portion ofthe 1.09-acre property.
The SHPD received the initial submittal on August 31,2021 which included a permit application packet prepared by
Wilson Okamoto Corporation on behalf of the applicant,a SHPD HRS 6E Submittal Form,a TMK Map,an aerial
site photograph,and associated project construction plans (Submission No.2021PR01071.001).The permit
application packet also included multiple exhibits.SHPD received additional materials via HICRIS on October 26,
2021 which included a revised permit application and an applicant cover letter dated October 25,2021 (Submission
No.2021PRO 1071.002).
The project will consist ofproposed interior and exterior renovations to the existing Parish Center at St.Catherine's
Catholic Church in Kapa'a,which was constructed in 1952 and was later converted for use as a preschool.The
Parish Center is a single-story,U-shaped building with the open side of the U-shape oriented to the south.The
existing stmcture encompasses approximately 4,300 sq.ft.Landscaping and a grass/gravel parking area with a
driveway providing ingress and egress from Hauaala Road make up the remainder ofthe project site.There are also
proposed modifications to the overall grounds of the property which should involve shallow/minimal ground
disturbance,including creating a new covered walkway,an ADA compliant walkway,and paving the parking lot
area.
The proposed interior improvements include reconfiguring the interior layout to accommodate two classrooms,
toilets,offices,a meeting space,and a reception area.The existing kitchen space will remain,but the existing
interior fmishes,casework,and fixtures are proposed to be replaced.All existing electrical systems will be replaced
with code compliant systems including updated electrical infrastructure,LED lighting,and a new fire alarm system.
New plumbing systems will also be provided throughout the building.
Proposed improvements to the exterior ofthe building include installing a new roof,new windows,and new doors to
replace the existing components.A new covered walkway will be constructed along the south wall of the existing
r
Di
y^-
RECEIVED
FEB -8 2022
CountyofKauai
^OfKaUa';COUNTY OF KAUA'I TnmsportationAgency
^IN60 T_,,PLANNING DEPARTMENT""4444 RICE STREET,SUITE A473 LIHU'E,HAWAI'I 96766
(808)241-4050
~£t.WR-3 flj:4y
FROM:Kaaina S.Hull,Director (Dale)Febmary 7,2022
SRlg^qT:Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2022-6,Use Permit U-2022-6,School
Tax Map Key:(4)4-6-015:058,Kamehameha Schools,Applicant
TO:
a Department of Transportation -STP DPW-Engineering
DOT-Highway,Kauai(info only)DPW-Wastewater
DOT-Airports,Kauai (info only)D DPW-Building
D DOT-Harbors,Kauai (info only)a DPW-SolidWaste
State Department of Health D Department of Parks &Recreation
D State Department of Agriculture Fire-Department
D State Office of Planning County Housing-Agency
a State Dept.ofBus.&Econ.Dev.Tourism D County Economic Development
State Land Use Commission D KHPRC
State Historic Preservation Division Water Department
D DLNR-Land Management D Kaua'i Civil Defense
a DLNR-Foresty &Wildlife D U.S.Postal Department
D DLNR-Aquatic Resources UH Sea Grant
D DLNR-OCCL County Transportation Agency
D Other:
FOR YOUR COMMENTS (pertaining to your department):
GT^t\^>1^0 ^j(^K^P-CP^AtA£^^.OtJ
'W^<?^SB<^-"W<^^J.-
"^<-3^*'Zo'z'^-
This matter is scheduled for a public hearing before the County of Kauai Planning Commission on
4/12/2022 at the Lihue Civic Center,Moikeha Building,Meeting Room 2A-2B,4444 Rice Street,
Lihue,Kauai,at 9:00 am or soon thereafter.If we do not receive your agency comments within one (1)
month from the date of this request,we will assume that there are no objections to this permit request.
Mahalo!
Ka'aina S.Hull
Director ofPlanning
Jodi A.Higuchi Sayegusa
Deputy Director ofPlanning
COUNTY OF KAUA'I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
I.SUMMARY
Action Required by
Planning Commission:
Consideration of Class IV Zoning Pennit and Use Pemiit to allow
the construction of a new single-family residential unit and
associated site improvements (utilities).
Permit Application Nos.Class IV Zoning Pemiit Z-IV-2022-7
Use Permit U-2022-7
Name of Applicant(s)KEOPELE V.&ASHLEY H.MCBRIDE
II.PERMIT INFORMATION
Use Permit Pursuant to Article 11,Section 8-11.3 ofthe KCC,1987 as
amended,a Use Permit is required to allow any
development,structures or uses within the Special
Treatment District (ST).
Project Development Use
Permit
1I Variance Pennit
Special Permit
Zoning Permit Class
Kliv
m
Pursuant to Section 8-3.1 ofthe KCC,1987,as amended,a
Class IV Zoning Permit is a procedural requirement in
applying for a Use Permit.
Special Management Area
Permit
QUse
|_|Minor
AMENDMENTS
I1 Zoning Amendment
I1 General Plan Amendment
Q State Land Use District
Amendment
WD22 Ntder RldkFtgiiaKri^ring ftmit^a,B MZ-IV.ZE-Al^at^pCBiUtixrt-l tt4.IZ2(I22_Z-nA2(E2-7_U.2022-7J4a|]eleV Stehley H MSidedacx
III.PROJECTDATA
IV.LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
Section 8-3.1(f),KCC:This report is being transmitted to the Applicant and
Planning Commission in order to satisfy the
requirements ofSection 8-3.l(f),relating to the
provision ofthe Planning Director's report and
Z-1V-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Report
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
2[Page
Date ofReceipt ofCompIeted
Application:Febmary 9,2022
Date of Director's Report:Marchl5,2022
Date of Public Hearing:APRIL 12,2022
Deadline Date for PC to Take Action
(60 Day):May 21,2022
3M:a®BWBilMMaBiSlBBlMMBMEUffliffii SK^^
Parcel Location:The project site is located on Lot 21-A-l ofthe Kilauea Subdivision
situated at the southem terminus ofAalona Street in a cul-de-sac,situated
300 feet south ofits intersection with Lokela Street and approximately
200 yards from Kuhio Highway.The subject property's rear property line
is adjacent to the Kflauea Elementary School parcel.
Tax Map Key(s):(4)5-2-006:014 Area:16,187sq.ft.
ZONING &DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Zoning:Residential District R-6 /Open (0)District /
Special Treatment-Public (ST-P)District
State Land Use District:Urban
General Plan Designation:Residential Community
Height Limit:Twenty-Five (25)feet OR as Authorized by the
Planning Commission
Max.Land Coverage:Residential District =60%
OpenDistrict=10%
Front Setback:lO'-O"
Rear Setback:5'or %the wall plate height whichever is greater
Side Setback:5 or %the wall plate height whichever is greater
Community Plan Area:North Shore Development Plan (NSDP)
Community Plan Land Use
Designation:N/A
Deviations or Variances Requested:N/A
recommendation on the subject proposal within sixty
(60)days ofthe filing ofa completed application.
The application was received on February 9,2022
and the Applicant,through its authorized agent,was
notified accordingly ofthe Planning Department's
mtent to commence permit processing.
PubIicHearmgDatelAPRIL 12,2022
V.PROJECT DESCMPTION AND USE
The applicant is proposing to construct a 560 square foot (SF)single-story dwelling
unit that involves one (1)bedroom,one (1)bath,a living area,a dining area,a kitehen,
and two (2)concrete landings.The overall lot coverage ofthe single-family dwelling
unit and two concrete landings will be 608 SF.
The project site is located within the KTlauea Subdivision and identified as Tax Map
Key:(4)5-2-006:014 consisting ofapproximately 16,187 SF.The property has a
County zoning designation ofResidential District (R-6),Open (0)District and Special
Treatment -Public Disto'ict.There is an existing three (3)bedroom single-family
dwelling unit and attached garage located on the front portion ofthe property that was
constructed in 1972.The proposed 560 SF single-family residential unit will be the
second dwelling on the property (aka.Additional Dwelling Unit)that will be located on
the rear ofthe property.
VI.APPLICANT'S REASONS/JUSTIFICATION
Pursuant to Article 11,Section 8-11.3 ofthe KCC,1987 as amended,a Use Permit is
required to allow any development,structures or uses within the Special Treatment
District (ST).
The proposed development is located within the portion ofthe subject property that is
County zoned Open/Special Treatment -Public District.As such,to allow for the
construction ofa new single-family dwelling unit within the Special Treatment District,
the Applicant has applied for a Use Pennit.
VII.AGENCY COMMENTS
Comments from applicable govemment agencies are being sought and are expected at
time ofthe public hearing scheduled on APRIL 12,2022.At the present time,the
department has only received comments from the Fire Department (attached as Exhibit'A')and has not received comments from other reviewing agencies that includes the
COK Public Works -Engineering Division (DPW),COK Water (DOW),the State
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7,Director's Rcport
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
3|Page
Department of Health (DOH)and the State Historic Preservation Division.However,
comments are being anticipated and will be presented at the public hearing.
VIII.FINDINGS
1.The subject property (Lot21-A-l)was part of Subdivision Application No.S-2020-
10 that received final subdivision map approval on December 8,2020.The
subdivision involved a four (4)lot consolidation and resubdivision into three (3)
lots;the subdivision action consolidated a parcel previously identified as Lot 21-A
that is County zoned Open/Special Treatment -Public District with three (3)
adjacent residential lots within the KTlauea Subdivision that are within the
Residential (R-6)zoning district.As a result,the total lot area ofthe subject parcel
increased in size from 10,053 SF to 16,187 SF and became split zoned containing
Residential District (R-6)and Open /Special Treatment -Public District.
2.Chapter l(^Article2.NorthShore DeveloEment Plan oftheKCC
A.The property is situated within the North Shore Planning area and is subject to
the applicable regulations ofthe North Shore Development Plan (NSDP)that
includes the following:
1)Section 10-2.4 (e)entitled "Special Regulations Applicable to All Districts"
states:
"(l)Heights.Except as provided under Ordinance No.416 (Flood Hazard
Areas)Section 15-1.5(c)(4),heightlimits shall beas establishedinthe
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance;provided,however,that no stmcture shall
be bigher than twenty-five (25)feet unless a greater height is authorized by
the Planning Commission pursuant to a use pennit after review (and
recommendation)by the North Shore Improvement Advisory Committee."
•As represented,the overall height ofthe proposed dwelling unit is 15'2-
7/8".
•The proposed development is located within Zone 'X'ofthe Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)Flood Insurance Rate Map.
FEMA has identified those areas within the Zone "X"to be outside ofthe
0.2%annual chance floodplain.This area is outside ofa Tsunami
Evacuation Zone and Dam Evacuation Zone.
3.CZO Development Standards
A.The proposed development is subject to £he standards prescribed in Sections 8-
2.4,8-4.3,8-4.5 and 8-9.2 ofthe CZO.The following standards are considered:
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Report
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
4|Page
1)Section 8-2.4 entitled "Uses in Districts"specifies that "single-family
detached dwellings"are a permissible use within the Open (0)Zoning
District,pursuant to Section 8-2.4(s)(9)ofthe CZO.
2)Section 8-4.3(b)entitled "Setback requirements"specifies:
a.Front setback:Stmcture should be setback a minimum often (10)feet.
b.Side setback:No structure shall be closer than five (5)feet or one-half
(1/2)the total plate height whichever is greater.
c.Rear setback:No structure shall be closer than five (5)feet or one-half
(1/2)the total plate height whichever is greater.
•As represented,the proposed dwelling unit has an overall height of 15'
2-7/8".The dwelling unit has a front setback often (10)feet,a rear
setback of 10 feet and a side setback oftwenty-five (25)feet to the East
property line.
3)Section 8-4.5 entitled "Standards of Development Applicable to All
Residential Development"specifies:
a.Parking Requirements:A minimum oftwo (2)off-street parking spaces
per dwelling unit shall be provided.
•The Applicant has represented that the subject property has a total of
four (4)off-street parking stalls;two stalls for the existing dwelling unit
and two stalls for the proposed dwelling unit.
4)Section 8-9.2 entitled Open District Development Standards"specifies:
"(l)The amount ofland coverage created,including buildings and
pavement,shall not exceed ten percent (10%)ofthe lot or parcel area."
*As represented,the total square footage ofthe Open District portion of
the subject property is 6,134 square feet.As such,the total allowable lot
coverage for the Open District portion is approximately 613.4 square
feet.As proposed,the lot coverage for the development that includes the
dwelling unit and concrete landings will be approximately 608 square
feet.
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Rcport
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
5|Page
5)Section 8-15.2 entitled "Additional Dwelling Unit in Residentially Zoned
Lots"states:
"(a)Notwithstanding other provisions to the contrary,for any residentially
zoned lot where only one single family residential dwelling is permitted,one
(1)additional single family residential dwelling unit (attached or detached)
may be developed,provided:
(1)All applicable County requirements,not inconsistent with Sec.46-4(c),
Hawai i Revised Statutes and the County's zoning provisions applicable to
residential use are met,including,but not limited to,building height,
setback,maximum lot coverage,parking,and floor area requirements."
4.Chapter 8,Article 11.Special Treatment Districts ofthe KCC
A.Section 8-11.1 entitled "Purpose"species:
"The Special Treatment District specifies the additional performance required
when critical or valuable social or aesthetic characteristics ofthe environment or
community exist in the same area as a parcel where particular functions or uses
may be developed."
B.Section 8-11.3 entitled "Generally Permitted Uses,Structures and Development"
states:
"All uses,stmctures,or development shall require a Use Permit,except repairs
or modifications ofland and existing structures that do not substantially change
the exterior form or appearance ofthree (3)dimensional stmctures or land;
provided that no uses,sto-uctures,or development shall be allowed in Special
Treatment-Open Space Districts without express provision to the contrary..."
C.Section 8-11.4 entitled "Uses,Stmctures and Development Requiring a Use
Permit"specifies:
(a)Any use,stmcture or development permitted with or without a Use
Pennit in the underlying Use District in which the parcel or lot is located
that is consistent with an approved plan for development in accordance
withSec.8-11.5."
5.The subject property is NOT located within the Visitor Designation Area (VDA).
6.The State Land Use District (SLUD)designation is "URBAN"and the project is
consistent with improvements typically situated with the urban designation,
pursuant to Chapter 205 ofthe Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS).
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7;Directol's Report
Keopele &AsUey MoBride
April 12,2022
6|Pa ge
7.Use Permit
Pursuant to Article 3 ofthe Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (CZO),Chapter 8 of
the Kauai county Code (1987),the purpose ofthe Use Permit Procedure is to assure
the proper integration into the community ofuses which may be suitable only in
specific locations ofa district,or only under certain conditions,or only ifthe uses
are designed,arranged or conducted in a particular manner,and to prohibit the uses
ifproper integration cannot be assured.Section 8-3.2 ofthe CZO specifies a Use
Permit may be granted only ifthe Planning Commission fmds that the use meets the
following criteria:
1)The use must be a compatible use;
2)The use must not be detrimental to persons or property in the area;
3)The use must not cause substantial environmental consequences;and
4)The use must not be inconsistent with the intent ofthe Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance (CZO)and General Plan.
IX.PRELIMINARY EVALUATION
In evaluating the Applicant's request to allow the construction ofthe proposed
residence,the following shall be being considered:
1.General Plan
The proposed development satisfies the following policies ofthe General PIan,as
taken from Section 1.3 and 1.4:
A.1.3,entitled "VISIONS AND GOALS"
1)Goal #1 "Sustainable Island"-The proposed constmction ofa single-
family residence in an existing residential neighborhood is an example of
responsible growth that will meet future housing needs while using
resources in a sustainable manner.
2)Goal #2 "Unique and Beautiful Place"-The single-story and modest
design ofthe structure will ensure that the existing scenic views and
character ofKilauea town will continue to be a unique and beautiful place.
3)Goal #3 "A Healthy and Resilient People"-The proposed residence will
contribute towards equitable communities by providing a housing unit in
Kilauea that is within walking distance to the school,to jobs,and to other
services in the area.
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Report
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
7|Page
4)Goal #4 "An Equitable Place,with Opportunity for All"-The proposed
residence will promote a healthy and resilient community by being located
in Kilauea Town and in walking distance to the school and nearby services.
B.Section 1.4,entitled "POLICIES TO GUIDE GROWTH"
1)Policy #1 "Manage Growth to Preserve Rural Character"-The
proposed residence is considered infill development and will accommodate
future growth within the existing residential neighborhood.By
concentrating growth within the neighborhood,it will reduce the need to
develop new areas outside ofthe town and will thereby preserve the rural
character.
2)Poliey #2 "Provide Local Housing"-The proposed residence will
contribute towards the local housing supply.
3)Policy #4 "Design Healthy and Complete Neighborhoods"-The
proposed application will promote a healthy and complete neighborhood by
ensuring that residential housing is located in proximity to schools,jobs,
and other services.
4)Policy#6 "Reduce the Cost of Living"-By directing the proposed
development within the town,the proposed application will reduce the cost
ofliving by being located within walking distance to schoolsjobs,and
other services.
5)Policy#8 "Protect Kaua'i's Scenic Beauty"-The single-story structure
design will protect Kauai's scenic beauty by not obstructing or detracting
from scenic views and natural landscapes in the surrounding area.
6)Policy#17 "Nurture our Keiki"-The proposed residence will nurture
keiki by contributing towards a safe and walkable community with access
to schools,parks,stores,and housing.
7)Policy#18 "Honor our Kupuna"-The proposed residence will honor our
kupuna by directing growth within the town core with safe and walkable
access to services and other nearby amenities
2.Use Permit
Pursuant to Article 3 ofthe Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (CZO),Chapter 8 of
the Kauai county Code (1987),the purpose ofthe Use Permit Procedure is to assure
the proper integration into the community ofuses which may be suitable only in
specific locations ofa district,or only under certain conditions,or only ifthe uses
8|Page
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Report
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
are designed,arranged or conducted in a particular manner,and to prohibit the uses
ifproper integration cannot be assured.Section 8-3.2 ofthe CZO specifies a Use
Permit may be granted only ifthe Planning Commission fmds that the use meets the
following criteria:
1)The use must be a compatible use;
2)The use must not be detrimental to persons or property in the area;
3)The use must not cause substantial enviromnental consequences;and
4)The use must not be inconsistent with the intent ofthe Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance (CZO)and General Plan.
A.Based on the foregoing,the following aspects are considered:
1)Compatible Use -As previously noted,single-family detached dwellings
are a permissible use within the Open (0)zoning district.The proposed
development is compatible with the surrounding uses and will have no
significant impact on the surrounding environment as the project site is
located within a residential subdivision and the subject property is
surrounded by similar parcels that are located within the State Land Use
Urban District,and the County R-4,R-6,and Open zoning districts.
3.North Shore Development Plan Standards
The proposed development does not exceed the maximum allowable height limit of
twenty-five feet as specified in Section 10-2.4 ofthe North Shore Development
Plan and is consistent with its policies.
4.CZO Development Standards
As proposed,the project complies with the setback,lot coverage and off-street
parking requirements for development within the Open/Special Treatment -Public
(0/ST-P)zoning district as specified in Sections 8-2.4,8-4.3,8-4.5 and 8-9.2 ofthe
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (CZO).
Based on the existing zoning and size ofthe parcel,the proposed residential
structure will be considered an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU),pursuant to
Section 8-15 ofthe CZO.Prior to building permit approval,the Applicant should
complete and execute an ADU Clearance Fomi per Section 8-15.2(a).
5.Native Hawaiian Traditional and Cultural Rights
The subject property has been developed and in residential use since 1972.The
applicant has interviewed kupuna who are familiar with the area and is unaware of
any current traditional and customary practices on the subject property.Based on
the Applicant's consultation with kupuna and evaluating historical information that
was available to the department,the department finds that the proposed Project
involving a developed parcel should have no impact on any known Hawaiian
traditional or customary practices for the following reasons:
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Report
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
91 Page
o There are no known traditional or customary practices of native Hawaiians that
are presently occurring within the Project Site.
o There are no special gathering practices taking place within any portion ofthe
Project Site.
o The Project will not detrimentally affect access to any streams;access to the
shoreline or other adjacent shoreline areas;or gathering along any streams,the
shoreline or in the ocean.
o There are no known religious practices taking place within the Project Site.
o There are no known pre-contact cultural or historic sites or resources located
within the Project Site.
o There are no known burials within the Petidon Area.
X.PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
Based on the information contained in the Director's Report Findings and Evaluation,
the Planning Department concludes the following:
1.The project will not have significant adverse impacts to the environment or
the surrounding area.The proposal is generally in compliance with the criteria
outlined for the granting of a Use Permit and Class IV Zoning Permit;
2.The proposed development should not be detrimental to persons,property,or
the environment in the surrounding area;and
3.The development is consistent with the objectives/goals/policies ofthe County
General Plan and Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance.
The Applicant should institute the "Best Management Practices"to ensure that the
operation ofthis facility does not generate impacts that may affect the health,safety,
and welfare ofthose in the surrounding area ofthe proposal.
The Applicant shall implement to the extent possible sustainable building techniques
and operational methods for the project.
XI.PRELMINARY RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing evaluation and conclusion,it is hereby recommended Class IV
Zoning Pennit Z-IV-2022-7 and Use Permit U-2022-7,be APPROVED subject to the
following conditions:
1.The project shall be constmcted as represented.Any changes to the operation
and/or the respective stmctures shall be reviewed by the Planning Director to
determine whether Planning Commission review and approval is warranted.
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Report
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
io|P ag e
2.The proposed dwelling unit shall not be utilized for any transient
accommodation purposes.It shall not be used as a transient vacation rental
(TVR)or as a homestay.This restriction shall be incorporated into the deed
restrictions ofthe subject parcel in the event the property is sold to another
party,draft copies ofwhich shall be submitted to the Planning Department
prior to building permit application approval.
3.In order to ensure that the project is compatible with its surroundings and to
minimize the visual impact ofthe structures,the extemal color ofthe
proposed dwelling and landscape plan shall be ofmoderate to dark earth-tone
color.The proposed color scheme should be submitted to the Planning
Department for review and acceptance prior to building permit application.
4.Prior to building permit approval,the Applicant shall complete and execute
an ADU Clearance form for the proposed residential unit.
5.The Applicant is advised that should any archaeological or historical resources be
discovered during ground disturbing/constmction work,all work in the area ofthe
archaeological/historical findings shall immediately cease and the Applicant shall
contact the State Department ofLand and Natural Resources,Historic Preservation
Division at (808)692-8015 and the Planning Department at (808)241-4050 to
determine mitigation measures.
6.In order to minimize adverseimpacts on the Federally Listed Threatened Species,
Newell's Shearwater and other seabirds,ifextemal lighting is to be used in
connection with the proposed project,all extemal lighting shall be only ofthe
following types:downward-facing,shielded lights.Spotlights aimed upward or
spotlighting of structures shall be prohibited.
7.The Applicant shall develop and utilize Best Management Practices (B.M.P's)
during all phases of development in order to minimize erosion,dust,and
sedimentation impacts ofthe project to abutting properties.
8.The Applicant shall resolve and comply with the applicable standards and
requirements set forth by the State Health Department,State Historic Preservation
Division-DLNR,and the County Departments ofPublic Works,Transportation,and
Water.
9.The Planning Commission reserves the right to revise,add,or delete conditions of
approval in order to address or mitigate unforeseen impacts the project may,create,
or to revoke the permits through the proper procedures should conditions of
approval not be complied with or be violated.
Z-rv-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Report
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
ii|P a ge
10.The Applicant is advised that prior to construction and/or use,additional
govemment agency conditions may be imposed.It shall be the Applicant's
responsibility to resolve those conditions with the respective agency(ies).
The Planning Commission is further advised that this report does not represent the
Planning Department s final recommendation in view ofthe forthcoming public
hearing process scheduled for April 12,2022 whereby the entire record should be
considered prior to decision-making.The entire record should include but not be
limited to:
a.Pending govermnent agency comments;
b.Testimony from the general public and interested others;and
c.The Applicant's response to staffs report and recommendation as
provided herein.
/•
iNNETH A.ESTES
Planner
Approved &Recommended to Commission
KA'Afli?AJS.HULL
Director of Planning
Date:/&/;2C2.Z
Z-IV-2022-7,U-2022-7;Director's Report
Keopele &Ashley McBride
April 12,2022
i2|P ag e
EXHIBIT 'A'
(AGENCY COMMENTS)
COUNTY OF KAUA'I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
4444 RICE STREET,SUITE A473 LIHU'E,HAWAI'I 96766
(808)241-4050
FROM:Kaaina S.Hull,Director (Kenneth)Februaiy 10,2022
SUBJECT:Class FV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2022-7,Use Permit U-2022-7,Dwelling,Single
Family Detached
Tax Map Key:(4)5-2-006:014,Keopele V.&Ashley H.Mcbride,Applicant
TO:
D Department ofTransportation -STP DPW-Engineering
DOT-Highway,Kauai(info only)D DPW-Wastewater
D DOT-Airports,Kauai (info only)D DPW-Building
D DOT-Harbors,Kauai (info only)D DPW-SolidWaste
State Department of Health D Department ofParks &Recreation
D State Department ofAgriculture UBBBMHfijfi
State Office ofPlanning County Housing-Agency
D State Dept.of Bus.&Econ.Dev.Tourism d County Economic Development
D State Land Use Commission D KHPRC
State Historic Preservation Division Water Depanment
DLNR-Land Management Kaua'i Civil DefensenDLNR-Foresty &Wildlife a U.S.Postal DepartmentnDLNR-Aquatic Resources UH_Sea_Grant
D DLNR-OCCL D County Transportation Agency
Other:
FOR YOUR COMMENTS (pertaining to your department):
Property to maintain proper fire department access requirements
This matter is scheduled for a public hearing before the County of Kauai Planning Commission on
4/12/2022 at the Lihue Civic Center,Moikeha Building,Meeting Room 2A-2B,4444 Rice Street,
Lihue,Kauai,at 9:00 am or soon thereafter,If we do not receive your agency comments within oae (1)
month from the date of this request,we will assume that there are no objections to this permit request.
Mahalo!
Application for
Special Management Area Use Permit:
Hanalei Traders
Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization
December 2021
Submitted to:
Kaua‘i County Planning Department
4444 Rice Street, Ste A473
Lihue, HI 96766
Prepared for:
Hanalei Traders, Inc.
P.O. Box 511
Hanalei, HI 96714
Prepared by:
SUSTAINABLE RESOURCES GROUP INTN’L, INC.
111 Hekili Street, Suite A373
Kailua, HI 96734
Tel/Fax: 808-356-0552 • www.srgii.com
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
This page intentionally left blank
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
i
Contents
Contents ......................................................................................................................................................... i
Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... ii
1 Applicant and Property Information ..................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Applicant Information ................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Property Information .................................................................................................................... 1
2 Property Features ................................................................................................................................. 2
2.1 Location ......................................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Property Features and Boundaries ............................................................................................... 2
2.3 State Land Use District, County Zone and Kaua‘i General Plan Land Use Designation ................ 2
2.4 Flood Zone..................................................................................................................................... 2
2.5 Proposed Structures...................................................................................................................... 2
2.6 Topography ................................................................................................................................... 2
2.7 Environmentally Sensitive Areas ................................................................................................... 2
2.8 Certified Shoreline / Shoreline Setbacks ....................................................................................... 3
3 Project Description................................................................................................................................ 3
4 Summary of Permits.............................................................................................................................. 4
5 Consistency with the County of Kaua‘i General Plan and Zoning Ordinances ...................................... 4
5.1 County of Kaua‘i General Plan - Section 1.3: Visions and Goals ................................................... 4
5.2 County of Kaua‘i General Plan – Section 1.4 Policies to Guide Growth ........................................ 5
5.3 County Zoning Ordinance ............................................................................................................. 6
6 Land Use of the Project Site and Surrounding Area ............................................................................. 7
7 Potable Water, Stormwater, Wastewater, Solid Waste Disposal, and Sewage Disposal ..................... 7
8 Protected Species .................................................................................................................................. 8
9 Environmental Assessment ................................................................................................................. 10
10 Historic and Cultural Considerations .............................................................................................. 11
10.1 SHPD Consultation ...................................................................................................................... 11
10.2 Ka Pa‘akai o ka ‘Aina Analysis (Native Hawaiian Customary and Traditional Rights) ................. 11
10.3 Community Access ...................................................................................................................... 12
11 Impacts on Surrounding Area ......................................................................................................... 12
12 BMPs ............................................................................................................................................... 13
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
ii
13 Water Quality Monitoring ............................................................................................................... 13
14 SMA Considerations ........................................................................................................................ 13
14.1 Recreational Resources ............................................................................................................... 13
14.2 Historic Resources ....................................................................................................................... 13
14.3 Scenic and Open Space Resources .............................................................................................. 14
14.4 Coastal Ecosystems and Coastal Hazards ................................................................................... 14
14.5 Economic Uses ............................................................................................................................ 14
15 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 14
Appendix A. Construction Estimate ....................................................................................................... A-1
Appendix B. Photos ................................................................................................................................ B-1
Appendix C. Figures ................................................................................................................................ C-1
Appendix D. FONSI ................................................................................................................................. D-1
Appendix E. Consultation ....................................................................................................................... E-1
Appendix F. Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Plan ..................................................................... F-1
Appendix G. Special Management Area Permit Assessment Form ....................................................... G-1
Acronyms
BMPs Best Management Practices
CWRM Commission on Water Resource Management
CZM Coastal Zone Management
CZO Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
DLNR Department of Land and Natural Resources
EA Environmental Assessment
ESA Endangered Species Act
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact
HAR Hawaii Administrative Rules
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MSL Mean Sea Level
NWP Nationwide Permit
OHA Office of Hawaiian Affairs
SHPD State Historic Preservation Division
SMA Special Management Area
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
1
1 Applicant and Property Information
1.1 Applicant Information
Applicant: Hanalei Traders, Inc., 5-5016 Kuhio Hwy, Hanalei, HI 96714, 808-346-2561
Agent: Andrew Hood, 111 Hekili St. Suite A373, Kailua, HI, 96734, 808-261-0862, ahood@srgii.com
Site Address: 5-5016 Kuhio Hwy. Hanalei, HI, 96714
TMK: (4) 5-5-010:067 Property Size: 2.32 acres
State Land Use Designation: Urban District County Zoning Designation: Commercial
General Plan Designation: Natural
Nature of Development: Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization
1.2 Introduction
The Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization (herein referred to as biowall) project seeks
to stabilize an eroding portion of river bank along the Hanalei River. The project was previously granted a
Special Management Area (SMA) Minor permit dated April 7, 2017. The Hanalei Traders was unable to
initiate the project prior to the expiration of that permit due to a catastrophic flood event that occurred
in April 2018 that caused significant structural damages on the property and resulted in financial hardship.
The estimated cost of the project in July 2016 was $485,000. Since that time the project costs have
increased to $600,000 due to increased material and labor costs, and thus an application for a SMA Use
Permit is being submitted. Other than cost, no changes to the project have been made since the previous
application. (Construction estimate is included in Appendix A).
1.3 Property Information
The project site is located on the Hanalei Traders property, on the North Shore of Kaua‘i, Hawai‘i. The
property is bordered by Kuhio Highway to the south/southeast, Hanalei River to the north and east, and
a privately owned parcel to the west. The property has one large building (Hanalei Dolphin Center), five
rental cottages, a small shed, landscaped grounds with walking paths, and several permanent cement
outdoor eating tables scattered on the lawn area between the restaurant and the Hanalei River. The
Hanalei Dolphin Center lies on the southern portion of the property approximately 20 ft from Kuhio
Highway and houses a restaurant, fish market, and gift shop. There are two gravel parking areas that
service the Center, one to the east (adjacent to the highway) and the other to the north (adjacent to the
river). The cottages are north of the Center and are aligned along and setback from the top of the west
bank of the river. Each cottage has designated parking off the gravel driveway that provides access from
the Center’s north parking lot.
The river bank is eroding at the project site, resulting in an unstable bank that is eight to twelve feet high
from its top down to the bed of the river. During high flows the bank erodes inland, resulting in loss of
land and narrowing the distance between the top of the bank and buildings and other structures on the
property. The opposite bank of the river is overgrown with hau bush (Hibiscus tiliaceus) that has
encroached into the river over decades. Hanalei Traders, Inc. proposes to stabilize approximately 450 ft
of eroding river bank by installing a bioengineered design to address erosion problems and to protect
private property and existing infrastructure. Photos of the property and project site are included in
Appendix B.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
2
2 Property Features
2.1 Location
The subject property is in Hanalei, Kaua‘i, Hawaii, shown on the Location Map (Appendix C, Figure 1) and
on the Tax Map (Appendix C, Figure 2).
2.2 Property Features and Boundaries
The subject property is 2.32 acres. The boundaries as well as several features of the property such as the
Hanalei Dolphin Building, the cottages, the ‘auwai and the highway are shown on Figure 3 (Appendix C).
2.3 State Land Use District, County Zone and Kaua‘i General Plan Land Use
Designation
As shown on the State Land Use District Map (Appendix C, Figure 4), the subject property is in the Urban
District. The subject property is designated as Commercial in the County of Kaua‘i Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance (CZO). As shown on the Kaua‘i General Plan Land Use Designation Map (Appendix C, Figure 5),
the subject property is designated Natural.
2.4 Flood Zone
The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Map (FM1500020055E) (Appendix C, Figure 6) shows that the
subject property is within Flood Zone AE Floodway (the Special Flood Hazard Area). Zone AE Floodway is
within the 100-year floodplain, with a 1% annual chance of a 100-year flood occurring or being exceeded
annually and a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30-year mortgage. The FIRM Map also shows the
project site is within the tsunami evacuation zone. Construction of the biowall will not change the chance
of flooding on the Hanalei Traders property, or any of the neighboring properties. The biowall will not
change the base flood elevation on the subject property or on properties up and downstream.
2.5 Proposed Structures
The extent of the biowall being used for river bank stabilization is shown in Figure 7 (Appendix C). Figure
8 (Appendix C) depicts a typical section of the biowall.
2.6 Topography
Topography at the project site and the property in general is relatively flat, as is normal within a floodplain
area, with elevations ranging from +7.5 to +5 ft mean sea level (msl). The river bank is a near vertical drop
of between eight and twelve feet from the subject property edge down to the bed of the river. The
proposed project with not change the topography or any of the drainage patterns of the property. No
grading will occur. Light grubbing will be conducted to remove the non-native vegetation from the top of
the river bank down to the normal high water line along the eroding bank within the project area. Removal
of the non-native vegetation within the project site is necessary to complete the biowall.
2.7 Environmentally Sensitive Areas
The only environmentally sensitive areas near the construction site of the biowall are an area of non-
native plants along the river bank that are occasionally used by endangered waterbirds for feeding and
the waters of the Hanalei River. Practices to avoid any adverse impacts to endangered species and the
Hanalei River are described in Section 8 and Section 12.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
3
2.8 Certified Shoreline / Shoreline Setbacks
The subject property is not located along the shoreline as defined in HRS Chapter 205A. As a result, the
proposed biowall is not subject to the provisions of the Shoreline Setback Ordinance.
3 Project Description
Hanalei Traders, Inc. proposes to install a bioengineered river bank stabilization design along 450 feet of
the Hanalei River. The project will be constructed occur over a twelve-week period beginning shortly after
the acquisition of all required permits. Installation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and construction
is expected to take ten weeks, and two weeks have been added to account for potential work stoppages.
The biowall will be constructed in increments of approximately 50 linear feet, in that all steps involved in
constructing the biowall will be completed before construction begins on the next increment.
Construction of each increment will take five days to complete. In-channel work, consisting of placement
of boulder rip rap, will only occur during base flow periods as indicated on the Hanalei River gauge station
and during periods of no rainfall. This will ensure that high flow events will not occur during in-channel
construction. The project involves the following:
• Installation of structural and non-structural site-specific BMPs at the property prior to any delivery
of materials or construction on the biowall (Appendix C, Figure 9).
• Installation of floating turbidity barrier prior to any work on each increment.
• Light grubbing to remove existing non-native vegetation from the river bank.
• Placement of washed boulders [2 to 3 ft diameter] from existing bed of river channel against toe
of the bank up to the ordinary high water level (1.3 ft msl). Boulders will protect the toe of the
bank from erosion and provide the foundation for placement of other materials. Equipment
operation for this task will be conducted from the top of the river bank, not “in-water”. A total of
216 cubic yards of washed boulders will be required.
• Placement of woven, porous, geotextile bags filled with grow medium made up of 80% sand and
20% compost from the top of the boulders to the top of the existing bank.
• Use of geogrid fabric to secure and anchor the interlocking geotextile bags to the river bank.
• Installation of plants (three species of native sedges and two species of native shrubs).
o Sedges will be placed between geotextile bags and geogrid fabric after each layer of bags has
been installed.1
o Woody native or Polynesian shrubs will be placed along top of existing bank after completion
of the biowall.
1 The Department of the Army permit requires that no non-native plant species introductions to the river shall result
from project related activities.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
4
4 Summary of Permits
Table 1 identifies the status of permits and approvals required for project construction.
Table 1. Required Permits and Approvals
Permit or Approval Agency Completed/Permit # Expires
Nationwide Permit
(NWP) #13 (CWA
Section 404)
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
Approval Received:
March 27, 2018
Department of the Army File
No. POH-2009-00354
March 19, 2022*
Environmental
Assessment Hawai‘i DLNR FONSI Issued
October 23, 2016 N/A
CZM Consistency
Determination
State of Hawai‘i,
Office of Planning
Approval Received:
March 23, 2018
DTS201803220914NA
Department of the Army File
No. POH-2009-00354
Valid as long as the NWP
from the Army is valid.
Right of Entry Hawai‘i DLNR Land Division,
CWRM
Approval Received:
June 5, 2018
Ref. No. 13KD-074
N/A
Special Management
Area Permit
County of Kaua‘i
Planning Department
This Application
(SMA Use Permit) -------
Zoning Permit
Application
County of Kaua‘i
Planning Department
Submittal accompanying the
SMA Use Permit Application -------
Stream Channel
Alteration Permit
Hawai‘i DLNR Land Division,
CWRM
Approval Received:
August 17, 2021
Permit No. 5687.2
August 17, 2023
Completion Report Hawai‘i DLNR Land Division,
CWRM
To be submitted upon
completion of the project -------
*The permit will be renewed prior to construction of the biowall if construction is not anticipated to be complete by the expiration
date.
5 Consistency with the County of Kaua‘i General Plan and Zoning Ordinances
The proposed project is compatible with all applicable components of the County of Kaua‘i General Plan.
The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives described in the North Shore
Development Plan and does not violate any County of Kaua‘i Comprehensive Zoning Ordinances.
5.1 County of Kaua‘i General Plan - Section 1.3: Visions and Goals
Section 1.3 (Vision and Goals) of the County of Kaua‘i General Plan details the overarching goals that will
provide for the desired long-range outcome. The four goals are: A Sustainable Island; A Unique and
Beautiful Place; A Healthy and Resilient People; and An Equitable Place, with Opportunity for All.
Goal: A Sustainable Island. The proposed project would support this goal by protecting physical
infrastructure, both natural (river bank) and man-made (cottages) with a natural systems engineering
design, which is a sustainable solution. The streambank stabilization project would reduce the amount of
soil being discharged into the Hanalei River during heavy rain events, and support establishment of native
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
5
plants. Bank stabilization will also help support a small, locally owned business in Hanalei by protecting its
revenue generating elements.
Goal: A Unique and Beautiful Place. Bank stabilization will protect the livelihood of a small business in
Hanalei that supports the visitor industry, helping to provide adequate facilities for welcoming tourists to
rural Hanalei. If the project is not completed, the river bank in front of the Hanalei Traders cottages will
continue to erode at an alarming rate, with the eventual outcome of the buildings being undermined and
deemed unsafe for occupancy. This would eliminate a revenue source for the business / property owner.
Goal: A Healthy and Resilient People. The bank stabilization project is planned to help build resilience by
employing a natural systems engineering approach to protect elements of the built environment. Recent
flooding, in part resulting from a changing climate (more frequent and higher intensity) has had a negative
effect on the site in the form of significant bank erosion. This project will help stabilize the bank and
minimize potential future impacts from flood events.
Goal: An Equitable Place, with Opportunity for All. The bank stabilization project will allow the property
and small business owner to continue to provide hospitality services in the same area that they call home,
Hanalei.
5.2 County of Kaua‘i General Plan – Section 1.4 Policies to Guide Growth
Section 1.4 (Polices to Guide Growth) of the County of Kaua‘i General Plan outlines nineteen policies to
address the most important issues to Kaua‘i residents regarding existing issues and future growth.
Information on how the project is consistent with these policies is included in Table 2.
Table 2. Project Consistency with County of Kaua‘i General Plan – Section 1.4 Policies to Guide Growth
Policy # Policy Title Project Consistency
1 Manage Growth to Preserve
Rural Character N/A
2
Provide Affordable Housing
While Facilitating a Diversity
of Privately-Developed
Housing For Local Families
N/A
3
Recognize the Identity of
Kaua‘i’s Individual Towns
and Districts.
The Hanalei Cottages and the Dolphin Restaurant have been
located on the edge of Hanalei since the early 1970s and are part
of the fabric of the town. Having small cottages for hosting visitors
to Hanalei helps preserve the rural character of the area.
4 Design Healthy and
Complete Neighborhoods
Having a thriving locally-owned small business in the tourist
industry helps keep jobs local to Hanalei.
5 Make Strategic
Infrastructure Investments N/A
6 Reduce the Cost of Living N/A
7 Build a Balanced Multimodal
Transportation System N/A
8 Protect Kaua‘i’s Scenic
Beauty
The proposed biowall will aid in preserving the scenic beauty
along a stretch of the Hanalei River. The project would reduce the
amount of soil being discharged into the Hanalei River during
heavy rain events. The river bank will be stabilized with native
plants, which will add to the scenic beauty of the property for
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
6
Policy # Policy Title Project Consistency
visitors to the restaurant and the cottages, as well as recreational
users of the Hanalei River.
9 Uphold Kaua‘i as a Unique
Visitor Destination
Having a thriving locally-owned small business in the tourist
industry helps limit the need for additional resort growth in the
area.
10 Help Business Thrive Hanalei Traders is a long-standing local small business and project
implementation would allow them to remain in business.
11 Help Agricultural Lands Be
Productive N/A
12 Protect Our Watersheds The project would reduce the amount of soil being discharged
into the Hanalei River during heavy rain events.
13 Complete Kaua‘i’s Shift to
Clean Energy N/A
14 Prepare For Climate Change The project would help protect the Hanalei Traders property from
impacts related to sea level rise resulting from climate change.
15 Respect Native Hawaiian
Rights and Wahi Pana
No Native Hawaiian cultural sites, customary gathering rights, or
traditions would be affected by project implementation.
16 Protect Access to Kaua‘i’s
Treasured Places
Project implementation would not change access to the Hanalei
River, nor would it impact any subsistence or customary practices.
17 Nurture Our Keiki N/A
18 Honor Our Kupuna N/A
19 Communicate with Aloha N/A
5.3 County Zoning Ordinance
The Hanalei Traders property, including the project area, is located within the County of Kaua‘i CZO
Commercial District. CZO Section 2.4(s) outlines the Uses and Structures permitted in the CZO Commercial
District, which includes accessory uses and structures.
The purposes of the Commercial District per CZO Article 6 are:
(a) To designate areas suitable for commercial and public or private business activities distributed so as
to supply goods and services to the public in a convenient and efficient manner.
(b) To relate commercial and business activities to established or projected transport, utility, and
community patterns so that they may contribute to the general health, safety, and welfare of the
public.
(c) To assure that commercial and business development and uses will not detract from the
environmental qualities of the surrounding areas.
With respect to purpose “c”, construction of the biowall will improve the environmental quality of the
Hanalei Traders property in that it will no longer be eroding into the river. Construction of the biowall will
improve water quality in the river since erosion of the river bank in this area is currently contributing to
turbidity and increased suspended solids in the river. Construction of the biowall will not affect any of the
surrounded properties and will not detract from the environmental qualities of the surrounding areas.
Development standards for commercial properties are outlined in CZO Article 6, Section 8.6(s). The focus
of Article 6 is on buildings and their construction (e.g. setbacks, parking, height limitations). One section
that is applicable to the project is Section 8-6.3 (g)(4) which states, “All uncovered areas shall be
landscaped with living plant material”. Project plans include adding living plant material to all areas where
non-native plants will be removed for construction of the biowall.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
7
6 Land Use of the Project Site and Surrounding Area
The subject property is located along the Hanalei River estuary, approximately one mile upstream of the
Hanalei River mouth at Hanalei Bay. It is a landscaped parcel with several buildings used for commercial
purposes (Section 1.3). The proposed project site (the river bank) does not contain any infrastructure, nor
it is used for any purpose except river viewing by people.
Water velocities and depths of the river in the vicinity vary with ocean tidal flux and river discharges.
Water surface elevations are highest when high discharges are coincident to rising tide levels, and lowest
during base flow discharges at mean low low tides. The river channel geometry in this stretch has been
altered due to growth of hau bush into the channel, predominantly from the east side of the river. A
review of historic air images finds that the channel cross section surface, in the stretch where the subject
property is located, has decreased in sections where hau bush has encroached by 20 to 30 feet, thus
changing hydrodynamics in that section of the river Surface velocities along the subject property in
general (not including flooding discharges) do not appear to exceed three feet per second.
Vegetation found along the river bank and in the river includes non-native emergents and riparian species:
California grass (Brachiria mutica), wedelia (Sphagneticola trilobata), Chinese violet (Asystasia gangetica)
and umbrella flatsedge (Cyperus involucratus). The rest of the property is grassy lawn and landscape plants
including non-native, Polynesian introduction, and a few native plants, though the natives do not
necessarily represent vegetation that was at the site prior to development. Aside from the river and low
areas of the river bank, within the property there is little to no habitat suitable for native species to
permanently inhabit.
Ranching (cattle and/or buffalo) occurs on two properties adjacent to the Hanalei Traders property, the
Princeville Ranch directly upstream and across Kuhio Highway (south), and the Mowry property across
the river (east) (Appendix C, Figure 2). Princeville Ranch also contains some taro lo‘i in the portion of
property closest to the Hanalei Traders property, across the highway. The boundary of the Princeville
Ranch property is aligned along an ‘auwai that empties into the Hanalei River at the northern most tip of
the property. It is used to access the Hanalei River by kayakers and paddlers who rent water equipment
from the neighboring property. Further west of the Hanalei Traders property is a residential area.
7 Potable Water, Stormwater, Wastewater, Solid Waste Disposal, and Sewage
Disposal
Potable water is obtained from the Department of Water County of Kaua‘i. Storm water runoff from most
of the property drains to the west via sheet flow to the ‘auwai. Since much of the site has landscaped
pervious surfaces surrounding the buildings and other impervious surfaces, storm water runoff is limited.
There are no improved drainage systems or natural drainage channels that carry storm water into either
the ‘auwai or the Hanalei River. Wastewater from the Hanalei Center and the cottages is treated onsite
via a series of septic tanks. A leach field located to the west of the cottages is used to dispose of treated
effluent. The project does not involve any changes to stormwater drainage, wastewater treatment, or
sewage disposal. Freshwater from the potable water system may be used to irrigate the newly installed
landscape plants on the top of the river bank, until they become established.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
8
Solid waste generated by the restaurant, fish market, and cottages is disposed of into onsite dumpsters
and brought to the County of Kaua‘i transfer station. Construction of the biowall will result in very little
construction waste. Any green waste generated will be removed from the site and disposed of at the
nearest transfer station with a Greenwaste Diversion Program (likely the Hanalei Transfer Station). All
solid waste generated will be disposed of at a solid waste disposal facility that complies with the applicable
provisions of Title 11, Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Chapter 11-58.1, “Solid Waste Management
Control”. There will be no open burning of waste, on or off site.
8 Protected Species
Vegetation at the subject property consists of non-native emergents and riparian species along the bank
and in the river, and landscape plants and grassy lawn above the bank and throughout the rest of the
property. There is no sensitive vegetation (i.e. rare, threatened, endangered, or proposed for listing
species) on the property.
There are native and non-native animals, including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, crustaceans,
mollusks, insects, and fish that are found in the Hanalei River and on adjacent properties. Most of the
animals that potentially use the project site and adjacent river are transients through the area. This
includes: one federally listed endangered bat species; four federally listed endangered waterbirds; one
State listed endangered bird; several migratory waterbirds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA); and one federally threatened species of sea turtle. Protected species that are known to occur, or
potentially occur, in the vicinity of the project site are listed in Table 3.
Table 3. Protected Species that Potentially Occur in the Vicinity of the Project Site
Species Common / Hawaiian Name Status Occurs at
Project Site
Mammals
Lasiurus cinereus Hawaiian hoary bat /
‘Ōpe‘ape‘a
Endangered Potentially
Birds
Anas acuta Northern pintail /
Koloa mapu Protected MBTA Potentially
Anas clypeata Northern shoveler /
Koloa moha Protected MBTA Potentially
Anas wyvilliana Hawaiian duck Endangered /
Protected MBTA Potentially
Asio flammeus
sandwichensis
Hawaiian short-eared owl /
Pueo
State listed
Endangered Potentially
Bulbulcus ibis Cattle egret Protected MBTA Confirmed
Fulica alai Hawaiian coot /
‘Alae ke‘oke‘o
Endangered /
Protected MBTA Potentially
Gallinula chloropus
sandvicensis
Hawaiian common moorhen
/ ‘Alae ‘ula
Endangered /
Protected MBTA Confirmed
Tringa incana (formerly
Heteroscelus incanus)
Wandering tattler /
‘Ulili Protected MBTA Potentially
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
9
Species Common / Hawaiian Name Status Occurs at
Project Site
Himantopus mexicanus
knudseni
Hawaiian stilt /
Ae‘o
Endangered /
Protected MBTA Potentially
Nycticorax nycticorax
hoactli
Black-crowned night-heron /
‘Auku‘u Protected MBTA Confirmed
Pterodroma
sandwichensis Hawaiian petrel Endangered /
Protected MBTA Confirmed
Puffinus newelli Newell’s shearwater Threatened /
Protected MBTA Confirmed
Reptiles
Chelonia mydas Green sea turtle / Honu Threatened Confirmed
Implementation of the proposed project will not result in any adverse effects to native wildlife species,
including those protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the MBTA. Construction BMPs will
be used to avoid any adverse impacts on fish and wildlife (Section 12 and Appendix C, Figure 9).
Additionally, as recommended by Department of Land and Natural Resource (DLNR) Department of Fish
and Wildlife, the following practices to avoid any adverse impacts specifically to birds and bats will be
followed. Two weeks prior to the start of construction a knowledgeable wildlife biologist will inspect the
site to determine if there are any nesting waterbirds. In the unlikely event that nesting waterbirds are
present, construction will be delayed until all chicks have fledged and left the area. The project will not
entail any nighttime work or the use of night construction lights, which if used could attract Newell’s
shearwaters (Puffinus newelli) or Hawaiian petrels (Pterodroma sandwichensis) and result in birds
becoming disoriented and falling to the ground. No trees greater than 15 ft in height will be removed.
In the long term, implementation of the proposed project will likely be beneficial to fish and wildlife
(primarily waterbirds) due to improved habitat conditions in the immediate vicinity of the subject
property, as well as decreasing sedimentation in the river in general.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
10
9 Environmental Assessment
An Environmental Assessment (EA) was completed for this project and a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) was issued on October 23, 2016 by DLNR Land Division (Appendix D). Informal Section 7
consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Historic Preservation Act Section 106
consultation with the DLNR State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD), and agency and community
outreach were conducted during the EA process. Appendix E lists the agencies, citizen groups, and
individuals contacted. Relevant points of the EA are discussed below. Table 3 summarizes the
environmental consequences detailed in the EA for the proposed action and no action alternatives. The
EA can be viewed at http://oeqc2.doh.hawaii.gov/EA_EIS_Library/2016-10-23-KA-FEA-Hanalei-River-
Bank-Stabilization.pdf.
Table 4. Summary of Environmental Consequences
Environmental
Variable
Alternative 1:
Proposed Action
Alternative 2:
No Action
Effect Effect
Physical Factors
Location, Land Use,
and Infrastructure Provide protection of existing infrastructure. Instability of river bank poses threat to
infrastructure and land use.
Topography,
Geology, and Soils Greatly reduce erosion. Continuing erosion.
Water Resources Negligible effect due to employment of BMPs. Continuing adverse impacts of
increased sedimentation and turbidity.
Air Quality Negligible effect due to employment of BMPs. No impacts or changes.
Noise Small and temporary increase in noise at the
subject property. No impacts or changes.
Scenic Resources Create a more desirable scenic state both on the
river bank and in the water clarity.
Continuing adverse impacts of
increased turbidity in the river and lack
of vegetation on the river bank.
Biological Factors
Vegetation Removal of non-native vegetation and installation
of native and Polynesian vegetation.
Continuing removal of existing
vegetation from river bank.
Fish and Wildlife Beneficial effects due to habitat improvements,
primarily for fish and native water birds.
Continuing adverse impacts of
increased sedimentation.
Habitat Habitat improvements. Continuing adverse impacts of
increased sedimentation.
Socioeconomic and Cultural Factors
Socioeconomic
Resources
Several benefits to local economy including
temporary contractor jobs, maintaining
employment of current employees, long term
income for property owners and supporting
tourism input into the local economy. Benefits
residents and tourists through improvements to
scenic resources, water quality, and habitat.
Loss of infrastructure value and
income. Loss of tax and tourist
revenue. Jeopardizes employment of
some locals
Recreational
Resources
Beneficial due to decreased sedimentation and
turbidity. No impacts or changes.
Historical and
Cultural Resources No impacts or changes. No impacts or changes.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
11
10 Historic and Cultural Considerations
10.1 SHPD Consultation
Consultation with SHPD was conducted throughout the development of the EA. SRGII consulted with SHPD
Kaua‘i to determine if there were any historic or cultural features present within the project area or on
the subject property. A review of the National and State Registers of Historic Places and consultation with
SHPD revealed that there are no historic properties listed or eligible for listing within or directly adjacent
to the subject property. In October 2015 the lead archeologist from the SHPD Kaua‘i office performed a
field inspection at the subject property. Although this was not a formal archeological survey, the field
inspection did not reveal any positively identified historic or cultural features. The presence of some
vertically aligned rocks set perpendicular to the river bank between and adjacent to Cottages 4 and 5, as
well as a pile of rocks fronting Cottage 5 just inland from the top of the river bank, was noted. Although
the origin of the rocks is not known, they are likely landscaping features that were placed on the property
for aesthetic reasons.
The two rock structures located on the property will not be moved or otherwise impacted during any
construction work. Although the rocks are not believed to be cultural or historic features, to ensure no
damage occurs to the rocks, the construction documents that the contractors will review and sign off on
before commencing work will identify their location and show equipment ingress and egress paths that
avoid the rock features. Any other rock features encountered on the property that have not been
identified will also be protected from any construction impacts. To ensure that any historic or cultural
features will be properly identified, an archeologist will be onsite to monitor the construction and inspect
the project site, including the river bank, during the first two days of project implementation, which would
include the entire grubbing phase. Safeguards and mitigation strategies to avoid any impacts to potential
historic or cultural features will be included on construction drawings and site plans.
10.2 Ka Pa‘akai o ka ‘Aina Analysis (Native Hawaiian Customary and Traditional
Rights)
The proposed development will not affect any Native Hawaiian customary and traditional rights protected
under Article XII, Section 7 of the Hawai‘i State Constitution. The proposed project will not change existing
access to the Hanalei River, adversely affect any natural resources (e.g. plants, wildlife, water quality) in
the area, or hinder in any fashion the ability of Native Hawaiians to continue to exercise all rights,
customarily and traditionally employed for subsistence, cultural, and religious purposes. Other than the
river, there are no known valued cultural or historic resources that will be affected by implementation of
the project.
During September and October 2015, sixteen non-governmental organizations and individuals, as well as
the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) and the DLNR SHPD, were contacted via email and mailed letters to
inquire if they had any knowledge of on-going traditional activities, rights, or resources that might occur
in the vicinity of the proposed project, specifically within and along this section of the Hanalei River
(Appendix E). Activities were defined to include, but not be limited to, cultural practices, subsistence
activities, and religious and spiritual customs. SRGII received one written response to this inquiry, from
the Hanalei Canoe Club. The Canoe Club comments were mainly ecological in nature, however they did
remark that the installation work should not impede river access for the Club or any other river users.
SRGII responded to all comments and included that the installation will not impede river access. Both OHA
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
12
and SHPD responded via phone that they did not have any knowledge of on-going traditional activities,
rights, or resources that might occur in the vicinity of the proposed project.
10.3 Community Access
There is no public access to the river provided from the Hanalei Traders property. Construction of the
biowall would not change public access to or use of the river in any way.
11 Impacts on Surrounding Area
The project is located in the riparian area of the Hanalei River. Implementation of the project will not
involve any chemical herbicides or fertilizers. The project will not require any machinery to be placed in
the river to complete construction. Impacts to the surrounding area will be negligible or mitigated through
project design and project BMPs (Section 12 and Appendix C, Figure 9).
All vegetation removal will be done by light digging, using the minimum amount necessary to remove
plants. Sedges newly installed within the biowall, will be planted in a medium made up of 80% sand and
20% compost. No additional fertilizer or other soil amendments will be used. Since no fertilizers will be
used, and the amount of compost used in the geotextile bags is very low, there is no expected increase in
nutrients (specifically nitrogen and phosphorus) to any surrounding waters.
Plants installed as part of the design are expected to root into the geotextile bags and existing bank
material. The sedges will provide food source and cover for several endemic waterbirds that periodically
utilize this section of the river. The plants will shade the geotextile bags, decreasing their exposure to UV
degradation and increasing their life expectancy.
Large rocks used below the normal low water level are expected to provide habitat for native fish. The
river bed and banks are currently made up of fine gravels and silts. Rocks will enhance instream habitat
by increasing surface area for algae and other vegetative matter that grows on rock surfaces, which may
be utilized by native and endemic fishes. The rocks will also provide cover from predators for some fish.
Installation of the biowall will not affect the floodplain, any shoreline processes, the tsunami evacuation
zone, any geologically hazardous land, estuary, freshwater, or coastal water. Installation of the biowall
will have a positive effect on the estuary reach of the Hanalei River by enhancing water quality through
erosion control.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
13
12 BMPs
BMPs will be used during construction to reduce the potential for releasing sediment, including all
applicable BMPs outlined in the Interim Construction Best Management Practices for Sediment and
Erosion Control for the County of Kaua‘i. Prior to commencement, and during all project related activities,
the site will be inspected by the Project Manager to verify that all activity-based BMPs are in place. BMPs
will be installed in the equipment staging area, the stockpile area, the vehicle wash down area, and the
biowall construction site prior to any site disturbance. Locations of the BMPs are shown in Figure 9
(Appendix C).
Grubbing to remove non-native plants will only be done during low tides and outside of flood season.
Equipment operation for grubbing will be conducted from the top of the river bank, not “in-water” (no
equipment will be placed within the bed of the river channel). Any parts of the mechanical equipment,
such as the bucket of the tracked excavator used to place the boulders, will be cleaned of pollutants
including any petroleum products (e.g. grease and oil) that could be released into the river. A silt curtain,
made of a polystyrene geotextile fabric, with a top floatation device and an anchor chain, will be
temporarily placed in the river to catch sediments that may be released during construction. It will be
attached to the downstream and upstream project boundaries, forming an arc with a maximum distance
from the bank of ten feet. All exposed excavated slopes will be protected at the end of each work day
until construction of the biowall has been completed.
13 Water Quality Monitoring
Water quality monitoring of the Hanalei River adjacent to and 50 ft downriver of the project site will be
conducted as a condition of the Department of Army NWP. Pre-construction sampling will be done to
determine baseline conditions. During-construction sampling will be done to determine any changes
related to construction of the biowall. Post-construction sampling will occur weekly for a period of three
weeks after construction is completed and all in-water BMPs (floating turbidity barrier) are removed. An
Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Program that describes the monitoring requirements and data
quality objectives to be met during water quality monitoring has been developed (Appendix F).
14 SMA Considerations
This section highlights findings detailed in the SMA Permit Assessment (Appendix G).
14.1 Recreational Resources
The project will not have any negative impact on any public recreational opportunities located near the
subject property. The project will preserve the cottages on the Hanalei property that are utilized by
tourists and locals.
14.2 Historic Resources
The project will not affect any known historic, cultural, or archaeological resources. As a precaution, an
archaeologist will be present during the grubbing portion of project work to ensure proper identification
of any previously undiscovered historic and/or cultural resources.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
14
14.3 Scenic and Open Space Resources
The proposed development will occur on a 450 ft stretch of the Hanalei River. The Hanalei River is
designated as an American Heritage River based in part on its value as a scenic resource. The river is valued
by locals and tourists for its scenic beauty as well as other resources. The proposed development would
benefit scenic resources within the subject property and along a portion of the lower river reach. The
biowall would convert an eroding muddy river bank to a stretch of native plant species, which is a more
desirable scenic state. Native plants may also improve scenic resources by providing improved habitat for
native fauna in the river to linger near the subject property. The visual quality of the water adjacent to
the project area, and just downstream, would improve.
14.4 Coastal Ecosystems and Coastal Hazards
Installation of the biowall would not negatively affect the coastal ecosystem. The water quality of the
Hanalei estuary would be improved due to the decrease in erosion. The biowall would reduce the loss of
property due to erosion, but otherwise would not affect hazards related to tsunami, storm waves,
flooding, or subsidence.
14.5 Economic Uses
Installation of the biowall would not result in any changes to public facilities important to the State’s
economy. Completion of the project would have economic benefits. The construction activities will be
contracted out to Kaua‘i-based contractors and will provide a temporary benefit to the local economy.
The rental cottages will continue to provide income for the property owners, some of which will be spent
in the local community for goods and services. Maintaining the cottages as available rental properties
supports continued tourism in the area, a major contributor to the local economy of Hanalei and North
Shore Kaua‘i. Visitors to the Hanalei Dolphin cottages usually spend money for other goods and services
while visiting Hanalei, including at the Hanalei Center. The Hanalei Center, including the Dolphin
Restaurant, gift shop, and fish market, would continue to operate, and the employment these businesses
provide for local residents would continue.
15 Conclusion
Installation of the biowall would not result in any long-term adverse impacts to surrounding properties,
the waters of the Hanalei River, any threatened and endangered species, cultural and traditional practices
or historic properties. The proposed development is consistent with all applicable components of the
County General Plan, North Shore Development Plan and does not violate Zoning Ordinances. Installation
of the biowall would result in preserving property of the Hanalei Traders including both the land and the
four vacation cottages located on the property.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
A-1
Appendix A. Construction Estimate
Kobayashi Trucking & Equipment, Inc.
PO Box 44
Hanalei.HI 96714
Ph: 808-826-6284 Fax: 808-826-1783
Lic# C-10072
Andy Hood
Ahood@srgii.com
March 6. 2021
ESTIMATE Hanalei Traders River Project
Price includes rock and placement of riprap, instailation of
Earth anchors and placement of Envirolok bags.
Price does not include permits, fees and surveying.
Estimated
Cost S 600,000.00
GENN KognYsNI
317 2l
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
B-1
Appendix B. Photos
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
B-2
Photo 1. Hanalei River Looking Upstream at Lower Section of Project Site
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
B-3
Photo 2. Hanalei River Looking Downstream at Upper Section of Project Site
California Grass and other vegetation
create floating mat that does not protect
bank from erosion during high flows.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
B-4
Photo 3. Hanalei River Looking Upstream at Project Site
Cottage 3, top of river bank, is
approximately 10 ft from base of cottage.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
B-5
Photo 4. Vertical River Bank along Hanalei Dolphin Center
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
B-6
Photo 5. Hanalei River Bank
Note: calcified sand material
creates near vertical bank.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
B-7
Photo 6. Hanalei River Bank
Note: Cottage 1 upper left, near
vertical eroding bank covered.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
B-8
This page intentionally left blank.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
C-1
Appendix C. Figures
Figure 1. Location Map
Figure 2. Property Location
Figure 3. Property Map and Limits of Work
Figure 4. State Land Use District location of the Hanalei Traders Property
Figure 5. Kauai County General Plan
Figure 6. FIRM Map
Figure 7. River Bank Stabilization Plan / Biowall
Figure 8. Typical Section of the Biowall
Figure 9. Site Specific Best Management Practices
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
This page intentionally left blank
FIGURE 3. PROPERTY MAP
RIVER BANK STABILIZATION
FIGURE 7.
OHW = 1.3
NOV. 14, 2009 FLOOD
RIVER BANK STABILIZATION
FIGURE 8. TYPICAL RIVER BANK STABILIZATION SECTION
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
This page intentionally left blank
FIGURE 9. SITE SPECIFIC BMPSTMK 5-5-010:067
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
D-1
Appendix D. FONSI
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
E-1
Appendix E. Consultation
The following agencies, citizen groups, and individuals were contacted by telephone, mail, email, or in-
person during the preparation of the Environmental Assessment and required permits.
Federal:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
NOAA NFMS
State of Hawai‘i:
Department of Land and Natural Resources:
Commission on Water Resources Management
Division of Aquatic Resources
Division of Boating and Ocean Resources
Division of Forestry and Wildlife
Engineering Division
Land Division
Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands
Office of Environmental Quality Control
Office of Hawaiian Affairs
State Historic Preservation Division
County of Kaua‘i:
Planning Department
Department of Public Works
Private:
Hanalei Hawaiian Civic Canoe Club
Hanalei Land Company LLC
Hanalei River Heritage Foundation
Hanalei Watershed Hui
Hale Halawai ‘Ohana ‘O Hanalei
Hawaiian Islands Land Trust Kaua‘i Office
Hui Maka‘āinana o Makana
Ka‘ie‘ie Foundation
Kaua‘i North Shore Community Foundation
Kua‘āina Ulu ‘Auamo
Waipa Foundation
Bob Butler
Allan Hoe
Rubillite Johnson
Mike Sheehan
Randy Wichman
Ralph Young
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
E-2
The following comments were received and responses were drafted and included in the EA.
Comment Response
Hanalei Hawaiian Civic Canoe Club (October 12, 2015)
The Club is aware that this portion of the river bank, lying
along an outside curve of the river, has been subject to
historic erosion. The Club is also aware that continued
erosion of the river bank in this area will eventually
undermine the structures on the subject property as well
as septic and or cesspool systems on the subject
property.
Both of these eventualities pose unacceptable dangers
to the health of the Hanalei River, and require either
reduction in river bank erosion or removal of the
structures on the subject property. Accordingly, the Club
generally supports the goal of the proposed Project as
an initial attempt to solve this problem.
The Club however has the following concerns regarding
the implementation of the Project:
Comment acknowledged. The Club’s support for the
project is appreciated.
The installation of stabilization materials is scheduled for
the "dry season." The Hanalei River is, however, subject
to flooding at all times of the year and the Project should
be prepared for this possibility at all times.
We are aware that the Hanalei River is subject to flooding
at all times of the year. The installation of stabilization
materials would not be possible during a flood event and
therefore work would be rescheduled. Weather forecast
will be monitored continuously during the construction
phase and in the event the forecast indicates moderate to
high rainfall, work will cease until the threat has passed.
Installation work should not impede river access for the
Club or any other river users. Similarly, the stabilization
material should not significantly alter the current river
bank by adding material to the bank and thereby
narrowing the river channel in the Project area.
There are no plans to impede river access for any river
users during construction. Best Management Practices
include use of a silt curtain made of a polystyrene
geotextile fabric, with a top floatation device and an anchor
chain. The silt curtain will be temporarily placed in the river
to catch sediments that may be released during
construction. It will be attached to the downstream and
upstream project boundaries, forming an arc with a
maximum distance from the bank of ten feet. This distance
will allow unrestricting passage up and down the river by
users. No equipment will be placed within the bed or
banks of the channel. The bank stabilization will not
significantly alter the topography of the current river bank
or narrow the river channel.
The Project should provide assurances that the
stabilization of this portion of the river bank will not
simply shift erosion to adjacent unstabilized portions of
the river bank upstream or downstream of the Project
site. Increased erosion upstream of the Project would
undermine the state highway. The Club understands that
at least in some instances the "stabilization" of either
river banks or ocean shorelines in one area simply shifts
erosion to neighboring property creating the perceived
necessity of even more stabilization work which
ultimately results in negative overall outcomes.
Over the long term, implementation of the proposed
project will reduce erosion and sedimentation from the
Hanalei Traders property into the river, which will have
beneficial results on water quality. The biowall will have
minimal to no effect on riverine and estuarine
hydrodynamics. Hydraulic analysis conducted using the
HEC-RAS one-dimensional hydraulic model indicates that
banks downstream on both sides of the river and upstream
from the biowall will not be impacted with respect to
erosion or deposition. Cross section stations used in the
model were derived from 2009 and 2014 topographic
surveys of the project reach. The stations extend from
approximately 150 feet downstream of the downstream
most limit of the project area, to 100 feet upstream of the
upstream limit. The model was run under existing site
conditions at a range of discharges (minimum: 70 cfs,
maximum: 6,500 cfs). Model output evaluated includes
velocity and water surface elevations for each discharge.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
E-3
Comment Response
The model was run a second time with the same
discharges and geometry at the stations changed to reflect
the proposed geometry. Roughness values were also
changed to reflect the biowall. Comparison of model
outputs for the two models runs were made at all stations
including those upstream and downstream of the project
on both sides of the river. Changes to water surface
elevations and velocities were minimal at all discharges.
Shear stress exerted by the flowing water against bed and
bank surface would not change appreciably, and rates of
sediment deposition and erosion are not expected to occur
from implementation of the design.
Installation should be carried out so as to eliminate or
minimize any reduction in the water quality of the river.
Best Management Practices will be implemented during
construction in accordance with applicable permits (Clean
Water Act (CWA) Section 401 Water Quality Certification
(WQC) and as required by Kaua‘i County Sediment and
Erosion Control Ordinance No. 808 to minimize any
reduction in water quality. Over the long-term, water
quality is expected to improve as nitrogen is taken up by
plants in the biowall and fine sediments currently being
released into the river are reduced as a result of the
stabilization.
The property owner conducting this Project should be
required to provide assurances that should stabilization
material "fail," the property owner will be responsible for
its removal and the remediation of the river bank to its
natural state.
The natural systems engineering approach adopted by this
project will result in a natural bank along the project reach,
versus the alternative of hardening the river bank. The
property owner will comply with the terms of all permits
required for this construction project. In the event there is
failure the landowner will remove material from the water
and repair the damage.
The Project should consider seeking permission and
approvals to remove invasive hau bush from the stream
bank opposite the project site. This invasive vegetation
along the inside curve of this portion of the river serves
to direct the flow of the river against the area of
proposed stabilization and likely increases erosion in this
area.
Encroachment of hau bush into the channel has altered
channel hydrodynamics and most probably is accelerating
the rate of erosion along the river bank along the Hanalei
Traders property. However, the land on the opposite bank
is privately owned and it is beyond the Hanalei Traders
Inc. ability to address this issue. We would encourage the
Canoe Club to pursue this issue with various government
agencies that have management authority regarding the
hau bush encroachment.
Approval of the Project should be contingent on some
system of regular monitoring in the future to ensure that
the Project is not causing any unanticipated harms.
Water quality monitoring will occur prior to and during
construction per the requirements of the Applicable
Monitoring and Assessment Program for CWA Section
401 WQC.
State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife
(November 23, 2015)
On Tuesday afternoon, October 27, an on-site inspection
was made by a staff wildlife biologist to look at the area
and take photographs. The embankment contained
several non-native plants and no native plant species.
The non-native plant species included California grass
(Brachiaria mutica) and Hilo grass (Paspalum
conjusatum), Napier grass (Penniseitum purpureum) and
several sedges. On the other side of the river bank, Hau
(Hibiscus tiliaceus), a Polynesian introduced tree was
the dominant plant species. The property is a high-use
visitor recreational area which includes kayaking, and
stand up paddle boarding.
Noted.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
E-4
Comment Response
The Hanalei river valley supports feeding and nesting
habitat for five state and federally endangered waterfowl
species. This includes the Hawaiian coot (Fulica alai),
Hawaiian gallinule (Gallinula c. sandvicensis), Hawaiian
duck (Anas wyvilliana}, Hawaiian stilt (Himantoyus
mexicanus) and Hawaiian goose (Branta sandvicensis).
The nearby U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Hanalei
National Wildlife Refuge supports all five species. During
my inspection, I did not observe any listed waterfowl and
did not find any evidence of nesting activity in the area.
The heavy presence of human activity along that section
of the river is most likely the reason for the absence of
waterbirds. Although, no waterbirds were observed
during the inspection, it is recommended a survey be
conducted by a knowledgeable wildlife biologist at least
two weeks prior to the start of construction. This is to
determine whether waterbird nesting had occurred
during the EA review period.
As recommended by DLNR DOFAW, the following
practices to avoid any adverse impacts to birds will occur.
Two weeks prior to the start of construction a
knowledgeable wildlife biologist will inspect the site to
determine if there are any nesting waterbirds. In the
unlikely event that nesting waterbirds are present,
construction will be delayed until all chicks have fledged
and left the area.
The Hanalei valley watershed is considered an important
nesting ground for two listed seabird species: Newell's
shearwater (Puffinus a. newelli) and Hawaiian petrel
(Pterodroma sandwichensis). It is well-document that
these seabirds transit the area at night during the nesting
season which runs from April to mid-December.
Therefore, it is imperative that night time work using
construction lights are avoided as much as possible, due
to the light attraction problem. If the project requires
night-time work using construction lights, it is
recommended the lights be shielded and pointed
downward and not pointed upward toward the night sky.
This action would reduce the potential risk of attracting
birds to the project area. From mid- September to mid-
December, fledging seabirds depart from their mountain
nesting grounds to the sea. This is the critical period as
young seabirds are highly susceptible to bright lights and
falling to the ground. We recommend no use of night
construction lights during this period.
As recommended by DLNR DOFAW, the following
practices to avoid any adverse impacts to birds will occur.
The project will not entail any night time work or the use of
night construction lights, which if used could attract
Newell’s shearwaters or Hawaiian petrels and result in
birds becoming disoriented and falling to the ground.
The Hawaiian bat (Lasiurus cinerus semotus) is known
to transit the area at night in search of food and their
roosting area. Bats roost in native and non-native trees
and tail shrubs throughout the island of Kauai. The
birthing and pup rearing season is from May 15 to
August 15, therefore, it is recommended that no cutting
or trimming of trees greater than 15 feet (4.6 meters)
during this period. If you foresee that trees will need be
cut or removed, we recommend doing so outside of this
period. Otherwise, if trees need to be cut or removed
inside of the pup rearing season, we recommend that
you consult with a knowledgeable wildlife biologist to
determine the status of bats in the area prior to cutting or
removal.
As recommended by DLNR DOFAW, the following
practices to avoid any adverse impacts to bats will occur.
There will be no cutting or trimming of trees greater than
15 feet (4.6 meters) during the birthing and pup rearing
season from May 15 to August 15.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
E-5
Comment Response
State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Engineering Division
(November 23, 2015)
Please take note that the project site, according to the
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), is located in Flood
Zone AEF. The National Flood Insurance Program
regulates developments within Zone AEF as indicated in
bold letters below.
Noted and discussed in EA.
Please note that the project site must comply with the
rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) presented in Title 44 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (44CFR), whenever development
within a Special Flood Hazard Area is undertaken. If
there are any questions, please contact the State NFIP
Coordinator, Ms. Carol Tyau-Beam, of the Department of
Land and Natural Resources, Engineering Division at
(808) 587-0267. Please be advised that 44CFR indicates
the minimum standards set forth by the NFIP. Your
Community's local flood ordinance may prove to be more
restrictive and thus take precedence over the minimum
NFIP standards. If there are questions regarding the
local flood ordinances, please contact the applicable
County NFIP Coordinators below: Mr. Stanford Iwamoto
at (808) 241-4896 of the County of Kauai, Department of
Public Works.
As required for any development within a Special Flood
Hazard Area, the project will comply with the rules and
regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program
presented in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Specifically, implementation of the proposed action will not
increase the flood hazard on other properties and all
required federal and state permits will be obtained prior to
execution.
State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Commission on Water Resource
Management (November 23, 2015)
A Stream Channel Alteration Permit(s) is (are) required
before any alteration can be made to the bed and/or
banks of a steam channel.
Understood. An application is being filed.
State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Aquatic Resources (November
23, 2015)
*Though DLNR DAR formally submitted the following comments on the Draft EA during a DLNR review period, it
should be noted that DLNR DAR conveyed these same comments during the development of the EA, which were
taken into consideration during the analysis and development.
The Hanalei River is a large (16.2 miles long) and
dynamic river on Kauai's north shore, with headwaters in
the 'Alaka'i with over 450 inches of rain, and with river
flows ranging from 20-50 million gallons per day (mgd) to
over 6 billion mgd. Because of its hydrogeographic
features, Hanalei River has a large floodplain. It is also
one of the 10 "National Heritage Rivers" in the United
States, and has a relative abundance of all of the native
Hawaiian amphidromous species of 'o'opu, 'opae and
hihiwai or wi. The culturally and economically important
'o'opu nakea spawns on basalt boulders and large
cobble stones within the Hanalei River estuary, including
adjacent to this proposed stream bank stabilization
project. About 40 species of native fishes use this
estuary for feeding, breeding and as a nursery habitat.
Also, the river, riparian and wetland areas along the
Hanalei River estuary are commonly used by species of
endangered Hawaiian water birds, most notably the
Hawaiian gallinule or 'alae ula, the Hawaiian duck or
koloa, Hawaiian coot or 'alae ke'oke'o and the Hawaiian
Acknowledged and information has been included in the
EA.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
E-6
Comment Response
goose or nene. The Hawaiian hoary bat, ape'ape'a, also
feeds along the river during the early evening.
The reasons the Hanalei River bank is eroding at this
project location, and adjacent private property is being
threatened, are as follows:
1. Riparian trees were removed from along the river
bank and riparian area, de-stabilizing the bank,
when the property was developed, presumably to give
visitors and those staying in the 5 cottages a better view
of the river;
2. The river is large with very high water velocities and
very large discharge volumes, up to 6 billion gpd;
3. The project location is on the eroding left bank (west
side of river) which is on the outside of a very sharp,
almost 90 degree, bend (to the east) in the river which
directs flood flows (with higher water velocities) into the
left bank where the erosion is occurring; this situation is
exacerbated by the opposite right bank (east side) being
dominated by a very large amount of invasive hau trees,
Hibiscus tiliaceus, which are growing emergent into the
river, also forcing the main flow of the river against the
eroding left bank;
4. Considering that large rivers are dynamic, erode their
banks and even make new channels and change their
direction of flow, the cottages in question are constructed
in the floodplain too close to the river bank.
1. For clarification, the riparian trees were not removed to
obtain a better view of the river, they were dislodged as a
result of high flow events. Any trees that were not fully
dislodged and were hanging out over the river were cut for
fear that their failure would dislodge a large amount of soil
from the river bank.
2. The section of river fronting the Hanalei Traders
property is classified as an estuarine reach, and the
velocities at peak flows under the most extreme flood
conditions do not reach velocities that are classified as
high. The low gradient channel in this reach, coupled with
the hydraulic control at the mouth of the channel, result in
low velocities.
3. While the river bank fronting the Hanalei Traders
property is located along the outside of meander bend, the
natural rates of erosion are low due to the tidal controls
and low velocities. A review of historic images and
conversations with various people shows that the bank
was in a state of quasi-equilibrium until the mid-1990s. At
this time hau bush along the channel, both across from
and upstream on both sides of the Hanalei Traders
property, was left to grow unchecked into the river. As a
result, the channels’ hydraulic radius decreased, in some
cross sections by approximately 40 percent. The channel
adjusted to this flow constriction by shifting to the west.
Additionally, construction of berms on the Mowry parcel
and on USFWS land within the floodway cutoff portions of
the floodway, decreasing flood water storage on these
portions of the floodway and directing flow against the
west bank of the river fronting the Hanalei Traders parcel.
Adhoc riprap structures were also installed downstream of
the Hanalei Bridge along the west bank. It is most
probable that the irregular placement of the rocks
comprising the riprap further decreased channel hydraulic
radius and, similar to the hau bush encroachment, induced
rapid channel adjustments downstream.
4. While the Hanalei Traders property is in the AE
floodway; this is true of many parcels along the west side
of the river, and several downstream along the east side.
Moving the Hanalei Traders cabins fronting the river bank
inland was investigated, and it was determined this was
not feasible due to lack of area and cost.
The proposed filling and hardening of the eroding left
bank will likely cause increased bank erosion of adjacent
property located downstream. As an alternative to the
proposed bank stabilization and erosion control, the
following actions are recommended:
1. Working with the USDA/Natural Resources
Conservation Service, the US Fish & Wildlife Service
and the Division of Forestry and Wildlife, develop a "Soil
and Water Conservation Plan" to plant and/or transplant
coconut trees, Kukui nut trees, hala trees and other bank
stabilizing trees and shrubs as large as possible, and
Hydraulic modeling using HECRAS was conducted under
existing and the proposed action scenarios. Velocities
downstream of the project site were the same under both
scenarios.
1. The vegetation selected as part of the proposed bio-
engineered design will aid in stabilizing the river bank.
Trees were not selected for use as it was determined they
would "load" the top of the bank and create instability.
2. Encroachment of hau bush into the channel has altered
channel hydrodynamics and most probably is accelerating
the rate of erosion along the river bank along the Hanalei
Traders property. However, the land on the opposite bank
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
E-7
Comment Response
plant them midway between the cottages and the
eroding river bank;
2. Working with adjacent land owners, particularly the
rancher on the east side of the river, USDA/NRCS, and
DLNR, develop an invasive hau tree removal project on
the right (east) bank, of the river; this will reduce or
nearly eliminate floodwaters being deflected towards the
left (west) bank;
3. It may be necessary to develop a plan to move the
cottages that are threatened by riverbank erosion to a
new location.
is privately owned and it is beyond the Hanalei Traders
ability to address this issue.
3. Moving the Hanalei Traders cabins fronting the river
bank inland was investigated, and it was determined this
was not feasible due to lack of area on the Hanalei
Traders property and cost.
Finally, if the proposed filling and hardening of the
riverbank is approved, the following actions should be
taken:
1. For boulders and fill material to be placed with a river
channel, a "Stream Channel Alteration Permit" must be
obtained by the CWRM; this permit, if issued, should
fulfill the applicant's request for a "right of entry" in order
to conduct channel alterations in the river.
2. Also, because the Hanalei River is considered a
"Navigable River", permits for river channel alteration
may also be required by the US Army Corps of
Engineers;
3. All fill and hardening materials use should be relatively
smooth basalt boulders and cobble stones of various
sized because the 'o'opu nakea prefer smooth surfaces
on which to lay their eggs.
1 & 2. Hanalei Traders is securing numerous permits that
will be reviewed by County, State, and Federal agencies.
The design prepared is expected to control bank erosion
and enhance habitat for avian and aquatic native species
in the least intrusive manner possible. We understand the
ecological, social, and spiritual significance of the Hanalei
River and attempted to prepare a design that does not
adversely affect the river.
3. DAR advised on their preference for the fill materials
earlier on in the design process and the design does
incorporate smooth boulders due to the preference of
'o'opu nakea.
Thank you for providing DAR the opportunity to review
and comment on the proposed project. Should there be
any changes to the project plans, DAR requests the
opportunity to review and comment on those changes.
Acknowledged.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Draft December 2021
E-8
This page intentionally left blank.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
F-1
Appendix F. Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Plan
Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Plan for
Clean Water Act Section 401
Water Quality Certification:
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank
Stabilization, Hanalei, Kaua‘i
July 21, 2016,
Revised September 21, 2017
Revised November 30, 2017
Prepared for:
Hanalei Traders, Inc.
P.O. Box 511
Hanalei, HI 96714
Prepared by:
SUSTAINABLE RESOURCES GROUP INTN’L, INC.
111 Hekili Street, Suite A373
Kailua, HI 96734
Tel/Fax: 808-356-0552 • www.srgii.com
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
i
Contents
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................................. i
Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... ii
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background Information ............................................................................................................... 1
2 Project Description................................................................................................................................ 2
3 Monitoring Program ............................................................................................................................. 3
3.1 Organization and Responsibilities ................................................................................................. 3
3.2 Parameters to be Measured ......................................................................................................... 5
3.3 Sampling Locations ....................................................................................................................... 5
3.4 Sampling Frequency ...................................................................................................................... 6
3.5 Instrument Calibration .................................................................................................................. 7
3.6 Sample Collection.......................................................................................................................... 7
3.7 Quality Assurance Plan ................................................................................................................. 9
4 Data Quality Objectives and Criteria for Measurement Data ............................................................... 9
Step 1: State the Problem ......................................................................................................................... 9
Step 2: Identify the Goals of the Study ..................................................................................................... 9
Step 3: Identify the Information Inputs .................................................................................................. 10
Step 4: Define the Study Boundaries ...................................................................................................... 10
Step 5: Develop the Analytic Approach .................................................................................................. 11
Step 6: Specify Performance/Acceptance Criteria .................................................................................. 11
Step 7: Develop the Plan for Obtaining Data .......................................................................................... 12
Chain of Custody Procedures .................................................................................................................. 12
5 Reports and Assessment ..................................................................................................................... 12
6 References .......................................................................................................................................... 13
List of Figures
Figure 5. Decision Unit Locations ................................................................................................................ 14
List of Tables
Table 1. Summary of Responsibilities and Qualifications ............................................................................. 4
Table 2. Sampling Locations .......................................................................................................................... 5
Table 3. Typical Accuracy Ranges .................................................................................................................. 7
Table 4. Analytical Methods and Instruments to be Used ............................................................................ 8
Table 5. Analytical Hold Times and Preservation Methods .......................................................................... 9
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
ii
Acronyms
AMAP Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Program
BMP Best Management Practices
C-DS Control Downstream
COC Chain-of Custody
C-US Control Upstream
CWB Clean Water Branch
DO Dissolved Oxygen
DU Decision Unit
GPS Global Positioning System
HAR Hawaii Administrative Rules
HDOH Hawaii Department of Health
msl Mean Sea Level
RSD Relative Standard Deviation
SRGII Sustainable Resources Group Intn’l, Inc.
TMDL Total Daily Maximum Load
WQC Water Quality Certification
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
1
1 Introduction
This Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) accompanies the Section 401 Water Quality
Certification (WQC) application for the proposed Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization
project, herein “the project”. The AMAP describes the monitoring requirements and data quality
objectives to be met during water quality monitoring efforts for the WQC. The intent of the AMAP is to
conduct water quality sampling and analysis in order to (1) determine if the BMPs are effectively
preventing sediment from the project site from entering the larger Hanalei estuary; and (2) confirm that
implementation of the project will not increase sediment contribution into the river longer term, nor will
it contribute to increased erosion on adjacent properties. The AMAP includes baseline (pre-construction),
during-construction, and post-construction monitoring. If shown to be necessary by the monitoring, BMPs
will be modified during construction to protect water quality. This plan has been prepared in accordance
with water quality regulations promulgated in Hawai‘i Administrative Rules (HAR) Chapter 11-54 (HDOH
2014), Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Plan General Instruction (HDOH 2015), and Data Quality
Objectives specified by EPA (EPA 2006).
1.1 Background Information
The project site is located on the Hanalei Traders property, Tax Parcel ID (4) 5-5-010:067, on the north
shore of Kaua‘i, Hawai‘i. It is located on the banks of the Hanalei River estuary. The project site centroid
coordinates are 22° 12’ 17.65” N and 159° 29’ 31.23” W (WGS84) (see Figures 1 & 3 in Appendix A of the
WQC application). At the project site the river channel is eroding and has created an unstable bank that
is nearly eight to twelve feet vertical from its top down to the bed of the river. During high flows the bank
erodes inland, resulting in loss of land and narrowing the distance between the top of the bank and
structures. The opposite bank of the river is overgrown with hau bush (Hibiscus tiliaceus). In order to
address erosion problems and to protect private property and existing infrastructure, Mr. Robert Ross of
Hanalei Traders, Inc. proposes to stabilize approximately 450 ft (137 m) of eroding river bank by installing
a bioengineered design. The project will install a bioengineered wall (biowall), comprised of boulders and
stacks of geotextile roll bags filled with grow medium (see Figure 2 in Appendix A of the WQC application).
The grow medium will consist of 80% sand and 20% compost. There will be no additional fertilizer or soil
amendments added to the grow medium, specifically to avoid additional input of dissolved inorganic
nitrogen and phosphate into the Hanalei River estuary. Native plants will be installed between the
geotextile rolls and along the upper portion of river bank.
A floating turbidity barrier made of a polystyrene geotextile fabric, with a top floatation device and an
anchor chain, will be deployed to protect water quality and isolate the construction area. The floating
turbidity barrier will temporarily be placed in the river adjacent to the active construction area to catch
sediments that may be released during construction. It will be attached to the downstream and upstream
project boundaries, forming an arc with a maximum distance from the bank of 10 ft (3.05 m). The depth
of the river at this location is approximately 7 ft (2.13 m) during a normal high tide. The floating turbidity
barrier will be secured to the river bank with reef lines such that contact with the river bed is made
throughout.
The waters of Hanalei River in the Project Area are designated as Class 2 estuarine waters in the Hawai‘i
water quality standards (HDOH 2014). According to the rule, the objective of Class 2 waters is:
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
2
“protect their use for recreational purposes, the support and propagation of aquatic life,
agricultural and industrial water supplies, shipping, and navigation.”
Designated uses are:
“all uses compatible with protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and with
recreation in and on these waters. These waters shall not act as receiving waters for any discharge
which has not received the best degree of treatment or control compatible with the criteria
established for this class.”
The Hanalei River, its estuary, and Hanalei Bay are listed on the Clean Water Act 303(d) list of impaired
waters (HDOH 2016). The project area is located along the estuary section of the Hanalei River. Per the
Hawai‘i Department of Health - Clean Water Branch (HDOH-CWB), “inland waters are comprised of water
body types such as streams, estuaries, lakes and reservoirs, wetlands, and anchialine pools”. The
discussion in the 2016 State of Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report, which contains the
Clean Water Act 303(d) list of impaired waters, describes the most recent HDOH-CWB assessment of the
waters of the Hanalei River estuary. “Hanalei River (end of Weke Road) estuary was initially listed as
impaired for enterococcus prior to the 2002 Integrated Report and for turbidity in the 2004 Integrated
Report. TDMLs for enterococcus and turbidity were approved in 2008. Newly assessed numerical data
indicate Hanalei River estuary continues to not attain Water Quality Standards for enterococcus and
turbidity.” (HDOH 2016). The 2016 Clean Water Act 303(d) list of impaired waters also lists the Hanalei
Bay estuary “upstream of the Dolphin” as not attaining Water Quality Standards for turbidity. Data
collected for the upstream decision unit will be reported via: http://health.hawaii.gov/cwb/site-
map/clean-water-branch-home-page/integrated-report-and-total-maximum-daily-loads/
2 Project Description
The project will occur over a twelve week period beginning shortly after the acquisition of all required
permits. Installation of BMPs and construction is expected to take ten weeks and two weeks have been
added to account for potential work stoppages. The biowall will be constructed in increments of
approximately 50 linear ft. For each increment, all steps involved in constructing the biowall will be
completed before beginning construction on the next increment. Construction of each increment will take
five days to complete. In channel work, consisting of placement of boulder rip rap, will only occur during
base flow periods as indicated on the Hanalei river gauge station and during periods of no rainfall. This
scheduling will insure that high flow events will not occur during in channel construction. The project will
consist of the following:
• Installation of structural and non-structural site specific BMPs to the property prior to any
construction on the biowall or delivery of materials (Appendix D)
• Installation of floating turbidity barrier prior to any work on each increment.
• Grubbing of existing vegetation from the river bank
• Placement of washed boulders [2 to 3 ft (0.6 to 0.9 m) diameter] from existing bed of river
channel against toe of the bank up to the ordinary high water level (1.3 ft msl). Boulders will
protect the toe from erosion and provide the foundation for placement of other materials
included in design. Equipment operation for this task will occur from the top of the river bank,
not “in-water”. A total of 216 cubic yards will be required.
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
3
• Placement of grow medium comprised of 80% sand and 20% compost inside woven geotextile
bags. The filled, porous, geotextile bags will be installed from the top of the boulders to the
top of the existing bank. Geotextile bag dimensions: 4 ft L x 1 ft diameter. A total of 180 cubic
yards of grow medium will be required.
• Use of geogrid fabric to secure and anchor the interlocking geotextile bags to the bank of the
river.
• Installation of plants (three species of native sedges and two species of native shrubs). Sedges
will be placed between geotextile bags from top of boulders to top of existing bank. Shrubs
will be placed along top of existing bank. Sedges will be installed concurrent to geotextile bags
and geogrid fabric as sedges will be planted after each layer of bags has been installed.
• Woody native or Polynesian shrubs will be placed along top of existing bank after completion
of the biowall.
3 Monitoring Program
The monitoring program largely follows the General Monitoring Guidelines for Section 401 Water Quality
Certification Projects (HDOH 2015).
3.1 Organization and Responsibilities
Table 1 provides the names, responsibilities, and qualifications of the personnel involved with this
monitoring program.
Collection of data including: operation, calibration, secondary checks of instruments, narrative of site
conditions, photographs, as well as field analysis will only be performed by experienced and qualified
SRGII field technicians.1 Details of SRGII field technician’s responsibilities regarding data collection and
analysis are detailed throughout Section 3. Information gathered by SRGII field technicians will be included
in individual sampling reports.
The construction contractor will assign a representative to perform daily visual inspections and take
photographs of the construction site including all BMPs, to ensure that the construction activities do not
result in adverse impacts to the water quality of Hanalei River. These observations will be recorded in a
field notebook and include at a minimum: date, time, predicted tidal stage, stream flow, weather
conditions, precipitation, description of the construction activity, location and condition of any BMPs, and
any other observed activities (related or unrelated to construction) that may affect water quality. The
assigned representative will maintain a field notebook to accompany the photographs that includes a
descriptive narrative of what is being documented by each photograph and a photo orientation map that
shows the location and orientation of photos taken. Photographs will include a date and time stamp or
that information will be embedded in the metadata associated with the digital photograph files. The
Project Manager will ensure the construction contractor’s representative is knowledgeable of their
responsibilities prior to the project commencing.
1 According to HDOH-CWB a “qualified sampler” is a person who actively practices environmental science, or has formal training
in sampling theory, practices, and techniques. Qualified samplers must be thoroughly knowledgeable of all aspects of the
sampling in this AMAP including all equipment, instruments, SOPs, calibrations, secondary checks, limits and reporting
requirements.
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
4
Table 1. Summary of Responsibilities and Qualifications
Name Responsibility Qualification
Andrew Hood
SRGII
Project Manager
808-261-0862
Ensure quality control for all BMPs and
monitoring activities.
Inform field technicians of monitoring
schedule (providing actual dates) and any
changes.
Investigate water quality exceedances,
inform on corrective actions, and report
occurrences and actions to HDOH-CWB.
Produce all reports for HDOH-CWB.
SRGII Project Manager, over 20 years
project management, laboratory, and
field experience. Qualified to oversee
monitoring program due to 29 years of
experience in water quality monitoring.
SRGII field technicians Perform all calibration and secondary
checks on collection equipment.
Collect samples and perform field
measurements.
Record field observations.
Perform photograph monitoring.
Submit field notebooks, photographs, and
other data to Project Manager.
Report any observations of adverse impacts
to Project Manager immediately.
Over 5 years experience collecting
water samples, performing field
measurements in aquatic
environments, and monitoring
construction contractors working in
aquatic environments.
Construction contractor’s
assigned representative
Notify SRGII and Hanalei Traders Inc. when
installation of BMP’s and biowall
construction will start with enough time to
collect 401 WQC pre-construction samples
prior to starting work. Project Manager will
notify HDOH-CWB.
Make daily visual observations of BMPs and
construction activity to be logged in a field
notebook (SM 2012). Take photographs
(with date/time stamp and description) and
provide notebook and photographs to SRGII
to be used as part of the assessment
process.
Notify SRGII Project Manager of any
compromises to BMPs that might affect
performance.
Notify SRGII and Hanalei Traders Inc. of
any modifications of work plan, BMPs, or
AMAP. Project Manager will notify HDOH-
CWB.
Reports to SRGII Project Manager who will
submit information to HDOH-CWB.
Knowledgeable of construction
activities as they relate to 401 WQC
requirements.
Familiar with aquatic environments.
Knowledgeable of WQC monitoring
requirements for this project.
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
5
If visual observations by either SRGII field technicians or the construction contractor’s assigned
representative include negative impacts to the estuary, such as turbidity plumes or fish kills, the HDOH-
CWB will be notified immediately. The SRGII field technicians or assigned representative must take
photographs to document the impact and work must cease until the source of the problem has been
identified and corrected if the problem is due to construction. A written report of action taken will be
submitted by the permittee (or authorized representative) to HDOH-CWB within three business days.
A copy of the contractor’s assigned representative’s daily observations and photographs will be provided
to SRGII for use in preparing the final report.
3.2 Parameters to be Measured
Due to the short duration of construction and the likelihood that there will be no changes in water quality,
other than the possibility of a temporary increase in turbidity and TSS, only those general parameters
included in the General Monitoring Guidelines for 401 Water Quality Certification Projects (HDOH 2015)
will be measured. Parameters to be measured in the AMAP include: temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved
oxygen (DO), turbidity, and TSS.
3.3 Sampling Locations
Station locations for the three decision units (DU) where the water quality samples will be collected
comport with Figure 4: Typical Layout (flowing water) in the Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Plan
General Instructions (July 10, 2015). Samples will be collected as called for in the Instructions.
Three DU will be established: Control Upstream (C-US), Control Downstream (C-DS), and Impact (Figure
5). The Control DUs will be located 50 ft (15 m) upstream of the most upstream extent of the floating
turbidity barrier location (C-US) and downstream of the most downstream extent of the floating turbidity
barrier location (C-DS). Control DUs will be static for the duration of sampling. The Impact DU will be
located 3.28 ft (1 m) from the downstream extent of the floating turbidity barrier. During pre- and post-
construction sampling the location for the Impact DU will be 3.28 ft (1 m) from the furthest downstream
extent of the floating turbidity barrier. During construction, the location of the Impact DU will change
based on the increment of the stream bank under construction, but will always be located 3.28 ft (1 m)
downstream of the floating turbidity barrier. The length of the three DUs will be equal to the width of the
river along a transect aligned perpendicular to the flow. Triplicate samples will be collected within the
3.28 ft (1 m) wide transect from the top to the bottom of the stream from bank to bank at the Impact DU.
The (C-US) and (C-DS) DUs will have one sample collected for each sampling event. Flagging will be
installed on the shoreline to mark the furthest upstream and furthest downstream extent of floating
turbidity barrier locations and, along with GPS coordinates, will be used to locate DUs for replication in
times when the floating turbidity barrier is not present. If a turbid plume is observed, the plume will be
sampled as an independent DU. Sampling locations are provided in Table 2.
Table 2. Sampling Locations
Sample ID Station Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
Upstream Control DU (C-US) 5+00 22° 12’ 16.57” 159° 29’ 27.97”
Downstream Control DU (C-DS) -0+50 22° 12’ 20.92” 159° 29’ 34.69”
Impact DU for pre- and post-
construction monitoring -0+03 22° 12’ 19.24” 159° 29’ 32.79”
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
6
Sample ID Station Latitude (N) Longitude (W)
During Construction Monitoring
Impact DU 1 (same location as pre- and
post-construction monitoring) -0+03 22° 12’ 19.24” 159° 29’ 32.79”
Impact DU 2 0+47 22°12’ 19.20” 159° 29’ 32.60”
Impact DU 3 0+97 22°12’ 18.85” 159° 29’ 32.55”
Impact DU 4 1+47 22° 12’ 18.45” 159° 29’ 32.35”
Impact DU 5 1+97 22° 12’ 18.15” 159° 29’ 32.20”
Impact DU 6 2+47 22° 12’ 18.00” 159° 29’ 31.85”
Impact DU 7 2+97 22° 12’ 17.85” 159° 29’ 31.65”
Impact DU 8 3+47 22° 12’17.50” 159° 29’ 31.40”
Impact DU 9 3+97 22° 12’ 17.35” 159° 29’ 30.30”
Impact DU 10 4+47 22° 12’ 16.85” 159° 29’ 29.85”
Plume TBD, if needed TBD, if needed
*Station Relative to stationing set for the biowall where stations 0+00 and 4+50 (ft) are the downstream
and upstream boundaries for the limits of work along the river bank.
**GPS Coordinates (Datum WGS84)
3.4 Sampling Frequency
Proposed modifications to the schedule or BMPs are subject to acceptance by HDOH-CWB.
Pre-construction sampling. Prior to construction, samples will be collected from the three DU once every
weekday over a period of two weeks for a minimum of ten sampling events. Samples from the Impact DU
will be collected in triplicate and the arithmetic mean calculated. The highest pre-construction means will
serve as the action levels (turbidity and Total Suspended Solids (TSS)). The highest and lowest pH means
will serve as the pH action levels. Dissolved Oxygen (DO), temperature and salinity means may also serve
as action levels where these parameters are impacted by the project. All pre-construction data and
calculated action levels (as defined in project data quality objectives Section 4 below) for pH, turbidity,
and TSS will be submitted to HDOH-CWB prior to the commencement of the proposed construction
activities (Section 5). The percent relative standard deviation (RSD) will be calculated to ensure that
variability is being adequately captured. If RSD exceeds 20%, sampling will be repeated. The means for
the parameters sampled at the Control (C-US) and (C-DS) will be reported and be referenced as baseline
conditions.
During-construction sampling. The during-construction sampling period will commence on the first day
that construction personnel are present on site for installation of BMPs. During that one week period,
expected to last five days, samples will be collected once per week. Once construction of the biowall
commences, samples will be collected from the three DU once a day during all grubbing and in-water
work. Grubbing and in-water work will require approximately two days during each increment of biowall
construction, 18 days in total. The other portion of constructing each increment is expected to take three
days. One additional sample collection will occur on the fifth day of each increment’s construction.
Therefore, there will be three sampling events during construction of each increment. For the Impact DU,
samples will be collected in triplicate and the percent RSD calculated. After the biowall is complete,
samples will be collect once a week during the planting of shrubs on the top of the river bank and removal
of equipment and BMPs from site.
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
7
Post-construction sampling. Post-construction sampling will occur weekly for a period of three weeks
after construction is completed and all in-water BMPs (floating turbidity barrier) are removed. Longer
term, samples will be collected quarterly for two years to determine if the project resulted in ongoing
impacts to water quality, and photographs will be taken to assess if the project could be contributing to
erosion downstream.2 Post-construction sampling will occur at all three DU with the Impact DU sampled
in triplicate. The percent RSD will be calculated for samples taken at the Impact DU.
3.5 Instrument Calibration
Calibration procedures outlined in the manufacturer’s instructions written specifically for the YSI 6-Series
Multiparameter Water Quality Sonde will be meticulously followed (YSI Incorporated 2012). Calibration
standards were prepared according to details in Standard Methods for the Treatment of Water and
Wastewater (2012). Instrument calibration procedures will be undertaken prior to field measurements.
For each sampling event, secondary checks will be performed prior to and after taking actual field
measurements to ensure that the probe was functioning properly during the measurements. If typical
accuracy ranges are not attained during the secondary check prior to field measurements, the probe will
be recalibrated and the secondary check repeated. If typical accuracy ranges are not attained during the
secondary check after field measurements are taken, the data will be discarded and new measurements
collected. Table 3 provides typical accuracy ranges for the various parameters.
Table 3. Typical Accuracy Ranges
Parameter Range Compare Against
Temperature ± 1° C NIST thermometer
Salinity ± 5% Known standard
pH ± 0.2 SU Standard calibration solution
DO ± 5% Use same procedure as for calibration
Turbidity ± 5% Known standard
Any field equipment that has been shown by calibration or otherwise to be defective will be taken out of
service until it has been repaired and verified as performing properly. If the equipment or instrument
cannot be repaired, it will be taken out of service and replacement equipment will be obtained.
Operation, calibration, secondary checks and field analysis will only be performed by experienced and
qualified personnel who have been properly trained in these procedures (Table 1). Documentation of
calibration, secondary checks, and any maintenance information will be maintained in field notebooks
and submitted to HDOH-CWB as part of reporting efforts.
3.6 Sample Collection
SRGII field technicians will record their name, date, start and end time of sample collection, predicted
tidal stage, and GPS location of each sampling site with datum. They will record field notes to include at a
minimum weather conditions, precipitation, description of construction activity, unusual site conditions,
location and condition of any BMPs and any other observed activities (related or unrelated to
construction) that may affect water quality at the time of sample collection. SRGII field technicians will
take photographs of each monitoring station at the time of sampling and any areas of potential and actual
disturbance. Field technicians will include a descriptive narrative of what is being documented by each
2 The first quarterly sampling will occur three months after the three week post-construction monitoring period has concluded.
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
8
photograph in the field notebook as well as a photo orientation map that shows the location and
orientation of photos taken. Photographs will include a time and date stamp or that information will be
embedded in the metadata associated with the image file.
A MULTI INCREMENT® sampling approach will be utilized.3 All DU will be monitored for temperature,
salinity, pH, DO, turbidity, and TSS. Samples will be collected in a one liter high density polyethylene
sample bottle with two quarter inch holes drilled in the cap. The sampler will move through the entire DU
with the bottle immersed horizontally and the holes aligned vertically. The bottle takes approximately one
minute to fill and care will be taken to ensure that the entire DU is traversed during that time, providing
an equal opportunity for any drop of water to be sampled. When triplicate samples are required, they will
be taken within each DU sequentially. All individual results will be recorded on data sheets (Appendix F).
All parameters except TSS will be measured in the field using a YSI 6600 V2-4 Multiparameter Water
Quality Sonde. The YSI 6600 V2-4 Sonde contains multiple optical sensors that can simultaneously
measure a variety of water properties. After data has been collected using the Sonde, the one liter samples
will be chilled on wet ice for delivery/shipment to the laboratory for TSS calculations. Test America will
perform analysis for TSS. Analytical methods and instruments are outlined in Table 4. Analytical hold times
and field preservation methods are summarized in Table 5.
Table 4. Analytical Methods and Instruments to be Used
Parameter Range and
Units Method Instrument Minimum
Detectable
Minimum
Sensitivity
Temperature -5 to +50°C Temperature
6560 Sensor
YSI 6600 V2-4
Sonde ±0.15°C 0.01°C
Salinity 0 to 70 ppt 0.1 ppt 0.01 ppt
pH 0 to 14 units pH
6561 Sensor 4
YSI 6600 V2-4
Sonde 0.2 ppt 0.01 unit
DO 0 to 500%
6150 ROX™
Optical
Dissolved
Oxygen•
% Saturation
YSI 6600 V2-4
Sonde ±1% 0.1%
DO 0 to 50 mg/L
6150 ROX™
Optical
Dissolved
Oxygen•
mg/L
YSI 6600 V2-4
Sonde ± 0.01 mg/L 0.01 mg/L
Turbidity 0 to 1,000 NTU Turbidity•
6136 Sensor
YSI 6600 V2-4
Sonde 0.05 NTU 0.1 NTU
TSS 0 to 250 mg/l ASTM D 3977-97
Lab analysis 2-micron meters 0.5mg/l
3 MULTI INCREMENT® is a registered trademark of EnvironStat, Inc.
4 pH probes are known to deteriorate over time. The probe will be replaced if pH readings do not stabilize for 8 seconds at the
standard value (i.e. 7.00 ± 0.20) within 60 seconds of immersion.
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
9
Table 5. Analytical Hold Times and Preservation Methods
Analysis Hold Time Field Preservation
Temperature Immediate None
Salinity Immediate None
pH Immediate None
DO Immediate None
Turbidity Immediately None
TSS To reach lab within 7 days Chill on ice to 4°C
3.7 Quality Assurance Plan
SRGII and construction contractor will retain in their records, the analytical procedures used, any relevant
quality assurance/quality control information, instrument calibration information, and data results
pertaining to specific analysis used in this AMAP. All analytical results and field notes will be entered into
a notebook and/or data form established for that purpose, and provided in reports prepared for the
monitoring plan (Section 5). The contractor’s assigned representative’s observations will be available on-
site while the project is on-going. Upon project completion, all observations and field notebooks will be
available (for at least five years) at the SRGII office for inspection by HDOH-CWB-authorized personnel
during normal business hours.
4 Data Quality Objectives and Criteria for Measurement Data
Data quality objectives are qualitative and quantitative statements developed through a seven-step
process based on USEPA guidance (USEPA 2006). The project-specific data quality objectives below
describe each step and how it pertains to the monitoring and assessment of water quality during this
project.
Step 1: State the Problem
The project will stabilize an eroding bank along the Hanalei River by installing a 450 ft (137 m) long biowall
comprised of boulders and stacks of geotextile roll bags filled with grow medium. Native plants will be
installed between the geotextile rolls and along the upper portion of river bank. Construction associated
with installation of the biowall has the potential to temporarily suspend existing sediment and affect the
pH level in the Hanalei River estuary in the immediate vicinity of the project site. A floating turbidity barrier
made of a polystyrene geotextile fabric, with a top floatation device and an anchor chain, will be deployed
to protect water quality and isolate the increment where biowall construction is occurring. The floating
turbidity barrier will be temporarily placed in the river to catch sediments that may be released during
construction activities. In order to determine if the BMPs are effectively preventing sediment from
entering the larger Hanalei estuary, data regarding turbidity and TSS in estuary areas directly downstream
of the project site are needed. Additionally, to confirm that implementation of the project will not increase
sediment into the river longer term, nor will it contribute to increased erosion on adjacent properties,
data regarding turbidity and TSS in estuary areas directly downstream of the project site along with
photographs to indicate changes over time, are needed.
Step 2: Identify the Goals of the Study
The goal of this AMAP is to conduct water sampling and analysis that will (1) ascertain that the BMPs for
the project are adequate to prevent water pollution; (2) promptly determine if BMPs are inadequate so
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
10
that modification of the BMPs can be implemented in a timely manner to bring the activity into
compliance; (3) serve as a basis for self-compliance so that activities associated with the proposed action
can proceed within the parameters required by Hawai‘i water quality standards; and (4) evaluate if the
action is resulting in any long term adverse impacts to the water quality of the Hanalei River estuary or
increased erosion to nearby properties.
Step 3: Identify the Information Inputs
Data collected as a part of the AMAP will be used in the decision rules to determine if the objectives listed
above are being met. All monitoring results will be provided to HDOH-CWB in written reports (Section 5).
Any exceedance above the specified limits identified in Step 5, will be reported to HDOH-CWB
immediately.
Pre-construction monitoring results will be used to assess baseline levels for each parameter. Pre-
construction field measurements and field notes will be reported to HDOH-CWB.
During-construction monitoring results will be used to assess whether the project is impacting State
waters and will be used, if necessary, to modify BMPs. During-construction data will be reported to HDOH-
CWB.
Post-construction monitoring data will be used to evaluate if the action is resulting in any long term
adverse impacts to the water quality of the Hanalei River estuary or increased erosion to nearby
properties. Sampling methodologies and analysis will follow the same protocols as all monitoring phases,
but additional photographs will be taken to assist in the evaluation. Additional photographs will include
the river bank across from the project area, directly upstream and downstream at both ends of the
completed bioengineered wall, and 50 ft (15 m) downstream of the C-DS. One report will be submitted at
the end of the three weeks post-construction monitoring period and following that, after each quarterly
assessment.
Step 4: Define the Study Boundaries
The project is expected to occur over a twelve week period, with ten weeks of construction within that
period. Sampling will occur ten times (once during each weekday for two weeks) during the pre-
construction sampling phase; once a day during grubbing and in-water work (approximately 18 days total),
and an additional sampling on the fifth day of construction of each biowall increment until the end of the
construction phase; once a week for all other “during construction” periods; and once a week for three
weeks immediately following construction completion and then quarterly for following two years.
Monitoring data will be collected from all three DU (Impact, C-DS, C-US) during all three phases: pre-
construction, during construction, and post-construction. During-construction samples will be collected
after 8:00 am and before 4:00 pm during ongoing work. All parameters listed in Table 4 will be measured.
The monitoring plan will be limited to the 450 ft (137 m) long project area in Hanalei Estuary and will
extend 50 ft (15 m) upstream and 50 ft (15 m) downstream of the project site. The Impact DU will monitor
the water quality 3.28 ft (1 m) downstream of the floating turbidity barrier location. During pre- and post-
construction monitoring, the Impact DU will be located 3.28 ft (1 m) downstream of the furthest
downstream location of barrier. During construction, this location will change based on the increment
under construction, but will always be located 3.28 ft (1 m) downstream of the floating turbidity barrier.
Station C-US will monitor the water quality 50 ft (15 m) upstream of the project limits. Station C-DS will
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
11
monitor the water quality 50 ft (15 m) downstream of the project limits. The study boundaries include all
waters from the surface to the bottom within the defined area. Sampling stations are shown on Figure 5.
Step 5: Develop the Analytic Approach
The results of all water quality monitoring, described in Sections 3.4 and 3.6, will be evaluated by
comparing the during and post-construction Impact DU results against the results from the upstream and
downstream DU and pre-construction monitoring results to determine if the goals outlined in Step 2 are
being met. Exceedance of the specified limits for measured parameters at either the Impact DU or the C-
DS, when the exceedance is not related to ambient conditions, indicates corrective action is necessary.
Repair or modification of the BMPs are likely to be the corrective actions that would improve water
quality. Specified limits are the means calculated for each parameter during pre-construction monitoring
as well as the C-US results for that sampling period. For turbidity and TSS, the highest means will serve to
determine if action is necessary. For pH, the lowest and highest means will serve to determine if action is
necessary. The highest and lowest mean for DO will also be calculated and utilized as a baseline as
necessary (e.g. if turbidity or TSS exceed the highest mean).
The SRGII field technician will notify the SRGII Project Manager of any exceedance. The Project Manager
will notify the contractor’s representative. If the field technician notices a problem in the field, he/she will
notify the contractor’s representative directly, or if the representative is not available, the on-site
manager. The contractor’s representative or on-site manager will attempt to track the cause of the
exceedance. If it is determined that construction is causing the problem, then the activity responsible will
cease until the problem is corrected. The contractor will verbally notify the Project Manager (SRGII) who
will notify HDOH-CWB of the problem and any corrective action taken. If the discharge event is caused by
other factors, then the contractor will report the findings (with material evidence) to the Project Manager
who will notify HDOH-CWB. If at any time it is noted that there is a turbidity plume extending beyond the
BMPs and the plume is associated with construction, all work will stop until the cause is determined and
corrected.
Additionally, during field sampling, SRGII field technicians are required to take field notes (Section 3.6).
The construction contractor is also required to maintain field notes. All field notes include data, narrative
observations, and photographs. Both the field technicians and construction contractor are required to
inform the SRGII Project Manager if observations indicate corrective action is necessary (e.g. water quality
results are within accepted means but floating turbidity barrier appears to be more loosely fitted than the
previous day).
Step 6: Specify Performance/Acceptance Criteria
Environmental decisions are uncertain. Some uncertainty will be the result of sample design errors and
some uncertainty will be the result of measurement errors. When examining the data against the decision
rules (Step 5), a decision must be made if the data show the water quality of the river is within the range
of ambient conditions (null hypothesis) or if the water quality of the river is affected by construction
activities. Two potential decision errors exist: Type I – false rejection of the null hypothesis (conclude a
water quality impact has occurred where one has not), or Type II – false acceptance of the null hypothesis
(conclude no water quality impact has occurred where one has).
Pre-construction values (10 data sets) will determine the baseline (ambient) conditions (and action level
range) in the project area. These will be used in conjunction with the values of the C-US station during
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
12
each sampling period. Action levels will be listed on the data recording sheets so the samplers are aware
when exceedance has occurred.
MULTI INCREMENT® samples provide values at or very close to the mean. MULTI INCREMENT® samples
will be taken in triplicate at all DU during pre-construction monitoring and at the Impact DU during all
monitoring days to ensure values are accurate. The percent RSD ensures that variability is being
adequately captured and is not to exceed 20%.
Step 7: Develop the Plan for Obtaining Data
The sampling plan was developed in accordance with water quality regulations promulgated in Hawai‘i
Administrative Rules (HAR) Chapter 11-54 (HDOH 2014), Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Plan
General Instruction (HDOH 2015), and Data Quality Objectives specified by EPA (EPA 2006). The sampling
locations, frequency, and design are the most effective for providing accurate data efficiently and satisfy
the DQOs specified. This sampling program may be modified based on analysis of data, visual
observations, changes in construction, changes in environmental conditions, and other information that
may become available during construction. Modifications to optimize the design may be necessary if
construction is found to be impacting water quality in the Hanalei River estuary. Any modifications to
sampling design or schedule are subject to acceptance by and require approval by HDOH-CWB.
Samples will be collected at three locations (four if a plume is observed) near the project site. Monitoring
of the project DUs for temperature, salinity, pH, DO, turbidity, and TSS should be adequate to assess the
effectiveness of project BMPs. Visual inspections of project BMPs will be documented daily by the
construction contractor.
Chain of Custody Procedures
Once the water samples have been obtained and site conditions and field measurements have been
properly documented in the field notebook and data sheets, a written record of the chain of custody of
the samples must be made for the laboratory analyses. A chain-of-custody (COC) form serves the purpose
of accompanying the samples to the laboratory and directly laboratory analysts on the analyses to be
performed (Appendix F). The form also identifies the samples so the laboratory can report the analytical
results by sample ID. When transferring possession of samples, the sampler should sign and record the
date and time on the COC record. Each person who subsequently takes custody should fill in the
appropriate section of the COC record. The COC will be filed with the laboratory data and become a part
of the permanent record.
5 Reports and Assessment
A pre-construction monitoring report assessing water quality parameters and identifying action levels for
pH, turbidity, and TSS will be prepared within two weeks of completion of pre-construction monitoring
and analysis. This report will include field notes regarding instrument calibration and secondary checks
with the date, time, and values specified. It will also indicate any equipment maintenance performed.
SRGII will submit the completed report will be sent via facsimile or email (as a pdf) by SRGII to HDOH-CWB
on behalf of Hanalei Traders Inc. prior to the commencement of the proposed construction activities.
Draft results of during-construction monitoring data and field notes will be sent via facsimile or email (as
a pdf) by SRGII to HDOH-CWB within 24 hours or the first business day after they become available. SRGII
will email a typed report of results to Hanalei Traders Inc. These typed reports will also be sent to HDOH-
AMAP: Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization November 2017
13
CWB via facsimile or email (as a pdf). These reports will have a running statistical summary (provided there
are sufficient data for statistical analysis) for each phase of the project. These reports will also include
field notes regarding instrument calibration and secondary checks with the date, time, and values
specified as well as any equipment maintenance performed.
Post-construction results will be reported to HDOH-CWB by facsimile or email within two weeks of
completion of the three analysis period and then after each quarterly analysis.
A final report and water quality assessment will be prepared upon completion of the monitoring program.
This report will be submitted via facsimile or email (as a pdf) by SRGII to HDOH-CWB on behalf of Hanalei
Traders Inc. within 60 days following completion of all post-construction monitoring and analysis. The final
report will identify the methods and procedures for analytical measurements and include all data
collected as well as statistical summaries of results by station and activity phase (pre-construction, during-
construction, and post-construction). Field notes regarding instrument calibration and secondary checks
with the date, time, and values specified will be included as well as any equipment maintenance
performed. This report will also assess whether water quality was impacted by the construction activity.
Upon completion of the monitoring program, SRGII will retain the original data and field notebook for a
minimum of five years.
6 References
Hawai‘i Department of Health (HDOH). 2014. Hawai‘i Administrative Rules, Title 11, Department of Health,
Chapter 54, Water Quality Standards. Available at:
http://health.hawaii.gov/cwb/files/2013/04/Clean_Water_Branch_HAR_11-54_20141115.pdf Last
accessed June 7, 2017.
Hawai‘i Department of Health (HDOH). 2015. Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Plan General
Instruction. Available at http://health.hawaii.gov/cwb/site-map/clean-water-branch-home-
page/forms/ (under AMAP guidelines). Last accessed June 12, 2017.
Hawai‘i Department of Health (HDOH). 2016. State of Hawaii Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment
Report. Available at: https://health.hawaii.gov/cwb/files/2013/05/Draft-2016-State-of-Hawaii-
Water-Quality-Monitoring-and-Assessment-Report.pdf Last accessed June 2, 2017.
Standard Methods (SM). 2012. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 22nd
Edition. (Rice, Baird, Clesceri, and Eaton, eds.). APHA, AWWA, & WEF. 1496 pp.
US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1993. Methods for the Determination of Inorganic
Substances in Environmental Samples. EPA 600/R-93/100. U.S.
US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2006. Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data
Quality Objectives Process: EPA QA/G-4. EPA/240/B-06/001. 121 pp. Available at:
http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/guidance_systematic_planning_dqo_proce
ss.pdf
YSI, Incorporated. 2012. YSI 6-Series Multiparameter Water Quality Sonde User Manual. 379 pp.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
This page intentionally left blank.
Hanalei Traders SMA Use Permit SRGII
Final December 2021
G-1
Appendix G. Special Management Area Permit Assessment Form
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
I. Part A
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Applicant: Roger Ross
Address: 5-5016 Kuhio Hwy. Phone: (808) 326-2561
Hanalei, HI 96714
Applicant’s Status: (Check one)
✔ Owner of the Property (Holder of at least 75% of the equitable and legal title)
Lessee of the Property Lessee must have an unexpired and recorded lease of five (5) years
or more from the date of filing of this application. If not, Owner(s) must
provide a Letter of Authorization.
Authorized Agent Attach Letter of Authorization
Contact Person: Andrew Hood Address: 111 Hekili St. Suite A373
Phone: (808) 261-0862 Kailua, HI 96734
Email: ahood@srgii.com
PROJECT INFORMATION
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
Site Address: 5-5016 Kuhio Hwy. Tax Map Key:
Hanalei, HI 96714 Lot Area:
State Land Use District: Urban County Zoning:
General Plan
Designation: Open Space
Nature of Development:
(4) 5-5-010:067
2.32 acres
Commercial
Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization
* NOTE: An Environmental Assessment in accordance with HRS Chapter 343 is required for actions
requiring a Shoreline Setback Variance (SSV). Please contact the Planning Department for
further information.
Valuation of Development: $600,000
(Estimate Attached)
Date of Application: April 26, 2021
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 2
II. Part B:
The petitioner shall be responsible for filing the following required information with the
department before an application is considered complete:
1. A written description of the proposed project, location and a statement of reasons/
justification for project.
See Item 3 in Application Packet, Project Description.
2. If property abuts a shoreline, a certified shoreline survey conducted by a registered land
surveyor within 6 months of an application shall be submitted, when required by the
Planning Agency.
Not applicable as the property does not abut a shoreline.
3. A plot plan of the property, drawn to scale, with all proposed and existing structures and
other pertinent information. Also, preliminary building sketch plans are to be submitted.
See Item 2, Location Map, Property Map and Site Plan.
4. Any other plans or information requirements by the Director. Note: An Environmental
Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement that has been declared adequate under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or under Chapter 343, HRS, may constitute a
valid filing under this section.
See Item 2, Location Map, Property Map and Site Plan. The Final Environmental Assessment for
this project was published in the Environmental Notice on 23 October 2016. A copy of the FONSI
is included, see Item 6.
5. Project Assessment:
a. Description of the area and environment involved including flora and fauna, and other
features;
At one mile upstream of the Hanalei river mouth, the subject property is located in the Hanalei
River estuary and water velocities and depths vary with tidal flux and discharges. Water su rface
elevations are highest when high discharges are coincident to rising tide levels, and lowest during
base flow discharges at mean low low tides. The river channel geometry in this stretch has been
altered due to growth of hau bush into the channel, predominantly from the east side of the river.
A review of historic air images finds that the channel cross section surface, in the stretch where
the subject property is located, has decreased in sections where hau bush has encroached by 20
to 30 feet, thus increasing velocity. A berm located on the property across the river from the
subject property forces the flow of water back towards the channel during flood events resulting
in larger volumes and higher velocities along the subject property than would be otherwise.
Surface velocities along the subject property in general (not including flooding discharges) do
not appear to exceed three feet per second (fps).
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 3
Vegetation at the subject property consists of non-native emergents and riparian species along
the bank and in the river, and landscape plants and grassy lawn above the bank and throughout
the rest of the property. Species occurring along the bank include: California grass (Brachiria
mutica), wedelia (Sphagneticola trilobata), Chinese violet (Asystasia gangetica) and umbrella
flatsedge (Cyperus involucratus). Landscape plants include non-native, Polynesian introduction,
and a few native plants, though the natives do not necessarily represent vegetation that was at
the site prior to development. The property does not contain any sensitive vegetation such as
rare, threatened, endangered, or proposed for listing species.
The Hanalei River and adjacent properties contain both native and non-native animals, including
mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, crustaceans, mollusks, insects, and fish. Most of the
animals that potentially utilize the project site and river adjacent to the project site are transients
through the area. This includes: one federally listed endangered bat species; four endemic
waterbirds federally listed as endangered; one State listed endangered bird; several migratory
waterbirds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA); and one species of sea turtle
listed as federally threatened.
The subject property is a landscaped area with several buildings used for commercial purposes.
Aside from the river and low areas of the river bank, within the property as a whole there is little
to no habitat suitable for native species to permanently inhabit. The vegetation on the river bank
provides some forage for transient bird species but no nesting areas. Both native and non-native
fauna utilize the estuary, even though instream habitat conditions are not ideal, mainly due
increased sedimentation and turbidity associated with land use along the lower reach of the river.
Neither the project site nor the nearby surrounding areas contain any designated critical habitat
for plants or wildlife.
Topography at the project site and the property in general is relatively flat, as is normal within a
floodplain area. The river bank is a near vertical drop of between eight and twelve feet from the
subject property edge down to the river.
b. Description of the existing land uses of the project site and surrounding areas;
The subject property, located one mile upstream from the river mouth at Hanalei Bay, is 2.32
acres and mostly level with elevations ranging from +7.5 to +5 ft. mean sea level. The property
borders consist of Kuhio Highway on the south/southeast, Hanalei River on the north and east,
and a privately owned parcel on the west/northwest. The property consists of one large building
(Hanalei Dolphin Center), five rental cottages, a small shed, landscaped grounds with walking
paths, and several permanent cement outdoor eating tables scattered on the lawn area between
the restaurant and the Hanalei River. The Hanalei Dolphin Center lies on the southern portion of
the property approximately 20 feet from Kuhio Highway and houses a restaurant and fish market
as well as a gift shop. There are two gravel parking areas that service the Center, located to the
east (adjacent to the highway) and north (adjacent to the river). The cottages are located north
of Center and are aligned along the top of the west bank of the river. Each cottage has designated
parking off the gravel driveway that provides access to the cottages from the Center’s north
parking lot. The west boundary of the property is aligned along an ‘auwai that drains taro lo‘i
mauka of Kuhio Highway. The ‘auwai empties into the Hanalei River at the northern most tip of
the property. It is used to access the Hanalei River by kayakers and paddlers who rent water
equipment from the neighboring property. The proposed project site (the river bank) does not
contain any infrastructure, nor it is used for any purpose except river viewing by people.
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 4
Ranching (cattle and/or buffalo) is conducted on two properties adjacent to the Hanalei Traders
property, the Princeville Ranch directly upstream and across the highway (south), and the Mowry
property across the river (east). Princeville Ranch also contains some taro lo‘i in the portion of
property closest to the Hanalei Traders property. There is a 3.2 acre parcel of land that surrounds
the Hanalei Traders parcel on two sides (north/northwest/west). It is owned by Halele‘a
Investment company and contains three structures one of which is a residential home. This is the
parcel that is directly downstream of the project site. The structures are approximately 130 ft
inland from the west bank of the river bank. Further west of the Hanalei Traders property is a
residential area.
c. Description of how the proposed project will affect the area involved and surrounding areas.
Specifically the assessment should evaluate if the proposal:
i. Involves an irrevocable commitment to loss or destruction of any natural or
cultural resources, including but not limited to, historic sites, Special
Treatment Districts as established by the County of Kauai Comprehensive
Zoning ordinance, view planes or scenic corridors as outlined in the
Community Development Plans, and recreation areas and resources;
Discussion: N/A
ii. Curtails the range of beneficial uses of the environment;
Discussion: N/A
iii. Conflicts with the County’s or the State’s long-term environmental policies or
goals;
Discussion: N/A
iv. Substantially affects the economics or social welfare and activities or the
community, County or State;
Discussion: N/A
v. Involves substantial secondary impacts, such as population changes and
effects on public facilities;
Discussion: N/A
vi. In itself has no significant adverse effect but cumulatively has considerable
effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions;
Discussion: N/A
vii. Substantially affect a rare, threatened, or endangered species of animal or
plant, or its habitat;
Discussion: N/A
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 5
viii. Detrimentally affects air or water quality or ambient noise levels; or
Discussion: N/A
ix. Affects an environmentally sensitive area, such as flood plain, shoreline,
tsunami zone, erosion- prone area, geologically hazardous land, estuary,
fresh water or coastal water;
Discussion: The project design is being used to stabilize an area that is experiencing
accelerated erosion due in part to offsite impacts. The development will not affect the
floodplain, any shoreline processes, the tsunami zone, any geologically hazardous land, or
coastal water. The development will have a positive effect on the estuary reach of the Hanalei
River by enhancing water quality through erosion control.
x. May have a major effect on the quality of the environment or affect the
economic or social welfare of the area; and
Discussion: N/A
xi. Would possibly be contrary to the policies and guidelines of the Rules and
Regulations, the County’s General Plan, Development Plans, and Zoning
and Subdivisions Ordinances.
Discussion: N/A
d. Evaluation of the proposed development relative to the objectives and policies as contained
in Chapter 205A, HRS and Section 3.0 of the Special Management Area (SMA) Rules and
Regulations: (Complete following questionnaire)
RECREATIONAL
RESOURCES:
Objective:
Provide coastal recreation opportunities accessible to the public.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” it is
necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the question
you answered “Yes”.
1. Will the proposed development adversely affect coastal resources uniquely
suited for recreational activities that cannot be provided in other areas?
Discussion: N/A
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 6
2. Will the project require replacement of coastal resources having significant
recreational value, including but not limited to surfing sites, sandy beaches
and fishing areas, when such resources will be unavoidably damaged by the
proposed development; or requiring reasonable monetary compensation to
the State for recreation when replacement is not feasible or desirable?
Discussion: N/A
3. Is the project site near a State or County Park?
Discussion: N/A
4. Will the proposed development affect an existing public access to or along the
shoreline?
Discussion: N/A
5. Will the proposed development provide public access to and/or along the
shoreline?
Discussion: N/A
6. Will the proposed development encourage expanded recreational use of
County, State, or federally owned or controlled shoreline lands and waters
having recreational value?
Discussion: N/A
7. Will the development generate point or non-point sources of pollution that will
affect recreation value of coastal area?
Discussion: N/A
HISTORICAL
RESOURCES:
Objective:
Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore those natural and
man-made historic and pre-historic resources in the Special
Management Area that are significant in Hawaiian and American
history and culture.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” it is
necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the question
you answered “Yes”.
1. Is the project site within a Federal, State and/or County designated
historical/cultural district?
Discussion: N/A
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 7
2. Is the project site listed on or nominated to the Hawaii or National Register of
Historic Places?
Discussion: N/A
3. Does the project site include land(s) which have not been previously surveyed
by an archaeologist?
Discussion: Although the project site has not had a formal archeological survey,
the Lead Archaeologist of the Hawaii State Historic Preservation Division Kauai (Mary Jane
Naone) conducted a field inspection on October 19, 2015.
4. If an archeological survey has been conducted for the project site, has the survey
been submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office for review and
recommendations?
Discussion: The field inspection, although not a formal survey, was done by SHPD.
5. Has any site survey revealed any information on historic or archaeological resources?
(Please provide a copy or reference of survey)
Discussion: The field inspection by SHPD did not reveal any positively identified
historic or cultural features. The presence of some vertically aligned rocks set perpendicular
to the river bank between and adjacent to Cottages 4 and 5 as well as a pile of rocks fronting
Cottage 5 just inland from the top of the river bank was noted. Although the origin of the rocks
is not known, they are likely simply landscaping features that were placed on the property
for aesthetic reasons. However, all contact with the noted rock piles will be avoided as a
precaution. The project will not entail any excavation, only light grubbing to remove non -
native plants along the 450 ft. of river bank where the biowall will be constructed. As an
additional precaution, an archaeologist will be present on site during the grubbing period of
project work to ensure proper identification of any previously undiscovered historic and/or
cultural resources.
6. Is the project site within or near a Hawaiian fishpond?
Discussion: N/A
7. Is the project located within or near a historic settlement area? (Cemeteries,
burials, heiaus, etc.)
Discussion: N/A
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 8
SCENIC AND
OPEN SPACE
RESOURCES:
Objective:
Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore or improve the
quality of coastal scenic and open space resources.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” it is
necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the question
you answered “Yes”.
1. Does the project site abut or affect a valued scenic resources or landmark
within the SMA?
Discussion: The proposed development would occur on a 450 ft. stretch of the Hanalei River.
The Hanalei River is designated as an American Heritage River based in part on its value as a
scenic resource. The river is valued by locals and tourists alike for its scenic beauty as well as
other resources. The proposed development would benefit scenic resources both within the
subject property and along a portion of the lower river reach. The biowall would convert an
eroding muddy river bank to a stretch of native plant species, which is a more desirable scenic
state. Native plants may also improve scenic resources by providing improved habitat for
native fauna in the river to linger near the subject property. The visual quality of the water
adjacent to the project area, and just downstream, would improve.
2. Does the proposed development affect existing shoreline open space and
scenic resources?
Discussion: N/A
3. Does the proposed development involve alteration to natural landforms and
existing public views to and along the shoreline?
Discussion: N/A
4. Is the project compatible with the visual environment?
Discussion: The proposed project would result in beneficial effect to the visual
environment both within the subject property and along a portion of the lower river reach.
The biowall would convert an eroding muddy river bank to a stretch of native plant species,
which is a more desirable scenic state. Native plants may also improve the visual
environment by providing improved habitat for native fauna in the river to linger near the
subject property. The visual quality of the water adjacent to the project area, and just
downstream, would improve.
5. Does the proposed action involve the construction of structures visible
between the nearest coastal roadway and the shoreline?
Discussion: N/A
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 9
6. Is the project site within the Shoreline Setback Area (20 or 40 feet inland from
the shoreline)?
Discussion: N/A
COASTAL
ECOSYSTEMS:
Objective:
Protect valuable coastal ecosystems from disruption and minimize
adverse impacts on all coastal ecosystems.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” it is
necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the question
you answered “Yes”.
1. Is the project site a habitat for endangered species of flora and fauna?
Discussion: Most of the animals that potentially utilize the project site and river
adjacent to the project site are transients through the area. This includes: one federally listed
endangered bat species; four endemic waterbirds federally listed as endangered; one State
listed endangered bird; and one species of sea turtle listed as federally threatened. The only
endangered species known to linger at the site is the Hawaiian common moorhen (Gallinula
chloropus sandvicensis). The moorhen has been observed foraging in the area adjacent to the
project site but is not known to nest there.
Implementation of the proposed development would not result in any adverse effects to
native wildlife species, including those protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Construction BMPs will be employed to avoid any adverse impacts on fish and wildlife (BMPs
are fully described in the Water Quality Certification application submitted to the Department
of Health Clean Water Branch). Over the long term, implementation of the proposed project
would likely be beneficial to fish and wildlife (including endangered water birds) due to
improved habitat conditions in the immediate vicinity of the property, as well as decreasing
sedimentation in the river in general.
2. Will the proposed development adversely affect valuable coastal ecosystems
of significant biological or economic importance?
Discussion: N/A
3. Will the proposed involve disruption or degradation of coastal water
ecosystems through stream diversions, channelization, and similar land and
water uses?
Discussion: N/A
4. Will the proposed development include the construction of special waste
treatment facilities, such as injection wells, discharge pipes, septic tank
systems or cesspools?
Discussion: N/A
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 10
5. Is there a wetland on the project site?
Discussion: N/A
6. Is the project site situated in or abutting a Natural Area Reserve or Wildlife
Refuge or Sanctuary?
Discussion: N/A
ECONOMIC
USES:
Objective:
Provide public or private facilities and improvements important to the
State’s economy in suitable locations.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” it is
necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the question
you answered “Yes”.
1. Does the project involve a harbor or port?
Discussion: N/A
2. Is the proposed development related to or near to an existing major hotel,
multi-family, or condominium project?
Discussion: N/A
3. Does the project site include agricultural lands designated for such use?
Discussion: N/A
4. Does the proposed development relate to commercial fishing or seafood
production?
Discussion: N/A
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 11
COASTAL
HAZARDS
Objective:
Reduce hazard to life and property from tsunami, storm waves,
stream flooding, erosion, and subsidence.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” it is
necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the question
you answered “Yes”.
1. Is the project site within a potential tsunami inundated area as depicted on
the National Flood Insurance Rate maps (FIRM)?
Discussion: The project site is within a potential tsunami inundation zone per
FIRM FM1500020055E (9/16/05). See Figure 8, Section 2 of this permit application.
2. Is the project site within a potential flood inundation area according to a
FIRM?
Discussion: The FIRM FM1500020055E (9/16/05) shows that the subject
property is within Flood Zone AEF (the Special Flood Hazard Area). Zone AEF is within the
100-year floodplain, with a 1% annual chance of a 100-year flood occurring or being
exceeded annually and a 26% chance of flooding over the life of a 30-year mortgage.
3. Does the project comply with the requirements of the Federal Flood
Insurance Program?
Discussion: The proposed action will not add any encroachments that would
alter base flood elevations and therefore is complies with the requirements of the Federal
Flood Insurance Program.
4. Has the project site or nearby shoreline areas experienced shoreline
erosion?
Discussion: The project site is not on a shoreline.
5. Have any seawalls/revetments/etc. been constructed or exist in the immediate
vicinity?
Discussion: N/A
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
Yes No
X
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMIT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF KAU AI
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SMA Assessment Application (v.10/2013) April 2021
Hanalei Traders Bioengineered River Bank Stabilization 12
PROJECT
ASSESSMENT
e. Evaluation of impacts which cannot be avoided and mitigating measures proposed to
minimize that impact;
Discussion: The proposed development would not result in any long-term adverse impacts. All
short-term adverse impacts will be avoided by use of construction BMPs.
f. Evaluation of the proposed development relative to Section 4.0 of the SMA Rules and
Regulations in accordance with the following aspects:
i. Substantial adverse environmental or ecological effects;
Discussion: No adverse environmental or ecological effects are anticipated as a result of
implementation of the proposed development. The potential for creating adverse impacts will
be minimized through construction BMPs, negating the need for mitigation measures. The
Proposed Action, in conjunction with other actions on and in the project site vicinity, will not
result in adverse cumulative effects.
ii. Consistency or compliance of the proposed development relative to the goals and
objectives of Chapter 205A, HRS and Section 3.0 of the SMA Rules and Regulations;
Discussion: The proposed development is consistent and in compliance with all of the
applicable goals and objectives of Chapter 205A, HRS and Section 3.0 of the SMA Rules and
Regulations.
iii. Consistency or compliance of the proposed development relative to the County General
Plan, Development Plan, and Zoning Ordinances.
Discussion: The proposed development is consistent with all applicable components of the
County General Plan and Development Plan and does not violate Zoning Ordinances.
April 23, 2021
Signature of Applicant/Representative Date
Andrew Hood, Sustainable Resources Group Intn'l, Inc.
Ka'aina S.Hull
Director of Planning
Jodi A.Higuchi Sayegusa
Deputy Director of PIanning
I.SUMMARY
Action Required by
PIanning Commission;
COUNTY OF KAUA'I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Consideration of a Special Management Area Use Permit to allow
stabilization of an eroding riverbank along the Hanalei River.
Permit Application Nos.Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)-2022-3
Name of Applicant(s)HANALEI TRADERS,INC.
II.PERMIT INFORMATION
PERMn'SREQUIRED
I1 Use Permit
Project Development Use
Permit
Variance Permit
1I Special Permit
Zoning Permit CIass
rv
nm
Special Management Area
Permit
|Z]Use
Minor
Pursuant to Section 205A of the Hawaii Revised Statutes
(HRS)and the Special Management Area Rules and
Regulations of the County of Kaua'i,a SMA Use Permit is
required as defined in Section 7.3(C)ofthe SMA Rules and
Regulations where the Director finds that the proposal (1)is
a "Development"as defined in Section 1.4F;and (2)is in
excess of $500,000.
AMENDMENTS
Zoning Amendment
General Plan Amendment
State Land Use District
Amendment
F.^.<<i
https://kauaicounty-my.sharepoint.corn/personaL/ridica_kauai_gov/Documents/Documents/Custom Office Templates/Report-
l_3.23.2022_SMA(U)-2022-3_HanalciTraders.docx
i..
Date of Receipt of Completed
Application:Febmary 10,2022
Date of Director's Report:March 23,2022
Date of Public Hearing:April 12,2022
Deadline Date for PC to Take Action
(60 Day):Junel 1,2022
III.PROJECTDATA
IV.LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
Section 8.0,9.0,and 10.0 of This report is being transmitted to the Applicant and
the Special Management Planning Commission in order to satisfy the
Area Rules and Regulations:requirements of Sections 8.0,9.0 and 10.0 of the Special
Management Area Rules and Regulations.The
application was received on February 10,2022 and the
Applicant,through its authorized agent,was notified
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Report
Hanalei Traders,[NC.
March 23.2022
a|Pag e
PROJECT INFORMATION
Parcel Location:The project site is located off Kuhio Highway approximately one (1)
mile west of the Hanalei bridge adjacent to the Hanalei River.
Tax Map Key(s):(4)5-5-010:067 Area:|2.32 acres
ZONING &DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Zoning:Open (0)
State Land Use District:Urban
General Plan Designation:Natural
Height Limit:Twenty-five (25)feet OR Base Flood Elevation
(B.F.E.)plus (fifteen)15 feet
Max.Land Coverage:3,000 s.f.maximum or not to exceed 10%ofthe
parcel or lot area
Front Setback:lO'-O"
Rear Setback:Five (5)feet or '/2 the wall plate height whichever
is greater
Side Setback:Five (5)feet or Vi the wall plate height whichever
is greater
Community PIan Area:North Shore Development PIan
Community Plan Land Use
Designation:N/A
Deviations or Variances Requested:N/A
accordingly of the Planning Department's intent to
commence permit processing.
PubUc Hearing Date:APRIL 12,2022
V.PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND USE
The proposed development is to stabilize approximately 450 linear feet of eroding
riverbank with a bioengineered (bio-wall)wall (see Figure 3.Property Map of the
Application).The bio-wall will be constructed in fifty (50)linear foot increments,each
increment will be fully completed before the next increment is started.Construction of each
increment/phase will take up to five (5)days to complete.The bio-wall construction will
consist of light grubbing to remove non-native plantings.Placement of washed boulders
that are two (2)to three (3)feet in diameter will be placed at the toe of the riverbank for
foundation.Equipment used for this operation will not be "in-water .A total of 216 cubic
yards of boulders will used.Woven,porous,geotextile bags will be placed on the top of the
boulders to the top of the existing riverbank.Geogrid fabric will be used to secure and
anchor the interlocking geotextile bags to the riverbank.Sedges and woody native or
Polynesian shrubs will be placed between the geotextile bags and geogrid fabric as well as
the top of the existing bank (see project description page 3 of application).
Current improvements on the subject property includes the Hanalei Dolphin Center and
Restaurant,five (5)rental cottages,outdoor seating area,a shed,and landscaped grounds
with walking paths.The north-eastem portion of the subject parcel is adjacent the Hanalei
River.As shown in the Application,the riverbank is eroding at the project site and resulting
in an unstable bank that is eight (8)to twelve (12)feet high from the top of the bank to the
bed of the river.
The applicant,Hanalei Traders,Inc.,was previously granted a Special Management Area
Minor permit SMA(M)-2017-4 for repair of the eroding riverbank.Work could not be
initiated prior to the two (2)year expiration date due to the April 2018 rain event.A cost
valuation of $485,000 was submittal in 2016 SMA assessment application which deemed
the project to be reviewed as a SMA Minor permit.Due to the present material and labor
costs,the project's valuation increased to $600,000 and thus requiring an SMA Use Permit.
It is noted that other than the change in costs,the scope of work has not changed since the
2017 SMA Minor permit.
VI.APPLICANT'S REASONS/JUSTIFICATION
(Refer to Application)
VII.ADDITIONAL FINDINGS
1.The project site is located offKuhio Highway approximately one (1)mile west ofthe
Hanalei bridge adjacent to the Hanalei River.
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Report
Hmalei Tradcrs,1NC.
March 23,2022
3|Page
2.The State Land Use District (SLUD)designation for this parcel is "Urban",which
allows for urban growth in a specified are.
3.The proposed development is not a shoreline property and not within the 500 feet
shoreline setback threshold,pursuant to the County's shoreline setback requirements
contained in Chapter 8,Article 27 ofthe Kaua'i County Code (1987),as amended will
not be applicable to this project.
4.The General Plan designation (GP)is "Natural".According to the GP,areas designated
as Natural have limited development capacity or are not suitable for development due
to topography,hazards,vulnerability,sensitive resources,and other constraints.The
proposed development is located at the property edge down to the bed of Hanalei River.
(see Figure 7 and 8 Appendix C.)
5.The subject parcels are located within the Zone "AEF"of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA)Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM).Zone "AEF areas
are designated as floodways within Zone "AE".The floodway is the channel of stream
plus any adjacent floodplain area that must be kept free from any encroachment so that
1%annual chance offlood is carried without increasing the BFE.The parcels are also
within the tsunami evacuation zone.
6.The topography is relatively flat,and no grading of the project area will occur.Light
grubbing is proposed to remove non-native vegetation from the top of the riverbank
down to normal high-water line.Existing drainage pattems on the property will not be
affected.
7.Special Management Area (SMA)
In addressing the issues of the Special Management Area and its objectives and
policies,the following aspects will be considered and evaluated:
a.Recreational Resources
b.Cultural/Historic Resources
c.Scenic resources
d.Coastal Hazard
e.Coastal Ecosystem
Furthermore,the proposal does not:
•Involve dredging,filling or otherwise altering any bay,salt marsh,river
mouth,slough or lagoon;
Reduce the size of any beach or other area usable for public recreation;
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Report
Hanalci Traders,INC.
March 23,2022
4|Page
•Reduce or impose restrictions upon public access to tidal and submerged
lands,beaches,rivers,and streams within the SMA;and
•Adversely affect water quality,existing areas of open water free of visible
structures,existing and potential fisheries and fishing grounds,wildlife
habitats,estuarine sanctuaries,potential or existing agriculture uses of land.
8.CZO Development Standards
The proposed development is subjected to standards prescribed in Sections 8-4.3,8-4.5
and 8-9.2:
a.Setback Requirements:Front property line setbacks are ten feet (10'-0")with a
side and rear property line setback of five feet (5'-0")or half the distance of the
plate height whichever is greater.As specified in the application,this proposal is the
stabilization of an eroding riverbank.Setback requirements are not applicable.
b.Setback between buildings:The distance between buildings shall be ten (10)feet
minimum.No buildings are associated with this proposal and not applicable to this
project.
c.Lot Coverage:The subject property is within the Open County zone area.
Allowable lot coverage is 3,000 square feet maximum or not more than 10%of the
parcel or lot area.No increase of lot coverage is anticipated with the riverbank
stabilization project.
d.Building Height:The North Shore Development Plan allows dwellings and
other structures to be a maximum height of twenty (25)feet or Based Flood
Elevation (B.F.E.)plus fifteen (15).No dwellings are proposed,the stnicture
within the proposal is a bio-wall to stabilize an eroding riverbank.
VIII.AGENCY COMMENTS
See attached Exhibit "A"
IX.PRELIMINARY EVALUATION
In evaluating the Applicant s request to allow the construction ofthe proposed
development,the following are being considered.
1.General Plan
The proposed development satisfies the following policies ofthe General Plan,as taken
from Section 1.3 and 1.4:
A.1.3,entitled "VISIONS AND GOALS"
5|Page
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Repon
Hanalei Traders,INC.
March 23.2022
1)Goal #1 "Sustainable Island"-The proposed natural engineering system
design of the bioengineered wall,will help to reduce the amount of soil
discharged into the Hanalei River during heavy rain events.
2)Goal #2 "Unique and Beautiful Place"-The Hanalei River is a treasured
resource to the island of Kaua'i.Protecting the eroding riverbank will reduce
turbidity in the Hanalei River.Keeping the river clean helps protect the river's
natural environment.
3)Goal #3 "A Healthy and Resilient People"-The Hanalei River near the river
mouth at Black pot beach as well as upriver,is widely used for gathering food
while promoting healthy lifestyle through recreation opportunities.Protecting
the riverbank upstream will minimize impacts such as turbidity.
4)Goal #4 "An Equitable Place,with Opportunity for All"-Hanalei Dolphin
Center and Restaurant offers a variety of employment in the Hanalei
Community.Protecting the eroding riverbank will protect potential property
loss will help the Hanalei Dolphin Center and Restaurant remain open to ensure
the employees have access tojobs.
B.Section 1.4,entitled "POLICIES TO GUIDE GROWTH"
1)Policy #3 "Recognize the Identity of Kaua'i's Individual Towns and
Distracts -The Hanalei Dolphin Center has been in the same location since the
1970's.This establishment contributes to the unique mral character to Hanalei
Town.
2)Policy #8 "Protect Kaua'i's Scenic Beauty"-The Hanalei River is a valuable
and treasured landmark in the Hanalei Town area.Installation of the
bioengineered stabilization wall will minimize impacts of turbidity on the
Hanalei River due to soil erosion.
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Report
Hanalei Traders,INC.
March 23.2022
3)Policy #9 "Uphold Kaua'i as a Unique Visitor Destination"-The riverbank
erosion is fronting the existing cottages and outdoor dining area (see appendix"C")of the subject property.The five (5)cottages have an existing non-
conforming use for vacation stay which has been grandfathered in.This
application is to stabilize the existing riverbank to protect the river and reduce
property loss.No new vacation rentals are proposed.
4)PolicyttlO "Help Business Thrive"-This application is to stabilize an eroding
riverbank to protect existing businesses on the subject property,that supports
the existing town center of Hanalei.
5)Policy#12 Protect Our Watersheds"-Kaua'i's natural drainage system is
mostly natural-comprised of it's streams and rivers.During heavy rain events
soil runoff from the riverbank scarp occurs.The construction of the bio-wall to
6 1 Pag e
stabilize the eroding riverbank will reduce the turbidity of the Hanalei River
from soil run off.
2.Natb'e Hawalian Tradjtionjil and Cultural Rifihts
The subject site has been previously developed and in operation since the 1970's.The
applicant has reached out to sixteen (16)non-govemmental organizations and
individuals via email and mailed letters.The inquiry requests if they had any
knowledge of on-going Native Hawaiian and Traditional Cultural Rights practices or
activities.One (1)written response was received by the applicant from the Hanalei
Canoe Club and two (2)organizations,the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA),and
State Historical Preservation Department (SHPD)reached out via phone call.
Based on the available information,traditional agriculture and aquaculture practices
will not be affected or impaired by the proposed development.
After the Applicant consulted with sixteen (16)non-govemmental organizations,three
(3)in total responded.The organizations who are familiar with the area and evaluating
historical information that was available to the department,the department finds that
the proposed Project involving a developed parcel should have no impact on any known
Hawaiian traditional or customary practices for the following reasons:
a.There are no known traditional or customary practices of native Hawaiians
that are presently occurring within the Project Site.
b.There are no special gathering practices taking place within any portion of
the Project Site.
c.The Project will not detrimentally affect access to any streams;access to the
shoreline or other adjacent shoreline areas;or gathering along any streams,
the shoreline or in the ocean.
d.There are known religious practices taking place within the project site.
e.There are no known pre-contact cultural or historic sites or resources located
within the project site.
f.There are no known burials within the petition area.
3.SMA Rules and Regulations
The COK SMA Rules and Regulations contain objectives,policies and guidelines
designed to protect coastal resources.Within the SMA,special consideration is given
to recreational opportunities,cultural and historic resources,scenic qualities and open
space,coastal ecosystems,and coastal hazards.In evaluating the proposed
development relative to the goals and objectives of the SMA Rules and Regulations,the
following aspects are taken into consideration:
7|Page
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Repon
Hanaiei Traders,INC.
March 23.2022
a.Public Access and Coastal Recreation -The project would not negatively impact
on any public recreational opportunities located near the project area.Access to
the Hanalei River is through the nearby Blackpot Beach Park.
b.Cultural/Historical Resources -Currently,there are no know historic,
cultural,or archeological resources on site.The applicant will have a qualified
Archaeologists present during the light grubbing phase of the project to ensure
proper identification of any previously undiscovered historic and/or cultural
resources.
e.
Scenic and Open Space Resources -In 1998,the Hanalei River was designated as
an "American Heritage River"by former President Bill CIinton based in part of
its value as a scenic resource.The proposed 450 linear feet of riverbank
stabilization should have minimal visual impacts to Hanalei River.Once the bio-
wall is completed,a riverbank of native plants would be installed to take the place
of the muddy riverbank.The visual water quality would likely to improve by the
reduction of turbidity due to the soil run off.
Coastal Hazards -The subject property is not a shoreline property and is out of
the Coastal High Hazard Area.It is however with in the tsunami evacuation area.
Based on the Pacific Islands Ocean Observing System (PacIOOS)State of
Hawai'i sea level rise viewer website,the subject parcel was analyzed using the
Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLRXA)at the 3.2 feet range for potential
impacts ofpassive flooding,annual high wave Hooding,and coastal erosion.The
subject parcel would be impacted by passive flooding and annual high wave run
up at the property boundary edge of the river.Tbe current existing development is
currently not affected by passive flooding,annual high wave flooding,and coastal
erosion.
Coastal Ecosystems —The project would not have any.significant impact on the
coastal ecosystem and any adjacent properties or its surroundings.The proposed
development is out of the shoreline setback area and no erosion-protection
stmctures seaward of the shoreline is being proposed.The property does not
contain any sensitive vegetation such as rare,threatened,endangered,or proposed
listing species.The Hanalei River and adjacent properties contain both native and
non-native animals that are transients through the area.These species include one
federally listed endangered bat species,four (4)endemic waterbirds that are
federally listed as endangered,one (1)State listed endangered bird,several
migratory waterbirds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA),
and one (1)federally listed threatened sea turtle.An Environmental Assessment
(EA)ofproposed project was issued a Finding ofNo Significant Impact (FONSI)
by Department of Land and Natural Resources,(DLNR)Land Division on
October 23,2016.Proper Best Management Practices (BMP's)along with water
quality monitoring and water quality samples will be taken as stated in the
Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Plan (see Appendix F.)
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Report
Hanalei Traders.INC.
March 23,2022
8|Page
It is unclear based on the information contained in the application as to what sort of
post-project maintenance would be necessary to ensure the structural integrity of the
bio-wall.Prior to any construction activity,the Applicant should be required to submit
a maintenance and monitoring schedule that document responsibilities and timeframes
to ensure that any inadvertent failures and water quality impacts due to lack of
maintenance are avoided.
X.PRELIIVDNARY CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing,it is concluded that through proper mitigative measures,the
proposed development can be considered,and it complies with the policies and guidelines
of the Special Management Area Rules and Regulations in that:
1.The development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or
ecological effect.
2.The development is consistent with the objectives/goals/policies of the County
General Plan,the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance,and other applicable
ordinances.
Furthermore,the proposal DOES NOT:
a.involve dredging,filling,or otherwise altering any bay,estuary,salt marsh,river
mouth,slough or lagoon;
b.reduce the size of any beach or other area usable for public recreation;
c.reduce or impose restrictions upon public access to tidal and submerged lands,
beaches,rivers or streams within the special management area;and
d.adversely affect water quality,existing areas of open water free of visible
structures,existing and potential fisheries and fishing grounds,wildlife habitats,
estuarine sanctuaries or existing agricultural uses of land.
Through proper mitigation measures,the proposed development should not have any
detrimental impact to the environment or the surrounding area,and in compliance with the
criteria outlined for the granting of a Special Management Area Use Permit.The Applicant
should institute the "Best Management Practices"to ensure that the operation of this
facility does not generate impacts that may affect the health,safety,and welfare of those in
the surrounding area of the proposal.
The Applicant shall implement to the extent possible sustainable building techniques and
operational methods for the project.
XI.PRELMINARY RECOMMENDATION
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Report
Hanalei Traders.INC.
March 23,2022
9|Page
Based on the foregoing evaluation and conclusion it is hereby recommended Special
Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)-2022-3 to be APPROVED.Ifapproved,the
following conditions shall be implemented:
1.The proposed improvements shall be constructed as represented.Any changes to
said development shall be reviewed by the Planning Director to determine
whether Planning Commission review and approval is warranted.
2.The Applicant is advised that should any archaeological or historical resources be
discovered during ground disturbing/construction work,all work in the area of the
archaeological/historical findings shall immediately cease and the Applicant shall
contact the State Department of Land and Natural Resources,Historic Preservation
Division at (808)692-8015 and the Planning Department at (808)241-4050 to
detennine mitigation measures.
3.The Applicant shall develop and utilize Best Management Practices (B.M.P's)
during all phases of development in order to minimize erosion,dust,and
sedimentation impacts of the project to abutting properties.Best Management
Practices (BMPs)shall be implemented during construction in accordance with
applicable permits (Clean Water Act (CWA)Section 401 Water Quality
Certification (WQC)and as required by Kaua'i County Sediment and Erosion
Control Ordinance No.808 to minimize any reduction in water quality.Over the
long-term,water quality is expected to improve as nitrogen is taken up by plants in
the bio-wall and fine sediments currently being released into the river are reduced
as a result of the stabilization.
4.The Applicant shall resolve and comply with the applicable standards and requirements
set forth by the State Health Department,State Historic Preservation Division-DLNR,
and the County Depanments ofPublic Works,Fire,Transportation,and Water.
5.The Hanalei River is subject to flooding at all times of the year.The installation of
stabilization materials would not be possible during a flood event and therefore work
should be rescheduled.Weather forecasts shall be monitored continuously during the
construction phase and in the event of a forecast of moderate to high rainfall,work shall
cease until the threat has passed.
6.All work shall not impede river access for any river users during construction.Best
Management Practices (BMPs)include use of a silt curtain made of polystyrene
geotextile fabric,with a top floatation device and an anchor chain.The silt curtain will
be temporarily placed in the river to catch sediments that may be released during
construction.It will be attached to the downstream and upstream project boundaries,
forming an arc with a maximum distance from the bank often (10)feet.This distance
will allow unrestricting passage up and down the river by users.No equipment shall be
placed within the bed or banks of the channel.The bank stabilization shall not
SMA(U)-2022-3;Direclor's Report
Hanalei Traders.B'lC.
March 23,2022
io|P a g e
significantly alter the topography of the current riverbank or narrow the river channel.
7.The property owner will comply with the terms of all permits required for this
construction project.In the event there is a failure ofthe riverbank stabilization project,
the landowner shall remove the material from the water and repair the damage.
8.Water quality monitoring will occur prior to,during construction,and post-construction
per the requirements of the Applicable Monitoring and Assessment Program for CWA
Section401WQC.
9.Two (2)weeks prior to the start of construction a knowledgeable wildlife biologist wilt
inspect the site to determine if there are any nesting waterbirds.In the unlikely event
that nesting waterbirds are present,construction will be delayed until all chicks have
fledged and left the area.
10.As recommended by DLNR DOFAW,the following practices to avoid any adverse
impacts to birds shall occur.The project will not entail any nighttime work or the use of
night construction lights,which ifused could attract Newell's shearwaters or Hawaiian
petrels and result in birds becoming disoriented and falling to the ground.
11.As recommended by DLNR DOFAW,the following practices to avoid any adverse
impacts to bats shall occur.There will be no cutting or trimming of trees greater than 15
feet (4.6 meters)during the birthing and pup rearing season from May 15 to August 15.
12.As required for any development within a Special FIood Hazard Area,the project will
comply with the rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program
presented in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations.Specifically,implementation
of the proposed action will not increase the flood hazard on other properties,and all
required federal and state permits will be obtained prior to execution.
13.The State DAR (Division ofAquatic Resources)advised that the fill materials to be
used in the design incorporate smooth boulders due to the preference of 'O'opu Nakea.
14.The BMPs to be implemented at the project site,which are subject to DOH
(Department of Health)review as part of the Water Quality Certification application,
state that green waste shall be removed from the project site daily for the duration of
the vegetation removal,and that vegetation material will be disposed of at the nearest
transfer station with a Green waste Diversion Program (likely Hanalei Transfer
Station).No open buming of waste,on or off site shall occur.
15.Prion to any construction activity,the Applicant shall be required to submit a
maintenance and monitoring schedule that document responsibilities and timeframes to
ensure that any inadvertent failures and water quality impacts due to lack of
maintenance are avoided.
ii|Pag e
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Repon
HanalciTraders,INC.
March 2.1,2022
16.To the extent possible within the confines of union requirements and applicable legal
prohibitions against discrimination in employment,the Applicant shall seek to hire
Kauai contractors as long as they are qualified and reasonably competitive with other
contractors and shall seek to employ residents of Kauai in temporary construction and
permanent resort-relatedjobs.It is recognized that the Applicant may have to employ
non-Kauai residents for particular skilledjobs where no qualified Kauai residents
possesses such skills.For the purposes of this condition,the Commission shall relieve
the Applicant ofthis requirement ifthe Applicant is subjected to anti-competitive
restraints on trade or other monopolistic practices.
17.The PIanning Commission reserves the right to revise,add,or delete conditions of
approval in order to address or mitigate unforeseen impacts the project may,create,or
to revoke the permits through the proper procedures should conditions of approval not
be complied with or be violated.
18.Unless otherwise stated in the permit,once permit is issued,the Applicant must
make substantial progress,as determined by the Director,regarding the
development or activity within two (2)years,or the permit shall be deemed to have
lapsed and be no longer in effect.
The Planning Commission is further advised that this report does not represent the
Plarming Department's final recommendation in view of the forthcoming public hearing
process scheduled for APRIL 12,2022 whereby the entire record should be considered
prior to decision-making.The entire record should include but not be limited to:
a.Pending govemment agency comments;
b.Testimony from the general public and interested others;and
c.The Applicant's response to staff's report and recommendation as provided
herein.
By
ROMIO IDICA
Planner
Approved &Recommended to Commission:
KA'AlNA S.HULL
Director of Planning
Date:t ^n-
T~l
SMA(U)-2022-3;Director's Repon
Hanalei Traders,INC.
March 23.2022
i2|P ag e
EXHIBIT "A"
(Agency Comments)
For reference
COUNTY OF KAUA'I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
4444 RICE STREET,SUITE A473 LIHU'E,HAWAI'I 96766
(808)241.4050
FROM:Kaaina S.Hull,Director (Romio)Febmary 10,2022
SUBJECT:
TO:
Special Management Are Use Permit SMA(U)-2022-3,Other
Tax Map Key:(4)5-5-010:067,Hanalei Traders,Inc.,Applicant
FOR YOUR COMMENTS (pertaining to your department):
No comments or concerns from Fire
This matter is scheduled for a public hearing before the County of Kauai Planning Commission on
4/12/2022 at the Lihue Civic Center,Moikeha Building,Meeting Room 2A-2B,4444 Rice Street,
Lihue,Kauai,at 9:00 am or soon thereafter.If we do not receive your agency comments within one (1)
month from the date of this request,we will assume that there are no objections to this permit request.
Mahalo!
'D:
Department of Transponation -STP
~s
DPW-EngineeringxDOT-Highway,Kauai(urfo only)E DPW-Wastewater
DOT-Airports,Kauai (info only)E DPW-Building'a'
DOT-Harbors,Kauai (info only)
~a
DPW-SolidWaste~w
State Depanment of Health
~D~
Department of Parks &Recreation'D'
State Department of Agriculture s Pire-DepartmenC~D~
State Office of Planning s County Housing-Agency
State Dept.of Bus.&Econ.Dev.Tourism 3~County Economic Development"D:
State Land Use Commission
~0
KHPRC~w
State Historic Preservation Division
~w
Water Department"D:
DLNR-Land Management
~a~
Kaua'i Civil Defense
DLNR-Foresty &Wildlife E U.S.Postal Department~CT~
DLNR-Aquatic Resources s UH_Sea_Grant~u
DLNR-OCCL
~w
County Transportation Agency
E Other:
Check
One:
Paper
Plans
Electronic
Plans
DEPARTMENT USE ONLY
Zoning Intake By:
Use
Variance Intake Date:
SMA
PDU Acceptance
Date/By:
TOTAL FEE:
Additional Fees:
Receipt Number
Building Permit No.
Associated Permits (e.g. SSD)
Complete Information Below
Tax Map Key Number Condominium Number
Applicant Name(s)
Property Address
Mailing Address
Parcel Area Contact Phone
Zoning Designation Contact Email
(if applicable)
Applicant Declarations (incorrect responses may slow your permit review)
Please place an “X” under Yes or No under the following:
YES NO Staff
Verification
1 Is this property located in the Special Management Area (SMA)?
2 Is this property part of a Condominium Property Regime (CPR)?
3 Is this property within 500 feet of the shoreline?
4 Is this property within the Agriculture Zoning District?
5 Is there a structure on the property that is 50 years old or older?
6 Do you have an Additional Dwelling Unit Certificate?
7 Is this a permit for an after-the-fact construction or activity?
8 I hold at least a 100% property interest in the property.
9 Are you an agent for the property owner?
10 Has a similar application been previously denied?
11 Is this an application for an agriculture structure under 200 square feet
12 Are there known burials on the site?
13 Are you using water not provided by a domestic water system?
14 Does existing grade under building footprint change by 2’ or more in any direction?
15 The proposed residential unit is a Multi-Family Dwelling Unit?
16 Is this a conversion of a legally existing single-family dwelling unit into a multi-
family two dwelling unit?
17 Is this structure a guest house?
18 Does guest house contain a kitchen?
This application shall be fil led out by all seeking Zoning, Use,
Variance, SMA Use or PDU permits pursuant to the Kauai
County Code, Hawai‘i Revised Statutes Chapter 205A and all
relevant rules and regulations of the Planning Commission and
Department. Supplemental information may be attached to
form. SMA applications may also require additional SMA
assessment forms.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
STANDARD ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION
One (1) original; If providing plans, five (5) sets, including original, required.
Fees vary based on permits required and range from $30 to over $1000.
Proof of 100% fee ownership rights or authorized agent must be attached.
3HUPLWWLQJIHHVPD\EHPDGHYLDFDVKRUFKHFN$OOFKHFNV
VKDOOEHPDGHRXWWR 'LUHFWRURI)LQDQFH
;
(4)2-8-021-070 n/a
Makahuena-Preferred A LLC et al.
n/a
P.O. Box 1205 Lihue, HI 96766
1.001 acres (808) 521-9297
Open mtrask@cades.com
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
1. What is the proposed construction and/or intended use of the structure or parcel (may attach
additional info)? Two-story Single-Family Dwelling Unit, pool, driveway, walkways, lanai, landscaping and associated improvements.
2. If this is not the first dwelling unit on the subject property identified on this application, please state
how many dwelling units presently exist: _n_la _________ _
Submittal Checklist
Please INITIAL under "Yes" or not applicable "N/ A" regarding each of the statements:
YES NA Staff Verification
X
I have ensured all TMK numbers are visible on all lan sheets. X
Any plans I have submitted clearly show all structures and setback
X dimensions.
4 M lans rovide lot covera e calculations X
5 I have ensured kitchens are marked with the 8' radii required by the X Plannin De artment' s Administrative Rules.
6 Because this application involves a CPR, the plot plan shows all
existin structures. X
7 Buildin late does not exceed 20 feet from the finished rade at ent X
Acknowledgements -Please INITIAL next to each of the statements:
I UNDERSTAND: Initial Here
Additional fees and/or the submittal of other application forms may be necessary to complete this application for MT acceptance and processing.
Tender of fees by the County does not imply acceptance of this application. MT
Errors in self-declaration or missing or incomplete information will delay acceptance and processing of your MT annlication.
Any purposeful misrepresentations in this application may result in delay, denial, permit revocation, violations, MT fines and even criminal prosecution.
The owner and/or authorized representative is hereby made aware that the construction, work, use or activity approved in this pennit shall be subject to inspection by
Planning Department personnel. The applicant is advised that ins ection may occur prior to or during construction and use to ascertain the activity is conducted in
compliance with the law. Further, I am a du! tor have O o ownership rights.
OWNER/ AGENT SIGNATURE: __,,s:::::::::=======--..:::::..----------DATE: February 10, 2022
FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY (THIS CONSTITUTES PERMIT IF FILLED OUT BY DEPT.):
APPROVED • DENIED • BY: DATE:
DIRECTOR'S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (staff to initial next to applicable conditions):
This permit shall expire ifno building is issued within one (1) year after the approval date and/or if
construction does not start within one (1) year of building permit issuance.
Director's standard conditions for non-residential agricultural structures (attach)
Should any archaeological or historic resources be discovered during ground
disturbing/construction work, all work in the area of the find shall immediately cease and the
Applicant shall contact the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, Historic Preservation
Division and the Planning Department to determine mitigation measures.
Additional Conditions (State):
V,\iesource library\form, • Applications\loning Permit Application_02.02.21 [CURRENT].doo:
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
I. Part A
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Applicant:
Address: Phone:
Applicant’s Status: (Check one)
Owner of the Property (Holder of at least 75% of the equitable and legal title)
Lessee of the Property Lessee must have an unexpired and recorded lease of five (5) years
or more from the date of filing of this application. If not, Owner(s) must
provide a Letter of Authorization.
Authorized Agent Attach Letter of Authorization
Contact Person: Address:
Phone:
Email:
PROJECT INFORMATION
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
Site Address: Tax Map Key:
Lot Area:
State Land Use District: County Zoning:
General Plan
Designation:
Nature of Development:
* NOTE: An Environmental Assessment in accordance with HRS Chapter 343 is
required for actions requiring a Shoreline Setback Variance (SSV). Please
contact the Planning Department for further information.
Valuation of Development:
(Estimate Attached)
Date of Application:
Makahuena - Preferred A LLC et al.
P.O. Box 1205, Lihue, HI 96766
(808) 521-9297
P.O. Box 1205, Lihue, HI 96766
Mauna Kea Trask
(808) 521-9297
mtrask@cades.com
N/A
Urban
Resort
Over $500,000.00
February 10, 2022
c/o Cades Schutte
✔
(4) 2-8-21-70
1.001 acres
Open
Two-story Single-Family Dwelling Unit, pool, driveway, walkways,
lanais, landscaping and associated improvements.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 2 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
II. Part B
The petitioner shall be responsible for filing the following required information with the
department before an application is considered complete:
1. A written description of the proposed project, location and a statement of
reasons/justification for project.
2. If property abuts a shoreline, a certified shoreline survey conducted by a registered land
surveyor within 6 months of an application shall be submitted, when required by the
Planning Agency.
3. A plot plan of the property, drawn to scale, with all proposed and existing structures and
other pertinent information. Also, preliminary building sketch plans are to be submitted.
4. Any other plans or information requirements by the Director.
Note: An Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement that has been
declared adequate under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or under
Chapter 343, HRS, may constitute a valid filing under this section.
5. Project Assessment:
a. Description of the area and environment involved including flora and fauna, and
other features;
b. Description of the existing land uses of the project site and surrounding areas;
c. Description of how the proposed project will affect the area involved and
surrounding areas. Specifically the assessment should evaluate if the proposal:
YES NO
i. Involves an irrevocable commitment to loss or destruction
of any natural or cultural resources, including but not
limited to, historic sites, Special Treatment Districts as
established by the County of Kauai Comprehensive
Zoning ordinance, view planes or scenic corridors as
outlined in the Community Development Plans, and
recreation areas and resources;
Discussion:
See attached.
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 3 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
ii. Curtails the range of beneficial uses of the environment;
Discussion:
YES NO
iii. Conflicts with the County’s or the State’s long-term
environmental policies or goals;
Discussion:
YES NO
iv. Curtails the range of beneficial uses of the environment;
Discussion:
YES NO
v. Substantially affects the economics or social welfare and
activities or the community, County or State;
Discussion:
YES NO
vi. In itself has no significant adverse effect but cumulatively
has considerable effect upon the environment or involves
a commitment for larger actions;
Discussion:
YES NO
vii. Substantially affect a rare threatened, or endangered
species of animal or plant, or its habitat;
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 4 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
viii. Detrimentally affects air or water quality or ambient noise
levels; or
Discussion:
YES NO
ix. Affects an environmentally sensitive area, such as flood
plain, shoreline, tsunami zone, erosion-prone area,
geologically hazardous land, estuary, fresh water or
coastal water;
Discussion:
YES NO
x. May have a major effect on the quality of the environment
or affect the economic or social welfare of the area; and
Discussion:
YES NO
xi. Would possibly be contrary to the policies and guidelines
of the Rules and Regulations, the County’s General Plan,
Development Plans, and Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinances.
Discussion:
d. Evaluation of the proposed development relative to the objective and policies as
contained in Chapter 205A, HRS; and Section 3.0 of the Special Management
Area (SMA) Rules and Regulations: (complete following questionnaire)
RECREATIONAL
RESOURCES:
Objective
Provide coastal recreation opportunities accessible to the public.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
See attached.
✔
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 5 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
1. Will the proposed development adversely affect coastal resources
uniquely suited for recreational activities that cannot be provided in
other areas?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Will the project require replacement of coastal resources having
significant recreational value, including but not limited to surfing sites,
sandy beaches and fishing areas, when such resources will be
unavoidably damaged by the proposed development; or requiring
reasonable monetary compensation to the State for recreation when
replacement is not feasible or desirable?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Is the project site near a State or County Park?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Will the proposed development affect an existing public access to or
along the shoreline?
Discussion:
YES NO
5. Will the proposed development provide public access to and/or along
the shoreline?
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 6 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
6. Will the proposed development encourage expanded recreational use
of County, State, or federally owned or controlled shoreline lands and
waters having recreational value?
Discussion:
YES NO
7. Will the development generate point or non-point sources of pollution
that will affect recreation value of coastal area?
Discussion:
HISTORICAL
RESOURCES:
Objective
Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore those natural and man-made
historic and pre-historic resources in the Special Management Area that are
significant in Hawaiian and American history and culture.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
YES NO
1. Is the project site within a Federal, State and/or County designated
historical/cultural district?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Is the project site listed on or nominated to the Hawaii or National
Register of Historic Places?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Does the project site include land(s) which have not been previously
surveyed by an archaeologist?
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
See attached.
✔
✔
See attached.
✔
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 7 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
Discussion:
YES NO
4. If an archeological survey has been conducted for the project site, has
the survey been submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office for
review and recommendations?
Discussion:
YES NO
5. Has any site survey revealed any information on historic or
archaeological resources? (Please provide a copy or reference of
survey)
Discussion:
YES NO
6. Is the project site within or near a Hawaiian fishpond?
Discussion:
YES NO
7. Is the project located within or near a historic settlement area?
(Cemeteries, burials, heiaus, etc.)
Discussion:
SCENIC & OPEN
SPACE
RESOURCES:
Objective
Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore or improve the quality of coastal
scenic and open space resources.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 8 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
1. Does the project site abut or affect a valued scenic resources or
landmark within the SMA?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Does the proposed development affect existing shoreline open space
and scenic resources?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Does the proposed development involve alteration to natural landforms
and existing public views to and along the shoreline?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Is the project compatible with the visual environment?
Discussion:
YES NO
5. Does the proposed action involve the construction of structures visible
between the nearest coastal roadway and the shoreline?
Discussion:
YES NO
6. Is the project site within the Shoreline Setback Area (20 or 40 feet
inland from the shoreline)?
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 9 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
COASTAL
ECOSYSTEMS:
Objective
Protect valuable coastal ecosystems from disruption and minimize adverse
impacts on all coastal ecosystems.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
YES NO
1. Is the project site a habitat for endangered species of flora and fauna?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Will the proposed development adversely affect valuable coastal
ecosystems of significant biological or economic importance?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Will the proposed involve disruption or degradation of coastal water
ecosystems through stream diversions, channelization, and similar land
and water uses?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Will the proposed development include the construction of special
waste treatment facilities, such as injection wells, discharge pipes,
septic tank systems or cesspools?
Discussion:
YES NO
5. Is there a wetland on the project site?
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 10 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
6. Is the project site situated in or abutting a Natural Area Reserve or
Wildlife Refuge or Sanctuary?
Discussion:
ECONOMIC
USES:
Objective
Provide public or private facilities and improvements important to the State’s
economy in suitable locations.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
YES NO
1. Does the project involve a harbor or port?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Is the proposed development related to or near to an existing major
hotel, multi-family, or condominium project?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Does the project site include agricultural lands designated for such use?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Does the proposed development relate to commercial fishing or
seafood production?
Discussion:
✔
However, there are nesting sites for wedge-tailed shear waters nearby. See
attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
The proposed development is bordered by the "Point at Poipu" hotel to the east,
and the "Makahuena at Poipu" and the "Poipu Palms" developments to the west.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 11 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
5. Does the proposed development relate to commercial fishing or
seafood production?
Discussion:
COASTAL
HAZARDS:
Objective
Reduce hazard to life and property from tsunami, storm waves, stream flooding,
erosion, and subsidence.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
YES NO
1. Is the project site within a potential tsunami inundated area as depicted
on the National Flood Insurance Rate maps (FIRM)?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Is the project site within a potential flood inundation area according to a
FIRM?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Does the project comply with the requirements of the Federal Flood
Insurance Program?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Has the project site or nearby shoreline areas experienced shoreline
erosion?
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
See attached.
✔
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 12 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
5. Have any seawalls/revetments/etc. been constructed or exist in the
immediate vicinity?
Discussion:
PROJECT
ASSESSMENT:
e. Evaluation of the impacts which cannot be avoided and mitigating measures
proposed to minimize that impact:
Discussion:
f. Evaluation of the proposed development relative to Section 4.0 of the SMA
Rules and Regulations in accordance with the following aspects:
i. Substantial adverse environmental or ecological effects;
Discussion:
ii. Consistency or compliance of the proposed development relative to the
goals and objectives of Chapter 205A, HRS; and Section 3.0 of the SMA
Rules and Regulations; and
Discussion:
iii. Consistency or compliance of the proposed development relative to the
County General Plan, Development Plan, and Zoning Ordinances.
Discussion:
[name], [title] Date
Mauna Kea Trask, Authorized Agent 2-10-2022
✔
See attached.
See attached.
See attached.
See attached.
See attached.
CADES SCHUTTE
A Limited Liability Law Partnership
MAUNA KEA TRASK 8418
P.O. Box 1205
Lihu’e, HI 96766
Telephone: (808) 521-9297
Facsimile: (808) 540-5015
Email: mtrask@cades.com
Attorneys for Applicants
MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL A, LLC; MAKAHUENA -
PREFERRED B, LLC; MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL B,
LLC; MAKAHUENA - TW, LLC; and MAKAHUENA -
DW, LLC.
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
COUNTY OF KAUA’I
In the Matter of the Application
Of
MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - TW, LLC; and
MAKAHUENA-DW, LLC, for a Special
Management Area Use Permit, for Real Property
Situated at Weliweli, Koloa, Kaua’i, Hawai’i,
Described as Lot 3 of Makahuena Estates
Subdivision, Identified by Kaua’i Tax Map Key
No. (4) 2-8-021:070.
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE
PERMIT SMA(U)-__________________
Class III Zoning Permit Z-III-_________
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL
MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT
AND CLASS III ZONING PERMIT;
EXHIBIT LIST; EXHIBITS “A” - “T”
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
‐i‐
SECTION 1. APPLICANTS/SUBJECT PROPERTY OWNERS. ............................................. 1
1.1 Applicants .............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Property .................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Ownership .............................................................................................................. 1
SECTION 2. LOCATION & LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OF THE PROPERTY. ............... 1
2.1 Location ................................................................................................................. 1
2.2 Land Use Designations .......................................................................................... 2
a. SLUC ......................................................................................................... 2
b. Kaua’i General Plan ................................................................................... 2
c. CZO............................................................................................................ 2
d. Development Plan Area ............................................................................. 2
e. Special Management Area ......................................................................... 2
f. Constraint District ...................................................................................... 2
g. Heritage Resources .................................................................................... 2
h. Flood Zone ................................................................................................. 2
i. Shoreline Setback ....................................................................................... 3
j. Violations ................................................................................................... 3
k. Visitor Destination Area ............................................................................ 3
l. Soils............................................................................................................ 3
2.3 Prior Land Use Permits .......................................................................................... 4
a. SMA (U) 2015-1 ........................................................................................ 4
b. Z-III-2015-1 ............................................................................................... 4
c. S-2015-14 ................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 3. PAST, EXISTING AND PROPOSED USES OF THE PROPERTY. .................. 4
3.1 Past Uses ................................................................................................................ 4
3.2 Existing Uses ......................................................................................................... 5
3.3 Proposed Uses ........................................................................................................ 5
SECTION 4. SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING LANDS ................................... 6
4.1 Location ................................................................................................................. 6
4.2 Surrounding Uses ................................................................................................... 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-ii-
SECTION 5. PERMITS REQUESTED AND REQUIRED ....................................................... 7
5.1 Class III Zoning Permit .......................................................................................... 7
5.2 SMA Use Permit .................................................................................................... 7
SECTION 6. IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT.......................................................................... 7
6.1 Botanical Resources ............................................................................................... 7
6.2 Historical Resources .............................................................................................. 7
6.3 Air Quality/Noise ................................................................................................... 8
6.4 Flooding and Drainage ........................................................................................... 9
6.5 Utilities ................................................................................................................... 9
a. Potable Water ............................................................................................. 9
b. Electric/Communications ........................................................................... 9
6.6 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal ..................................................................... 9
6.7 Solid waste Disposal ............................................................................................ 10
6.8 Governmental Services ........................................................................................ 10
a. Fire & Police Services ............................................................................. 10
b. Schools ..................................................................................................... 10
6.9 Economics ............................................................................................................ 10
a. Jobs .......................................................................................................... 10
b. Housing .................................................................................................... 10
c. Property Values ........................................................................................ 10
6.10 Population ............................................................................................................ 11
6.11 Traffic Circulation ............................................................................................... 11
6.12 Heritage Resources .............................................................................................. 11
SECTION 7. SLUC CONSIDERATIONS. ............................................................................... 11
7.1 SLUC Urban District ........................................................................................... 11
SECTION 8. GENERAL PLAN CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................ 11
8.1 Kauai General Plan Visions and Goals ................................................................ 11
a. Goal # 1: A Sustainable Island................................................................. 11
b. Goal # 2: A Unique and Beautiful Place .................................................. 12
c. Goal # 3: A Healthy and Resilient People ............................................... 12
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-iii-
d. Goal # 4: An Equitable Place, with Opportunity for All ......................... 13
8.2 Kauai General Plan Policies to Guide Growth .................................................... 13
a. Policy # 1: Manage Growth to Preserve Rural Character ........................ 14
b. Policy # 3: Recognize the Identity of Kauai’s Individual Towns
and Districts ............................................................................................. 14
c. Policy # 4: Design Healthy and Complete Neighborhoods ..................... 14
d. Policy # 7: Build a Balanced Multimodal Transportation System .......... 15
e. Policy # 8: Protecting Kauai’s Scenic Beauty ......................................... 15
f. Policy # 9: Uphold Kaua’i as a Unique Visitor Destination Area ........... 15
g. Policy # 14: Prepare for Climate Change ................................................ 16
h. Policy # 15: Respect Native Hawaiian Rights and Wahi Pana ................ 16
i. Policy # 16: Protect Access to Kauai’s Treasured Places ........................ 16
8.3 Kauai General Plan Resort Use Designation ....................................................... 16
8.4 Project Compliance with Kauai General Plan Standards ..................................... 17
SECTION 9. CZO OPEN DISTRICT CONSIDERATIONS. .................................................. 17
9.1 CZO Open District ............................................................................................... 17
9.2 Development’s Compliance with CZO Open District Standards ........................ 17
9.3 Shore Constraint District Considerations ............................................................. 18
SECTION 10. SOUTH KAUAI COMMUNITY PLAN CONSIDERATIONS. ........................ 19
10.1 Community Plan Goals and Objectives ............................................................... 19
10.2 Compliance with Development Plan Standards ................................................... 19
SECTION 11. SMA CONSIDERATIONS. ................................................................................ 19
11.1 Recreational Resources ........................................................................................ 19
11.2 Historic Resources ............................................................................................... 19
11.3 Scenic and Open Space Resources ...................................................................... 20
11.4 Coastal Ecosystems .............................................................................................. 21
a. In consultation with DLNR/DOFAW, CLDC engaged a
landscaping firm and established a new shrub land of native
naupaka (Scaevola taccada) on the makai western corner of the
subdivision creating more nesting habitat for wedge-tailed
shearwaters ............................................................................................... 22
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-iv-
b. At DOFAW’s request, the CLDC hired a pest control firm to
conduct trapping for feral cats ................................................................. 22
c. Finally, in order to avoid a potentially dangerous condition for
humans, the makai rock wall along the public access way was
approved as constructed with ground-level tubes that allow
shearwaters to pass through ..................................................................... 23
11.5 Economic Uses ..................................................................................................... 23
11.6 Coastal Hazards ................................................................................................... 23
11.7 Managing Development/Public Participation ...................................................... 24
11.8 Beach Protection/Marine Resources .................................................................... 24
11.9 Value of Development ......................................................................................... 24
11.10 Compatibility with Surrounding Uses ................................................................. 24
11.11 Significant Adverse Effect to the SMA ............................................................... 25
11.12 Compliance with SMA Guidelines ...................................................................... 25
a. Adequate access, via existing public access easements, is provided
to nearby beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves ........................ 25
b. Adequate and properly located public recreation areas and wildlife
preserves have been reserved ................................................................... 25
c. Provisions have been made for solid and liquid waste treatment,
disposition, and management that will minimize adverse effects on
SMA resources ......................................................................................... 25
d. Because the Property is prepared for development, alterations to
existing landforms and vegetation will be very minimal, and
construction will cause negligible adverse effects to water
resources and scenic and recreational amenities ...................................... 25
e. The development is consistent with the objectives and policies of
HRS Ch. 205A and the County SMA Rules ............................................ 26
f. The development is consistent with the County general plan and
zoning ordinances .................................................................................... 26
g. No dredging, filing or other altering of any coastal resources will
occur whatsoever ..................................................................................... 26
h. The development will not reduce the size of the coastal access
easement area, nor will the development impose any restrictions
upon public access to tidal and submerged lands, beaches, or other
coastal resources ...................................................................................... 26
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-v-
i. The development will not substantially interfere with or detract
from the line of sight toward the sea or from existing public views
to and along the shoreline ........................................................................ 26
j. The development will not significantly adversely affect water
quality, or existing and potential fisheries, wildlife habitats, or
estuarine sanctuaries ................................................................................ 26
SECTION 12. HRS CH 343 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
CONSIDERATIONS. .......................................................................................... 26
12.1 HRS Chapter 343 ................................................................................................. 26
SECTION 13. IMPACTS TO NATIVE HAWAIIAN TRADITIONAL AND
CUSTOMARY PRACTICES .............................................................................. 27
13.1 Existence of Traditional and Customary Practices .............................................. 27
SECTION 14. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 29
APPLICATION
Comes now, MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED A, LLC; MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL A,
LLC; MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED B, LLC; MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - TW, LLC; and MAKAHUENA-DW, LLC, by and through their undersigned
attorneys, and hereby submits the following Application to construct a single-family residential
dwelling unit (“SFR”) and associated improvements as described herein.
SECTION 1. APPLICANTS/SUBJECT PROPERTY OWNERS.
1.1 Applicants. The Applicants are , MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL A, LLC; MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED B, LLC; MAKAHUENA
- CAPITAL B, LLC; MAKAHUENA - TW, LLC; and MAKAHUENA-DW, LLC
(“Applicants”). Applicants have authorized Mauna Kea Trask of Cades Schutte LLP to file this
Application. See, Exhibit “A”.
1.2 Property. This Application concerns that certain parcel of land (being portion(s)
of the land(s) described in and covered by Royal Patent Grant Number 1416 to Eke Opunui)
situate, lying and being at Weliweli, Koloa, Island and County of Kaua’i, State of Hawai’i, being
Lot 3 of the Makahuena Estates subdivision, and further identified as Kaua’i Tax Map Key No.
(4) 2-8-021-070 (the “Property” or “Lot 3”). A legal description of the Property is contained in
the Deed attached hereto as Exhibit “B”.
1.3 Ownership. Applicants are the owners of the Property as shown in Exhibit “B”.
SECTION 2. LOCATION & LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
2.1 Location. The Property is located in Weliweli, Koloa, Kaua’i, Hawai’i, and is
shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit “C-1”.
2
2.2 Land Use Designations. The State Land Use Commission (“SLUC”), Kaua’i
General Plan (“General Plan”), County of Kaua’i Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (“CZO”),
and other relevant land use designations for the Property are described as follows:
a. SLUC. The Property is located in the SLUC Urban District. See, Exhibit “C-2”.
b. Kaua’i General Plan. The Property is located in the Kauai General Plan Resort
Use Designation. See, Exhibit “C-3”.
c. CZO. The Property is within the County of Kauai Open (O) zoning District. See,
Exhibit “C-4”.
d. Development Plan Area. The Property is located within the South Kauai Planning
District. See, Exhibit “C-5”.
e. Special Management Area. The Property is located within the County’s Special
Management Area (“SMA”). See, Exhibit “C-6”.
f. Constraint District. The Property is located within the Shore Constraint District
(S-SH). See, Exhibit “C-7”.
g. Heritage Resources. As shown in General Plan (2018) Figure 5-11, South Kaua’i
Heritage Resource Map, the Property does not contain any important natural, scenic, or historical
features. See, Exhibit “C-8”.
h. Flood Zone. Initially, FEMA FIRM Panel map 1500020352F, panel; effective
date November 26, 2010, included a majority of the Property, including the project site, within
the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) Zone VE (EL 10), with small mauka portions of the
Property within SFHAS Zone AE (EL 10) and Non-Special Flood Hazard Zone XS. See, Exhibit
“C-9”. However, Letters of Map Revision - Coastal High Hazard Area Determination Document
(Removal) 16-09-0378A, dated November 12, 2015; 16-09-0391A, dated November 12, 2015;
3
and 19-09-1672A, dated June 26, 2019, removed the entire buildable area of Lot 3 from the
SFHA Zones VE and AE and placed them within the Non-Special Flood Hazard Area Zone X.
Id.
i. Shoreline Setback. The Property is a shoreline parcel, and the State previously
certified the shoreline in 2014. See, Exhibit “C-10”. The coastline consists of steep rocky cliff
faces and the Property itself is between 41 ft. and 49ft. above sea level. See, Exhibit “C-10”. The
project site is approximately 36 ft. above sea level and will be well mauka of the certified
shoreline. Id. Further, according to the Kauai Coastal Erosion study, the coastline fronting the
Property is unchanging. Id.
Although there are no parcels of real property between the Property and the shoreline,
there are dedicated coastal access and view easements fronting the Property that create a
substantial buffer between the shoreline and the Property, and the proposed development will not
impact public beach access. See, Exhibit “C-11”. Thus, the proposed development will not affect
beach processes, impact public beach access, or be affected by or contribute to coastal erosion or
hazards.
j. Violations. There are no known land use and zoning violations on the Property.
k. Visitor Destination Area. Pursuant to Ord. PM-2017-410, the Property is within
the Visitor Destination Area (“VDA”). See, Exhibit “C-12”.
l. Soils. According to the National Resources Conservation Service (“NRCS”) Web
Soil Survey, the Property consists of Koloa stony silty clay (KvD) with 15 to 25 percent slopes,
and Rock outcrop (rRO). See, Exhibit “C-13”. However, due to the completion of the
subdivision improvements the project site itself has been graded and the development will be
built on an existing flat building pad.
4
2.3 Prior Land Use Permits. The Property is subject to the following land use permits
and conditions:
a. SMA (U) 2015-1. On August 26, 2014, the County of Kaua’i Planning
Commission approved SMA Use Permit SMA (U) 2015-1, allowing the consolidation and re-
subdivision of the larger Makahuena Estates property from a 25-lot subdivision to a 10-lot
subdivision subject to 14 conditions. See, Exhibit “D”.
b. Z-III-2015-1. On August 29, 2014, the County of Kauai Planning Department
approved Class III Zoning Permit Z-III-2015-1, allowing the consolidation and re-subdivision of
the larger Makahuena Estates property from a 25-lot subdivision to a 10-lot subdivision subject
to 14 conditions. See, Exhibit “E”. The terms and conditions of the Class III zoning permit were
the same as SMA (U) 2015-1 discussed above.
c. S-2015-14. On April 14, 2015, the County of Kauai Planning Commission
tentatively approved S-2015-14, allowing the consolidation and re-subdivision of the larger
Makahuena Estates property from a 25-lot subdivision to a 10-lot subdivision subject to 6
conditions. See, Exhibit “F”. The County Department of Public Works conducted a final
inspection of the subdivision on August 8, 2017, and found construction to be complete and
acceptable. See, Exhibit “G”.
SECTION 3. PAST, EXISTING AND PROPOSED USES OF THE PROPERTY.
3.1 Past Uses. The prior landowner, CIRI Land development Company (“CLDC”),
acquired the entire area now comprising Makahuena Estates subdivision, approximately 13.1
acres, from the United States federal government on or about March 22, 1996. At the time of
CLDC’s acquisition, the area consisted of 26 separate lots, which, since 1951, had been used by
the Coast Guard as a LORAN-A receiver which used radio waves and provided ships with the
ability to triangulate their locations hundreds of miles from a transmitting station. At that time
5
there were five to six buildings in use, along with a 280-foot-high antenna located makai of the
structures. The use of the station, known as LORSTA Kauai, ceased in 1979, following which
Hale ‘Opio, Inc., a private nonprofit organization that provided youth-oriented social services,
used the properties until Hurricane Iwa devastated Kauai in 1982.
From 2014 to 2015 CLDC sought and received permission from the County to
consolidate and re-subdivide the properties from 26 lots to a ten-lot subdivision. After approval
was obtained from the County, CLDC proceeded to develop the subdivision and associated
infrastructure as approved. On December 4, 2017, the County Department of Public Works sent
a memorandum to Planning Director Michael A. Dahilig certifying the completion of the
subdivision. See, Exhibit “G”. Final Subdivision map approval was obtained from the Planning
Commission on March 27, 2018. See, Exhibit “G-1”
3.2 Existing Uses. The Property is currently “fully-developed” as allowed under
SMA (U)2015-1, Z-III-2015-1 and S-2015-14, meaning that it has been graded, grassed and all
subdivision infrastructure has been installed. However, no structure has been developed on the
Property and to that extent the Property is “vacant”.
3.3 Proposed Uses. Applicants are proposing to develop a two-story SFR, pool, and
associated driveway, walkways, and lanais. See, Exhibit “H”. Applicants will also landscape the
Property. See, Exhibit “I”
Pursuant to CZO § 8-9.2(a)(1), the amount of land coverage created, including pavement,
shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the lot or parcel area. The total square footage of the
Property as reflected on the final approved subdivision map is 1.001 acres or 43,603 sq. ft. See,
Exhibit “G-1”. The land coverage of the proposed development is as follows:
6
Structure Size Percentage of Square footage
Two-Story House 2,375 sq. ft. 5.4%
Covered Lanais 604 sq. ft. 1.4%
Pool 486 sq. ft. 1.1%
Garage 850 sq. ft. 1.9%
Total 4,315 sq. ft. 9.8%
See, Exhibit “H”, at SP01.
Applicants note that the driveway is composed of gravel that will not prevent normal
precipitation from directly reaching the surface of the underlying land and will not be compacted
so as to prevent substantial infiltration. Thus, the gravel driveway does not count towards lot
coverage pursuant to CZO § 8-1.5. Additionally, Applicant has removed a previously planned
pond feature so as to stay within the 10% lot coverage threshold.
SECTION 4. SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING LANDS.
4.1 Location. The Property is located in Weliweli, Koloa, Kaua’i at Makahuena Point
near the intersection of Pe’e Road and Maka Place. The Property is about one-half mile to the
east of Po‘ipū Beach Park and one-half mile to the west of Shipwrecks Beach Park.
4.2 Surrounding Uses. To the west of the Property is the Makahuena at Po‘ipū , a 79-
unit condominium development (zoned R-20), to the east is the Point at Po‘ipū , a 219-unit hotel
development, (zoned RR-10), and mauka of the Property are residential houses (zoned R-4). All
surrounding properties are within the VDA. Makai of the project site is a rock wall built
pursuant to SMA (U) 2015-1, Z-III-2015-1 and S-2015-14 that delineates the mauka boundary of
the County’s public access easements which are located on the makai portion of the Makahuena
Estates subdivision lots.
7
SECTION 5. PERMITS REQUESTED AND REQUIRED.
5.1 Class III Zoning Permit. Because the Property is within the County Open (O)
zoning district and Shore Constraint district (S-SH), the proposed development must obtain a
Class III zoning permit from the County of Kauai Planning Department. See, CZO §§ 8-9.4(b),
8-8.4(c) and 8-12.5(d) (2).
5.2 SMA Use Permit. Applicant is proposing to develop a two-story SFR, a pool, and
associated landscaping and improvements. Although this is the first house on the lot and the
proposed development is less than 7,500 sq. ft., Act 16 L 2020 amended Hawaii Revised Statutes
(“HRS”) §205A-22 to exclude the first house exemption from the definition of “Development”
within the SMA if the lot is a shoreline parcel. Therefore, the proposed development constitutes
“Development” as defined by HRS §205A-22. The total value of the development is estimated to
be $2,301,480.00. See, Exhibit “J”. As such, Applicants are requesting the Planning
Commission issue a SMA Use Permit as provided in Section 7.3.C(1)&(2) of the SMA Rules.
SECTION 6. IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT.
6.1 Botanical Resources. The Property is located within a fully developed and
prepared subdivision, and currently consist of a vacant lot containing a grass lawn. See, Exhibit
“K”. There are no known botanical resources located on the Property and the proposed
development will not have any impact on Botanical Resources. .
6.2 Historical Resources. Prior to the County’s approval of the subdivision
development, CLDC contracted with Haun & Associates to conduct an Archaeological Inventory
Survey (“AIS”) of TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:041, which at the time included the Property. See,
Exhibit “L”. The objective of the AIS was to satisfy historic preservation regulatory review
requirements of the Department of Land and Natural Resources - Historic Preservation Division
8
(“DLNR-SHPD”), as contained within Hawaii Administrative Rules (“HAR”), Title 13,
Subtitle 13, State Historic Preservation Rules. Id. at ii.
The AIS identified 18 sites with 128 features, consisting of 98 concrete pads, 7 concrete
blocks, 4 artifact scatters, 4 posts, 3 terraces, 3 slabs, 2 paths, 2 walls, and one each of the
following: ditch, road, stairs, utility box and walled slab. Id. Subsurface testing was undertaken
during the project, consisting of the excavation of twenty test units, and no intact sub surface
cultural deposits or burials were encountered during the subsurface testing. Id. According to the
AIS, all of the documented remains were the remnants of U.S. federal government navigation-
related infrastructure in operation for over 100 years. Id.
The 18 sites were assessed as significant solely for their information content. Id. The
sites were adequately documented, and no further work or preservation was recommended by
Haun & Associates to DLNR-SHPD. Id. DLNR-SHPD concurred with Haun & Associates’
recommendation subject to certain corrections which were subsequently made. See, Exhibit “L”,
letter from DLNR-SHPD, dated August 27, 2012, and letter from Haun & Assoc., dated
December 2, 2012.
Because the subdivision was subsequently developed after the acceptance of the AIS, no
historical resources are expected to be encountered during the proposed development and no
historical resources will be affected.
6.3 Air Quality/Noise. The development will have little or no impact on the air
quality and ambient noise levels in the area. Air quality and ambient noise levels may be
affected at a very minimal level during the actual construction activities. All vehicles or
equipment used by Applicants for the construction will be properly muffled, housed and
9
maintained to reduce any noise impacts or emission impacts. The Environmental Protection
Agency (“EPA”) and State of Hawaii air quality standards will not be exceeded.
6.4 Flooding and Drainage. The proposed development is within the Non-Special
Flood Hazard Area Zone X. See, Exhibit “C-9”. The development will meet all of the
requirements of the Flood Plain Management Ordinance of the County of Kauai, as contained in
Chapter 15, Article 1, of the Kauai County Code, 1987. All drainage resulting from construction
activities and from the increase in land coverage will be retained on site in the existing drainage
basin that was constructed by CLDC pursuant to its permits to develop the existing subdivision.
No additional drainage is anticipated to significantly or negatively impact the surrounding
properties or coastal area.
6.5 Utilities. In 2015 all necessary state and county agencies approved the
construction plans for the Makahuena estates Subdivision. See, Exhibit “M”. These plans
included the construction of all utilities. On December 4, 2017, the County of Kauai Department
of Public Works certified that the Makahuena Estates subdivision was completed and acceptable.
See, Exhibit “G”.
a. Potable Water. The Property currently obtains water service from the County of
Kauai Department of Water.
b. Electric/Communications. The Property obtains electric service from Kauai
Island Utility Cooperative (“KIUC”), and communication services from Hawaiian Telcom, Inc.
Existing electric and communications are presently adequate to provide the demand for such
services that will be generated by the proposed development.
6.6 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal. Applicants will install a private individual
wastewater system (septic tank(s) and leach field(s)) as consistent with the Individual Waste
10
System (IWS) Report prepared for CLDC by Esaki Surveying & Mapping, Inc. that was
prepared for the County and State’s review and approval during the subdivision entitlement
process. See, Exhibit “N”.
6.7 Solid waste Disposal. Solid waste collection will be provided by private means.
Solid waste will be taken to the County’s refuse transfer stations or disposal in the County’s
landfill as appropriate.
6.8 Governmental Services. Applicants anticipate the development will have the
following impacts on governmental services:
a. Fire & Police Services. Fire and Police services are located in Koloa within two
to three miles of the Property respectively. The development will not significantly increase the
need for existing Fire and Police services.
b. Schools. The closest schools are Koloa Elementary School located in Koloa, and
Chiefess Kamakahelei Middle School and Kaua’i High School, both located in Lihue. The
development will not generate any significant additional enrollment.
6.9 Economics. Applicants anticipate the development will have the following
economic impacts:
a. Jobs. The development will result in the creation of temporary construction jobs
during the construction of the project. Thereafter, Applicants anticipate an ongoing need for
housekeeping and landscaping and maintenance jobs to maintain the Property.
b. Housing. The Project will not result in the need for additional housing.
c. Property Values. Because fair market value of real property is based on the value
of the land and any physical improvements, the development will increase the value and the real
property taxes of the Property thus increasing revenues to the County of Kaua’i.
11
6.10 Population. The development will not result in a measurable increase in
population.
6.11 Traffic Circulation. The Property is primarily served by Maka Place, which
Applicants understand is a private road built to county standards but not accepted by the County
Council. The nearest public road is Pe’e Road, which is about 500 ft. from the Property. The
development of the Property will not measurably affect or increase traffic on Pe’e Road.
6.12 Heritage Resources. As stated above in section 2.2.g, according to the General
Plan, Figure 5-11 South Kaua’i Heritage Resource Map, the Property does not contain any
important natural, scenic, or historical features. See, Exhibit “C-8”.
SECTION 7. SLUC CONSIDERATIONS.
7.1 SLUC Urban District. The Property is located within the SLUC Urban District.
Residential uses are permitted within the SLUC Urban District.
SECTION 8. GENERAL PLAN CONSIDERATIONS.
8.1 Kauai General Plan Visions and Goals. An evaluation of the Kauai General Plan
(“General Plan”) section 1.3 shows that the proposed development is consistent with the
Visions and Goals of the General Plan.
a. Goal # 1: A Sustainable Island. The Makahuena Estates subdivision was
carefully planned and developed in order to fulfill the requirements of Goal # 1 of the General
Plan, and the proposed development of Lot 3 is consistent therewith. The subdivision density
was reduced from at least 25 dwelling units to ten, only nine of which are within the VDA. A
public parking area and an open space and public access easement were dedicated to the County
to protect the natural coastal systems that support life, air, water, soil, and living organisms on
the makai portion of Lot 3. See, General Plan at 33. The development of the proposed single
family dwelling unit on Lot 3 will not negatively affect the sustainability of the island. Rather,
12
the subdivision is the direct result of well-reasoned actions starting in 2014 that ensure this area
remains sustainable and meets the needs of current and future generations without depleting
important resources. Id.
b. Goal # 2: A Unique and Beautiful Place. Applicant’s proposed Development is
consistent with Goal # 2 of the General Plan and ensures the care and protection of the treasured
resources, traditions, and qualities of the natural, built, and human environment of Makahuena
point. Id. at 34. Applicant’s proposed Development maintains the perpetual protection of the
natural coastal ecosystem on the makai portion of Lot 3. Id. The Development will not infringe
upon the rights of the community to engage in their cultural traditions and practices and provides
opportunities for recreation and meditative contemplation along this beautiful coastline. Id. The
Development is consistent with the tenets of the Public Trust Doctrine as provided in Article 11,
Section 1 of the Hawaii State Constitution to, “conserve and protect Hawaii’s natural beauty and
all natural resources, including land, water, air minerals and energy sources”, and “promotes the
development and utilization of these resources in a manner consistent with their conservation and
in furtherance of the self-sufficiency of the State.” Id. at 34.
c. Goal # 3: A Healthy and Resilient People. General Plan Goal # 3 recognizes that
health is influenced by the built environment, including the ability to walk or bicycle to key
destinations, and to access the recreational areas that support active lifestyles. Id. at 35. The
development of a single-family dwelling unit on Lot 3 of Makahuena Estates is consistent with
these principles and will not interfere with the community’s use of the coastal access area. This
specific development is part of a larger well planned and sustainable subdivision project that
increased the resilience and vitality of the community and promoted better health outcomes
13
through improved coastal access opportunities related to the natural, built, and social
environment. Id. at 35.
d. Goal # 4: An Equitable Place, with Opportunity for All. Goal # 4 of the General
Plan aims to foster diverse and equitable communities with vibrant economies, access to jobs and
housing, and a high quality of life. Id. at 36. Short term and long-term job opportunities will
result from the construction and continued maintenance of this specific development as is typical
with high-end residential vacation rental properties. However, Goal # 4 is not simply about
economic opportunity. Goal # 4 recognizes that reversing Kaua’i’s trending inequity means
ensuring Kaua’i residents, regardless of factors such as geographic location, age, race, gender,
and economic status, have access to, inter alia, opportunities for recreation and enjoyment of
shared spaces; and making sure that planning and land development decisions do not unfairly
burden disadvantaged groups. Id at 36. This subdivision was specifically designed and
permitted to ensure equitable opportunities for recreation and shared spaces for all of Kaua’i, not
just the landowners in the neighborhood. Anyone on Kaua’i can park in the public parking lot at
Makahuena Estates subdivision and access the entire coastline all the way to Mahaulepu. The
coastal access area allows for fishing off of the makai portion of Lot 3 in perpetuity and such
opportunities benefit, not burden, disadvantaged groups on Kaua’i. Applicant embraces this
kuleana and has designed the proposed development to complement the environment and
character of this special place.
8.2 Kauai General Plan Policies to Guide Growth. The General Plan contains
nineteen (19) polices to guide growth that articulate the County’s path forward toward meeting
the community’s vision and goals of sustainability, unique character, resilience, and equity. An
14
evaluation of Kaua’i General Plan Section 1.4 shows the proposed development is consistent
with the following Policies to Guide Growth.
a. Policy # 1: Manage Growth to Preserve Rural Character. The proposed
development is consistent with Policy # 1 because it is contained within an existing
neighborhood that has been planned for residential subdivision development since the early 20th
century. This ensures that Kauai’s rural character is preserved as the proposed development is
within the Po‘ipū growth boundary and is compact and walkable. General Plan at 38.
b. Policy # 3: Recognize the Identity of Kauai’s Individual Towns and Districts.
The proposed SFR on Lot 3 in consistent with Po‘ipū ’s distinct character. The SFR will be
constructed within the pre-approved building envelope mauka of the rock wall that delineates
and preserves the open space coastal access easement. The SFR is low massing and designed to
blend into and compliment the rocky-shoreline cliffs. The development will not interfere with
Po‘ipū ’s many costal access opportunities which provide lateral access along the coast from
Mahaulepu to Lawai.
c. Policy # 4: Design Healthy and Complete Neighborhoods. General Plan Policy #
4 seeks to guide growth in a way that combats the recent trend of health problems in Hawaii,
attributed in part to increasing levels of sedentary lifestyles. The SFR on Lot 3 will not interfere
with the coastal open spaces access easement that was dedicated to the County to specifically
allow for safe and convenient walking activities makai of the subdivision and provide residents
an opportunity to increase physical activity on a daily basis, thereby reducing health risks. The
SFR on Lot 3 is part of a low-density, compact and walkable neighborhood that maintains
coastal access opportunities consistent with Policy # 4.
15
d. Policy # 7: Build a Balanced Multimodal Transportation System. Makahuena
Estates subdivision was specifically designed and constructed to be consistent with Policy # 7.
By reducing the previously permitted subdivision density of at least 25 residential units and
voluntarily providing for a public parking area and an open space public access easement, the
subdivision is consistent with the County’s Multimodal Land Transportation Plan (2013) and
provides the community with pedestrian access opportunities along the entire coastline of the
south shore. The proposed SFR on Lot 3 will not interfere with these opportunities and is
consistent with Policy # 7.
e. Policy # 8: Protecting Kauai’s Scenic Beauty. The proposed SFR is consistent
with preserving the natural views of Makahuena point. The proposed development is low
massing and will be entirely located within the pre-approved building envelope of Lot 3 which
was specifically designed to protect and preserve both mauka and makai views along the
coastline. The views in this area are not only protected by the reduced subdivision density but
also by the open space access easement on the makai portion of Lot 3. And unlike the two
neighboring developments to the east and west of Makahuena Estates subdivision, the proposed
SFR is specifically designed to complement the rugged coastal cliff area of Makahuena point and
incorporates dark earth tones and design features that blend in with the natural environment.
f. Policy # 9: Uphold Kaua’i as a Unique Visitor Destination Area. The proposed
SFR is consistent with Policy # 9’s purpose of focusing and limiting growth to pre-existing
Visitor Destination Areas and reducing visitor impacts on infrastructure. The Makahuena
Estates subdivision was specifically designed to ensure that the nine lots within the VDA do not
negatively affect the community character of Po‘ipū . Further, the location of the SFR within the
pre-approved building envelope will limit the physical footprint of transient accommodation uses
16
and ensure that such uses do not encroach upon the dedicated open space coastal access
easement area.
g. Policy # 14: Prepare for Climate Change. The proposed SFR is consistent with
Policy # 14 and will not contribute to or exacerbate concerns regarding rising sea levels along
Makahuena point. By restricting the development of Lot 3 to the pre-approved building
envelope, the proposed SFR will not be affected by any coastal hazards. Further, the makai rock
wall fronting Lot 3 is a physical delineation of the shoreline setback line and ensures that no
development will occur within or affect the shoreline area along Makahuena point.
h. Policy # 15: Respect Native Hawaiian Rights and Wahi Pana. A cultural impact
assessment (“CIA”) was prepared during the Makahuena Estates subdivision permitting process.
See, Exhibit “T”. Although the CIA did not identify any traditional and customary practices
occurring in the area that is now Lot 3, the CIA stated that fisherman continue to gather and
catch a variety of fish for subsistence purposes, including moi, ‘o’io and also harvest various
marine invertebrates along the shoreline and rocky edges of Makahuena point. Exhibit “T” at 13.
In response, the developer dedicated both the public parking lot and coastal open space access
easements to the County to ensure these traditional and customary practices may continue in
perpetuity.
i. Policy # 16: Protect Access to Kauai’s Treasured Places. The proposed SFR is
consistent with Policy # 16 by ensuring the continued protection of access to and customary use
of the shoreline area, trails, and places along the coast of Makahuena point for religious and
cultural observances, fishing, gathering, and recreational activities, such as hiking.
8.3 Kauai General Plan Resort Use Designation. The Property is located in the
Kaua’i General Plan Resort Use Designation. See, Exhibit “C-3”. The Property is also within the
17
VDA. See, Exhibit “C-12”. Actions for the Resort Use Designation are found in the Chapter 3,
Sector VI. of the General Plan. The General Plan contemplates, in relevant part, strengthening
existing town centers and mixed-use environments, revitalizing existing visitor destination areas,
and protecting agricultural lands for agricultural production and food self-sufficiency. Because
the Property is in the existing VDA and will not take existing agricultural land out of food
production, the development complies with the tenets of the General Plan concerning the Resort
Use Designation.
8.4 Project Compliance with Kauai General Plan Standards. The proposed
Development is a residential use within a completed subdivision development. Therefore, the
development itself will have no significant impact on the surrounding environment. The
development is consistent with neighboring residential and resort and transient accommodation
uses and will not have a significant adverse effect to the surrounding neighborhood. As such, the
development complies with the General Plan’s policy for the Resort Use Designation and is
consistent with the County’s “use it or lose it” policy concerning resort development.
SECTION 9. CZO OPEN DISTRICT CONSIDERATIONS.
9.1 CZO Open District. The Open District is established and regulated to create and
maintain an adequate and functional amount of predominantly open land to provide for the
recreational and aesthetic needs of the community or to provide for the effective functioning of
land, air, water, plant and animal systems or communities. CZO § 8-9.1.
9.2 Development’s Compliance with CZO Open District Standards. Single-family
detached dwelling units and accessory structures are permitted uses within the Open (O) zoning
district pursuant to CZO § 8-2.4(s) (1) & (9). The development will not exceed the 10% land
coverage limitation contained in CZO § 8-9.2(a) (1). The development itself will have no
significant impact on the surrounding environment and is compatible with existing residential
18
and resort uses in the immediate area surrounding the Property. Further, the coastal portion of
the Property, makai of the rock-wall, is encumbered by a coastal access easement held by the
County of Kaua’i that provides coastal access to recreational users and fishermen in the area.
Therefore, the proposed Development complies with CZO § 8-9.1 and allows for the
development of the SFR while providing for the recreational and aesthetic needs of the
community and the effective functioning of land, air, water, plant and animal systems or
communities.
9.3 Shore Constraint District Considerations. The purpose of the Shore Constraint
District is to regulate development or alterations to shore and water areas which have unique
physical and ecological conditions in order to protect and maintain physical, biologic and scenic
resources of particular value to the public. During the entitlements of the Makahuena Estates
subdivision, CLDC prepared and submitted numerous reports that addressed the impact that a
10-lot subdivision would have on the Shore Constraint District. These reports included: Air
Quality Assessment (Exhibit “O-1”); Geological Investigation (Exhibit “O-2”); Biological
Survey (“O-3”); Visual Analysis of Public Views (Exhibit “O-4”); and Visual Analysis of
Private Views (Exhibit “O-5”). All of these studies were accepted and approved thus allowing
CLDC to proceed with development of the subdivision improvements.
Because there has been no change in the condition of the subdivision properties in
general, or to Lot 3 specifically since the completion of the subdivision improvements,
Applicants submit that the existing studies establish that the proposed development will not
cause significant harm to: (A) the water quality of the ocean, including, but not limited to, its
clarity, temperature, color, taste and odor; (B) fish and aquatic habitats; (C) the natural beauty of
the area; (D) navigation, safety or health; or (E) would not substantially interfere with public use
19
of the ocean waters or underlying lands; and (F) that other facilities are unavailable to the
applicant.
SECTION 10. SOUTH KAUAI COMMUNITY PLAN CONSIDERATIONS.
10.1 Community Plan Goals and Objectives. The goals and objectives of the South
Kauai Community Plan, as adopted by Ordinance No. 990, include in relevant part, that Kōloa
will be a thriving commercial and residential community that maintains its rural feel and historic
“old town” charm by preserving, enhancing, and protecting its vast cultural treasures; and that
Po‘ipū will be a world-class, sustainable resort destination, serving residents and visitors alike,
developed responsibly, with clean, healthy beaches and ocean environments, welcoming parks,
and preserved heritage resources, all well-connected and accessible to everyone.
10.2 Compliance with Development Plan Standards. The development is consistent
with the goals and objectives contained in the South Kauai Community Plan. The design, layout
and outside appearance of the development will utilize architectural design elements that will be
compatible with the natural beauty of the area. The development will cover less than 10% of the
lot, and the dedicated public access easement and view easement makai of the rock-wall ensures
that coastal access and open space along the coastline will be maintained in perpetuity.
SECTION 11. SMA CONSIDERATIONS.
11.1 Recreational Resources. An open space public access easement encumbers the
portion of the Property makai of the rock-wall. The development will not affect or hinder the
continued use of the public access easement in any way. Therefore, the development will not
have any significant adverse effect on any public recreational opportunities located on the
Property, and the development will not affect any existing public beach or coastal access rights.
11.2 Historic Resources. As stated above in section 6.2, prior to the County’s approval
of the subdivision development, CLDC (the previous landowner) contracted with Haun &
20
Associates to conduct an Archaeological Inventory Survey (“AIS”) of TMK No. (4) 2-8-
021:041, which at the time included the Property. See, Exhibit “L”. The AIS identified 18 sites
with 128 features, all of which were the remnants of U.S. federal government navigation-related
infrastructure in operation on the larger subdivision Property for over 100 years. Id. A
comparison of AIS Figure 11 (Site Location Map) and Figure 68 (Distribution of associated
Features within Project Area) with the Demolition & Naupaka Preservation/Replanting Plan
(Exhibit “S” at 4) indicates that none of the documented historic sites or features were located
within Lot 3. It appears that Site 2142 was located within the neighboring Lot 4, and Site 2143
(including features A-C) was located makai of the rock wall near the boundary of Lots 3 and 4.
Site 2142 was recognized as a small roughly oval-shaped concrete pad that was created
by pouring concrete into a hole dug into the ground and probably served to anchor wiring.
Exhibit “L” at 45 and 49. Site 2143 was recognized as a complex of three features comprised of
a concrete slab (Feature A), a stone retaining wall (Feature B), and a concrete pad (Feature C).
Exhibit “L” at 49.
DLNR-SHPD concurred with Haun & Associates’ recommendation that no further work
or preservation was necessary of any of the sites or features discussed in the AIS. See, Exhibit
“L”, letter from DLNR-SHPD dated August 27, 2012, and letter from Haun & Assoc. dated
December 2, 2012. The subdivision was subsequently developed after the acceptance of the
AIS, and currently there are no historic sites or features located on the Property. Thus, the
proposed development will not have any significant adverse effect to any Historic Resources.
11.3 Scenic and Open Space Resources.
When the County granted CLDC’s request to consolidate and re-subdivide the larger
subdivision property from 25 lots to 10 lots, the County found that the 10-lot subdivision would
21
not block the line-of-sight towards the ocean from public view planes as the 10-lot subdivision
would be less dense and contain more open space compared to a 25-lot subdivision. See, Exhibits
“O-4” and “O-5”.
The proposed development will not have a significant and adverse impact on the scenic
and open space resources in the area and will blend into the existing neighborhood motif and the
natural environment. See, Exhibit “O-6”1. Any visual impacts to the coastline will be
sufficiently mitigated as the development itself has been designed to blend in with the rugged
coastline by using dark earth tones and modern design elements, including Tahitian Brown
roofing materials, black fiberglass windows, stained accent cedar siding, stained cedar siding,
stained board formed concrete, and Polynesian landscaping motifs. See, Exhibits “H”, “I” and
“O-6”.
11.4 Coastal Ecosystems.
The Property is a shoreline parcel and abuts the ocean and the proposed development of
Lot 3 will not significantly and adversely affect the coastal ecosystem. Prior to entitlement of
the subdivision, CLDC commissioned a Preliminary Engineering Report which addressed the
mitigation of any significant adverse effects that the subdivision would have on the coastal
ecosystem. See, Exhibit “P”. The Preliminary Engineering Report addressed site grading,
drainage plans, storm water management and water quality, erosion control plans, roadways,
wastewater, the flood zone and the constraint district. Id. The recommendations in the
Preliminary Engineering Report were included in the approved construction plans of the
subdivision (Exhibit “M”) which were constructed as approved and certified by the Department
1 Exhibit “O-6” contains a copy of a survey of the Makahuena Estates subdivision and five (5) pictures. The survey
itself indicates where pictures 1-5 were taken, and pictures 1-5 contain a computer image of the potential visual
impact of the proposed development. Lot 3 is not visible from Pe’e Road because of the neighboring development
The Point at Po‘ipū.
22
of Public Works (Exhibit “”G”). Because all subdivision infrastructure has been constructed and
approved, including the necessary drainage basin, the development will not have any significant
adverse effect on the coastal ecosystem, and the development will be constructed and maintained
so that any erosion or increased run off will stay within the pre-existing drainage allowances and
maintained on site in the existing drainage basin.
During the subdivision entitlement process three indigenous Hawaiian bird species were
recorded during the Biological Survey of the site: Wedge-tailed Shearwater, White-tailed
Tropicbird, and Wandering Tattler. Exhibit “O-3” at 28. Of these three species, only the
Wedge-tailed Shearwater was noted to nest along the coast. Id. This species is not listed under
either federal or state endangered species programs; however, it is protected under the federal
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Id. at 29. The Biological Survey noted that the subject property is
not included in any federal Critical Habitat designations, and the development of the site would
not impact Critical Habitat. Id. at 34. Nonetheless, the County imposed various permit conditions
to mitigate any development impacts to the Wedge-tailed shearwaters located in the area.
Exhibit “D” at 2-3. Based upon representations of Jan Tenbruggencate, CLDC and Applicant’s
consultant, and an analysis of the public record, Applicant understands that all of these
requirements were complied with. For example:
a. In consultation with DLNR/DOFAW, CLDC engaged a landscaping firm and
established a new shrub land of native naupaka (Scaevola taccada) on the makai western corner
of the subdivision creating more nesting habitat for wedge-tailed shearwaters.
b. At DOFAW’s request, the CLDC hired a pest control firm to conduct trapping for
feral cats. Exhibit “Q”. The Applicant has continued that contract and animal control specialists
23
are on the property daily. Exhibit “Q-1”. Applicant issued a Right-of-Entry permit to
DLNR/DOFAW to allow the State to monitor wedge-tailed shearwaters in the area. Exhibit “R”.
c. Finally, in order to avoid a potentially dangerous condition for humans, the makai
rock wall along the public access way was approved as constructed with ground-level tubes that
allow shearwaters to pass through. Exhibits “S” and “G”. However, according to Mr.
Tenbruggencate, there is no evidence the birds actually do cross it on foot, as shearwaters that
have been seen inside the wall are adults fully capable of flight.
Applicant intends to comply with all existing permitting requirements, including those
relating to construction times and any prohibitions against external upward facing and unshielded
lighting. Nonetheless, Applicant is aware that predation of Wedge-tailed shearwaters continues
along the makai portion of the subdivision largely due to the feeding of feral cats at neighboring
properties and in some part unleashed domestic dogs that walk within the open space coastal
access easement with their owners. Applicant is working cooperatively with DLNR/DOFAW
and the community to find collaborative solutions to further protect the coastal bird population.
11.5 Economic Uses. The Property will be developed for residential purposes and will
be allowed to be used as a transient vacation rental as it is within the VDA. The proposed
development will create short term economic benefits associated with the construction of the
improvements and will create more long-lasting employment opportunities associated with the
management and upkeep of a vacation rental property, if the development is used for such
purposes. Therefore, the proposed development will not have any significant adverse effect on
the economy.
11.6 Coastal Hazards. The Property is a shoreline parcel but its’ makai boundary
consists of rock cliff face and the Property itself is approximately 36 ft. above sea level. See,
24
Exhibit “C-10”. According to the Kauai shoreline change website, developed in partnership with
the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) and the University of Hawaii
School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, the coastline of the Property is not
experiencing any coastal erosion. Id. The Property is within the Non-Special Flood Hazard
Zone X and all drainage will be maintained on site via an existing drainage basin. As such, no
significant risks of coastal hazards are likely.
11.7 Managing Development/Public Participation. The development is consistent with
the SMA objectives and policies concerning Managing Development and Public Participation in
that the SMA Use Permit process will provide the public with an opportunity to review the
proposed development and communicate and participate in the management of coastal resources
and hazards.
11.8 Beach Protection/Marine Resources. The development will not have any
significant adverse effect on any coastal beach processes because there are no beaches in the
vicinity, instead there is a steep, rugged and rocky cliff faced shoreline. Likewise, the
development will not significantly adversely affect any open space areas along the shoreline due
to the existing county coastal access and view easements encumbering the Property makai of the
rock-wall. There are no existing fishponds, seawalls, or revetments in the vicinity of the
Property and as such the development will not have any significant adverse effect to Beach
Protection or Marine Resources.
11.9 Value of Development. The value of the development is estimated at
$2,301,480.00 as shown in the construction estimate attached as Exhibit “J”.
11.10 Compatibility with Surrounding Uses. The Property is surrounded by properties
located in the SLUC Urban District, County Resort District, and County Residential District and
25
is the VDA. Uses on the surrounding properties include residential, resort and vacation rental
activities. The Property is similar in topography, character and nature with adjacent properties
and the development is consistent with surrounding land uses.
11.11 Significant Adverse Effect to the SMA. The development will not have any
significant adverse environmental or ecological effect to the SMA, including but not 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. The development
is and will be compatible with existing uses in areas surrounding the Property. Further, the
design, siting, and landscaping of the development will ensure that any adverse effects of the
development are minimized to the extent practical consistent with the special controls on
development within the SMA and the State policy to preserve and protect the natural resources
of the coastal zone of Hawai’i.
11.12 Compliance with SMA Guidelines. The development is consistent with the SMA
Guidelines contained in HRS § 205A-26 and Section 4.0 of the Special Management Area Rules
and Regulations of the County of Kaua’i State of Hawai’i (“SMA Rules”) as follows:
a. Adequate access, via existing public access easements, is provided to nearby
beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves.
b. Adequate and properly located public recreation areas and wildlife preserves have
been reserved.
c. Provisions have been made for solid and liquid waste treatment, disposition, and
management that will minimize adverse effects on SMA resources.
d. Because the Property is prepared for development, alterations to existing
landforms and vegetation will be very minimal, and construction will cause negligible adverse
26
effects to water resources and scenic and recreational amenities. Further, danger of floods, wind
damage, storm surge, landslides, erosion, siltation, or failure in the event of earthquake is not
expected.
e. The development is consistent with the objectives and policies of HRS Ch. 205A
and the County SMA Rules.
f. The development is consistent with the County general plan and zoning
ordinances.
g. No dredging, filing or other altering of any coastal resources will occur
whatsoever.
h. The development will not reduce the size of the coastal access easement area, nor
will the development impose any restrictions upon public access to tidal and submerged lands,
beaches, or other coastal resources.
i. The development will not substantially interfere with or detract from the line of
sight toward the sea or from existing public views to and along the shoreline.
j. The development will not significantly adversely affect water quality, or existing
and potential fisheries, wildlife habitats, or estuarine sanctuaries.
SECTION 12. HRS CH 343 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
CONSIDERATIONS.
12.1 HRS Chapter 343. HRS Ch. 343 requires the preparation of an Environmental
Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement for certain activities specified in HRS §
343-5. The development does not constitute an action for which an Environmental Assessment
and/or an Environmental Impact Statement must be prepared pursuant to HRS § 343-5.
27
SECTION 13. IMPACTS TO NATIVE HAWAIIAN TRADITIONAL AND
CUSTOMARY PRACTICES.
13.1 Existence of Traditional and Customary Practices. Under Article XII, Section 7
of the Hawaii State Constitution, the State of Hawai’i:
[R]eaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and
traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious
purposes and possessed by ahupua‘a tenants who are descendants
of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to
1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights.
For the purpose of practicing [Native Hawaiian] traditional and customary rights,
practitioners may gather anywhere that those rights have been traditionally and customarily
exercised in that manner – on land that is less than “fully developed.” David M. Forman and
Susan K. Serrano, Ho’ohana Aku, a Ho’ola Aku: A Legal Primer for Traditional and Customary
Rights in Hawaii, December 2012; citing, Public Access Shoreline Hawaii (“PASH”) v. Hawaii
County Planning Commission, 79 Haw. 425, 903 P.2d 1246. If property is deemed "fully
developed," i.e., lands zoned and used for residential purposes with existing dwellings,
improvements, and infrastructure, it is always "inconsistent" to permit the practice of traditional
and customary native Hawaiian rights on such property. State v. Hanapi, 89 Haw. 177, 970 P.2d
485.
As part of the subdivision entitlement process, CLDC commissioned the preparation of a
Cultural Impact Assessment (“CIA”) by McMahon Consulting. See, Exhibit “T”. The CIA
analyzed previous archaeological studies, the historical record and detailed consultation with
native Hawaiian practitioners and informants in an effort to identify any ongoing practice of
traditional and cultural activities and the presence of any valued cultural, historical or natural
resources within the subdivision or its vicinity. The CIA further assessed the potential impacts
that the proposed development may have on those resources.
28
In analyzing whether any valued cultural, historical, or natural resources were present
within the applicable area, the CIA found a paucity of data in the written record regarding the
presence of pre-contact settlement and historic land tenure for the Property and limited
mythological and legendary references.
However, in speaking with native Hawaiian practitioners and informants it was
determined that the coastline fronting the subdivision has been use for traditional and cultural
subsistence fishing practices from pre-historic times to today. Fish caught off of the rock cliffs
at Makahuena include: awa (milkfish), ‘o’io (bone fish), he’e (octopus), ula (spiny lobster), akule
(big-eye scad), and moi (thread fish). Ha’uke’uke (sea urchin) and ‘opihi (limpet) are also
gathered from the rocky cliffs along the coastline. According to cultural informants, at one point
in time there were small salt beds in the area, but no salt pans were located during an
archaeological inventory by Haun et al in 2011. Exhibit “T” at 12. No further cultural, historical,
or natural resources were identified in the area.
All traditional and customary practices and all valued cultural, and natural resources in
the area involve subsistence fishing and gathering within the open space access easement makai
of the subdivision’s rock wall. As this area is protected and preserved in perpetuity, the
development of Lot 3 will not affect or impair these continued practices whatsoever.
No traditional and customary practices were identified on the Property in the area mauka
of the rock wall. The construction plans for the subdivision improvements were approved by all
governmental regulatory agencies in 2015. A final inspection of the subdivision improvements
was conducted on August 8, 2017, and the County Engineer certified that the construction was
complete and acceptable on December 4, 2017. As such, the Property is deemed fully
developed. State v. Hanapi, 89 Haw. 177, 970 P.2d 485. Given the tenets of the law regarding
practice of Native Hawaiian customary and traditional rights on ''fully developed" lands, the
development will not affect any Native Hawaiian customary and traditional rights protected
under Article XII, Section 7 of the Hawai'i State Constitution.
SECTION 14. CONCLUSION.
Applicant respectfully requests the Planning Department and the Planning Commission:
1. Find that the development will not have any substantial 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.
2. Find that the development is consistent with the objectives, policies, and
guidelines set forth in HRS Ch. 205A and Sections 3.0 and 4.0 of the SMA Rules.
3. Find that the development is consistent with permitted uses in the SLUC Urban
District, the Kauai General Plan, the South Kauai Community Plan, and the CZO.
4. Approve the issuance of a SMA Use Permit and a Class III Zoning Permit for the
development on the Property as described herein, subject to such reasonable conditions as the
Planning Department and Planning Commission shall impose.
DATED: Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii, February J..P., 2022.
CADES SCHUTTE LLP
Attorneys for Applicants
MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA -CAPITAL A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA-CAPITAL B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA -TW, LLC; and
MAKAHUENA -DW, LLC
29
EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit Exhibit Description
A Applicant Authorization
B Deed
C-1 Lot 3 Tax Map
C-2 Lot 3 State Land Use District Map
C-3 Kauai County General Plan Land Use Designation Map
C-4 Zoning Map ZM-PO 300
C-5 South Kauai Community Plan Land Use Map
C-6 Lot 3 Special Management Area Map
C-7 County Constraint District Map
C-8 Kauai County General Plan South Kauai Heritage Resource Map
C-9 Lot 3 Flood Hazard Assessment Report
C-10 Shoreline Certification and Topography map
C-11 Grant of Pedestrian Access and Parking Easements
C-12 Ordinance No. PM-2017-410
C-13 Natural Resource Conservation Services (NRCS) Lot 3 Soil Survey Map
D SMA (U) 2015-1
E Z-III-2015-1
F S-2015-14
G Certification of Completion Makahuena Point Subdivision
G-1 Final Approved Subdivision Map S-2015-14
H Lot 3 House Plans
2
I Lot 3 Landscape Plans
J Lot 3 Construction Estimate
K Lot 3 Photo Exhibit
L Archaeological Inventory Survey
M Approved Construction Plans for Makahuena Subdivision
N Individual Wastewater System (IWS) Report - Makahuena Subdivision
O-1 Air Quality Assessment
O-2 Geological Investigation
O-3 Biological Survey
O-4 Visual Analysis Public Views
O-5 Visual Analysis Private Views
O-6 View Impact of Lot 3 development
P Preliminary Engineering Report
Q Previous Kani Wildlife Contract
Q-1 Existing Kani Wildlife Contract
R Right-of-Entry with DLNR/DOFAW
S May 9, 2016 Status Report to Planning Department
T Cultural Impact Assessment
6206182.v4
EXHIBIT A
October _, 2021
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Cades Schutte LLLP is authorized on behalf of: (i) (a) MAKAHUENA-PREFERRED
A, LLC, a Hawaii limited liability company; and (b) MAKAHUENA -CAP IT AL A, LLC, a
Hawaii limited liability company, both of whose mailing address is 3214 N. University Ave.,
#104, Provo, Utah 84604; and (ii) (a) MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED B, LLC, a Hawaii
limited liability company, (b) MAKAHUENA-CAPITAL B, LLC, a Hawaii limited liability
company, (c) MAKAHUENA-TW, LLC, a Hawaii limited liability company, and (d)
MAKAHUENA -OW, LLC, a Hawaii limited liability company; collectively the owners of the
property located at Pe'e Rd. and Maka Rd., Koloa, HI 96756, identified as TMK No. (4)
2-8-021:070), in submitting any and all permit assessments, determination requests, and/or
permit applications to the various departments and agencies of the State of Hawaii and the
County of Kaua' i relative to the above referenced property.
MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED A, LLC,
a Hawaii limited liability company
By: ak Tanner Weekes
Its Manager
MAKAHUENA -CAPITAL A, LLC,
a Hawaii limited liability company
By: Udl Tanner Weekes
Its Manager
MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED B, LLC,
a Hawaii limited liability company
By: -=-/2�£(' __ _
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C-1
Developed by
Parcel
ID
280210700000
Acreage 1.001
Class RESIDENTIAL
Situs/Physical
Address
PEE RD
Mailing Address MAKAHUENA-PREFERRED A LLC
111 E BROADWAY STE 100
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
Total Market Value $1,450,400
Total Assessed Value $1,450,400
Total Exemptions $0
Total Net Taxable
Value
$1,450,400
Last 2 Sales
Date Price Reason
n/a 0 n/a
n/a 0 n/a
Brief Tax Description LOT 3 POR GR 1416 FP 354 MAKAHUENA TRACT 1.001 AC DES
(Note: Not to be used on legal documents)
The Geographic Information Systems (GIS) maps and data are made available solely for informational purposes. The GIS data is not the official representation of any of the
information included, and do not replace a site survey or legal document descriptions. The County of Kauai (County) makes or extends no claims, representations or warranties of any
kind, either express or implied, inluding, without limitation, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, as to the quality, content, accuracy, currency,
or completeness of the information, text, maps, graphics, links and other items contained in any of the GIS data. In no event shall the County become liable for any errors or omissions
in the GIS, and will not under any circumstances be liable for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential, or other loss, injury or damage caused by its use or otherwise
arising in connection with its use, even if specifically advised of the possibility of such loss, injury or damage. The data and or functionality on this site may change periodically and
without notice. In using the GIS data, users agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the County for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of
accuracy or correctness of the data, or the use of the data.
Date created: 9/29/2021
Last Data Uploaded: 9/29/2021 7:08:13 AM
590 ft
Overview
Legend
Parcels
Roads
EXHIBIT C-1
EXHIBIT C-2
+DZDLL6/8'/RFDWRU6RXUFHV (VUL +(5( *DUPLQ 86*6 ,QWHUPDS ,1&5(0(17 3 15&DQ70.3DUFHOV6WDWH/DQG8VH'LVWULFWV&RQVHUYDWLRQ8UEDQ6HSWHPEHUPLNP EXHIBIT C-2
EXHIBIT C-3
5.2 FUTURE LAND USE MAPS| 5.0 POLICY MAPS 235Figure 5-4 South Kaua‘i Land Use Map5.2 FUTURE LAND USEMAPS|5.0 POLICYMYAPS 235KKKƃƃƃoaoloaPoPo॒॒ppppipƻƻKKauummuuali॒॒iHHwwyyKaKalĈĈheoheo॒Q॒Qmama॒॒ooKukui‘ulaKukui‘ulaLLLĈĈĈ‘wawa‘wa‘iWaita ReservoirWaita ReservoirKalawai ParkKalawai ParkPo‘ipPo‘ipƻƻBeachPark Beach ParkMauhia RdMaluhia RdAA la KKKK inn oo ikk i RR dd
॒॒QQQQ mm a॒ooooRRRddddPapPaapPPapĈlina Rdlina RdLLĈĈwwa‘iRRdd0120.5MilesN1 in = 1 milesReservoirsNaturalAgriculturalAgricultural (IAL)Major RoadsPlanning District BoundaryRoadsStreamsSmall TownParks and RecreationHomesteadLarge TownGolf CourseNeighborhood GeneralResidential CommunityNeighborhood CenterResortIndustrialTransportationProvisional AgricultureAgricultureAgriculture (IAL)ONLINE VERSIONONLINEONLINE VERSIONVERSIONEXHIBIT C-3
EXHIBIT C-4
EXHIBIT C-4
EXHIBIT C-5
-EXHIBIT C-5
EXHIBIT C-6
+DZDLL60$/RFDWRU6RXUFHV (VUL +(5( *DUPLQ 86*6 ,QWHUPDS ,1&5(0(17 3 15&DQ70.1HLJKERU,VODQGV6SHFLDO0DQDJHPHQW$UHD 60$ 6HSWHPEHUPLNP EXHIBIT C-6
EXHIBIT C-7
EXHIBIT C-7
EXHIBIT C-8
5.3 HERITAGE RESOURCE MAPS | 5.0 POLICY MAPS 247
Weliweli MĈhĈঘulepƻ
LĈwaঘi
Kal Ĉheo
PĈঘĈ
Kƃloa
e Halewili RdK a umuali॒iHwyKalĈheo
Kalawai Park
LĈwa‘i
‘Qma‘o
Kƃloa
Po‘ipƻ
Po‘ipƻ Beach Park Al
aKi
noi
kiRdWaita Reservoir
Maluhia RdKukui‘ula
PapĈlina
RdFigure 5-11 South Kaua‘i Heritage Resource Map
Registered Historic Sites
State"J
National"J
State & National"J
Cultural Features
Priority Public Access Points#*
Ahupua॒a Boundaries
Wetlands
Coral Reefs
State & County Parks
Preserves
Planning District Boundary
Fish Ponds$ò
Kƃloa Scenic Byway
Trails
Regulated Fishing Areas
Major Roads
Streams & Waterbodies
Roads
Reservoirs
Traditional Cultivation Areas
Open Space Acquisition Priorities
Critical Habitat
Threatened & Endangered Species
High Density
Very High Density
Sand Dunes
N
01.530.75
Miles
1 in = 2 miles
ONLINE VERSIONONLINE VERSION
ONLINE VERSION
EXHIBIT C-8
EXHIBIT C-9
Flood Hazard Assessment Report
Disclaimer: The Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) assumes no responsibility arising from
the use, accuracy, completeness, and Ɵmeliness of any informaƟon contained in this report. Viewers/Users are
responsible for verifying the accuracy of the informaƟon and agree to indemnify the DLNR, its oĸcers, and employ-
ees from any liability which may arise from its use of its data or informaƟon.
If this map has been idenƟĮed as 'PRELIMINARY', please note that it is being provided for informaƟonal purposes
and is not to be used for Ňood insurance raƟng. Contact your county Ňoodplain manager for Ňood zone determina-
Ɵons to be used for compliance with local Ňoodplain management regulaƟons.
Property InformaƟon
COUNTY:
FIRM INDEX DATE:
THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN A TSUNAMI EVACUTION ZONE:
FOR MORE INFO, VISIT: hƩp://www.scd.hawaii.gov/
THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN A DAM EVACUATION ZONE:
FOR MORE INFO, VISIT: http://dlnreng.hawaii.gov/dam/
Flood Hazard InformaƟon
SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS (SFHAs) SUBJECT TO INUNDATION BY
THE 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD - The 1% annual chance Ňood (100-
year), also know as the base Ňood, is the Ňood that has a 1% chance of
being equaled or exceeded in any given year. SFHAs include Zone A, AE,
AH, AO, V, and VE. The Base Flood ElevaƟon (BFE) is the water surface
elevaƟon of the 1% annual chance Ňood. Mandatory Ňood insurance
purchase applies in these zones:
Zone A: No BFE determined.
Zone AE: BFE determined.
Zone AH: Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding);
BFE determined.
Zone AO: Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually sheet Ňow on
sloping terrain); average depths determined.
Zone V: Coastal Ňood zone with velocity hazard (wave acƟon);
no BFE determined.
Zone VE: Coastal Ňood zone with velocity hazard (wave acƟon);
BFE determined.
Zone AEF: Floodway areas in Zone AE. The Ňoodway is the
channel of stream plus any adjacent Ňoodplain areas that must
be kept free of encroachment so that the 1% annual chance
Ňood can be carried without increasing the BFE.
NON-SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA - An area in a low-to-moderate risk
Ňood zone. No mandatory Ňood insurance purchase requirements apply,
but coverage is available in parƟcipaƟng communiƟes.
Zone XS (X shaded): Areas of 0.2% annual chance Ňood; areas of
1% annual chance Ňood with average depths of less than 1 foot
or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas
protected by levees from 1% annual chance Ňood.
Zone X: Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance
Ňoodplain.
OTHER FLOOD AREAS
Zone D: Unstudied areas where Ňood hazards are undeter-
mined, but Ňooding is possible. No mandatory Ňood insurance
purchase apply, but coverage is available in parƟcipaƟng commu-
niƟes.
FLOOD HAZARD ASSESSMENT TOOL LAYER LEGEND
(Note: legend does not correspond with NFHL)
www.hawaiinfip.org
Notes:
BASEMAP: FIRM BASEMAP
0 400 800 ft
KAUAI
TMK NO:(4) 2-8-021:070
WATERSHED:MAHAULEPU
PARCEL ADDRESS:ADDRESS NOT DETERMINED
KOLOA, HI 96756
FEBRUARY 26, 2021
LETTER OF MAP CHANGE(S):16-09-0378A, 16-09-0391A, 19-09-1672A
FEMA FIRM PANEL:1500020352F
PANEL EFFECTIVE DATE:NOVEMBER 26, 2010
YES
NO
EXHIBIT C-9
Case No.: 16-09-0378ADate: November 12, 2015 LOMR-VZ
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
Page 1 of 5
COMMUNITY AND MAP PANEL INFORMATION LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
COMMUNITY
AFFECTED
MAP PANEL
NUMBER: 1500020352F
DATE: 11/26/2010
FLOODING SOURCE: PACIFIC OCEAN
KAUAI COUNTY, HAWAII
(Unincorporated Areas)
Lots 45 through 47, 58 through 61 and a portion of Parcel L-3,
Makahuena Tract, as described in the Quitclaim Deed recorded as
Document No. 96-068054, in the Office of the Bureau of
Conveyances, Kauai County, Hawaii
The portion of property is more particularly described by the following
metes and bounds:COMMUNITY NO.: 150002
DATUM: NAD 83
APPROXIMATE LATITUDE & LONGITUDE OF PROPERTY: 21.870, -159.443
SOURCE OF LAT & LONG: GOOGLE EARTH PRO
LETTER OF MAP REVISION – COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
DETERMINATION
STREET FLOOD
ZONE
LOWEST
LOT
ELEVATION
(LTD)
BLOCK/
SECTION
SUBDIVISIONLOT
OUTCOME 1% ANNUAL
CHANCE
FLOOD
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
ADJACENT
GRADE
ELEVATION
(LTD)
WHAT IS
REMOVED FROM
THE SFHA
L-3 10.0 to 24.0
feet
--10.0 to 24.0
feet
X
(shaded)
Portion of
Property
--Makahuena
Tract
--
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) - The SFHA is an area that would be inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being
equaled or exceeded in any given year (base flood).
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS (Please refer to the appropriate section on Attachment 1 for the additional considerations listed below.)
LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
ZONE V
PORTIONS REMAIN IN THE SFHA
This determination is based on the flood data presently available. The enclosed documents provide additional information regarding this
determination. If you have any questions about this document, please contact the FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at (877) 336-2627
(877-FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 847 South Pickett Street,
Alexandria, VA 22304-4605.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
This document provides the Federal Emergency Management Agency's determination regarding a request for a Letter of Map Revision for the
property described above. Using the information submitted and the effective National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) map, we have determined that the
property(ies) is/are not located in a Coastal High Hazard Area or the SFHA, an area inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year (base flood). This document revises the effective NFIP map to remove the subject property from the Coastal High Hazard Area and the
SFHA located on the effective NFIP map; therefore, the Federal mandatory flood insurance requirement does not apply. However, the lender has the option to
continue the flood insurance requirement to protect its financial risk on the loan. A Preferred Risk Policy (PRP) is available for buildings located outside the SFHA.
Information about the PRP and how one can apply is enclosed.
Case No.: 16-09-0378ADate: November 12, 2015 LOMR-VZ
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
Page 2 of 5
LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
Parcel L-3
A portion of this property, but not the subject of the Determination/Comment Document, is located within a
Coastal High Hazard Area (Zone V, VE or V1-30). Therefore, any future construction or substantial improvement
on the property remains subject to Federal, State/Commonwealth, and local regulations for floodplain
management. No construction using fill for structural support or that may increase flood damage to other property
may take place in these areas.
PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY REMAIN IN THE SFHA (This Additional Consideration applies to the
preceding 1 Property.)
Portions of this property, but not the subject of the Determination/Comment document, may remain in the Special
Flood Hazard Area. Therefore, any future construction or substantial improvement on the property remains
subject to Federal, State/Commonwealth, and local regulations for floodplain management.
This attachment provides additional information regarding this request. If you have any questions about this attachment, please contact the
FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at (877) 336-2627 (877-FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 847 South Pickett Street, Alexandria, VA 22304-4605.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
LETTER OF MAP REVISION – COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
ATTACHMENT 1 (ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS)
BEGINNING at a ½” pipe located at the northeast corner of Lot L-3, a parcel of land being a portion of Grant
1416 to Eke Opunui, Makahuena Tract at Weliweli, Koloa, Island of Kauai, State of Hawaii, Tax Map Key: (4)
2-8-021: 041, having a latitude of 21.870954 and a longitude of -159.441649, and running in bearings
measured clockwise from the point of beginning as shown on the attached Exhibit A; thence S26°01’00’E,
110.36 feet; thence S31°46’09”W, 49.24 feet; thence, S77°27’05”W, 63.70 feet; thence, S37°39’37”W, 38.00
feet; thence, S65°05’45”W, 39.07 feet; thence, S37°39’37”W, 30.00 feet; thence, S09°53’44”E, 24.39 feet;
thence, S37°39’37”W, 107.44 feet; thence, N69°52’26”W, 90.18 feet; thence, S32°36’10”W, 72.35 feet;
thence, S87°31’11”W. 12.22 feet; thence, S32°36’10”W, 15.83 feet; thence, S02°20’20”E, 17.46 feet; thence,
S32°36’10”W, 42.00 feet; thence, S36°56’14”E, 89.47 feet; thence, S28°17’21”W, 113.52 feet; thence,
S61°36’32”W, 166.40 feet; thence, S72°15’15”W, 42.12 feet; thence, S34°24’32”W, 17.02 feet; thence,
S61°36’32W, 20.00 feet; thence, S48°47’18”E, 31.84 feet; thence, S42°14’17”W, 110.80 feet; thence,
N31°01’00”W, 167.34 feet; thence, N64°12’18”E, 62.11 feet; thence, N63°59’00”E, 299.60 feet; thence,
N26°01’00”W, 75.00 feet; thence, N18°59’00”E, 35.36 feet; thence, N26°01’00”W, 100.00 feet; thence,
N63°59’00”E, 299.60 feet; thence, N26°01’00”W, 100.00 feet; thence, N63°59’00”E, 244.80 feet to the POINT
OF BEGINNING
ZONE V (This Additional Consideration applies to the preceding 1 Property.)
Case No.: 16-09-0378ADate: November 12, 2015 LOMR-VZ
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
Page 3 of 5
COMMUNITY AND MAP PANEL INFORMATION LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
COMMUNITY
AFFECTED
MAP PANEL
NUMBER: 1500020352F
DATE: 11/26/2010
FLOODING SOURCE: PACIFIC OCEAN
KAUAI COUNTY, HAWAII
(Unincorporated Areas)
Lots 45 through 47, 58 through 61 and a portion of Parcel L-3,
Makahuena Tract, as described in the Quitclaim Deed recorded as
Document No. 96-068054, in the Office of the Bureau of
Conveyances, Kauai County, Hawaii
The portion of property is more particularly described by the following
metes and bounds:COMMUNITY NO.: 150002
DATUM: NAD 83
APPROXIMATE LATITUDE & LONGITUDE OF PROPERTY: 21.870, -159.443
SOURCE OF LAT & LONG: GOOGLE EARTH PRO
DETERMINATION
STREET FLOOD
ZONE
LOWEST
LOT
ELEVATION
(LTD)
BLOCK/
SECTION
SUBDIVISIONLOT
OUTCOME 1% ANNUAL
CHANCE
FLOOD
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
ADJACENT
GRADE
ELEVATION
(LTD)
WHAT IS
REMOVED FROM
THE SFHA
45 18.0 feet--10.0 feetX
(shaded)
Property--Makahuena
Tract
--
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) - The SFHA is an area that would be inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being
equaled or exceeded in any given year (base flood).
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS (Please refer to the appropriate section on Attachment 1 for the additional considerations listed below.)
LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
DETERMINATION TABLE (CONTINUED)
This document provides the Federal Emergency Management Agency's determination regarding a request for a Letter of Map Revision for the
property described above. Using the information submitted and the effective National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) map, we have determined that the
property(ies) is/are not located in a Coastal High Hazard Area or the SFHA, an area inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year (base flood). This document revises the effective NFIP map to remove the subject property from the Coastal High Hazard Area and the
SFHA located on the effective NFIP map; therefore, the Federal mandatory flood insurance requirement does not apply. However, the lender has the option to
continue the flood insurance requirement to protect its financial risk on the loan. A Preferred Risk Policy (PRP) is available for buildings located outside the SFHA.
Information about the PRP and how one can apply is enclosed.
This determination is based on the flood data presently available. The enclosed documents provide additional information regarding this
determination. If you have any questions about this document, please contact the FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at (877) 336-2627
(877-FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 847 South Pickett Street,
Alexandria, VA 22304-4605.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
LETTER OF MAP REVISION – COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
Case No.: 16-09-0378ADate: November 12, 2015 LOMR-VZ
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
Page 4 of 5
LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED)
Parcel L-3
DETERMINATION TABLE (CONTINUED)
LOWEST
LOT
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
ADJACENT
GRADE
ELEVATION
(LTD)
1% ANNUAL
CHANCE
FLOOD
ELEVATION
(LTD)
FLOOD
ZONE
SUBDIVISION STREETBLOCK/
SECTIONLOT
WHAT IS
REMOVED FROM
THE SFHA
OUTCOME
46 --Makahuena
Tract
--Property X
(shaded)
10.0 feet --20.0 feet
47 --Makahuena
Tract
--Property X
(shaded)
--20.5 feet
58 --Makahuena
Tract
--Property X
(shaded)
--26.5 feet
59 --Makahuena
Tract
--Property X
(shaded)
--20.5 feet
This attachment provides additional information regarding this request. If you have any questions about this attachment, please contact the
FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at (877) 336-2627 (877-FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 847 South Pickett Street, Alexandria, VA 22304-4605.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
LETTER OF MAP REVISION – COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
ATTACHMENT 1 (ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS)
BEGINNING at a ½” pipe located at the northeast corner of Lot L-3, a parcel of land being a portion of Grant
1416 to Eke Opunui, Makahuena Tract at Weliweli, Koloa, Island of Kauai, State of Hawaii, Tax Map Key: (4)
2-8-021: 041, having a latitude of 21.870954 and a longitude of -159.441649, and running in bearings
measured clockwise from the point of beginning as shown on the attached Exhibit A; thence S26°01’00’E,
110.36 feet; thence S31°46’09”W, 49.24 feet; thence, S77°27’05”W, 63.70 feet; thence, S37°39’37”W, 38.00
feet; thence, S65°05’45”W, 39.07 feet; thence, S37°39’37”W, 30.00 feet; thence, S09°53’44”E, 24.39 feet;
thence, S37°39’37”W, 107.44 feet; thence, N69°52’26”W, 90.18 feet; thence, S32°36’10”W, 72.35 feet;
thence, S87°31’11”W. 12.22 feet; thence, S32°36’10”W, 15.83 feet; thence, S02°20’20”E, 17.46 feet; thence,
S32°36’10”W, 42.00 feet; thence, S36°56’14”E, 89.47 feet; thence, S28°17’21”W, 113.52 feet; thence,
S61°36’32”W, 166.40 feet; thence, S72°15’15”W, 42.12 feet; thence, S34°24’32”W, 17.02 feet; thence,
S61°36’32W, 20.00 feet; thence, S48°47’18”E, 31.84 feet; thence, S42°14’17”W, 110.80 feet; thence,
N31°01’00”W, 167.34 feet; thence, N64°12’18”E, 62.11 feet; thence, N63°59’00”E, 299.60 feet; thence,
N26°01’00”W, 75.00 feet; thence, N18°59’00”E, 35.36 feet; thence, N26°01’00”W, 100.00 feet; thence,
N63°59’00”E, 299.60 feet; thence, N26°01’00”W, 100.00 feet; thence, N63°59’00”E, 244.80 feet to the POINT
OF BEGINNING
10.0 feet
10.0 feet
10.0 feet
Case No.: 16-09-0378ADate: November 12, 2015 LOMR-VZ
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
Page 5 of 5
LOWEST
LOT
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
ADJACENT
GRADE
ELEVATION
(LTD)
1% ANNUAL
CHANCE
FLOOD
ELEVATION
(LTD)
FLOOD
ZONE
SUBDIVISION STREETBLOCK/
SECTIONLOT
WHAT IS
REMOVED FROM
THE SFHA
OUTCOME
60 --Makahuena
Tract
--Property X
(shaded)
--23.0 feet
61 --Makahuena
Tract
--Property X
(shaded)
--33.0 feet
This attachment provides additional information regarding this request. If you have any questions about this attachment, please contact the
FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at (877) 336-2627 (877-FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 847 South Pickett Street, Alexandria, VA 22304-4605.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
LETTER OF MAP REVISION – COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
ATTACHMENT 1 (ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS)
10.0 feet
10.0 feet
Case No.: 16-09-0391ADate: LOMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
Page 1 of 2 November 12, 2015
COMMUNITY AND MAP PANEL INFORMATION LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
COMMUNITY
AFFECTED
MAP PANEL
NUMBER: 1500020352F
DATE: 11/26/2010
FLOODING SOURCE: PACIFIC OCEAN
KAUAI COUNTY, HAWAII
(Unincorporated Areas)
Lots 48, 49 and 50, Makahuena Tract, as described in the Quitclaim
Deed recorded as Document No. 96-068054, in the Office of the
Bureau of Conveyances, Kauai County, Hawaii
COMMUNITY NO.: 150002
DATUM: NAD 83
APPROXIMATE LATITUDE & LONGITUDE OF PROPERTY: 21.870, -159.443
SOURCE OF LAT & LONG: GOOGLE EARTH PRO
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
LETTER OF MAP AMENDMENT
DETERMINATION
STREET FLOOD
ZONE
LOWEST
LOT
ELEVATION
(LTD)
BLOCK/
SECTION
SUBDIVISIONLOT
OUTCOME 1% ANNUAL
CHANCE
FLOOD
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
ADJACENT
GRADE
ELEVATION
(LTD)
WHAT IS
REMOVED FROM
THE SFHA
48 23.0 feet--10.0 feetX
(shaded)
Property--Makahuena
Tract
--
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) - The SFHA is an area that would be inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being
equaled or exceeded in any given year (base flood).
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS (Please refer to the appropriate section on Attachment 1 for the additional considerations listed below.)
DETERMINATION TABLE (CONTINUED)
This document provides the Federal Emergency Management Agency's determination regarding a request for a Letter of Map Amendment for
the property described above. Using the information submitted and the effective National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) map, we have
determined that the property(ies) is/are not located in the SFHA, an area inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year (base flood). This document amends the effective NFIP map to remove the subject property from the SFHA located
on the effective NFIP map; therefore, the Federal mandatory flood insurance requirement does not apply. However, the lender has the option to
continue the flood insurance requirement to protect its financial risk on the loan. A Preferred Risk Policy (PRP) is available for buildings
located outside the SFHA. Information about the PRP and how one can apply is enclosed.
This determination is based on the flood data presently available. The enclosed documents provide additional information regarding this
determination. If you have any questions about this document, please contact the FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at (877) 336-2627
(877-FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 847 South Pickett Street,
Alexandria, VA 22304-4605.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
Case No.: 16-09-0391ADate: LOMA
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
Page 2 of 2 November 12, 2015
LETTER OF MAP AMENDMENT
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
ATTACHMENT 1 (ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS)
DETERMINATION TABLE (CONTINUED)
LOWEST
LOT
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
ADJACENT
GRADE
ELEVATION
(LTD)
1% ANNUAL
CHANCE
FLOOD
ELEVATION
(LTD)
FLOOD
ZONE
SUBDIVISION STREETBLOCK/
SECTIONLOT
WHAT IS
REMOVED FROM
THE SFHA
OUTCOME
49 --Makahuena
Tract
--Property X
(shaded)
10.0 feet --26.5 feet
50 --Makahuena
Tract
--Property X
(shaded)
--33.0 feet
This attachment provides additional information regarding this request. If you have any questions about this attachment, please contact the
FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at (877) 336-2627 (877-FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 847 South Pickett Street, Alexandria, VA 22304-4605.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
10.0 feet
Page 1 of 2 Date: June 26, 2019 Case No.: 19-09-1672A LOMR-VZ
LETTER OF MAP REVISION – COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
COMMUNITY AND MAP PANEL INFORMATION LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
COMMUNITY
KAUAI COUNTY, HAWAII
(Unincorporated Areas)
A portion of Makahuena Tract described as Ehukai Road, in the
Quitclaim Deed recorded as Document No. 96‐068054, in the Office
of the Bureau of Conveyances, Kauai County, Hawaii
COMMUNITY NO: 150002
AFFECTED MAP
PANEL
NUMBER: 1500020352F
DATE: 11/26/2010
FLOODING SOURCE: PACIFIC OCEAN APPROXIMATE LATITUDE & LONGITUDE OF PROPERTY: 21.869624; -159.443202
SOURCE OF LAT & LONG: GOOGLE EARTH PRO DATUM: NAD 83
DETERMINATION
LOT BLOCK/
SECTION SUBDIVISION STREET
OUTCOME
WHAT IS
REMOVED
FROM THE
SFHA
FLOOD
ZONE
1% ANNUAL
CHANCE
FLOOD
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
ADJACENT
GRADE
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
LOT
ELEVATION
(LTD)
Ehukai
Road --Makahuena Tract --Property X
(shaded) ------
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) – The SFHA is an area that would be inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded
in any given year (base flood).
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS (Please refer to the appropriate section on Attachment 1 for the additional considerations listed below)
ZONE V
This document provides the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s determination regarding a request for a Letter of Map Revision for the property
described above. Using the information submitted and the effective National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) map, we determined that the structure(s) on
the property is/are not located in a Coastal High Hazard Area or the SFHA, an area inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year (base flood). This document revises the effective NFIP map to remove the subject property from the Coastal High Hazard Area
and the SFHA located on the effective NFIP map; therefore, the federal mandatory flood insurance requirement does not apply. However, the lender has
the option to continue the flood insurance requirement to protect its financial risk on the loan. A Preferred Risk Policy (PRP) is available for buildings
located outside the SFHA. Information about the PRP and how one can apply is enclosed.
This determination is based on the flood data presently available. The enclosed documents provide additional information regarding this determination. If
you have any questions about this document, please contact the FEMA Map Information eXchange toll free at 1-877-336-2627 (FEMA MAP) or by letter
addressed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 3601 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite 500, Alexandria, VA 22304-6426.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
Page 2 of 2 Date: June 26, 2019 Case No.: 19-09-1672A LOMR-VZ
LETTER OF MAP REVISION – COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
ATTACHMENT 1 (ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS)
This attachment provides additional information regarding this request. If you have any questions about this attachment, please contact the FEMA Map
Information eXchange toll free at 1-877-336-2627 (FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, LOMC
Clearinghouse, 3601 Eisenhower Avenue, Suite 500, Alexandria, VA 22304-6426.
Luis Rodriguez, P.E., Chief
Engineering Management Branch
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
ZONE V (This Additional Consideration applies to the preceding property(ies))
A portion of this property, but not the subject of the Determination/Comment Document, is located within a Coastal High
Hazard Area (Zone V, VE or V1-30). Therefore, any future construction or substantial improvement on the property
remains subject to Federal, State/Commonwealth, and local regulations for floodplain management. No construction
using fill for structural support or that may increase flood damage to other property may take place in these areas.
EXHIBIT C-10
EXHIBIT C-10
Page 44
11-09-17
12/09/201412/09/201412/09/
2
0
1
4
12/09/201403/31/197219261927Poʻipū.DXD
LVKRUHOLQHFKDQJH5HVRXUFH0DSSLQJ+DZDLL0D[DU.DXD
LWUDQVHFWVKLVWRULFDOVKRUHOLQHFKDQJHUDWHV IW\U !.DXD
LORZZDWHUPDUNV /:0 -XO\PLNP
EXHIBIT C-11
EXHIBIT C-11
EXHIBIT C-12
ORDINANCE NO. PM-2017-410 BILL NO. 2647, Draft 1
A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY
CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO ZONING MAP ZM-PO 300
CIRI Land Development Company, Applicant) (ZA-2017-2)
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE
OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. The Visitor Destination Area map established in
Chapter 8, Article 17, Kaua`i County 1987, as amended, is hereby amended to
include the properties shown on Zoning Map ZM-PO 300 (Po`ipu), which is attached
hereto and incorporated herein, and identified by Tax Map Key Nos. (4) 2-8-21:041
and 2-8-21:044-068, subject to the following conditions:
a. The issuance of final approval of Subdivision S-2015-14 for a ten-lot
subdivision;
b. The exclusion of one (1) lot from the Visitor Destination Area
designation as shown on the zoning map attached to the ordinance
that amends the zoning district boundary of the subject property;
c.The restriction on each of the ten (10) lots included in
Subdivision S-2015-14 to one dwelling per lot. The Applicant shall be
required to enter into a Workforce Housing Agreement with the Kauai
County Housing Agency agreeing to execute a Deed Restriction that
will create a restrictive covenant which will run with the land in
perpetuity, unless modified per the terms found in the Deed
Restriction;
d. Within sixty (60) days of the adoption of this ordinance, a deed
restriction that prohibits owners, their heirs, successors, and assigns
from causing the development of more than ten (10) dwelling units on
the entirety of the subject property must be recorded with the Ilureau
of Conveyances of the State of Hawaii.
e. Within sixty (60) days of the adoption of the subject ordinance, this
ordinance authorizing the zoning amendment to designate nine (9) of
the lots in Subdivision S-2015-14 to the Visitor Destination Area must
be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances of the State of Hawaii.
SECTION 2. The Director of Planning is directed to note the boundary
change on official Zoning Map ZM-PO 300 on file with the Department of Planning.
All applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance shall apply to the
area demarcated by the new boundary.
1
EXHIBIT C-12
SECTION 3. Severability. The invalidity of any word, section, clause,
paragraph, sentence, part or portion of this ordinance shall not affect the validity of
any other part of this ordinance that can be given effect without such invalid part
or parts.
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval.
Introduced by: /s/ MASON K. CHOCK
By Request)
DATE OF INTRODUCTION:
April 12, 2017
Lihu`e, Kaua`i, Hawaii
V:\BILLS\2016-2018 TERM\Bill No. 2647 Dl AMK_dmc.doc
2
4a nq'
a/ /
9
vA0 rT.,
A' '
i
a
0 f
oet S
6441'
a 4
t" •
d
1 ,I',
OP OP
III
LOT 1
i
µ9 1 Ac
µy '
µ ` deer Grant '-1418 ,
nr `' "
t ay ', Ble
O pv
I
t i
Fq
fit A.for
a
I
re'
s'A
Jr ay Sw fI \ w
w'
I.*a 4
N. '
0 W :
ar
a w a.... 1t 4ci 7
LOT s 1 Iss5 Ac o.'9 COa
Ai
11 W.A..
4_..
It
i
a1w.
o `
i
i dif i
It
w
I#
I
too...
tJoel t3/
4
IP
ow I
422P21C ALE
Y 1 - . •
L ...AA MFUV911EK0Mi0A
KAUAI.
h1N Al0 II ml MAK: (4)2-8-2{:41.end 44 to
11e.NOW.0.w OM toed 0ndop
ant Co.Date Jewry
CERTIFICATE OF THE COUNTY CLERK
I hereby certify that heretofore attached is a true and correct copy of
Bill No. 2647, Draft 1, which was adopted on second and final reading by the Council of
the County of Kaua`i at its meeting held on May 31, 2017 by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Rapozo TOTAL — 5*,
AGAINST ADOPTION: Yukimura TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa TOTAL— 1
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kaua`i,
Councilmember Chock was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative vote
for the motion.
Lihu`e, Hawaii feat
May 31, 2017 Jad-lw ountain-Tanigawa
County Clerk, County of Kaua`i
ATTEST:
illim°
Mel Rapozo
Chairman & Presiding Officer
DATE OF TRANSMITTAL TO MAYOR:
June 1, 2017
Approved this 1k) day of
2017.
Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr.,
Mayor
County of Kauai
1*
17 JUN -8 A 9 :22
OFFlCEE Cif
OUN1Y CLERK
COUNTY OF KA,Uki
EXHIBIT C-13
Soil Map—Island of Kauai, Hawaii
(Lot 3)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
9/29/2021
Page 1 of 324183702418390241841024184302418450241847024184902418510241853024185502418370241839024184102418430241845024184702418490241851024185302418550454180454200454220454240454260454280454300
454160 454180 454200 454220 454240 454260 454280 454300
21° 52' 13'' N 159° 26' 37'' W21° 52' 13'' N159° 26' 32'' W21° 52' 7'' N
159° 26' 37'' W21° 52' 7'' N
159° 26' 32'' WN
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 4N WGS84
0 45 90 180 270
Feet
0 10 20 40 60
Meters
Map Scale: 1:950 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
EXHIBIT C-13
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Island of Kauai, Hawaii
Survey Area Data: Version 15, Jun 8, 2020
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jan 29, 2017—Oct
11, 2020
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Soil Map—Island of Kauai, Hawaii
(Lot 3)
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
9/29/2021
Page 2 of 3
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
KvD Koloa stony silty clay, 15 to 25
percent slopes
3.3 77.7%
rRO Rock outcrop 0.6 14.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 4.3 100.0%
Soil Map—Island of Kauai, Hawaii Lot 3
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
9/29/2021
Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT D
EXHIBIT D
EXHIBIT E
EXHIBIT E
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT G
MEMORANDUM
TO: Michael A. Dahilig, Planning Director
FROM: Michael Moule, P.E., Chief of Engineering
VIA: Lyle Tabata, Acting County Engineer
SUBJECT: Certification of Completion of Makahuena Point Subdivision
DATE: December 4, 2017
A final inspection conducted on August 8, 2017 found construction to be complete and acceptable
for the subject subdivision. Grassing establishment has been approved and the grading permit
closed. All infrastructure within this subdivision is private. The County of Kauai did not inspect
all details of the installation of the infrastructure, such as monitoring concrete pours and checking
placement and grades of the infrastructure.
Should you have any questions, please contact Devin Quinn at (808) 241 -4995 or Donald Fujimoto
at (808) 241 -4882.
W
cc: Construction Inspection
Road Maintenance
Public Works Fiscal
EXHIBIT G
EXHIBIT *
EXHIBIT H
UPUPUPFreezerRangeRefrigeratorRefrigeratorW a sh e rDr y e r
COVERAGE:HOUSE2375 SF 5.4%COVERED LANAIS 604 SF 1.4%POOL 486 SF 1.1%GARAGE 850 SF 1.9%COVERAGE4315 SF 9.8%SITE AREA:43603 SFAREA CALCULATIONS:MAIN LEVEL2375 SFMAIN COVERED LANAIS 604 SFUPPER LEVEL1705 SF (55%)UPPER COVERED LANAIS 170 SF ( 5%)TOTAL COVERED4958 SFGARAGE 850 SFOPEN LANAIS2472 SFPOOL 486 SF38' - 1"GRADE AT ENTRYE N T R Y H A L L
COVERED LANAI37' - 11"35' - 3"33' - 7"37' - 6"38' - 0"37' - 11"35' - 6"POOLOPEN DECKINGLANAILANDSCAPELANDSCAPEGRAVEL DRIVEV I E W E A S E M E N T
VIEW EASEMENTSETBACK LINESIDEYARD SETBACKS ID E Y A R D S E T B A C KFRONTYARD SETBACKEXISTING DETENTION POND10.1%2.1%5.3%1 1.6%PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROP
E
R
TY L IN EPOOL FENCEPROPERTY LINEEXIST. SIDEWALKGRASS STRIPCONC. DRIVEAPPROACH(NOT ON PROPERTY)BOARDERNOTE: DRIVEWAY IS GRAVEL. CONCRETE APPROACH IS NOT ON PROPERTYEXIST. SIDEWALKGRASS STRIPEXISTINGCURB AND GUTTERP R O P E R T Y L IN E
10' - 0"10' - 0"15' - 0"20' - 0"ScaleProject numberDate1" = 10'-0"2/1/2022 4:06:20 PMSP01SITE PLAN00MAKAHUENA LOT 3 TMK (4) 2-8-021-070Gulfstream Financial LLC3214 N. University Ave#117 Provo UT 846047-16-2021Koloa Kauai HINORTH1" = 10'-0"1SITE PLANNo.DescriptionDate
UPDNDNUPFreezerRangeRefrigeratorRefrigeratorWasherDryer34'35'36'F R O N T Y A R D S B SIDEYARD SBDECKENTRYBUNK ROOMPOOL AND ACAC WHSTAIR T YARD37' - 11"37' - 6"38' - 0"35' - 0"15'-10" x 12'-6"COVERED LANAIPOOLGREAT ROOMDININGKITCHENMASTER 2PANTRYLAUNDGARAGESPABAHA30' X 11'23'-0" X 23'-0"21'-0" X 24'-6"11'-0" X 24'-6"10'-0" X 24'-6"7'-6" X 16'-0"17'-4" X 12'-6"33'-0" X 27'-0"LANDSCAPELANDSCAPEBBQ38' - 0"2 1/2"R 8' - 0"R 8' - 0"1A62A6POOL FENCEP O O L G A T E
P O O L G A T E ScaleProject numberDate1/4" = 1'-0"8/5/2021 7:59:31 AMA1MAIN LEVEL00MAKAHUENA LOT 3 TMK (4) 2-8-021-070Gulfstream Financial LLC3214 N. University Ave#117 Provo UT 846047-16-2021Koloa Kauai HI1/4" = 1'-0"1MAIN LEVELNORTHNo.DescriptionDate
DNDNWDWRefrigeratorWasherDryerMASTER 1BEDROOM SUITELANAILANAIMASTER 3OPEN UPPERLANAI18'-3" X 12'-6"23'-0" X 23'-0"16'-10" X 13'-6"23'-0" X 22'-0"FOLDINGWINDSCREENSOLID UPPERLANAI1A62A6ScaleProject numberDate1/4" = 1'-0"8/5/2021 7:59:50 AMA2UPPERLEVEL00MAKAHUENA LOT 3 TMK (4) 2-8-021-070Gulfstream Financial LLC3214 N. University Ave#117 Provo UT 846047-16-2021Koloa Kauai HINo.DescriptionDate
MAIN LEVEL38' -0"SITE PLAN36' -0"GARAGE38' -0"ROOF LOW49' -0"UPPER LEVEL49' -0"GUEST SUITE49' -0"20' BEARING58' -0"30' HEIGHT68' -0"VIEW EASEMENTPROPERTY LINE10' SY SETBACK38' - 0"GRADE ATENTRY1" 12"MAIN LEVEL38' -0"GARAGE38' -0"ROOF LOW49' -0"UPPER LEVEL49' -0"GUEST SUITE49' -0"20' BEARING58' -0"2' - 6"EXISTING GRADEFINISH GRADEEXISTING GRADEFINISH GRADE20' FY SETBACK1A6ScaleProject numberDate1/4" = 1'-0"8/5/2021 8:00:15 AMA3EXTERIORELEVATIONS00MAKAHUENA LOT 3 TMK (4) 2-8-021-070Gulfstream Financial LLC3214 N. University Ave#117 Provo UT 846047-16-2021Koloa Kauai HINo.DescriptionDate1/4" = 1'-0"1NORTH ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"2EAST ELEVATIONTAHITIAN BROWN STANDING SEAMMILGARD FIBERGLASS BLACKSTAINED BOARD FORMED CONCRETESTAINED ACCENT CEDAR SIDINGSTAINED CEDAR SIDINGETCHED GLASS AND ALUM. GARAGE DOORALUMINUM SLIDING DOORS
MAIN LEVEL38' -0"ROOF LOW49' -0"UPPER LEVEL49' -0"20' BEARING58' -0"30' HEIGHT68' -0"PROPERTY LINE10' SY SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SY SETBACK1 1/2" 12"1" 12"2A6MAIN LEVEL38' -0"GARAGE38' -0"ROOF LOW49' -0"UPPER LEVEL49' -0"GUEST SUITE49' -0"20' BEARING58' -0"30' HEIGHT68' -0"38' - 0"GRADE AT ENTRYEXISTING GRADEFINISH GRADEFINISH GRADEEXISTING GRADE6' - 0"2' - 6"ScaleProject numberDate1/4" = 1'-0"8/5/2021 8:00:27 AMA4EXTERIORELEVATIONS00MAKAHUENA LOT 3 TMK (4) 2-8-021-070Gulfstream Financial LLC3214 N. University Ave#117 Provo UT 846047-16-2021Koloa Kauai HINo.DescriptionDate1/4" = 1'-0"1SOUTH ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"2WEST ELEVATION
ScaleProject numberDate8/5/2021 8:01:19 AMA5EXTERIORVIEWS00MAKAHUENA LOT 3 TMK (4) 2-8-021-070Gulfstream Financial LLC3214 N. University Ave#117 Provo UT 846047-16-2021Koloa Kauai HINo.DescriptionDate1GARAGE VIEW2POOL VIEW3SIDE VIEW
MAIN LEVEL38' -0"ROOF LOW49' -0"UPPER LEVEL49' -0"20' BEARING58' -0"30' HEIGHT68' -0"VIEW EASEMENTPROPERTY LINE10' SY SETBACKEXISTING GRADEFINISH GRADE2' - 6"COVERED LANAIUPPER LANAIGREATROOMUPPER LANAI BEYONDBEDROOMBEDROOM1 1/2" 12"1 1/2" 12"3' - 1"MAIN LEVEL38' -0"GARAGE38' -0"ROOF LOW49' -0"UPPER LEVEL49' -0"GUEST SUITE49' -0"20' BEARING58' -0"30' HEIGHT68' -0"BEDROOMBEDROOMBATHBATHPOOLGREATROOM BEYONDENTRY DOORGARAGE BEYONDREAR SETBACK(VARIES)PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE20' FY SETBACKEXISTING GRADEDETENTIONBASINEXISTING GRADEEXISTING GRADEFINISH GRADEFINISH GRADEScaleProject numberDateAs indicated8/5/2021 8:01:30 AMA6SECTIONS00MAKAHUENA LOT 3 TMK (4) 2-8-021-070Gulfstream Financial LLC3214 N. University Ave#117 Provo UT 846047-16-2021Koloa Kauai HINo.DescriptionDate1/4" = 1'-0"1CROSS SECTION1/8" = 1'-0"2LONGITUDINAL SECTIONFINSH GRADEEXISTING GRADE
EXHIBIT I
34' 35' 36' 37' 38' 39' 40' 34' 35' 36' 37' 38' 39' 40' 36' 36' 37' 38' 28' 28' 29' 29' 30' 30' 31' 31' 32' 32' 33' 33' 34' 35'
Cm
Cm
Cm
Cm
Cm
Cm
Cm
CmCmCmCmCm
Cm
Cm
Cm
Cm
Cm
Cr4Cr4Cr4Cr4
Cr4
Cr4Cr4
Cr4
Cr
4
Cr
4
Cr
4
Cr4
Av
Av
Av
Av
Av
Ri
Ri
Ri
Ri
Ri
Ri
Ri
Ri Ri RiRi Av AvAvAv
Cr4
Cr4
Cr
4
Cr4
Cr4
Cr4
Ri
Ri
Ri
RiRiTREESBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECLUSIA ROSEA / AUTOGRAPH TREEPLUMERIA OBTUSA `SINGAPORE` / SINGAPORE PLUMERIAMATURE SIZEH:15` X W:15'VITEX TRIFOLIA / ARABIAN LILACPALM TREESBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECOCOS NUCIFERA / COCONUT PALMMATURE SIZEH:50` X W:25`PHOENIX ROEBELENII / PYGMY DATE PALMSABAL PALMETTO / CABBAGE PALMETTOPLANT SCHEDULESHRUBSBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMEAECHMEA BLANCHETIANA / ORANGE BROMELIADALOE VERA / MEDICINAL ALOECARISSA MACROCARPA 'PROSTRATA' / PROSTRATE NATAL PLUMCHRYSOBALANUS ICACO 'RED TIP' / RED TIP COCOPLUMCRINUM AUGUSTUM 'QUEEN EMMA' / QUEEN EMMA CRINUM LILYDRACAENA REFLEXA 'SONG OF JAMAICA' / SONG OF JAMAICAGARDENIA TAITENSIS 'DOUBLE' / DOUBLE TAHITIAN GARDENIARHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA / INDIAN HAWTHORNSCAEVOLA FRUTESCENS / BEACH NAUPAKAAvCmCr4RiGROUND COVERSBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMEBACOPA MONNIERI / HERB OF GRACEMICROSORUM SCOLOPENDRIA / WART FERNWEDELIA TRILOBATA / CREEPING WEDELIAZOYSIA JAPONICA `EL TORO` / KOREAN GRASSOVERALLLANDSCAPEPLANnLP101Drawing numberN0.DESCRIPTIONDesigned By:yy/mm/dayREVISIONSDrawn By:Date:Checked By:CLIENT Drawing TitleProject No:blu line designs planning landscape architecture design8719 S. Sandy ParkwaySandy, UT 84070p 801.913.7994StampRDBP01.25.2022CS21-172MAKAHUENA
LOT 3 TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:070
KOLOA KAUAI, HI ....0 10520 30Scale: 1" = 10'-0"TRADEWINDSsummer sunrisesumme
r
sun
se
t
win
te
r
sun
r
i
sewinter sunsetnLANDSCAPE DESIGN NOTE:THIS LANDSCAPE WAS DESIGNED BY ORUNDER THE DIRECTION OFCORY SHUPEA LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT INTHE STATE OF UTAHTHE STAMP IS UNDERKEVIN D. HORNA LICENSED ARCHITECT IN THE STATE OFHAWAIILANDSCAPE EDGER, TYP.LANDSCAPE EDGER, TYP.EXISTING COMMUNITY WALLLANDSCAPE EDGER, TYP.STEPPING STONES, TYP.LANDSCAPE EDGER, TYP.DOUBLE TRACK DRIVEACCESSGRAVELFIREPITPATIO
34' 35' 36' 37' 38' 39' 40' 34' 35' 36' 37' 38' 39' 40' 36' 36' 37' 38' 28' 28' 29' 29' 30' 30' 31' 31' 32' 32' 33' 33' 34' 35'LANDSCAPEGRADINGPLANnLP201Drawing numberN0.DESCRIPTIONDesigned By:yy/mm/dayREVISIONSDrawn By:Date:Checked By:CLIENT Drawing TitleProject No:blu line designs planning landscape architecture design8719 S. Sandy ParkwaySandy, UT 84070p 801.913.7994StampRDBP01.25.2022CS21-172MAKAHUENA
LOT 3 TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:070
KOLOA KAUAI, HI ....0 10520 30Scale: 1" = 10'-0"TRADEWINDSsummer sunrisesumme
r
sun
se
t
win
te
r
sun
r
i
sewinter sunsetnLANDSCAPE DESIGN NOTE:THIS LANDSCAPE WAS DESIGNED BY ORUNDER THE DIRECTION OFCORY SHUPEA LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT INTHE STATE OF UTAHTHE STAMP IS UNDERKEVIN D. HORNA LICENSED ARCHITECT IN THE STATE OFHAWAIILANDSCAPE DRAIN PIPE,DAYLIGHT TO RETENTION, TYP.LANDSCAPE DRAININLET, TYP.LANDSCAPE BERMAROUND DECK, GRADE SODECK IS MAXIMUM 30"ABOVE TOP OF BERM, TYP.RETENTION BASIN
TREESBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTCALQTYCLUSIA ROSEA / AUTOGRAPH TREE25 GAL. 8-12` HT1PLUMERIA OBTUSA `SINGAPORE` / SINGAPORE PLUMERIA25 GAL. 6-8` HT1MATURE SIZEH:15` X W:15'VITEX TRIFOLIA / ARABIAN LILAC25 GAL. 8-12` HT4PALM TREESBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTCALQTYCOCOS NUCIFERA / COCONUT PALM50 GAL. 20-25` HT3MATURE SIZEH:50` X W:25`PHOENIX ROEBELENII / PYGMY DATE PALM10 GAL. 6` HT MIN.8SABAL PALMETTO / CABBAGE PALMETTO25 GAL. 12-15` HT1PLANT SCHEDULESHRUBSBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTAECHMEA BLANCHETIANA / ORANGE BROMELIAD5 GAL17ALOE VERA / MEDICINAL ALOE5 GAL9CARISSA MACROCARPA 'PROSTRATA' / PROSTRATE NATAL PLUM 5 GAL17CHRYSOBALANUS ICACO 'RED TIP' / RED TIP COCOPLUM5 GAL18CRINUM AUGUSTUM 'QUEEN EMMA' / QUEEN EMMA CRINUM LILY 5 GAL19DRACAENA REFLEXA 'SONG OF JAMAICA' / SONG OF JAMAICA 5 GAL9GARDENIA TAITENSIS 'DOUBLE' / DOUBLE TAHITIAN GARDENIA 5 GAL15RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA / INDIAN HAWTHORN5 GAL16SCAEVOLA FRUTESCENS / BEACH NAUPAKA5 GAL22GROUND COVERSBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTSPACINGBACOPA MONNIERI / HERB OF GRACE1 GAL269 SFMICROSORUM SCOLOPENDRIA / WART FERN1 GAL24" o.c. 96WEDELIA TRILOBATA / CREEPING WEDELIA1 GAL24" o.c. 323ZOYSIA JAPONICA `EL TORO` / KOREAN GRASSSOD5,285 SFAvCmCr4RiLANDSCAPEDETAILSLP501Drawing numberN0.DESCRIPTIONDesigned By:yy/mm/dayREVISIONSDrawn By:Date:Checked By:CLIENT Drawing TitleProject No:blu line designs planning landscape architecture design8719 S. Sandy ParkwaySandy, UT 84070p 801.913.7994StampRDBP01.25.2022CS21-172MAKAHUENA
LOT 3 TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:070
KOLOA KAUAI, HI ....TREE PLANTINGNOT TO SCALE4' ABOVE GRADE
DIAMETER SHALL BE2 TIMES SIZE OF ROOTBALLJAIN FLEXSTRAP TREE TIE OR APPROVEDEQUALSTAKE DECIDUOUS TREES WITH 2 - 2" DIA.LODGE POLE PINE STAKES AT 180 DEGREES.FOR TREES LARGER THAN 2" CALIPER OR INWINDY CONDITIONS, STAKE WITH 3 - 2" DIA.LODGE POLE PINE STAKES AT 120 DEGREES.EMBED MIN. 3' INTO GROUND. DRIVE FIRMLYINTO SUBGRADE. REMOVE STAKES AFTER ONEYEAR.FINISH GRADESOIL - SUBGRADEPROVIDE MIN. 1'-6" RADIUS MULCH (4"DEPTH) COLLAR WHEN TREES AREPLANTED IN SOD. DO NOT PLACEMULCH IN CONTACT WITH TREE TRUNK.PREPARED BACKFILL MIX - 30% EXISTINGSOIL, 50% LOAMY TOPSOIL, AND 20%CLEAN SAND. WATER AND TAMP TOREMOVE AIR POCKETS. BRING LEVEL TOFINISH GRADE. SCARIFY SIDES OF PIT.ROOTBALL- PLANT ON UNEXCAVATEDOR TAMPED SOIL. REMOVE ALL WIRE,ENTIRE BASKET, NYLON TIES, TWINE,ROPE, AND 2/3 BURLAP.NATIVE SOILPLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOTBALL IS 2"ABOVE FINISHED GRADE SUCH THATTHE TRUNK FLARE IS VISIBLE AT THETOP OF THE ROOTBALL. DO NOTCOVER THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALLWITH SOIL.FORM SAUCER (NATIVE AREAS ONLY)1TYPICAL TREE STAKING WITH STRAPSTREES IN WINDY CONDITIONS OR LARGER THAN 2" CAL.TREE STAKING - FLEX STRAPSNOT TO SCALEFLEXIBLE STRAP TREE TIESTREE TRUNKTREE TRUNKFLEXIBLE STRAP TREE TIE -ONE CONTINUOUS STRAP.2" DIA.LODGEPOLESTAKE PINESTAKES, TYP.2" DIA. LODGEPOLE STAKE PINESTAKES, TYP.ROOFING NAILROOFING NAIL2NOTE:PLANT SO THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL IS 2"ABOVE FINISHED GRADESHRUB DETAILNOT TO SCALEMULCH (3" DEPTH)FORM SAUCER -NATIVE AREAS ONLYSCARIFY SIDES OFPLANTING PITUNEXCAVATED ORCOMPACTED BACKFILLBELOW ROOTBALL TOBE 1/2 DEPTH OFROOTBALL (6" MIN).EXISTING SOILBACKFILL MIX - 30%EXISTING SOIL, 50%LOAMY TOPSOIL, AND20% CLEAN SAND.WATER AND TAMP TOREMOVE AIR POCKETS.BRING LEVEL TOFINISH GRADE.REMOVE STRING &BURLAP FROM TOP 2/3OF BALL WHEN B&B.MIN. 2X BALL DIA.3LANDSCAPE NOTES:1. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATEST CITY AND STATE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES ANDSHALL ADHERE TO THE MAKAHU'ENA ESTATES DESIGN GUIDELINES.2. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE GROWN IN CLIMATIC CONDITIONS SIMILAR TO THOSE IN THE LOCALITY OF THIS WORK ANDSHALL CONFORM TO THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK, ANSI Z60.1 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROVIDE TREES OFNORMAL GROWTH AND UNIFORM HEIGHTS, ACCORDING TO SPECIES, WITH STRAIGHT TRUNKS AND WELL DEVELOPED LEADERS,LATERALS, AND ROOTS.3. EXISTING UTILITIES, EASEMENTS, AND STRUCTURES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AVAILABLE RECORDS.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATION, SIZE, TYPE, AND STRUCTURES TO BE ENCOUNTERED ON THE PROJECTPRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION AND CONSTRUCTION IN THE VICINITY OF THE EXISTING UTILITIES AND STRUCTURES.4. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS, LICENSES, AND APPROVALS REQUIRED TOLEGALLY AND RESPONSIBLY COMPLETE THE WORK.5. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE REMOVAL, DISPOSAL, OR RELOCATION OF ALL OBSTRUCTIONS AND DEBRIS WITHINTHE DELINEATED CONSTRUCTION AREA PRIOR TO STARTING NEW CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR IS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FORTHE REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF ANY DEBRIS RESULTING FROM NEW CONSTRUCTION.6. DAMAGE TO ANY EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS OR TO ANY PORTION OF THE PROJECT'S SURROUNDING AREA DURINGCONSTRUCTION SHALL BE REPAIRED AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE.7. ALL COMPACTED AREAS DEVELOPED THROUGH CONSTRUCTION WITHIN PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE SCARIFIED ANDLOOSENED TO A DEPTH OF 12" PRIOR TO LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION WORK BEGINNING.8. NO PLANT SPECIES SUBSTITUTIONS WILL BE MADE WITHOUT APPROVAL OF OWNER.9. ALL PLANT LAYOUT SHALL BE VERIFIED AND APPROVED IN FIELD BY OWNER PRIOR TO PLANTING. FAILURE TO RECEIVE APPROVALMAY RESULT IN RE-WORK BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.10. ALL AREAS WITHIN AND AFFECTED BY THIS PROJECT SHALL HAVE POSITIVE DRAINAGE. POSITIVE DRAINAGE SHALL BE PROVIDEDTO DIRECT STORMWATER AWAY FROM ALL STRUCTURES.11. ALL CLARIFICATIONS OF DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE DRAWINGS AND THE SITE SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OFTHE OWNER PRIOR TO BEGINNING OF WORK.12. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE IRRIGATED WITH A FULLY AUTOMATED IRRIGATION SYSTEM (SEE IRRIGATION PLAN).13. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL RECEIVE 2" TOP DRESSING OF GRAVEL MULCH AS APPROVED BY OWNER. TREES WITHIN LAWN AREASSHALL RECEIVE A MIN. 5' DIA. ORGANIC MULCH RING.14. ALL LAWN AREAS SHALL RECEIVE A MIN. 4" DEPTH OF TOPSOIL. ALL PLANTING BEDS SHALL RECEIVE A MIN. 6" DEPTH OFTOPSOIL. CONTRACTOR MAY USE AVAILABLE EXISTING TOPSOIL ON SITE IF SUITABLE. IF NOT SUITABLE OR SUFFICIENT TO PROVIDETHE NECESSARY QUANTITY, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPORT ADDITIONAL TOPSOIL.15. LANDSCAPE EDGER: BENDA BOARD (BROWN COLOR) INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDATIONS.
515151515151515101010101515188880121212180121218018882121018821012101010121212121212121212101POCBF8888888010101010101010101010101CR0101010101010101010101212121212121212121212121210121110.11"126.661"2314.61"3415.51"4513.91"5611.31"6713.41"783.681"893.191"91011.61"101110.71"111210.31"121"1"114"1"1"1"114"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"114"1"1"114"1"1"1"1"1"1"1"SYMBOLMANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTIONPSIRAIN BIRD 1804-U-SAM-PRS U8 SERIESTURF SPRAY 4.0" POP-UP SPRINKLER WITH CO-MOLDEDWIPER SEAL. 1/2" NPT FEMALE THREADED INLET. WITHSEAL-A-MATIC CHECK VALVE. PRESSURE REGULATING.30RAIN BIRD 1804-U-SAM-PRS U10 SERIESTURF SPRAY 4.0" POP-UP SPRINKLER WITH CO-MOLDEDWIPER SEAL. 1/2" NPT FEMALE THREADED INLET. WITHSEAL-A-MATIC CHECK VALVE. PRESSURE REGULATING.30RAIN BIRD 1804-U-SAM-PRS U12 SERIESTURF SPRAY 4.0" POP-UP SPRINKLER WITH CO-MOLDEDWIPER SEAL. 1/2" NPT FEMALE THREADED INLET. WITHSEAL-A-MATIC CHECK VALVE. PRESSURE REGULATING.30RAIN BIRD 1804-U-SAM-PRS U15 SERIESTURF SPRAY 4.0" POP-UP SPRINKLER WITH CO-MOLDEDWIPER SEAL. 1/2" NPT FEMALE THREADED INLET. WITHSEAL-A-MATIC CHECK VALVE. PRESSURE REGULATING.30RAIN BIRD 1804-U-SAM-PRS ADJTURF SPRAY 4.0" POP-UP SPRINKLER WITH CO-MOLDEDWIPER SEAL. 1/2" NPT FEMALE THREADED INLET. WITHSEAL-A-MATIC CHECK VALVE. PRESSURE REGULATING.30SYMBOLMANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTIONRAIN BIRD XCZ-100-PRB-COMWIDE FLOW DRIP CONTROL KIT FOR COMMERCIALAPPLICATIONS. 1" BALL VALVE WITH 1" PESB VALVE AND 1"PRESSURE REGULATING 40PSI QUICK-CHECK BASKETFILTER. 0.3GPM TO 20GPM.AREA TO RECEIVE DRIP EMITTERSRAIN BIRD XB-PCSINGLE OUTLET, PRESSURE COMPENSATING DRIPEMITTERS. FLOW RATES OF 0.5GPH=BLUE, 1.0GPH=BLACK,AND 2.0GPH=RED. COMES WITH A SELF-PIERCING BARBINLET X BARB OUTLET.Emitter Notes:1.0 GPH emitters (1 assigned to each 1 Gal plant)2.0 GPH emitters (2 assigned to each 5 Gal plant)2.0 GPH emitters (4 assigned to each B&B, 2" Cal plant)2.0 GPH emitters (4 assigned to each B&B, 6` HT MIN. plant)AREA TO RECEIVE DRIPLINENETAFIM TLCV-04-18TECHLINE PRESSURE COMPENSATING LANDSCAPEDRIPLINE WITH CHECK VALVE. 0.4 GPH EMITTERS AT 18"O.C. DRIPLINE LATERALS SPACED AT 18" APART, WITHEMITTERS OFFSET FOR TRIANGULAR PATTERN. 17MM.SYMBOLMANUFACTURER/MODEL/DESCRIPTIONRAIN BIRD PEB1", 1-1/2", 2" PLASTIC INDUSTRIAL VALVES. LOW FLOWOPERATING CAPABILITY, GLOBE CONFIGURATION.RAIN BIRD 33-DRC3/4" BRASS QUICK-COUPLING VALVE, WITHCORROSION-RESISTANT STAINLESS STEEL SPRING,THERMOPLASTIC RUBBER COVER, DOUBLE TRACK KEYLUG, AND 2-PIECE BODY.BACKFLOW PREVENTER - ZURN 375XLVSR 1"INSTALL IN INSULATED VIT STRONGBOX ALUMINUMENCLOSURE - SIZE TOFITRAIN BIRD ESP4ME3 WITH (3) ESP-SM313 STATION, HYBRID MODULAR OUTDOOR CONTROLLER.FOR RESIDENTIAL OR LIGHT COMMERCIAL USE. LNK WIFIMODULE AND FLOW SENSOR READY.RAIN BIRD WR2-RFCWIRELESS RAIN AND FREEZE SENSOR COMBO, INCLUDES 1RECEIVER AND 1 RAIN/FREEZE SENSOR TRANSMITTER.IRRIGATION LATERAL LINE: PVC SCHEDULE 40IRRIGATION MAINLINE: PVC SCHEDULE 40PIPE SLEEVE: PVC SCHEDULE 40SIZE: TWICE (2X) DIAMETER OF PIPE WITHIN, MIN. 4". LIMITONE PIPE PER SLEEVEFHTQ8888Q T H F01010101Q T H TT TQ F212121212121QT H TT TQ F51515151515108HE-VAN 12HE-VAN10HE-VAN 15HE-VAN8012151BFCRValve NumberValve FlowValve SizeValve Callout###"IRRIGATION SCHEDULEOVERALLIRRIGATIONPLANnLI101Drawing numberN0.DESCRIPTIONDesigned By:yy/mm/dayREVISIONSDrawn By:Date:Checked By:CLIENT Drawing TitleProject No:blu line designs planning landscape architecture design8719 S. Sandy ParkwaySandy, UT 84070p 801.913.7994StampRDBP01.25.2022CS21-172MAKAHUENA
LOT 3 TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:070
KOLOA KAUAI, HI ....0 10520 30Scale: 1" = 10'-0"
IRRIGATIONDETAILSLI501Drawing numberN0.DESCRIPTIONDesigned By:yy/mm/dayREVISIONSDrawn By:Date:Checked By:CLIENT Drawing TitleProject No:blu line designs planning landscape architecture design8719 S. Sandy ParkwaySandy, UT 84070p 801.913.7994StampRDBP01.25.2022CS21-172MAKAHUENA
LOT 3 TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:070
KOLOA KAUAI, HI ....1. THIS DRAWING IS DIAGRAMMATIC AND IS INTENDED TO CONVEY THEGENERAL LAYOUT OF IRRIGATION SYSTEM COMPONENTS. ALLIRRIGATION EQUIPMENT SHALL BE INSTALLED IN PLANTING AREASWHEREVER POSSIBLE. LOCATE MAINLINE AND VALVES NEAR WALKSWHERE FEASIBLE.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE AVAILABLE WATER PRESSUREAT THE SITE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIESBETWEEN THE WATER PRESSURE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ANDACTUAL PRESSURE READINGS AT THE POINT OF CONNECTION TO THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. WATER PRESSURE AT THE POINT OFCONNECTION IS EXPECTED TO BE A MINIMUM OF 50-55 PSI. IN THE EVENTTHAT PRESSURE DIFFERENCES ARE NOT REPORTED PRIOR TO THESTART OF CONSTRUCTION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME FULLRESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY REVISIONS NECESSARY.3. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO FAMILIARIZEHIMSELF WITH ALL STRUCTURES, SITE IMPROVEMENTS, WALKS,UTILITIES, AND GRADE CHANGES. COORDINATE LAYOUT OF THEIRRIGATION SYSTEM WITH OTHER TRADES SO THAT CONSTRUCTION CANCONTINUE IN A NORMAL SEQUENCE OF EVENTS. ADJUSTMENTS MAY BENECESSARY TO MAINTAIN FULL COVERAGE DEPENDING ON ACTUAL SITECONDITIONS. ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES WILL REQUIRE WRITTENAPPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PLACEMENT.ALL MODIFICATIONS SHALL BE RECORDED ON 'AS-BUILT' DRAWINGS.4. DO NOT WILLFULLY INSTALL THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WHEN IT ISAPPARENT IN THE FIELD THAT UNKNOWN OBSTRUCTIONS OR GRADINGDIFFERENCES MAY NOT HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE ENGINEERING.SUCH OBSTRUCTIONS OR DIFFERENCES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THEATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. IN THE EVENT THAT THISNOTIFICATION IS NOT PERFORMED, CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSUME FULLRESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY REVISIONS NECESSARY.5. CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECTSITE CONDITIONS AND EXISTING IRRIGATION SYSTEM (IF ANY). IN THEEVENT THAT THE CONTRACTOR DAMAGES, DISPLACES OR OTHERWISECAUSES OTHER TRADES WORK TO BE REINSTALLED, THE CONTRACTORSHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RESTORING TO ORIGINAL CONDITION ATHIS OWN EXPENSE.6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FLUSH AND ADJUST ALL SPRINKLER HEADSAND VALVES FOR OPTIMUM PERFORMANCE. INSTALL HEADS WITH THEAPPROPRIATE ARC AND RADIUS FOR THE AREA TO BE COVERED. ADJUSTNOZZLES TO ELIMINATE OVERSPRAY ONTO WALKS, BUILDINGS, ETC.7. IRRIGATION CONTROLLER SHALL BE GROUNDED PER ESTABLISHEDASIC GUIDELINES. MOUNT CONTROLLER BEHIND REAR WALLENCLOSURE.8. IRRIGATION CONTROL WIRES SHALL BE COLOR CODED WIRE FORDIRECT BURIAL. COMMON, HOT, & SPARE WIRES SHALL BE 14 AWG(WHITE, RED & YELLOW RESPECTIVELY). FOR CONTROL WIRE RUNSEXCEEDING 3000 FEET OR COMMON WIRE RUNS EXCEEDING 1500 FEET,USE 12 AWG WIRE. CONTRACTOR SHALL RUN 1 DEDICATED SPARE WIRE'HOMERUN' FROM CONTROLLER TO TERMINUS OF EACH WIRE LEG. ALLWIRE SPLICES TO BE LOCATED IN VALVE BOX. ALL WIRE CONNECTIONSSHALL BE 3M DBRY.9. ALL MAINLINES, LATERAL LINES, AND CONTROL WIRES UNDER PAVINGSHALL BE INSTALLED IN SEPARATE SLEEVES.10. ALL MAINLINE AND LATERAL LINE PIPE SHALL BE SCHEDULE 40 PVC.ALL LATERAL LINE FITTINGS SHALL BE SCHEDULE 40 PVC UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED. ALL MAINLINE FITTINGS SHALL BE SCHEDULE 80PVC.11. CONTRACTOR SHALL USE WELD-ON P-70 PRIMER AND 711 LOW VOCCEMENT FOR ALL SOLVENT WELDED JOINTS.12. ALL LINES SHALL SLOPE TO DRAIN. ADD MANUAL DRAINS AT ALLMAINLINE LOW POINTS AS NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE DRAINAGE OFTHE ENTIRE SYSTEM. INDICATE ALL DRAIN LOCATIONS ON 'AS-BUILT'DRAWINGS.13. ALL VALVE BOXES AND LIDS TO MATCH COLOR OF SURROUNDINGAREA. VALVE BOXES AND LIDS IN LAWN AREAS ARE TO BE STANDARDGREEN. ALIGN VALVE BOXES PARALLEL WITH EDGE OFPAVEMENT/PLANTING BEDS. WHERE FEASIBLE, LOCATE THE EDGE OFVALVE BOX 12"-18" FROM EDGE OF PAVEMENT. ALL VALVE BOXES TO BELOCATED WITHIN 3 FEET OF THE BUILDING.14. ALL SPRINKLER HEADS SHALL BE SET PERPENDICULAR TO FINISHGRADE. HEADS SHALL BE LOCATED 6" AWAY FROM AND 1/4" BELOWADJACENT CURBS, WALLS, AND WALKS. ALL HEADS LOCATED ADJACENTTO MOWSTRIPS SHALL BE LOCATED 1" AWAY AND 1/4" BELOW.15. DRIP DISTRIBUTION TUBING TO BE BURIED BELOW MULCH ANDSTAKED AT MIN. 6' O.C. DRIP FITTINGS SHALL BE BARBED INSERT TYPEFITTINGS, COMPRESSION TYPE FITTINGS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.EMITTERS SHALL BE LOCATED ON UPHILL SIDE OF PLANTS. INSTALL DRIPFLUSH VALVE AT LOW POINT OF EACH DRIP ZONE AND AT THE END DRIPLINES.16. GUARANTEE: ALL WORK SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR ONE YEARFROM DATE OF ACCEPTANCE AGAINST ALL DEFECTS IN MATERIAL,EQUIPMENT, AND WORKMANSHIP. GUARANTEE SHALL COVER REPAIR OFDAMAGE TO ANY PART OF THE PREMISES RESULTING FROM LEAKS OROTHER DEFECTS IN MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, OR WORKMANSHIP TO THESATISFACTION OF THE OWNER. REPAIRS, IF REQUIRED, SHALL BE DONEPROMPTLY AND AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.17. SEE DETAILS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. ALL IRRIGATIONEQUIPMENT NOT OTHERWISE DETAILED SHALL BE INSTALLED AS PERMANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS.18. CONTRACTOR IS REMINDED THAT THE 10 FT WIDE STREET PARKWAYFRONTING THEIR LOT MUST BE INCLUDED IN THAT SPECIFIC LOTSPRIVATE IRRIGATION SYSTEM AND MUST BE IRRIGATED AND MAINTAINEDAS PART OF THE LOT LANDSCAPING. THEREFORE, THE ASSOCIATION'SEXISTING NON-POTABLE WATER MAIN WILL SIMPLY BECOME A "PASSTHROUGH" SYSTEM SERVING TO IRRIGATE OTHER AREAS ON EITHERSIDE OF THE LOT.IRRIGATION NOTESSCALE: NOT TO SCALEQUICK COUPLERSCALE: NOT TO SCALEIRRIGATION CONTROL VALVESCALE: NOT TO SCALEPOP-UP SPRAY/ROTARYSCALE: NOT TO SCALEPIPE TRENCHSCALE: NOT TO SCALEPIPE SLEEVESCALE: NOT TO SCALEIRRIGATION CONTROLLER - WALL MOUNT132654
LANDSCAPEDETAILSLI501Drawing numberN0.DESCRIPTIONDesigned By:yy/mm/dayREVISIONSDrawn By:Date:Checked By:CLIENT Drawing TitleProject No:blu line designs planning landscape architecture design8719 S. Sandy ParkwaySandy, UT 84070p 801.913.7994StampRDBP01.25.2022CS21-172MAKAHUENA
LOT 3 TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:070
KOLOA KAUAI, HI ....DFDFSCALE: NOT TO SCALECENTER FEED INLINE DRIPSCALE: NOT TO SCALEPVC TO DRIP TUBING CONNECTIONSCALE: NOT TO SCALEDRIP FLUSH VALVESCALE: NOT TO SCALEDRIP CONTROL ZONE KITSCALE: NOT TO SCALEDRIP EMITTER41523
EXHIBIT J
Lot 3
1645 Pee rd
Koloa, HI 96756
TOTAL:2,301,480.00$
Item Description Total
Soft Costs 172,850.00$
Plans and Engineering 45,300.00$
Permits and Fees 16,600.00$
Overhead Office work and management.81,900.00$
Other Soft Costs Insurance, financing, etc.29,050.00$
Hard Costs 2,128,630.00$
GRADING & BACKFILL Post & Beam 54,000.00$
SEPTIC & PERCULATION 49,800.00$
CONCRETE WORK Foundation, retaining walls, flatwork 127,000.00$
FRAMING MAT'LS 225,600.00$
FRAMING LABOR 179,800.00$
PLUMBING 87,150.00$
PLUMBING FIXTURES Sinks, faucets, toilets, tubs 24,900.00$
ELECTRICAL Includes Low Voltage 91,300.00$
ELECTRICAL FIXTURES Can lights, pendants, sconces 24,900.00$
HVAC 58,100.00$
ROOFING Standing seam and membrane 91,600.00$
SIDING MAT'LS Vertical Lap siding 51,500.00$
EXTERIOR DOORS Bi-folds, multi-slides, and hinged doors 113,200.00$
INTERIOR DOORS Stain grade 22,300.00$
WINDOWS 69,500.00$
GARAGE DOORS 11,500.00$
INSULATION & DRYWALL Smooth finish 59,500.00$
RAILING 40,500.00$
FLOORING Hardwood and Tile 62,000.00$
FINISH CARPENTRY 125,010.00$
CABINETS Kitchen, laundry, bathrooms 65,800.00$
COUNTERTOPS Quartz 35,200.00$
PAINT 73,500.00$
GLASS & HARDWARE Shower Enclosures, mirrors, etc.25,500.00$
WINDOW COVERINGS 16,550.00$
GUTTERS 18,500.00$
APPLIANCES Stainless Steel 49,000.00$
Main Residence
Living Space 2375 SF/ Garage 850 SF/ Covered Lanais 604 SF/ Pool 486 SF
EXHIBIT J
LANDSCAPE 93,000.00$
POOL Infinity Edge and spa 125,000.00$
FENCE & STONEWORK 16,600.00$
DUMPSTER 6,640.00$
CONSTRUCTION TOILET 2,490.00$
SITE CLEANUP 4,150.00$
UTILITIES 3,320.00$
MISC SHIPPING 20,900.00$
MAT'L STORAGE 3,320.00$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
-$
EXHIBIT K
EXHIBIT K
EXHIBIT L
EXHIBIT L
Report 81 0.1 11 31 2
FINAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY
TMK: (4) 2-8-021 :041
MAKAHUENA POINT, WELlWELl AHUPUA'A
KOLOA DISTRICT, ISLAND OF KAUA'I
Haun & Associates
Archaeological, Cultural, and Historical Resource Management Services
73-1 168 Kahuna A'o Road, Kailua-Kona Hawai'i 96740 Phone: (808) 325-2402 Fax: 325-1520
FINAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY
TMK: (4) 2-8-021 :041
MAKAHUENA POINT, WELlWELl AHUPUA'A
KOLOA DISTRICT, ISLAND OF KAUA'I
By:
Alan E. Haun, Ph.D.
Dave Henry, B.S.
and
Solomon H. Kailihiwa, 111, B.A.
Prepared for:
CIRI Land Development Company
2525 C Street, Suite 500
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
June 201 1
(Revised November 20 12)
Haun & Associates
Archaeological, Cultural, and Historical Resource Management Services
73-1 168 Kahuna A'o Road, Kailua-Kona Hawai'i 96740 Phone: (808) 325-2402 Fax: 325-1520
At the request of CIRI Land Development Company, Haun & Associates conducted an
archaeological inventory survey of the 13.6-acre TMK: (4) 2-8-021:041 located in Weliweli Ahupua'a,
Kbloa District, Island of Kaua'i. The objective of the survey was to satisfy historic preservation regulatory
review requirements of the Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division
(DLNR-SHPD), as contained within Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 13, DLNR, Subtitle 13, State
Historic Preservation Rules.
The archaeological survey identified 18 sites with 128 features. The 128 features consist of 98
concrete pads, 7 concrete blocks, 4 artifact scatters, 4 posts, 3 terraces, 3 slabs, 2 paths, 2 walls, and one
each of the following; ditch, road, stairs, utility box and walled slab. Feature function includes utility
(n=79), foundation (31), marker (5), transportation (4), boundary (I), disposal (I), recreation (I), soil
retention (I), water diversion (1) and indeterminate (4). Subsurface testing was undertaken during the
project, consisting of the excavation of twenty test units. No intact subsurface cultural deposits were
encountered during the subsurface testing.
All of the documented remains are the remnants of U.S. federal government navigation-related
infrastructure in operation for over 100 years. A navigation aid was established at Makahuena Point in 1908
and continues to function today. The majority of the remains are associated with the former U.S. Coast
Guard Long Range Navigation (LORAN) station that was in operation from 195 1 until 1979.
The 18 sites present within the parcel are assessed as significant solely for their information
content. These sites have been adequately documented and no further work or preservation is
recommended. Although extensive subsurface testing did not identify subsurface cultural deposits or
burials, it is recommended that any future development-related land disturbance be archaeologically
monitored during the initial site work because significant deposits and burials were found on the adjacent
property. The monitoring would be guided by a monitoring plan prepared for DLNR-SHPD review and
approval.
CONTENTS
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1
Scope of Work ........................................................................................................ 1
Project Area Description ........................................................................................... 1
Field Methods ........................................................................................................ 4
Archaeological and Historical Background ................................................................................. 6
Historical Documentary Research ................................................................................. 6
Previous Archaeological Work .................................................................................... 13
Project Expectations .......................................................................................................... 18
Findings ......................................................................................................................... 19
Site Descriptions ..................................................................................................... 19
Subsurface Testing ................................................................................................... 57
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 64
Discussion ............................................................................................................. 64
Significance Assessments .......................................................................................... 68
Recommended Treatments ........................................................................................ 69
References .................................................................................................................... 70
ILLUSTRATIONS
.......................................... Figure 1 . Portion of 1996 USGS Koloa Quadrangle showing Project Area 2
Figure 2 . Tax Map Key 2-8-2 1 showing Project Area .................................................................. 3
Figure 3 . Project Area Overview ......................................................................................... 5
Figure 4 . Project Area Overview ......................................................................................... 5
Figure 5 . 1935 Map of Kdoa Plantation ................................................................................ 10
Figure 6 . 1961 Photograph of LORAN Station Facility ............................................................... 12
....................................... Figure 7 . 1966 Photograph of LORAN Station Staff and Adjacent Property 12
Figure 8 . Previous Archaeological Work ............................................................................... 14
Figure 9 . The Basic Schematic of the Kdoa Field System .......................................................... 16
Figure 10 . Raised 'auwai in the Kdoa Field System ................................................................. 16
Figure 11 . Site Location Map ............................................................................................ 20
Figure 12 . Plan Map of Site 2130 Complex ............................................................................. 22
Figure 13 . Plan Map of Site 2130, Features A-F ....................................................................... 23
Figure 14 . Site 2130, Feature G Staircase ............................................................................... 24
........................................................... Figure 15 . Site2130, FeatureHRoadandFeatureIDitch 25
Figure 16 . Site 2130, Feature J Path ..................................................................................... 25
ILLUSTRATIONS (cont.)
Figure 17 . Site 2130. Feature K Wall ................................................................................. 26
Figure 18 . Site 2 130. Feature L Path ................................................................................. 27
Figure 19 . Site 2130, Feature M Concrete Pad with Vertical Poles .............................................. 27
Figure 20 . Site 2130. Feature N Concrete Box ...................................................................... 28
Figure 21 . Site 2130, Feature 0 Walled Concrete Slab ............................................................ 28
................................. Figure 22 . 196 1 Photograph of LORAN Station Showing Identified Features 30
Figure 23 . Site 213 1, Feature A Concrete and Stone Block ....................................................... 31
Figure 24 . Site 2 13 1. Feature B Concrete Blocks ................................................................... 32
Figure 25 . Site 2 13 1, Feature C Terrace .............................................................................. 32
Figure 26 . Site 213 1, Feature D Terrace ............................................................................... 33
................................... Figure 27 . Site 213 1, Feature E Concrete Pad and Feature F Artifact Scatter 33
Figure 28 . Site 2132, Feature B Concrete and Stone Block ........................................................ 35
Figure 29 . Site 2133, Feature A and B Concrete Pads .............................................................. 35
Figure 30 . Site 2133, Feature C Concrete Pad ........................................................................ 36
Figure 3 1 . Site 2 134 Concrete Post .................................................................................... 36
Figure 32 . Site 2135. Feature A Concrete Block ..................................................................... 38
Figure 33 . Site 2135, Feature B Concrete Pad with Inscription ................................................... 38
Figure 34 . Site 2135, Feature C Artifact Scatter ..................................................................... 39
Figure 35 . Site 2135, Feature D Concrete Pad with Inscription .................................................... 39
Figure 36 . Site 2136, Feature A Concrete Pad ........................................................................ 40
Figure 37 . Site 2136, Feature B Artifact Scatter ..................................................................... 40
Figure 38 . Site 2 136. Feature B Engine ............................................................................... 41
Figure 39 . Site 2137, Feature A Concrete Block .................................................................... 41
. ................................................... Figure 40 Site 2137, Feature B Concrete Pad with Inscription 43
Figure 4 1 . Site 2 138 Jumbled Concrete Blocks ..................................................................... 43
Figure 42 . Site 2 139, Feature A Concrete Post ...................................................................... 44
Figure 43 . Site 2139, Feature B Concrete Block ..................................................................... 44
Figure 44 . Site 2 139, Feature C Concrete Pad ....................................................................... 46
Figure 45 . Site 2139, Feature D Concrete and Metal Post ......................................................... 46
Figure 46 . Site 2140 Concrete Block .................................................................................. 47
Figure 47 . Site 2 141 Concrete Pad .................................................................................... 47
. Figure 48 Site 2142 Concrete Pad .................................................................................... 48
Figure 49 . Site 2143, Feature A Concrete Slab ...................................................................... 48
Figure 50 . Site 2143. Feature B Retaining Wall ...................................................................... 50
ILLUSTRATIONS (cont.)
Figure 5 1 . Site 2 143. Feature C Concrete Pad ....................................................................... 50
Figure 52 . Site 2 144. Feature A Concrete Block .................................................................... 51
Figure 53 . Site 2144, Feature B Concrete Pad ....................................................................... 51
Figure 54 . Site 2144. Features C, D and E Concrete Pads ......................................................... 52
Figure 55 . Site 2144, Feature D Concrete Pad with Inscription .................................................... 52
Figure 56 . Site 2145. Feature A and B Concrete Pads ............................................................. 54
Figure 57 . Site 2146, Feature A Concrete Block .................................................................... 54
Figure 58 . Site 2146. Feature B Concrete Pad ....................................................................... 55
Figure 59 . Site 2147 Concrete Pads ................................................................................... 55
Figure 60 . Concrete Pad at Site 2 147 ................................................................................. 56
Figure 6 1 . Concrete Pad at Site 2 147 ................................................................................. 56
Figure 62 . West Face Profiles of TUs 1-5 ............................................................................ 59
Figure 63 . West Face Profiles of TUs 6-10 ......................................................................... A0
Figure 64 . West Face Profiles of TUs 1 1 - 15 ........................................................................ 61
Figure 65 . West Face Profiles of TUs 16-20 ......................................................................... 62
Figure 66 . Post-excavation of TU-3 ................................................................................... 63
Figure 67 . Post-excavation of TU-6 ................................................................................... 63
Figure 68 . Distribution of Associates Features within Project Area .............................................. 67
TABLES
Table 1 . Summary of Previous Archaeological Research ............................................................ 15
Table 2 . Summary of Identified Sites ................................................................................... 21
Table 3 . Summary of Test Unit Stratigraphy .......................................................................... 58
Table 4 . Summary of Concrete Objects ............................................................................... .65
INTRODUCTION
At the request of CIRI Land Development Company, Haun & Associates has prepared an
archaeological inventory survey of the 13.6-acre TMK: (4) 2-8-02 1 :O4l located in Weliweli Ahupua'a,
Kdoa District, Island of Kaua'i (Figures 1 and 2). The objective of the survey was to satisfy historic
preservation regulatory review requirements of the Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic
Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD), as contained within Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 13, DLNR,
Subtitle 13, State Historic Preservation Rules (2003).
The survey fieldwork was conducted April 3-7, 20 1 1 by Project Supervisors Solomon and Juliana
Kailihiwa, B.A., under the direction of Dr. Alan Haun. The fieldwork required 160 person hours to
complete. Described in this final report are the project scope of work, field methods, background
information, survey findings, and significance assessments of the sites with recommended further
treatments.
Scope of Work
Based on DLNR-SHPD rules for inventory surveys, the following specific tasks were determined
to constitute an appropriate scope of work for the project:
1. Conduct background review and research of existing archaeological and historical
documentary literature relating to the project area and its immediate vicinity--including
examination of Land Commission Awards, ahupua'a records, historic maps, archival
materials, archaeological reports, and other historical sources;
2. Conduct a high intensity, 100% pedestrian survey coverage of the project area;
3. Conduct detailed recording of all potentially significant sites including scale plan
drawings, written descriptions, and photographs, as appropriate;
4. Conduct subsurface testing (manual excavation) at selected sites as necessary to
determine site function and elsewhere to test for buried cultural deposits;
5. Analyze background research and field data; and
6. Prepare and submit Final Report.
Project Area Description
The project area is an irregularly-shaped 13.6-acre parcel located in coastal Weliweli Ahupua'a at
Makahuena Point. It is bordered by the coastline along the south and by resort developments to the west
(Makahuena at Po'ipii) and northeast (The Point at Po'ipii). Pe'e Road parallels the north project boundary
in the western portion. The project area varies in elevation from c. 10 to 45 ft above sea level. Rainfall in
the project area vicinity ranges from 30 to 40 inches per year (Juvik and Juvik 1998:56).
There is a large oval-shaped depression present in the western portion of the project area. This
depression is 138.0 m long (north-northwest by south-southeast), 82.0 m wide and c. 10.0 m depth below
the surrounding ground surface. This depression occupies c. 1.99-acres or 14.6% of the total project area.
This depression appears to represent a collapsed volcanic crater. A modem navigational aid consisting of
an automated light is located in the southwestern coastal portion of the project area within a separate tax
map key parcel (2-8-02 1 :43 - see Figure 2).
The vegetation within the depression portion of the project area is comprised of koa haole
(Leucaena glauca), bougainvillea (Boerhavia spectabilis Willd.), panini cactus (Opuntia fmmindica),
plumera (Plumeria acuminata Ait.), lantana (Lantana camara L.) and grasses and vines. There is a line of
ironwood trees (Casuarine equisetifolia L.) present along the northern project boundary paralleling Pe'e
Road. The vegetation throughout the remainder of the parcel primarily consists of beach naupaka
(naupaka-kahakai - Scaevola sericea Vahl).
The soil through the inland portion of the parcel is comprised of Koloa stony silty clay on 15-25%
slopes. This soil has a medium runoff potential and a moderate to severe erosion hazard. It developed in
material weathered from basic igneous rock with multiple layers of silty clay to depths of 20 inches over
pahoehoe bedrock (Foote et al. 1972:74). It is classified as suitable for irrigated sugarcane, pasture,
woodland and wildlife habitat. The coastal portions of the parcel are classified as Rock land, which is
defined by Foote et al. as, "areas where exposed bedrock covers more than 90 percent of surface
(1972:119). Project area overviews are presented in Figures 3 and 4.
Field Methods
The project area was subjected to a 100% surface examination with surveyors spaced at 10 meter
intervals. Ground surface visibility was fair within the more vegetated depression portion of the project
area, although was excellent throughout the remainder of the parcel.
The identified sites and features were subjected to varying levels of documentation. The length,
width, height and orientation of the majority of the concrete features within the parcel were obtained using
hand tapes and compasses. The large complex in the northwestern portion of the project area was subjected
to detailed recording consisting of the completion of a scaled plan map and standardized sitelfeature forms.
All sites and features were photographed.
The location of the sites and features within the project area were plotted on a scaled project area
map with the aid of hand-held Garmin Global Positioning System (GPS) Model 60 devices using the NAD
83 datum. The accuracy of these GPS devices for a single point is +I- 3-5 m. This accuracy is increased to
less than c. 2-3 meters by taking multiple points including property comers and overlying the plotted points
on a scaled map using AutoCAD software.
The sites, as defmed for this study, consist of features situated less than 15 m apart. Features located
more than 15 m apart were assigned separate site designations. The only exception to the 15 m distance threshold
was a site designation applied to a series of widely scattered, nearly identical small concrete pads that were
poured directly onto the exposed, coastal bedrock surface.
Subsurface testing consisted of the excavation of twenty 0.5 m by 0.5 m test units in the inland
portions of the project area, inland of coastal lava areas. The units were excavated in arbitrary levels within
stratigraphic layers and were terminated on bedrock or within an overlying, culturally sterile saprolitic clay
deposit. Standardized excavation records were prepared after the completion of each stratigraphic layer. The soil
removed during excavation was screened through % "mesh. Portable remains collected were placed in paper bags
labeled with the appropriate provenience information. Following the excavation, a section drawing depicting the
stratigraphy was prepared and post-excavation photographs were taken. Cultural remains recovered during
testing were transported to Haun & Associates' office for analysis.
Figure 3. Projcct Area Overview, view to southeast
Figure 4. Project Area Overview, view to northeast
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Historical Documentary Research
Weliweli Ahupua'a is situated in Kdoa District on Kaua'i's southern coast. It is bordered by
Kbloa Ahupua'a to the east and Pg'B Ahupua'a to the west. The word weliweli is a reduplication of weli
that means "violent, dreadful, horrible, fearful, ferocious; revered; respectful, as of the chief; [or] full of
fear" depending upon the context (Pukui and Elbert 1986:384). Relatively little legendary and historical
information about Weliweli Ahupua'a is available.
One specific mention of Weliweli concerns the legendary gourd of La'amaomao, a calabash that
the winds of Hawai'i were stored in. This calabash belonged to Paka'a, a servant of Keawenuiaumi, the
son of 'Umi and a ruling chief of Hawai'i Island. The gourd was named after Paka'a's mother,
La'amaomao, who had the ability to control the winds because the winds listened to her (Fornander
1918:72). Kuapaka'a, son of Paka'a, called to all of the winds from all of the islands when he first meets
his father's master, Keawenuiaumi, to discredit the advisers that have replaced Paka'a at the king's side. In
his chant to the winds, Kuapaka'a named the wind that blows through Weliweli, Kuiamanini (Fornander
1918:96).
Additional information relating to Weliweli is derived from the history of Kbloa District, formerly
known as Kona District, and the adjoining ahupua'a of Kbloa and Pg'g. Kbloa is the closest part of Kaua'i
to O'ahu and was a desirable canoe landing to mount an invasion of Kaua'i. Westervelt (1917) records the
story of a late 13" Century Hawai'i Island chief (ali'i) named Kalauniuohua, who sought to unite all of the
islands under his rule. Before undertakirig his conquest of the islands, he attempted to sacrifice a
prophetess by the name of Waahia (ibid.). Waahia came to the chief and told him how to kill her so that
her sacrifice would insure success in his campaign.
You may try everywhere to kill me and I shall not die. There is only one place. This is
the temple of Keeku. Burn that temple in the fire then I shall die. When you burn that
place you stay quietly in your house from morning till night. Do not go outside. If you
hear the outcry of the people seeing strange signs in the sky, do not go out to see. Do not
open the doors of your house. If you do these things you shall not live. Wait patiently in
your house until night comes, then open the door. If you obey perfectly you shall have
all the islands even to Kauai. If not, the gods shall leave you. The name of my god is
Kane-opepe-nui-o-Alakai [The great bundled-up man of Alakai]. He is willing that I
should die (Westervelt 19 17).
Kalauniuohua followed Waahia's instructions and stayed inside his house after she was thrown
into the temple of Keeku and burned. The people that witnessed Waahia's death saw various signs rise up
out of her funeral pyre: two roosters fighting, a pig, scintillating thunder clouds that changed color and
finally two large black clouds that turned into giant alae birds [Gallinula chloropus sandvicensis] fighting
each other. The chief wanted to see what has happening outside of his house. Lightning was striking
wherever the buds' feet touched the ground and the people were shouting loudly at this spectacle. It was
near sundown when Kalauniuohua could no longer help himself and made a hole in the wall of his house
with his right hand. The buds flew away as the chief heard a voice say to him, "You have kept from sunrise
to near sundown. Then you lost the time until night. You shall win for a time and then lose" (Westervelt
1917).
Kalauniuohua went on to conquer Maui, Molokai, and O'ahu. He took the rulers of these islands
as prisoners and took them with him to conquer Kaua'i. They landed at Kiiloa and were defeated by the
Kaua'i ruler, Kukona in the battle named Ka-wele-wele or "the battle after refusing to fulfill the command
of the gods" (ibid.). Kukona freed the chiefs from Maui, Molokai and O'ahu, and took Kalauniuohua as a
prisoner. Kalauniuohua was eventually freed. Kukona gifted the islands of Hawai'i, Maui, Molokai, and
O'ahu to the chief of Maui and kept the other three rulers on Kaua'i, where, Westervelt says, "they were
lost or mixed with the people, their followers from the other islands changing even the language of old
Kauai so that it became more like the speech of the other islands" (ibid.).
According to a story told to Augustus Knudsen (1913) by a man named Puako, Kamehameha I
was also defeated at the same site as Kalauniuohua by the forces of Kaumuali'i. Knudsen recounts that in
1893 he met with two or three of men from Kaua'i that were alive during this battle between
Kamehameha's forces and the people of Kaua'i.
But in 1893 I had two or three of the old men gathered around telling stories of ancient
Hawaii, and again they told me the story so that I got it direct from the lips of men who,
while not participating in the battle, had participated in the excitement of the day and the
thousands giving offerings in the temples when next day the victory was celebrated
(Knudsen 191 3: 137).
Puako describes that upon hearing of Kamehameha's conquest of O'ahu the people of Kaua'i were
worried about an impending attack from Kamehameha. Warriors were posted to keep watch for
Kamehameha's invasion force which they expected to land "on the Kona coast, where there was smooth
sea for the landing and where, in case of defeat, the canoes putting to sea would not have to battle with
wind and wave" (ibid:137-138). Kamehameha's invasion force was observed in the early hours of the
morning before dawn and the word was spread around the Island of Kaua'i. The warriors of Kaua'i were
then assembled to meet Kamehameha's forces before the sun came up.
But in the gloom of the darkness before dawn, the chiefs, gathered at Koloa, decided that
they had a sufficient force, for the warriors of Weliweli had reconnoitered and again
reported that there were probably not more than six thousand warriors on the beach. And
so the march was started and before dawn the attack made on the resting warriors, who
had dragged the their canoes above the reach of the high surf (ibid: 138).
The forces of Kaua'i enveloped the invading force and handily routed the forces of Kamehameha.
Puako even states that the forces of Kaua'i came very close to capturing Kamehameha's feathered image of
his war god, which Puako named as Kalaipilhoa. "Kalaipahoa, the war god that carried the standards of
Kamehameha triumphantly through the battles of his conquest of the whole archipelago, was for the first
time in danger. To lose that was to lose the kingdom; and probably the dynast was then in peril" (ibid:
139). Kamehameha's casualties for this battle included one half of his canoe fleet either destroyed or
captured, 4000 men dead on the field and 543 men taken as prisoners of war (ibid : 139, 140).
Stokes (1946) questions the veracity Puako's story recorded by Knudsen. He asserts that
Kaumuali'i would not have been in charge of Kaua'i when Kamehameha's aborted attempt on the island
occurred. According to Joesting (1987) Keawe and Kaumuali'i were battling over control for the island at
the time of Kamehameha's first attempt to land on Kaua'i.
Strife-tom Kauai could have offered little resistance to the invasion armada of
Kamehameha. Keawe had declared to Captain Bishop that he would join the forces of
Kamehameha if he had not defeated Kaumualii by the time the invasion came, and in
April 1796 the two were still battling for control of Kauai. If it had not been for the
winds and currents of the wild Kaieie Waho Channel, Kauai would certainly have fallen
to the forces of Kamehameha (Joesting 198759-60).
The second point that Stokes makes is that Puako incorrectly names Kamehameha's war god as
KBlaipilhoa (Stokes 1946). Kamehameha's war god was an akua huh (feathered god) named Kukailimoku
that was bequeathed to him by his uncle, Kalaniopu'u, the mo'i (ruling chief) of Hawai'i Island, on
Kalaniopu'u's death bed. KBlaipZhoa was Kamehameha's poison god cut from a kdaip6hoa tree
(Alphitonia ponderosa) on Molokai (Westervelt 1916:74). KBlaipilhoa was a carved wooden image that
"had an elliptical cavity in its back, extending from neck to buttocks, to hold poison" (Krauss 1993: 114).
Stokes also argues that Puako was most likely relating the story of Kalauniuohua's defeat rather
than Kamehameha's defeat (Stokes 1946:43). Stokes adds:
Nevertheless the improbability or impossibility of the affair is clearly shown by the
journal entries of foreigners recorded at Kauai immediately before and after the time of
the alleged event. Information gathered by reliable authorities more than a century ago
proves that the raconteur was ignorant of the name of the chief, and of the current history
and native customs of the time in which he claimed to have lived, and implies that then
he was not even born" (Stokes1946:45).
According to the dates and ages given by Knudsen for his informant, Puako, he would have been
well over 100 years of age. Kamehameha's first attempt at invading Kaua'i took place in the spring of
1796. Puako claimed to have been 12 years of age at that time when he witnessed the events described.
Knudsen recorded the story told to him by Puako in 1893, which means that Puako had to be the unlikely
age of 109 when he told Knudsen his story. According to Kamakau (1 992), Kamehameha's invading forces
never reached Kaua'i, thwarted by rough seas in the channel between the island and 'Oahu that swamped
many canoes forcing them to retreat.
In the summer of 1867, Sanford B. Dole wrote a letter to Jeffiies Wyman, Hersey Professor of
Anatomy at Harvard College detailing the large number human remains that could be found at Keoneloa
(Wyman 1868). Dole mentions that the remains could be the result of a large battle that took place at this
location and describes events similar to that of Puako's story. He has no specifics such as where the
invading army was from or who was its leader because the people from the area did not know. Dole also
states that due to the large number of infant burials associated with the area that these remains could be
from a plague that swept through the islands after initial contact.
Dear Sir:
On the Southern shore of the Island of Kauai, for about four miles, there is a series of
low, volcanic hills facing the sea, with precipices varying in height from twenty to sixty
feet. Between these hills are several low sand beaches, from which the sand is ever
carried inland by the trades. The windward slopes of these hills are covered with white
sand of varying depth.
Over this whole extent of sand beaches and hills, human bones are thickly
scattered, and here it was that I collected the skulls. Ten years ago they were much more
numerous than now. The wind is constantly uncovering the skeletons, and, when
exposed, they are quickly destroyed by the weather and the feet of cattle. At the time I
speak of, it was easy to find perfect skeletons in the exact position in which they were
buried. This is now impossible, and even perfect crania are becoming more scarce with
every year. In olden times the natives often made use of the soft sand-banks for
sepulture, but the immense number that was buried here forbids the idea that it was any
common burying place. The present generations of natives know nothing definite on the
subject. One of their traditions, as near as I can remember, is, that a fight between two
large fleets of canoes took place off the coast, and that the defeated party was driven
ashore at this place, and many of them killed. A second tradition is this; a tribe passing
along the coast in canoes, and having landed in a secluded little cove which is now
pointed out, to bathe and refresh themselves, a rival tribe charged down from the hills
around and cut off almost the whole party.
Those who have studied the subject, I think, give to the great pestilence, Mai
Ahulau, which raged through the islands soon after their discovery, the credit of peopling
this and other similar graveyards. Infant skulls are sometimes found, and also skulls that
appear as if they had been pierced by spears, or fractured with clubs. The skulls which I
collected for you were some of them above, and some below, the surface of the sand.
Yours Truly,
S.B. Dole. (ibid 447,450)
Wyman analyzed the crania that he received from Dole. He concluded that there was no evidence
of death from violent trauma and that some of the crania showed signs of periosteal inflammation giving
credence to the cause of death being from disease.
The collection is the more valuable, from the fact that the crania were all
obtained from the same place, and from an island not commonly mentioned in the
catalogues. Dr. J. Barnard Davis, in his Thesaurus Craniorum, out of one hundred and
thirty-nine Kanaka skulls, does not mention one from Kauai. They are nearly all adult,
No. 13 being the only one belonging to a child. As far as they go, they do not afford
evidence of having been killed in battle, as they bear no marks of injuries inflicted by
weapons. A few show signs of disease, as if they had been the seat of periosteal
inflammation (ibid 450).
The first historical documentation of the Island of Kaua'i was by Captain James Cook during his
voyage to the Pacific Ocean to determine the practicability of a northern passage between Europe and Asia
(Cook 1784). Cook anchored and went ashore at the southern end of Kaua'i and describes his admiration
for the fields of taro, sweet potato, sugar and banana. Cook also notes that while there is an abundance of
food being grown, the area is capable of sustaining a much larger population.
What we saw of their agriculture, furnished sufficient proofs that they are not
novices in that art. The vale ground has already been mentioned as one continued
plantation of taro, and a few other things, which have all the appearance of being well
attended to. The potatoe fields, and spots of sugar-cane, or plantains, on the higher
grounds, are planted with the same regularity; and always in some determinate figure;
generally as a square or oblong; but neither these nor the others, are inclosed with any
kind of fence, unless we reckon the ditches in the low grounds such; which, it is more
probable, are intended to convey water to the taro. The great quantity and goodness of
these articles may also, perhaps, be as much attributed to skillfid culture, as to natural
fertility of soil, which seems better adapted to them than to bread-hit and cocoa-nut
trees; the few of which we saw of those latter not being in a thriving state, which will
sufficiently account for the preference given to the culture of the other article, though
more labour be required to produce them. But notwithstanding this skill in agriculture,
the general appearance of the island shewed [showed], that it was capable of much more
extensive improvement, and of maintaining, at least, three times the number of
inhabitants that are at present upon it; for the far greater part of it, that now lies quite
waste, seemed to be as good a soil as those parts of it that are in cultivation. We must
therefore conclude, that these people, from some cause, which we were not long enough
amongst them to be able to trace, do not increase in that proportion, which it would make
necessary to avail themselves of the extent of their island, toward raising a greater
quantity of its vegetable productions for their subsistence (Cook 1784:244-245).
In 1839, John K. Townsend visited the Kbloa region of Kaua'i. He describes it as being well
maintained agriculturally much like the Island of O'ahu, which he visited before Kaua'i.
This part of the island of Kauai exhibits no particularly interesting features: from
the beach to the mission station there is a good road made by the natives over a gentle
ascent of about two miles, on each side of which taro patches, yam, and maize fields
abound. Back from the ocean at right angles with it, are seen several ranges of long, high
hills, with narrow valleys between; the hills are covered with low trees of Tu-tui and
Pandanus, and the valleys with dense bushes, tall ferns, and broad leaved bananas
(Townsend 1839:206).
Organized sugar plantations began in the 1830s in the Kbloa District when local Chinese built a
mill in Miihii'ulepii to grind sugar grown in the area. This operation went out of business once Ladd & Co.
began operations a few years later in 1835 (Yorck et al. 2005: 10). Kbloa became a center of commerce,
initially provisioning whaling ships and later, the California gold rush in the 1850s. In 1857, sweet potato
production reached 10,000 barrels annually at Koloa. The crop furnished nearly all the potatoes sent to
California from Hawaii (Judd 1935:326).
Ladd & Co. negotiated a lease with Kamehameha I11 and Kaikioewa, governor of Kaua'i, for
almost 1,000 acres at KBloa in 1835. The lease was a 50 year lease at $300 a month (Ching 1985). After
10 years Dr. Robert W. Wood became the sole owner of Ladd & Co. and renamed it Koloa Plantation
(ibid.; Figure 5). In 1855 Royal Patent1754 was issued to Dr. Wood giving him clear title to the entirety of
PB'B Ahupua'a, which he bought from Pi'ikoi, who was awarded the majority of the PB'B as LCA 10605,
and upland portions of Weliweli Ahupua'a (Alexander 198554).
Figure 5. 1935 Map of Kdoa Plantation.
Sugar production diverted water away from the traditional crops and caused most of the other
plantations to become dry and brown. Weliweli suffered from the loss of water and is described as follows:
Weliweli is about like Pa'a (very dry, bananas, yams, and bananas were planted in the
gulches). Both of these narrow land sections lie on a slight seaward promontory,
Makahuena Point. W. C. Bennett (1 93 1, p. 1 18) found an irrigation ditch and terraces,
indicating that there used to be some wet taro grown in an area which is now dry.
Desiccation may have been partly caused by clearing the woodland when the first sugar
plantation on Kauai was established (Handy et al. 1991 :427-428).
One Land Commission Award (LCA) was granted in Weliweli in the 'ili of Kahoana to Punipu. It
consisted of dry lo 'i (taro paddies), a kula (field) and house lot. The rest of Weliweli was reserved as
government land (Harnmatt and Toenjes 1991). Testimony in support of Punipu's land claim for LCA 5219
was provided by Pohina:
Pohina, sworn, says, I know the land of [the] Clmt [claimant]. It is in the ahupuaa of
Weliweli, and ili of "Kahoana" lua. It consists of several dry loi, a kula and house lot.
[Hala] is planted in some places (Papakilo Database).
In 1870, Eliza Sinclair bought most of Kbloa Ahupu'a and gave it as a dowry to his daughter Anne
and her husband Valdemar Knudsen. After Vlademar's death the land was leased initially to Grove Farm
and later the McBryde Sugar Company (Mitchell et al. 2005). The McBryde Sugar Company was created
by Benjamin Dillingham in the 1890s from lands previously controlled by the Kbloa Agricultural
Company, 'Ele'ele Plantation and Waiawa Ranch (ibid.). The company was able to expand lands under
cultivation through development of railroad transportation system in the late 1800s to early 1900s. Kbloa
Plantation was sold to Grove Farm Co. in 1948 (Smith 1991 in Walker and Goodfellow 1991).
In 1908 a lighthouse was established in the seaward portion of project area by the Lighthouse
Service, which at that time was part of the U.S Commerce and Labor Department (www.us1hs.org). In
1914, the facility is described in lighthouse records as a white house with a 40 ft high lead-colored mast
and a red fixed light. Between 1930 and 1951 the facility is described as a 20 ft high white pyramidal
concrete tower with a white light flashing every 6 seconds. In 1984, it is characterized as an "NR on pole"
and in 1988 and 2004 as a "NB on a post". Both were 20 ft high with white lights flashing every 2.5
seconds.
During World War I1 a Long Range Navigation (LORAN) system was developed at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology under the supervision of the National Defense Research Council.
LORAN used radio waves and gave ships the ability to triangulate their locations hundreds of miles from a
transmitting station (USCG 1946). In the spring of 1944, Construction Detachment C began construction of
a LORAN monitoring station, Unit 207, at near Port Allen, Kaua'i. Once testing of the LORAN station
was completed it was turned over to the District Coast Guard Officer of the 14' Naval District on
November 8, 1944 (ibid: 65). The Port Allen LORAN facility was disestablished in 1948.
In 1951, following an initial site survey in 1950, a new station for a LORAN-A receiver was
established by the Coast Guard at Makahuena Point in the project area (loran-history.info). The first
commanding officer was Lt. Harley E. Dilcher. The facility was "on air" as a "dual rate low power" station
in December 1951 and was operational as a "dual rate high power" facility on October 25, 1952 (ibid.).
Figure 6 depicts the facility in 1961. The photograph shows 5-6 buildings including a two story structure
that was built in the inland portion of the large depression on the property. The large, 280 ft high antenna is
situated seaward of the buildings. A website for Coast Guard veterans (fkedsplace.org) includes a reference
to the construction of a barbeque facility in 1974 that is still present today. The barbeque was constructed in
the vicinity of the sign and flagpole shown in a 1966 photograph (Figure 7). The station, known as
LORSTA Kaua'i was disestablished in 1979 (ibid.).
After the LORAN station was closed, the former Coast Guard facility was utilized by Hale 'Opio,
Inc., a private nonprofit organization, that provides youth-oriented social services. The organization
relocated following Hurricane Iwa that devastated the Island of Kaua'i in 1982 (Burgess, pers.
communication). Since Hurricane Iwa, the project area has been vacant.
Archival research and interviews conducted for a cultural impact assessment of the property
(Kailihiwa et al. 201 1) documented traditional cultural resources in the vicinity of the project area. The
area is known as a place of bountiful fish. Local fishermen continue to gather hcl 'uke 'uke (sea urchin) and
'opihi (limpet), and to catch awa (milkfish), akule (big-eyed scad fish), moi (thread fish), '6 'io (bonefish),
he'e (octopus), and ula (spiny lobster). Formerly, depressions were made from clay soil in the vicinity to
evaporate seawater and obtain salt. Community members continue to conduct cultural protocols at
KZne'aukai Heiau, every October during the makahiki season, and at a large sand dune burial site. Both
sites are situated mauka (inland) of the project area within the grounds of The Point at Po'ipti.
Figure 6. 1961 Photograph of LORAN Station Facility (fi-om www.lo~a~~-histoy.info), view to south
Figure 7. 1966 Photograph or LUKAIV >ration Starr ana ~ctjacent Property (mom www.lordn-mstory.inro)
view to north-northeast
Previous Archaeological Research
A search of DLNR-SHPD archaeological report database and other sources identified more than
30 archaeological studies for the Kbloa District. Figure 5 shows the locations of the projects and Table I
summarizes the projects. Not included in the table are the studies by Thrum (1906), Bennett (1931),
Kikuchi (1963) and Ching et al. (1974).
Thrum (1906) compiled a list of heiau on the islands of Kauai and Oahu. He identified two
ceremonial sites in the project area vicinity. Weliweli Heiau is situated in the Land of Weliweli and
Waiopili Heiau is in MBhB'ulepii. According to Thnim, Waiopili Heiau measures 60 by 40 ft and Weliweli
Heiau is a "...paved heiau of large size, pookanaka class; walls 4 feet high; portions of same said to be still
standing" (1906:36). Thrum reported that Weliweli Heiau was covered with stones cleared from an
adjacent sugarcane field.
Bennett (1931) conducted a survey of archeological sites on Kaua'i for the Bishop Museum in
1928-1929. He recorded several sites in the general vicinity of the project area, including Weliweli Heiau,
which he designated as Site 83. Additional sites documented by Bennett consisted of sand dune burials
(Site 82) and a petroglyph complex (Site 84) at Keoneloa Beach.
In 1963, Kikuchi conducted an archaeological survey of the coastal lands in Kbloa District. He
noted several sites in the project vicinity consisting of the Keoneloa Dune Burials, which he assigned State
Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP) site number 97, the Keoneloa Beach Petroglyphs (Site 98) and
Weliweli Heiau (Site 99). He also identified a series of walls designated as Site 100. These sites were also
examined by Ching et al. (1974) during a survey of the coastal lands of MBhB'ulepii, PB'B and Weliweli.
The surveys in Table I cover over 3,100 acres identifying 154 sites with 457 features. To aid in
reconstructing settlement patterns, features were quantified by probable age and function. Traditional
Hawaiian features were categorized as habitation, agricultural, ritual and burial. Density per acre values
are given for the sites and features. Overall, the studies have identified 253 habitation features, 293
agricultural features, 43 burials and possible burials and 15 ritual features. Historic features were not
segregated by function. Miscellaneous features are comprised of petroglyphs, salt pans and bait cups. The
historic features are generally associated with the sugarcane industry or ranching activity.
One of the most notable sites in the region is the Kbloa Field System, a modem term used to
describe the large system of agricultural fields that formerly extended from LBwa'i to Weliweli and served
as the main food source for the people of the Kdoa district (Mitchell et al. 2005). The Kbloa Field System
is atypical for Hawai'i because it is an irrigated system that is not topographically restricted to the confines
of a valley. It is spread out over the broad plain of Kbloa District that is broken up by ridges formed by lava
channels (ibid). The irrigation ditches ('auwai) that watered the fields were constructed along the crests of
the ridges, extending from Waikomo Stream for distances of nearly 2,400 m (ibid).
In its simplest form, the Kbloa Field System was a series of parallel 'auwai with a network of
feeder ditches branching off the main 'auwai to irrigate the agricultural fields (Figure 9). Aqueducts were
constructed within the system to convey water over low-lying ground (Figure 10). The field system is
estimated to have covered at least 700 acres. It is likely that the acreage is much higher, but evidence of the
system has been destroyed by commercial sugarcane cultivation (ibid).
Several projects conducted in the vicinity of the project area were surveys of large parcels that
ranged in area fkom 210 acres to more than 1,400 acres in extent. Walker and Rosendahl(1990) conducted
an inventory survey of approximately 210 acres for the Hyatt Regency Kauai in the adjacent Land of PB'B.
This survey identified 12 sites with 14 component features consisting of two habitation sites, four
ceremonial sites, three walls assigned a boundary function and two indeterminate mounds.
Table 1. Summary of Previous Archaeological Work - Sites pr acre - 0.18 - 0.75 acre T Total sites Hab Feu Ritua Feu Author Pention bd (*ANsL) Comment Found subsurface deposit during exavation and auger coring. - Subnilled 3 radiocarbon samples with dates ranging from AD 1282-1414 to 1678-1940. Coastal Coastal i Hamnatt el a1 (1993b) I Koloa IAS,EXMO~ 1 0-10 Kikuchi (1980,1988). NeUcr (1981). Walkeret a1 (1992) Paa RN.EXDR 0-10 Identiifed Kconeloa Sand Dune Burials, Kaneauhi (Weliweli) Heiau and Keoneloa Beach Petroglyphs Walker and Rosendahl(l990). Firor and Rosendahl(1992) IS 0-70 Coastal I Hyatt Regency Kauai Cmve Farm Coastal, Lower slopes Dockall el a1 (2005) Koloa IS 5-10 0% et al. (2003) Koloa IS 5-20 Hamnatt (1989a. b, 19%. b) Weliweli, Paa IS 20-30 Identitied fishpond and agricultural features Identified coastal sah pans and bait cups potentially Coastal Lowerslopes representing knnetts (1931) Site 76 havatrions wuhin dune deposits contammg nultrple bunals Survey along Poipu Road Subsurface testing at 2 sites with no cuhual remms Creed et al. 199 Yorck el al 004 Koloa Hamtlatt (1992). Hanrmatt el aL 1993a Koloa RN. IS Palam (1973). Landrum(l984). Koloa, Lawai Hanrmatt el al. (1988) 20-300 Large pottions bulldozed Coastal, Hamnatt et aL (1988) survey encompasses previous studies fanmatt el a1 (1978,1991). Van Ryzin and Hamnatt @OW), Tukbin and Koloa IS 40-160 Hamnan (2005). Yorcket aL (2005) Coastal Lower slopes Viage at Poi'pu Project Area Overlapping Project Areas -Identified a total of5 sites ncluding a flum, two water diversion walk, a habitation ~ite and a habitation burialsite - Walker and Goodfellow WaO.randC.odfdow(l99l). I Mahau*u I IS 1 Wigglesworh and Ciaves (1992) Ida et aL (1996) Weliweli, Koloa AS 180-240 Hill et a1 (2005) Koloa IS 180-205 Lowerslo es Lower slopes I? ' -IS- Inventory Survey, RN- Rcconnaissancc SYNCY, AS =Assessment, EX - Excavation, Mod
Figure 10. Raised 'auwai in the Kaloa Field System (from Mitchell et al., 2005:21).
Further data collection was subsequently undertaken within the Walker and Rosendahl (1990)
project area by Firor (1992). This additional work consisted of plane table mapping, surface collection,
photography and excavations. Charcoal collected from these excavations was submitted for radiometric
age determination. One sample yielded a modem date, with the 19 additional samples producing dated age
ranges spanning the period between AD 650 and 1954 with most ranges falling between AD 1170 and
1818.
In 1990, Firor et al. (1991) conducted an inventory survey of a c. 1,430-acre parcel situated in the
Lands of PB'B and M&BCulepii. This study identified 31 sites with 38 component features. Feature
functions consisted of habitation (n=34), agriculture (3), ceremonial (I), burial (2), petroglyph (20) and
historic (6). The historic features consisted of an erosion control wall and five boundary walls.
A survey of a 196-acre parcel within the Land of Koloa was conducted by Cultural Surveys
Hawaii (Hammatt 1991). This project was preceded by a Hammatt (1978) reconnaissance survey of the
parcel. This survey identified 91 sites with 216 features. The features included 76 habitation features, 121
agricultural features, 1 burial feature and 18 historic features.
A survey of the c. 1,000-acre Kukui'ula Bay Planned Community in Kbloa and LBwa'i was
undertaken by Cultural Surveys Hawaii (Hammatt et al. 1988). This project included areas that were
previously surveyed by Palama (1973) and Landrum (1984). Fifty-seven sites with 235 features were
documented in this area. Feature functions consist of 135 habitation, 89 agricultural, 4 ceremonial, 1 burial
and 11 historic features.
Ladd (198 1) conducted archaeological surveys of four lighthouse sites for the U.S. Coast Guard in
1981. Makahuena Point was one of the four sites surveyed. Ladd noted that the project area had been
heavily impacted by bulldozer clearing activities, jeep trails, and construction activities (ibidl). Ladd
noted a midden scatter, various concrete pads, and a series of rocks that had been painted white outlining a
jeep trail (ibid7). According to Ladd, none of the identified remains met the significance criteria for
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility (ibid 2).
In 1991, Nancy McMahon (1991) conducted a synthesis of archaeological and historical literature
relating to the location of KBne'aukai Heiau. McMahon utilized 26 archaeological reports and historical
texts attempting to pin point the location of the heiau. The first mention of KBne'aukai in literature is in a
report written by a student attending Lahainaluna School in Maui in 1885; however, there is no detailed
description in the report. Archaeological studies of the area have assigned KZne'aukai three different
numbers, Site 83, Site 3089, and Site 477. Weliweli Heiau, Kauakahai'a fishing altar and Hali'i fishing
altar are all names that have been used in the area with KZne'aukai in various locations. McMahon
concluded that there is no empirical evidence that KZne'aukai is extant, and that it is only preserved in the
present through oral histories.
In April of 20 1 1, Haun & Associates conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the current
project area. The survey identified 18 sites with 128 features. The features consist of 98 concrete pads, 7
concrete blocks, 4 artifact scatters, 4 posts, 3 terraces, 3 slabs, 2 paths, 2 walls, and one each of the
following; ditch, road, stairs, utility box and walled slab. Most of these features are remnants of the U.S.
Coast Guard LORAN station that was in operation from 195 1 until 1979.
Subsurface testing consisted of twenty test units that were excavated throughout the inland portion
of the project area. These excavations ranged in depth from 0.08 to 0.4 m. Cultural remains recovered
from the excavations were limited to relatively recent (1900s) historic materials (glass, metal, wire). No
prehistoric sites or deposits were identified during the study.
PROJECT EXPECTATIONS
Based on background research prehistoric use of the project area is potentially evidenced by coastal
habitation sites dating to as early as the 1200s. Habitation sites would consist of platforms, enclosures, caves and
small walled shelters. Trails and petroglyphs may also be present. Unlike adjacent parcels, no sand dunes are
present within the project area, reducing the potential for subsurface burial features. Sites dating to the mid- to
late 1800s would primarily consist of ranching and agriculture-related features such as walls, corrals, and
clearing piles of stone associated with agriculture and pasture improvement.
Later historic utilization of the parcel would likely be evidenced by the remnants of U.S. federal
government navigation-related infrastructure. These remains could consist of concrete foundations, roads,
utilities and associated materials.
FINDINGS
The archaeological survey identified 18 sites with 128 features. The 128 features consist of 98
concrete pads, 7 concrete blocks, 4 artifact scatters, 4 posts, 3 terraces, 3 slabs, 2 paths, 2 walls, and one
each of the following; ditch, road, stairs, utility box and walled slab. Feature function consists of utility
(n=79), foundation (31), marker (3, transportation (4), boundary (I), disposal (I), recreation (I), soil
retention (I), water diversion (1) and indeterminate (4). The location of the sites is presented in Figure 11
and the sites are summarized in Table 2 and are described below. Subsurface testing was undertaken during
the project, consisting of the excavation of twenty 0.5 by 0.5 m test units. The results of these test
excavations are discussed below in a following section.
Standard measurements are used in the following descriptions, in addition to metric values, for
featureslsites likely built using that measurement system. Slabs are defined as formed concrete surfaces that
are usually rectangular and exceed 10 ft in maximum dimension. In most instances, slabs are structural
foundations that also sewed as interior floors. Pads are formed concrete surfaces that are smaller than slabs
in maximum dimension, less than 8 ft (most are less than 6 ft), and likely sewed a variety of functions as
foundations for small structures, footings for larger structures, and supports for equipment or utilities. Pads
that are greater than 2 ft in height are termed blocks.
Site Descriptions
Site 2130 is a complex of 15 features located in the northwestern portion of the project area,
seaward of Pe'e Road. The features consist of two concrete slabs (Features A and B), five concrete pads
(Features C-E and M), a set of concrete stairs (Feature G), an asphalt road (Feature H), a concrete ditch
(Feature I), two boulder and concrete paths (Features J and L), a mortared stone wall (Feature K) a buried
utility box (Feature N) and a walled slab (Feature 0). The overall site encompasses an overall area 125 m
long (northeast by southwest) and 72 m wide, an area of approximately 2.2 acres (Figure 12).
The Feature A and B concrete slabs are located on a level bench just below the rim of the large
depression (Figure 13). The main portion of Feature A is rectangular in shape and is 13' 7 W (4.16 m)
long (north-northwest by south-southeast) by 7' 11 72' (2.41 m) wide. The sides of the feature range in
height from 9 W (0.25 m) to 2' 5 %" (0.75 m). There is a rectangular projection at the southeast comer of
the main slab that is 4' 11 %" (1.51 m) long (north-northwest by south-southeast) and 1' 10" (0.56 m) wide.
A step is located below the projection to the southeast, measuring 3' 4 %" (1.21 m), 2' 7 %: (0.8 m) wide
and 1' 8 %" (0.53 m) in height above the surrounding ground surface A second step is situated at the
southeast end of the main slab, measuring 8' (2.44 m) long (east-northeast by west-southwest) and 2' 2 3/4"
(0.68 m) wide. The step is 1' 5 %" (0.44 m) high and 8 %" (0.22 m) below the surface of the main slab.
Electrical wires are present on the surface of the slab. A linear projection extends 9' 4 %" (2.85 m) to the
north-northwest from the northeast comer of Feature A. This projection is 9 %" (0.25 m) in height on the
west side and is level with the ground surface on the east. Features D and F are located adjacent to this
projection to the east.
The Feature B concrete slab is located 16' 1 W" (4.91 m) to the northeast of Feature B. The area
between the two slabs is level soil with concrete rubble. The main portion of Feature B is rectangular in
shape and is 14' 3 %" (4.36 m) long (north-northwest by south-southeast) by 7' 11 W (2.42 m) wide. The
sides range in height from 7 W (0.2 m) to 1' 7 %" (0.49 m) above the surrounding ground surface.
A rectangular projection is present along the east side of the slab, measuring 8 %" (0.22 m) long
north-northwest by south-southeast) and 4' 9 W (1.46 m) wide. A step extends across the southeast end of
the main slab that is 7 ' 11 '/4" (2.42 m) long and 2' 2 M" (0.68 m) wide. The step is 11" (0.28 m) in height
above the surrounding ground surface and is 8 %" (0.22 m) below the surface of the main slab.
The Feature C concrete pad is located 2' 8 X" (0.83 m) to the north of the northeast comer of
Feature B, along the northern edge of the large depression. This pad is roughly rectangular in shape and is
3' %" (0.93 m) long (east-northeast by west-southwest) and 2' 8 %" (0.83 m) wide. The sides of the pad are
/- North 2 -3
9 W (0.25 m) in height. There is a circular metal manhole cover located on top of the pad that is 2' 3 %"
(0.71 m) in diameter.
The Feature D concrete pad is located adjacent to Feature C to the north-northwest, above the edge
of the large depression. This pad was originally rectangular in shape although the northwestern comer is
missing. The pad is 3' %" (0.93 m) long (north-northwest by south-southeast), 2' 8 %" (0.83 m) wide and
7 %" (0.2 m) in height. No cultural remains are present.
Feature E is a square concrete pad located adjacent to the northern projection at Feature A. This
pad is similar to Feature C and is 2' 9 %" (0.86 m) square by 9 %" (0.2 m) in height. There is a 2' 3 %"
(0.71 m) diameter metal manhole cover in the center of the pad. No cultural remains are present.
The Feature F pad is located adjacent to Feature E to the north. This pad is rectangular in shape
and the northwest comer is broken. It is 2' 10 %" (0.87 m) long (northeast by southwest), 2' 3 !P (0.7 m)
wide and 1' 1 %" (0.35 m) in height. No cultural remains are present.
Feature G is a concrete stairway located 8.5 m to the northeast of Feature D. The stairs lead down
the slope from the Feature H asphalt road to the Feature A-F vicinity. It measures 22' 7 %" (6.9 m) long
(north-northwest by south-southeast) and 3' 1 %" (0.96 m) wide with 3 7/s" (0.1 m) high risers (Figure 14).
There are 19 steps, all with yellow reflective safety paint. No cultural remains are present.
Figure 14. Sitc 2 130, Feature G Staircase, view to north
Feature H is a U-shaped asphalt road
that parallels the project area boundary
(see Figure 12). The road has an
overall length of 545' 7 '/z" (166.3 m)
and ranges in width from 20' (6.1 m) to
37' 8 W (11.5 m; Figure 15). From the
southeastern end the road extends 149'
7 %" (45.6) m to the north-northwest,
then turns 90 degrees to the west-
southwest. It extends in this direction
past the Feature A-F complex and the
Feature G stairs a distance of 231'
7 %" (70.6 m). It then angles to the
south-southwest for 164' 4 '/2"
(50.1 m), following the edge of the
large depression where it terminates at
the Feature L path.
There are two projections that extend
off the main road; one to the east and
one to the south. The eastern projection
is 36' 10 %" (1 1.25 m) long (northeast
by southwest) and 36' 8 %" (11.2 m)
wide. The southern projection is 29' 6
W' (9.0 m) long (north-northwest by
south-southeast) and 21' 3 %" (6.5 m)
to 32' 1 7/s" (9.8 m) wide. No cultural
remains are present at the feature.
Feature I is a concrete-lined
ditch situated between the northern
project area boundary and the north side of the Feature H road (see Figure 12). The ditch originates at the
west side of the Feature J path and extends 173' 2 3/4" (52.8 m) to the east-northeast where it terminates.
The ditch is 2' 11 %" (0.9 m) wide at the top, 2' 3 W (0.7 m) wide at the base, with an average depth of 1'
5 %" (0.45 m - see Figure 15). No cultural remains are present.
Figure 15. Site 2130, Feature H Road and Feature I Ditch, view to west-southwest
Figive 16. Site 2 130, Feature J Path, view to southeast
Feature J is a path located in the northwest comer of the site. The path originates along the
northern project area boundary and extends 34' 5 %" (10.5 m) to the southeast, terminating at the south side
of the Feature H road. The path is 1' 7 %" (0.5 m) wide and is comprised of a level linear surface bordered
on the east side by a concrete and basalt stone curb, 10 %" (0.27 m) in height (Figure 16). No cultural
remains are present at the feature.
Feature K is a mortared stone wall located to the south of the Feature J path and to the west of the
Feature H road. The wall has an overall length of 48' 6 5/s" (14.8 m). From the north end the wall extends 5'
6 %" (1.68 m) to the southeast, then turns to the southwest for 7' 6 '/s" (2.29 m -Figure 17). It then angles
to the south-southeast for 35' 9 W (10.9 m) where it terminates. The wall is 11 %" (0.3 m) wide and 1' 5
%" (0.45 m) in height. No cultural remains are present.
Feature L is a path situated at the southern end of the western portion of the Feature H wall. The
path originates outside of the project area to the west. From the western project boundary it extends 3 1' 2"
(9.5 m) to the east-northeast, where it terminates at the western edge of the large depression. The path is 3'
1 1 %" (1.2 m) wide and is comprised of mortared stones (Figure 18). No cultural remains are present.
Feature M is a formed concrete pad situated along the northern portion of the site complex, north
of the Feature H road and west of the Feature I ditch. The pad is rectangular in shape and is 4' 11'' (1.5 m)
long (north-south), 4' 1 %" (1.25 m) wide and 3 W (0.08 m) in height (Figure 19). There are two 3"
(0.075 m) diameter poles set vertically in the pad, spaced 1' 3 %" (0.4 m) apart. The poles were once
painted red and are 4' W (1.24 m) in height above the surface of the pad. No cultural remains are present.
Feature N is a concrete box set into the ground, located adjacent to the Feature H road to the
south. The box is 2' 11 %" (0.9 m) long (east-west) and 1' 7 %" (0.5 m) wide (Figure 20). The sides of the
Figure, 18. Sitc 2 130, Feature L Path, view to north
Figure 19. Site 2 130, Feature M Concrete Pad with Vertical Poles, view to north
box are level with the surrounding ground surface. There is a concrete lid sealing the box, with two metal
handles set into the lid. The sides and lid of the box are cracked. No cultural remains are present.
Feature 0 is a walled concrete slab located in the northeastern comer of the site complex,
bordering the project boundary (Figure 21). The feature is roughly rectangular in shape and is 29' 2 W'
(8.9 m) long (northeast by southwest) and 22' 11 %" (7.0 m) to 27' 6 W (8.4 m) wide.
A mortared stone wall extends along the northeast, northwest and southwest sides of the feature,
measuring 1' 4 7/s" (0.43 m) wide and 3' 11 %" (1.2 m) to 4' 1 %" (1.25 m) in height above the slab. There
is a barbeque grill located in the northwest comer of the structure that is 6' 2" (1.88 m) long (northwest by
southeast), 2' 11 K" (0.9 m) wide and 3 1 %" (0.95 m) in height. A copper pipe is present within the grill
indicating that it was fueled with propane. No cultural remains are present.
As discussed in the preceding Background section, the project area was once the site of the US.
Coast Guard LORAN station that was in operation from 1951 until 1979. The station was known as
LORSTA Kaua'i. Several of the features described above are shown in a 1961 photograph of the station
(Figure 22).
The Feature A and B slabs, located within the large depression in northwest portion of the project
area, appear to have functioned as the foundation for the large, two-story structure in the right-hand comer
of the photograph. The apparent size of this structure suggests that the two slabs and the level soil area with
concrete rubble that separates them, served as the foundation for this building (see Figure 13). The Feature
H asphalt road is clearly visible in the Figure 22 photograph. This road provided access to the buildings
within the complex. Feature M, a concrete pad with two vertical metal pipes (see Figure 19) is present in
the location of the sign located at the entrance to the facility.
The Feature G stairs functioned to access the two-story structure within the depression,
represented by the Feature A and B slabs. The Feature C and E pads with manhole covers and the Feature
N box functioned as associated utility features. It is possible that the manhole covers were used to access a
subterranean sewer system and the concrete box potentially served as a junction box for the electrical or
water lines. The Feature K wall likely served as a boundary marker for the complex and the Feature D and
E pads served as foundations of undetermined specific function. The Feature 0 walled slab is a recreational
area based on the presence of the barbeque grill.
The remnants of the other LORAN facility structures depicted in Figure 22 are no longer present
within the project area. These structures were likely destroyed with the materials removed fiom the
property, following the abandonment of the facility after Hurricane Iwa in 1982. The tower present seaward
of the facility has also been removed. The remaining remnants of the LORAN facility, designated as
Features A through 0 of Site 2130 are assessed as significant for their information content. The site is
altered and in poor to fair condition.
Site 2131 is a complex of six features located along the western side of the project area, on the
western rim and upper slope of the large depression. The features consist of three terraces (Features A, B
and C), a block (Feature D), a concrete pad (Feature E) and a scatter of historic debris, located in an area
33.0 m long (northwest by southeast) and 9.0 m wide. Features A, B, C and D are recently constructed
features built fiom a combination of local stone and concrete objects that were probably collected from the
immediate area.
These features were likely built by occupants of the adjacent parcel as landscaping features and
although the features are modem constructions, the use of older historic materials led to their inclusion
within Site 2 13 1. A fifth modem planting feature is located 12.0 m north of Feature A, although no historic
debris was noted in this location (see Figure 11).
Feature A is a mortared concrete and stone block capped with a cement veneer, located at the
northwestern end of the site. The block measures 3' 3 %" (1.0 m) long, 2' 4 3/4" (0.73 m) wide and 2' 3 %"
(0.7 m) in height (Figure 23). The block has been positioned at the base of a slope with ornamental plants
placed above it. A wooden crate is located upslope of the feature to the southwest.
Figure 23. Site 21 3 1, Feature A Concrete and Stone Block, view to west
Feature B is a pair of concrete blocks that form a rough terrace located 7.5 m southeast of Feature
A. Soil has been placed between the blocks planted with ornamental plants in the soil fill and below the
feature to the north (Figure 24). The feature measures 4' 3 'A'' (1.3 m) long, 3' 3 %" (1.0 m) wide and 2' 11
%" (0.9 m) in height. No cultural remains are present.
Feature C is a stone terrace located 4.7 m south (upslope) from Feature B. This feature is roughly
oval in shape and is 3' 3 '/z" (1.0 m) long, 2' 7 '/2" (0.8 m) wide and 1' 7 %" (0.5 m) in height, built of
stacked and piled basalt cobbles (Figure 25). Several broken fragments of formed concrete are incorporated
into the structure. No cultural remains are present. Feature D is terrace similar in construction to Feature C,
located 4.5 m to the northeast. This terrace is 2' 3 %" (0.7 m) long, 1' 11 W (0.6 m) wide and 2' 7 '/z" (0.8
m) in height (Figure 26). Concrete fragments are also incorporated into Feature D.
Feature E is a formed concrete pad located 4.5 m to the east of Feature D. The pad is nearly square
measuring 2' 11 %" (0.91 m) long, 2' 11" (0.89) m wide and 5 %" (0.15 m) in height (Figure 27). There is
a triangular configuration of bolts present on the surface. No cultural remains are located on the feature,
though elements of the Feature F artifact scattered surround it.
Feature F is a scatter of historic materials that extend to the southeast from the Feature E pad.
These material include metal and concrete fragments and are located in an area 11.6 m long (northwest by
southeast) and 4.3 m wide (see Figure 27).
As stated, Features A-D are modem features that incorporated pieces of concrete that are likely the
remnants of the LORAN station structures. The Feature E pad is a probable tower base based on the
Figure 24. Site2 13 1, Fcature. B Concrcte Blocks, view to southcast
presence of the bolts on the surface. The Feature F scatter potentially represents the rusted remnants of a
structure or piece of equipment.
Site 2132 is a complex of two features located near the western project area boundary, south of
the large depression. The features consist of a concrete pad (Feature A) and a concrete and stone post
(Feature B). The Feature A pad is formed concrete and is situated at the east end of the site. It is rectangular
in shape and is 1' 3 %" (0.4 m) long (east-west), 1' 1 K" wide and 2 %" (0.07 m) in height above the
surrounding ground surface. No cultural remains are present.
Feature B is located 14.5 m to the west of Feature A adjacent to the western project area boundary.
It consists of a post or block made of basalt stones and concrete (Figure 28). The feature is lying on its side
and is 3' 7 %" (1.1 m) long, 1' 5 !4" (0.75 m) wide and 1' 7 W (0.5 m) thick. No cultural remains are
present. The two features at the site are probable foundations based on their formal type and appearance.
The site is assessed as significant for its information content. It is altered and in poor to fair condition.
Site 2133 is a complex of three concrete pads situated in the southwestern portion of the project
area in an area of shallow soil. The pads are located in an area 14.3 m long (east-west) and 5.1 m wide.
Feature A is situated at the western end of the site and is comprised of a rectangular formed concrete pad
that measures 2' 9 %" (0.86 m) long (northwest by southeast), 2' 5 !4" (0.74 m) wide and 3 %" (0.1 m) in
height (Figure 29). There is a rectangular configuration of four bolts that appear to have been sheared off
level with the surface of the pad. These bolts are 1 W (0.045 m) diameter and are in an area 1' 5 %" (0.44
m) long (east-west) and 9" '/s" (0.235 m) wide. There is a metal plate present within the configuration of
bolts that is 6 %" (0.175 m) long (north-south), 1 %" (0.035m) and K" (0.01m) in height. No cultural
remains are present.
The Feature B pad is situated 3.75 m to the southeast of Feature A (see Figure 29). This feature
is irregular in shape and appears to have been created by pouring concrete into a hole dug into the ground
and troweling the surface level. It measures 5' 10 3/4" (1.8 m) in length (northwest by southeast) and 5' 6
%" (1 -7 m) wide and is level with the surrounding terrain. No cultural remains are present.
The Feature C pad is located 9.0 m to the southwest of Feature A. This feature is similar to the
Feature B pad in that it appears to have been created by pouring concrete into a hole dug into the ground
and leveling the surface (Figure 30). It is roughly rectangular in shape and measures 4' 3 %" (1.3 m) long
(northwest by southeast) by 2' 3 !4" (0.7 m) wide. The surface is level with the surrounding terrain. No
cultural remains are present.
The site is a complex of foundations that are likely associated based on the features' proximity,
formal type, similar orientation and appearance. The presence of the aligned bolts and metal plate at
Feature A suggest it likely served as a mount for a tower or piece of equipment. The specific hction of the
Feature B and C pads is unclear. The site is assessed as significant for information content. It is unaltered
and in good condition.
Site 2134 is a concrete post located in the western portion of the project area, south of the large
depression and 19.5 m east-northeast of the Site 2133 complex. The post is made of formed concrete and
measures 1' (0.305 m) square by 2' 7 !h" (0.8 m) in height (Figure 31). It is embedded in the ground and is
leaning to the west. A large diameter (5" or 0.13 m) cable is extending out of the top of the block attached
to it by a series of 1" (0.027m) threaded bolts. A metal turnbuckle is attached to the cable base by a hinged
metal plate. The turnbuckle is 1' 11 %" (0.6 m) m long with threaded bolts extending out of it on both
sides. The cable is coated in a woven mesh material and the connecting bolts and cable base are wrapped in
a stiff cloth. No associated cultural remains are present at the site.
The site probably is an anchor for a tower based on its formal type and appearance. The cable
probably served as a guy wire for a large tower, likely the one shown in the 196 1 photograph of LORSTA
Kaua'i (see Figure 22). The turnbuckle probably was attached to a secondary guy wire that stabilized the
anchor based on its attachment to the base of the large cable attachment bracket (see Figure 31). The site is
assessed as significant for information content. It is unaltered and in good condition.
Figurc 28. Sitc 2 132, Feature B Concrete and Stone Block, view to west
m
.e 29. Sitc 2 133, Fcature A and B Concretc Pads, view to east
Figurc 3 1. Sitc 2 134 Concrctc Post, vicw to south-southcast
Site 2135 is a complex of four features located along the coastal escarpment in the southwestern
portion of the project area. A modem navigational aid is located adjacent to the site to the northwest. The
features are comprised of a concrete block (Feature A), two concrete pads (Features B and D) and a scatter
of rusted metal fragments (Feature C) located in an area 25.0 m long (northeast by southwest) and 8.5 m
wide (see Figure I I).
The Feature A block is located at the north end of the site. It is made of formed concrete and is 4'
11 %" (1.52 m) square and 1' 11 %" (0.6 m) in height above the surrounding ground surface (Figure 32).
Forms marks are visible on the sides of the feature. No cultural remains are present.
The Feature B concrete pad is located in an area of bare lava 11.0 m to the south of Feature A.
This feature is roughly oval in shape and is comprised of concrete that has been poured into a cavity in the
surface lava. It measures 1' 9 %" (0.54 m) long (north-south) and 1' 6 %" (0.47 m) wide (Figure 33). The
surface of the pad is level with the surrounding ground surface and no cultural remains are present. An
inscription has been imprinted into the surface of the pad reading:
Feb 16
1922
The Feature C scatter of rusted metal fragments is located 5.0 m to the west of Feature B. These
fragments are present in an area 28' 6 W (8.7 m) long (north-south) and 26' 10 W (8.2 m) wide (Figure
34). No additional cultural remains, other than the metal are present.
The Feature D formed concrete pad that has been poured directly onto bedrock, 4.0 m to the west
of the Feature C scatter. This pad is roughly square and is 11 72' (0.3 m) long, 9 %" (0.25 m) wide and 3 %"
(0.1 m) in height (Figure 35). No cultural remains are present as the feature. A metal pipe is positioned
vertically in the center (0.04 m) in height. The initials "US" and "LHS" are imprinted in the surface of the
pad above and below the pipe.
As discussed in the Background section of this report, "LHS" denotes the Lighthouse Service, a
U.S. federal government agency that originally was part of the Department of Commerce that was
transferred to the U.S. Coast Guard in 1939. The Feature A block is interpreted as a foundation based on its
formal type and appearance, although its specific function is undetermined. The Feature B pad served as a
marker dating to 1922. The Feature D pad potentially is a mount for a sign or piece of equipment.
Alternatively, it could be a survey marker. The Feature C metal scatter potentially represents the rusted
remnants of an a tower or piece of equipment. The site is unaltered and in poor to good condition. It is
assessed as significant for its information content.
Site 2136 is a complex of two features located along the coastal escarpment to the east of Site
2135. The features consist of a formed concrete pad (Feature A) and a scatter of historic debris (Feature B)
located in an area 52.0 m long (east-west) and 13.0 m wide.
The Feature A pad is located at the eastern end of the site. It is rectangular in shape and is 7' 7 !4"
.3 m) long (northwest by southeast) and 6' 10 518'' (2.1 m) wide (Figure 36). The pad is 10 W (0.27 m)
height above the surrounding lava flow surface. There is a raised pad on top of the feature along the
northeast side. This pad is 2' 4 %" (0.72 m) long (northwest by southeast), 2' 3 '/2" (0.7 m wide) and 8 %"
(0.21 m) in height. A rectangular configuration of four bolts is present on top of this pad. A rusted metal
projection is present within this bolt pattern. There are five short plastic pipes that extend vertically out of
the ground, adjacent to the pad to the southeast.
Feature B consists of a large scatter of historic debris located 13.0 m west of Feature A. The
feature is covers an area 34.0 m long (east-west) and 13.6 m wide. The majority of the debris consists of
small rusted metal pieces (Figure 37). A rusted engine is also present, located at the western end of the
metal scatter (Figure 38).
Figure 34. Site 2 135, Feature C Artifact Scatter, view to south-southeast
I
Figure 35. Site 2 135, Feature D Concrete Pad with Inscription, view to east
Figure 36. Site 2 136, Feature A Concrete Pad, view to northeast
Figure 38. Site 2136, Feature B Engine, view to west-southwest
Figure 39 Site 2137, Feature A Concrete Block, view to south-southwest
The Feature A pad potentially supported a tower or served as a mount for a piece of equipment
that required electrical and monitoringlcommunication connections. This is based on the presence of the
vertical pipes adjacent to the pad that likely served as wire conduits. The Feature B artifact consists of
rusting metal fragments and machinery parts, possibly remnants of a metal tower and associated
equipment.. The site is unaltered and in fair condition. It is assessed as significant for its information
content.
Site 2137 is a complex of two concrete features located in the southwestern portion of the project
area, 17.0 m northeast of Site 2135 and 16.0 m northwest of Site 2136. The features are comprised of a
concrete block (Feature A) and a concrete pad (Feature B). The Feature A block is located at the east end of
the site. It is constructed of formed concrete and is 5' 6 %" (1.7 m) square at the base, 4' 7 7/8" (1.42 m)
square at the top and 3' 8 %" (1.13 m) in height (Figure 39). There is a recessed area on top of the block
that is 2' 1 %" (0.64 m) square by 1' 3 %" (0.4 m) deep. Horizontal form marks are visible on the sides of
the block. No cultural remains are present.
The Feature B pad is situated 9.7 m west-southwest of Feature A. The pad is rectangular and is
comprised of formed concrete. It measures 2' 8 %" (0.82 m) long (east-west), 1' 11 %" (0.6 m) wide and 10
%" (0.27 m) in height above the surrounding ground surface (Figure 40). Several fragments of rusted metal
and a coil of old rope are present on the pad. The remnants of two rusted metal bolts are located in the
approximate center and "U.S.C.G." (United States Coast Guard) has been stamped into the pad above the
bolts. There is an inscription that has been carved into the top of the pad, above the "U.S.C.G" that reads:
7- 16-74
MKl BLACHOWSKI
The Feature A block probably supported a large "telephone" pole-sized post based on its similarity
to an identical block at Site 2140 (see below) that still supports an intact post base. Its location roughly
correlates with a pole situated immediately to the left of the flagpole shown in the 1961 photograph of
LORSTA Kaua'i (see Figure 22). The inscription on Feature B indicates it was constructed by the Coast
Guard in 1974 and probably served as a tower foundation or equipment mount based on the presence of
bolts. The site is unaltered and in good condition.
Site 2138 is a scatter of concrete blocks and fragments located in a jumbled pile on the coastal
escarpment, 19.5 m to the northeast of Site 2136. The site encompasses an area 5.5 m long (northeast by
southwest), 4.0 m wide and 1.2 m in height, though the majority of the materials are located in a pile that is
4.0 m in diameter (Figure 41). The majority of the concrete objects consist of rectangular blocks that range
in length from 1' 7 %" (0.5 m) to 3' 3 W' (1.0 m) and 9 %" (0.25 m) to 2' 11 %" (0.9 m) in width. The
remainder of the material consists of irregularly shaped concrete fragments. The materials appear to have
been impacted by wave activity. No additional cultural remains are present.
The site is interpreted as the disturbed remnant of a foundation based on the appearance of the
concrete blocks. The original size and shape of the foundation is undermined as is its specific function. The
site is assessed as significant for information content, is altered and in poor condition.
Site 2139 is a complex of four features located in the west-central portion of the project area to the
southeast of the large depression. The features consist of two concrete posts (Features A and D), a concrete
block (Feature B) and a concrete pad (Feature C) located in an area 33.5 m long (north-south) by 12.0 m
wide.
Feature A consists of a formed concrete post located at the northern end of the site. It is set in the
ground and is leaning slightly to the south (Figure 42). The post is 11 %" (0.3 m) square and 1' 7 % (0.5 m)
in height. A metal anchor is present on top of the post. No cultural remains are present.
Feature B consists of a formed concrete block situated 14.5 m to the southwest of Feature A. It
measures 5' 7 %" (1.72 m) square at the base, 4' 8 %" (1.43 m) square at the top and 3' 5 % " (1.05 m) in
height above the surrounding ground surface (Figure 43). There is a square recessed area on top of the
Fieurc 42. Site 2 139. Featurc A Concrctc Post. view to south
Figure 43. Site 2 139, Feature B Concrctc Block, view to wcst
block that is 2' 3 1/81' (0.69 m) on each side and 2' 2 %" (0.68 m) in depth below the top of the block. A
jumble of white and red wires is located within the recessed area. No cultural remains are present.
Feature C is a formed concrete pad located 14.0 m southeast of Feature B. It is 4' 11 %" (1.52 m)
square and 1 !4" (0.04) m in height above the surrounding ground surface (Figure 44). No cultural remains
are present.
Feature D is a formed concrete post located 13.5 m southwest of Feature C. The post is set
vertically in the ground and is 1' 7 %" (0.5 m) square and 4' 3 'A" (1.3 m) in height (Figure 45).
Reinforcing metal rebar is visible on the broken sides of the post and a metal strap extends out of the side.
A metal bracket is bolted to the post, extending 5 %" (0.15 m) above the top. No cultural remains are
present.
The Feature A and D posts potentially functioned a guy wire anchors like Site 2134. The more
substantial Feature D post has a metal bracket that potentially sewed to attach a large cable like the one
attached to the Site 2140 concrete post. The Feature D post lacks a metal bracket, but otherwise closely
resembles the Site 2140 concrete post in form and size. The Feature B block probably supported a large
post based on its similarity to an identical block at Site 2140 (see below) that still supports an intact post
base. Its location roughly correlates with a pole situated immediately to the left of the main metal tower
shown in the 1961 photograph of LORSTA Kaua'i (see Figure 22). Feature C is a concrete pad that likely
functioned as a foundation for a small structure or piece of equipment. The site is unaltered and in fair to
good condition. It is assessed as significant for its information content.
Site 2140 is a formed concrete block located in the base of the large depression in the
northwestern portion of the project area. The pier is 4' 7 %" (1.42 m) by 4' 7 %" (1.24 m) at the top, 5' 6
%" (1.7 m) by 5' 7 %" (1.72 m) at the base and 3' 8 W (1.13 m) in height above the surrounding ground
surface (Figure 46). Form marks from 6'' (15 cm) planks are visible on the sides of the block. A wooden
pole is set vertically into the top of the block, within a recessed area that is 1 ' 11 %" (0.6 m square) by 7 K"
(0.2 m) deep). The pole has been cut off above the top of the block, within the remaining portion measuring
1' %" (0.32 m) in diameter and 1' 1 %" (0.35 m) in height. Tar is smeared on top of the block and within
the recessed area. No cultural remains are present at the site.
The block functioned as a support for a large post, the base of which is still present. Its location
roughly correlates with a pole situated behind the possible shop building (right bay door) in the central
portion of the LORSTA Kaua'i facility shown a 1961 photograph (see Figure 22). The site is assessed as
significant for information content. It is unaltered and in good condition.
Site 2141 is a small, rectangular formed concrete pad located in the central portion of the project
area. The pad measures 2' 9 %" (0.86 m) long (east-west), 2' 4 1/4" (0.75 m) wide and 2 %" (0.06 m) high
(Figure 47). There is a rectangular configuration of four bolts that appear to have been sheared off flush
with the surface of the pad. These bolts are 1 %" (0.045 m) diameter and are in an area 1' 5 W (0.44 m)
long (east-west) and 9" 'A" (0.235 m) wide. There is a metal plate present within the configuration of bolts
that is 6 %" (0.175 m) long (north-south), 1 %'' (0.035m) wide and %" (0.01m) in height. No cultural
remains are present at the site.
The site is interpreted as a foundation for a tower or piece of equipment based on its formal type
and presence of bolts and metal plate. The site is assessed as significant for information content, is
unaltered and is in good condition.
Site 2142 is a small roughly oval-shaped concrete pad located in an area of shallow soil, 41.0 m to
the east of Site 2141. The pad is 1' 3 %" (0.4 m) long (east-west), 8 W (0.21 m) wide and 1 W (0.04 m) in
height above the surrounding ground surface (Figure 48). The pad is irregular and appears to have been
created by pouring concrete into a hole dug into the ground. Stone aggregate within the concrete is visible
indicating the pad was not trowel finished. No cultural remains are present.
'igure 45. Site 2 139, Featurc D Concretc and Metal Post, view to cast
The site probably served to anchor wiring similar to the unformed pads at Site 2147. The site is
assessed as significant for information content. It is unaltered and in good condition.
Site 2143 is a complex of three features located central seaward portion of the project area on the
coastal escarpment. The features are comprised of a concrete slab (Feature A), a stone retaining wall
(Feature B), and a concrete pad (Feature C) located in an area 16.5 m long (northwest by southeast) and
4.5 m wide.
Feature A consists of a rectangular, formed concrete slab located at the northwestern end of the
site. The slab measures 14' 9 %" (4.5 m) long (northwest by southeast), 6' 8 %" (2.04 m) wide and 10 '/z"
(0.27 m) in height (Figure 49). There are two 3' (0.92 m) diameter manhole covers present on top of the
slab; one at the northwest end and one at the southeast end. Both manholes are positioned on raised
concrete seats that are 3 %" in height above the slab surface. The southeast seat is square and the northwest
seat is broken with remnants remaining. Both manhole covers were rusted shut. No cultural remains are
present.
Feature B consists of a linear cobble and small boulder retaining wall located adjacent to Feature
A to the southeast. The wall is 14' 9 W (4.5 m) long (northeast by southwest) and 1' 11 !4" (0.6 m) wide,
built of stacked stones and soil (Figure 50). The inland (northwest) side is level with the sloping terrain and
the seaward (southeast) side has been built up to a maximum height of 1' 5 X" (0.45 m). No cultural
remains are present.
Feature C is an unformed concrete pad that was poured onto an outcrop 8.0 m to the southeast of
Feature B. It is 1 ' 1 1 %" (0.6 m) long (northwest by southeast) and 1 ' 3 %" (0.4 m) wide (Figure 51). The
inland (northeast) side is 1" (0.03 m) in height above the outcrop and the seaward side is 1' 9 7'2' (0.55 m)
in height, extending down the side of the outcrop. The surface has been troweled level. There is a scatter of
rusted metal fragment located to the northwest of the feature.
The Feature A slab is a component of a utility system, potentially for wastewater based on the
presence of the manholes. The Feature B retaining wall appears to have functioned to retain the slope
below Feature A. Feature C probably served to anchor wiring similar to the unformed pads at Site 2147.
The site is unaltered and in fair condition. It is assessed as significant for its information content.
Site 2144 is a complex of five concrete features located in the northwestern portion of the project
area. The features consist of a block (Feature A) and concrete pads (Features B-D) located in an area
27.0 m long (northeast by southwest) and 5.0 m wide.
The Feature A block is situated in the central portion of the site. This feature is a rectangular
formed concrete block that was painted green. It is 5' 6 %" (1.68 m) square at the base, 4' 8 X" (1.44 m)
square at the top and 3' 6 %" (1.07 m) in height (Figure 52). There is a column of reinforced concrete
extending vertically out of the center of the block that is 10 %" (0.26 m) square and 1' 10 !h" (0.57 m) in
height. No cultural remains are present.
The Feature B concrete pad is located 12.0 m to the east-northeast of Feature A. This pad is
constructed of formed concrete and is roughly square, measuring 5' 1" (1 S5m) by 4' 11 W (1 32 m) and
6 %" (0.16 m) in height (Figure 53). No cultural remains are present.
Features C, D and E are formed concrete pads situated 12.5 m to the southwest of Feature A. The
Feature C pad appears to be in original location although Features D and E appear to have been moved to
this location because the features are chipped and not level (Figure 54). The Feature C pad is 4' 11 W
(1.52 m) square and 1' 3" (0.38 m) in height. No cultural remains are present.
Feature D is situated adjacent to Feature C to the southwest. This pad is rectangular in shape and is
2' 7 %" (0.81 m) long (north-south), 1' 11 %" (0.6 m) wide and 10 %" (0.27 m) thick. There is a piece of
rusted metal that probably was for attachment, extending out of the center of the pad. "U.S.C.G" is
Figure 50. Site 2143, Featurc B Retaining Wall, vicw to west
Figure 5 1. Site 2 143, Feature C Concrete Pad, view to eat
Figure 52. Site 2 144, Feature A Concrete Block, view to northwest
Figure 53. Site 2 144, Feature B Concrete Pad, view to east
Figure 55. Site 2144, Feature 1) Concrctc Pad with Inscription, view to west
stamped into the concrete above the metal (Figure 55). There an inscription stamp that reads, "7-17-74 -
Little SKI" over a heart with an arrow through it. No cultural remains are present.
The Feature E pad is located to the northwest of Feature C. It is rectangular and is 2' 8 !A''
(0.82 m) long (north-south), 2' %" (0.62 m) wide and 1' 2 !4" (0.37 m) thick. No cultural remains are
present.
Features A, B, C and E are interpreted as foundations based on their formal type and appearance.
The Feature A foundation served as a support for a concrete post. It is identical in dimensions to the post
support foundation at Site 2140 and several other features. The specific function of the other features is
undetermined, although the metal embedded in Feature D suggests that it was a mount for a tower or piece
of machinery. The site is altered and in fair to good condition.
Site 2145 is a complex of two adjacent formed concrete pads located in the northeastern portion
of the project area, 25.5 m northeast of Site 2144 (Figure 56). The Feature A pad is rectangular in shape
and is 6' 5 %" (1.97 m) long (east-west), 3' %" (0.92 m) wide and 2 %" (0.06 m) in height. The pad appears
to have been poured in two pieces, evidenced by a seam in the concrete that bisects it longitudinally. The
southeastern comer of the pad is broken.
The Feature B pad is located 1.85 m to the southeast of Feature A. This pad is roughly square and
is 3' 2 %" (0.98 m) long (north-south), 3' %" (0.92 m) wide and 3 W (0.09 m) in height. No cultural
remains were present in association with either feature.
The site likely functioned as two associated foundations based on their spatial proximity. The
foundations are too small to have supported buildings and likely were used for equipment or tower
facilities. The site is assessed as significant for information content. It is unaltered and in good condition.
Site 2146 is a complex of two concrete features located in the northeastern portion of the project
area. The features are comprised of a concrete block (Feature A) and a concrete pad (Feature B). A second
concrete pad very similar to Feature B is located outside the boundaries of the present project to the east of
Feature A.
The Feature A block is constructed of formed concrete and has been painted green (Figure 57).
The block measures 4' 7 %" (1.42 m) square at the top, 5' 7 %" (1.72 m) square at the base and 3' 6 W
(1.07 m) in height. There is a recessed area on top of the block that is 1' (0.3 m) square) and 1 '/4" (0.03 m)
deep. No cultural remains are present.
The Feature B concrete pad is located 12.0 m to the south-southwest of Feature A. This feature is
comprised of formed concrete and is 4' 11 1/4" (1.52 m) square and 1 W (0.04 m) in height above the
surrounding ground surface (Figure 58). No cultural remains are present.
The features at Site 2 146 are interpreted as foundations based on their formal type and appearance.
The Feature A foundation likely served as a support for a concrete post. It is identical in dimensions to the
post support foundation at the nearby Feature C at 2144, Site 2140 and several other features, except unlike
the others, the interior cavity is filled with concrete. The Feature B foundation is too small to have
supported a building and likely was used for equipment or a tower facility. The site is assessed as
significant for information content. It is unaltered and in good condition.
Site 2147 is a complex of 73 small oval-shaped, unformed concrete pads created by pouring
concrete directly onto stone outcrops. These features are present in the seaward portion of the project area,
extending between Sites 2135 in the west to Site 2143 in the east (see Figure 11). These feature vary
slightly in size and shape but most are oval in plan and average 1' 1 K" (0.35 m) in length and 9 %I"
(0.24 m) in width (Figures 59, 60 and 61). Most of these features have been troweled smooth on the
surface. Electrical wires (bare copper and white plastic coated) extend from the long ends of these pads.
E
Figure 56, Sitc 2 145, Fcatwe A and B Concretc Pads, vicw to east
Figure 57. Sitc 2146, Feature A Concrete Block, view to northwest
Figure 58. Site 2146, Feature B Concrete Pad, view lo north
The Site 2147 concrete pads apparently functioned to secure wiring that served the towers and
associated equipment. The bare copper wiring probably served to ground-protect towers and equipment
during electric storms. The other wires probably provided electric power and monitoring communication.
The site is unaltered and in fair to good condition.
Subsurface Testing
Subsurface testing was undertaken in 20 locations during the project. This testing involved the
excavation of 20 0.5 m by 0.5 m test units, located in the inland half of the project area (see Figure 11).
Four of the units were located within the large depression in the northwestern portion of the project area
(TU-8, -9, -10 and -12) and eight were located to the north, south and east (TU-11, -13, -14, -16 thru -20).
The eight remaining units (TU-1 thru -7, and -15) were located along the northern project boundary to the
east of the depression.
The excavations revealed similar stratigraphy throughout the parcel consisting of a surface layer
over decomposing bedrock (Table 3). The profiles for the 20 units are depicted in Figures 62 through 65.
The surface layer consists of a dark reddish brown sandy silt to clay silt with 10 to 50% cobble, pebble and
small boulder inclusions. This layer varied in thickness from 0.07 to 0.4 m with an average depth of
0.19 m.
The layer was designated Layer I in 19 of the units although in TU-18 it was overlain by a layer of
decaying organic material. Wires were present in two of the test units (TU-2 and -16) and clear glass and
waterworn coral were present in one unit (TU-3). No cultural remains were present in the deposit in the
remaining units.
A sand lens was noted at the base of Layer I in two of the test units (Layer I1 in TU-1 and -2),
located at the northeastern end of the parcel. This deposit consisted of 0.02 to 0.06 m of a brown sand.
Marine shells (2 Neritapicea and 1 waterworn shell) and one bird bone were present in Layer I1 in TU-1,
although no cultural remains were present in TU-2.
The subsoil throughout the parcel was comprised of a dark reddish sandy silt to clay silt saprolite
with 0 to 60% pebble inclusions. This deposit is represented by Layer I1 in TU-8, -9, -1 1 and -15 and by
Layer I11 in TU-1 and -2. The remaining units were terminated on the saprolitic layer, with the exception of
TU-14 and -15, which were terminated on saprolite and bedrock. No cultural remains were present within
this deposit. Examples of the test units examined during the present project are illustrated in Figures 66 and
6 7.
Table 3. Summary of Test Unit Stratigraphy
Comment
Clay silt with 500h cobble and
No cultural remains
Nerita picea (n=2,0.4 grams),
bud bone (n=l, 2.0 g), waterwon
marine shell (n=l, 0.2 g)
19
20
No cultural remains; Saprolite
Wire present
I
I
No cultural remains
No cultural remains; Saprolite
0.06-0.07
0.07-0.09
Clear glass (n=l, 0.3g),
waterworn coral (n=3,0.2 g);
Terminated on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
0.07
0.09
No cultural remains
No cultural remains; Saprolite
Dark reddish brown
Dark reddish brown
No cultural remains
No cultural remains; Saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
2.5YR 314
2.5YR 314
No cultural remains
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite and bedrock
Clay silt with 300/0 pebble
inclusions
Clay silt with 100/o pebble
inclusions
No cultural remains
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite and bedrock
Wie present; Terminated on
saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
No cultural remains; Terminated
on saprolite
/I Layer I - Dab reddish brow1 (5YK 314) sandy silt with 50% cobble, pebble
G'., j f --- 11 - and small boulder inclusions: No cultural senlains
Laycr 11 - Brown (IOYK 4i3) sand lens: miuinc shell and bird bone
Laycr 111 - Dark reddish brown (2.5YK 314) sandy silt with 60% pcbblc
inclusions: Saprolitc: No cultural rcnlains
Layer I - Ihrk rctldish brown (5YH 3N) sandy silt will1 50% cohhlc. pclhlc
and anall boulda inclusions: Wire present
Laycr ll - Brown (IOYK W3) sirnd lens: No cultulnl remains
Lnyer 111 - Dark reddish brown (2.5YK 314) sandy silt with 60% pebble
inclusions; Saprolitc; No cultuml remains
Layer 1 - Dark reddish brown (2.5YK 314) clay silt with 50% cobble and
pcbblc inclusions; Glass fragnlcnt and watcrwom corn1 present
0 5Ocm
Laycr 1 - ark reddish brown (2.5YK 3i4) clay silt with 50% cobble and
pebble inclusions; No cultu~d reniains
L, I - Dark reddish brow1 (2.IYR 314) clay silt with 50% cobble and
pcbblc inclusions: No oultunl ~rmains
0 Ocm
Figure 62. West Face Profiles of TUs 1-5
59
I Lilycr I - Oark reddish brown (Z.5YK 314) clay sill with 20% rubble ;md
pcbblc inclusions: No cultu~:~l remains
Lnyw I - hk reddish brown (5YK 313) sandy silt with 30% cobble and
pebble inclusions: No cultul.il1 remains
Lnyer 11 - Dark I-cddish brown (5Y R 314) clay silt with 60% pcbblc
inclusions; Snprolitc; No cultu~.ill rcmains
Laycr 1 - Dark reddish brown (SYK 313) sandy silt with 30% cobble and
pcbblc inclusions: No cultuml remains
Layer I1 - Dark reddish brown (5Y R 311) clay silt with 60% pebble
inclusions: Saprolitc; No cultural remains
TU-I0 Wires
Layer 1 - Dark reddish brown (iYK 313) sill with 50% cobble and
pebble inclusions; No cultunl ren~ains
'igure 63. West Face Profiles of TUs 6-1 0
60
TU- I I
0 0 6 OrS. aoa,
c3 30 0 Layer I - Dark reddish brown (5YK 313) sandy silt with 20% cobble and
pcbblc inclusions: No cultural rcmrtins
II
Layer 11 - Dark brown (7.5YK 3/3) clay silt: No cultural remains
Layer 1 -
Layer 1
Laycr l -
Dark 1-cddis1i brown (5YK 313) clay silt with 20% cobble nnd
pebble inclusions: No cultu~nl rc~nains
Dark l-cddish brown (SYR 3/3) clay silt with 30% cobble and
pcbblc inclusions; No cultund rcnwins
Dark ~xddish brown (5YK 31.3) clay silt with 30% cobblc and
pcbblc inclusions; No cultur.~l mrniiins
TU-15
Laym I - Dark rcddish brown (SYK 313) clay silt with 10% cobblc and
pcbblc inclusions; No cultu~nl remains
Laycr 11 - Dark brown (7.SYK 313) clay silt with 15% pchblc inclusions:
Saprolite; No cultural remains
0 50cm
Figure 64. West Face Profiles of TUs 1 1 - 15
61
r - I o Ocm
TU- I9
Layer 1 - Dark rcddish brown (SYK 313) sandy silt : Wire present
Layer 1 - Dark rcddish brow1 (5YK 314) clay silt with 20% pcbblc
inclusions; No cultun~l rcmains
Layer 1 - Mulch; No cultulal irlnains
Layer I1 - Uark rcddish brown (SYK 314) clay silt with 5% pcbblc
inclusions: No cultu~nl remains
Laycr I - Dark ~uddish brown (2.5YK 3/4) cloy silt with 20% pcbblc
inclusions; No culturirl rcmitins
Laycr 1 - Uark lddish brow11 (2.5YK 3i4) clay silt with 10% pcbblc
inclusions; No cultuml scrnains
Figure 65. West Face Profiles of TUs 16-20
62
Figure 66. Post-excavation of TU-3, view to northeast
CONCLUSION
Discussion
The survey results generally confum the expectations derived from historical and archaeological
background research. No traditional Hawaiian sites were identified within the parcel. The absence of such sites is
not surprising given the extensive historic use of the area. The survey documented 18 sites with 128 features
consisting of concrete pads, concrete slabs, concrete blocks, posts, artifact scatters, terraces, paths, walls, a
ditch, a road, stairs, a utility box and a walled slab.
Subsurface testing was conducted throughout the inland portion of the project area revealing a shallow
surface layer of dark reddish brown sandy silt to clay silt overlying decomposing bedrock. Historic debris
consisting of wire and clear glass were present in three of the units. One unit contained a sand lens that yielded a
small quantity of marine shell and a bird bone.
Most of the identified features are remnants of the U.S. Coast Guard LORAN Station (LORSTA
Kauai) that was in operation between 195 1 and 1979. A few features on the periphery of TMK: 2-8-02 1 :43,
where a USCG LHS navigation aid is situated, may have been associated with previous facilities that were
initially installed in 1908 and continue in use today.
As discussed, the majority of the features consist of formed concrete structures of varying size and
shape. These features are summarized in Table 4. The features can be grouped into several categories based
on morphology and function as follows: (1) features associated with the main LORAN station, (2) wiring
anchors, (3) tower baseslequipment mounts, (4) possible wastewater utility features, (5) guy wire anchors,
(6) 5' square pads, (7) 5'6-8" square post supports, (8) foundations of indeterminate function, and (9)
modem landscaping features. The distribution of these categories is presented in Figure 68. The main
buildings of the station are represented by the Site 2 130 complex in the northwestern portion of the project
area. These features consist of concrete structural foundations, roads, paths, and utility and drainage
features.
Site 2142, Feature C at Site 2143, and the 72 features of Site 2147 all consist of small, unformed
concrete pads poured directly on exposed bedrock that apparently served as wiring anchors. The features
are clustered in the central seaward portion of the project area (see Figure 11). The features apparently
secured wiring for the antenna array and associated equipment. Wires protruding from these pads consist of
bare copper and plastic-sleeved wires that functioned as grounds, and to transmit electrical power and
monitoring communications.
There is a large area covered with a deposit of small rusted metal fragments (Site 2136, Feature B;
see Figure 37) that is centrally located on the seaward side of the anchor cluster (see Figure 68). The dense
deposit of gravel-sized fragments rusted metal probably came from the large, 230 ft high metal tower that
was the main antenna of the LORAN antenna array (see Figure 22). Rust removal and associated
maintenance was probably necessary on a regular basis for such metal structures sited adjacent to the
ocean.
One small concentration of eight anchors is situated adjacent to Feature C of Site 2 135 (see Figure
34) next to the navigation aid at the west end of overall anchor cluster. Feature C is an area covered with a
similar deposit of rusted metal fragments that also likely indicate the former presence of a metal tower.
Two inscriptions are present on concrete pads adjacent to Feature C (see Figure 68, Inscriptions 1 and 2)
that indicate a US LHS facility and a date of February 1922.
No anchors are present on the seaward sides of these metal fragment concentrations, possibly
because the towers were designed to sendlreceive radio signals primarily in a southerly direction. At least
three features (Site 21 34, and 2 139, Features A and D) are probably anchors for guy wires that stabilized
the main metal tower.
Table 4. Suntrtiary of Concrete Features Site 2130 21-30 Feuture A J3 Type Slab Slnb Length IT 7 Y" 14' 3%" Width T I 1%" 7 1%" Depth 2' 5%" 1' 7%" shape Rcctongubr Rcclangubr Comhuction Formd concmte Formbd concretc Associated c lemena I'rcjcctions nnd stcps Projccliot~s u~vl stcps Potc nth1 function Fouiut?tion hr LOKSTA builditg I~o~u~liOn lbr LOKSTA builditp Similar kutut~s in ptujcct ntyu
Table X Summary of Cot~crete Feattires (conL) Site 2139 2 140 2141 2142 2143 2143 2144 2 144 2144 2154 2144 2145 2145 214 214 + 2147 Feature 1) A C A B C D E A a A B 72 fcns. Type Post Block Pad Pod Slab Pad Block Pnd Pad Pnd Pad Pad Pad Block Pad Pad Lrngth 1' 7 X' 5' 7 Y" 2'9 ?4" 1'3%' 14' 9 %" I' I 1 X S G %* 91" 4' 11 'A" 2' 7 #" 2'8 %* 6 5 X' 3'2 X' 5'7%" 4' 11 3" I I Y Wdth I' 7 X" 9 6 %" 2'4 #" 8%" G 8%' 1' 3 3' 9 6 %' 411%" 4 ll Y" 1' I I X" 2 Y." 3'3" T %" 97%" 4 11 Y" 9%" Height1 DE th 4 3 H" 3' 8 X" 2 %" L X" 10%" I' 9 ?4 3 G 'X" 6%" 1' 3" 10 X" I' 2X" 2 %" 3 K" 3'G%" I X" 2%" Shnpc Squnrc Squnrc Rccta~~ulnr Oval Rcctargular lrrcgllnr Squnrc Squnrc Squnrc Rcctsr~ular Rectangular Rccteqular Rcctatppbr Squarc Squmrc Oval Construction Formcd cmrctc and lnetal Formed concrclc Formed concrctc Pmucd illto ground For:ormcdcmrctc Pourcd onto outcrop Formed concretc Formed concrctc Formd concrctc Formed concrctc Formed concrctc Fmrd concrctc Formedconcntc Formd concrctc Fd collcrctc Pourcd onto outcrop Associuted elements Mctnl hckct and strnp Rcccsscd am on top \\'it11 \vd pok Rcctangulnr confgurat~on of bolts nnl plntc on surfacc Two mnnhok cowrs Vertical concrete column m ccntcr Metal attschmncnt. 7- 17-74: 7,ittk: SKI" n~d Flcnrt wrth nrrour Rccesscd arcs on top Pute ntiul function Ciu! \\ ~rc nnchor Post st~pport Tower lwrsc M cquipmnt munl Wlr111g anclw Utilitv kzaturc (wastc\\?itcr?) W~rtng anchor I'cnt support I.'ou~&tion for ? I:oumd&n~ for ? 'I'owcr htsc or cquipmenl nmmr I ou~ldaii for ? I ou~idntio~i for :' I otndntioo for ? Post support I ounbuon for ? W~nngnnchors Similar featu~vs in ptapct atra 2134.2139-A 2137-A.2139-B, 2144-A, 2I4G-A 2 133A 2143-C, 2147 2130-C and E 2142,2137 2137-A.2139-B. 2140.2IJGA 2135-A.2139-C.214GB 2137 2l37-A.2139-F3.2140.2IJJ-A 2135-A.2133-C.2144-C 2142.2 133-C
1 - Feature 2 135-B 2-sell 16 1922 (Fqyre 33) 2- Feature 2135-B US LHS (Figure 34 3- Feature 2139-B 7-1 6- 74 - BLACtfOWSW - U.S.C.G. (Figure 40) 4- Feature 2144-D 7-1 7-74 - "Li.CCbSKf" - U.S.C.G. (F1gw-e 59 / / .. f - Feature Associated wtih main LORAN Station Wiring Anchor Tower Base or Equipment Mount @ Utility Feature (Wastewater?) X Guy Wire Anchor 5' Square Pads A 5' 6-8" Square Post Support Figure 68. Distribution of Associated Features within Project Area
Three features (Site 2143-A and Site 2130-C and -E; see Figures 13 and 49) are formed concrete
surfaces with round metal manhole covers. The covers resemble ones usually associated with wastewater
transmission systems. The two at Site 2130 would have been located in or adjacent to the two story
building in the depression at the west side of the main LORAN facility (see Figure 22). The location of
these features at the lowest elevation within the main facility would be consistent with a main facility-wide
gravity-fed wastewater drainage system.
Feature 2134-A has two manhole covers and is situated in a relatively isolated location at the coast
in the central portion of the project area. The isolated, coastal location may indicate that the system was
designed to drain into the ocean; however, no evidence of a buried pipeline connecting the two facilities
was observed during the survey. Much of the intervening terrain is exposed bedrock or bedrock covered
with a shallow soil deposit that would have required substantial effort to excavate. It is possible that the
pipeline was on the surface and was subsequently removed. Alternatively, these manhole covers may
represent access points to subterranean vaults unrelated to wastewater, potentially electrical utilities.
Six features within the project area likely functioned as tower bases or mounts for equipment
based on the presence of bolts and other metal hardware protruding from formed, concrete pads (see Figure
68). These consist of Features 2 13 1-E, 2 133-A, 2 136-A, 2 137-B, 2141, and 2144-D. Four of these features
are situated in a roughly linear pattern, 150-200 fi (46-61 m) apart extending from the central coast to the
southwest side of the large depression. The other two are situated approximately 350 ft (107 m) apart along
the inland side of the project area adjacent to The Point at Po'ipii resort. One feature fiom each group is
dated to July 1974 (see Figure 68, Inscriptions 3 and 4).
There are two standardized types of formed concrete features that have nearly identical
dimensions, and probably had similar functions. One type consists of standardized formed concrete blocks
and the other of formed concrete pads. The first type consists of five concrete blocks that are c. 5'6" to 5'
8" square at the base tapering to 4' 8" square at the top (Features 2137-A, 2139-B, 2140,2144-A and 2146-
A). The features range from 3' 5" to 3' 8" in height and have a square hole in the upper surface that served
to support a large 'telephone pole" size post (see Figure 46). Three of these features (2 137-A, 21 39-B, and
2140) probably support the three poles that were part of the LORAN antenna array seaward of the main
facility (see Figure 22). The other two pole supports are situated at the east end of the properly. One has a
reinforced concrete pole remnant (2144-A; see Figure 52) and the hole the other one is filled with concrete
(2146-A; see Figure 57).
The second standardized concrete feature type consists of four concrete pads that are 4' 11 %"
square (Features 2135-A, 2139-C, 2135-A, and 2146-B; "5' Square Pads" in Figure 68). One of these
(2135-A) is categorized as a block because it is nearly two feet thick, potentially a result of erosion
exposing the lower half of the feature (see Figure 32). These features likely sewed as foundations for some
type of small structure, facility, or equipment, but lack any attachment hardware. It is notable that all except
one of these features is situated within approximately 50-95 fi (15-29 m) of a standardized post support
feature, the only exception is the isolated post support (Site 2140) in the large depression. This apparent
pairing probably indicates a functional relationship between these two standardized feature types.
There are ten pads of variable size that are categorized as indeterminate foundations (Features
2130-D, 2130-F, 2132-A, 2132-B, 2133-B, 2133-C, 2144-B, 2144-E, 2145-A, and 2145-B). The
distribution of these features is shown in Figure 68. All appear to be paired with one other pad. Two are
situated within the LORAN main facility in the inland portion of the project area. The others are situated in
the eastern (2 pairs) and western (2 pairs) coastal portions of the project area. These features likely also
served as foundations for some type of small structure, facility, or equipment. The pairing and overall
distribution probably indicates a functional relationship between the features.
Significance Assessment
ksuant to DLNR (1998) Chapter 275-6 (d), the initial significance assessments provided herein are
not fmal until concurrence fiom the DLNR has been obtained. Sites identified during the survey are assessed for
significance based on the criteria outlined in the Rules Governing Procedures for Historic Preservation Review
(DLNR 1998: Chapter 275). According to these rules, a site must possess integrity of location, design, setting,
materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and shall meet one or more of the following criteria:
Criterion "a". Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad
patterns of our history;
Criterion "b". Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past;
Criterion "c". Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction; represent the work of a master; or possess high artistic value;
Criterion "d". Have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on
prehistory or history; and
Criterion "e". Have an important traditional cultural value to the native Hawaiian people or to
another ethnic group of the state due to associations with traditional cultural practices once
carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs,
events or oral accounts--these associations being important to the group's history and cultural
identity.
The 18 sites identified within the project area are assessed as significant solely under Criterion "d".
The sites have yielded information important for understanding historic land use in project area.
Recommended Treatments
The sites within the project area have been adequately documented and no further work or
preservation is recommended. Although extensive subsurface testing did not identify subsurface cultural
deposits or burials, it is recommended that any future development-related land disturbance be
archaeologically monitored during the initial site work because significant deposits and burials were found
on the adjacent property. The monitoring would be guided by a monitoring plan prepared for DLNR-
SHPD review and approval.
References
Alexander, Arthur
1985 Koloa Plantation 1835-1935. Kauai Historical Society. Lihue.
Bennett, Wendell C.
193 1 The Archaeology ofKaua 'i, Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 80, Honolulu, HI.
Burgess, Stella
201 1 Interview on 26 April 201 1. Audio Recording on File at Ham & Associates.
Ching, F., S.L. Palama and C. Stauder
1974 The Archaeology of Kona Kaua'i na ahupua 'a Weliweli, Pa'a, Miihii 'ulepii: Surface
Survey of the Coastal Lands, Archaeological research Center Hawai'i, Lawa'i, Kaua'i.
Ching, Harold
1985 Hawaii's Chinese Pioneers: Notes in the Chinese Historical Society. For Koloa's 1985 multi-
Anniversary Jubilee
Cook, James
1784 A Voyage to the Pacific Ocean: Undertaken, by the Command of His Majesty, for Making
Discoveries in the Northern Hemisphere, to Determine the Position and Extent of the West Side of
North America; its Distance fiom Asia; and the Practicability of a Northern Passage to Europe.
Volume II. Dublin.
Creed, V., G. Ida, and H. Hammatt
1995 An Archaeological Inventory Survey for Po'ipii Road Safety Improvements, Po'ipii,
Kaua'i (TMK: 2-8-15, 16, 17 & 18), Cultural Surveys Hawai'i, Kailua, Hawai'i.
DLNR (Department of Land and Natural Resources)
2003 Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources, State Historic
Preservation Division.
Dockall, J., H. Hammatt, U. Rainalter, and S. Masciengelo
2005 Archaeological Inventory Survey of Po'ipii Beach Park, Mauka Preserve, Kdoa
Ahupua'a, Kona District,
Farley, J.K.
1907 Notes on Maulili Pool, K6loa. Thrum's Annual, Honolulu, HI.
Foote, D.E., E.L. Hill, S. Nakamura, and F. Stephens
1972 Soil Survey of the Islands of Kauai, Oahu, Maui, Molokai and Lanai, State of Hawaii. U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and University of Hawaii Agricultural Experiment Station.
Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Fornander, Abraham
191 8 Fornander Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore: The Hawaiians' Account of the
Formation of their Islandr and Origin of Their Race, with the Traditions of Their Migrations, Etc.,
as Gatheredfiom Original Sources. Memoirs of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum Volume V,
1918-1919. Bishop Museum Press. Honolulu, H.I.
Firor, J., P. Rosendahl and S. Goodfellow
1991 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Grove Farm, Kawailoa Property, Land of Mahaulepu, Koloa
District, Island of Kauai. PHFU Report 597-123091 prepared for Grove Farm Properties, Inc. Lihue, HI.
Firor, J. and P. Rosendahl
1992 Additional Data Collection, Hyatt Regency Kauai, Proposed Golf Course Project Area, Land of Paa,
Koloa District, Island of Kauai. PHRI Report 447 prepared for Grove Farm Properties, Inc. and
Ainako Resorts Associates.
Fredsplace.org
nd. The Place to Meet Old Shipmates website (www.fredsplace.org)
Hammatt, H
1989a Archaeological Data Recovery Plan for Keoneloa Bay Villas, Weliweli and Pa'a, Kauai. Cultural
Surveys Hawaii report prepared for Landmark Suites of America, Inc.
1989b A Burial Treatment Plan for the Proposed Keoneloa Bay Villas, Weliweli and Pa'a, Kauai.
Cultural Surveys Hawaii report prepared for Landmark Suites of America, Inc.
1 99Oa Preliminary Report on Archaeological Testing for the Proposed Keoneloa Bay Villas, Weliweli
and Pa'a, Kauai. Cultural Surveys Hawaii report prepared for Sweeny Development Company,
Inc.
1990b Preliminary Status Report on Further Archaeological Testing for the Proposed Keoneloa Bay
Villas, Weliweli and Pa'a, Kauai. Cultural Surveys Hawaii report prepared for Sweeny
Development Company, Inc.
1992 Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Po'ipii Road and LBwaLi Road Junction, Kbloa, Kaua'i,
Cultural Surveys Hawai'i Inc., Kailua, Hawai'i.
Hammatt, H.H., J.H. Toenjes
199 1 Archaeological Data Recovery and Construction Monitoring at the Proposed Keoneloa Bay Villas,
Weliweli and Pa'a, Kaua'i (TMK 4-2-8-20: 1 & 4-2-8-2 1 : 1). Prepared for Sweeney Development
Company.
Hammatt, H. , R.M. Bordner and M. J. Tomonari-Tuggle
1978 Archaeological and Biological Survey of the Proposed Kiahuna Golf Village Area, Kbloa, Kona,
Kaua'i Island, Hawai'i, A.R.C.H., LZwa'i, Kaua'i.
Hammatt, H., D. Borthwick, D. Shideler and M. Stride
1988 Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Proposed Kukuiula Bay Planned Community, Koloa, Kauai.
Cultural Surveys Hawaii report prepared for R.M. Towill Corporation.
Hammatt, H., W. Folk and M. Stride
1991 Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Proposed Poipulani Golf Course and Residential Development,
Koloa, Kauai. Cultural Surveys Hawaii report prepared for Poipulani Development Corporation.
Hammatt, H., G. Ida, and W. Folk
1993a Archaeological Survey of 7.6 Acres at Kbloa, Kaua'i, TMK: (4) 2-8-14:30, Cultural Surveys
Hawai'i, Kailua, Hawai'i.
Hammatt, H., G. Ida, W. Folk, D. Shideler, and B. Collins
1993b Archaeological Testing and Monitoring at Poi'pu Beach Park, Koloa, Kauai. Cultural Surveys Hawaii
report.
Handy, E.S.C., E.G. Handy, M.K. Pukui
1991 Native Planters in Old Hawaii, Their Life, Lore, & Environment. Bishop Museum Press,
Honolulu, HI
Hill, R., T. Tulchin, J. Tulchin and H. Hammatt
2005 Archaeological Inventory Survey for a 8.633-acre Parcel at Koloa. Cultural Surveys Hawaii report
prepared for Eric A, Knudsen Trust
Ida, G., V. Creed and H. Hammatt
1996 Archaeological Investigation for Environmental Assessment of the proposed KoloaPoipu Bypass
Road, Koloa, Weliweli, Kona, Kauai. Cultural Surveys Hawaii Report prepared for Wilson Okamoto
and Associates.
Joesting Edward
1987 Kauai: The Separate Kingdom. University of Hawaii Press
Judd, Bernice
1935 Koloa: A Sketch of its Development. In Kaua'i Museum Material, Section 11. Unpublished
Manuscript.
Juvik, S.P. and J.O. Juvik (editors)
1998 Atlas of Hawaii, Third Edition. University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu.
Kailihiwa, S., A. Haun, and J. Henry
20 1 1 Cultural Impact Assessment, TMK: (4) 2-8-02 1 :O4 1, Makahuena Point, Weliweli Ahupuaca, Kbloa
District, Island of Kaua'i, Haun & Associates Report 811 prepared for CIRI Land Decvelopment
Company.
Kamakau, S.
1992 Ruling Chiefs ofHawaii. [Revised] Kamehameha Schools Press, Honolulu. [I842 and 1870.1
Kikuchi, W.
1963 Archaeological Survey and Excavations on the Island of Kauai, Kona District, Hawaiian Islands.
Sponsored by University of Hawaii Committee for the Preservation and Study of Hawaiian
Language, Art, and Culture.
1980 Letter Report on Archaeological Reconnaissance of Keoneloa Beach Area, Koloa, Kauai. Prepared for
ADM International.
1988 Archaeological Reconnaissance of a Proposed Multi-Family Rental Subdivision,
Pa'anau Camp, Ahupua'a of Kbloa, Kbloa District, Kaua'i, TMK 2-6-04:46.
Archaios, Lawa'i, Kaua'i, HI
Knudsen, Augustus
19 13 "The Defeat of Kamehameha's Army". Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1914. The Reference
Book of Information and Statistics Relating to the Territoly of Hawaii, of Value to Merchants,
Tourists and Others pp136-141. Thos. G. Thrum, Honolulu T.H.
Krauss, Beatrice H.
1993 Plants in Hawaiian Culture. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI.
Ladd, E.J.
198 1 Archaeological Field Survey Report, Makahuena Point, Kauai. Prepared for the 14" Coast Guard
District.
Landrum, J.
1984 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Alexander and Baldwin's Lands at Kukuiula, Koloa, Kauai. Bishop
Museum, Honolulu, Hawaii.
loran-histoy info
nd. Loran Station Kauai. httv://www.loran-history.info/kauaikauai.htm
McMahon, Nancy
1991 Locating Kane'aukai Heiau, an Archaeological and Historical Synthesis, Weliweli, Koloa, Hawaii.
Mitchell, A., R. Chiogioji, H.H. Harnrnatt
2005 Cultural Impact Assessment for an Approximately 203-Acre Parcel in Kdoa Ahupua'a, Kona
District, Island of Kaua'i, TMK (4) 2-18--013:OOl; 2-8-014:001, 002, 003, 004, and 019.
Prepared for the Eric A. Knudsen Trust.
Neller, E.
1981 An Archaeological Assessment of recent Disturbances to Archaeological Sites in the Poipu Kai
Subdivision, Pa'a, Kauai. Historic Sites Section, De[t. of Natural resources.
O'Hare, C., D. Shideler and H. Hammatt
2003 An Archaeological Assessment of Lands in the Sheraton Kauai Resort at Koloa Ahupua'a, Kauai
Island. Cultural Surveys Hawaii Report.
Palama, Stephen L.
1973 The Archaeology of Kona, Kaua'i fiom the Ahupua'a of Koloa to the Ahupua'a of Weliweli:
Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Proposed Cane Haul
Papakilo Database
nd. Milhele 'Aha Index - Foreign Testimony - Helu 5219.
httD://vavakilodatabase.com/main/imaidima~ese~er.vhv?file=Ol138.vdf&vath=H/A~SM/7/1/5/1/1
Pukui, M.K., S.H. Elbert
1986 Hawaiian Dictionary, Hawaiian-English, English-Hawaiian, Revised and Enlarged Edition.
University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu, HI
Smith, H.W.
1991 Historical Documentary Research. Archaeological Inventory Survey Grove Farm Kawailoa
Property Additional Parcel, Land of Mahaulepu, Koloa District, Island of Kauai. Walker and
Goodfellow 1991. Appendix B pp. B-1 to B-1 1.
Spanamwar.com
nd. Spanish American War Centennial War Website. http://www.spanamwar.com/
Stokes, J.F.G.
1946 "Dune Sepulture, Battle Mortality, and Kamehameha's Alleged Defeat on Kauai". Hawaii
Historical Review Annual Report 1946. Honolulu, HI.
Thrum, Thomas G.
1906 Heiaus and Heiau Sites Throughout the Hawaiian Islands." Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for
1907. Honolulu.
Townsend, John K.
1839 Narrative of a Journey Across the Rocky Mountains, to the Columbia River, and a Visit to the
Sandwich Islanh, Chili, &c. with a ScientiJic Appendix. Henry Perkins, Philadelphia, PA.
Tulchin, T. and H. Hammatt
2005 Archaeological Literature Review and Field Inspection for an 8.5-acre Knudsen Trust Parcel. Cultural
Surveys Hawaii report prepared for Eric A. Knudson Trust.
USCG
1946 The Coast Guard at War IV, LORAN Volume 11. Prepared in the Historical Section Public
Information Division U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters. Aug. 1, 1946.
uscg.mil
nd. United States Coast Guard. (www.uscg.mi1)
USLHS.org
nd. The United States Lighthouse Society website (uslhs.org)
Van Ryzin, K. and H. Hammatt
2004 Archaeological Data Recovery of the Eric A. Knudson Trust Lands. Koloa, Kauai. Cultural Surveys
Hawaii report prepared for Eric A. Knudson Trust.
Walker, A. and P. Rosendahl
1990 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Hyatt Regency Kauai, Proposed Golf Course Project Area, Land of
Paa, Koloa District, Island of Kauai. PHRI Report 447-1 11591 prepared for Grove Farm Properties,
Inc. and Ainako Resorts Associates.
Walker, A. and S. Goodfellow
1991 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Grove Farm Kawailoa Property, Additional Property, Land of
Mahaulepu, Koloa District, Island of Kauai. PHRI Report 597-063092 prepared for Grove Farm
Properties, Inc. Lihue, HI.
Walker, A. P. Rosendahl and S. Goodfellow
1992 Archaeological Data Recovery, Phase 11, Hyatt Regency Kauai Mitigation Program, Land of Paa,
Koloa District, Island of Kauai. PHRI Report 472 prepared for Grove Farm Properties, Inc. Lihue,
Kauai.
Westewelt, William D.
1916 Hawaiian Legends of Ghosts and Ghost-God. Forgottenl3ooks.org
19 17 "A Hawaiian High Chief -A-Lau-Niu-Ohua (The leaf of the fruitful coconut), who lived about
1270 (According to Fornander) or 1300 (according to Kamakau)." me Friend, December 19 17.
Wigglesworh, K. and D. Graves
1992 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Grove Farm Quany Relocation Project, Land of Mahaulepu, Koloa
District, Island of Kauai. PHRI Report 1263 prepared for Grove Farm Properties, Inc. Lihue, HI.
Wyman, Jefiies
1868 "Observations on Crania." Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History. Vol XI. 1866-
1868. Press of Abner A. Kingman, Boston, MA. pp 440-462.
Yorck, J., R. Chiogioji, and H. Hammatt
2004 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of a 9.4-Acre Parcel along Waikomo Stream, Kdoa
Ahupua'a, Kona District, Kaua'i Island, (TMK: (4) 2-6-04: 19 Portion), Cultural Surveys Hawai'i,
Inc., Kailua, Hawai'i.
Yorck, J., J. Madeus, Tulchin, T., S. Freeman, J. Dockall and H. Hammatt
2005 Archaeological Inventory Survey for Makai Portion of Parcel 19 of the Eric A. Knudson Trust Lands.
Koloa, Kauai. Cultural Surveys Hawaii report prepared for Eric A. Knudson Trust.
Associates
Archaeological, Cultural, and Historical Resource Management Services
73-1168 Kahuna A'o Road, Kailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740 Phone: (808) 325-2402 Fax: 325-1520
December 2,2012 Project 810
Pua Aiu, Ph.D., SHPD Administrator
State Historic Preservation Division
Department of Land and Natural Resources
601 Kamokila Boulevard, Suite 555
Kapolei, Hawai'i 96707
Subject: Final Archaeological Inventory Survey for a 13.6-acre Project Area
Weliweli Ahupua'a, Koloa District, Island of Kauai
TMK: (4) 2-8-021:041
(A.E. Haun, D. Henry and S. Kailihiwa 2011, Report 810-042611)
Dear Dr. Aiu:
The subject final archaeological inventory survey (AIS) is enclosed. The draft AIS was revised based on Division
review comments dated August 27, 2012 (LOG NO: 2011.1830; DOC NO: 1208SL18). The 12 review comments
listed in the ATTACHMENT to the review letter are listed below followed by our response and associated revisions.
Project Area Description
1. Revise (page 1) from "the project are varies" to "the project area varies".
Response: Corrected
2. Revise Fig 1 caption to include map date.
Response: Revised as requested, listing map date of 1996
Previous Archaeological Research
3. Revise Thrum (1907) to Thrum (1906).
Response: Revised as requested
4. Revise (page 13) from "He also identified a series of walls at designated as" to "He also identified a
series of wall designated as".
Response: Revised to read, "He also identified a series of walls designated as".
5. Revise (page 17) from "The features 98 concrete pads," to "The features consist of 98 concrete pads".
Response: Revised as requested
6. Revise Table 1- to include the following studies shown in Fig 8: Palama 1973; Hammatt 1992; Hammatt
et al. 1993a, and Hill et al. 1996.
Response: Revised as requested. Date of Hill et at. changed from 1996 to 2005, which is the correct date
7. Revise Fig 8 -to include the following studies listed in Table 1: Walker and Goodfellow 1991; Hill et al.
2005
Response: Revised as requested
Haun & Associates
December 2,2012
Findings
8. Revise format glitches (see sentences not right justified) in which dimensions (feet & inches) are
overwritten/jumbled: page 19-last 4 paragraphs; page 24 - 3rd paragraph; page 26-1st paragraph (see
also - Figure 16)); page 31-2nd paragraph; page 34-3rd and 4th paragraphs; page 42-2nd paragraph;
page 45-3rd paragraph (see also "remain ns are"); page 494th) Sth, & 8th paragraphs; page 53-last
paragraph.
Response: Revised as requested
Subsurface Testing
9. Revise (page 57) from "Five of the units were located" to "Four of the units were located".
Response: Revised as requested
10. Revise (page 58) Table 3 line subdividing TU 18 into 2 blocks - i.e., layers I and II should both apply to
TU-18.
Response: Revised as requested
11. Revise (page 61) Fig 64 stratum I label in TU-14.
Response: Revised as requested
References Cited
12. Revise - Firor 1992 appears in Table 1 and Fig 8 but not in bib; Firor & Rosendahl1992 appears in bib
but not in Table 1, Fig 8 or text; Firor et al. 1991 appears in Table 1 and Fig 8 but not in bib; Revise to
include the following citation mentioned in text but absent from bib: Knudsen 1914 (see page 7; story
dates 1914 but citation is 1913); Kamakau 1992 (see page 8); Thrum citation should read: Thrum,
Thomas 1906 "Heiaus and Heiau Sites throughout the Hawaiian islands." Hawaiian Almanac and
Annual for 1907. Honolulu.
Response: Firor 1992 changed to Firor & Rosendahl 1992 in Table 1, Figure 8 and references
Firor et al. 1991 added to references
Knutson 1914 changed to 1913 on page 7 -correct in references
Kamakau 1992 added to references
Thrum 1906 citation modified in references
If you have any further questions, or require any additional information, please contact me at (808) 325-2402.
Principal Investigator
Encl. Report, CD, Copy of Review Letter
cc: ClRl Land Development Co.
NEIL hBERCROIlRlE
(jO\'ER.OR OF IiANAIhlt
August 27,2012
Dr. Alan E. Haun, Principal Investigator
Haun &Associates
73- 1 168 Kahuna A'o Road
ICailua-Kona. Hawaii 96740
Dear Dr. Haun:
PAUL J. COSROI'
hMlLl FIRST DFPUn
HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION
DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES
601 Kamokila Boulevard, Suite 555
Kapolei. HI 96806
LOG NO: 201 1.1830
DOC NO: l2O8SLI8
Archaeology
SUBJECT: Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review -
Archaeological Inventory Survey Report for 13.6 Acres, Makahuena Point
Weliweli Ahupua'a, Kaloa District, Island of Kaua'i
TMK: (4) 2-8-021:041
Thank you for the opportunity to review the draft report titled Archaeological Inwntoiy Survey TMK: (4) 2-8-
021 :O4I Makahzrena Point, Weliweli Ahupua 'a, K6loa District, Island of Kaua 'i (Haun, Henry, and Kailihiwa, June
201 1). This document was received by our office on June 6, 201 1; we apologize for the delayed review and thank
you for your patience. This report presents the findings of an archeological inventory survey that was conducted on a
13.6-acre parcel and involved a 100% pedestrian surface survey. Sites were defined as clusters of features less than
15 m apart. The exception was a site designation applied to a series of widely scattered, nearly identical small
concrete pads. The archaeological survey identified 18 sites comprised of a total of 128 features. All of the sites and
features &e identified as remnants of US federal government navigation-related infrastructure. The majority of the
remains are associated with the former US Coast Guard Long Range Navigation (LORAN) station that operated at
the point from 1951 to 1979. The documented features consist of 98 concrete pads, 7 concrete blocks, 4 artifact
scatters, 4 posts, 3 terraces, 3 slabs, 2 paths, 2 walls, and one each of the following: ditch, road, stairs, utility box.
and wall slab. Subsurface testing consisted of the excavation of 20 test units. No intact subsurface cultural deposits
were identified during the testing.
The 18 sites are assessed as significant solely under Hawaii Register of Historic Places (HRIIP) Criterion "d" for
their information content, and are recommended as having been adequately documented. No further work or
presentation is recommended. Although no subsurface cultural deposits were identified during subsurface testing,
archaeological monitoring is recommended for future ground-disturbing activities because significant deposits and
burials were found on the adjacent property. SHPD agrees with the proposed significance assessments and treatment
recommendations.
The archaeological inventory survey report provides an excellent discussion of field methods, archival and historical
background, previous archaeological investigations, and the project findings and sites. This report meets the
requirements of Hawaii Administrative Rule 13-276-5 and is accepted bv SHPD with the understanding that some
minor revisions are made in the final document (see attachment). ke t :nd one
rdcopy of the document, clearly marked FINAL, along with a copy
-. . ..- -7 cp L A- v -..- I-: ounn ..cc..- ...h..-6.-- cwnn r :L ---. -
8019 or St .A.Lebokaha\\~aii.~o\l if you have any questions
~rtca~c LUIILSLLL ~US~II n. LGUU ai (800) U~L-
:ems regarding this letter.
Aloha,
Theresa K. Donham
Archaeology Branch Chief
Dr. Ham
August 27,2012
Page 2
ATTACMMENT
Comments and Questions: Archaeological Inventoiy Survey TMX.. (4) 2-8-021 :O4I Makahuena Point, Weliweli
Ahupua 'a, Kdoa District, Island of Kazia 'i (Haun, Henry, and Kailihiwa, June 20 1 1).
Project Area Description
(1) Revise @age 1) fiom "the project are varies" to "the project area varies"
(2) Revise Fig 1 caption to include map date.
Previous Archaeological Research
(3) Revise Thrum (1907) to Thnun (1906).
(4) Revise (page 13) from "He also identified a series of walls at designated as" to "He also identified a series of
wall designated as".
(5) Revise (page 17) from "The features 98 concrete pads," to "The features consist of 98 concrete pads".
(6) Revise Table 1 - to include the following studies shown in Fig 8: Palama 1973; Hamman 1992; Hammatt et
al. 1993a, and Hill et al. 1996.
(7) Revise Fig 8 -to include he-following studies listed in Table 1: Walker and Goodfellow 1991; Hill et al.
2005.
Findings
(8) Revise format glitches (see sentences not right justified) in which dimensions (feet & inches) are
overwrittenJjumbled: page 19- last 4 paragraphs; page 24 - 3rd pargagraph; page 26-1st paragraph (see also
C Figure 16)); page 3 1-2nd paragraph; page 34-3rd and 4th paragraphs; page 42-2nd paragraph; page 45-
3rd paragraph (see also "remain ns are"); page 49-4th,5th, & 8th paragraphs; page 53-last paragraph.
Subsurface Testing
(9) Revise (page 57) fiom Tive of the units were located" to "Four of the units were located".
(10) Revise @age 58) Table 3 line subdividing TU 18 into 2 blocks - i.e., layers I and I1 should both apply to TU
18.
(1 1) Revise (page 61) Fig 64 stratum I label in TU-14.
References Cited
(1 2) Revise - Firor 1992 appears in Table 1 and Fig 8 but not in bib; Firor & Rosendahl1992 appears in bib but
not in Table 1, Fig 8 or text; Firor et al. 1991 appears in Table 1 and Fig 8 but not in bib; Revise to include
the following citation mentioned in text but absent fiom bib: Knudsen 1914 (see'page 7; story dates 1914 but
citation is 1913); Kamakau 1992 (see page 8); Thrum citation should read: Thrum, Thomas 1906 "Heiaus and
Heiau Sites throughout the Hawaiian Islands." Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1907. Honolulu.
Bernard P. Cawalho, Jr.
Mayor
Gary K. Beu
Managing ~kector
Michael A. Dahilig
Interim Director of Planning
Dee M. Crowell
Deputy Director of Planning
f* nzm A T)TRR~~F
County of Kauaci, State of Hawai'i
4444 Ricc Street, Suite A-473, Lihu'e, Hawai'i 96766
TEL (808) 241-'4050 FAX (808) 241-6699
SEP 1 9 2011
Galen T. Nakarnura
SHIRAMIZU LOO & NAKAMURA
4357 Rice Street, Suite 201
Lihu'e, Hawai'i 96766
Subject: Tax Map Key: (4) 2-8-021:041
Po'ipii, Kaua'i
This is to acknowledge receipt of your transmittal dated May 27,201 1 requesting a
deteimination for the property referenced above.
In considering your request, please understand that the definition of a "LOT" is being referenced
pursuant to Section 9-1.5 of the Kauai County Code (1987), as amended, and it reads:
"LOT means aportion of land shown as a unit on an approved and recorded
subdivision map. "
Based on the foregoing and information you've provided, the department recognizes the 25
parcels within the Makahuena Tract and further identified on File Plan 354 (Exhibit 2 of your
transmit@) as existing lots of record. Howeverj. the department is unable to support the
existence of Parcels L-1 through L-3 since there are no supporting documents that recognize the
establishment of these parcels,
Should you have .fUrther questions regarding this matter, please contact Dale A. Cua of my staff
at 808.24l.4050. Aloha!
~CHAEL A. DAHILIG 4
Interim Director of Planning
An Equal Opportunity Employer
EXHIBIT M
EXHIBIT M
EXHIBIT N
INDIVIDUAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM (IWS) REPORT
FOR
CIRI Land Development Company
an Alaska corporation, and a wholly owned subsidiary of
Cook Inlet Region Inc., an Alaska Native corporation
PREPARED BY:
ESAKI SURVEYING & MAPPING, INC.
1610 HALEUKANA STREET
LIHU'E, KAUA 'I, HAWAI'J 96766
(808)246-0625
EXHIBIT N
EXHIBIT O-1
B.D. NEAL & ASSOCIATES
Applied Meteorology • Air Quality • Computer Science
P.O. BOX 1808 • KAlLUA-KONA, HA WAll96745 • TELPHONE (808) 329-1627 • FAX (808) 325-6739
EMAIL: bdneal@bdneal.com
Attn: Mr. Dave Pfeifer
CIRI Land Deve lopment Company
P.O. Box 93330
Anchorage , Alaska 99509-3330
Subject: Makahuena Point Project
Air Quality Impact Assessment
Dear Mr. Pfeifer:
December 20 , 20 1 3
In response to your request, we have examined the potential air
quality impacts related to the proposed Makah uen a Point Project
located at Poipu , Kauai. The results of this examination along
with background information rel ated to this issue and recommended
mitigation measures are summarized below.
Project Description
CIRI Land Development Company (CLDC) is proposing to consolidate
and re-subdivide lots on its Makahuena Point property i n the
Koloa District on the island of Kauai . CLDC is an Alaska
corporation, and a wholly owned subsidiary of Cook Inle t Re gion
Inc. (CIRI). CIRI is an Alaska Native corporation a n d one of the
12 Alaska-based regional corporations established by the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act of 197 1. CIRI was established to
benefit Alaska Native s who have ties to the Cook Inlet Region of
Alaska, and is owned by more than 8,100 Alaska Native
s hareholders of predominately Athabascan and Southeast Indian,
Inup iat, Yup 'ik Eskimo, Alutiiq and Aleut descent. CLDC, as the
land development and investment arm of CIRI, is dedicated to
making sound, l ong -term real estate investmen ts in properties
t hat are capable of providing a sustainable return to fulfill
CIRI's mission to benefit current and future Native shareholders.
The CLDC prope rt y comprises approximately 13 acres of land along
the coast at Poipu with 25 lots of record (tax map key (TMK)
No. (4) 2 -8 -021 : 044 -068), one bulk lot (TMK No. (4) 2 -8 -021 :
041), and two unnumbered road lots. The consolidation andre-
subdivision wil l result in 10 s ingle -family residential lots along
EXHIBIT O-1
Mr. Dave Pfeifer
Makahuena Point Project
with associated open space and infrastructure.
subdivision will be via Pe'e Road.
Amb i ent Air Quality Standards
Decembe r 20, 20 1 3
Page 2
Access to the new
Both federal and s t ate standards have been established t o maintain
ambient air quality. At t he present time, seven parameters are
regulated including: particulat e matter, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen
sulfide, nitrogen dioxide , carbon monoxide, ozone and l ead.
Hawaii air q u ality s t andards are comparab l e to the national
s t andards except those for nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide
which are more stringent than the national standards.
Re gional and Local Climatology
Regional and local climate together with the amount and type of
human activity often dictate the air quality of a given location.
The climate of the Poipu area is very much affect ed by its
situation along the southern coast of Kauai. Tab l e 1 shows
monthly mean wind speed and direction data for Lihue Airport,
which is abou t 10 mi l es to the northeast. These dat a can be
expected to be reasonably representative of the p r oject site.
Winds are predominantly trade winds f r om the northeast and provi de
good ventilation much of the time. Monthly mean speeds are about
13 to 14 mph in summer and about 11 to 12 mph during t h e winter
months. Daily wind speeds typically vary between abou t 10 and 25
miles per hour.
Temperatures in the Poipu area are generally very consistent and
mild. Average daily temperatures at Lihue Airport, which are not
significantly different from the Poipu area, are about 70°F to
75°F. Wi nte r mont h s are only a few degrees cooler than summer.
As indicated in Table 2, average annual rainfall in the Poipu area
amounts to about 34 inch es, which means it is a moderately dry
location. This is based on more than 50 years of data collected
at nearby Puuhi. Summer months are the d r iest with an average of
about 1 to 2 inches per month, while winter months receive about 4
to 5 inches.
Existing Air Quality Conditions
Air quality in the vicinity of the project site prese n tly is
mostly affected by emissions from natu ral , industrial,
Mr. Dave Pfeifer
Makahuena Po i nt Project
Decembe r 20, 2013
Page 3
agricultural and/or motor veh icle sources . The only air quality
monitoring data t hat is presently collected on Ka ua i by the Hawaii
Department of Health is obtained at Niumalu, which is about
7 miles to the northeast of t he Poipu area. The purpose of this
monitoring station is primarily to mo ni tor emissions from cruise
ships visiting Nawiliwili Harbor . Monitoring equipment is
installed at the station to measure fi ne particulate, sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide. This station only
began operations in April 2011, so there is on ly a limited record
available. The da ta reported to date suggest that air quality
standards are currently being met, although a few higher
concentrations of sulfur dioxide have been measured. Air quality
in the Poipu area is believed to be good at the present time.
Air Quality Impacts of Project
The p rimary concern for this pro ject with respect to air quality
is the short-term direct and indirect impacts that could
potentially occur during project construction. For a project of
this nature, there are two potential types of air pollution
emissions that could directly result in short -term air q uality
impacts during project construction: (1) fugitive dust from site
clearing, soil excavation, aggrega t e processing and vehicle
movement; and (2) exhaust emissions from the operation of on-site
construction equipment. Indirectly, there also could be s ho rt-
te rm air quality impacts from the disruption of traffic on nearby
roadways, from slow -moving constru ction equipment traveli ng to
and from the project site, and from a temporary increase in local
traffic caused by commuting construction workers.
For this project, the potent ial for offsite fugitive dust impacts
during project construction is perhaps the most significant.
This is because: 1) the project site borders existing residential
uni t s on t he north and west; 2) the project site is located in a
windy and relatively dry area; and 3} the project site is rocky
with t hin layers of fine red soi l typical for much of Kauai.
Although t he prevailing trade winds from the northeast will tend
to move any fugiti ve dust emissions away from areas to the north
of the site, residential areas to the west (The Makahuena
Condominiums} could be impacted. Areas to the north or east may
also be impacted at times when the occasional winds from the
south or southwest occur.
Hawaii Administrative Rules, Section 11-60.1-33 state, in pa rt ,
that no person shall cause or permi t visible fugitive dust to
become airborne without taking reasonable precautions and that no
Mr. Dave P feif e r
Makahuena Point Project
December 20, 2013
Page 4
person shall cause or permit the discharge of visible fugitive
dust beyond the property lot line on which the f ugitive dust
originates. Failure to comply with the fugit ive dust
requirements may result in civil and administrative fines of up
to $25,000 per day per violation. Thus, to avoid potential
violations of these rules, and given the sensitive nature of the
p rope rty, a comprehensive dust control plan should be prepared
p ri or to beg inni ng construction. For this particular project, it
may be appropriate to consider going beyond the norm or the
traditional d us t control measures in an effort to avoid or reduce
conflicts.
The usual fugitive dust control measures for construction
activities include :
• Watering of land clearing and earth-moving activities
• Applying water or dust suppressants on unpaved roads and
material stockpiles
• Installing dust screens or wind barriers around t he site
boundary
• Limiting vehicle speeds onsite
• Paving or covering ingress and egress points to the site
with crushed rock or other temporary covering material
• Covering all moving , open -bod ied trucks transporting dusty
materials
• Keeping adjacent paved roads clean f rom soil tracked from
the site (road cleaning and/or tire washing)
• Limiting the amount of exposed areas through planning and
timing of project phases
• Mulching or chemically stabilizing inactive areas that have
been worked .
Installing dust screens as suggested above, while commonly done,
would likely no t be overly effective in controlling dust if used
as the sole means of addressing fugitive dust . In addition, some
find dust screens aesthetically displeasing.
Additional dust control measures could include:
• Scheduling land clearing and earth moving activities for
periods of the year that are less windy and more wet (winter
months in this case)
• Avoiding any rock crushing, screening or stockpiling
activities onsite
Mr. Dave Pfeifer
Makahuena Point Project
December 20, 2013
Page 5
• If offsite f ill material i s requi red , wetting the mate r ial
prior to trucking it to the site so t ha t it h as a high
mois t u r e content
• Paving of any permanent parking areas and/or es tab lishment
of landscap ing as early in the construction schedul e as
possible
Although the winter months are wetter and thus more advantageous
for dust control, rainfall is not so excessive so as to impede
site ear t h work .
Even wi t h an extensive dust control program, given the nature of
the project site and the nea rb y residential areas, it may be
inevitable that there will be some offsite impact s d u e to dust
du ri ng periods of site clearing and earth moving activities.
Therefore, it may be appropriate to conside r monito ring dust at
the site boundaries so as t o eva lua te a nd document the
effectiveness of d us t con tro l measures .
On -site mobile and stationary construction equipment also will
emit air pollu tants f rom engine exhausts. The l arges t of t his
equ i pment is usually d iesel-powered a n d emits nitrogen oxides and
other a ir po llut ants. The engines for this equipment should be
kept we ll-tuned and not a llowed to operate or idle excessively .
Slow-moving construction vehicles on roadways l eading to and from
the p r oject site cou l d obs truct the no r ma l f low of traffic to
such an extent th at overall vehicular emissions are increased.
This impact can be mi tiga ted by moving heavy construction
equipment during periods of low traffic volume.
In summary, even wi th best efforts, short -te r m i mpac ts f rom
fug itive d ust during initial project construction, i.e ., d ur ing
subdivision improvements, may potent i a lly occur. Becau se of
t his, it may b e appropriate and adv isab l e to go beyond t he no r mal
dust control measures in preparing t he project dust cont r ol p lan .
I t should be ant icipated t h at fugitive d u st control and
mi tigation during project construction will likely require extra
t ime, effort and cost .
Mr. Dave Pfeifer
Makahuena Point Project
December 20, 2013
Page 6
Please call me if you have any questions concerning the
information presented he r ein or if you wish to discuss this
matter further.
cc: Jennifer A . Benck (Carlsmith Ball)
Very truly yours,
~)J~
Barry D. Neal
Ce r t ified Consulting
Me teo rologist
J an
Table 1
MONTHLY MEAN WIND SPEED AND PREVAILING DIRECTION
FOR LIHUE AIRPORT, KAUAI
Feb Mar Ap r May J un Jul Aug Sep Oc t Nov
Speed (mph ) 11 .3 12.0 1 2 .8 13 .7 13 .4 13 .6 14 .1 13 .4 12 .1 11.9 1 2 .7
Dire ction
Notes :
NE ENE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE NE
Mean wind speeds are based o n 3 2 years of data . Mean wi n d
d irection based on 20 years o f d a t a.
Source : "Loca l Climatological Data , Annual Summ a r y Wi t h Comp a r at i ve
Da t a, L i hue , Hawaii , 1999 ", U.S . Depa rtme nt of Comm erc e,
Na tiona l Oce a n ic and Atmospheric Admin i stration ,
Enviro nm ental Data Service , National Clima t ic Cen t e r,
As h e v i lle , NC .
Dec Year
12 .2 12 .8
NE NE
Jan Feb Mar
Total 5 .1 5 3 .4 1 4 .08
Table 2
MONTHLY MEAN PRECIPITATION
FOR PUUHI, KAUAI
Apr May Jun Jul Aug
2.2 4 1. 87 1.12 1. 60 1. 92
Sep Oct Nov Dec Year
2 .09 2. 62 3. 49 4 .72 34.31
Precipi tat ion
(inches)
Notes :
Source:
Based on 54 years of data from the 1990's.
"Climatic Summary of the Un ited States, Supplement for 1951 through 1960,
Hawaii and Pacific ", U.S. Department of Commerce , Weather Bureau,
Washington , D.C., 1965.
EXHIBIT O-2
GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
MAKAHUENA POINT PROPERTY, KAUAI, HAWAII
Report Prepared for CIRI Land Development Company (CLDC)
by
Charles T. Blay, Ph.D., Geologist
TEOK Investigations
Poipu, Kauai
January 22, 2014
Revised February 01, 2014
Revised February 10, 2014
INTRODUCTION
General Statement:
The Makahuena Point property, occupying approximately 13 acres of coastal land
at the extreme southern tip of the island of Kauai, was examined geologically over
a three-day period of time in early January 2014. Principal objectives of the inves-
tigation were to describe the site’s geological features in order to evaluate its sta-
bility. The character and stability of the large heavily-vegetated depression occupy-
ing the northwestern portion of the property and that of a prominent collapsed lava
tube located near the central portion of the property’s coastal zone were of particu-
lar interest.
Methodology:
A base map was constructed utilizing Google Earth photographic images and a
portion of the 1996 edition of the Koloa, U.S. Geological Survey, 7.5-minute quad-
rangle map (Figures 1 and 2). The orientation of lava rock layers and related geo-
logical features were measured, to the nearest degree of strike and dip, using a
standard geological compass. The “T” shaped strike and dip symbols shown in
Figure 1 indicate the trend (long “strike” line) and direction of inclination (short
line at right angle to strike line); the amount of inclination is indicated in degrees,
from 0 to 90. Locations were established to the nearest second of latitude and lon-
EXHIBIT O-2
gitude utilizing a hand held GPS. Geological features, especially those associated
with the collapsed lava tube, are displayed in Photos 2-6. No observations were
made below sea level along the coast. Also, owing to a thick weedy vegetation
cover no geological observations could be made within the large, oval-shaped de-
pression occupying the northwestern portion of the property.
GEOLOGY
General Geological Setting:
The Makahuena Point area of Kauai is composed of basaltic, pahoehoe style lava
flows of the rejuvenated stage Koloa Volcanics Formation, the island’s youngest
volcanic rocks (Macdonald, et al, 1960, Garcia et al, 2013, Blay & Siemers, 2013).
Koloa Formation volcanic vents and associated lava flows in the general vicinity of
the Makahuena Point property range from as old as 1.25 million years to as young
as 150 thousand years. A series of volcanic cinder and spatter cones immediately
north of the property, the Poipu Volcanic Cones, have been geologically dated to
have last erupted 320 thousand years ago (Garcia et al, 2013). A considerable por-
tion, if not all, of the lava flows within the Makahuena Point property erupted from
one or more of those cones. The closest volcanic cone, Pihakekuka Crater (present
location of Poipu Crater Resort; Photo 1), north of the Makahuena Point property
probably contributed the bulk of the lava now covering the property.
Site Geology:
Lava flows of the Koloa Volcanics are well exposed all along the rugged coastal
zone but are covered by soil layers a short distance landward (Figure 1, Photos 1
and 2). Across most of the coastal zone thick, laterally extensive lava flows, the
most characteristic feature of the property, dip gently seaward, mostly at only 2 to
5 degrees (Figure 2, Photo 2). There is moderate undercutting of the flows by
wave erosion along the irregular, rocky shoreline.
A large, thickly-vegetated, 200 x 500 ft, oval depression, with up to 30 feet of re-
lief, occupies the northwestern portion of the property. A distinct, collapsed, elon-
gated lava tube, perhaps the geologically most interesting feature within the prop-
erty, is well exposed at the coast near the western boundary of the property (Fig-
ures 1-2, Photos 3-4). Both the oval depression and the coastal collapsed lava tube
feature are likely the result of a large connected lava tube that collapsed complete-
ly. It is highly unlikely that the vegetated oval depression is a volcanic crater. At
the coast the collapsed lava tube is 100-120 feet wide and 20-25 feet deep. It is
partly filled both with large, randomly oriented, angular blocks of lava rock, and
with post-tube-collapse lava flows, both of geological origin and now stable. The
area of the large oval depression is thickly vegetated, and unlike the geologically-
filled coastal lava tube structure, no lava rock exposures were observed within the
depression.
No open lava tubes were observed above sea level. Portions of the coarse lava
block rubble were in the past partly covered with lime cement; however it does not
appear that it was done to maintain stability of natural geological rubble filling the
collapsed tube. Locally the oxidized and disarticulated fragments of an iron net-
ting of some sort are present, but are of unknown origin.
At the coast and immediately landward of the coastal exposures, margins of the la-
va tube are well defined by a thin, 3-4 ft wide zone of vertical to overturned lava
rock layers (Figures 5 and 6). At such exposures, post-tube-collapse lava rock of
geological origin can also be observed partly filling the tube structure.
DISCUSSION
Broad, laterally extensive lava flows and associated lava tubes are typical products
of Hawaiian style volcanic eruptions. They represent the non-explosive, effusive-
style eruption of liquid lava (magma), in contrast to the explosive eruption of cin-
der and ash of volcanoes, such as those occurring in continental localities and
along the “Ring of Fire” that rims the Pacific Ocean. Lava tubes develop in order
to insulate the liquid magma as it flows down slope away from the emitting vents
and cones, allowing the magma to extend great distances from its source. Some
tubes are preserved as elongated open cave-like features. Others collapse and are
partly to completely filled by solidified blocks of lava rock and post-collapse lava
flows. They are the products of the very dynamic process of the effusive eruption
of magma and its emplacement away from its vent or fissure source.
The lava tube feature present on the Makahuena Point property is an example of a
dynamic tube that formed, collapsed almost entirely and then was partly to almost
entirely filled with both lava block rubble and lava flows which filled the tube dur-
ing, and subsequent to, its collapse. Tube formation and collapse may have oc-
curred over and over again until the lava finally stopped flowing through the tube
and into its collapsed depression. Today, the composite collapsed tube structure is
represented by a subtle, mostly geologically-filled, elongated surface depression.
Importantly, it appears that the tube is completely collapsed. No open tube could
be delineated, based on the surface expression of both the well-exposed coastal
zone and the inland, soil and vegetation covered oval-shaped depression. At pre-
sent both features, the coastal partly-filled lava tube and the vegetation-covered
oval-shaped depression appear stable.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Makahuena Point property, occupying approximately 13 acres of coastal land
at the southern tip of Kauai, was examined geologically in early January 2014.
Principal objectives of the investigation were to describe the site’s geological fea-
tures in order to evaluate its stability.
The property is underlain by extensive lava flows of the geological formation
known as the Koloa Volcanics, which locally has been dated to have formed ap-
proximately 320 thousand years ago. Most, if not all, of the lava formed from
magma flowing out of a series of volcanic vents and cones located immediately
north of Makahuena Point.
A prominent, northwest-trending collapsed lava tube is present at the coast near the
western boundary of the property. It is displayed as a well-exposed, largely filled,
elongated depression. The margins of the 100-120 ft wide tube structure are well
defined by narrow (3-4 ft) zones of vertical to overturned lava rock layers. The 20-
25 ft deep collapsed tube is partly filled with coarse lava block rubble and post-
collapse lava flows of geological origin. There is no evidence of the lava tube
structure having acted as a vent for fluids or sediments flowing into the ocean.
Inland, to the northwest, is a large, oval-shaped depression that is obscured vegeta-
tion. The 200 ft wide, 500 ft long depression displays a relief of 20-30 feet. Lava
rocks were not observed within the depression owing to its soil and plant cover. It
is likely part of the same lava tube that is evident at the coast, is completely col-
lapsed, and appears stable.
The obvious lava tube structure of the Makahuena Point property appears to have
collapsed completely. At the coast it is partly filled with lava block rubble and la-
va flows that were emplaced as the tube was actively collapsing and after various
stages of collapse. At present it is a stable, no longer collapsing, feature. No open
lava tubes were observed during the geological field investigation.
Today the Makahuena Point collapsed lava tube appears stable, with little or no po-
tential for additional collapse. However, the specific area of the collapsed tube
near the coast is not recommended as a site for the emplacement of large struc-
tures. In its current state, the coastal collapsed lava tube structure is one of Kauai
Island’s more interesting geological features.
REFERENCES CITED
Blay, C. and Siemers, R., 2013, Kauai’s Geologic History: A Simplified Overview:
TEOK Investigations, Koloa, Hawaii, 161 pp.
Garcia, M.O., Swinnard, L., Weis, D., Greene, A.R., Tagami, T., Sano, H., and
Gandy, C.E., 2010, Petrology, geochemistry and geochronology of Kauai la-
vas over 4.5 myr: Implications for the origin of rejuvenated volcanism and
evolution of the Hawaiian plume: Journal of Petrology, v. 51, no. 7, p. 1507-
1540.
Macdonald, G.A., Davis, D.A., and COX, D.C., 1960, Geology and ground-water
resources of the island of Kauai, Hawaii: Hawaii Division of Hydrology
Bulletin 13, 212 pp, color geologic map.
approximatepropertyboundarybeaconlargevegetateddepressionMakahuenaPointcollapsedlava tube20 ft40 ft
40 ft0500 FtFigure 1. Google map image of Makahuena Point property, Kauai. Location of property boundary is approximate. Elevationcontours are in feet above sea level. Note general location of collapsed lava tube well exposed at shoreline which aligns northwardwith a large, extensively vegetated, elongate depression.
20 ft40 ft
40 ft4162732434313516655474905289019561050approximatepropertyboundarylargevegetateddepressionbeaconMakahuenaPointcollapsedlava tube 15926’ 40” 15926’ 30” 2152’ 05” 2152’ 10” 2152’ 15” 15926’ 35”0500 FtFigure 2. Locality map of Makahuena Point property, Kauai. Property boundary is approximate. Elevation contours are in feetabove sea level. Note general location of collapsed lava tube well exposed at shoreline which aligns northward with a large,extensively vegetated, elongate depression. Strike and dip symbols indicate general orientation of lava flows. Grid is in degrees,minutes and seconds of latitude and longitude.
approximate
property
boundary
Pihakekuka
Crater
Makahuena Pt.
Keoneloa
“Shipwreck’s”
Beach
Makawehi Pt.
Keoneloa Bch
Mt Haupu
Makahuena Pt.
lava flows
Photo 1. Google Earth image of Makahuena Point property location. Pihakekua Crater (present
location of Poipu Crater Resort) most likely produced much of the lava of the Makahena Pt. area.
Photo 2.View east from Makahuena Point displaying the gently inclined lava flowspresent across
most of the Makahuena Point property. Flows dip seaward mostly at less than 5 degrees. Keoneloa
(”Shipwrecks”) Beach and Makawehi Pt. is present along the distant shoreline with Haupu Mt. in
the far distance.
Photo 3. Coastal view of central portion of collapsed lava tube partly filled with coarse lava block
rubble and post collapse lava flows.
coarse lava
block rubble
lava flows partly filling
collapsed lava tube
coarse lava
block rubble
Photo 4. Chaotic lava block rubble within collapsed lava tube at coastal exposure.
Photo 5. Eastern edge of lava tube displaying roll of lava flows into collapsed tube and late stage
lava flows partly filling tube after soon after collapse.
roll over of
lava flows
into collapsed
lava tube
late stage lava flows
partly filling collapsed
lava tube
edge of lava tube
with vertical to
overturned layers
late stage lava flows
partly filling collapsed
lava tube
vertical to overturned
lava flows along
sinuous edge of
collapsed lava tube
large, vegetated
depression
Photo 6. Sinuous edge of collapsed lava tube with vertical to overturned lava flows along margin
and post collapse lava flows partly filling tube structure.
EXHIBIT O-3
AECOS No. 1269
Biological surveys for Makahu'ena Project
site (TMK: 2-8-21: 041), Po'ipil, Kaua'i
Prepared For:
CIRI Land Development Co.
2525 C Street, Suite 500
Anchorage, Alaska
Prepared By:
AECOSlnc.
939 Kamehameha Highway, Suite 104
Kane'ohe, Hawai'i
Augus t 4, 2011
EXHIBIT O-3
Biological surveys for Makahu'ena Project site
(TMK: 2-8-21: 041), Po'ipfl, Kaua'i 1
August 4, 2011
Eric Guinther, Reginald David 2, Dr. Steve Montgomery3, and Anita Manning 3
AECOSinc.
45-939 Kamehameha Highway, Suite 104
Kane'ohe, Hawai' i 96744
Phone: (808) 234-7770 Fax: (808) 234-7775 Email: guinther@aecos.com
Introduction
AECOS No. 1269
The project site, owned by CIRI Land Development Company, is an
approximately 13-acre (5.3-ha) coastal parcel (TMK: (4)2-8-21:041) at
Makahu'ena Point, Weliweli, Po'ipu in the Koloa District on the south side of the
Island of Kaua'i (Figs. 1 and 2). A portion of the property previously was
occupied by the Makahu'ena Point Lighthouse under the U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG) and a few concrete structural remnants of that facility are still
present. At the present time, the property is vacant land between the
developments of The Point at Po'ipu (former Embassy Suites Hotel) and the
Makahu'ena at Po'ipu. A modern marine navigation light (cover photo) under
USCG control is located on an inholding owned by the State of Hawai'i.
The site is an L-shaped parcel (Fig. 2) that demonstrates a clear transition from
wave swept cliffs, through coastal strand vegetation, into leeward (dry) scrub
land. Thus, the zone closest to the shore--a wave-swept rocky
substratum-supports essentially no terrestrial vegetation owing to frequent
wetting by large waves and wave splash. Further inland is found a sparse, low-
growing vegetation of plants tolerant of regular salt spray and minimal soil (Fig.
3). As the soil depth increases inland, plants gain density and stature, but still
show the effects of strong and persistent winds. The interior leg of the parcel is
1 This report was prepared for CIRI Land Development Co. to be used as needed to support an EA for
site development ("Project"). This report will presumably become part of the public record.
2 Rana Biological Consulting, Inc., Kailua-Kona, Hawai'i .
3 Montane Matters, Waipahu, Hawai'i.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 1
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Methods
Biological surveys of the project site were undertaken in May-June 2011. The
survey team assembled by AECOS Inc. included Dr. S. L Montgomery
(invertebrates), Reginald David (vertebrates), and Eric Guinther (plants).
Surveys were conducted independent of each other in as much as each specialty
required methods standard to each discipline.
Surveys of other dryland areas have created a sizeable body of information on
native invertebrates and related botanical resources found in similar areas
(Bridwell, 1920; Swezey 1935). A search at the State's Office of Environmental
Quality Control (2011) web site for surveys done on the subject parcel or in
adjacent areas returned no reports that surveyed biota (OEQC, 2011). A search
was made for independent biological studies associated with this site or with
nearby sites. Searches were made in the Hawai 'i State, Bishop Museum, and
University of Hawai'i libraries. Online proprietary data bases such as Ingenta
Connect were searched. Searches were made for publicly available articles on
the internet (Google Scholar, Google Books, University of Hawaii's Scholar Space
and eVols (2011). Data base searches were made in Bishop Museum's
Arthropod (2002a) and Mollusk (2002b) checklists, and the University of
Hawai'i, Hamilton Library's Hawai'i-Pacific Journal Index (2011). Only
adventive invertebrates species were reported. Searches in the Pacific Basin
Information Node specimen database which provides geographic access (2011)
returned records of fossil mollusks . A search in the Hawai'i Natural Heritage
Program (20 11) database returned no records for this area.
Plant names used in this report generally follow Staples and Herbst (2005) and
Wagner, Herbst, and Sohmers (1990, 1999). Invertebrate names follow
Freshwater & Terrestrial Mollusk Checklist (HBS, 2002b), Common Names of
Insects & Related Organisms (HES, 1990), and Hawaiian Terrestrial Arthropod
Checklist (HBS, 2002a; Nishida 2002). The avian phylogenetic order and
nomenclature used in this report follows The American Ornithologists' Union
Checklist of North American Birds 7th Edition (American Ornithologists' Union
1998), and the 42nd through the 51st supplements to Check-list of North
American Birds (American Ornithologists' Union, 2000; Banks et al., 2002, 2003,
2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011). Mammal scientific names
follow Mammals in Hawaii (Tomich, 1986).
Botanical Survey
The botanical field survey consisted of walking a majority of the parcel on May
25, 2011. Plants were identified as they were encountered and an estimate
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 5
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
made of the relative abundance of each species developed as the survey
progressed.
Invertebrate Survey
Field surveys for invertebrates were conducted June 2-3, 2011. Initially, a
general assessment of terrain and habitats was made, followed by survey efforts
at various times of day and night, vital for a thorough invertebrate survey.
Visual observation-Visual observations are a cross check that extends the
reach of sampling techniques. Visual observation also included turning over
rocks, examining dead wood, and other debris.
Host plant searches -Potential host plants, both native and introduced, are
searched for arthropods that feed or rest on plants. For this survey, wandering
transects were followed throughout the coastal and inland area with emphasis
on examining native host plants.
Sweep nets -Sweeping is a common method of general collecting for most
flying and perching insects. A fine mesh net is swept across plants, leaf litter,
rocks, pond surfaces, etc. to collect any flying, perching, or crawling insects.
Transfer from the net is either by aspiration, or by placing the net contents
directly into a holding container.
Baiting -Baits are used to attract insect species to specific tastes or smells.
For example, native beach crickets respond to a strong odor of decaying
proteins. Baits can mimic that smell and attract those insects. Baits of old fish
and odoriferous blue cheese, proven attractants, were placed at likely locations
in bottle traps and checked periodically. Any insects at the bait are then
observed and censused. This method is more efficient than roaming the area
seeking cryptic or night active insects; baiting is a recognized method of
censusing beach crickets.
Light survey-A survey of insects active at night is vital to a complete record
of the fauna. Many insects are active only at night to evade birds, avoid
desiccation and high temperatures, or to use night food sources, such as flowers
that only open at night. A light survey employs a bright light source in front of a
white cloth sheet (Fig. 5). Nocturnal insects seem to mistake the collecting light
for the light of the moon, which they use to orient themselves. In attempting to
navigate, disoriented insects are drawn toward the collecting light and land on
the cloth in confusion. This type of collecting is most successful during the dark
phase of the moon or under clouds blocking moonlight.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 6
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
station. Stations were each counted once. Field observations were made with
the aid of Leica 10 X 42 binoculars and by listening for vocalizations. Counts
were concentrated during the early morning hours, the peak of daily bird
activity. Additionally, we conducted a search of the property for active Wedge-
tailed Shearwater burrows, and recorded the locations of burrows with a hand-
held GPS unit. Time not spent at counting stations was used to search the
Project site for species and habitats not detected during count sessions.
Other Vertebrates Survey
With the exception of the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus
semotus), or '6pe'ape'a as it is known locally, all terrestrial mammals currently
found on the Island of Kaua'i are alien species, and most are ubiquitous. The
survey of mammals was limited to visual and auditory detection, coupled with
visual observation of scat, tracks, and other animal sign. A running tally was
kept of all vertebrate species observed and heard within the project area.
Survey Limitations I Conditions
Our ability to form advisory opinions is influenced in the following ways:
• Weather: Weather was mixed June 2-3, 2011. Rain was disruptive on June 2
and a second evening of surveying was conducted June 3 to ensure appropriate
coverage. Conditions for collecting were good on June 3. Weather conditions
were excellent on May 25, although onshore winds were strong.
• Seasons: Weather and seasonal vegetation play an especially important role in
any biological survey. Host plant presence/absence, and seasonal changes,
especially plant growth after heavy rains, affect the species collected. Many
arthropods time their emergence and breeding to overlap or follow seasonal
weather, or to coincide with growth spurts of an important food plant.
Monitoring at a different time of the year might produce a different list of
species. After seasonal rains, vegetation was in a good state to both identify and
act as host to many invertebrates. Nevertheless, the very low number of native
plants and the presence of ants--a strong alien predator on arthropods--were
strong factors in limiting native invertebrates encountered; more so than the
seasonal condition of vegetation.
• Moon: The moon was 'dark' and obscured by cloud cover on the
evenings ofJune 2 and 3, 2011. (USNO) The nearby artificial light sources
offered by street lights and buildings offered minimal competition to the
arthropod census light.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 8
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
• Limited duration: The survey provides a reasonable review of the
biological resources present given the size of the property and time
allotted. The area is not large, yet it is always possible that a biologist will
miss one or more species if population levels are low. Surveying for a
longer period of time might enlarge our lists of species. A few species
reasonably expected to occur on the property were not found (see
Species Not Observed on page 24).
• Selectivity: The plant and bird surveys attempted to chronicle all
vascular plants and birds, respectively, occurring on the Project site. The
invertebrate survey focused on finding terrestrial endemic and
indigenous Hawaiian species. No attempt was made to completely
document the common alien arthropod or all non-avian, alien vertebrate
species present.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 19
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Table 1. Flora for CIRI Land Development Company, Makahii'ena parcel, Poipu, Kauai
Species Common name Status Abundance Notes
CONIFERS and CYCADS
ARAUCARIACEAE
Araucaria columnaris (G. Forst.) J .D . Hook. Cook pine Nat R <2>
FLOWERING PLANTS
DICOTYLEDONE
ACANTHACEAE
Asystasia gangetica (L.) T. Anderson Chinese violet Nat 0
Barleria repens C . Nees pink-ruellia Om U2
AIZOACEAE
Aptenia cordifolia (L.) N .E. Brown hearts-and-flowers Om u
Sesuvium portulacas/rum (L.) L. 'akutikuli Ind c <1>
AMARANTHACEAE
Amaranthus lividus L. Nat Rl
Mangifera indica L. khaki weed Nat 0
ANACARDIACEAE
Schinus terebinthifolius Raddi Christmas berry Nat u
APOCYNACEAE
Carissa macrocarpa (Ecklon) A. de Cand. Natal-plum Om R
Plumeria rubra L. graveyard flower Om u
Thevetia peruviana (Pers.)K . Schum. be-still Nat R
ARALIACEAE
Schejjlera actinophylla (Endl.) Hanns octopus or umbrella tree Nat R
ASTERACEAE (COMPOSIT AE)
Bidens pilosa L. Spanish needle Nat Rl
Emilia fosbergii Nicolson Flora's paintbrush Nat u
Gaillardia x grandiflora Van Houtte waikohuli Om R <2>
Hypochoreus cf. radicata L. hairy eat's ear Nat Rl <1,3>
Pluchea indica (L.) Less. Indian fleabane Nat U1
Pluchea carolinensis (Jacq.) G. Don sourbush Nat u
Verbesina encelioides (Cav .) Benth. & Hook. golden crown-beard Nat 01
BORAGINACEAE
Tournefortia argentea L. fill. tree heliotrope Nat R <I>
BRASSICACEAE
Lobularia maritima Desvaux sweet alysum Om u <2>
CACTACEAE
Cereus hildmannianus K. Schum . spiny tree cactus Nat u
Hylocereus undatus (Haworth) Britt. & Rose night-blooming cereus Nat R <3>
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX) Page I ll
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Table 1 (continued).
SEecies Common name Status Abundance Notes
CACT ACEAE (continued)
Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Mill. panini Nat Rl
Se/enicereus cf. macdonaldiae (Hooker) snake cactus Nat R <3>
Britton & Rose
CAPPARACEAE
Cleome gynandra L. wild spider flower Nat R
CASUARINACEAE
Casuarina equisetifolia L. ironwood Nat u
CHENOPODIACEAE
Atriplex semibaccata R. Br. Australian saltbush Nat A <1>
Chenopdium murale L. 'aheahea Nat R
CLUSIACEAE
Calophyllum sp. indet. street tree Om u
CONVOLVULACEAE
Ipomoea obscura (L.) Ker-Gawl. Nat 0
Ipomoea triloba L. little bell Nat u
Merremia aegyptia (L.) Urb. hairy merremia Nat Rl
CUCURBIT ACEAE
Cucumis dipsaceus Ehrenb. & Spach teasel gourd Nat Ul
CRASSULACEAE
Bryophyllum tubiflorum Harvey chandelier plant Nat R3
EUPHORBIACEAE
Chamaesyce albomarginata (Torr. & A. rattlesnake weed Nat R
Gray) Small
Chamaesyce hirta (L.) Millsp. garden spurge Nat 01
Chamaesyce hypericifolia (L.) Millsp. graceful spurge Nat 0
Codiaeum variegatum (L.) Blume croton Om u
Pedilanthus tithymaloides tithymaloides slipper flower Om R3 <2>
(L.) Poiteau
Phyllanthus debilis Klein ex. Willd. niuri Nat R
Ricinus communis L. castor beran Nat R
FABACEAE
Desmanthus pernambucanus (L.) Thellung virgate mimosa Nat u
Indigofera hendecaphylla Jacq . prostrate indigo Nat R
Macroptilium atropurpureum (DC) Urb. Nat u
GOODINACEAE
Scaevola taccada (1. Gaert.) Roxb. naupaka kahakai lnd c <I>
LAMIACEAE
Ocimum basilicum L. sweet basil Om R <2>
MALVACEAE
Abutilon grandifolium (Willd.) Sweet hairy abutilon Nat u
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 12
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Table 1 (continued).
SEecies Common name Status Abundance Notes
MAL V ACEAE (continued)
Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L. cultivars Chinese hibiscus Om u
Malvastrum coromandelianum (L.) Garcke false mallow Nat c
Sidafallax Walp. ilima, ilima papa lnd c
Sida rhombifolia L. Nat R
MORACEAE
Ficus microcarpa L. fil. Chinese banyan Nat R
MYRTACEAE
Syzygium cumini (L.) Skeels. Java plum Nat R
NICT AGINACEAE
Boerhavia acutifolia (Choisy) J.W. Moore a lena lnd R <I>
Bougainvillea cult . bougainvillea Om u
POLYGONACEAE
Coccoloba uvifera (L.) L. sea-grape Om R <I>
PORTULACACEAE
Portulaca pilosa L. Nat u <1>
PRIMULACEAE
Anagallis arvensis L. scarlet pimpernel Nat R
SOLANACEAE
Solanum americanum Mill. popolo lnd 0
Solanum lycopersicum cerasiforme cherry tomato Nat u
(DunaJ) Spooner, G.J. Anderson, & R.K .
Jans en
STERCULIACEAE
Waltheria indica L. 'uhaloa lnd 0
VERBENACEAE
Clerodendrum inerme (L.) Gaertn. Om R3
Lantana camara L. lantana Nat c
Stachytarpheta australis Moldenke Nat 0
Stachytarphetajamaicensis (L.) Yah!. Jamaica vervain Nat R
Vitex rotundifolia L. til. pohinahina lnd R
MONOCOTYLEDONES
AGAVACEAE
Agave vivipara L. Om R <2>
Cordylinefruticosa (L.) A. Chev. ki; green ti Pol R <2>
Furcraeafoetida (L.) Haw. Mauritius hemp Nat R <2>
ALOEACEAE
Aloe vera (L.) N .L. Burm. aloe Om Ul <2>
ARECACEAE
Cocos nucifera L. coconut palm Pol R
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 113
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Table 1 (continued).
Species Common name Status Abundance Notes
COMMELINACEAE
Tradescantia spathacea Swartz
LILIACEAE
Crinum asiaticum L.
POACEAE (GRAMINEAE)
Axonopusfisifolius (Sw.) P.Beauv.
Cenchrus echinatus L.
Chloris barbata (L.) Sw.
Chloris virgata Sw .
Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers.
Dactyloctenium aegyptium (L.) Willd.
Digitaria insularis (L.) Mez ex Ekman
Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn.
Setaria verticillata (L.) P. Beauv .
Sporobolus virginicus (L.) Kunth
Panicum maximum (Jacq.)
STRELITZIACEAE
Strelitzia reginae Dryandcr
Status = distributional status
Moses-in-the-cradle
giant lily
nrw-lvd. carpetgrass
sandbur
swollen-finger grass
feather fingergrass
Bermuda grass
beach wiregrass
sourgrass
wire grass
bristly foxtail
'aki'aki
Guinea grass
bird-of-paradise
Legend to Table l
End. • endemic; native to Hawai'i and found naturally nowhere else.
Ind. • indigenous; native to Hawai'i, but not unique to the Hawaiian Islands.
Om R
Nat R
Nat 03
Nat R
Nat A
Nat C3
Nat A <I>
Nat R
Nat AA
Nat u
Nat R1
lnd A <I>
Nat AA
Om R <2>
Nat. -naturalized, exotic, plant introduced to the Hawaiian Islands since the arrival of Cook Expedition in
1778, and well-established outside of cultivation.
Om.-exotic, ornamental or cultivated crop; plant not naturalized (not well-established outside of
cultivation, at least at this location).
Pol. = Polynesian introduction; brought to the Hawaiian Islands before 1778.
Abundance • occurrence ratings for plants on property in March 2008
Notes:
R -Rare -only one or two plants seen.
U -Uncommon -several to a dozen plants observed.
0-Occasional -found regularly, but not abundant anywhere.
C-Common-considered an important part of the vegetation and observed numerous times.
A -Abundant -found in large numbers; may be locally dominant.
AA -Abundant -very abundant and dominant; defining vegetation type.
Numbers (as in R3) offset occurrence ratings (I-several plants; 2 -many plants; 3-abundant
in a limited area) in cases where distribution across the survey area may be limited, but individuals
seen are more than indicated by the occurrence rating alone.
<I> Associated with the coastal strand zone along top of cliff(Fig. 2).
<2> Associated with landscape plantings in the area.
<3> Plant lacking flowers or fruit; identification uncertain.
native to places outside of the Hawaiian Islands). Two additional species
(2.3%) are Polynesian introductions (so-called "canoe plants"), arriving in these
Islands well before 1778. The remainder (88.3%) are plants introduced to the
Islands since 1778--most in the last century-and now naturalized (escaped
from cultivation).
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 14
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Although none of the natives growing at the Project site is considered an
endemic species (defined as uniquely native to the Hawaiian Islands), the
abundance of several of the indigenous species is high within the coastal strand
environment (see Fig. 10). Drying winds, salt air, and shallow soil make this
environment very harsh and few plants readily adapt to these conditions. All of
plants found in this environment on the Project site are widespread species (in
Hawai'i as well as on other tropical Pacific islands), typically dispersed by ocean
currents. Nonetheless, outside of the coastal strand, it is rare to find a
vegetation on lowland Kaua'i dominated by native plants .
A total of 16 species of plants (18.6%) in Table 1 are regarded as ornamentals
(not naturalized in Hawai'i at this time), although many more are planted
and/or cultivated on the site or immediately adjacent as ornamentals. These
plants are regarded as naturalized because that is their status in the Islands.
Both naturalized and native plants are planted as ornamentals in some
landscaping situations.
Invertebrate Survey Results
Native terrestrial invertebrate species of note are discussed here. Also,
information is provided on adventive (naturalized) species often misidentified
or confused with native species. Non-native species on the Project site that
constitute a danger to native species (e.g., ants) or potential hazard to humans
(e .g., paper wasp) are also discussed.
The results of the survey are presented in Table 2. Although this listing shows
three species as new island records4, this is not remarkable considering the
survey for available literature (see page 6) indicated no previous invertebrate
surveys at this location.
Native Arthropoda~ Araneae (spiders)
Fam. Lycosidae: Lycosa hawaiiensis: wolf spider
This endemic spider (Fig. 6) is known in similar environments along this coast
Wolf spiders hide by day and hunt by night in established individual territories.
These quick, strong predators will feed on non-native invertebrates allowing it
to adapt to a changed menu. Females provide maternal care to their young,
' New island record designation indicates this species has not been previously reported as present
on an island.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 15
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Table 2. List of invertebrates, Makahii'ena property, Koloa, Kaua'i, June 2011.
Taxon / Species Common Name Status Frequency Notes
MOLLUSCA
GASTROPODA
PULMONATA snails and slugs
ACHITINIDAE
A chat ina Julie a Giant African Snail Adv A
SPIRAXIDAE
Euglandina rosea Rosy Wolf Snail Adv c
ARTHROPODA
ARACHNIDA
ARANEAE spiders
HETEROPODIDAE
Heteropoda venatoria Cane spider Adv c
ARANEIDAE
Argiope appensa orb weaver spiders Adv u
(Walckenaer 1841)
LYCOSIDAE
Lycosa hawaiiensis wolf spider End u observed only
Simon, 1899
ARTHROPODA
INSECTA
COLLEMBOLA springtails
ENTOMOBRYIDAE
undetermined sp. I unknw c under stones
DIPTERA
CABACIDAE
Canaceoides hawaiiensis beach fly End c
Wirth, 1969
CERA TOPOGONIDAE
Forcipomyia hardyi End A at light
Wirth & Howarth, 1982
CHIRONOMIDAE bloodworm midges
Chironomus hawaiiensis End? u at light
Grimshaw, 1901
HELEOMYZIDAE
Spilochroa ornata Adv c at light; new
(Johnson, 1895) island record
HETEROPTERA true bugs
LYGAEIDAE seed bugs
Nysius sp. End u at light
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 16
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Table 2 (continued).
Taxon j Species Common Name Status Frequency Notes
HOMOPTERA planthoppers
CICADELLIDAE leafhoppers
Balclutha hospes End c at light
DERBIDAE
Cedusa sp . Adv u at light; new
island record
PSYLLIDAE
Heteropsylla cubana Adv AA on koa haole
(Cawford, 1914)
HYMENOPTERA wasps, bees, ants
ANTHOPHORIDAE
Ceratina sp. near dentipes Adv u
Xylocopa sonorina Carpenter bee Adv c
F. Smith, 1874
COLLETIDAE
Hylaeus albonitens Adv R
(Cockerell, 1905)
FORMICIDAE ants
Camponotus variegatus Carpenter ant Adv c at light
Pheidole megacephala Big-headed ant Adv c on soil
(Fabricius, 1793)
VESPIDAE wasps
Polistes exclamans Common paper wasp Adv 0
Viereck, 1906
LEPIDOPTERA butterflies & moths
CHOREUTIDAE
Choreutis sp. Twisted wing moth Adv c at light; new island
record
COSMOPTERIGIDAE
Anatrachyntis incertulella Adv 0
(Walker, 1864)
/thorne conco/orella Kiawe flower moth Adv c
(Chambers, 1875)
Trissodoris honorariella Adv u
(Walsingham 1907)
GEOMETRIDAE
Macaria abydata Guenee, 1857 Adv A at light
GRACILLARIIDAE
Caloptilia sp. Adv u
NOCTUIDAE
Achaeajanata (Linnaeus), 1758 Croton caterpillar Adv c
Asca/apha odorata Black witch moth Adv 0 at light
(Linnaeus, 1758)
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX) Page 117
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Vertebrate Survey Results
Birds
A total of 55 individual birds representing 13 species from 11 separate families,
were recorded during station counts (Table 3). Three of the species recorded:
Wedge-tailed Shearwater (Puffinius pacificus), White-tailed Tropicbird
(Phaethon lepturus), and Wandering Tattler (Tringa incana), are indigenous to
the Hawaiian Islands. The two seabirds (shearwater and tropicbird) are
indigenous breeding species, one of which (Wedge-tailed Shearwater) nests on
the site. Wandering Tattler is an indigenous, migratory shorebird species. The
remaining 10 species observed during the survey are alien (non-native species)
to the Hawaiian Islands.
Table 3-Avian Species Detected at Makahu'ena Point, June 2011
Common Name I Scientific Name I ST IRA
PROCELLARIIFORMES
PROCELLARIIDAE -Shearwaters & Petrels
Wedge-tailed Shearwater Puffin us pacificus IB 0.50
PHAETHONIFORMES
PHAETHONTIDAE-Tropicbirds
White-tailed Tropicbird Phaethon lepturus IB 0.50
CHARADRIIFORMES
SCOLOPACIDAE-Sandpipers, Phalaropes & Allies
Wandering Tattler Tringa incana IM 0.50
COLUMBIFORMES
COLUMBIDAE-Pigeons & Doves
Spotted Dove Streptopelia chinensis A 1.50
Zebra Dove Geopelia striata A 4.50
PASSERIFORMES
ZOSTEROPIDAE -White-eyes
Japanese White-eye Zosterops japonicus A 2.50
STURNIDAE -Starlings
Common Myna Acridotheres tristis A 3.00
EMBERIZIDAE-Emberizids
Red-crested Cardinal Paroaria coronata A 2.50
CARDINALIDAE-Cardinals Saltators & Allies
Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis A 1.50
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 28
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Table 3 (continued).
Common Name
House Finch
House Sparrow
I Scientific Name
FRINGILLIDAE-Fringilline And Cardueline Finches
& Allies
Carduelinae -Carduline Finches
Carpodacus mexicanus
PASSERIDAE-Old World Sparrows
Passer domesticus
ESTRILDIDAE-Estrildid Finches
Estrildinae -Estrildine Finches
Chestnut Munia Lonchura atricapilla
_J_av_a_S_.p._a_rr_o_w _____ Padda oryzivora
Key to Table 3:
ST Status
I ST IRA
A 4.00
A 2.00
A 1.00
A 3.50
RA Relative Abundance: Number of birds detected divided by the number of count stations (2)
A Alien species-Introduced to Hawai'i by humans, and have become established in the wild
IB Indigenous Resident -Native breeding species also found elsewhere naturally
IM Indigenous Migratory species -native migratory species does not breed in Hawai 'i
Avian diversity and densities are in keeping with habitats present on the site,
and the location along the south shore of the Island of Kaua'i. Three species--
Zebra Dove (Geopelia striata), Java Sparrow (Padda oryzivora) and Common
Myna (Acridotheres tristis)-accounted for 40% of the total number of
individual birds recorded during station counts. The most commonly recorded
species was Zebra Dove, which accounted for slightly more than 16% of the
total number of individual birds recorded. An average of 27 birds were
detected per station count--is a relatively low number--in keeping with the
coastal location and limited habitats present on the site.
Seabirds -The Wedge-tailed Shearwater colony that stretches the length of
the coastal strand area of the site, with at least a couple of outlying burrows
further inland, represents a significant native avian resource. This colony has
been expanding, albeit slowly for the past several years (David, 2011). During
the course of this survey we mapped a total of 23 apparently active, or recently
active, burrows (see white dots in Fig. 2; recorded positions are given in Table
4). Numerous scrapes, which appear not to be currently active, were noted but
not recorded. This species is not listed under either federal or state endangered
species programs; however, it is protected under the federal Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (MBTA).
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 129
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT , KAUA'I
Table 4. Recorded coordinates of Wedge-tailed Shearwater active
or recently active burrows on the Project site.
Degrees North Degrees West
ID No. Latitude Longitude
2 21.869175 159.44464
3 21.868974 159.44434
4 21.870819 159.44163
6 21.870818 159.44163
7 21.870650 159.44185
8 21.870640 159.44206
9 21.870346 159.44221
10 21.870214 159.44237
11 21.869786 159.44276
12 21.869806 159.44276
13 21.869513 159.44314
14 21.869417 159.44298
15 21.869419 159.44296
16 21.869383 159.44296
17 21.869457 159.44284
18 21.869386 159.44317
19 21.869147 159.44353
20 21.869123 159.44354
21 21.869105 159.44354
22 21.869144 159.44364
23 21.869138 159.44371
24 21.868976 159.44435
25 21.869806 159.44400
Mammals
Two mammalian species were detected during the course of the survey. Tracks
and scat of dogs (Canis f. familiaris) were encountered at several locations
within the site. One cat (Felis catus) was seen prowling the shearwater colony
on the northwest corner of the site.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 30
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
General Discussion
Botanical Resources
For this site, maintaining a healthy mix of native plant species is particularly
relevant for the coastal strand zone (Fig. 2), since this vegetation zone is
presently dominated by native species. No botanical resources worthy of
special protection occur landward of the strand zone.
Invertebrate Resources
Native Hawaiian plant, vertebrate, and invertebrate populations are
interdependent. Certain insects are obligatorily attached to host plants, using
only that plant as their food and others provide pollination for native plants.
Invertebrates such as insects and snails, as well as the fruit and seeds of native
plants, are the natural foods of native birds. The health of native Hawaiian
ecosystems depends on habitat quality and absence or low levels of continental
predators and herbivores. Sufficient food sources, host plant availability, and
the absence of continental dominants comprise a classic native, healthy
ecosystem. Where appropriate in the invertebrates results presentation above,
host plants and introduced arthropods, birds, and mammals are noted.
Avian Resources
The findings of the avian survey are consistent with the location of the property,
and the habitats present on the site. Three of the 13 avian species detected
during the course of this survey, Wedge-tailed Shearwater, White-tailed
Tropicbird, and Wandering Tattler are indigenous species. Wedge-tailed
Shearwaters are a pelagic seabird species, which nests in Hawai'i, and in fact
nests on the site. White-tailed Tropicbirds are also a pelagic indigenous
breeding seabird species, though there are no resources on the site that this
species utilizes . Wandering Tattlers are an indigenous migratory shorebird
species that nests in the high Arctic during the late spring and summer months,
returning to Hawai'i and the tropical Pacific to spend the fall and winter months
each year. They usually leave Hawai'i for the trip back to the Arctic in late April
or the very early part of May of each year. The single bird recorded on the site
is likely one that is going to over-summer, and not make the journey north to
breed.
In can be expected that at least three other migratory shorebird species, Pacific
Golden-Plover (Pluvialis fulva), Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres), and
Sanderling (Calidris alba) use resources on this site between late July and late
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 3 1
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
April each year. The remaining 10 avian species detected during this survey are
all alien introductions to the Hawaiian Islands.
Two other seabird species not detected during our survey-Hawaiian Petrel
(Pterodroma sandwichensis) and the threatened endemic sub-species of the
Newell's Shearwater (Puffinus auricularis newel/i)--have been recorded over-
flying the Project area between April and the end of November each year
(David, 1995; Morgan et al., 2003, 2004; David and Planning Solutions, 2008).
Additionally, the Save Our Shearwaters (SOS) Program has recovered both
species from the general Project area on an annual basis over the past three
decades (Morgan et al., 2003, 2004; David and Planning Solutions, 2008; Save
our Shearwater Program, 2010).
The petrel is listed as endangered and the shearwater as threatened under both
federal (Endangered Species Act [ESA]) and State of Hawai'i endangered species
statutes. The primary cause of mortality in both Hawaiian Petrels and Newell's
Shearwaters is thought to be predation by alien mammalian species at the
nesting colonies (USFWS, 1983; Simons and Hodges, 1998; Ainley et a!., 2001 ).
Collision with man-made structures is considered to be the second most
significant cause of mortality of these seabirds in Hawai'i. Nocturnally flying
seabirds, especially fledglings on their way out to sea in the summer and fall,
can become disoriented by exterior lighting. When disoriented, seabirds often
collide with manmade structures, and if they are not killed outright, dazed or
injured birds are easy targets of opportunity for feral mammals (Hadley, 1961;
Telfer, 1979; Sincock, 1981; Reed et al., 1985; Telfer et al., 1987; Cooper and
Day, 1994; Podolsky et al., 1998; Ainley et al., 2001). There are no nesting
colonies nor appropriate nesting habitat for either of these listed seabird
species within the Project site.
Mammalian Resources
The findings of the mammalian survey are consistent with the location of the
property and habitats currently present on the site. All three mammalian
species detected during the course of this survey are alien to the Hawaiian
Islands. Although no Hawaiian hoary bats were detected during the course of
our survey, bats have been recorded foraging for insects within the general area
on a regular basis (David, 2011). Hawaiian hoary bats are widely distributed in
the lowland areas on the Island of Kaua'i, and have been documented in and
around almost all areas that have some dense vegetation (Tomich, 1986;
USFWS, 1998; David, 2011). There are no suitable roosting sites within the
Project site for this species.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 32
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Although no rodents were detected during the course of this survey, it is likely
that the four established alien Muridae found on Kaua'i-roof rat (Rattus r.
rattus), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), European house mouse (Mus musculus
domesticus), and possibly Polynesian rats (Rattus exulans hawaiiensis}---use
various resources found within the project area. All of these human commensal
rodents are deleterious to native ecosystems and native faunal species
dependent on them.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 133
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Potential Impacts to Protected Species or Special Habitats
Critical Habitat
The subject property is not included in any federal Critical Habitat designations.
Thus, development of the site will not impact Critical Habitat. No equivalent
statute exists under state or county law.
Jurisdictional Waters
No federal waters or special habitats are present on the subject parcel inland
from the mean high water (tide) line. The Pacific Ocean below mean higher high
water (MHHW) along this shore is under federal jurisdiction as described in the
Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and the Clean Water Act of 1972. Inland of this
boundary, no streams or wetlands occur on the subject property. State of
Hawai'i, Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) jurisdiction
extends seaward from the vegetation line (Hawaii Administrative Rules, §13 -
222)-a line presumably higher than the MHHW line along this wave-swept
coast.
Botanical Resources
No plant species currently listed as endangered, threatened, or proposed for
listing under either the federal or the State of Hawai'i's endangered species
programs (DLNR, 1998; USFWS, 2005, 2010) were recorded within the Project
property. Therefore, development of the site will not result in deleterious
impacts to listed plant species.
Invertebrate Resources
No federal or state listed endangered or threatened land invertebrate species
were noted in this survey (USFWS, 2010b).
Avian Resources
No avian species currently proposed for listing, or any that are listed under
either federal or the State of Hawai'i endangered species statutes was recorded
in our survey of the site (DLNR, 1998; USFWS, 2005a, 2005b, 2011). However,
two listed seabirds fly over the area.
Hawaiian Petrel and Newell's Shearwater-The principal potential impact
that development of this site poses to ESA-protected Hawaiian Petrel and
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX) Page 134
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Newell's Shearwater is an increased threat that birds will be downed after
becoming disoriented by outdoor lighting associated with either night-time
construction activity or exterior lighting associated with whatever structures
and appurtenances are built on the property.
Wedge-tailed Shearwater -The principal potential impacts that the
development of the site poses to MBTA-protected Wedge-tailed Shearwaters
are: 1) during any clearing and grubbing of the Project site where birds and
burrows may be disturbed or destroyed; ad 2) an increased risk that birds will
be downed after becoming disoriented by outdoor lighting associated with
either night-time construction activity or exterior lighting associated with
whatever structures and appurtenances that are built on the property.
Mammalian Resources
No mammalian species protected or proposed for protection under either
federal or State of Hawai'i endangered species programs (DLNR, 1998; USFWS,
2005a, 2005b, 2011) were detected during the course ofthis survey.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 35
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Recommendations
Vegetation
• Landscape with native dryland plants for lower cost maintenance. We
recommend post-construction landscaping with native dryland and coastal
strand plants. Planted in a mix of ground cover, shrub, and tree heights,
native plants will slow run-off and retain moisture when rain occurs. Native
plants will remain green and more fire resistant throughout dry periods.
Most native plantings have lower maintenance costs as well. Native species
need less hedge trimming, weed-whacking, and usually grow well without
fertilizers, reducing cost and the potential for non-point pollution of the
ocean. Native species will provide educational, visual, and aesthetic benefits
while conserving water. Native plants will create interesting areas for
walking, cultural learning, nature study, and bird watching. Resources
helpful in understanding Hawaiian plants in landscaping include Native
Hawaiian Plants for Landscaping, Conservation_ and Reforestation (Bornhorst
& Rauch, 1994) and Growing Native Hawaiian Plants (Bornhorst, 2005). By
prior arrangement with growers, native Hawaiian plants can be as
convenient to mass plant as the introduced plants commonly used to re-
vegetate after new construction.
Invertebrates
• Shield external lighting: during construction and in the finished project and
roadways, it will be important to plan to shield outdoor lighting. Artificial
lighting is attractive and confusing to many arthropods (see Methods: Light
survey, page 6), concentrating them at night as easy prey for feeding bats or
arthropod predators such as praying mantis. Insects attracted to lights at
night often remain in place at dawn and are then easily seen and consumed
by birds.
Birds
• Immediately prior to initiation of ground disturbance activities on the
Project site, a survey for nesting Wedge-tailed Shearwaters should be
conducted by a qualified biologist to record all then currently active
burrows with GPS. These locations can then be plotted on construction plan
documents so that the burrows can be avoided. At this site, the colony is
active and expanding; as such, the current location of burrows (as in Fig. 2)
is not an accurate indication of where all burrows will be next breeding
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 36
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
season. No construction should occur until all nesting Wedge-tailed
Shearwaters have left the colony.
• If night-time work will be required in conjunction with construction
activities on the property, it is recommended that construction lights be
shielded to reduce the potential for interactions between nocturnally flying
Wedge-tailed Shearwaters, Hawaiian Petrels, Newell's Shearwaters, and
other seabirds protected under either the MBTA or ESA (or equivalent state
statutes) and man-made structures (Reed et al., 1985; Telfer et al., 1987).
• Permanent exterior lights associated with any development on the property
must be shielded so as to reduce the potential for interactions of nocturnally
flying seabirds with man-made structures (Reed et al., 1985; Telfer et al.,
1987).
• Restrict food sources: do not allow employees to feed cats or encourage cat
colonies. Food meant for cats will attract rats, mice, ants and mongoose. All
offer dangers to sea birds.
Mammals
• Remove trash regularly: food trash can attract mongoose, cat, and rat and
mice populations, resulting in predation on birds. Population surges of such
pests will make the project a poor neighbor to existing housing in the area.
Provide trash cans at construction areas where food is consumed, provide
can covers, and empty cans frequently. Importantly, construction
supervisors need to establish with crew members a culture of using the
receptacles.
• Limit animal access: do not allow employees to bring pet dogs or cats to the
site. Even well behaved animals can escape a leash and fail to return on
command. Dogs and cats will harass and kill ground-nesting birds.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 3 7
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Glossary6
Adventive: organisms introduced to an area but not purposefully.
Alien: not native; occurring in the locality it occupies ONLY with human assistance,
accidental or purposeful. Polynesian (e.g., coconut) and post-1778 introductions (e.g.,
guava, goats, and sheep) are aliens.
Anaphylactic: hypersensitivity; may cause shock, respiratory distress, swelling, other
problems
Arthropod: insects and related invertebrates (e.g., spiders) having an external skeleton and
jointed legs.
Aeolian: wind blown, a habitat dominated by effects of wind blowing over it.
Aspiration: invertebrates are transferred from the original location (leaf, net, etc.) into a
large vial. Two tubes are lodged in one stopper in the vial. Air drawn in on one tube,
creates suction at the end ofthe second tube; the target insect is drawn into the vial by the
pulling air.
Endemic: naturally occurring, without human transport, ONLY in the locality occupied.
Hawaii has a high percentage of endemic plants and animals, some in very small
microenvironments.
Indigenous: naturally occurring without human assistance in the locality it occupies; may
also occur elsewhere, including outside the Hawaiian Islands. (e.g., naupaka kahakai
(Scaevola sericea) is the same plant in Hawai'i and throughout the Pacific).
Insects: arthropods with six legs, and bodies in three sections
Invertebrates: animals without backbones (insects, spiders, snails, shrimp)
Kipuka: an area of vegetation surrounded by younger lava flows
Larvajlarvai: an immature stage of development in young of many animals.
Littoral: belonging to or along the sea shore
Makal: toward the ocean
Mauka: toward the mountains
Midden: human food refuse in an archaeological setting, often in a heap or pile
6 Glossary based largely on definitions in Biological Science: An Ecological Approach, 7th ed.,
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, a high school text; on the glossary in Manual of Flowering
Plants of Hawai'i, Vol.2, Wagner, et al., 1999, Bishop Museum Press, and other sources.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 38
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Glossary (continued).
Mollusk: invertebrates in the phylum Mollusca. Common representatives are snails, slugs,
mussels, clams, oysters, squids, and octopuses.
Native: organism that originated in area where it lives without human assistance. May be
indigenous or endemic.
Naturalized: an alien organism that, with time, yet without further human assisted releases
or plantings, has become established in an area to which it is not native.
Nocturnal: active or most apparent at night.
Pupa: the stage between larva and adult in insects with complete metamorphosis, a non-
feeding and inactive stage often inside a case
Purposefully introduced: an organism brought into an area for a specific purpose, for
example, as a biological control agent.
Rare: threatened by environmental factors and in low numbers.
Senescent: Aged. Said of a plant community when most or all of the individual plants are
mature and there is no regeneration or young plants in the complement.
Species: all individuals and populations of a particular type of organism, maintained by
biological mechanisms that result in their breeding mostly with their kind.
Strand: Similar to littoral; describes plant community extending inland from the high tide
line, typically growing on rock and sand substrata.
Vertebrates: animals with backbones (birds, mammals, reptiles)
Waxing: describes gradual increase in visible amount of the moon's disk
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 39
Biological Surveys MAKAHO 'E NA POINT, KAUA 'l
References
Ainley, D. G, R. Podolsky, L. Deforest, G. Spencer, and N. Nur. 2001. The Status
and Population Trends of the Newell's Shearwater on Kaua'i: Insights
from Modeling, in: Scott, J. M, S. Conant, and C. Van Riper III (editors)
Evolution, Ecology, Conservation, and Management of Hawaiian Birds: A
Vanishing Avifauna. Studies in Avian Biology No. 22: Cooper's
Ornithological Society, Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas. (Pg. 108-123).
American Ornithologist's Union. 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. 7th
edition. AOU, Washington D.C. 829 pp.
__ . 2000. Forty-second supplement to the American Ornithologist's Union
Check-list of North American Birds. Auk, 117: 84 7-858.
Asquith, A 1993. A new species of Cyrtopeltis from coastal vegetation in the
Hawaiian Islands (Heteroptera: Miridae: Dicyphinae). Pac. Sci., 47(1):
17-20.
Banks, R. C., C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, A W. Kratter, P. C. Rasmussen, J. V. Remsen, Jr.,
J. D. Rising, and D. F. Stotz. 2002. Forty-third supplement to the American
Ornithologist's Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk, 119: 897-
906.
_, _, ______, and __ . 2003 Forty-
fourth supplement to the American Ornithologist's Union Check-list of
North American Birds. Auk, 120: 923-931.
_, _, ______, and __ . 2004 Forty-
fifth supplement to the American Ornithologist's Union Check-list of
North American Birds . Auk, 121: 985-995.
_, ______, ______,and __ . 2005 Forty-
sixth supplement to the American Ornithologist's Union Check-list of
North American Birds. Auk, 122: 1031-1031.
_, _, ______,and __ . 2006 Forty-
seventh supplement to the American Ornithologist's Union Check-list of
North American Birds. Auk, 123: 926-936.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 140
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Banks, R. C., C. R. Terry Chesser, C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, A. W. Kratter, I. J. Lovette, P.
C. Rasmussen, J. V. Remsen, Jr., J. D. Rising, and D. F. Stotz. 2007 Forty-
eighth supplement to the American Ornithologist Union Check-list
ofNorth American Birds. Auk, 124: 1109-1115.
and K. Winker. 2008. Forty-ninth supplement to the American
Ornithologist Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk, 125: 758-
768.
Bonaccorso, F. J., C. M. Todd and, A. C. Miles. 2005. Interim Report on Research
to Hawaiian Bat Research Consortium for The Hawaiian Hoary Bat,
Ope'ape'a, Lasiurus cinsereus semotus. 1 September 2004 to 31 August
2005.
_, _, and __ . 2007. Interim Report on Research to Hawaiian Bat
Research Consortium for The Hawaiian Hoary Bat, Ope'ape'a, Lasiurus
cinsereus semotus. April1, 2007.
_, M. Corresen, and C, Pinzari 2009. Interim Report on Research to
Hawaiian Bat Research Consortium for The Hawaiian Hoary Bat,
Ope' ape' a, Lasiurus cinsereus semotus. February 4, 2009.
Bornhorst, H. L. 2005. Growing native Hawaiian plants: a how-to guide for the
gardener. Bess Press, Honolulu, 104 pp.
and F. D. Rauch. 1994. Native Hawaiian plants for landscaping,
conservation, and reforestation. HIT AHR, College of Tropical Agriculture
and Human Resources, University of Hawaii, Honolulu. 17 pp.
Bridwell, J. C. 1920, "A New Lowland Plagithmysine Cerambycid from Oahu
with Notes on its Habits. [Ewa Dryland Insect survey]," Proceedings of the
Hawaiian Entomological Society, 4 (2): 314-327.
Bryan, Jr., E. H. 1929. Notes and Exhibitions, Proceedings of the Hawaiian
Entomological Society, 7(2):237.
Chesser, R. T., R. C. Banks, F. K. Barker, C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, A. W. Kratter, I. J.
Lovette, P. C. Rasmussen, J. V. Remsen, Jr., J.D. Rising, and D. F. Stotz, and
K. Winker. 2009. Fiftieth supplement to the American Ornithologist
Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk, 126: 1-10.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 41
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Chesser, R. T., R. C. Banks, F. K. Barker, C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, A. W. Kratter, I. J.
Lovette, P. C. Rasmussen, J. V. Remsen, Jr., J.D. Rising, and D. F. Stotz, and
K. Winker. 2010. Fifty-first supplement to the American Ornithologist
Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk, 127: 726-7 44.
___, ___, ___, ___, ___, ___, ___, __ _, __ __, __ _, and
__ . 2011. Fifty-second supplement to the American Ornithologist
Union Check-list of North American Birds. Auk, 128: 600-613.
Christensen, C. 1992. Kauai's Native Land Shells. Fisher Printing, Honolulu. 28
pp.
Cooper, B. A and R. H. Day. 1994. Kauai endangered seabird study. Volume 1:
Interactions of Dark-rumped Petrels and Newell's Shearwaters with
utility structures on Kauai, Hawaii: Final Report, TR-105847-V1, Electric
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California.
__ . 1998. Summer Behavior and Mortality of Dark-rumped Petrels and
Newell's Shearwaters at Power Lines on Kauai. Colonial Waterbirds, 21
(1): 11-19.
Cowie, R. H. 2006. Succineid project web data: Systematics, Phylogenetics, and
Biogeography. Available on the web at URL: www.hawaii.edu/cowielab/
Succineid_project/suchome; last accessed July 2011.
Daly, H. V. and K. N. Magnacca. 2003. Insects of Hawaii. Volume 17: Hawaiian
Hylaeus. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 234 pp.
David, R. E. 2010. Unpublished field notes-Kaua'i, 1980-2010.
___, R. H. Day, and B. A. Cooper 2002. Results of Newell's Shearwater Surveys
at the Kaluahonu, Moalepe and Anahola Memorial Colonies, Island of
Kaua'i, Hawai'i, July 2002. Prep. for Planning Solutions, Inc., and Kaua'i
Electric.
__ and Planning Solutions. 2008. 2007 Save Our Shearwaters Program End
of Year Report: Prep. for: Kaua'i Island Utility Cooperative & The Hawai'i
Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and
Wildlife.
Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR). 1997. Indigenous Wildlife,
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants, and Introduced Wild
Birds. Department of Land and Natural Resources. State of Hawaii.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 142
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Administrative Rule §13-124-2 -§13-124-3, June 13, 1996. Exhibit 1.
Feb. 1, 1997. Available on the web at URL: www.state.hi.us/dlnr/
dofaw/rules/Chap124exhib.pdf.
Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR). 1998. Indigenous Wildlife,
Endangered And Threatened Wildlife And Plants, And Introduced Wild
Birds. Department of Land and Natural Resources. State of Hawaii.
Administrative Rule §13-134-1 through §13-134-10, dated March 02,
1998.
Division of Forestry & Wildlife (DOFAW) 2009. Unpublished Seabird Survey
Data.
Ebin, Moser + Skaggs LLP, and Rana Biological Consulting, Inc. 2010. Kaua'i
Lagoons Habitat Conservation Plan. Prepared for: Kauai Lagoons, LLC &
Mori Golf (Kauai), LLC.
eYols. University of Hawaii at Manoa Library. Available on the web at URL:
http:/ /evols.library.manoa.hawaii.edu/; last accessed May 2011.
Hadley, T. H. 1961. Shearwater calamity on Kauai. 'Elepaio, 21: 60.
Hawai'i Biological Survey (HBS). 2002a update. Hawaiian Arthropod Checklist.
B. P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawai'i. Available on the web at URL:
http:/ /www2.bishopmuseum.org/HBS/checklist/; Last accessed May 2011.
__ . 2002b. Hawaiian Freshwater & Terrestrial Mollusk Checklist. B. P.
Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawai'i. Available on the web at URL:
http://www2.bishopmuseum.org/HBS/checklist/; Last accessed May 2011.
Hawaii Natural Heritage Program (HNHP). Undated. Hawaii Natural Heritage
Program, Center for Conservation Research and Training, University of
Hawaii at Manoa. Data provided by Roy Kam, Database Manager,
accessed May 2011.
Hawaii-Pacific Journal Index. University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawai'i. Accessed
October 2009. Available on the web at URL: http://uhmanoa.lib .hawaii.
Hawaiian Entomological Society (HES). 1990. Common Names of Insects &
Related Organisms. Committee on Common Names of Insects. 87 pp.
Available on the web at URL: edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi; last accessed
May 2011.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page I 43
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Hazlett, R. W., and D. W. Hyndman. 1996. Roadside Geology of Hawaii. Mountain
Press, Missoula, Montana. 304 pp.
Howarth, F. G. and W. P. Mull . 1992. Hawaiian Insects and Their Kin . University
of Hawai 'i Press, Honolulu. 160 pp .
Ingenta Connect search service j online abstracts. Available on the web at URL:
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/; last accessed May 2011.
Kunishi, R. 1976. "Notes and Exhibitions (Oct 1974)," Proceedings of the
Hawaiian Entomological Society, 22(2): 175-176.
Liittschwager, D. and S. Middleton, photographers. 2001. Remains of a Rainbow,
National Geographic / Environmental Defense Fund. Accompanying
zoological captions by Manning, Montgomery, eta/.
Montgomery, S. L. 2003. Survey of terrestrial faunal resources on Po'ipii Beach
Villas property, Po'ipii, Koloa, Kaua'i, 21pp. Report for Po'ipii Beach
Villas, LLC.
__ . 2005. Survey of native terrestrial and stream fauna near Koloa Landing,
Po'ipii, Koloa District, Island of Kaua'i, 21pp. Report for Po'ipii Beach
Villas, LLC.
Morgan, C., P. White, and R. E. David. 2003. Habitat Conservation Plan: Kaua'i
Island Utility Cooperative: Working Paper No. 2 Data Analysis:
Interpreting the Save Our Shearwaters Bird Recovery Database (1979-
2002) for Habitat Conservation Planning. Prep. for: Kaua'i Island Utility
Cooperative.
__ . 2004 Habitat Conservation Plan: Kaua'i Island Utility Cooperative: Data
Report and Analysis: Save Our Shearwaters Bird Program 2003 Update.
Prepared for: Kaua'i Island Utility Cooperative.
Nishida, G. M. (ed .). 2002. Hawaiian Terrestrial Arthropod Checklist. Fourth
edition. Bishop Museum Technical Report 22: 313 pp.
__ and J. M. Tenorio. 1993. What Bit Me? Univ. of Hawaii Press. 72 pp.
Office of Environmental Quality Control. Online library. Available on the web at
URL: http:/ joeqc.doh.hawaii.govjShared Documents/; last accessed May
2011.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 144
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Otte, D. 1994. The Crickets of Hawaii. The Orthopterists' Society, Philadelphia,
PA. 396 pp.
Pacific Basin Information Node (PBIN). Data base I geographic search available
on the web at URL: http:/ /pbin.nbii.gov/otherinverts/index.asp; last
accessed May 2011.
Perkins, R. C. L. 1913. "Introduction. Being a review of the land-fauna of
Hawaiia," and "Vertebrates." In: Sharp, D., ed., Fauna Hawaiiensis. Vol. 1.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, and Bishop Museum Special
Pub.6.
Podolsky, R., D. G. Ainley, G. Spencer, L. de Forest, and N. Nur. 1998. Mortality
of Newell's Shearwaters Caused by Collisions with Urban Structures on
Kaua'i. Colonial Waterbirds, 21: 20-34.
Pukui , M. K., S. H. Elbert, and E. T. Mookini 1976. Place Names of Hawaii.
University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, Hawai'i. 289 pp.
Reed, J. R., J. L Sincock, and J. P. Hailman 1985. Light Attraction in Endangered
Procellariform Birds: Reduction by Shielding Upward Radiation. Auk
102: 377-383 .
Scholar Space. University of Hawaii at Manoa Library. Available on the web at
URL: http:/ /schola rspace. manoa. haw a ii.ed u/; last accessed May 2 011.
Simons, T. R., and C. N. Hodges. 1998. Dark-rumped Petrel (Pterodroma
phaeopygia).ln: A. Poole and F. Gill (editors). The Birds of North America,
No. 345. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA. and the
American Ornithologists Union, Washington, D.C.
Sincock, J. L. 1981. Saving the Newell's Shearwater. Pages 76-78 in Proceedings
of the Hawaii Forestry and Wildllife Conference, 2-4 October 1980.
Department of Land and Natural Resources, State of Hawaii, Honolulu.
Staples, G. W. and D. R. Herbst. 2005. A Tropical Garden Flora. Plants Cultivated
in the Hawaiian Islands and other Tropical Places. Bishop Museum,
Honolulu. 908 pp.
Stearns, H. T. 1966. Road Guide to Points of Geologic Interest in the Hawaiian
Islands. Pacific Books, Palo Alto, Ca . 66 pp.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 145
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
Swezey, 0. H. 193S. "Winter Revival of Insect Life in the Arid Region at Koko
Head, O'ahu," Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society, 9: 9S-
96.
___ .. 19S4. Forest Entomology in Hawai'i. Special Publication 44, Bishop
Museum Press, Honolulu, 266 pp.
Telfer, T. C. 1979. Successful Newell's Shearwater Salvage on Kauai. 'Elepaio,
39:71
__, J. L. Sincock, G. V. Byrd, and J. R. Reed. 1987. Attraction of Hawaiian
seabirds to lights: Conservation efforts and effects of moon phase.
Wildlife Society Bull., 1S: 406-413.
Tenorio, J. M. and G. M. Nishida. 199S. What's Bugging Me? University of
Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI, 184 pp.
Tomich, P. Q. 1986. Mammals in Hawaii. Bishop Museum Press. Honolulu,
Hawaii. 37 pp.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1983. Hawaiian Dark-Rumped Petrel &
Newell's Manx Shearwater Recovery Plan. USFWS, Portland, Oregon.
February 1983.
__ . 1998. Recovery Plan for the Hawaiian Hoary Bat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, Portland, Oregon.
__ . 2000. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination
of Threatened Status for Newcomb's Snail from the Hawaiian Islands. SO
CFR Part 17. Federal Register, Vol. 6S(No.17): 4162-4169.
__ . 2003. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for the Blackburn's Sphinx Moth. Federal Register,
68(111; Tuesday, June 10, 2003): 34710-34766.
__ . 200Sa. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. SO CFR 17:11
and 17:12 (Tuesday, November 1, 200S).
__ . 200Sb. SO CFR 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.
Review of Species That Are Candidates or Proposed for Listing as
Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted
Petition; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions. Federal
Register, 70 (No. 90; Wednesday, May 11, 200S): 24870-24934.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 146
Biological Surveys MAKAHO'ENA POINT, KAUA'I
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010a. SO CFR Part 17. Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species that are
Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of
Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on
Listing Actions; Proposed Rule. Federal Register, Vol. 7S(No. 217; Nov.
10): 69221-69294.
__ . 2010b. USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species System (TESS),
available on the web at URL: http:/ /ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/StartTESS.do.
__ . 2010c. SO CFR Part 17. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants;
Listing the Flying Earwig Hawaiian Damselfly and Pacific Hawaiian
Damselfly As Endangered Throughout Their Ranges. Final rule. Federal
Register, 7S(No. 121; June 24): 3S990-36012.
U.S. Naval Observatory (USNO), Astronomical Applications Department. Sun
and Moon Data for One Day. Available on the web at URL:
http:/ /aa.usno.navy.mil/.
Wagner, W. L., D. R Herbst, and S. H. Sohmer. 1990. Manual of the Flowering
Plants of Hawai'i. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, Hawaii. 2 vols.
18S4 pp.
__ and __ . 1999. Supplement to the Manual of the flowering plants of
Hawai'i, pp. 18SS-1918. In: Wagner, W. L., D.R. Herbst, and S.H. Sohmer,
Manual of the flowering plants of Hawai'i. Revised edition. 2 vols.
University of Hawaii Press and Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.
Zimmerman, E. C. 1948-80. Insects of Hawaii. University of Hawaii Press,
Honolulu.
____ .. 2001. Insects of Hawaii. Volume 1: Introduction. University of
Hawaii Press, Honolulu. xx + 206 pp.
AECOS Inc. [1269.DOCX] Page 147
EXHIBIT O-4
Makahü‘ena Point
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
PBR
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
HAWAII
FIGURE 1
Public View Analysis
1. Ala Kinoiki (foreground) and Po‘ipü Road (cross street) are the closest County highways from the Property. This photograph was taken
from the east side of Ala Kinoiki. See location of photo indicated on the map below.
2. From the Ala Kinoiki/Po‘ipü Road intersection the Property is not visible and thus the build out of either the 10 lot subdivision or the
25+ legal lots of record will have no impact on public views from the closest coastal County highways. This photograph was taken
from the west side of Ala Kinoiki. See location of photo indicated on the map below.
3. Kaumuali‘i Highway (Route 50), the State highway nearest to the coast in this area of Kaua‘i and closest to the Property, is approximately
4.8 miles from the Property. Because of this distance, the Property cannot be seen Kaumuali‘i Highway. Thus the Makahü‘ena Point
subdivision will not interfere with or detract from the line-of-sight toward the ocean from the State highway nearest the coast.
Kaumu
ali‘i
H
w
y.Maluhia Rd.Pö‘ipu Rd.
K
o
l
o
a
R
d
.
4
.
8
m
i
l
e
s
0 1 mile
Makahü‘ena Point
12Ala
K
i
no
ik
i
Rd
.
EXHIBIT O-4
Makahü‘ena Point
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
PBR
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
HAWAII
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale that could
be built on the lots but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are
provided for general visualization purposes only.
FIGURE 2
Public View Analysis
Current Conditions: Pe‘e Road is the County road directly in front of the Property. Currently from Pe‘e Road the only view of the
ocean across the Property from is from the access driveway. Tall vegetation blocks ocean views from other locations along Pe‘e Road.
This photograph was taken near the east side of the Property; see key map on the right.
With the 25+ lot Subdivision: From this perspective build out of the 25+ legal lots of record would create a dense line of homes
along Pe‘e Road and the internal access road, blocking all ocean views.
With the 10-lot Subdivision: With only two homes directly fronting Pe‘e Road, the 10-lot subdivision would provide for more
opportunities for ocean views between the homes.
Makahü‘ena Point
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
PBR
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
HAWAII
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale that could
be built on the lots but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are
provided for general visualization purposes only.
FIGURE 3
Public View Analysis
Current Conditions: From this perspective along Pe‘e Road tall vegetation blocks ocean views. This photograph was taken near the
west side of the Property; see key map on the right.
With the 25+ lot Subdivision: From this perspective build out of the 25+ legal lots of record would create a dense line of homes
along Pe‘e Road and block all ocean views.
With the 10-lot Subdivision: With large, one-acre lots, and only two homes directly fronting Pe‘e Road, the 10-lot subdivision would
provide for more opportunities for ocean views between the homes.
Makahü‘ena Point
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
PBR
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
HAWAII
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale that could
be built on the lots but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are
provided for general visualization purposes only.
FIGURE 4
Public View Analysis
Current Conditions: The paved public shoreline access path in front of The Point at Po‘ipü condominium and timeshare complex ends
at the west Property boundary; see key map on the right. A survey stake marks the property line. The end of the paved path can be seen
at the bottom left.
With the 25+ lot Subdivision: Build out of the 25+ legal lots of record would allow for up to three rows of homes between The Point
at Po‘ipü condominium and timeshare complex and the ocean; however from this perspective the homes would not detract from the line-of-
sight toward the ocean, as the primary ocean view is to the south.
With the 10-lot Subdivision: The 10 lot subdivision, with large, one acre lots, would provide for one row of homes between
The Point at Po‘ipü condominium and timeshare complex and the ocean, with generous spacing between homes. From this perspective the
homes would not detract from the line-of-sight toward the ocean, as the primary ocean view is to the south.
Makahü‘ena Point
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
PBR
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
HAWAII
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale that could
be built on the lots but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are
provided for general visualization purposes only.
FIGURE 5
Public View Analysis
Current Conditions: : This photograph was taken further to the east than the photograph in Figure 4; see kep map on the right. The
paved public shoreline access path in front of The Point at Po‘ipü condominium and timeshare complex can be seen in the foreground.
The paved path ends at the west Property boundary.
With the 25+ lot Subdivision: Build out of the 25+ legal lots of record would not be very perceptible from this vantage point as
Building 6 of The Point at Po‘ipü condominium and timeshare complex would block most of the homes and the primary ocean view is to
the south.
With the 10-lot Subdivision: Similarly, the 10 lot subdivision would not be very perceptible from this vantage point as Building 6 of
The Point at Po‘ipü condominium and timeshare complex would block most of the homes and the primary ocean view is to the south.
Makahü‘ena Point
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
PBR
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
HAWAII
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale that could
be built on the lots but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are
provided for general visualization purposes only.
FIGURE 6
Public View Analysis
Current Conditions: This photograph was taken from the public access beach park on the eastern side of the Grand Hyatt Resort and
Keoneloa (Shipwreck) Beach; see key map on the right. The Makahü’ena Point Property this the prominent point in the center of the photo-
graph. The Point at Po‘ipü condominium and timeshare complex can be seen in the center of the photograph and to the right.
With the 25+ lot Subdivision: The build out of the 25+ legal lots of record on the Property would result in a greater cluster of homes
on the Makahü’ena Point Property, but would not be out of context with the large buildings of Point at Po‘ipü condominium and timeshare
complex and would not block the line-of-sight toward the ocean from this perspective.
With the 10-lot Subdivision: With the 10 lot subdivision, homes on the Property would not block the line-of-sight toward the
ocean from this perspective and would be less dense with more open space compared to the build out of the 25+ legal lots of record
on the Property.
EXHIBIT O-5
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
Visual Analysis 25+ lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 1
Makahü‘ena Point
The Point at Poipu
Makahuena at Poipu
Pe‘e Road
Certified Shoreline
EXHIBIT O-5
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
Visual Analysis 25+ lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 2
Makahü‘ena Point
The Point at Poipu
Makahuena at Poipu Pe‘e RoadCertified Shoreline
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
2nd Floor
1st Floor
Visual Analysis 25+ lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 3
Makahü‘ena Point
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
3rd Floor
1st Floor
Visual Analysis 25+ lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 4
Makahü‘ena Point
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
Visual Analysis 25+ lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 5
Makahü‘ena Point
2nd Floor
1st Floor
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
1st Floor
3rd Floor
Visual Analysis 25+ lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 6
Makahü‘ena Point
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
Visual Analysis 10 lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 1
The Point at Poipu
Makahuena at Poipu
Certified Shoreline Shoreline Setback Line
Pe‘e Road Public
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
Makahü‘ena Point
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
Visual Analysis 10 lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 2
Makahü‘ena Point
The Point at Poipu
Makahuena at Poipu
Certified Shoreline
Shoreline Setback Line
Pe‘e Roa
d
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
Visual Analysis 10 lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 3
Makahü‘ena Point
Makahuena at Poipu
The Point at Poipu
Pe‘e Ro
a
d
Certified Shoreline
Shoreline Setback Line
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
1st Floor
2nd Floor
Visual Analysis 10 lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 4
Makahü‘ena Point
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
1st Floor
3rd Floor
Visual Analysis 10 lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 5
Makahü‘ena Point
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
1st Floor
2nd Floor
Visual Analysis 10 lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 6
Makahü‘ena Point
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
1st Floor
3rd Floor
Visual Analysis 10 lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 7
Makahü‘ena Point
House illustrations are representative of the general mass and scale of homes that could be built on the lots
but are not depictions of what will actually be built and are provided for general visualization purposes only.
1st Floor
4th Floor
Visual Analysis 10 lot Subdivision
CIRI Land Development Company Island of Kaua‘i
Figure 8
Makahü‘ena Point
EXHIBIT O-6
Photograph 1
Photograph 2
Photograph 3
Photograph 4
Photograph 5
EXHIBIT P
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
FOR
MAKAHUENA POINT
TMK: (4) 2-8-021:041; (4) 2-8-021: 044-067
Located in
Poipu, Island of Kauai, State of Hawaii
OWNER:
CIRI LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
2525 C Street, Suite 500
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Prepared By:
David A Grenier, P.E.
Hawaii. License No. 6353-C
Triad Engineering
1300 E. 68th Ave., Suite 210
Anchorage, Alaska 99518
April 7, 2014
EXHIBIT P
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION
3.0 TOPOGRAPHY and CURRENT DRAINAGE PATTERNS
4.0 FLOOD ZONES
5.0 SOIL CONDITIONS
6.0 OCEAN CONDITIONS
7.0 EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE
7.1 EXISTING ACCESS
7.2 AVAILABLE WASTEWATER FACILITIES
7.3 EXISTING WATER FACILITIES
7.4 AVAILABLE ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE AND TELECOMMUNICATION
8.0 FLOOD ZONES & CONSTRAINT DISTRICTS
9.0 ANTICIATED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
9.1 SITE GRADING
9.2 DRAINAGE PLAN
9.3 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT & QUALITY
9.4 EROSION CONTROL PLAN
9.5 ROADWAYS
9.6 WASTEWATER
9.7 WATER
9.8 ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE AND TELECOMMUNICATION
9.9 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
10.0 CONCLUSION
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A: Tax Map
EXHIBIT B: Preliminary Site Layout & Grading Plan
EXHIBIT C: FIRM Panel 352 of 356
EXHIBIT D: USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soils Map
EXHIBIT E: Department of Water Letter dated October 30, 2012
EXHIBIT F: Individual Wastewater System (IWS) Report
1
PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT
FOR
MAKAHUENA POINT
TMK: (4) 2-8-021:041; (4) 2-8-021: 044-067
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Landowner CIRI Land Development Company (CLDC) proposes to consolidate the existing
25+ lots of record1 located on its 13.078 acre property (the Property) at Makahuena Point,
near Poipu, and re-subdivide the Property into 10 single-family residential lots
(approximately one acre each); see Exhibit A, TMK map and Exhibit B, Preliminary Site
Layout & Grading Plan.
The purpose of this report is to provide information relating to the existing infrastructure in
the vicinity of the Makahuena Point Property and outline additional infrastructure required to
serve the new subdivision. This report will also assist in identifying site conditions and
design elements that require careful consideration of Kauai's land and waters.
The existing lots were created in 1932 under a subdivision known as the Makahuena Tract
(File Plan 354), which established 63 lots and associated road lots on the Property as well as
on the adjacent property currently occupied by the project known as The Point at Poipu. The
Point at Poipu property was consolidated and re-subdivided in the 1990s.
2.0 PROJECT LOCATION
The Property is located at the southern tip of the Island of Kauai, identified by the County as
TMK 2-8-021:041 and TMKs (4) 2-8-021: 044-067; see the attached Exhibit A. The 13.078
acre Property fronts the Pacific Ocean and is located south of Pee Road with The Point at
Poipu development to the northeast and The Makahuena at Poipu development to the west.
3.0 TOPOGRAPHY and CURRENT DRAINAGE PATTERNS
The general slope of the Property is from the north to a southeasterly direction toward the
ocean with the exception of an existing large, oval-shaped depression located within the
westerly portion of the Property. No runoff from the Property drains onto the east or west
adjacent properties or onto the Pee Road right of way. The elevations on the Property
range from sea level up to the 64 foot contour at Pee Road with an existing slopes ranging
from the certified shoreline in the 4% to 9% with an overall average slope of the Property
at 5.8 percent.
A catch basin inlet exists along the south side of Pee Road located approximately in the
middle of the Property‟s road frontage. It appears that no runoff from Pee Road drains
onto the Property. Minor runoff from The Point at Poipu development appears to enter the
Property in the vicinity of proposed Lots 1 and 2.
1 25 lots of record TMK (4) 2-8-021: 044 – 068; one bulk lot TMK (4) 2-8-021: 041, and two unnumbered road lots.
2
4.0 FLOOD ZONES
No defined stream channels, notable drainage paths or signs of erosion exist within the
Property boundary or along the shoreline which consists of rock outcrops. The Property
flood zone designations are X, VE and AE flood zones with base flood elevations as
identified and depicted on the FEMA Kauai County, Hawaii Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) Panel 352 of 356; see attached Exhibit C.
Note that the location of the base flood elevation lines as depicted on the FIRM Panel
differ somewhat from the existing and current ground elevation contour lines shown on the
Preliminary Site layout and Grading Plan. This difference is due to the actual site survey
performed that produced a contour map which is more precise than the methods used by
FEMA. Also note that all of the proposed house pads are located above the VE Base
Flood Elevations when compared to the actual surveyed ground contours.
5.0 SOIL CONDITIONS
The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service identifies two different soil groups
within the Property. The majority of the Property is classified as Koloa stony silty clay
with a hydrologic soil group rating of C which is characterized as soils having a slow
infiltration rate. The remainder of the site along the shore line is classified as rock
outcrop; see attached Exhibit D
6.0 OCEAN CONDITIONS
The State of Hawaii classifies a small portion the waters off the Property‟s coastline west
of Makahuena Point as Class AA, which is the most protective classification of marine
waters, and requires that the waters remain in their natural pristine state as nearly as
possible. See HAR §11-54-3(c) (Dec. 2013). The remaining waters fronting the Property
from Makahuena Point to the east are classified as Class A waters. The objective of Class
A waters is that their use for recreational purposes and aesthetic enjoyment be protected.
See HAR §11-54-3. "Any other use shall be permitted as long as it is compatible with the
protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and with recreation in and on
these waters."
7.0 EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE
7.1 EXISTING ACCESS
The Property has approximately 215 linear feet (lf) of frontage along Pee Road, which is a
County dedicated and maintained road. Existing road improvements include asphalt
concrete (AC) pavement with barrier curb and gutter. No sidewalk exists along the Pee
Road frontage; however, a detached sidewalk does exist both east and west of the property
along the southerly side of Pee Road. An existing driveway apron is located
approximately 75 feet (ft) west of the easterly property line. Note that the driveway
actually crosses The Pointe at Poipu property and will need to be abandoned and a new
driveway apron will be established roughly 100 ft to the west of the current driveway
location.
3
A dirt road exists along the westerly Property boundary which accesses a 10,000 square-
foot parcel (TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:043) located in the south-western portion of the
Property and is owned by the United States. The 10,000 sq. ft. parcel houses a
navigational aid known as the Makahuena Light; see Exhibit A which shows the parcel
labeled as “Makahuena Lighthouse.”
7.2 AVAILABLE WASTEWATER FACILITIES
Currently, there are no County owned or maintained wastewater facilities available to
serve the Property. The developments to the east and west have on site treatment facilities
which are privately owned and maintained.
7.3 EXISTING WATER FACILITIES
There is an existing County owned and maintained 12-inch ductile iron waterline within
Pe„e Road fronting the Property
7.4 AVAILABLE ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE AND TELECOMMUNICATION
Underground electrical, telephone and telecommunication facilities currently exist at the
northeast corner of the Property along the southern edge of the Pee Road right of way.
8.0 FLOOD ZONES & CONSTRAINT DISTRICTS
The Property is within the Shore Constraint District and the Tsunami Constraint District.
The purpose of the Shore District is to regulate development or alterations to shore and
water areas which have unique physical and ecological conditions in order to protect and
maintain physical, biologic and scenic resources of particular value to the public. The
purpose of the Tsunami District is to minimize the threat to public health and safety as
well as damage to property due to extraordinary wave action. CZO §8-12.8. Within the
Tsunami District, single family dwellings are permitted, but are subject to additional
construction and development standards as provided in Chapter 15, Article 1 of the Kauai
County Code.
Most of the Property is in flood zone X. Therefore construction shall meeting the
requirements of KCC §15-1.5(a) or 15-1.5(b), whichever is determined to be appropriate
by the County Engineer. KCC §15-1.5(d). The State Commission on Water Resource
Management shall be notified prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse.
However, the CLDC Project does not entail any movement, relocation of alteration of a
watercourse, so this provision is not applicable.
Other portions of the Property are in the AE and VE zones. Therefore, the construction
and development standards under KCC §15-1.5 for residential structures apply. The
maximum height of residential structures in the flood fringe area is the greater of 30 feet
from the ground, or the base flood elevation plus 15 feet, unless otherwise permitted by
the Planning Commission. KCC §15-1.5(a)(E).
4
Within zones AE and VE all water and sewer systems must be designed to minimize or
eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems, and discharge from the systems into
flood waters. On-site waste disposal systems should be located to avoid impairment to
them or contamination from them during flooding. KCC §§15-1.5(a)(4); 15-1.5(c)(6).
Within the AE zone, no new construction shall be permitted unless it is demonstrated that
the cumulative effect of the development, when combined with all other existing and
anticipated development, will not increase the water surface elevation of the base flood
more than 1 foot at any point within the community. KCC §15-1.5(a)(6).
Within the VE zone, fill is prohibited for structural support and all new construction
should be elevated so that the bottom of the lowest horizontal structural member of the
lowest floor, excluding pilings and columns, is elevated to or above the base flood
elevation. KCC §15-1.5(c). The maximum height of residential structures within the
coastal high hazard area is the greater of 30 feet from the ground, or the base flood
elevation plus 15 feet, unless otherwise permitted by the Planning Commission. KCC
§15-1.5(c)(4).
Building plans for new construction must be certified by a registered professional
structural engineer or architect that the new construction is designed and methods of
construction to be used are in accordance with the accepted standards of practice for
meeting the requirements of the County's flood ordinance. KCC §15-1.5(c)(7).
In addition, for areas of special flood hazard (i.e., lands within the floodplain subject to
1% or greater chance of flooding in any given year), are subject to additional development
standards to minimize flood damage. All finally approved subdivision plans within these
areas must provide base flood elevations within the lots, and if fill is used to elevate the
site of any lot above the base flood elevation, the final ground elevations of the pads shall
be certified by a registered professional civil engineer or surveyor. KCC §15-1.6.
9.0 ANTICIATED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
9.1 SITE GRADING
To construct the internal road, utilities, and house pads as shown on Exhibit B, mass
grading of approximately 70 to 80% of the Property will occur. Prior to beginning the
mass grading operations, the temporary erosion control measures and Best Management
Practices (BMPs) will be installed as outlined in the County approved Erosion Control
Plan. After the BMPs are in place, clearing and grubbing of the site will occur followed
by excavation and placing of the material in accordance with the approved grading plan.
All embankment material will be non-organic and compacted to 95% as directed by the
project soils engineer. Dust control is a key element of the Erosion Control Plan and will
be monitored on a continuous basis during the site grading operation.
The proposed house pad elevations range from an elevation of 24 feet on Lot 1, to an
elevation of 62 feet on Lot 10. The proposed grading plan anticipates approximately
25,000 cubic yards (cy) of cut and fill, a balanced situation requiring no fill will be
brought from offsite onto the Property. No material is anticipated to leave the site and
5
only classified material for road and utility construction is expected to be imported.
Grading operations will be scheduled to occur outside of the Wedge-tailed Shearwater
nesting period (approximately April through October). In addition to not beginning
construction within this time frame, a site inspection will be conducted to insure the site is
clear of nesting birds.
9.2 DRAINAGE PLAN
Along with grading of each building pad, drainage basins will be constructed on each of
the lots. These basins will be sized to contain the increase in storm water due to the home
construction and the increase in impervious surfaces to ensure that surface runoff does not
enter the ocean. Note that, pursuant to the limitations in the Open District, coverage on
the lots with constructed buildings will be limited to no more than 10% of the total site.
The shoreline survey performed in August of 2013 was certified by the State Department
of Land and Natural Resources in January 2014. Prior to beginning site grading
operations, a rock retaining wall will be constructed along the makai side of Lots 1
through 8 to be located at (or slightly mauka of) the shoreline setback line, as determined
by the County of Kauai. This wall will serve as a retaining structure for construction of
the building pads as well as a physical barrier to prevent surface drainage on the lots from
reaching the ocean. The wall, which will also be an aesthetic feature, is anticipated to
range in height from 3 ft to a maximum of 10 ft. The front of the wall will be constructed
with a 1:12 back pitch using face stones 18” or less in size and set using recessed mortar
joints. This same style of wall will also be constructed along the north Property boundary
adjacent to Lot 1 and The Point at Poipu property to act as a physical barrier as well as a
retaining structure.
9.3 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT & QUALITY
The drainage systems within the proposed subdivision will be based on and follow the
requirements of the County of Kauai Storm Water Runoff System Manual, which
mandates that any development greater than two acres in size shall maintain the peak
storm runoff to pre-development conditions.
Drainage sumps, 8 ft deep by 8 ft diameter, will be installed to control the runoff generated
from the road tract and public parking spaces. Individual drainage basins, capable of
handling the increase in runoff due to the addition of impervious surfaces, will be
constructed on each of the lots. The rock retaining walls, as discussed above in 9.2,
Drainage Plan, will be designed to prevent surface drainage from reaching the ocean. The
subdivision‟s Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&R‟s) will require that these
drainage sumps and drainage basins be maintained by the subdivision‟s Homeowners
Association. The CC&R‟s will also address the issue of each lot being responsible to
maintain the required capacity of each drainage basin. Sizing of the basins will meet or
exceed the requirements of the Kauai County Storm Water Runoff criteria with the goal of
keeping surface runoff from reaching the ocean.
6
The total amount of impervious surface is estimated to be 0.6 acre for the road and public
parking area and approximately 1.0 acre for the home improvements and driveways.
Under the existing pre-development conditions, the storm drainage flow rate for the 10
year, 1 hour storm event is estimated to be 11 cubic feet per second. The estimated post
development flow rate for the same storm event is estimated to be 19.5 cubic feet per
second, an increase of 8.5 cfs over existing conditions. The proposed drainage facilities,
consisting of drainage sumps and drainage basins, will be sized to handle the estimated
19.5 cubic feet per second (cfs) of surface runoff for the 10 year, 1 hour storm event; not
simply the increase in runoff from the existing conditions. The size of each lot‟s drainage
basin is anticipated to be in the 4,500 cubic foot range.
In addition to the proposed improvements being sized to handle the quantity of runoff
anticipated during a 10 year, 1 hour storm event, the grassed and landscaped drainage
basins will provide water quality control. These proposed features will function as
infiltration basins which provide the means to remove sediment and contaminants.
In summary, drainage improvements provided as part of the subdivision will improve
drainage conditions over existing conditions as all drainage from the Property (pre-
development and post development) is proposed to be retained on the Property during the
10 year storm event. These proposed improvements also address water quality criteria.
This exceeds the requirements of the County of Kauai Storm Water Runoff System
Manual, which mandates that any development greater than two acres shall maintain the
peak storm runoff to pre-development conditions.
9.4 EROSION CONTROL PLAN
Temporary erosion control measures will be incorporated during construction to minimize
soil loss and erosion hazards. Best Management Practices will include such measures as
installation of silt fences, waddles, straw bales, a stabilized construction entry, watering
for dust control as well as other measures as outlined in the approved Erosion Control
Plan.
Construction activities will comply with all applicable Federal, State, and County
regulations and rules for erosion control. Before issuance of a grading permit by the
County of Kauai, an Erosion Control Plan and Best Management Practices (BMPs)
required for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit will be
prepared describing the implementation of appropriate erosion control measures. The
NPDES permit will allow CLDC to perform erosion control measures to ensure that no
discharge to the ocean occurs. The NPDES general permit covers discharges composed
entirely of storm water runoff associated with construction activities, including clearing,
grading, excavation and construction support activities that result in the disturbances of
one acre or more of total land area. See HAR chapter 11-55. In accordance with the
Department of Health regulations, as well as the requirements of the standard permit
conditions, CLDC shall design, install and maintain erosion and sediment controls that
minimize (i.e., reduce and/or eliminate to the extent achievable) the discharge of pollutants
from earth-disturbing activities. HAR chapter 11-55. All storm water controls must be
installed prior to earth-disturbance, and pollution prevention procedures must be identified
and followed.
7
In accordance with HAR chapter 11-55, the Property will be subject to Best Management
Practices to minimize the discharge of pollutants via storm water discharges. Examples
include open, vegetated swales and natural or constructed depressions; structures for storm
water retention, detention, velocity dissipation devices and other appropriate measures.
9.5 ROADWAYS
The proposed roadway access to the lots will be privately maintained and located within a
50 ft wide road tract. Improvements will consist of 24 ft asphalt strip pavement with
grassed shoulders. No pedestrian walkway within the road tract is anticipated.
A public parking area along the north Property line of Lot 9 is proposed for public use to
access the shoreline. Pedestrian access would be along the westerly Property boundary
within a dedicated public access easement; see the attached Exhibit B. The proposed
development will not substantially interfere with the public's use of the ocean
9.6 WASTEWATER
As stated above under 7.2, there are no County owned or maintained wastewater facilities
available to provide service to this property. Two options are available to provide
wastewater service to the subdivision.
The first consists of installing individual wastewater systems (IWSs) on each lot, which is
addressed in a report prepared by Esaki Surveying & Mapping, Inc (see the attached
Exhibit F). As detailed in the report, each IWS will be designed to meet the wastewater
flow requirements of the State of Hawaii Department of Health (DOH) for a five bedroom
dwelling, which would have a maximum projected flow of 1,000 gallons per day (gpd)
based on 200 gallons per day per bedroom. This will result in a greater wastewater
capacity for the entire property (10,000 gpd) than the total anticipated wastewater flow of
approximately 3,200 gpd based on the County of Kauai Department of Public Works
criteria. Using the DOH higher flow rate insures that an adequate safety factor is used in
designing and sizing of the IWSs.
The second option to provide wastewater service to the project involves connecting to the
adjacent property‟s on-site treatment facility. This option would require installation of a
sanitary sewer main line to service each lot along with a privately owned and maintained
lift station that would pump effluent to the existing neighboring wastewater treatment
facility. Initial conversations with the owners and operators of “The Makahuena”
development indicate that there is adequate capacity to handle the increase in flow
anticipated from this the subdivision. However, there is no agreement at this time between
The Makahuena condominium and CLDC for such shared use.
9.7 WATER
As stated above under 7.3, a County owned and maintained 12” ductile iron waterline is
available to serve the subdivision. It is anticipated that water for the project will be
8
supplied by the County Department of Water. The total amount of anticipated domestic
water usage by the proposed 10 lots is estimated to be approximately 5,000 gallons per
day. Irrigation water usage for the project would be in addition to the domestic usage. An
eight inch waterline is proposed to be connected to the waterline within Pe„e Road and
then extend within the subdivision internal roadway to provide water connections to each
of the house lots. The waterline will provide water service for both domestic and irrigation
use as well as for fire protection.
By letter dated October 2012, the DOW confirmed that there is adequate source, storage,
and transmission to serve 25 residential lots at the Property. (see the attached Exhibit E).
In the letter DOW stated that “Any actual subdivision or development of this area will be
dependent on the adequacy of the source, storage, and transmission facilities at that time.
At the present time, these facilities are adequate along Pee Road.” DOW also stated that
their letter does not represent a commitment or approval by the DOW of proposed or
future water meter requests and/or subdivision building permit applications.
CLDC will submit a written request for water service for the proposed 10 lots after
obtaining the SMA and Class III Zoning Permits. The request will include detailed water
demand (both domestic and irrigation) calculations, along with other information required
by DOW.
9.8 ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE AND TELECOMMUNICATION
Electric, telephone, and telecommunication lines are proposed to be installed underground
extending from the existing facilities along the Pee Road right of way to each lot along the
proposed internal subdivision road lot. The anticipated increase in usage from the
proposed 10 lots would be minimal.
9.9 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Solid waste pickup will be provided by a local private collection company for each
individual lot. No community dumpster or centralized collection location will be provided.
10. CONCLUSION
The proposed improvements for the Makahuena Point project will be designed in accordance
with the applicable rules of the County of Kauai and the State of Hawaii and will minimize
any adverse environmental or ecological effects to the maximum extent practicable. Public
health, safety and welfare are of primary concern to CLDC during this initial planning process
and will continue to be the guiding focus as the project develops.
The project design concept provisions outlined above will minimize potential adverse effects
upon the site and the surrounding special management area resources. Although development
of the project will entail alterations to existing land forms and vegetation, the anticipated
design features and construction methods will cause minimum adverse effect to water
resources and current land uses.
EXHIBIT Q
SERVICES CONTRACT
THIS SERVICES CONTRACT ("Contract"), effective iR._ day of~~ 2020
("Effective Date") by and between CIRI Land Development Company, with principal
offices at 725 E Fireweed Lane, Suite 800, Anchorage, Alaska 99503 ("Owner") and
Kani Wildlife Control, LLC, with principal offices at PO Box 1206, Kekaha, Hawaii,
96752 ("Contractor") is for the purpose of engaging Contractor to perform, or cause
to be performed services, for the benefit of Owner's property, for the compensation
herein provided all upon the terms and conditions set forth below.
ARTICLE 1
Work/ Compensation/ Payment
1.1 Contractor shall perform predator cat control as set forth above and as
further described below (the Work) at Owner's property known as Makah0'ena Estates
located off Pe'e Road on Kauai (the Property).
• Contractor shall monitor the Property monthly to actively trap and conventional
control with removal of feral cats
Such Work shall be performed in a good workmanlike manner and will be completed
in accordance with the specifications outlined above.
1.2 Contractor agrees to perform the Work for Sixty-five Dollars an hour
($65/hr.) (the Contract Price), not to exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) in a 30-
day period without prior approval. Contractor shall submit monthly requests for
payment to Owner. All requests for payment shall contain an itemized list detailing
the Work done, including times and dates with specific reference to the Property.
Owner shall review the invoices and pay Contractor within 30 days of receipt and
approval of an invoice.
ARTICLE 2
Independent Contractor Status
2.1 Contractor is an independent contractor. Contractor shall not be deemed
to be the agent, employee, partner, joint venturer or any other legal or business
relationship of Owner for any purpose. Contractor shall be solely responsible for and
shall maintain adequate records while performing Work hereunder and shall be solely
responsible for and shall file or make, on a timely basis, all tax returns and payments
required to be filed with or made to any federal, state, or local authority, including all
self-employment taxes or returns, with respect to Contractor's Work hereunder.
Contractor shall not enter in any agreement (written or otherwise) with a third party
on behalf of Owner or otherwise purport to bind Owner.
2.2 Contractor shall provide competent supervision for performance of the
Work and shall be responsible for all acts of employees or subcontractors of the
Contractor and shall allow only qualified persons to perform the Work.
EXHIBIT Q
Services Contract
Page 2 of s
ARTICLE 3
Representations
3.1 In order to induce Owner to enter into this Contract, Contractor
represents as follows:
3.1.1 Contractor has full experience and proper qualifications to perform
the Work. Contractor is the holder of all governmental consents, licenses, permits or
other authorizations required to permit Contractor operate or conduct its business now
and as contemplated by the Contract.
3.1.2 None of the execution and delivery of this Contract, the
performance of the Work herein contemplated or compliance with the terms and
provisions in this Contract shall conflict with or result in a breach of, or require any
consent under any agreement or instrument to which Contractor is a party or by which
it is bound or to which it is subject, or constitute a default under any such agreement
or instrument.
3.1.3 The scope of work described herein is sufficient to describe the
requirements for the Work. Contractor has given Owner written notice of all conflicts,
errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies that Contractor has discovered, if any, in the
scope of work.
ARTICLE 4
Insurance and Indemnity
4.1 Contractor shall maintain, and require its subcontractors, if any, to
maintain at all times while obligated to perform hereunder a: (1) Commercial General
Liability policy of combined single limit insurance coverage with bodily injury, (including
death of any person), in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence and/or $2,000,000
aggregate and if Contractor has employees, (2) Contractor shall provide statutory
Workers Compensation coverage for Contractor's employees and Employers Liability
Coverage, with minimum limits of $500,000 Bodily Injury/Each Accident, $500,000
Bodily Injury by Disease/Policy Limit and $500,000 Bodily Injury by Disease/Each
Employee. If Contractor is required to drive in the performance of the Work and/or
drives on the Property, Contractor shall maintain in addition to the above requirements
Business Automobile/Motor Vehicle Liability coverage with limits of liability not less
than $1,000,000 per occurrence combined single limit Bodily Injury and Property
Damage. Coverage shall include all owned vehicles, all non-owned vehicles, and all
hired vehicles. If Contractor is required to perform remediation of hazardous materials
including but not limited to asbestos containing materials, lead, contaminated soil, or
if its operations create an exposure to hazardous materials, Contractor must in addition
to the above requirements, carry a Contractors Pollution Liability policy with limits not
less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and not less than $2,000,000 aggregate for Bodily
Injury, Personal Injury, and Property Damage. Each Owner and Manager, their agents,
assigns, parents, subsidiaries, subcontractors, and employees shall be named as an
additional insured on each required policy except Workers Compensation. Contractor's
Services Contract
Page 3 of 5
insurance shall be primary and non-contributory. Contractor waives any rights of
subrogation against Owner and Contractor's policies of insurance shall acknowledge or
permit such waiver. A certificate of insurance evidencing such requirements shall be
furnished by the Contractor prior to the commencement of any Work. No required
coverage shall be suspended, voided, canceled, reduced in coverage or endorsed to
lower limits except after 30 days prior written notice is given to Owner.
4.2 Contractor hereby agrees to indemnify and hold Owner and the Property
free of and harmless from, and shall defend against, any and all actions, liabilities,
claims and expenses (including attorney's fees) arising from any acts or omissions of
Contractor and / or its employees and agents related to this contract for services, and
/ or arising from any services or material provided to the Property by Contractor and /
or its agents and employees.
ARTICLE 5
Standard of Care
5.1 Contractor's Work shall be performed in a competent, diligent manner,
and to the satisfaction of Owner using the professional skill and judgment ordinarily
exercised by similarly situated professionals in Contractor's industry performing like
work in like circumstances and in compliance with the requirements of this Contract
and shall comply with all laws, ordinances and enforceable directions of governmental
agencies having regulatory authority over the Property and the Work ("Standard of
Care").
5.2 Contractor shall use due diligence in performing under this Contract so
as to protect the Property (and all improvements therein), adjoining property and all
persons and property at or near the performance area of Contractor. Contractor shall
promptly, and at its expense, repair, replace or otherwise restore property and
improvements damaged by its employees, equipment, subcontractors, suppliers and
the like.
5.3 If any Work performed by Contractor is incomplete, defective, or fails to
meet the requirements of this Contract, Contractor shall promptly undertake such
steps as are necessary to complete or remedy the Work.
ARTICLE 6
Default
6.1 Each of the following shall constitute a "default" by Contractor hereunder:
6.1.1 Failure of Contractor to (a) make prompt payment for labor and
materials required for performance hereunder, (b) supply enough workmen or
equipment to timely perform hereunder, or (c) comply with this Contract generally or
any law, ordinance or the like applicable to this Contract or the work hereunder.
Services Contract
Page 4 of 5
6.1.2 Any (a) attachment, execution or other judicial levy upon the
assets of Contractor, (b) assignment of the benefits of this Contract for the direct or
indirect benefit of creditors of Contractor, ( c) any agreement whereby Contractor loses
control of its business to a committee of its creditors, (d) judicial appointment of a
receiver, trustee, or similar officer to take possession of he business or assets of
Contractor, or (e) filing of any petition by or against Contractor under any chapter of
the Federal Bankruptcy laws or the commencement of a case or proceeding under such
laws.
6.2 If any default occurs, and without prejudice to any other remedy, Owner
may terminate Contractor's performance hereunder upon 24 hours prior written notice.
Thereupon, Owner may take such action deemed necessary to effect completion of the
Contract Work.
ARTICLE 7
Term
7 .1 The term of this Contract shall commence upon the Effective Date and
continue on a month-to-month basis. Either the Owner or the Contractor may cancel
this Contract with thirty (30) days written notice. This Contract shall be deemed
cancelled upon receipt of notice of the sale of the Property.
ARTICLE 8
Liens
8.1 Should the performance of the Work or services, or any portion thereof,
convey Mechanic's lien rights to the Contractor or any subcontractor, Contractor shall
provide lien waivers from itself and any Subcontractors prior to payment by Owner. If
any shall file liens against the work, Contractor shall promptly obtain and file a release
of any such lien.
ARTICLE 9
General Provisions
9.1 Contractor agrees that it will not directly or indirectly, interfere with other
contractors and/or labor engaged by Owner in the maintenance and/or operation of
the Property.
9.2 All permits required by governing agencies and all sales and similar taxes
shall be secured and paid for by the Contractor, the cost of which is included in the
total Contract Price.
9.3 Contractor warrants that its employees and the employees of its
subcontractors, if any, providing services under this Contract are authorized by
federal law to work in the United States and that such employment strictly complies
with the requirements of 8 CFR Part 274(a). Breach of this warranty shall constitute
a material breach of this Contract.
Services Contract
Page 5 of 5
9.4 Contractor's Taxpayer Identification Number {TIN) is ~ I -L/ dd--l..,,b.$" 0
9.5 If at any time any controversy should arise between Owner and
Contractor regarding anything pertaining to this Contract and which the parties hereto
do not promptly adjust and determine, then the written orders from Owner to
Contractor shall be followed.
9.6 The waiver by Owner of any requirement of this Contract shall not be
deemed a waiver of any subsequent failure to perform, or construed as precluding
Owner from insisting on strict adherence to the terms of this Contract in the future.
The remedies and rights of Owner, in the event of any default hereof by Contractor,
are cumulative.
9. 7 Notices, demands and requests required or desired to be given hereunder
shall be in writing and delivered either personally or by deposit into the U.S. Mail,
postage prepaid, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, or by recognized
overnight air courier addressed to the party at its address at the beginning hereof.
9.8. Contractor shall not assign this Contract, or any rights, benefits, or
monies due or to become due to Contractor hereunder. Nothing herein shall preclude
or prohibit Owner from assigning or transferring the whole or any part of this Contract.
9.9 This Contract shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws
of the State of Hawaii. Venue of any action under this Contract shall be exclusively in
Hawaii State Court. In the event of litigation involving a dispute arising out of this
Contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive actual reasonable attorneys'
fees and costs, pursuant to applicable court rule, incurred in connection therewith.
9.10 This Contract supersedes all prior negotiations, proposals and
understandings, if any, of the parties hereto, and constitutes the entire understanding
of the parties with reference to the work to be performed under this Contract. This
Contract shall not be modified except by a writing signed by all of the parties.
9.11 This Contract and all of the representations, warranties and conditions
herein contained shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors,
administrators, legal representatives, assigns or other successors in interest (to the
extent permitted hereunder) of each of the parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Contract has been executed as of the date set forth above.
OWNER: CONTRACTOR:
CIRI Land Development Company Kani Wildlife Control, LLC
1/DocuSigned by:
~;
7
~~J_g_e_n_t _____ _
Title: President
Q.~14LS Nae:
Title: iA,c1__ o~ s fY'~'i e, / O v-) "~
(;+,%,74
David Weekes
1645 Pe'e Rd
Koloa, HI 96756
801-634-9075
Feral Cats
2-4 based on populations
David Weekes
EXHIBIT Q-1
EXHIBIT R
EXHIBIT R
EXHIBIT S
EXHIBIT S
RETAINING WALL DETAILS
E N G I N E E R I N G
Makahuena Point Subdivision
S-4
EXHIBIT T
Cultural Impact Assessment
at Makahū‘ena Point, Weliweli Ahupuaʻa, Kona, Kauaʻi
Prepared by McMahon Consulting
3-2600 Kaumualii Hwy., Suite 1300 –PMB 306
Lihue, Kauaʻi, HI 96766
January 2014
Figure 1: Moi Hole at Makahū‘ena Point
EXHIBIT T
i
Table of Contents
Project Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 1
Environmental Setting .................................................................................................................................. 2
Geology ..................................................................................................................................................... 2
Soils ........................................................................................................................................................... 3
Previous Archaeological Investigations ....................................................................................................... 3
Traditional Background ................................................................................................................................ 7
Kauaʻi ........................................................................................................................................................ 7
Weliweli and Makahū‘ena Point ............................................................................................................... 9
Land Commission Awards ........................................................................................................................... 10
Place Names ................................................................................................................................................ 10
Mythology and Mo’olelo ............................................................................................................................ 11
Informants ................................................................................................................................................... 12
Traditional Uses .......................................................................................................................................... 13
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 13
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................ 15
List of Figures
Figure 1: Moi Hole at Makahū‘ena Point .......................................................................... cover
Figure 2: 1921 Aerial Photograph of Kōloa.. ........................................................................... 3
Figure 3: Previous archaeological work in Kona District. ......................................................... 7
List of Tables
TABLE 1: PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS NEAR/AT MAKAHŪ‘ENA POINT .................................... 4
TABLE 2: (HAUN ET. AL 2011) MAKAHŪ‘ENA INVESTIGATIONS .................................................. 6
1 | P a g e
Project Summary
McMahon Consulting conducted a cultural assessment for an approximately 13.078 acre land
area, formerly designated as TMK: (4) 2-8-021: 041, and a 10,000 square foot parcel designated
as TMK (4) 2-8-021: 043, located at Makahū‘ena Point, Weliweli ahupuaʻa within the Traditional
District of Kona, island of Kauaʻi. The larger parcel contains 28 subdivided lots that were
created in the 1930's. The property is owned by CIRI Land Development Company ("CLDC"), an
Alaska corporation, and wholly owned subsidiary of Cook Inlet Region Inc. (“CIRI”), which is an
Alaska Native corporation and one of the 12 Alaska-based regional corporations established by
the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971. CIRI was established to benefit Alaska Natives
who have ties to the Cook Inlet Region of Alaska; the company is owned by more than 8,100
Alaska Native shareholders of predominately Athabascan and Southeast Indian, Inupiat, Yup'ik
Eskimo, Alutiiq and Aleut descent. The 10,000 sq. ft. parcel is owned by the United States. CLDC
acquired the property from the United States in 1996. CLDC now proposes to develop the
property for residential lots and related uses. Although the CLDC property contains over 25
legally recognized subdivided lots, CLDC's proposed Makahū‘ena project anticipates a less dense
development of approximately 10 residential lots and related uses.
The Constitution of the State of Hawaii states the duty of the State and its agencies is to
preserve, protect and prevent interference with the traditional and customary practices of
native Hawaiians. Article XII, Section 7 of the Constitution requires the State to "protect all
rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes
and possessed by ahupua‘a tenants who are descendants of Native Hawaiians who inhabited
the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights. "
Furthermore, Act 50, passed by the Hawaii State Legislature in 2000, requires environmental
impact statements to "identify the address effects on Hawaii's culture, and traditional and
customary rights."
The purpose of a cultural impact assessment is to identify the possibility of on-going cultural
activities and resources within a project area or its vicinity, and assess the potential impacts
that a proposed development may have on those resources. This cultural assessment has been
prepared to fulfill the requirements of a cultural impact assessment, as outlined by the Office of
Environmental Quality Control guidelines under Chapter 343 Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes, and as
required under Article XII, Section 7 of the Hawaii State Constitution. This assessment is a
compilation of information from pertinent literature and records, mythological and legendary
sources, previous archaeological investigations, a history of the Kōloa area, modern land use,
and interviews conducted with cultural practitioners and elders.
There is a paucity of data regarding pre-Contact settlement and historic land tenure for the
parcel, and limited mythological and legendary references. The parcel had been owned by the
Federal Government, specifically the U.S. Coast Guard, who utilized it starting in 1908 for a now
decommissioned light house, and later a Long Range Navigation (LORAN) station. The only
structures present on the parcel are the remnants of support structures for the manning and
2 | P a g e
upkeep of the lighthouse and a former LORAN station. Hale Opio used the property until 1982.
Excavations by Haun et al. (2011) revealed no subsurface cultural deposits. Test trenching
revealed soil that is shallow, with poorly drained clay-loam over saprolitic bedrock.
One Land Commission Award (LCA) was granted in Weliweli in the ‘ili of Haoana in Punipu, and
another that borders Weliweli to Ka’ana’ana within the ‘ilis of Halehinahina and Lapapohaku.
The rest of the ahupuaʻa was reserved as government land. Previous cultural investigations
reveal that the area has been utilized, and still is, for fishing practices.
Environmental Setting
Geology
Makahū‘ena Point is the terminus of a series of small eruptions along the Poipu Fault that that
produced four craters extending across the Kōloa plain approximately 2.3 to 1.0 mya, producing
40 vents, spatter and cinder cones, and a tuff cone. Kōloa lavas cover about half of the surface
of the eastern part of the island to the floor of the Lihue Basin. The last crater produced the
lava flow that is Makahū‘ena Point. Ranging southwest mauka to makai the first crater has
been turned into the Puuhi Reservoir, likely during the tenure of the Kōloa Sugar plantation.
The second Puʻu lies on the slopes of the reservoir and is shown on the USGS Kōloa Quad
topographic map as a cinder pit named Puʻu Hunihuni. The third crater is named Puʻu
Wanawana, situated on the Kōloa Plain above the present Weliweli Road makai of the parcel.
The fourth crater is named Puʻu Pihakekua also called Poipu crater, which lies in the northwest
corner of Makahū‘ena Point. It is likely that this eruption caused the formation of the point.
Finally, a shallow unnamed collapsed crater is present on the parcel. The rugged coastline of
the promontory of Makahū‘ena separates the sandy beaches of Poipu on the west and
Keoneloa Bay on the east.
3 | P a g e
Figure 2: 1921 Aerial Photograph of Kōloa. Note Makahū‘ena Point at bottom right.
Soils
The soils of Makahū‘ena consist of Kōloa Stony silt clay on a 15-25% slope at the mauka side of
the parcel with the makai portion classified as Rock Land. The area is classified as a moderate
to severe erosion hazard, with maximum soil depths of 20 inches over a pahoʻehoʻe flow. The
coastal portions of the parcel are classified as Rock land, which is defined by Foote et al. as,
"areas where exposed bedrock covers more than 90 percent of surface (1972:119).
Previous Archaeological Investigations
There have been numerous archaeological investigations in the vicinity of Makahū‘ena, with
many sites being re-recorded and assigned different site numbers. Thrum recorded heiau sites
on Kaua`i (Thrum 1906) and Bennett recorded sand dune burials at adjacent Keoneloa beach
(Site 82), and petroglyphs (Site 84) (Bennett 1931). These surveys were conducted prior to the
developments at Poipu, Keoneloa beach and former Kōloa Plantation lands for residential,
hotels and condominium lots.
There were three investigations at Makahū‘ena Point. One consisted of a survey by Ladd under
the auspices of the U. S. Coast Guard 14th District to record impacts to the historic lighthouse
located at the point (Ladd 1981). In 1983 a reconnaissance survey of the coastal lands of the
4 | P a g e
Kona district was conducted within the ahupuaʻa of Weliweli and Mahaulepu. Three boundary
walls were recorded in Weliweli. The first (site 3195) is interpreted as a boundary wall dividing
a “housing tract from the cane lands.” The second (site 3196) is interpreted as a boundary wall
separating Grove Farm land from private landowners. The third (site 3198) is a wall located “in
the vicinity of “Puʻu Pihakekua crater” adjacent to the project area (Ching et al. 1983).
The State Historic Preservation Kaua`i archaeologist synthesized available archaeological and
historic literature related to the location of Kaneʻaukai Heiau in an attempt to pinpoint the
location of this heiau said to be located at Makahū‘ena Point. This heiau had been written
about as early as 1885 (Lahainaluna School 1885) but no locational data was provided, and later
archaeological investigations attempting to pinpoint the location resulted in the assignation of
different site numbers; Site 83 (Bennett 1931), (Kikuchi 1963), and SIHP# 3089 (Hammatt
1989a, 1990a, 1990b, 1990c) and 477 (McMahon 1991). None of these later investigations
provided data to conclusively locate this heiau, and the synthesis concluded that Weliweli
Heiau, Kauakahaʻi fishing alter and Haliʻi fishing alter are all applied to Kaneʻaukai Heiau in
various location. McMahon determined that the existence of the heiau was only preserved
through oral histories (McMahon 1991) [Table 1].
TABLE 1
PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS NEAR/AT MAKAHŪ‘ENA POINT
Investigation Site # Investigation Results
Lahainaluna
Schools
None Oral history identifies Kaneʻaukai
Heiau
No locational data provided
Ching,
Palama,
Stauder
3195
3196
3197
3198
The Archaeology of Kona, Kauaʻi
Na Ahupuaʻa Weliweli, Paʻa,
Mahaulepu Surface Survey of
Coastal Lands
Three mauka sites and one
site located near Puʻu
Pihakekua at Makahū‘ena
Point
Kikuchi
1963
Site 97 Archaeological Survey and
Excavations on the Island of Kauai,
Kona District, Hawaiian Islands.
Inland of Makahū‘ena Point
Ladd
1980
None Archaeological Field Survey
Report, Makahūʻena Point, Kauaʻi.
No NRHP significance
Hammatt
1989a
Site 82 Archaeological Data Recovery Plan
for Keoneloa Bay Villas, Weliweli
and Pa’a.
Identified a rock alignment
as possible Kane’aukai
Heiau
Hammatt
1990a
Site 82 Preliminary Report on
Archaeological Testing for the
Proposed Keoneloa Bay Villas.
[TMK: (4) 2-8-20: 21].
Noted “large rectangular
boulder alignments on the
east and north side, but
other two sides not
identified”
Hammatt
1990b
Site 82 Preliminary Status Report on
Archaeological Testing for the
Proposed Keoneloa Bay Villas
SPD requires further
investigation
5 | P a g e
Investigation Site # Investigation Results
[TMK: (4) 2-8-20: 21].
1990c Site 3089 Update on our Research on
Kaneʻaukai Heiau, Keoneloa Bay,
Weliweli.
Survey of Keoneloa Bay
Villas project complete.
SHPD requests further
documentation
1991 Testing of Possible Heiau,
Keoneloa, Weliweli, Kōloa, Kauaʻi
[TMK: (4) 2-8-20:21]
No definitive determination
of heiau
Haun et al.
2011
Site 2130-
2147
Archaeological Inventory Survey,
TMK: (4) 2-8-021:041,
Makahūʻena Point, Weliweli
Ahupua‘a,
Kōloa District, Island of Kauaʻi
Survey of the project area,
found 18 sites, all historic
and related to Coast Guard
occupation
McMahon
1991
Site 477 Locating Kaneʻaukai Heiau: An
Archaeological and historical
Synthesis, Weliweli, Kōloa, Kauaʻi.
Synthesis of all data
determines that heiau only
survive in the oral histories
In 2011, an Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) of Makahū‘ena Point recorded historic
remnants and debris of the former historic lighthouse (constructed in 1906) support buildings
and infrastructure, and from the LORAN station that operated between 1952 and 1979. The
survey identified 18 sites with 128 features consisting of concrete pads, concrete blocks, metal
artifact scatters, posts, terraces, slabs, paths walls, a ditch, road, stairs, a utility box and a
walled slab. Twenty subsurface trenches recorded 20th century historic materials, but no pre-
Contact sites or deposits (Haun et al. 2011) [Table 2].
6 | P a g e
TABLE 2
(HAUN ET. AL 2011)
MAKAHŪ‘ENA INVESTIGATIONS
7 | P a g e
Figure 3: Previous archaeological work in Kona District.
Traditional Background
Kauaʻi
Kauaʻi is the oldest of the eight major islands of the Hawaiian chain. Radio carbon dates from
Paʻa suggest the island was settled by Polynesians from the Marquesas Islands, and later, Tahiti
as early as 200 A.D (Walker and Rosendahl 1990). A rock shelter excavated in the 1950’s at
Haʻeleʻele in Kōloa produced evidence of occupation starting in the 11 th century A.D. (Kirch
1985). An old rock altar atop Waiʻaleʻale attests to the deep spirituality of the first Hawaiians.
Their sacred places once lined the Wailua River, considered to be one of the most sacred areas
in all the Hawaiian Islands.
Before European contact [sic 1796], Kauaʻi’s geographic location meant relative isolation from
the other islands, an advantage resulting in never being defeated by, or ruled by a chief of
another island (Bennett 1931). According to sources (Kamakau 1961; Fornander 1969; Dukas
2004) during Kalaunuiohuaʻs War, also called Kawelewelei War (ca. 1480 – 1500) Kalaunuiohua
(Hawaiʻii) fought against the chiefs of Maui, Moloka`i, and West Oʻahu, eventually being
defeated at Kōloa by Kukona, chief of Kauaʻi.
8 | P a g e
Kauaʻi was discovered on January 20, 1778, when the two British ships under Captain James
Cook, the Resolution and Discovery, sailed into Waimea Bay documenting villages all along the
southern shoreline passing Maka`huena Point. Christian missionaries arrived on Kauaʻi shortly
thereafter, establishing a church in Hanalei on the north shore called Waioli Huila. The little
green church still stands. The missionaries would later establish churches in Waimea and Kōloa.
In 1810 the island was ceded to Kamehameha I to prevent an invasion and to maintain its
political independence until the death of Kaumuali’i in 1824. In April of 1796, Kamehameha I
attempted an abortive invasion of Kauaʻi, but suffers a major disaster in the Kauaʻi channel.
Locals reported that the warriors of Kamehameha I was able to land two war canoes but were
defeated on the beach at Keoneloa Bay, and the rest driven off. Most believe the battle actual
took place at Mahaulepu. A second attempt resulted in Kamehameha and his invading army
being caught in a storm in the Kaua`i Channel and aborting the invasion.
Near the bank of the Waimea River are the remains of Fort Elizabeth. It was constructed in
1816 by the Russians during their attempt to established forts on Kauaʻi and Oʻahu. The
Russians occupied this fort for only a short time, and later in the historic period by Hawaiians,
who renamed the fort Ka Ula Pa. The great battle took place there for Kauaʻi with descendants
of Kaumualiʻi, George Humehume, his son and the Oʻahu warriors sent there to protect the
interests of the Oʻahu chiefs.
"The natives of all the islands seem very generally to prefer the hot and barren side to the
cooler and more verdant situations further up the valley” (Jarvis 1844:121), Many villages were
located near the ocean and the numerous fresh water streams where wet taro cultivation was
practiced. Archaeological investigations have confirmed this settlement pattern on Kauaʻi
recording numerous archaeological features (583 sites, including 175 enclosures and 108 house
platforms) integrated with an extensive agricultural field complex that was drawing water from
Waikomo Stream in Kōloa (Sinoto 1975; Hammatt et. al. 1978). This agricultural field system,
now labeled the Kōloa Field System, was probably developed between 1200-1400 AD and
maintained historically up to the 1840s when Kauaʻi is known to have produced large quantities
of sweet potatoes for the booming California market" (Kirch 1985: 104). The Kōloa Field System
formerly extended from Lawaʻi to Weliweli and served as the main food source for the people
of the Kōloa district (Hammatt et al. 1991; Mitchell et al. 2005). The Kōloa Field System is
atypical for Hawaiʻi because it is an irrigated system that is not topographically restricted to the
confines of a valley. It spreads out over the broad plain of Kona District which is broken up by
ridges formed by lava channels (ibid.). The irrigation ditches (`auwai) that watered the fields
were constructed along the crests of the ridges, extending from Waikomo Stream for distances
of nearly 2,400 m (ibid.).
Paʻa has been referred to as “very dry but breadfruit, yams and bananas were planted in the
gulches” (Handy and Handy 1972:153). Handy further states that the early Hawaiians in the
Kōloa area “had many taro plantations but the sweet potatoes must have had a large place in
the subsistence economy of the people" (1940:153). A local informant told Handy that she
9 | P a g e
remembered stone walls that enclosed sweet potato growing areas. Weliweli was also a rather
dry ahupuaʻa and archaeological evidence shows that Hawaiians extended the waters of
Waikomo Stream into this land with the Kōloa Field System. Much of the archaeological
remnants found are from the recent historical cattle ranching activities of the Knudsen family in
Weliweli (Hammatt et al. 1991). Many believe that major water sources for Weliweli were
diverted by late historic sugar cane cultivation.
In 1848, a division of land between the crown, government, lesser chiefs (Konohiki) and native
tenants of the land was formalized under the Mahele. The Mahele converted land held in
tenure to fee-simple, allowing Native Hawaiians to own lands they lived and worked on. In Paʻa
Natives Hawaiians applied for and received lands. The documented claims confirmed that
primary residences were located along the coast, with people cultivating both wet and dry land
taro, sweet potatoes and constructing salt pans and fishponds. Other plots of land inland
where used for the cultivation of sweet potato, wet-land taro and orange and banana trees.
With the arrival of foreigners, the southeast coast of Kauaʻi began to change. By 1836,
agriculturalists were experimenting with crops such as tapioca, mulberry for silkworms, and
coffee. In 1835 Ladd & Co began a twelve acre sugar plantation. By 1850 the plantation,
known as the Kōloa Plantation, had grown to 450 acres, yielding a crop of approximately two
tons. A new mill was constructed in 1854 and then rebuilt in 1913, however, sugar cane
cultivation was not initiated on a large scale until the 1880s and 1890s. An 1891 map by M.D.
Monserrat shows that the project area was not in cane cultivation. The McBryde Sugar
Company took over operations in the late 1890s. In the 1890s, Benjamin F. Dillingham
incorporated "three estates, namely Kōloa Agricultural Co. (No connection with Kōloa Sugar
Co.); Ele’ele Plantation, and Wahiawa Ranch" (Cond`e 1985). Theo. H. Davies was the acting
agent until 1909 when Alexander and Baldwin took over agency control. By 1935 the plantation
owned 2776.67 acres and leased 1180 acres.
Weliweli and Makahū‘ena Point
Weliweli is now a dry ahupua’a. Any water that had been available to the makai portions of the
ahupuaʻa was redirected away by the Kōloa Plantation as flumes and ditches were constructed
to water sugar cane fields. Handy et.al. describes the ahupua’a:
“Weliweli is about like Paʻa (very dry, bananas, yams were
planted in the gulches). Both of these narrow land
sections lie on a slight seaward promontory, Makahū‘ena
Point. W.C. Bennett (1931: 118) found some irrigation
ditches and terraces, indicating that there used to be wet
taro grown in an area which is not dry. Desiccation may
have been partly caused by clearing the woodland when
the first sugar plantation on Kauaʻi was established”
(Handy et al.1991: 427-428)
10 | P a g e
Land Commission Awards
The 2011 archaeological survey noted a single Land Commission Award (LCA) for Weliweli,
however, there may be more than one (Ching 1983). The first is in the ‘ili of Kahoana to Punipu
(LCA 5219):
Pohina, sworn, says, I know the land of [the] Clmt. It is in
the ahupuaʻa of Weliweli, and the ‘ili of Kahoana lua. It
consists of several dry loʻi, a kula and house lot. [Hala] is
planted in some places (Papakilo Database).
Ching lists another LCA that has a boundary to Weliweli. This LCA is to Ka’ana’ana (LCA 3584):
Located in Kōloa Hikina, consisting of four
places….No. 4 the entire ‘ili o Kiki-a-ola. No. 4 is
bounded: mauka by ‘ili O Halehinahina and ‘ili
Lapapohakui; Puna (east) by the ahupuaʻa of
Weliweli; makai by ‘ili O Kapaha’alaea; Hanapepe
(west) by ‘ili O Kapalakea. Foreign Testimony, v. 13:3,
February 16, 1850; 3 acres, 2 roods, 27 rods.
Place Names
The literal translation of Makahū‘ena is “eyes overflowing heat” while Poipu is designated a
land division and also translates as” completely overcast or crashing (as in waves) (Pukui et. al.
1974). Though puʻu are known to be sacred places, there are no place names associated with
the puʻu that extend down through Kōloa to Makahū‘ena. It is postulated here that these may
refer to the most makai crater, Puʻu Pihakekua, which is now known as Poipu crater. Also, the
name Poipu may relate to the crashing of the surf against the cliffs of Makahū‘ena.
Makahū‘ena also translates as “the eyes of the spirit”, a reference to night marchers passing
through Weliweli to make their leap into Pō (the nether world) at Makahū‘ena Point (Kalihiwa
et al. 2011). The Kōloa District, known in traditional times as the Kona District, is adjoined by
the ahupuaʻa of Kōloa and Paʻa. The word weliweli is a reduplication of weli that means
"violent, dreadful, horrible, fearful, ferocious; revered; respectful, as of the chief; [or] full of
fear" depending upon the context (Pukui and Elbert 1986:384).
11 | P a g e
Mythology and Mo’olelo
There are few legends or chants associated with Makahū‘ena Point, and very little for Weliweli
ahupua’a. One story concerns the gourd of Laʻamaomao, in which the winds of Hawaii were
stored. This gourd belonged to Pakaʻa, a servant and advisor to Keawenuiaui the ruling chief of
Hawai`i. Laʻamaomao, Pakaʻa’s mother, has the ability to control the winds (Fornander 1918:
72). Pakaʻa’s son, Kuapakaʻa, calls all the winds to all the islands to discredit the advisors who
replaced Pakaʻa as advisor to the king. During Kuapakaʻa’s chant he names the wind that blows
through Weliweli as Kuiamanini (Fornander 1918: 96)
One legend recites the search by Pele for a home, but is continually driven off by Wakea, the
ancestor of the people. Pele has been searching throughout the islands, and now has landed on
Kauaʻi (Wichman 2001):
Peleʻs canoe with red sails
Reached Kauaʻi just at dawn.
The sound of digging on the cliffs
Woke Wakea from his sleep.
Wakea asked:
Who is digging there at Keʻe?
I, Pele, came the answer.
I am digging a pit to find fire.
A fire pit on Kauaʻi, a home for Pele?
Not so, said Wakea
Each time you dig a hole
The waters of Ka-wa-kiki
Will drown your fire.
Kauaʻi is no place for you
Move on!
A story relates the involvement with the warrior Lima-loa with the demi-god Kamapuaʻa in the
last battle in the long running war between the districts of Puna and Kona. In the tale, the war
between Kona and Puna has been ongoing for three generations as the result of the refusal of
marriage by the lovely grand-daughter of Moʻikeha, the heir to Puna, to Keliʻikoa, prince of
Kona. Kamapuaʻa, in the guise of a man, boasts at the ease with which Kukona’s warriors will
defeat Mo`ikeha. Kukona, the chief of Kona, has fought on the side of Puna with his warrior
Lima-loa, and does not believe it will be so easy. Kamapuaʻa takes to the battlefield with Lima-
loa and Kukona and defeats all who challenge him. Kamapuaʻa is finally challenged by Makaliʻi,
chief of Kona, and chants an insult:
“The sea is destroying the sands of Kahalahaa,
The sea of Hanalei is roaring
The sea of Haʻena is shallow
While the sea of Ka-lalau breaks over the land.
The spray of the sea flies up,
12 | P a g e
And my wind and cloud forms appears,
O Makaliʻi-nui-ku-a-ka-wai-ea,
Small clouds, large clouds,
Tall clouds, and short clouds
And the large cloud standing close to heaven,
That heaven is furious because of you
O Makaliʻi-nui-ku-a-ka-wai-ea
Your land is not mine,
The whole of Kauaʻi has become mine.”
Makaliʻi realizes that this is Kamapuaʻa, and chants many chants in hopes that Kamapuaʻa will
spare his life. Kamapuaʻa does spare his life, commanding him give up his kingdom to Kukona
and live apart from everyone in the mountain of Haʻupu. Satisfied at ending the wars,
Kamapuaʻa sails to Tahiti (Wichman 2001).
The name Kaneʻaukai is associated with the boundary between the ahupuaʻa of Weliweli and
Paʻa. A deity of fisherman, he taught those who wished to fish at the point the proper chants
to attract fish. Fish caught off the Makahū‘ena Point by local fisherman today include: awa
(milkfish), ʻōʻio (bonefish) heʻe (octopus), ula (spiny lobster) akule (big-eye scad), and moi
(thread fish). The cover photo shows on of the moi fishing locations. They also gathered
hāʻueʻuke´ (sea urchin) and ʻopihi (limpet) from the rocks. Salt pans were constructed to collect
salt in the sections of the point that contain shallow soil (Kalihiwa et al. 2011). Unfortunately,
no salt pans were located during the archaeological inventory by Haun et al. (2011).
Informants
During the previous work for this project (Kalihiwa et al 2011 in Haun et al. 2011) there was an
extensive attempt to contact individuals and organizations that they had contacted for this
project. In addition to letters, emails, and telephone calls, a public notice was placed in Ka Wai
Ola and in The Garden Island newspaper (The Garden Island –Wednesday (4/27/11), Friday
(4/29/11), and Sunday (5/1/11) and Ka Wai Ola – May 2011). Only a few informants came
forward with information on traditional uses during these studies.
Some of the same informants were contacted for this study, are considered cultural
practitioners and elders of the community were also contact by Haun and Kalihiwa. The
following individuals were: Ruper Rowe, Stella Burgess, Kepa Maly and Kauai Historical Society
archivist, Malina Pereza. Attempts were made to contact others but they were unavailable at
the time of this study.
13 | P a g e
Traditional Uses
According to informants, Makahūʻena also means the “eyes of the spirits”. Makahū‘ena Point
may have been named so from the leina, or jumping off point to Pō (nether world), present at
this locality. The night marchers are known to come through Kōloa down to Makahū‘ena. The
night marchers are wandering spirits that have not continued on to Pō because they either have
unfinished business, or are lost (Kalihiwa et al 2011).
Fisherman currently frequent this area to fish for moi (thread fish, Polydactilis sexfilis) and ‘ō‘io
(bonefish, Albula vulpes). The western part of the shore at Makahūʻena is known for having an
abundance of moi (ibid.).
According to informants there were small salt beds on the property. Salt is not collected off of
the rocks on Kauaʻi, but collected from beds called puʻuwai dug in shallow clay soils. The water
is added to the bed to evaporate, and the red-stained salt of Kauaʻi is collected. This process
was given to the people of Kauaʻi by the goddess Hina (ibid.). There is no evidence of this
traditional activity today.
Recommendations
The objective of this assessment is to identify any culturally significant resources or traditional
cultural practices that occurred within the project area and its vicinity. Local fishermen
continue to gather and catch a variety of fish and marine invertebrate species for subsistence
along the shoreline and rocky edges at Makahū‘ena. Future development of the property has
the potential to adversely affect the exercise of these traditional practices for subsistence
related marine exploitation. This adverse effect can be mitigated by including explicit plans to
ensure, and potentially enhance access and parking to the shoreline.
In addition, during the design and layout of the adjacent development project of the Point at
Poipu, the building layouts were designed around the four directions winds and around the
burial preserve (author’s personal knowledge). The chant of the winds of Weliweli which are
well documented in early accounts and referenced in current studies (Fornander 1918; Kalihiwa
et al in Haun et al. 2011) are still remembered as significant in the eyes of present day cultural
practitioners and kupuna. This should be considered while designing the layout in order to
enhance and take advantage of the winds, as well as let the spirits pass through as they do at
the Point at Poipu.
There also is a leina or leaping off place to Pō at Makahū‘ena Point. Because it is believed that
the night marchers continue to pass through this location on their way to Pō, open access
needs to be maintained.
Although no burials have been identified on the property during the archaeological inventory
survey (Haun et al. 2011) numerous burials have been identified in sand deposits at and
adjacent to Keoneloa Bay to the north and east. Haun’s (2011) work recommends that
14 | P a g e
archaeological monitoring be conducted under an approved archaeological monitoring plan.
The State Historic Preservation Division agreed with the findings of the report and the
recommendations (Letter: 8/27/2012 LOGNO.: 2011.1830/DOCNO.: 1208SL18). It is
recommended that the recommendations be followed through to protect any iwi kapuna
(ancestral remains) that may be inadvertently discovered. If human remains are encountered
during future development-related activities, the remains will be treated following the
procedures outlined in Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E-43. Work in the area of the
discovery will be halted, the remains stabilized if necessary and DLNR-SHPD will be consulted
for guidance.
15 | P a g e
Bibliography
Anonymous
1885 Lahainaluna Schools, HEN 43, #17. Manuscript, B. P. Bishop Museum Library.
Honolulu
Bennett, Wendell C.
1931 The Archaeology of Kauai. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 80. Honolulu, HI
Ching, K. W. Francis, Stephen L. Palama, and Catherine Stauder
1983 The Archeology of Kona, Kauaʻi, Na Ahupuaʻa Weliweli, Paʻa, Maha’ulepu,
Surface Survey of Coastal Lands. Hawaiian Archaeological Journal 74-1,
Archeological Research Center Hawai`i. Prepared Fort Leadership Homes of
Hawaiʻi, Inc.
Ching, Francis K. W.
1983 Final Report Archaeological Reconnaissance Kukuiula-Kualu, Kōloa/Lawai,
Kauai. Prepared for the Royal Order of Kamehameha I, Chapter 3 –Kaumualii
and for Alexander & Baldwin, Inc.
Conde, J.C.
1978 Narrow Gauge In A Kingdom, The Hawaiian Railroad Company, 1878-1897.
Railhead Publications, 1985
Dukas, Neil Bernard
2004 A Military History of Sovereign Hawaii. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu.
Firor, J. and P. Rosendahl
1992 Additional Data Collection, Hyatt Regency Kauaʻi Proposed Golf Course Project
Area, Land of Paʻa, Kōloa District, Island of Kauaʻi. PHRI Report 447 prepared
for Grove Farm Properties, Inc. and Ainako Resorts Associates.
Foote, D.E., E.L. Hill, S. Nakamura, and F. Stephens
1972 Soil Survey of the Islands of Kauai, Oahu, Maui, Molokai and Lanai, State of Hawaii. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and University of Hawaii Agricultural
Experiment Station. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Fornander, Abraham
1918 Fornander Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-Lore: The Hawaiians’
Account of the Formation of their Islands and Origin of Their Race, with the
Traditions of Their Migrations, Etc., as Gathered from Original Sources.
16 | P a g e
Memoirs of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Volume V. 1918-1919.
Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu, HI
Hammatt, Hallett
1989a Archaeological Data Recovery Plan for Keoneloa Bay Villas, Weliweli and Paʻa.
Cultural Surveys Hawai`i. Prepared for Sweeny Development Company.
1990a Preliminary Report on Archaeological Testing for the Proposed
Keoneloa Bay Villas. [TMK: (4) 2-8-20: 21]. Cultural Surveys, Hawai`i.
Prepared for Land Mark Suites of America.
1990b Preliminary Status Report on Archaeological Testing for the Proposed
Keoneloa Bay Villas [TMK: (4) 2-8-20: 21]. Prepared for Sweeny
Development Company.
1990c Update on our Research on Kaneʻaukai Heiau, Keoneloa Bay, Weliweli.
Prepared for Sweeny Development Company
1991 Testing of Possible Heiau, Keoneloa, Weliweli, Kōloa, Kauai [TMK: (4) 2-8-
20:21]. Letter report, Cultural Surveys Hawaiʻi, January 16, 1991.
Hammatt, H., R. M. Bordner and M. J. Tomonari-Tuggle
1978 Archaeological and Biological Survey of the Proposed Kiahuna Golf Village
Area, Kōloa, Kona, Kauaʻi Island, Hawaii. A.R.C.H., Lawai, Kaua`i
Hammatt, H., W. Folk and M. Stride
1991 Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Proposed Poipulani Golf Course and Residential
Development, Kōloa, Kauai. Cultural Surveys Hawaii report prepared for Poipulani
Development Corporation.
Handy, E. S. C., E. G. Handy, M. K. Pukui
1991 Native Planters of Old Hawaii, Their Life, Lore & Environment. Bishop
Museum Press. Honolulu, HI
1940 The Hawaiian Planter, vol. 1.” BPBM Bull. 161
Haun, Alan E., Dave Henry, and Solomon H. Kailihiwai III
2011 Archaeological Inventory Survey [TMK: (4) 2-8-021: 041], Makahūʻena Point,
Weliweli Ahupua’a, Kōloa District, Island of Kaua`i (Final). Haun and
Associates, Kailua-Kona, Hawai`i. For CIRI Land Development Company, 2525 C
Street, Suite 500, Anchorage, Alaska, 99503.
Jarves, James Jackson
1844 History of the Hawaiian or Sandwich Islands, Edward Moxon, Dover Street, London.
17 | P a g e
Kailihiwa, S., A. Hann, and J. Henry
2011 Cultural Impact Assessment, TMK: (4) 2-8-021:041, Makahūʻena Point, Weliweli
Ahupuaʻa, Kōloa District, Island of Kauai, Haun & Associates Report 811 prepared for CIR1
Land Development Company.
Kamakau, S.
1992 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. [Revised] Kamehameha Schools Press. Honolulu.
[1842 and 1870]
Kikuchi, William
1963 Archaeological Survey and Excavations on the Island of Kauai, Kona District,
Hawaiian Islands. Sponsored by the University of Hawaiʻi Committee for the
Preservation and Study of Hawaiian Language, Art, and Culture
Kirch, Patrick V.
1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks, and Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and
Prehistory. University of Hawaiʻi Press. Honolulu
Ladd, Edward J.
1981 Archaeological Field Survey Report, Makahū‘ena Point, Kauai. Prepared for
the 14th Coast Guard District
McGerty, Leanne and Robert Spear
2001 Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) for a Proposed Well Site at Mahaulepu,
Kōloa, Kauaʻi, Hawai`i *TMK: (4) 2-9-03]. Scientific Consultants Services, Inc.,
Honolulu, Hawai`i. For Ron Terry, Geometrician.
McMahon, Nancy
1991 Locating Kaneʻaukai Heiau: An Archaeological and Historical Synthesis,
Weliweli, Kōloa, Kauaʻi. State Historic Preservation Division, Department of
Land and Natural Resources, January 2, 1991.
Mitchell, A., R. Chiogioji, H.H. Hammatt
2005 Cultural Impact Assessment for an Approximately 203-Acre Parcel in Kōloa Ahupua‘a,
Kona District, Island of Kauaʻi, TMK (4) 2-18—013:001; 2-8-014:001, 002, 003, 004, and
019. Prepared for the Eric A. Knudsen Trust.
Papakilo Database
nd. Mahele ‘Aina Index –Foreign Testimony –Helu 5219
http://papakilodatabase.com/main/imageserver.phpo?file=01138.pdf&path=H/H/A/S/H/7/1/5/1/12/
Pukui, Mary Kawena, Samuel H. Elbert, and Ester T. Mookini
1974 Place Names of Hawaii, University of Hawai`i Press, Honolulu.
18 | P a g e
Sinoto, A.
1975 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Knudsen Trust Lands at Kōloa,
Poipu, Kauaʻi. Typescript in Library, BPBM
Smith, H. W.
1991 Historical Documentary Research. Archaeological Inventory Survey, Grove
Farm, Kawailoa Property Additional Parcel, Land of Mahaulepu, Kōloa District,
Island of Kauaʻi. Walker and Goodfellow 1991. Appendix B pp. B-1 to B-11
Thrum, Thomas G.
1906 Heiaus and Heiau Sites Throughout the Hawaiian Islands. Hawaiian Almanac
and Annual for 1906. Honolulu.
2001 Pele Ma, Legends of Pele from Kauaʻi. Bamboo Press, Honolulu.
Walker, A. and P. Rosendahl
1990 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Hyatt Regency Kauai, Proposed Golf Course Project
Area, Land of Paʻa, Kōloa District, Island of Kauai. PHRI Report 447-111591 prepared for
Grove Farm Properties, Inc. and Ainako Resorts Associates.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
KA'AINAHULL,DIRECTOR
JODI A.HIGUCHI SAYEGUSA,DEPUTY DIRECTOR
DEREK S.K.KAWAKAMI,MAYOR
MICHAEL A.DAHILIG.MANAGING DIRECTOR
SUMMARY
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Action Required by
Planning Commission:
Consideration of a Special Management Area Use Permit for the
construction of a single-family residence (SFR).
Permit Application Nos.Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)-2022-4
Class III Zoning Permit Z-lll-2022-1 (For PC information &
concurrence)
Name of Applicant(s)MAKAHUEANA -PREFERED A,LLC.et.al.
II.PERMIT INFORMATION
T?^.^.1
https://hauaicounty-my.sharepoint.com/pErsonal/dcuaJauai_gov/Oocuments/dcua.files/ltegulatory Files/Coastal Oe^elopment/SHA Permits/SHA(U)-2022-'l,_Hakahuena/lleporo/fteport-
l_i.i).ili2_SN»(U].;B2i.<_Hikahutana Lol IJftdoa
PERMITS REQUIRED
I1 Use Permit
I1 Project Development Use
Permit
I1 Variance Permit
I1 Special Permit
K]Zoning Permit Class
IV
A Class III Zoning Permit is a procedural requirement since
the proposed development is situated within the Shore
Constraint District (S-SH),pursuant to Section 8-12.5fd)of
the Kaua i County Code (1987),as amended.
^]Special Management Area
Permit
^lUse
1]Minor
Pursuant to Section 205A of the Hawaii Revised Statutes
(HRS)and the Special Management Area Rules and
Regulations ofthe County ofKaua'i,a SMA Use Permit is
required as defined in Section 7.3(C)ofthe SMA Rules and
Regulations where the Director finds that the proposal (1)
is a "Development"as defined in Section 1.4F;and (2)is in
excess of $500,000.
AMENDMENTS
1I Zoning Amendment
1I General Plan Amendment
State Land Use District
Amendment
Date of Receipt of Completed
Application:February 10,2022
Date of Director's Report:March 23,2022
Date of Public Hearing:April 12,2022
Deadline Date for PC to Take Action
(60THDay):June 11,2022
III.PROJECT DATA
SMA(U)-2022-4;Dircctor's Reporc
Makahucna Prcferred-A,LLC,
03.23.2022
2|P a ge
PROJECT INFORMATION
Parcel Location:The project site is located on the makai side of Pe'e Road in Po ipu,at
the terminus of a cul-de-sac situated approximately 600 feet south of
its intersection with Pe'e Road,within the Makahu'ena Estates
Subdivision.
Tax Map Key(s):(4)2-8-021:070 Area:43,604 square feet
ZONING &DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Zoning;Open (0)
State Land Use District:Urban
General Plan Designation:Resort
Height Limit:Thirty (30)feet
Max.Land Coverage:Not to exceed 10%of the parcel or lot area OR
4,360 SF
Parking Requirement:2 min.parking spaces required per dwelling unit
Front Setback:lO'-O"
RearSetback:Five (5)feet or Vi the wall plate height,whichever
Is greater
Side Setback:Five (5)feet or 1/z the wall plate height,whichever
is greater
Community Plan Area:South Kauai Community Plan
Community Plan Land Use Designation:
N/A
Deviations or Variances Requested:N/A
IV.LEGALREQUIREMENTS
Section 8.0,9.0,and 10.0 of
the Special Management
Area Rules and Regulations:
This report is being transmitted to the Applicant and
Planning Commission in order to satisfy the
requirements of Sections 8.0,9.0 and 10.0 of the
Special Management Area Rules and Regulations.
The application was received on February 10,2022
and the Applicant,through its authorized agent,was
notified accordingly of the Planning Department's
intent to commence permit processing.
Public Hearing Date:APRIL 12,2022
V.PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND USE
As represented,the Applicant is proposing to construct a two-story single-family
residence featuring 4 bedrooms with 4.5 bathrooms and containing a total living area
of approximately 3,570 square feet (SF).In addition,the Applicant is proposing a 2-car
garage,guesthouse,pool,and lanai area.The project will be developed within the
Open (0)zoning district and the areas are broken down as follows,as represented:
VI.
The subject parcel is identified as Lot 3 of the "Makahu'ena Estates Subdivision"and
contains approximately 1.001 acres or 43,604 SF.As mentioned in the application,the
subject parcel was a part of a 10-lot subdivision that was created through Subdivision
Application No.S-2015-14 and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)-2015-1.
There are no existing improvements within the subject parcel.Plans and elevations of
the proposed development are illustrated through Exhibits 'H','l'and 'O-G'ofthe
Application.
APPLICANT'SREASONS/JUSTIFICATION
(See application)
SMA(U).2022-4;Director's Report
Makahuena Preferred -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
3|Page
FLOORAREA
^4ain Level 2,620 squarefeet(SF)
Upper Level 1,705 SF
Covered Lanais 604 SF
Upper Level Lanais 170 SF
Pool 486 SF
Garage 850 SF
Guesthouse 506 SF
VII.ADDITIONALFINDINGS
1.The State Land Use District (SLUD)designation for this parcel "Urban"which allows
for urban growth in a specified area.
2.The subject property is within and adjacent to properties that are located within
the Visitor Designation Area (VDA)and the General Plan designation is "RESORT".
According to the General Plan,this Resort area consistently posts the highest
occupancy rate among island resort areas.
3.The General Plan designation (GP)is "Resort".According to the GP,areas
designated as Resort are generally within the Visitor Destination Area (VDA)and
have the infrastructure to support these type of developments.In certain areas of
the island,there is growing public concern for the infrastructure serving these
areas that include utilization of roadways,wastewater systems,and parks.
4.The project is immediately adjacent to high-density development to the west &
east,and single-family residences to the north.The proposed development abuts
a resort facility (The Point at Po'ipu)along its eastern boundary and a
condominium (Makahu'ena at Po'ipu)project along its western boundary.
5.The subject parcel is considered a shoreline property and would be subject to the
County s shoreline setback requirements contained in Chapter 8,Article 27 ofthe
Kaua i County Code(1987).At the time the SMA Use Permit was considered for
the subdivision,a one hundred (100)feet shoreline setback line was established
for Lot 3.
6.As previously noted by the County Department of Public Works (DPW)during the
SMA Use Permit application forthe subdivision,a portion ofthe subject property is
located in Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)Zones 'VE and 'AE'.Zone VE areas are
Coastal High Hazard Areas (Tsunami),whereas Zone AE areas are those area that
have one-percent (1%)chance of being inundated by a 100-year flood.However,
most of the property is located in Non-SFHA Zone 'X'which is an area determined
to be outside the 0.2%annual chance 500-year floodplain.The parcel is also within
the tsunami evacuation zone.
7.SpeciAlManagementArea(SMA)
In addressing the issues ofthe Special Management Area and its objectives and
policies,the following aspects will be considered and evaluated:
a.Recreational Resources
b.Cultural/Historic Resources
c.Scenic resources
4|Page
SMA(U)-2022-4;Dircctor's Report
Makahucna Preferrcd -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
d.Coastal Hazard
e.Coastal Ecosystem
Furthermore,the proposal does not:
•Involve dredging,filling or otherwise altering any bay,salt marsh,
river mouth,slough or lagoon;
•Reduce the size of any beach or other area usable for public
recreation;
•Reduce or impose restrictions upon public access to tidal and
submerged lands,beaches,rivers,and streams within the SMA;and
•Adversely affect water quality,existing areas of open water free of visible
structures,existing and potential fisheries and fishing grounds,wildlife
habitats,estuarine sanctuaries,potential or existing agriculture uses of
land.
8.The subject property is within the Shore Constraint District (S-SH)and a small
portion is within the Tsunami Constraint District (S-TS).Pursuant to Section 8-
12.5(c)of the KCC,before a permit can be granted (in this case,an SMA Use Permit
&Class III Zoning Permit),it must be determined that the proposed development
will not cause significant harm to:
o the water quality ofthe ocean,including but not limited to its clarity,
temperature,color,taste and odor;
o fish and aquatic habitats
o the natural beauty ofthe area
o navigation,safety or health,or
o would not substantially interfere with public use ofthe ocean waters or
underlying lands;and
o that other facilities are unavailable to the Applicant.
9.CZO Development Standards
The proposed development is subjected to standards prescribed in Sections 8-4.3,
8-4.5and8-9.2:
a.Setback Requirements:Front property line setbacks are ten feet (10'-0")with
a side and rear property line setback offive feet (5'-0")or halfthe distance of
the plate height whichever is greater.As proposed,the structure complies with
the setback requirements specified by the CZO.
SMA(U)-2022-4;Director's Roport
Makahuena Prcferred -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
5|Page
b.Land/Lot Coverage:The subject property is within the County Open zoning
district.Thus,the allowable land coverage should not exceed more than 10%
of the parcel orlot area,as prescribed in Section 8-9.2(a)of the CZO.
Per Section 8-1.5 ofthe CZO,"Land Coverage"is defined as "o man-made
structure,improvement or covering that prevents normal precipitation from
directly reaching the surface of the land underlying the structure,improvement
or covering.Structures,improvements and covering include roofs,surfaces that
are paved with asphalt,stone,or the like such as roads,streets,sidewalks,
drii/ewoys,parking lots,tennis courts,patios,and lands so used that the soil
will be compacted so as to prevent substantial infiltration,such as parking of
cars and heavy and repeated pedestn'an traffic."
c.Building Height:The South Kauai Community Plan allows dwellings and
other structures to be no more than thirty (30)feet to the highest point of
the roof measured at each point along the building from the finished grade
at the main entry,and no more than two (2)stories above and one (1)
story below from the finished grade at the main entry,over twenty (20)
feet measured from the finished grade at the main entry to the highest
exterior wall plate line.
VIII.AGENCY COMMENTS
Comments from applicable government agencies are being sought and are expected
at time ofthe public hearing scheduled on April 12,2022.The agency comments have
been received are attached in Exhibit 'A'.
IX.PRELIMINARY EVALUATION
In evaluating the Applicant s proposal to allow residential development on the subject
parcel,the following are being considered and responses are taken from the
Application (beginningfrom Page 11).
1.General Plan
The proposed development satisfies the following policies ofthe General Plan,as
taken from Section 1.3 and 1.4:
A.1.3,entitled "VISIONS AND GOALS"
1)Goal #1 Sustainable Island"-The Makahu'ena Eststes Subdivision was
carefully planned and developed to be consistent with the vision,goals,
and policies ofthe General Plan.The overall density ofthe subdivision was
reduced from at least 25 dwelling units to ten,only nine ofwhich are
SMA(U)-2022-4;Director's Report
Nakahuena Preferrcd -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
6|P a ge
within the VDA.A public parking area and an open space and public access
easement were dedicated to the County to protect the natural coastal
systems that support life,air,water,soil,and living organisms on the makai
portion of Lot 3.The development of the proposed single family dwelling
unit on Lot 3 will not negatively affect the sustainability of the island.
Rather,the subdivision is the direct result ofwell-reasoned actions starting
in 2014 that ensure this area remains sustainable and meets the needs of
current and future generations without depleting important resources.
2)Goal #2 "Unique and Beautiful Place"-The proposed development ensure
the care and protection of the treasured resources,traditions,and qualities
ofthe natural,built,and human environment of Makahu'ena Point.The
proposed development maintains the perpetual protection of the natural
coastal ecosystem on the makai portion of Lot 3 and will not infringe upon
the rights of the community to engage in their cultural traditions and
practices and provides opportunities for recreation and meditative
contemplation along the coastline.Further,the development is consistent
with the tenets of the Public Trust Doctrine as provided in Article 11,
Section 1 ofthe Hawaii State Constitution to,"conserve and protect
Hawaii s natural beauty and all natural resources,including land,water,air
minerals and energy sources ,and promotes the development and
utilization of these resources in a manner consistent with their
conservation and in furtherance ofthe self-sufficiencyofthe State."
3)Goal #3 "A Healthy and Resilient People"-The development of a single-
family dwelling unit on Lot 3 of Makahu'ena Estates is consistent with
these principles and will not interfere with the community's use ofthe
coastal access area.This specific development is part of a larger well
planned and sustainable subdivision project that increased the resilience
and vitalityofthe community and promoted better health outcomes
through improved coastal access opportunities related to the natural,built,
and social environment.
4)Goal #4 "An Equitable Place,with Opportunity for All"-Short term and
long-term job opportunities will result from the construction and continued
maintenance ofthis specific development as is typical with high-end
residential vacation rental properties.This subdivision was specifically
designed and permitted to ensure equitable opportunities for recreation
and shared spaces for all of Kaua'i,not just the landowners in the
neighborhood.Anyone on Kaua i can park in the public parking lot at
Makahu'ena Estates Subdivision and access the entire coastline all the way
to Maha'ulepu Maha ulepu.The coastal access area allows for fishing off of
7|Page
SMA(U)-2022-4;Director's Rcport
Makahucna Preferrcd -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
the makai portion of Lot 3 in perpetuity and such opportunities benefit,not
burden,disadvantaged groups on Kaua i.Applicant embraces this kuleana
and has designed the proposed development to complement the
environment and character of this area.
B.Section 1.4,entitled "POLICIES TO GUIDE GROWTH"
1)Policy (fl "Manage Growth to Preserve Rural Character"-The project is
consistent with the policy since it is contained within an existing
neighborhood that has been planned for residential development and
within the Po'ipu growth boundaries.
2)Policy #3 "Recognize the Identity of Kauai's Individual Towns and
Distracts"-The proposed residence would be constructed within the
development boundaries established previously through SMA Use Permit
for the entire subdivision where it delineates and preserves the open space
alongthe coastline.
3)Policy #8 "Protect Kauai's Scenic Beauty"-The proposed SFR would be
consistent in preserving the natural views of Makahu ena Point.The
proposed development involves relatively low massing and it's situated in
such a way that protects and preserves both mauka and makai views along
the coastline.Since the overall density of the subdivision was reduced from
a total of 25 to 10 lots,the views in this area have been protected and
further assisted by the open space access easement along the makai
portion of Lot 3 as well as shoreline abutting parcels.In further assuring
compatibility with the surrounding area,the proposed SFR has been
designed to complement the rugged coastal cliff area of Makahu'ena Point
and incorporates dark earth tones and design features that blend in with
the natural environment.
4)Policy #9 "Uphold Kaua'i as a Unique Visitor Destination"-The
subdivision was specifically designed to ensure that the nine lots within the
VDA do not negatively affect the community character of Po'ipu .Further,
the location ofthe SFR within the pre-approved building envelope will limit
the physical footprint of transient accommodation uses and ensure that
such uses do not encroach upon the dedicated open space coastal access
easement area.
5)Policy #14 "Prepare for Climate Change"-The project should not
contribute to or exacerbate concerns regarding rising sea levels along
Makahu'ena Point.By restricting the development of Lot 3 to the mauka
SMA(U)-2022-4;Dircctor's Rcport
Makahuena Prcfcrrcd -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
8|Page
side ofthe existing rock wall along the coastline and in compliance with the
shoreline setback that was established by the previous SMA Use Permit for
the subdivision,the proposed SFR should not be affected by any coastal
hazards.
6)Policy #15 "Respect Native Hawaiian Rights and Wahi Pana"-As
represented,a cultural impact assessment (CIA)was prepared during the
Makahu ena Estates subdivision permitting process.Although the CIA did
not identify any traditional and customary practices occurring in the area
that is now Lot 3,the CIA stated that fisherman continue to gather and
catch a variety offish forsubsistence purposes and harvest various marine
invertebrates along the shoreline and rocky edges of Makahu'ena point.In
response,the developer has dedicated areas for public parking lot and
coastal open space access easements to the County to ensure these
traditional and customary practices may continue in perpetuity.
2.Native Hawaiian Traditional and Cultural Rights
The original parcel was initially subdivided in 1932 under a subdivision known as
the "Makahu'ena Tract"(File Plan 354)that established 63 lots and associated
roadway lots (within this subdivision as well as the adjacent parcel presently
referred to as The Point at Po'ipii property).The residential lots that are now
encumbered by the Point at Po'ipu property were consolidated and re-subdivided
in the 1990s and thus leaving the 25 pre-existing lots.They were subsequently
consolidated in 2015 and resubdivided into a total of 10 lots.
As noted,a Cultural Impact Assessment Report (CIA)was prepared and submitted
during the SMA Use Permit for the subdivision in 2015.The CIA did not identify any
traditional and customary practices occurring within the area,however it did
mention that fisherman continue to utilize the coastline to gather and catch a
variety of fish for subsistence purposes,and harvest various marine invertebrates
along the shoreline and rocky edges of Makahu'ena Point.
Based on the information contained in the CIA where known cultural practitioners
and kumu ofvarious Hawaiian arts were consulted,and evaluating historical
information that was available to the department,the department finds that the
proposed Project involvingthe construction ofthe residential building on the
subject parcel should have no impact on any known Hawaiian traditional or
customary practices for the following reasons:
a.There are no known traditional or customary practices of native
Hawaiians that are presently occurring within the Project Site.
9|P a g e
SMA(U).2022-4;Director's R.eport
Makahucna Prefcrrcd -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
b.There are no special gathering practices taking place within any portion
ofthe ProjectSite.
c.The Project will not detrimentally inhibit access to any streams;access
to the shoreline or other adjacent shoreline areas;or gathering along
any streams,the shoreline or in the ocean.
d.There are known religious practices taking place within the project site.
e.There are no known pre-contact cultural or historic sites or resources
located within the project site.
f.There are no known burials within the petition area.
The CIA recognizes that all traditional and customary practices,and all valued
cultural,and natural resources in the area involve subsistence fishing and
gathering within the open space access easement makai ofthe subdivision's rock
wall.In addressing this subject further,it is noted that the developer dedicated
areas for a public access and parking (easements to the County)in order to ensure
traditional and customary practices may continue in perpetuity.The public parking
area is situated along the northern section of the subdivision,along Pee Road and
encumbers Lot 9,and the coastal access easement to the shoreline is along the
western boundaries of Lots 8 &9 of the subdivision.
3.SMA Rules and Regulations
The COK SMA Rules and Regulations contain objectives,policies and guidelines
designed to protect coastal resources.Within the SMA,special consideration is
given to recreational opportunities,cultural and historic resources,scenic qualities
and open space,coastal ecosystems,and coastal hazards.In evaluatingthe
proposed development relative to the goals and objectives of the SMA Rules and
Regulations,the following aspects are taken into consideration:
a.Public Access and Coastal Recreation -The project will not negatively impact
on any public recreational opportunities located near the project area.As
previously noted,the developer has provided public parking and access to
the shoreline.
b.Cultural/Historical Resources -Currently,there are no know historic,
cultural,or archeological resources on site.As noted in the FINAL
Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS)dated November 2012,the subject
property has been disturbed byprevious activitiesand mostofthe
SMA(U)-2022-4;Dircctor's Rcport
Makahuena Preferred -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
io|Pa g e
identified features are remnants ofthe U.S.Coast Guard LORAN Station
(LORSTA Kaua'i)that was in operation between 1951 and 1979.However,
shoutd any historical artifacts,shell or charcoal deposits,burials and stone
pavings are discovered during construction within the petitioned area,the
petitioner shall stop work in the immediate area and contact the State
Department of Land &Natural Resources (DLNR),Historic Preservation
Division (SHPD)to mitigate the situation.
Scenic and Open Soace Resources -The project site is surrounded by
developed lands and this parcel does offer views to the ocean as observed
along Pe e Road.A detailed visual analysis ofthe proposed development is
illustrated in Exhibits 0-4,0-5,and 0-6 ofthe Application.In orderto further
ensure that the project is compatible with its surroundings and to minimize
the visual impact of future structures,the external color should be of a
moderate to dark earth-tone colors,and the Applicant should provide
substantial landscaping.The proposed color scheme and a landscape plan
should be submitted to the Planning Department for review and acceptance
prior to building permit application or during the subdivision process.
Coastal Hazards -The subject property is located within a flood zone and all
new development will be required to conform to the requirements noted in
the County's Flood Ordinance,as administered by the County Department of
Public Works (DPW).Therefore,the risk of potential damage due to coastal
hazards will be minimized.
Coastal Ecosvstems -The Application indicates that there are no known rare,
threatened or endangered plant or critical habitats are located within the
project site.However along the shoreline,the wedge-tailed Shearwater
colony has been expanding very slowly over the past several years and it
stretches along the coast for 3-4 miles between the resorts at Po'ipu and
Makahu'ena.
The subject property has been extensively disturbed by previous activities,
and the site is surrounded by developed lands.The construction ofthe
proposed residence should be required to conform to the requirements of
the Department of Public Works regarding grading,drainage,and runoff
concerns from the proposed development,as well as the Department of
Health regarding the proposed IWS and fugitive dust,drainage,noise,and
solid waste,if/when applicable.
It is further noted that the developer has worked closely with the State
DLNR,Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW),Kauai Branch in
ii|P a g e
SMA(U)-2022-4:Dircctor's Report
Makahucna Prcferrcd -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
establishing mitigation measures to minimize the potential impacts of the
development to the bird's nesting/burrow areas.
4.CZO Development Standards
As proposed,the project complies with the building height,setback,and off-street
parking requirements for development within the Open (0)zoning district,as
specified in Sections 8-4.3 &8-4.5 the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (CZO).
In reviewing the land coverage calculations provided in the Application,it is noted
that the total land coverage of the proposed development is approximately 4,315
SF or 9.8%ofthe parcel area.It unclear asto whether all ofthe improvementsthat
are considered land coverage,as defined in Section 8-1.5 ofthe CZO,have been
included in the calculations (i.e.hardscape that includes but not limited to
sidewalks).In order to ensure that the development remains under 10%land
coverage for the subject parcel as specified in Section 8-9.2(a)of the CZO,the
Applicant should work closely with the Planning Department prior to building
permit application.
Finally,it is uncertain as to whether the Applicant has made provisions for night
illumination with the project,based on the preliminary plans that have been
submitted.Ifso,night illumination should be designed to minimize adverse impacts
on the Federally Listed Threatened Species,Newell's Shearwater and other seabirds.
Night lighting should be shielded from above and directed downwards and shall be
approved bythe U.S.Dept.ofthe Interior Fish and Wildlife Service.If external lighting
is to be used in connection with the proposed project,all external lighting should be
only ofthe followingtype:downward-facing shielded lights.Spotlights aimed upward
or spotlighting of structures is prohibited.
X.PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing,it is concluded that through proper mitigative measures,the
proposed development can be considered and it should not have any significant
adverse impacts to the environment nor the surrounding neighborhood.It is further
concluded that the proposed development complies with the policies and guidelines
of the Special Management Area Rules and Regulations in that:
1.The development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or
ecological effect.
2.The development is consistent with the objectives/goals/policies of the
County General Plan,the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance,and other
applicable ordinances.
i2|Pa g e
SMA(U)-2022-4;Dircccor's Report
Makahucna Prcferred -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
Furthermore,the proposal DOES NOT:
a.involve dredging,filling,or otherwise altering any bay,estuary,salt
marsh,river mouth,slough or lagoon;
b.reduce the size of any beach or other area usable for public
recreation;
c.reduce or impose restrictions upon public access to tidal and
submerged lands,beaches,rivers or streams within the special
management area;and
d.adversely affect water quality,existing areas of open water free of
visible structures,existing and potential fisheries and fishing grounds,
wildlife habitats,estuarine sanctuaries or existing agricultural uses of
land.
Through proper mitigation measures,the proposed development would be in
compliance with the criteria outlined for the granting of a Special Management Area
Use Permit.The Applicant should institute the "Best Management Practices"to
ensure that the operation of this facility does not generate impacts that may affect
the health,safety,and welfare ofthose in the surrounding area ofthe proposal.
Additionally,the Applicant should implement to the extent possible sustainable
building techniques and operational methods for the project.
XI.PRELMINARY RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing evaluation and conclusion,it is hereby recommended that the
proposed development involving the construction of a single-family residence and
associated site improvements through Special Management Area Use Permit SMA(U)-
2022-4 and Class III Zoning Permit Z-lll-2022-1 be APPROVED subject to the following
conditions:
1.The proposed improvements shall be constructed as represented.Any changes
to said development shall be reviewed by the Planning Director to determine
whether Planning Commission review and approval is warranted.
2.Prior to building permit application,the Applicant shall work closely with the
Planning Department to ensure that the proposed development remains under
the 10%land coverage requirement for the parcel,as specified in Section 8-
9.2fa)of theCZO.
SMA(U).2022-4;Directpr's Rcport
Makahucna Prcfcrrecf -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
i3|P a g e
3.To ensure that the project is compatible with its surroundings and to minimize
the visual impact of the structure,the external color of the proposed residence
shall be of a moderate to dark earth-tone color.The proposed color scheme and
a landscape plan should be submitted to the Planning Department for review
and acceptance prior to building permit application.
4.The Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Planning Department,
a landscape plan composed of native species,or species common to the area,to
help to screen the proposed structures,and integrate the site with its
surroundings.
5.If external lighting is to be used in connection with the proposed project,all
external lighting shall only ofthe following type:downward-facing shielded
lights.Spotlights aimed upward or spotlighting ofstructures is prohibited.
6.Unless otherwise stated in the permit,once permit is issued,the Applicant
must make substantial progress,as determined by the Director,regarding
the development or activity within two (2)years,or the permit shall be
deemed to have lapsed and be no longer in effect.
7.The Applicant shall develop and utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs)
during all phases of development in order to minimize erosion,dust,and
sedimentation impacts ofthe project to abutting properties.
8.The Applicant is advised that should any archaeological or historical resources
be discovered during ground disturbing/construction work,all work in the area
ofthe archaeological/historical findings shall immediately cease and the
Applicant shall contact the State Department of Land and Natural Resources,
Historic Preservation Division at (808)692-8015 and the Planning Department at
(808)241-4050to determine mitigation measures.
9.The Applicant shall resolve and comply with the applicable standards and
requirements set forth by the State Health Department,State Historic
Preservation Division-DLNR,and the County Departments of Public Works,Fire,
Transportation,and Water.
10.To the extent possible within the confines of union requirements and applicable
legal prohibitions against discrimination in employment,the Applicant shall seek
to hire Kauai contractors as long as they are qualified and reasonably
competitive with other contractors and shall seek to employ residents of Kauai in
temporary constructioi')and permanent resort-related jobs.It is recognized that
the Applicant may have to employ non-Kauai residents for particular skilled jobs
SMA(U)-2022-4;Dircctor's Rcport
Makahucna Prcfcrrcd -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
i4|Pa g e
where no qualified Kauai residents possesses such skills.For the purposes of this
condition,the Commission shall relieve the Applicant ofthis requirement ifthe
Applicant is subjected to anti-competitive restraints on trade or other
monopolistic practices.
11.The Applicant is advised that priorto construction and/or use,additional
government agency conditions may be imposed.It shall be the Applicant's
responsibility to resolve those conditions with the respective agency(ies).
12.The Planning Commission reserves the right to revise,add,or delete conditions
of approval in order to address or mitigate unforeseen impacts the project may,
create,or to revoke the permits through the proper procedures should
conditions of approval not be complied with or be violated.
The Planning Commission is further advised that this report does not represent the
Planning Department's final recommendation in view ofthe forthcoming public
hearing process scheduled for APRIL 12,2022 whereby the entire record should be
considered prior to decision-making.The entire record should include but not be
limited to:
a.Pending government agency comments;
b.Testimony from the general public and interested others;and
c.The Applicant s response to staff s report and recommendation as
provided herein.
DALE A.
Planner
CIIA
Approved &Recommended to Commission:
KA'AINA^HULL
Director of Plannini
Date :_^/'Zo'2-'2-
SMA(U)-2022-4:Director's Rcport
Makahuena Prcferred -A,LLC.
03.23.2022
ig|P a ge
//A //EXHIBIT"A
(Agency Comments)
For reference
COUNTYOFKAUA'I
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
4444 RICE STREET,SUITE A473 LlHU'E,HAWAI'I 96766
(808)241-4050
FROM:Kaaina S.Hull,Director (Dale)February 14,2022
SUBJECT:
TO:
Class III Zoning Permit Z-III-2022-1,Special Management Are Use Permit
SMA(U)-2022-4,Dwelling,Single Family Detached
Tax Map Key:(4)2-8-021:070,Makahuena -Preferred A Llc,Applicant
FOR YOUR COMMENTS (pertaining to your department):
No comments or concerns from Fire
This matter is scheduled for a public hearing before the County ofKauai Planning Commission on
4/12/2022 at the Lihue Civic Center,Moikeha Building,Meeting Room 2A-2B,4444 Rice Street,
Lihue,Kauai,at 9:00 am or soon thereafter.If we do not receiveyour agency comments within one (1)
month from the date of this request,we will assume that there are no objections to this permit request.
Mahalo!
~a~_
Department of Transportation -STP
~w
DPW-EngineeringsDOT-Highway,Kauai(info only)s DPW-WastewatersDOT-Airports,Kauai (info only)s DPW-BuildingsDOT-Harbors,Kauai (info only)
-D~
DPW-SolidWastexStateDepartmentofHealth
~D
Department of Parks &Recreation~D_
State Department of Agriculture ;'Eire"De{%rtMentt;?s State Office of Planning
~w
County Housing-Agency'a:
State Dept.ofBus.&Econ.Dev.Tourism
-D~
County Economic Development-D~
State Land Use Commission
~0
KHPRCsStateHistoricPreservationDivision
~w
Water Department
DLNR-Land Management s Kaua'i Civil Defense
DLNR-Foresty &Wildlife
"CT'
U.S.Postal DepartmentsDLNR-Aquatic Resources ^UH_Sea_Grant"D:
DLNR-OCCL
~w
County Transportation AgencysOther:
r-
1RECE1VED
hh',152CZ2
'•^•'^yofKau-
Pi i.jNIMft'nc^COUNTY OF KAUA'I""'"''""EPLANNING DEPARTMENT
4444 RICE STREET,SUITE A473 LlHU'E,HAWAI'I 96766
22 W-5 A 1:3,(808)241.4050
County ot'Kauai
Ttansportation Agency
FROM:Kaaina S.Hull,Director
SUBJECT:
TO:
iR£ii^(
(Dale)February 14,2022
Clas'slirZoriing Permit Z-111-2022-1,Special Management Are Use Permit
SMA(U)-2022-4,Dwelling,Single Family Detached
Tax Map Key:(4)2-8-021:070,Makahuena -Preferred A Llc,Applicant
a Department of Transportation -STP DPW-Engineering
D DOT-Highway,Kauai(info only)D DPW-Wastewater
DOT-Airports,Kauai (info only)D DPW-BuiIding
DOT-Harbors,Kauai (info only)a DPW-SolidWaste
State Department of Health D Department of Parks &Recreation
State Department of Agriculture Fire-Department
State Office of Planning County Housing-Agency
State Dept.ofBus.&Econ.Dev.Tourism County Economic Development
State Land Use Commission D KHPRC
State Historic Preservation Division Water Department
DLNR-Land Management a Kaua'i Civil Defense
D DLNR-Foresty &Wildlife U.S.Postal Department
DLNR-Aquatic Resources UH_Sea Grant
D DLNR-OCCL County Transportation Agency
D Other:
FOR YOUR COMMENTS (pertaining to your department):
GW v^t\i.<Jo ^(ZWCT^COKI^."^°'-'TH'S'^oT^G"
2-'a.-'?.<»-2--2_
This matter is scheduled for a public hearing before the County of Kauai Plaiining Commission on
4/12/2022 at the Lihue Civic Center,Moikeha Building,Meeting Room 2A-2B,4444 Rice Street,
Lihue,Kauai,at 9:00 am or soon thereafter.Ifwe do not receive your agency comments within one(1)
month from the date of this request,we will assume that there are no objections to this permit request.
Mahalo!
Check
One:
Paper
Plans
Electronic
Plans
DEPARTMENT USE ONLY
Zoning Intake By:
Use
Variance Intake Date:
SMA
PDU Acceptance
Date/By:
TOTAL FEE:
Additional Fees:
Receipt Number
Building Permit No.
Associated Permits (e.g. SSD)
Complete Information Below
Tax Map Key Number Condominium Number
Applicant Name(s)
Property Address
Mailing Address
Parcel Area Contact Phone
Zoning Designation Contact Email
(if applicable)
Applicant Declarations (incorrect responses may slow your permit review)
Please place an “X” under Yes or No under the following:
YES NO Staff
Verification
1 Is this property located in the Special Management Area (SMA)?
2 Is this property part of a Condominium Property Regime (CPR)?
3 Is this property within 500 feet of the shoreline?
4 Is this property within the Agriculture Zoning District?
5 Is there a structure on the property that is 50 years old or older?
6 Do you have an Additional Dwelling Unit Certificate?
7 Is this a permit for an after-the-fact construction or activity?
8 I hold at least a 100% property interest in the property.
9 Are you an agent for the property owner?
10 Has a similar application been previously denied?
11 Is this an application for an agriculture structure under 200 square feet
12 Are there known burials on the site?
13 Are you using water not provided by a domestic water system?
14 Does existing grade under building footprint change by 2’ or more in any direction?
15 The proposed residential unit is a Multi-Family Dwelling Unit?
16 Is this a conversion of a legally existing single-family dwelling unit into a multi-
family two dwelling unit?
17 Is this structure a guest house?
18 Does guest house contain a kitchen?
This application shall be fil led out by all seeking Zoning, Use,
Variance, SMA Use or PDU permits pursuant to the Kauai
County Code, Hawai‘i Revised Statutes Chapter 205A and all
relevant rules and regulations of the Planning Commission and
Department. Supplemental information may be attached to
form. SMA applications may also require additional SMA
assessment forms.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
STANDARD ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION
One (1) original; If providing plans, five (5) sets, including original, required.
Fees vary based on permits required and range from $30 to over $1000.
Proof of 100% fee ownership rights or authorized agent must be attached.
3HUPLWWLQJIHHVPD\EHPDGHYLDFDVKRUFKHFN$OOFKHFNV
VKDOOEHPDGHRXWWR 'LUHFWRURI)LQDQFH
;
(4)2-8-021-070 n/a
Makahuena-Preferred A LLC et al.
n/a
P.O. Box 1205 Lihue, HI 96766
1.001 acres (808) 521-9297
Open mtrask@cades.com
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
1. What is the proposed construction and/or intended use of the structure or parcel (may attach
additional info)? Two-story Single-Family Dwelling Unit, pool, driveway, walkways, lanai, landscaping and associated improvements.
2. If this is not the first dwelling unit on the subject property identified on this application, please state
how many dwelling units presently exist: _n_la _________ _
Submittal Checklist
Please INITIAL under "Yes" or not applicable "N/ A" regarding each of the statements:
YES NA Staff Verification
X
I have ensured all TMK numbers are visible on all lan sheets. X
Any plans I have submitted clearly show all structures and setback
X dimensions.
4 M lans rovide lot covera e calculations X
5 I have ensured kitchens are marked with the 8' radii required by the X Plannin De artment' s Administrative Rules.
6 Because this application involves a CPR, the plot plan shows all
existin structures. X
7 Buildin late does not exceed 20 feet from the finished rade at ent X
Acknowledgements -Please INITIAL next to each of the statements:
I UNDERSTAND: Initial Here
Additional fees and/or the submittal of other application forms may be necessary to complete this application for MT acceptance and processing.
Tender of fees by the County does not imply acceptance of this application. MT
Errors in self-declaration or missing or incomplete information will delay acceptance and processing of your MT annlication.
Any purposeful misrepresentations in this application may result in delay, denial, permit revocation, violations, MT fines and even criminal prosecution.
The owner and/or authorized representative is hereby made aware that the construction, work, use or activity approved in this pennit shall be subject to inspection by
Planning Department personnel. The applicant is advised that ins ection may occur prior to or during construction and use to ascertain the activity is conducted in
compliance with the law. Further, I am a du! tor have O o ownership rights.
OWNER/ AGENT SIGNATURE: __,,s:::::::::=======--..:::::..----------DATE: February 10, 2022
FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE ONLY (THIS CONSTITUTES PERMIT IF FILLED OUT BY DEPT.):
APPROVED • DENIED • BY: DATE:
DIRECTOR'S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (staff to initial next to applicable conditions):
This permit shall expire ifno building is issued within one (1) year after the approval date and/or if
construction does not start within one (1) year of building permit issuance.
Director's standard conditions for non-residential agricultural structures (attach)
Should any archaeological or historic resources be discovered during ground
disturbing/construction work, all work in the area of the find shall immediately cease and the
Applicant shall contact the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, Historic Preservation
Division and the Planning Department to determine mitigation measures.
Additional Conditions (State):
V,\iesource library\form, • Applications\loning Permit Application_02.02.21 [CURRENT].doo:
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
I. Part A
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Applicant:
Address: Phone:
Applicant’s Status: (Check one)
Owner of the Property (Holder of at least 75% of the equitable and legal title)
Lessee of the Property Lessee must have an unexpired and recorded lease of five (5) years
or more from the date of filing of this application. If not, Owner(s) must
provide a Letter of Authorization.
Authorized Agent Attach Letter of Authorization
Contact Person: Address:
Phone:
Email:
PROJECT INFORMATION
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
Site Address: Tax Map Key:
Lot Area:
State Land Use District: County Zoning:
General Plan
Designation:
Nature of Development:
* NOTE: An Environmental Assessment in accordance with HRS Chapter 343 is
required for actions requiring a Shoreline Setback Variance (SSV). Please
contact the Planning Department for further information.
Valuation of Development:
(Estimate Attached)
Date of Application:
Makahuena - Preferred A LLC et al.
P.O. Box 1205, Lihue, HI 96766
(808) 521-9297
P.O. Box 1205, Lihue, HI 96766
Mauna Kea Trask
(808) 521-9297
mtrask@cades.com
N/A
Urban
Resort
Over $500,000.00
February 10, 2022
c/o Cades Schutte
✔
(4) 2-8-21-70
1.001 acres
Open
Two-story Single-Family Dwelling Unit, pool, driveway, walkways,
lanais, landscaping and associated improvements.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 2 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
II. Part B
The petitioner shall be responsible for filing the following required information with the
department before an application is considered complete:
1. A written description of the proposed project, location and a statement of
reasons/justification for project.
2. If property abuts a shoreline, a certified shoreline survey conducted by a registered land
surveyor within 6 months of an application shall be submitted, when required by the
Planning Agency.
3. A plot plan of the property, drawn to scale, with all proposed and existing structures and
other pertinent information. Also, preliminary building sketch plans are to be submitted.
4. Any other plans or information requirements by the Director.
Note: An Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement that has been
declared adequate under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or under
Chapter 343, HRS, may constitute a valid filing under this section.
5. Project Assessment:
a. Description of the area and environment involved including flora and fauna, and
other features;
b. Description of the existing land uses of the project site and surrounding areas;
c. Description of how the proposed project will affect the area involved and
surrounding areas. Specifically the assessment should evaluate if the proposal:
YES NO
i. Involves an irrevocable commitment to loss or destruction
of any natural or cultural resources, including but not
limited to, historic sites, Special Treatment Districts as
established by the County of Kauai Comprehensive
Zoning ordinance, view planes or scenic corridors as
outlined in the Community Development Plans, and
recreation areas and resources;
Discussion:
See attached.
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 3 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
ii. Curtails the range of beneficial uses of the environment;
Discussion:
YES NO
iii. Conflicts with the County’s or the State’s long-term
environmental policies or goals;
Discussion:
YES NO
iv. Curtails the range of beneficial uses of the environment;
Discussion:
YES NO
v. Substantially affects the economics or social welfare and
activities or the community, County or State;
Discussion:
YES NO
vi. In itself has no significant adverse effect but cumulatively
has considerable effect upon the environment or involves
a commitment for larger actions;
Discussion:
YES NO
vii. Substantially affect a rare threatened, or endangered
species of animal or plant, or its habitat;
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 4 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
viii. Detrimentally affects air or water quality or ambient noise
levels; or
Discussion:
YES NO
ix. Affects an environmentally sensitive area, such as flood
plain, shoreline, tsunami zone, erosion-prone area,
geologically hazardous land, estuary, fresh water or
coastal water;
Discussion:
YES NO
x. May have a major effect on the quality of the environment
or affect the economic or social welfare of the area; and
Discussion:
YES NO
xi. Would possibly be contrary to the policies and guidelines
of the Rules and Regulations, the County’s General Plan,
Development Plans, and Zoning and Subdivision
Ordinances.
Discussion:
d. Evaluation of the proposed development relative to the objective and policies as
contained in Chapter 205A, HRS; and Section 3.0 of the Special Management
Area (SMA) Rules and Regulations: (complete following questionnaire)
RECREATIONAL
RESOURCES:
Objective
Provide coastal recreation opportunities accessible to the public.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
See attached.
✔
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 5 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
1. Will the proposed development adversely affect coastal resources
uniquely suited for recreational activities that cannot be provided in
other areas?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Will the project require replacement of coastal resources having
significant recreational value, including but not limited to surfing sites,
sandy beaches and fishing areas, when such resources will be
unavoidably damaged by the proposed development; or requiring
reasonable monetary compensation to the State for recreation when
replacement is not feasible or desirable?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Is the project site near a State or County Park?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Will the proposed development affect an existing public access to or
along the shoreline?
Discussion:
YES NO
5. Will the proposed development provide public access to and/or along
the shoreline?
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 6 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
6. Will the proposed development encourage expanded recreational use
of County, State, or federally owned or controlled shoreline lands and
waters having recreational value?
Discussion:
YES NO
7. Will the development generate point or non-point sources of pollution
that will affect recreation value of coastal area?
Discussion:
HISTORICAL
RESOURCES:
Objective
Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore those natural and man-made
historic and pre-historic resources in the Special Management Area that are
significant in Hawaiian and American history and culture.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
YES NO
1. Is the project site within a Federal, State and/or County designated
historical/cultural district?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Is the project site listed on or nominated to the Hawaii or National
Register of Historic Places?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Does the project site include land(s) which have not been previously
surveyed by an archaeologist?
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
See attached.
✔
✔
See attached.
✔
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 7 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
Discussion:
YES NO
4. If an archeological survey has been conducted for the project site, has
the survey been submitted to the State Historic Preservation Office for
review and recommendations?
Discussion:
YES NO
5. Has any site survey revealed any information on historic or
archaeological resources? (Please provide a copy or reference of
survey)
Discussion:
YES NO
6. Is the project site within or near a Hawaiian fishpond?
Discussion:
YES NO
7. Is the project located within or near a historic settlement area?
(Cemeteries, burials, heiaus, etc.)
Discussion:
SCENIC & OPEN
SPACE
RESOURCES:
Objective
Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore or improve the quality of coastal
scenic and open space resources.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 8 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
1. Does the project site abut or affect a valued scenic resources or
landmark within the SMA?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Does the proposed development affect existing shoreline open space
and scenic resources?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Does the proposed development involve alteration to natural landforms
and existing public views to and along the shoreline?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Is the project compatible with the visual environment?
Discussion:
YES NO
5. Does the proposed action involve the construction of structures visible
between the nearest coastal roadway and the shoreline?
Discussion:
YES NO
6. Is the project site within the Shoreline Setback Area (20 or 40 feet
inland from the shoreline)?
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 9 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
COASTAL
ECOSYSTEMS:
Objective
Protect valuable coastal ecosystems from disruption and minimize adverse
impacts on all coastal ecosystems.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
YES NO
1. Is the project site a habitat for endangered species of flora and fauna?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Will the proposed development adversely affect valuable coastal
ecosystems of significant biological or economic importance?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Will the proposed involve disruption or degradation of coastal water
ecosystems through stream diversions, channelization, and similar land
and water uses?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Will the proposed development include the construction of special
waste treatment facilities, such as injection wells, discharge pipes,
septic tank systems or cesspools?
Discussion:
YES NO
5. Is there a wetland on the project site?
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 10 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
6. Is the project site situated in or abutting a Natural Area Reserve or
Wildlife Refuge or Sanctuary?
Discussion:
ECONOMIC
USES:
Objective
Provide public or private facilities and improvements important to the State’s
economy in suitable locations.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
YES NO
1. Does the project involve a harbor or port?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Is the proposed development related to or near to an existing major
hotel, multi-family, or condominium project?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Does the project site include agricultural lands designated for such use?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Does the proposed development relate to commercial fishing or
seafood production?
Discussion:
✔
However, there are nesting sites for wedge-tailed shear waters nearby. See
attached.
✔
See attached.
✔
The proposed development is bordered by the "Point at Poipu" hotel to the east,
and the "Makahuena at Poipu" and the "Poipu Palms" developments to the west.
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 11 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
5. Does the proposed development relate to commercial fishing or
seafood production?
Discussion:
COASTAL
HAZARDS:
Objective
Reduce hazard to life and property from tsunami, storm waves, stream flooding,
erosion, and subsidence.
Check either “Yes” or “No” for each of the following questions. If your answer below is “Yes” or
“No” it is necessary to elaborate by providing comments in the “Discussion” section below the
question.
YES NO
1. Is the project site within a potential tsunami inundated area as depicted
on the National Flood Insurance Rate maps (FIRM)?
Discussion:
YES NO
2. Is the project site within a potential flood inundation area according to a
FIRM?
Discussion:
YES NO
3. Does the project comply with the requirements of the Federal Flood
Insurance Program?
Discussion:
YES NO
4. Has the project site or nearby shoreline areas experienced shoreline
erosion?
Discussion:
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
See attached.
✔
✔
See attached.
✔
See attached.
COUNTY OF KAUA‘I
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA (SMA)
PERMIT ASSESSMENT
- 12 -
SMA Assessment Application
UPD. 10/2013
YES NO
5. Have any seawalls/revetments/etc. been constructed or exist in the
immediate vicinity?
Discussion:
PROJECT
ASSESSMENT:
e. Evaluation of the impacts which cannot be avoided and mitigating measures
proposed to minimize that impact:
Discussion:
f. Evaluation of the proposed development relative to Section 4.0 of the SMA
Rules and Regulations in accordance with the following aspects:
i. Substantial adverse environmental or ecological effects;
Discussion:
ii. Consistency or compliance of the proposed development relative to the
goals and objectives of Chapter 205A, HRS; and Section 3.0 of the SMA
Rules and Regulations; and
Discussion:
iii. Consistency or compliance of the proposed development relative to the
County General Plan, Development Plan, and Zoning Ordinances.
Discussion:
[name], [title] Date
Mauna Kea Trask, Authorized Agent 2-10-2022
✔
See attached.
See attached.
See attached.
See attached.
See attached.
CADES SCHUTTE
A Limited Liability Law Partnership
MAUNA KEA TRASK 8418
P.O. Box 1205
Lihu’e, HI 96766
Telephone: (808) 521-9297
Facsimile: (808) 540-5015
Email: mtrask@cades.com
Attorneys for Applicants
MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL A, LLC; MAKAHUENA -
PREFERRED B, LLC; MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL B,
LLC; MAKAHUENA - TW, LLC; and MAKAHUENA -
DW, LLC.
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
COUNTY OF KAUA’I
In the Matter of the Application
Of
MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - TW, LLC; and
MAKAHUENA-DW, LLC, for a Special
Management Area Use Permit, for Real Property
Situated at Weliweli, Koloa, Kaua’i, Hawai’i,
Described as Lot 3 of Makahuena Estates
Subdivision, Identified by Kaua’i Tax Map Key
No. (4) 2-8-021:070.
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE
PERMIT SMA(U)-__________________
Class III Zoning Permit Z-III-_________
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL
MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT
AND CLASS III ZONING PERMIT;
EXHIBIT LIST; EXHIBITS “A” - “T”
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
‐i‐
SECTION 1. APPLICANTS/SUBJECT PROPERTY OWNERS. ............................................. 1
1.1 Applicants .............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Property .................................................................................................................. 1
1.3 Ownership .............................................................................................................. 1
SECTION 2. LOCATION & LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OF THE PROPERTY. ............... 1
2.1 Location ................................................................................................................. 1
2.2 Land Use Designations .......................................................................................... 2
a. SLUC ......................................................................................................... 2
b. Kaua’i General Plan ................................................................................... 2
c. CZO............................................................................................................ 2
d. Development Plan Area ............................................................................. 2
e. Special Management Area ......................................................................... 2
f. Constraint District ...................................................................................... 2
g. Heritage Resources .................................................................................... 2
h. Flood Zone ................................................................................................. 2
i. Shoreline Setback ....................................................................................... 3
j. Violations ................................................................................................... 3
k. Visitor Destination Area ............................................................................ 3
l. Soils............................................................................................................ 3
2.3 Prior Land Use Permits .......................................................................................... 4
a. SMA (U) 2015-1 ........................................................................................ 4
b. Z-III-2015-1 ............................................................................................... 4
c. S-2015-14 ................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 3. PAST, EXISTING AND PROPOSED USES OF THE PROPERTY. .................. 4
3.1 Past Uses ................................................................................................................ 4
3.2 Existing Uses ......................................................................................................... 5
3.3 Proposed Uses ........................................................................................................ 5
SECTION 4. SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING LANDS ................................... 6
4.1 Location ................................................................................................................. 6
4.2 Surrounding Uses ................................................................................................... 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-ii-
SECTION 5. PERMITS REQUESTED AND REQUIRED ....................................................... 7
5.1 Class III Zoning Permit .......................................................................................... 7
5.2 SMA Use Permit .................................................................................................... 7
SECTION 6. IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT.......................................................................... 7
6.1 Botanical Resources ............................................................................................... 7
6.2 Historical Resources .............................................................................................. 7
6.3 Air Quality/Noise ................................................................................................... 8
6.4 Flooding and Drainage ........................................................................................... 9
6.5 Utilities ................................................................................................................... 9
a. Potable Water ............................................................................................. 9
b. Electric/Communications ........................................................................... 9
6.6 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal ..................................................................... 9
6.7 Solid waste Disposal ............................................................................................ 10
6.8 Governmental Services ........................................................................................ 10
a. Fire & Police Services ............................................................................. 10
b. Schools ..................................................................................................... 10
6.9 Economics ............................................................................................................ 10
a. Jobs .......................................................................................................... 10
b. Housing .................................................................................................... 10
c. Property Values ........................................................................................ 10
6.10 Population ............................................................................................................ 11
6.11 Traffic Circulation ............................................................................................... 11
6.12 Heritage Resources .............................................................................................. 11
SECTION 7. SLUC CONSIDERATIONS. ............................................................................... 11
7.1 SLUC Urban District ........................................................................................... 11
SECTION 8. GENERAL PLAN CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................ 11
8.1 Kauai General Plan Visions and Goals ................................................................ 11
a. Goal # 1: A Sustainable Island................................................................. 11
b. Goal # 2: A Unique and Beautiful Place .................................................. 12
c. Goal # 3: A Healthy and Resilient People ............................................... 12
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-iii-
d. Goal # 4: An Equitable Place, with Opportunity for All ......................... 13
8.2 Kauai General Plan Policies to Guide Growth .................................................... 13
a. Policy # 1: Manage Growth to Preserve Rural Character ........................ 14
b. Policy # 3: Recognize the Identity of Kauai’s Individual Towns
and Districts ............................................................................................. 14
c. Policy # 4: Design Healthy and Complete Neighborhoods ..................... 14
d. Policy # 7: Build a Balanced Multimodal Transportation System .......... 15
e. Policy # 8: Protecting Kauai’s Scenic Beauty ......................................... 15
f. Policy # 9: Uphold Kaua’i as a Unique Visitor Destination Area ........... 15
g. Policy # 14: Prepare for Climate Change ................................................ 16
h. Policy # 15: Respect Native Hawaiian Rights and Wahi Pana ................ 16
i. Policy # 16: Protect Access to Kauai’s Treasured Places ........................ 16
8.3 Kauai General Plan Resort Use Designation ....................................................... 16
8.4 Project Compliance with Kauai General Plan Standards ..................................... 17
SECTION 9. CZO OPEN DISTRICT CONSIDERATIONS. .................................................. 17
9.1 CZO Open District ............................................................................................... 17
9.2 Development’s Compliance with CZO Open District Standards ........................ 17
9.3 Shore Constraint District Considerations ............................................................. 18
SECTION 10. SOUTH KAUAI COMMUNITY PLAN CONSIDERATIONS. ........................ 19
10.1 Community Plan Goals and Objectives ............................................................... 19
10.2 Compliance with Development Plan Standards ................................................... 19
SECTION 11. SMA CONSIDERATIONS. ................................................................................ 19
11.1 Recreational Resources ........................................................................................ 19
11.2 Historic Resources ............................................................................................... 19
11.3 Scenic and Open Space Resources ...................................................................... 20
11.4 Coastal Ecosystems .............................................................................................. 21
a. In consultation with DLNR/DOFAW, CLDC engaged a
landscaping firm and established a new shrub land of native
naupaka (Scaevola taccada) on the makai western corner of the
subdivision creating more nesting habitat for wedge-tailed
shearwaters ............................................................................................... 22
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-iv-
b. At DOFAW’s request, the CLDC hired a pest control firm to
conduct trapping for feral cats ................................................................. 22
c. Finally, in order to avoid a potentially dangerous condition for
humans, the makai rock wall along the public access way was
approved as constructed with ground-level tubes that allow
shearwaters to pass through ..................................................................... 23
11.5 Economic Uses ..................................................................................................... 23
11.6 Coastal Hazards ................................................................................................... 23
11.7 Managing Development/Public Participation ...................................................... 24
11.8 Beach Protection/Marine Resources .................................................................... 24
11.9 Value of Development ......................................................................................... 24
11.10 Compatibility with Surrounding Uses ................................................................. 24
11.11 Significant Adverse Effect to the SMA ............................................................... 25
11.12 Compliance with SMA Guidelines ...................................................................... 25
a. Adequate access, via existing public access easements, is provided
to nearby beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves ........................ 25
b. Adequate and properly located public recreation areas and wildlife
preserves have been reserved ................................................................... 25
c. Provisions have been made for solid and liquid waste treatment,
disposition, and management that will minimize adverse effects on
SMA resources ......................................................................................... 25
d. Because the Property is prepared for development, alterations to
existing landforms and vegetation will be very minimal, and
construction will cause negligible adverse effects to water
resources and scenic and recreational amenities ...................................... 25
e. The development is consistent with the objectives and policies of
HRS Ch. 205A and the County SMA Rules ............................................ 26
f. The development is consistent with the County general plan and
zoning ordinances .................................................................................... 26
g. No dredging, filing or other altering of any coastal resources will
occur whatsoever ..................................................................................... 26
h. The development will not reduce the size of the coastal access
easement area, nor will the development impose any restrictions
upon public access to tidal and submerged lands, beaches, or other
coastal resources ...................................................................................... 26
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Page
-v-
i. The development will not substantially interfere with or detract
from the line of sight toward the sea or from existing public views
to and along the shoreline ........................................................................ 26
j. The development will not significantly adversely affect water
quality, or existing and potential fisheries, wildlife habitats, or
estuarine sanctuaries ................................................................................ 26
SECTION 12. HRS CH 343 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
CONSIDERATIONS. .......................................................................................... 26
12.1 HRS Chapter 343 ................................................................................................. 26
SECTION 13. IMPACTS TO NATIVE HAWAIIAN TRADITIONAL AND
CUSTOMARY PRACTICES .............................................................................. 27
13.1 Existence of Traditional and Customary Practices .............................................. 27
SECTION 14. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................... 29
APPLICATION
Comes now, MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED A, LLC; MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL A,
LLC; MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED B, LLC; MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - TW, LLC; and MAKAHUENA-DW, LLC, by and through their undersigned
attorneys, and hereby submits the following Application to construct a single-family residential
dwelling unit (“SFR”) and associated improvements as described herein.
SECTION 1. APPLICANTS/SUBJECT PROPERTY OWNERS.
1.1 Applicants. The Applicants are , MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA - CAPITAL A, LLC; MAKAHUENA - PREFERRED B, LLC; MAKAHUENA
- CAPITAL B, LLC; MAKAHUENA - TW, LLC; and MAKAHUENA-DW, LLC
(“Applicants”). Applicants have authorized Mauna Kea Trask of Cades Schutte LLP to file this
Application. See, Exhibit “A”.
1.2 Property. This Application concerns that certain parcel of land (being portion(s)
of the land(s) described in and covered by Royal Patent Grant Number 1416 to Eke Opunui)
situate, lying and being at Weliweli, Koloa, Island and County of Kaua’i, State of Hawai’i, being
Lot 3 of the Makahuena Estates subdivision, and further identified as Kaua’i Tax Map Key No.
(4) 2-8-021-070 (the “Property” or “Lot 3”). A legal description of the Property is contained in
the Deed attached hereto as Exhibit “B”.
1.3 Ownership. Applicants are the owners of the Property as shown in Exhibit “B”.
SECTION 2. LOCATION & LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
2.1 Location. The Property is located in Weliweli, Koloa, Kaua’i, Hawai’i, and is
shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit “C-1”.
2
2.2 Land Use Designations. The State Land Use Commission (“SLUC”), Kaua’i
General Plan (“General Plan”), County of Kaua’i Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance (“CZO”),
and other relevant land use designations for the Property are described as follows:
a. SLUC. The Property is located in the SLUC Urban District. See, Exhibit “C-2”.
b. Kaua’i General Plan. The Property is located in the Kauai General Plan Resort
Use Designation. See, Exhibit “C-3”.
c. CZO. The Property is within the County of Kauai Open (O) zoning District. See,
Exhibit “C-4”.
d. Development Plan Area. The Property is located within the South Kauai Planning
District. See, Exhibit “C-5”.
e. Special Management Area. The Property is located within the County’s Special
Management Area (“SMA”). See, Exhibit “C-6”.
f. Constraint District. The Property is located within the Shore Constraint District
(S-SH). See, Exhibit “C-7”.
g. Heritage Resources. As shown in General Plan (2018) Figure 5-11, South Kaua’i
Heritage Resource Map, the Property does not contain any important natural, scenic, or historical
features. See, Exhibit “C-8”.
h. Flood Zone. Initially, FEMA FIRM Panel map 1500020352F, panel; effective
date November 26, 2010, included a majority of the Property, including the project site, within
the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) Zone VE (EL 10), with small mauka portions of the
Property within SFHAS Zone AE (EL 10) and Non-Special Flood Hazard Zone XS. See, Exhibit
“C-9”. However, Letters of Map Revision - Coastal High Hazard Area Determination Document
(Removal) 16-09-0378A, dated November 12, 2015; 16-09-0391A, dated November 12, 2015;
3
and 19-09-1672A, dated June 26, 2019, removed the entire buildable area of Lot 3 from the
SFHA Zones VE and AE and placed them within the Non-Special Flood Hazard Area Zone X.
Id.
i. Shoreline Setback. The Property is a shoreline parcel, and the State previously
certified the shoreline in 2014. See, Exhibit “C-10”. The coastline consists of steep rocky cliff
faces and the Property itself is between 41 ft. and 49ft. above sea level. See, Exhibit “C-10”. The
project site is approximately 36 ft. above sea level and will be well mauka of the certified
shoreline. Id. Further, according to the Kauai Coastal Erosion study, the coastline fronting the
Property is unchanging. Id.
Although there are no parcels of real property between the Property and the shoreline,
there are dedicated coastal access and view easements fronting the Property that create a
substantial buffer between the shoreline and the Property, and the proposed development will not
impact public beach access. See, Exhibit “C-11”. Thus, the proposed development will not affect
beach processes, impact public beach access, or be affected by or contribute to coastal erosion or
hazards.
j. Violations. There are no known land use and zoning violations on the Property.
k. Visitor Destination Area. Pursuant to Ord. PM-2017-410, the Property is within
the Visitor Destination Area (“VDA”). See, Exhibit “C-12”.
l. Soils. According to the National Resources Conservation Service (“NRCS”) Web
Soil Survey, the Property consists of Koloa stony silty clay (KvD) with 15 to 25 percent slopes,
and Rock outcrop (rRO). See, Exhibit “C-13”. However, due to the completion of the
subdivision improvements the project site itself has been graded and the development will be
built on an existing flat building pad.
4
2.3 Prior Land Use Permits. The Property is subject to the following land use permits
and conditions:
a. SMA (U) 2015-1. On August 26, 2014, the County of Kaua’i Planning
Commission approved SMA Use Permit SMA (U) 2015-1, allowing the consolidation and re-
subdivision of the larger Makahuena Estates property from a 25-lot subdivision to a 10-lot
subdivision subject to 14 conditions. See, Exhibit “D”.
b. Z-III-2015-1. On August 29, 2014, the County of Kauai Planning Department
approved Class III Zoning Permit Z-III-2015-1, allowing the consolidation and re-subdivision of
the larger Makahuena Estates property from a 25-lot subdivision to a 10-lot subdivision subject
to 14 conditions. See, Exhibit “E”. The terms and conditions of the Class III zoning permit were
the same as SMA (U) 2015-1 discussed above.
c. S-2015-14. On April 14, 2015, the County of Kauai Planning Commission
tentatively approved S-2015-14, allowing the consolidation and re-subdivision of the larger
Makahuena Estates property from a 25-lot subdivision to a 10-lot subdivision subject to 6
conditions. See, Exhibit “F”. The County Department of Public Works conducted a final
inspection of the subdivision on August 8, 2017, and found construction to be complete and
acceptable. See, Exhibit “G”.
SECTION 3. PAST, EXISTING AND PROPOSED USES OF THE PROPERTY.
3.1 Past Uses. The prior landowner, CIRI Land development Company (“CLDC”),
acquired the entire area now comprising Makahuena Estates subdivision, approximately 13.1
acres, from the United States federal government on or about March 22, 1996. At the time of
CLDC’s acquisition, the area consisted of 26 separate lots, which, since 1951, had been used by
the Coast Guard as a LORAN-A receiver which used radio waves and provided ships with the
ability to triangulate their locations hundreds of miles from a transmitting station. At that time
5
there were five to six buildings in use, along with a 280-foot-high antenna located makai of the
structures. The use of the station, known as LORSTA Kauai, ceased in 1979, following which
Hale ‘Opio, Inc., a private nonprofit organization that provided youth-oriented social services,
used the properties until Hurricane Iwa devastated Kauai in 1982.
From 2014 to 2015 CLDC sought and received permission from the County to
consolidate and re-subdivide the properties from 26 lots to a ten-lot subdivision. After approval
was obtained from the County, CLDC proceeded to develop the subdivision and associated
infrastructure as approved. On December 4, 2017, the County Department of Public Works sent
a memorandum to Planning Director Michael A. Dahilig certifying the completion of the
subdivision. See, Exhibit “G”. Final Subdivision map approval was obtained from the Planning
Commission on March 27, 2018. See, Exhibit “G-1”
3.2 Existing Uses. The Property is currently “fully-developed” as allowed under
SMA (U)2015-1, Z-III-2015-1 and S-2015-14, meaning that it has been graded, grassed and all
subdivision infrastructure has been installed. However, no structure has been developed on the
Property and to that extent the Property is “vacant”.
3.3 Proposed Uses. Applicants are proposing to develop a two-story SFR, pool, and
associated driveway, walkways, and lanais. See, Exhibit “H”. Applicants will also landscape the
Property. See, Exhibit “I”
Pursuant to CZO § 8-9.2(a)(1), the amount of land coverage created, including pavement,
shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the lot or parcel area. The total square footage of the
Property as reflected on the final approved subdivision map is 1.001 acres or 43,603 sq. ft. See,
Exhibit “G-1”. The land coverage of the proposed development is as follows:
6
Structure Size Percentage of Square footage
Two-Story House 2,375 sq. ft. 5.4%
Covered Lanais 604 sq. ft. 1.4%
Pool 486 sq. ft. 1.1%
Garage 850 sq. ft. 1.9%
Total 4,315 sq. ft. 9.8%
See, Exhibit “H”, at SP01.
Applicants note that the driveway is composed of gravel that will not prevent normal
precipitation from directly reaching the surface of the underlying land and will not be compacted
so as to prevent substantial infiltration. Thus, the gravel driveway does not count towards lot
coverage pursuant to CZO § 8-1.5. Additionally, Applicant has removed a previously planned
pond feature so as to stay within the 10% lot coverage threshold.
SECTION 4. SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING LANDS.
4.1 Location. The Property is located in Weliweli, Koloa, Kaua’i at Makahuena Point
near the intersection of Pe’e Road and Maka Place. The Property is about one-half mile to the
east of Po‘ipū Beach Park and one-half mile to the west of Shipwrecks Beach Park.
4.2 Surrounding Uses. To the west of the Property is the Makahuena at Po‘ipū , a 79-
unit condominium development (zoned R-20), to the east is the Point at Po‘ipū , a 219-unit hotel
development, (zoned RR-10), and mauka of the Property are residential houses (zoned R-4). All
surrounding properties are within the VDA. Makai of the project site is a rock wall built
pursuant to SMA (U) 2015-1, Z-III-2015-1 and S-2015-14 that delineates the mauka boundary of
the County’s public access easements which are located on the makai portion of the Makahuena
Estates subdivision lots.
7
SECTION 5. PERMITS REQUESTED AND REQUIRED.
5.1 Class III Zoning Permit. Because the Property is within the County Open (O)
zoning district and Shore Constraint district (S-SH), the proposed development must obtain a
Class III zoning permit from the County of Kauai Planning Department. See, CZO §§ 8-9.4(b),
8-8.4(c) and 8-12.5(d) (2).
5.2 SMA Use Permit. Applicant is proposing to develop a two-story SFR, a pool, and
associated landscaping and improvements. Although this is the first house on the lot and the
proposed development is less than 7,500 sq. ft., Act 16 L 2020 amended Hawaii Revised Statutes
(“HRS”) §205A-22 to exclude the first house exemption from the definition of “Development”
within the SMA if the lot is a shoreline parcel. Therefore, the proposed development constitutes
“Development” as defined by HRS §205A-22. The total value of the development is estimated to
be $2,301,480.00. See, Exhibit “J”. As such, Applicants are requesting the Planning
Commission issue a SMA Use Permit as provided in Section 7.3.C(1)&(2) of the SMA Rules.
SECTION 6. IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT.
6.1 Botanical Resources. The Property is located within a fully developed and
prepared subdivision, and currently consist of a vacant lot containing a grass lawn. See, Exhibit
“K”. There are no known botanical resources located on the Property and the proposed
development will not have any impact on Botanical Resources. .
6.2 Historical Resources. Prior to the County’s approval of the subdivision
development, CLDC contracted with Haun & Associates to conduct an Archaeological Inventory
Survey (“AIS”) of TMK No. (4) 2-8-021:041, which at the time included the Property. See,
Exhibit “L”. The objective of the AIS was to satisfy historic preservation regulatory review
requirements of the Department of Land and Natural Resources - Historic Preservation Division
8
(“DLNR-SHPD”), as contained within Hawaii Administrative Rules (“HAR”), Title 13,
Subtitle 13, State Historic Preservation Rules. Id. at ii.
The AIS identified 18 sites with 128 features, consisting of 98 concrete pads, 7 concrete
blocks, 4 artifact scatters, 4 posts, 3 terraces, 3 slabs, 2 paths, 2 walls, and one each of the
following: ditch, road, stairs, utility box and walled slab. Id. Subsurface testing was undertaken
during the project, consisting of the excavation of twenty test units, and no intact sub surface
cultural deposits or burials were encountered during the subsurface testing. Id. According to the
AIS, all of the documented remains were the remnants of U.S. federal government navigation-
related infrastructure in operation for over 100 years. Id.
The 18 sites were assessed as significant solely for their information content. Id. The
sites were adequately documented, and no further work or preservation was recommended by
Haun & Associates to DLNR-SHPD. Id. DLNR-SHPD concurred with Haun & Associates’
recommendation subject to certain corrections which were subsequently made. See, Exhibit “L”,
letter from DLNR-SHPD, dated August 27, 2012, and letter from Haun & Assoc., dated
December 2, 2012.
Because the subdivision was subsequently developed after the acceptance of the AIS, no
historical resources are expected to be encountered during the proposed development and no
historical resources will be affected.
6.3 Air Quality/Noise. The development will have little or no impact on the air
quality and ambient noise levels in the area. Air quality and ambient noise levels may be
affected at a very minimal level during the actual construction activities. All vehicles or
equipment used by Applicants for the construction will be properly muffled, housed and
9
maintained to reduce any noise impacts or emission impacts. The Environmental Protection
Agency (“EPA”) and State of Hawaii air quality standards will not be exceeded.
6.4 Flooding and Drainage. The proposed development is within the Non-Special
Flood Hazard Area Zone X. See, Exhibit “C-9”. The development will meet all of the
requirements of the Flood Plain Management Ordinance of the County of Kauai, as contained in
Chapter 15, Article 1, of the Kauai County Code, 1987. All drainage resulting from construction
activities and from the increase in land coverage will be retained on site in the existing drainage
basin that was constructed by CLDC pursuant to its permits to develop the existing subdivision.
No additional drainage is anticipated to significantly or negatively impact the surrounding
properties or coastal area.
6.5 Utilities. In 2015 all necessary state and county agencies approved the
construction plans for the Makahuena estates Subdivision. See, Exhibit “M”. These plans
included the construction of all utilities. On December 4, 2017, the County of Kauai Department
of Public Works certified that the Makahuena Estates subdivision was completed and acceptable.
See, Exhibit “G”.
a. Potable Water. The Property currently obtains water service from the County of
Kauai Department of Water.
b. Electric/Communications. The Property obtains electric service from Kauai
Island Utility Cooperative (“KIUC”), and communication services from Hawaiian Telcom, Inc.
Existing electric and communications are presently adequate to provide the demand for such
services that will be generated by the proposed development.
6.6 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal. Applicants will install a private individual
wastewater system (septic tank(s) and leach field(s)) as consistent with the Individual Waste
10
System (IWS) Report prepared for CLDC by Esaki Surveying & Mapping, Inc. that was
prepared for the County and State’s review and approval during the subdivision entitlement
process. See, Exhibit “N”.
6.7 Solid waste Disposal. Solid waste collection will be provided by private means.
Solid waste will be taken to the County’s refuse transfer stations or disposal in the County’s
landfill as appropriate.
6.8 Governmental Services. Applicants anticipate the development will have the
following impacts on governmental services:
a. Fire & Police Services. Fire and Police services are located in Koloa within two
to three miles of the Property respectively. The development will not significantly increase the
need for existing Fire and Police services.
b. Schools. The closest schools are Koloa Elementary School located in Koloa, and
Chiefess Kamakahelei Middle School and Kaua’i High School, both located in Lihue. The
development will not generate any significant additional enrollment.
6.9 Economics. Applicants anticipate the development will have the following
economic impacts:
a. Jobs. The development will result in the creation of temporary construction jobs
during the construction of the project. Thereafter, Applicants anticipate an ongoing need for
housekeeping and landscaping and maintenance jobs to maintain the Property.
b. Housing. The Project will not result in the need for additional housing.
c. Property Values. Because fair market value of real property is based on the value
of the land and any physical improvements, the development will increase the value and the real
property taxes of the Property thus increasing revenues to the County of Kaua’i.
11
6.10 Population. The development will not result in a measurable increase in
population.
6.11 Traffic Circulation. The Property is primarily served by Maka Place, which
Applicants understand is a private road built to county standards but not accepted by the County
Council. The nearest public road is Pe’e Road, which is about 500 ft. from the Property. The
development of the Property will not measurably affect or increase traffic on Pe’e Road.
6.12 Heritage Resources. As stated above in section 2.2.g, according to the General
Plan, Figure 5-11 South Kaua’i Heritage Resource Map, the Property does not contain any
important natural, scenic, or historical features. See, Exhibit “C-8”.
SECTION 7. SLUC CONSIDERATIONS.
7.1 SLUC Urban District. The Property is located within the SLUC Urban District.
Residential uses are permitted within the SLUC Urban District.
SECTION 8. GENERAL PLAN CONSIDERATIONS.
8.1 Kauai General Plan Visions and Goals. An evaluation of the Kauai General Plan
(“General Plan”) section 1.3 shows that the proposed development is consistent with the
Visions and Goals of the General Plan.
a. Goal # 1: A Sustainable Island. The Makahuena Estates subdivision was
carefully planned and developed in order to fulfill the requirements of Goal # 1 of the General
Plan, and the proposed development of Lot 3 is consistent therewith. The subdivision density
was reduced from at least 25 dwelling units to ten, only nine of which are within the VDA. A
public parking area and an open space and public access easement were dedicated to the County
to protect the natural coastal systems that support life, air, water, soil, and living organisms on
the makai portion of Lot 3. See, General Plan at 33. The development of the proposed single
family dwelling unit on Lot 3 will not negatively affect the sustainability of the island. Rather,
12
the subdivision is the direct result of well-reasoned actions starting in 2014 that ensure this area
remains sustainable and meets the needs of current and future generations without depleting
important resources. Id.
b. Goal # 2: A Unique and Beautiful Place. Applicant’s proposed Development is
consistent with Goal # 2 of the General Plan and ensures the care and protection of the treasured
resources, traditions, and qualities of the natural, built, and human environment of Makahuena
point. Id. at 34. Applicant’s proposed Development maintains the perpetual protection of the
natural coastal ecosystem on the makai portion of Lot 3. Id. The Development will not infringe
upon the rights of the community to engage in their cultural traditions and practices and provides
opportunities for recreation and meditative contemplation along this beautiful coastline. Id. The
Development is consistent with the tenets of the Public Trust Doctrine as provided in Article 11,
Section 1 of the Hawaii State Constitution to, “conserve and protect Hawaii’s natural beauty and
all natural resources, including land, water, air minerals and energy sources”, and “promotes the
development and utilization of these resources in a manner consistent with their conservation and
in furtherance of the self-sufficiency of the State.” Id. at 34.
c. Goal # 3: A Healthy and Resilient People. General Plan Goal # 3 recognizes that
health is influenced by the built environment, including the ability to walk or bicycle to key
destinations, and to access the recreational areas that support active lifestyles. Id. at 35. The
development of a single-family dwelling unit on Lot 3 of Makahuena Estates is consistent with
these principles and will not interfere with the community’s use of the coastal access area. This
specific development is part of a larger well planned and sustainable subdivision project that
increased the resilience and vitality of the community and promoted better health outcomes
13
through improved coastal access opportunities related to the natural, built, and social
environment. Id. at 35.
d. Goal # 4: An Equitable Place, with Opportunity for All. Goal # 4 of the General
Plan aims to foster diverse and equitable communities with vibrant economies, access to jobs and
housing, and a high quality of life. Id. at 36. Short term and long-term job opportunities will
result from the construction and continued maintenance of this specific development as is typical
with high-end residential vacation rental properties. However, Goal # 4 is not simply about
economic opportunity. Goal # 4 recognizes that reversing Kaua’i’s trending inequity means
ensuring Kaua’i residents, regardless of factors such as geographic location, age, race, gender,
and economic status, have access to, inter alia, opportunities for recreation and enjoyment of
shared spaces; and making sure that planning and land development decisions do not unfairly
burden disadvantaged groups. Id at 36. This subdivision was specifically designed and
permitted to ensure equitable opportunities for recreation and shared spaces for all of Kaua’i, not
just the landowners in the neighborhood. Anyone on Kaua’i can park in the public parking lot at
Makahuena Estates subdivision and access the entire coastline all the way to Mahaulepu. The
coastal access area allows for fishing off of the makai portion of Lot 3 in perpetuity and such
opportunities benefit, not burden, disadvantaged groups on Kaua’i. Applicant embraces this
kuleana and has designed the proposed development to complement the environment and
character of this special place.
8.2 Kauai General Plan Policies to Guide Growth. The General Plan contains
nineteen (19) polices to guide growth that articulate the County’s path forward toward meeting
the community’s vision and goals of sustainability, unique character, resilience, and equity. An
14
evaluation of Kaua’i General Plan Section 1.4 shows the proposed development is consistent
with the following Policies to Guide Growth.
a. Policy # 1: Manage Growth to Preserve Rural Character. The proposed
development is consistent with Policy # 1 because it is contained within an existing
neighborhood that has been planned for residential subdivision development since the early 20th
century. This ensures that Kauai’s rural character is preserved as the proposed development is
within the Po‘ipū growth boundary and is compact and walkable. General Plan at 38.
b. Policy # 3: Recognize the Identity of Kauai’s Individual Towns and Districts.
The proposed SFR on Lot 3 in consistent with Po‘ipū ’s distinct character. The SFR will be
constructed within the pre-approved building envelope mauka of the rock wall that delineates
and preserves the open space coastal access easement. The SFR is low massing and designed to
blend into and compliment the rocky-shoreline cliffs. The development will not interfere with
Po‘ipū ’s many costal access opportunities which provide lateral access along the coast from
Mahaulepu to Lawai.
c. Policy # 4: Design Healthy and Complete Neighborhoods. General Plan Policy #
4 seeks to guide growth in a way that combats the recent trend of health problems in Hawaii,
attributed in part to increasing levels of sedentary lifestyles. The SFR on Lot 3 will not interfere
with the coastal open spaces access easement that was dedicated to the County to specifically
allow for safe and convenient walking activities makai of the subdivision and provide residents
an opportunity to increase physical activity on a daily basis, thereby reducing health risks. The
SFR on Lot 3 is part of a low-density, compact and walkable neighborhood that maintains
coastal access opportunities consistent with Policy # 4.
15
d. Policy # 7: Build a Balanced Multimodal Transportation System. Makahuena
Estates subdivision was specifically designed and constructed to be consistent with Policy # 7.
By reducing the previously permitted subdivision density of at least 25 residential units and
voluntarily providing for a public parking area and an open space public access easement, the
subdivision is consistent with the County’s Multimodal Land Transportation Plan (2013) and
provides the community with pedestrian access opportunities along the entire coastline of the
south shore. The proposed SFR on Lot 3 will not interfere with these opportunities and is
consistent with Policy # 7.
e. Policy # 8: Protecting Kauai’s Scenic Beauty. The proposed SFR is consistent
with preserving the natural views of Makahuena point. The proposed development is low
massing and will be entirely located within the pre-approved building envelope of Lot 3 which
was specifically designed to protect and preserve both mauka and makai views along the
coastline. The views in this area are not only protected by the reduced subdivision density but
also by the open space access easement on the makai portion of Lot 3. And unlike the two
neighboring developments to the east and west of Makahuena Estates subdivision, the proposed
SFR is specifically designed to complement the rugged coastal cliff area of Makahuena point and
incorporates dark earth tones and design features that blend in with the natural environment.
f. Policy # 9: Uphold Kaua’i as a Unique Visitor Destination Area. The proposed
SFR is consistent with Policy # 9’s purpose of focusing and limiting growth to pre-existing
Visitor Destination Areas and reducing visitor impacts on infrastructure. The Makahuena
Estates subdivision was specifically designed to ensure that the nine lots within the VDA do not
negatively affect the community character of Po‘ipū . Further, the location of the SFR within the
pre-approved building envelope will limit the physical footprint of transient accommodation uses
16
and ensure that such uses do not encroach upon the dedicated open space coastal access
easement area.
g. Policy # 14: Prepare for Climate Change. The proposed SFR is consistent with
Policy # 14 and will not contribute to or exacerbate concerns regarding rising sea levels along
Makahuena point. By restricting the development of Lot 3 to the pre-approved building
envelope, the proposed SFR will not be affected by any coastal hazards. Further, the makai rock
wall fronting Lot 3 is a physical delineation of the shoreline setback line and ensures that no
development will occur within or affect the shoreline area along Makahuena point.
h. Policy # 15: Respect Native Hawaiian Rights and Wahi Pana. A cultural impact
assessment (“CIA”) was prepared during the Makahuena Estates subdivision permitting process.
See, Exhibit “T”. Although the CIA did not identify any traditional and customary practices
occurring in the area that is now Lot 3, the CIA stated that fisherman continue to gather and
catch a variety of fish for subsistence purposes, including moi, ‘o’io and also harvest various
marine invertebrates along the shoreline and rocky edges of Makahuena point. Exhibit “T” at 13.
In response, the developer dedicated both the public parking lot and coastal open space access
easements to the County to ensure these traditional and customary practices may continue in
perpetuity.
i. Policy # 16: Protect Access to Kauai’s Treasured Places. The proposed SFR is
consistent with Policy # 16 by ensuring the continued protection of access to and customary use
of the shoreline area, trails, and places along the coast of Makahuena point for religious and
cultural observances, fishing, gathering, and recreational activities, such as hiking.
8.3 Kauai General Plan Resort Use Designation. The Property is located in the
Kaua’i General Plan Resort Use Designation. See, Exhibit “C-3”. The Property is also within the
17
VDA. See, Exhibit “C-12”. Actions for the Resort Use Designation are found in the Chapter 3,
Sector VI. of the General Plan. The General Plan contemplates, in relevant part, strengthening
existing town centers and mixed-use environments, revitalizing existing visitor destination areas,
and protecting agricultural lands for agricultural production and food self-sufficiency. Because
the Property is in the existing VDA and will not take existing agricultural land out of food
production, the development complies with the tenets of the General Plan concerning the Resort
Use Designation.
8.4 Project Compliance with Kauai General Plan Standards. The proposed
Development is a residential use within a completed subdivision development. Therefore, the
development itself will have no significant impact on the surrounding environment. The
development is consistent with neighboring residential and resort and transient accommodation
uses and will not have a significant adverse effect to the surrounding neighborhood. As such, the
development complies with the General Plan’s policy for the Resort Use Designation and is
consistent with the County’s “use it or lose it” policy concerning resort development.
SECTION 9. CZO OPEN DISTRICT CONSIDERATIONS.
9.1 CZO Open District. The Open District is established and regulated to create and
maintain an adequate and functional amount of predominantly open land to provide for the
recreational and aesthetic needs of the community or to provide for the effective functioning of
land, air, water, plant and animal systems or communities. CZO § 8-9.1.
9.2 Development’s Compliance with CZO Open District Standards. Single-family
detached dwelling units and accessory structures are permitted uses within the Open (O) zoning
district pursuant to CZO § 8-2.4(s) (1) & (9). The development will not exceed the 10% land
coverage limitation contained in CZO § 8-9.2(a) (1). The development itself will have no
significant impact on the surrounding environment and is compatible with existing residential
18
and resort uses in the immediate area surrounding the Property. Further, the coastal portion of
the Property, makai of the rock-wall, is encumbered by a coastal access easement held by the
County of Kaua’i that provides coastal access to recreational users and fishermen in the area.
Therefore, the proposed Development complies with CZO § 8-9.1 and allows for the
development of the SFR while providing for the recreational and aesthetic needs of the
community and the effective functioning of land, air, water, plant and animal systems or
communities.
9.3 Shore Constraint District Considerations. The purpose of the Shore Constraint
District is to regulate development or alterations to shore and water areas which have unique
physical and ecological conditions in order to protect and maintain physical, biologic and scenic
resources of particular value to the public. During the entitlements of the Makahuena Estates
subdivision, CLDC prepared and submitted numerous reports that addressed the impact that a
10-lot subdivision would have on the Shore Constraint District. These reports included: Air
Quality Assessment (Exhibit “O-1”); Geological Investigation (Exhibit “O-2”); Biological
Survey (“O-3”); Visual Analysis of Public Views (Exhibit “O-4”); and Visual Analysis of
Private Views (Exhibit “O-5”). All of these studies were accepted and approved thus allowing
CLDC to proceed with development of the subdivision improvements.
Because there has been no change in the condition of the subdivision properties in
general, or to Lot 3 specifically since the completion of the subdivision improvements,
Applicants submit that the existing studies establish that the proposed development will not
cause significant harm to: (A) the water quality of the ocean, including, but not limited to, its
clarity, temperature, color, taste and odor; (B) fish and aquatic habitats; (C) the natural beauty of
the area; (D) navigation, safety or health; or (E) would not substantially interfere with public use
19
of the ocean waters or underlying lands; and (F) that other facilities are unavailable to the
applicant.
SECTION 10. SOUTH KAUAI COMMUNITY PLAN CONSIDERATIONS.
10.1 Community Plan Goals and Objectives. The goals and objectives of the South
Kauai Community Plan, as adopted by Ordinance No. 990, include in relevant part, that Kōloa
will be a thriving commercial and residential community that maintains its rural feel and historic
“old town” charm by preserving, enhancing, and protecting its vast cultural treasures; and that
Po‘ipū will be a world-class, sustainable resort destination, serving residents and visitors alike,
developed responsibly, with clean, healthy beaches and ocean environments, welcoming parks,
and preserved heritage resources, all well-connected and accessible to everyone.
10.2 Compliance with Development Plan Standards. The development is consistent
with the goals and objectives contained in the South Kauai Community Plan. The design, layout
and outside appearance of the development will utilize architectural design elements that will be
compatible with the natural beauty of the area. The development will cover less than 10% of the
lot, and the dedicated public access easement and view easement makai of the rock-wall ensures
that coastal access and open space along the coastline will be maintained in perpetuity.
SECTION 11. SMA CONSIDERATIONS.
11.1 Recreational Resources. An open space public access easement encumbers the
portion of the Property makai of the rock-wall. The development will not affect or hinder the
continued use of the public access easement in any way. Therefore, the development will not
have any significant adverse effect on any public recreational opportunities located on the
Property, and the development will not affect any existing public beach or coastal access rights.
11.2 Historic Resources. As stated above in section 6.2, prior to the County’s approval
of the subdivision development, CLDC (the previous landowner) contracted with Haun &
20
Associates to conduct an Archaeological Inventory Survey (“AIS”) of TMK No. (4) 2-8-
021:041, which at the time included the Property. See, Exhibit “L”. The AIS identified 18 sites
with 128 features, all of which were the remnants of U.S. federal government navigation-related
infrastructure in operation on the larger subdivision Property for over 100 years. Id. A
comparison of AIS Figure 11 (Site Location Map) and Figure 68 (Distribution of associated
Features within Project Area) with the Demolition & Naupaka Preservation/Replanting Plan
(Exhibit “S” at 4) indicates that none of the documented historic sites or features were located
within Lot 3. It appears that Site 2142 was located within the neighboring Lot 4, and Site 2143
(including features A-C) was located makai of the rock wall near the boundary of Lots 3 and 4.
Site 2142 was recognized as a small roughly oval-shaped concrete pad that was created
by pouring concrete into a hole dug into the ground and probably served to anchor wiring.
Exhibit “L” at 45 and 49. Site 2143 was recognized as a complex of three features comprised of
a concrete slab (Feature A), a stone retaining wall (Feature B), and a concrete pad (Feature C).
Exhibit “L” at 49.
DLNR-SHPD concurred with Haun & Associates’ recommendation that no further work
or preservation was necessary of any of the sites or features discussed in the AIS. See, Exhibit
“L”, letter from DLNR-SHPD dated August 27, 2012, and letter from Haun & Assoc. dated
December 2, 2012. The subdivision was subsequently developed after the acceptance of the
AIS, and currently there are no historic sites or features located on the Property. Thus, the
proposed development will not have any significant adverse effect to any Historic Resources.
11.3 Scenic and Open Space Resources.
When the County granted CLDC’s request to consolidate and re-subdivide the larger
subdivision property from 25 lots to 10 lots, the County found that the 10-lot subdivision would
21
not block the line-of-sight towards the ocean from public view planes as the 10-lot subdivision
would be less dense and contain more open space compared to a 25-lot subdivision. See, Exhibits
“O-4” and “O-5”.
The proposed development will not have a significant and adverse impact on the scenic
and open space resources in the area and will blend into the existing neighborhood motif and the
natural environment. See, Exhibit “O-6”1. Any visual impacts to the coastline will be
sufficiently mitigated as the development itself has been designed to blend in with the rugged
coastline by using dark earth tones and modern design elements, including Tahitian Brown
roofing materials, black fiberglass windows, stained accent cedar siding, stained cedar siding,
stained board formed concrete, and Polynesian landscaping motifs. See, Exhibits “H”, “I” and
“O-6”.
11.4 Coastal Ecosystems.
The Property is a shoreline parcel and abuts the ocean and the proposed development of
Lot 3 will not significantly and adversely affect the coastal ecosystem. Prior to entitlement of
the subdivision, CLDC commissioned a Preliminary Engineering Report which addressed the
mitigation of any significant adverse effects that the subdivision would have on the coastal
ecosystem. See, Exhibit “P”. The Preliminary Engineering Report addressed site grading,
drainage plans, storm water management and water quality, erosion control plans, roadways,
wastewater, the flood zone and the constraint district. Id. The recommendations in the
Preliminary Engineering Report were included in the approved construction plans of the
subdivision (Exhibit “M”) which were constructed as approved and certified by the Department
1 Exhibit “O-6” contains a copy of a survey of the Makahuena Estates subdivision and five (5) pictures. The survey
itself indicates where pictures 1-5 were taken, and pictures 1-5 contain a computer image of the potential visual
impact of the proposed development. Lot 3 is not visible from Pe’e Road because of the neighboring development
The Point at Po‘ipū.
22
of Public Works (Exhibit “”G”). Because all subdivision infrastructure has been constructed and
approved, including the necessary drainage basin, the development will not have any significant
adverse effect on the coastal ecosystem, and the development will be constructed and maintained
so that any erosion or increased run off will stay within the pre-existing drainage allowances and
maintained on site in the existing drainage basin.
During the subdivision entitlement process three indigenous Hawaiian bird species were
recorded during the Biological Survey of the site: Wedge-tailed Shearwater, White-tailed
Tropicbird, and Wandering Tattler. Exhibit “O-3” at 28. Of these three species, only the
Wedge-tailed Shearwater was noted to nest along the coast. Id. This species is not listed under
either federal or state endangered species programs; however, it is protected under the federal
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Id. at 29. The Biological Survey noted that the subject property is
not included in any federal Critical Habitat designations, and the development of the site would
not impact Critical Habitat. Id. at 34. Nonetheless, the County imposed various permit conditions
to mitigate any development impacts to the Wedge-tailed shearwaters located in the area.
Exhibit “D” at 2-3. Based upon representations of Jan Tenbruggencate, CLDC and Applicant’s
consultant, and an analysis of the public record, Applicant understands that all of these
requirements were complied with. For example:
a. In consultation with DLNR/DOFAW, CLDC engaged a landscaping firm and
established a new shrub land of native naupaka (Scaevola taccada) on the makai western corner
of the subdivision creating more nesting habitat for wedge-tailed shearwaters.
b. At DOFAW’s request, the CLDC hired a pest control firm to conduct trapping for
feral cats. Exhibit “Q”. The Applicant has continued that contract and animal control specialists
23
are on the property daily. Exhibit “Q-1”. Applicant issued a Right-of-Entry permit to
DLNR/DOFAW to allow the State to monitor wedge-tailed shearwaters in the area. Exhibit “R”.
c. Finally, in order to avoid a potentially dangerous condition for humans, the makai
rock wall along the public access way was approved as constructed with ground-level tubes that
allow shearwaters to pass through. Exhibits “S” and “G”. However, according to Mr.
Tenbruggencate, there is no evidence the birds actually do cross it on foot, as shearwaters that
have been seen inside the wall are adults fully capable of flight.
Applicant intends to comply with all existing permitting requirements, including those
relating to construction times and any prohibitions against external upward facing and unshielded
lighting. Nonetheless, Applicant is aware that predation of Wedge-tailed shearwaters continues
along the makai portion of the subdivision largely due to the feeding of feral cats at neighboring
properties and in some part unleashed domestic dogs that walk within the open space coastal
access easement with their owners. Applicant is working cooperatively with DLNR/DOFAW
and the community to find collaborative solutions to further protect the coastal bird population.
11.5 Economic Uses. The Property will be developed for residential purposes and will
be allowed to be used as a transient vacation rental as it is within the VDA. The proposed
development will create short term economic benefits associated with the construction of the
improvements and will create more long-lasting employment opportunities associated with the
management and upkeep of a vacation rental property, if the development is used for such
purposes. Therefore, the proposed development will not have any significant adverse effect on
the economy.
11.6 Coastal Hazards. The Property is a shoreline parcel but its’ makai boundary
consists of rock cliff face and the Property itself is approximately 36 ft. above sea level. See,
24
Exhibit “C-10”. According to the Kauai shoreline change website, developed in partnership with
the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (“NOAA”) and the University of Hawaii
School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, the coastline of the Property is not
experiencing any coastal erosion. Id. The Property is within the Non-Special Flood Hazard
Zone X and all drainage will be maintained on site via an existing drainage basin. As such, no
significant risks of coastal hazards are likely.
11.7 Managing Development/Public Participation. The development is consistent with
the SMA objectives and policies concerning Managing Development and Public Participation in
that the SMA Use Permit process will provide the public with an opportunity to review the
proposed development and communicate and participate in the management of coastal resources
and hazards.
11.8 Beach Protection/Marine Resources. The development will not have any
significant adverse effect on any coastal beach processes because there are no beaches in the
vicinity, instead there is a steep, rugged and rocky cliff faced shoreline. Likewise, the
development will not significantly adversely affect any open space areas along the shoreline due
to the existing county coastal access and view easements encumbering the Property makai of the
rock-wall. There are no existing fishponds, seawalls, or revetments in the vicinity of the
Property and as such the development will not have any significant adverse effect to Beach
Protection or Marine Resources.
11.9 Value of Development. The value of the development is estimated at
$2,301,480.00 as shown in the construction estimate attached as Exhibit “J”.
11.10 Compatibility with Surrounding Uses. The Property is surrounded by properties
located in the SLUC Urban District, County Resort District, and County Residential District and
25
is the VDA. Uses on the surrounding properties include residential, resort and vacation rental
activities. The Property is similar in topography, character and nature with adjacent properties
and the development is consistent with surrounding land uses.
11.11 Significant Adverse Effect to the SMA. The development will not have any
significant adverse environmental or ecological effect to the SMA, including but not 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. The development
is and will be compatible with existing uses in areas surrounding the Property. Further, the
design, siting, and landscaping of the development will ensure that any adverse effects of the
development are minimized to the extent practical consistent with the special controls on
development within the SMA and the State policy to preserve and protect the natural resources
of the coastal zone of Hawai’i.
11.12 Compliance with SMA Guidelines. The development is consistent with the SMA
Guidelines contained in HRS § 205A-26 and Section 4.0 of the Special Management Area Rules
and Regulations of the County of Kaua’i State of Hawai’i (“SMA Rules”) as follows:
a. Adequate access, via existing public access easements, is provided to nearby
beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves.
b. Adequate and properly located public recreation areas and wildlife preserves have
been reserved.
c. Provisions have been made for solid and liquid waste treatment, disposition, and
management that will minimize adverse effects on SMA resources.
d. Because the Property is prepared for development, alterations to existing
landforms and vegetation will be very minimal, and construction will cause negligible adverse
26
effects to water resources and scenic and recreational amenities. Further, danger of floods, wind
damage, storm surge, landslides, erosion, siltation, or failure in the event of earthquake is not
expected.
e. The development is consistent with the objectives and policies of HRS Ch. 205A
and the County SMA Rules.
f. The development is consistent with the County general plan and zoning
ordinances.
g. No dredging, filing or other altering of any coastal resources will occur
whatsoever.
h. The development will not reduce the size of the coastal access easement area, nor
will the development impose any restrictions upon public access to tidal and submerged lands,
beaches, or other coastal resources.
i. The development will not substantially interfere with or detract from the line of
sight toward the sea or from existing public views to and along the shoreline.
j. The development will not significantly adversely affect water quality, or existing
and potential fisheries, wildlife habitats, or estuarine sanctuaries.
SECTION 12. HRS CH 343 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
CONSIDERATIONS.
12.1 HRS Chapter 343. HRS Ch. 343 requires the preparation of an Environmental
Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement for certain activities specified in HRS §
343-5. The development does not constitute an action for which an Environmental Assessment
and/or an Environmental Impact Statement must be prepared pursuant to HRS § 343-5.
27
SECTION 13. IMPACTS TO NATIVE HAWAIIAN TRADITIONAL AND
CUSTOMARY PRACTICES.
13.1 Existence of Traditional and Customary Practices. Under Article XII, Section 7
of the Hawaii State Constitution, the State of Hawai’i:
[R]eaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and
traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious
purposes and possessed by ahupua‘a tenants who are descendants
of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to
1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights.
For the purpose of practicing [Native Hawaiian] traditional and customary rights,
practitioners may gather anywhere that those rights have been traditionally and customarily
exercised in that manner – on land that is less than “fully developed.” David M. Forman and
Susan K. Serrano, Ho’ohana Aku, a Ho’ola Aku: A Legal Primer for Traditional and Customary
Rights in Hawaii, December 2012; citing, Public Access Shoreline Hawaii (“PASH”) v. Hawaii
County Planning Commission, 79 Haw. 425, 903 P.2d 1246. If property is deemed "fully
developed," i.e., lands zoned and used for residential purposes with existing dwellings,
improvements, and infrastructure, it is always "inconsistent" to permit the practice of traditional
and customary native Hawaiian rights on such property. State v. Hanapi, 89 Haw. 177, 970 P.2d
485.
As part of the subdivision entitlement process, CLDC commissioned the preparation of a
Cultural Impact Assessment (“CIA”) by McMahon Consulting. See, Exhibit “T”. The CIA
analyzed previous archaeological studies, the historical record and detailed consultation with
native Hawaiian practitioners and informants in an effort to identify any ongoing practice of
traditional and cultural activities and the presence of any valued cultural, historical or natural
resources within the subdivision or its vicinity. The CIA further assessed the potential impacts
that the proposed development may have on those resources.
28
In analyzing whether any valued cultural, historical, or natural resources were present
within the applicable area, the CIA found a paucity of data in the written record regarding the
presence of pre-contact settlement and historic land tenure for the Property and limited
mythological and legendary references.
However, in speaking with native Hawaiian practitioners and informants it was
determined that the coastline fronting the subdivision has been use for traditional and cultural
subsistence fishing practices from pre-historic times to today. Fish caught off of the rock cliffs
at Makahuena include: awa (milkfish), ‘o’io (bone fish), he’e (octopus), ula (spiny lobster), akule
(big-eye scad), and moi (thread fish). Ha’uke’uke (sea urchin) and ‘opihi (limpet) are also
gathered from the rocky cliffs along the coastline. According to cultural informants, at one point
in time there were small salt beds in the area, but no salt pans were located during an
archaeological inventory by Haun et al in 2011. Exhibit “T” at 12. No further cultural, historical,
or natural resources were identified in the area.
All traditional and customary practices and all valued cultural, and natural resources in
the area involve subsistence fishing and gathering within the open space access easement makai
of the subdivision’s rock wall. As this area is protected and preserved in perpetuity, the
development of Lot 3 will not affect or impair these continued practices whatsoever.
No traditional and customary practices were identified on the Property in the area mauka
of the rock wall. The construction plans for the subdivision improvements were approved by all
governmental regulatory agencies in 2015. A final inspection of the subdivision improvements
was conducted on August 8, 2017, and the County Engineer certified that the construction was
complete and acceptable on December 4, 2017. As such, the Property is deemed fully
developed. State v. Hanapi, 89 Haw. 177, 970 P.2d 485. Given the tenets of the law regarding
practice of Native Hawaiian customary and traditional rights on ''fully developed" lands, the
development will not affect any Native Hawaiian customary and traditional rights protected
under Article XII, Section 7 of the Hawai'i State Constitution.
SECTION 14. CONCLUSION.
Applicant respectfully requests the Planning Department and the Planning Commission:
1. Find that the development will not have any substantial 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.
2. Find that the development is consistent with the objectives, policies, and
guidelines set forth in HRS Ch. 205A and Sections 3.0 and 4.0 of the SMA Rules.
3. Find that the development is consistent with permitted uses in the SLUC Urban
District, the Kauai General Plan, the South Kauai Community Plan, and the CZO.
4. Approve the issuance of a SMA Use Permit and a Class III Zoning Permit for the
development on the Property as described herein, subject to such reasonable conditions as the
Planning Department and Planning Commission shall impose.
DATED: Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii, February J..P., 2022.
CADES SCHUTTE LLP
Attorneys for Applicants
MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA -CAPITAL A, LLC;
MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA-CAPITAL B, LLC;
MAKAHUENA -TW, LLC; and
MAKAHUENA -DW, LLC
29
EXHIBIT LIST
Exhibit Exhibit Description
A Applicant Authorization
B Deed
C-1 Lot 3 Tax Map
C-2 Lot 3 State Land Use District Map
C-3 Kauai County General Plan Land Use Designation Map
C-4 Zoning Map ZM-PO 300
C-5 South Kauai Community Plan Land Use Map
C-6 Lot 3 Special Management Area Map
C-7 County Constraint District Map
C-8 Kauai County General Plan South Kauai Heritage Resource Map
C-9 Lot 3 Flood Hazard Assessment Report
C-10 Shoreline Certification and Topography map
C-11 Grant of Pedestrian Access and Parking Easements
C-12 Ordinance No. PM-2017-410
C-13 Natural Resource Conservation Services (NRCS) Lot 3 Soil Survey Map
D SMA (U) 2015-1
E Z-III-2015-1
F S-2015-14
G Certification of Completion Makahuena Point Subdivision
G-1 Final Approved Subdivision Map S-2015-14
H Lot 3 House Plans
2
I Lot 3 Landscape Plans
J Lot 3 Construction Estimate
K Lot 3 Photo Exhibit
L Archaeological Inventory Survey
M Approved Construction Plans for Makahuena Subdivision
N Individual Wastewater System (IWS) Report - Makahuena Subdivision
O-1 Air Quality Assessment
O-2 Geological Investigation
O-3 Biological Survey
O-4 Visual Analysis Public Views
O-5 Visual Analysis Private Views
O-6 View Impact of Lot 3 development
P Preliminary Engineering Report
Q Previous Kani Wildlife Contract
Q-1 Existing Kani Wildlife Contract
R Right-of-Entry with DLNR/DOFAW
S May 9, 2016 Status Report to Planning Department
T Cultural Impact Assessment
6206182.v4
EXHIBIT A
October _, 2021
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Cades Schutte LLLP is authorized on behalf of: (i) (a) MAKAHUENA-PREFERRED
A, LLC, a Hawaii limited liability company; and (b) MAKAHUENA -CAP IT AL A, LLC, a
Hawaii limited liability company, both of whose mailing address is 3214 N. University Ave.,
#104, Provo, Utah 84604; and (ii) (a) MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED B, LLC, a Hawaii
limited liability company, (b) MAKAHUENA-CAPITAL B, LLC, a Hawaii limited liability
company, (c) MAKAHUENA-TW, LLC, a Hawaii limited liability company, and (d)
MAKAHUENA -OW, LLC, a Hawaii limited liability company; collectively the owners of the
property located at Pe'e Rd. and Maka Rd., Koloa, HI 96756, identified as TMK No. (4)
2-8-021:070), in submitting any and all permit assessments, determination requests, and/or
permit applications to the various departments and agencies of the State of Hawaii and the
County of Kaua' i relative to the above referenced property.
MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED A, LLC,
a Hawaii limited liability company
By: ak Tanner Weekes
Its Manager
MAKAHUENA -CAPITAL A, LLC,
a Hawaii limited liability company
By: Udl Tanner Weekes
Its Manager
MAKAHUENA -PREFERRED B, LLC,
a Hawaii limited liability company
By: -=-/2�£(' __ _
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C-1
Developed by
Parcel
ID
280210700000
Acreage 1.001
Class RESIDENTIAL
Situs/Physical
Address
PEE RD
Mailing Address MAKAHUENA-PREFERRED A LLC
111 E BROADWAY STE 100
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
Total Market Value $1,450,400
Total Assessed Value $1,450,400
Total Exemptions $0
Total Net Taxable
Value
$1,450,400
Last 2 Sales
Date Price Reason
n/a 0 n/a
n/a 0 n/a
Brief Tax Description LOT 3 POR GR 1416 FP 354 MAKAHUENA TRACT 1.001 AC DES
(Note: Not to be used on legal documents)
The Geographic Information Systems (GIS) maps and data are made available solely for informational purposes. The GIS data is not the official representation of any of the
information included, and do not replace a site survey or legal document descriptions. The County of Kauai (County) makes or extends no claims, representations or warranties of any
kind, either express or implied, inluding, without limitation, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, as to the quality, content, accuracy, currency,
or completeness of the information, text, maps, graphics, links and other items contained in any of the GIS data. In no event shall the County become liable for any errors or omissions
in the GIS, and will not under any circumstances be liable for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential, or other loss, injury or damage caused by its use or otherwise
arising in connection with its use, even if specifically advised of the possibility of such loss, injury or damage. The data and or functionality on this site may change periodically and
without notice. In using the GIS data, users agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the County for any and all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of
accuracy or correctness of the data, or the use of the data.
Date created: 9/29/2021
Last Data Uploaded: 9/29/2021 7:08:13 AM
590 ft
Overview
Legend
Parcels
Roads
EXHIBIT C-1
EXHIBIT C-2
+DZDLL6/8'/RFDWRU6RXUFHV (VUL +(5( *DUPLQ 86*6 ,QWHUPDS ,1&5(0(17 3 15&DQ70.3DUFHOV6WDWH/DQG8VH'LVWULFWV&RQVHUYDWLRQ8UEDQ6HSWHPEHUPLNP EXHIBIT C-2
EXHIBIT C-3
5.2 FUTURE LAND USE MAPS| 5.0 POLICY MAPS 235Figure 5-4 South Kaua‘i Land Use Map5.2 FUTURE LAND USEMAPS|5.0 POLICYMYAPS 235KKKƃƃƃoaoloaPoPo॒॒ppppipƻƻKKauummuuali॒॒iHHwwyyKaKalĈĈheoheo॒Q॒Qmama॒॒ooKukui‘ulaKukui‘ulaLLLĈĈĈ‘wawa‘wa‘iWaita ReservoirWaita ReservoirKalawai ParkKalawai ParkPo‘ipPo‘ipƻƻBeachPark Beach ParkMauhia RdMaluhia RdAA la KKKK inn oo ikk i RR dd
॒॒QQQQ mm a॒ooooRRRddddPapPaapPPapĈlina Rdlina RdLLĈĈwwa‘iRRdd0120.5MilesN1 in = 1 milesReservoirsNaturalAgriculturalAgricultural (IAL)Major RoadsPlanning District BoundaryRoadsStreamsSmall TownParks and RecreationHomesteadLarge TownGolf CourseNeighborhood GeneralResidential CommunityNeighborhood CenterResortIndustrialTransportationProvisional AgricultureAgricultureAgriculture (IAL)ONLINE VERSIONONLINEONLINE VERSIONVERSIONEXHIBIT C-3
EXHIBIT C-4
EXHIBIT C-4
EXHIBIT C-5
-EXHIBIT C-5
EXHIBIT C-6
+DZDLL60$/RFDWRU6RXUFHV (VUL +(5( *DUPLQ 86*6 ,QWHUPDS ,1&5(0(17 3 15&DQ70.1HLJKERU,VODQGV6SHFLDO0DQDJHPHQW$UHD 60$ 6HSWHPEHUPLNP EXHIBIT C-6
EXHIBIT C-7
EXHIBIT C-7
EXHIBIT C-8
5.3 HERITAGE RESOURCE MAPS | 5.0 POLICY MAPS 247
Weliweli MĈhĈঘulepƻ
LĈwaঘi
Kal Ĉheo
PĈঘĈ
Kƃloa
e Halewili RdK a umuali॒iHwyKalĈheo
Kalawai Park
LĈwa‘i
‘Qma‘o
Kƃloa
Po‘ipƻ
Po‘ipƻ Beach Park Al
aKi
noi
kiRdWaita Reservoir
Maluhia RdKukui‘ula
PapĈlina
RdFigure 5-11 South Kaua‘i Heritage Resource Map
Registered Historic Sites
State"J
National"J
State & National"J
Cultural Features
Priority Public Access Points#*
Ahupua॒a Boundaries
Wetlands
Coral Reefs
State & County Parks
Preserves
Planning District Boundary
Fish Ponds$ò
Kƃloa Scenic Byway
Trails
Regulated Fishing Areas
Major Roads
Streams & Waterbodies
Roads
Reservoirs
Traditional Cultivation Areas
Open Space Acquisition Priorities
Critical Habitat
Threatened & Endangered Species
High Density
Very High Density
Sand Dunes
N
01.530.75
Miles
1 in = 2 miles
ONLINE VERSIONONLINE VERSION
ONLINE VERSION
EXHIBIT C-8
EXHIBIT C-9
Flood Hazard Assessment Report
Disclaimer: The Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) assumes no responsibility arising from
the use, accuracy, completeness, and Ɵmeliness of any informaƟon contained in this report. Viewers/Users are
responsible for verifying the accuracy of the informaƟon and agree to indemnify the DLNR, its oĸcers, and employ-
ees from any liability which may arise from its use of its data or informaƟon.
If this map has been idenƟĮed as 'PRELIMINARY', please note that it is being provided for informaƟonal purposes
and is not to be used for Ňood insurance raƟng. Contact your county Ňoodplain manager for Ňood zone determina-
Ɵons to be used for compliance with local Ňoodplain management regulaƟons.
Property InformaƟon
COUNTY:
FIRM INDEX DATE:
THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN A TSUNAMI EVACUTION ZONE:
FOR MORE INFO, VISIT: hƩp://www.scd.hawaii.gov/
THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN A DAM EVACUATION ZONE:
FOR MORE INFO, VISIT: http://dlnreng.hawaii.gov/dam/
Flood Hazard InformaƟon
SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS (SFHAs) SUBJECT TO INUNDATION BY
THE 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD - The 1% annual chance Ňood (100-
year), also know as the base Ňood, is the Ňood that has a 1% chance of
being equaled or exceeded in any given year. SFHAs include Zone A, AE,
AH, AO, V, and VE. The Base Flood ElevaƟon (BFE) is the water surface
elevaƟon of the 1% annual chance Ňood. Mandatory Ňood insurance
purchase applies in these zones:
Zone A: No BFE determined.
Zone AE: BFE determined.
Zone AH: Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding);
BFE determined.
Zone AO: Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually sheet Ňow on
sloping terrain); average depths determined.
Zone V: Coastal Ňood zone with velocity hazard (wave acƟon);
no BFE determined.
Zone VE: Coastal Ňood zone with velocity hazard (wave acƟon);
BFE determined.
Zone AEF: Floodway areas in Zone AE. The Ňoodway is the
channel of stream plus any adjacent Ňoodplain areas that must
be kept free of encroachment so that the 1% annual chance
Ňood can be carried without increasing the BFE.
NON-SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA - An area in a low-to-moderate risk
Ňood zone. No mandatory Ňood insurance purchase requirements apply,
but coverage is available in parƟcipaƟng communiƟes.
Zone XS (X shaded): Areas of 0.2% annual chance Ňood; areas of
1% annual chance Ňood with average depths of less than 1 foot
or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas
protected by levees from 1% annual chance Ňood.
Zone X: Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance
Ňoodplain.
OTHER FLOOD AREAS
Zone D: Unstudied areas where Ňood hazards are undeter-
mined, but Ňooding is possible. No mandatory Ňood insurance
purchase apply, but coverage is available in parƟcipaƟng commu-
niƟes.
FLOOD HAZARD ASSESSMENT TOOL LAYER LEGEND
(Note: legend does not correspond with NFHL)
www.hawaiinfip.org
Notes:
BASEMAP: FIRM BASEMAP
0 400 800 ft
KAUAI
TMK NO:(4) 2-8-021:070
WATERSHED:MAHAULEPU
PARCEL ADDRESS:ADDRESS NOT DETERMINED
KOLOA, HI 96756
FEBRUARY 26, 2021
LETTER OF MAP CHANGE(S):16-09-0378A, 16-09-0391A, 19-09-1672A
FEMA FIRM PANEL:1500020352F
PANEL EFFECTIVE DATE:NOVEMBER 26, 2010
YES
NO
EXHIBIT C-9
Case No.: 16-09-0378ADate: November 12, 2015 LOMR-VZ
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Washington, D.C. 20472
Page 1 of 5
COMMUNITY AND MAP PANEL INFORMATION LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
COMMUNITY
AFFECTED
MAP PANEL
NUMBER: 1500020352F
DATE: 11/26/2010
FLOODING SOURCE: PACIFIC OCEAN
KAUAI COUNTY, HAWAII
(Unincorporated Areas)
Lots 45 through 47, 58 through 61 and a portion of Parcel L-3,
Makahuena Tract, as described in the Quitclaim Deed recorded as
Document No. 96-068054, in the Office of the Bureau of
Conveyances, Kauai County, Hawaii
The portion of property is more particularly described by the following
metes and bounds:COMMUNITY NO.: 150002
DATUM: NAD 83
APPROXIMATE LATITUDE & LONGITUDE OF PROPERTY: 21.870, -159.443
SOURCE OF LAT & LONG: GOOGLE EARTH PRO
LETTER OF MAP REVISION – COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA
DETERMINATION DOCUMENT (REMOVAL)
DETERMINATION
STREET FLOOD
ZONE
LOWEST
LOT
ELEVATION
(LTD)
BLOCK/
SECTION
SUBDIVISIONLOT
OUTCOME 1% ANNUAL
CHANCE
FLOOD
ELEVATION
(LTD)
LOWEST
ADJACENT
GRADE
ELEVATION
(LTD)
WHAT IS
REMOVED FROM
THE SFHA
L-3 10.0 to 24.0
feet
--10.0 to 24.0
feet
X
(shaded)
Portion of
Property
--Makahuena
Tract
--
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) - The SFHA is an area that would be inundated by the flood having a 1-percent chance of being
equaled or exceeded in any given year (base flood).
ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS (Please refer to the appropriate section on Attachment 1 for the additional considerations listed below.)
LEGAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
ZONE V
PORTIONS REMAIN IN THE SFHA
This determination is based on the flood data presently available. The enclosed documents provide additional information regarding this
determination. If you have any questions about this document, please contact the FEMA Map Assistance Center toll free at (877) 336-2627
(877-FEMA MAP) or by letter addressed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, LOMC Clearinghouse, 847 South Pickett Street,
Alexan