Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSept282017KHPRCaendapacketreducedMEETING OF THE KAUA'I COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2017 3:00 p.m. (or soon thereafter) Llhu'e Civic Center, Moikeha Building RFCEIVED MEETING ROOM #2A/2B 4444 Rice Street, L1hu'e, Kaua'i *17 SEP 19 P 3 :50 A (TFMn A A. CALL TO ORDER e B. ROLL CALL C. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA D. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 27, 2017 MINUTES E. HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT - Individuals may orally testify on items on this agenda during the Public Comment Period. Please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting or notify Commission Staff at the meeting site. Testimony shall also be accepted when the agenda item is taken up by the Commission. However if an individual has already testified during this period, additional testimony at the agenda item testimony may be allowed at the discretion of the Chair. Testifiers shall limit their testimony to three (3) minutes, but may be extended longer at the discretion of the Chair. Written testimony is also accepted. An original and twelve (12) copies of written testimony can be hand delivered to the Planning Department or submitted to Commission Staff at the meeting site. F. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS G. COMMUNICATIONS H. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Discussion on the status of the Certified Local Government. I. NEW BUSINESS 1. Kapaia Swinging Bridge Rebuild TMK: 3-7-004:009 and 37-001:001 Laukini Road, Kapaia, Kauai 2. Gulick Rowell Mission House 9567 Huakai Road, TMK: 1-2-06:34, Waimea, Kauai Replacement of temporary shingle roof that was installed in 1994 with plywood barrier and metal roof. a. Letter (9/11/17) to Jim Ballantine from Alan S. Downer, PhD, Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division. September 28, 2017 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Agenda Page 2 Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Project Federal -Aid Project No. STP-0545(002) TMK: (4)1-8-08, (4)1-9-03, (4)1-9-04, (4)1-9-05, (4)1-9-11 County of Kauai, Department of Public Works National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Consultation. 4. Hanapepe Road Bridge National Register of Historic Places Nomination. Kress Building TMK: 3-6-007:031, Lihu`e, Kauai Renovation and Repairs. COMMISSION EDUCATION COMMITTEE Kauai Modern! Presented by Historic Hawaii Foundation & Docomoco US Hawaii Chapter. K. KAUAI HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORY UPDATE COMMITTEE L. HISTORIC PRESERVATION PUBLICITY COMMITTEE M. HANAPEPE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT COMMITTEE N. DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS (October 26, 2017) O. ADJOURNMENT EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Commission may go into an executive session on an agenda item for one of the permitted purposes listed in Section 92-5(a) Hawaii Revised Statutes ("H.R.S."), without noticing the executive session on the agenda where the executive session was not anticipated in advance. HRS Section 92-7(a). The executive session may only be held, however, upon an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members present, which must also be the majority of the members to which the board is entitled. HRS Section 92-4. The reason for holding the executive session shall be publicly announced. Note: Special accommodations and sign language interpreters are available upon request five (5) days prior to the meeting date, to the County Planning Department, 4444 Rice Street, Suite 473, Lihue, Hawaii 96766. Telephone: 241-4050. j KAUA'I COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B MINUTES A regular meeting of the Kauai County Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission (KHPRC) was held on July 27, 2017 in the Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/213. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Victoria Wickman; Vice -Chair Deatri Nakea; Althea Arinaga; Larry Chaffin Jr.; James Guerber; and Anne Schneider. The following Commissioners were absent: Gerald Ida (excused); Stephen Long (excused) The following staff members were present: Planning Department — Myles Hironaka; Deputy Planning Director Ka`aina Hull, Shanlee Jimenez; Office of the County Attorney — Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi- Sayegusa; Boards and Commissions Office Staff --- Administrator Paula Morikami, Commission Support Clerk Sandra Muragin. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:01 p.m. ROLL CALL Deputy Planning Director Ka`dina Hull: Good afternoon Chair, members of the Commission. First order of the agenda is roll call. Commissioner Arinaga. Ms. Arinaga: Present. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Chaffin. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Griffin; excuse me ... old list. Commissioner Long is excused. Commissioner Nakea. Ms. Nakea: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Schneider. Ms. Schneider: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ida is also excused. Commissioner Guerber. Mr. Guerber: Here. Mr. Hull: Chair Wichman, Chair Wichman: Here. Mr. Hull: You have a quorum Madame Chair. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is approval of the agenda. Chair Wichman: Everybody has had a chance to look at the agenda? Can I get a movement [sic]? Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we approve the agenda. Ms. Nakea.: Second. Chair Wichman: Any discussion? (None) Deatri or Anne? Any discussion? (None) All those in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) The agenda is approved. Motion carried 6:0. APPROVAL OF THE DUNE 22,.2017 MINUTES Mr. Hull: Next on the agenda is approval of the June 22, 2017 KHPRC minutes. Mr. Guerber: I move that we approve. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion to second. Chair Wichman: We have a motion and second. Commissioner Guerber and Commissioner Schneider made the second. Any discussion? (None) Time for a vote so all those in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) So moved, thank you. Motion carried 6:0. HEARINGS .AND PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Hull: This agenda item is for those members of the public that would like to testify on any of the agenda items if you so desire at this time. The Chair does allow for testimony to occur at the specific agenda item as well. If there is any members of the public that would like to testify in the beginning, now is the time to do so. Seeing none. July 27, 2017 KIWRC Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 29 ANNOUNCEMENTS AND GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS Mr. Hull: The Department has none at this time. COMMUNICATIONS 1. Letter (6/26/17) from Molly Ka'imi Summers, Hawaiian Studies, Kauai Community College requesting a letter support in support of the Pila Kikuchi Center, a center in which Pila's significant papers, documents, archaeological findings, and research materials will be housed and cared for, and made available as a resource for students, faculty, scholars, and community members. Mr. Hull: Second is the communications. If the Commission wants, the Department can read the letter for the record. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Is there a cost associated with it that would reflect on us? Mr. Hull: The request is strictly for a letter of support. They are doing fund raising efforts, but the request for this body is for a letter of support. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we send a letter of support for this application. Ms. Nakea.: I second. Mr. Hull: On that note the Department would open it up to see if there is any individual Commission member that would like to take on the responsibility of drafting that. The only reason I'm offering that is because I know some of you may be familiar with Pila (Kikuchi), he was a former KHPRC member. The Department can also draft that as well and provide it for you at the next meeting. I just wanted to open it up in case anybody in particular wanted to spearhead those efforts. Chair Wichman: Any volunteers? Ms. Schneider: I'll volunteer if you really need someone. I remember Pila. Mr. Hull: No, it was only if you really wanted to, but the Department would have no problem doing it on our own as well. Chair Wichman: Is there someone from the audience that wanted to speak on this? Okay, thank you. So we've had a motion to accept the support for the letter for Pila Kikuchi for the new center, the Pila Kikuchi Center. All those in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) So move. Motion carried 6:0. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 29 UNFMSHED BUSINESS 1. Discussion on the status of the Certified Local Government (CLG). Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is the discussion on the status of the Certified Local Government. The Department is trans ... well, as can be seen there is no individual from State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) here today and it has been previously stated the Department doesn't anticipate any further attendance in the near future just given the lack of resources that department has. At the last meeting the Commission did take action to send a letter to SHPD to officially request their presence to discuss the CLG program in the future, and so we will be transmitting that letter shortly. On a side note, for the Certified Local Government program itself, I can state that last year the KHPRC did take action to apply for CLG funds for the nomination of the historic Hanapepe Bridge to the State and National Regis.... excuse me, just the State Register. The Department was awarded that CLG grant about 3-months ago, so we've gone through the process of doing the paperwork and the final stages of procurement to award that contract. Given the CLG's strict timeline the project has to be complete by September 30th. We anticipate hopefully securing the contract within the next few weeks so that the contract will have about a month to get the paperwork together and then submit it to the State Historic Preservation Review Commission. It's something this Commission has eagerly watched and members of the public from Hanapepd have been very proud to be a part of. We can say that it's almost at the finish line, but not quite there yet and this is an update. Lastly an announcement. The Department has been discussing with the body for a couple years now the desire to have an on staff person for you, to provide further guidance above and beyond me and Myles (Hironaka) fumbling. We did go out, as many of you are aware, for a position specifically for a preservation planner and ultimately, did not receive any qualified applicants after being out on publication for approximately a year. Subsequent to that we have hired another individual within the Departments Long Range Division and that individual is also going to be part-time staffing this Commission. He will be your resource for guidance into the applications as they come before you. In the other commissions of the Planning Department services you have the Open Space Commission and the Planning Commission. Each of those commissions have a dedicated staff to them. You have been the last Commission that the Department serves that does not have a dedicated staff, but now we've got one. Our intent is, essentially if you look at your agenda item today, the way it's been operating since its inception was there's an agenda item, you have the proposal from the applicant before you, and discussion happens. Essentially with this body and quite frankly we rely on sometimes State Historic Preservation Division staff or expertise of Commissioners themselves to guide the discussion. Now that we have a dedicated staff member, we intend to have a report generated from the Department on each one of these applications that will do a historic preservation analysis. It will essentially help you. The Department does acknowledge that we are kind of untethered out here, we sometimes go into deep space 9. Essentially the way Planning Commission has a staff report for every single project that comes before it, you now and not necessarily the next meeting, we're working with this individual to get the program together for your reports. In the next few meetings we do anticipate all the agenda items having a staff report, with ultimately recommendations to you. You will have the final say in the action this body takes, but the staff reports will work as a measure to guide the discussions and keep in line with historic preservation. Without further ado, I just want to introduce you to Alex Wong, who is sitting with July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 29 Marie Williams. Alex if you want to come up. Alex is our newest member within the Long Range Division. He's been with the department for about a year working within our Special Management Area program. He has since transferred over to the Long Range Division for which part of his duties and responsibilities will be servicing this Commission. Alex, I don't know if you have a few words. Planning Department Alex Wong: Aloha mai kakou. My name is Alex Wong. As Ka`dina said I did start out in regulatory. My main responsibilities included going over permit applications that were in SMA (Special Management Area) and coastal areas. I think having that background was a good primer to coming to this current job doing historic in addition to long range planning. If you'd like I could give a little bit of information about my academic background. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Briefly. Mr. Wong: I was a double major at UC (University of California) Berkeley and graduated in 2010. One degree was in political economics, same as Deputy Director, and my second degree was in anthropology with a focus on bioarcheology. I must admit I'm not well versed in historical architecture, but if it comes to bones and human remains especially in the forensic context that's where my specialty is. However, I'm also currently working on a master's degree in GIS Geographic Information Systems and my first foray into that field was through archaeology. I worked as an archaeological technician for the forest service in eastern Nevada in a little town called Ely. That was my first introduction to National Register standards and requirements. I do have introductory level experience in terms of dealing with things that can be nominated for the National Register through that job. Chair Wichman: Thank you. Sounds like you have a lot more experience than you're admitting. Mr. Wong: Are there any other questions I can answer about myself. Chair Wichman: Any questions? (None) Welcome onboard, we're happy to have you. Mr. Wong: I'll try and work on a template with Ka`aina and Myles so that we can get a system going for how we go about the recommendations. Chair Wichman: That would be very useful for our Commission. I appreciate that, thank you. Mr. Wong: Aloha. Mr. Hull: The last issue on the Certified Local Government. At the last meeting there were a couple documents that were requested, two meetings before. One of them was the Historic Preservation Review Commission roster with specific and areas of expertise each individual sits or capacity sits in, so you have that before you today. The other information that was requested, I'll circulate this a little bit later on the agenda, was a list of training and seminars. We will circulate that during the PIG (Permitted Interaction Group) educational committee section. The last one requested was a book for preservation that each Commissioner could work specifically off of. The Department is still trying to essentially create that book and we haven't come across July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 29 one book that just is the bible so to speak that everyone can refer to. There are an array of different things, when it comes to the fact that you have not just the Kauai County Code that formulates this body and gives you design review standards, but you also have HRS 6E which has their components as the National Preservation Act and the Secretary of Interior Standards. Within that you have all these different design criteria's for roofs, for windows, for an array of different things. When you have your orientation there's a large binder we give you that has multiple resources in it and the Department understands and is sympathetic to the fact that it's a lot of information and we're trying to see if we can synthesis it down to something a little more simplistic that is a little more accessible, readily accessible. We won't have it at the next meeting but we do anticipate myself, Alex and hopefully working a little bit more with SHPD on getting some type of package together for you that is easier and readily accessible. That's where that stands and that would be all for the discussion of CLG. Chair Wichman: Thank you Ka'aina. NEW BUSINESS 1. National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106 Consultation Kuhio Highway Resurfacing, Kapuna Road to Wailapa Road Hanalei District, Island of Kauai, Ahupuaa of Waiakalua, Pila`a and Waipake, Project No. 56C-02-15M Tax Map Keys: (4)5-1-002, 004, 005, and 006 Chair Wichman: Do we have someone from the public to present? Mr. Hull: My apologies, the note that was just given to me was that Larry Dill from DOT (Department of Transportation) is running a bit late. If we could perhaps.... Chair Wichman: Is he still here? Unidentified Speaker: He went to the car, he'll be right in. Mr. Hull: I guess we could table this. Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi- Sayegusa: Just move it to the end of the agenda or directly after Kapaia Bridge. Technically we need a motion and a second. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: I'll make that motion. Chair Wichman: There's a motion to move I.1. to the end of New Business. Ms. Arinag_a: I'll second. Chair Wichman: Second by Commissioner Arinaga. Any discussion? (None) He's here right now and we haven't voted on this. There's a motion on the floor. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 29 Mr. Hull: Withdraw the motion. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: I'll withdraw that motion. Ms. Higuchi- Sayegusa: Withdraw the second. Ms. Arinaga: I'll withdraw the second. Chair Wichman: Ms. Arinaga withdrew her second. Welcome Mr. Dill. Unidentified Speaker: Thank you, good to be here. Mr. Hull: So Larry, since you walked in the door the agenda item, the bulk of DOT discussion, is going to focus on the Kapaia Bridge replacement. But you also have a request for input from KHPRC concerning the Section 106 consultation for the P1Ia`a and Waipake Road resurfacing project. De artment of Transportation Lara Dill: Correct. I didn't prepare to speak myself to speak on these projects and saw them on the agenda as I was getting ready for the other. I can describe to you, this project is one of our very standard resurfacing projects. We go in, mill out the top inch and a half of the existing asphalt and we replace it. All the work happens within the right-of- way. We'll go in and mill out the top surface of the asphalt; we put it back with a new asphalt course on top of that; replace the pavement markings; put in rumble strips; and clean the drains and replace signs that need to be replaced. This is a pretty standard run of the mill project for us. Everything happens within the existing right-of-way, within the area that has already been disturbed. We come to solicit your input for these projects as part of our process. Ms. Schneider: It needs to be done, I just drove over there. Mr. Dill: It needs to be done, I agree. Chair Wichman: And there will be no widening of the road, it's just completely the exact same track, right? Mr. Dill: Correct. Chair Wichman: Did you have a presentation for this? Mr. Dill: Not for this one. That was my presentation. Chair Wichman: Oh, okay. Mr. Hull: For the Commission's own edification DOT is required to come before you on the (Section) 106 process because the project has federal funds attached to it. Essentially what they're doing is resurfacing the existing roadway, not expanding beyond it. In their consultation research work process they have not found any historic or archaeological sites within the existing July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 29 paved area. The question that remains before you as Commissioners, are you aware of any archaeological or historical sites that since their previous work in this road area have been found? The Department is not aware of any but it's part of the consultation process. Ms. Schneider: It's just within the Waipake subdivision, there was, but they're not going outside of the road. Mr. Guerber: So let me move that we approve this. Chair Wichman: Commissioner Guerber has moved that we receive. Ms. Higuchi- Saye usa: It was approved but it could just be a receiving unless you have any comments or anything else to contribute to the project. Mr. Guerber: Receive or approve, I'll move that we do one of those. Ms. Schneider: I'll second. Ms. Higuchi- Sayegusa: So maybe just clarify.... Mr. Guerber: Receive. Chair Wichman: We have a receive from Commissioner Guerber and a second from Commissioner Schneider. Any discussion? (None) All those in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) So moved. Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Dill: Thank you. I would point out that our last paragraph says that we would appreciate a written response. If you can get us one for our file that would be terrific to close the loop on this. Thank you. 2. Kuhi6 Highway, Replacement of Hanama`ulu (Kapaia) Stream Bridge Federal -Aid Project No. BR-056-1(48) Continuation of the consultation process pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (2006). Mr. Hull: The applicant is again Larry Dill and I believe they have a presentation. Mr. Dill: Yes I do. Good afternoon Commissioners, again thank you for your time. My name again is Larry Dill, for the record I'm the District Engineer of the Kauai District State Highways of the Hawaii Department of Transportation. Also with me today are consultants from Cultural Surveys Hawaii and Wilson Okamoto (Corporation). If there's any technical questions that I need their assistance they're here and available to answer any questions you may have. We were here before you in 2015. I think at the time our project was at a very early stage and we were basically introducing you to the project. We're back here now with the request of the July 27, 2017 KE PRC Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 29 Commission as part of the (Section) 106 process to give you an update and tell you about where we are with the project. Mr. Dill presented a power point presentation to the Commission. In a nutshell the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation is proposing to replace the existing Kapaia Bridge in Kapaia, in Hanama`ulu. The bridge is located on KM-i6 Highway in the Kapaia, Hanama`ulu area. According to the Hawaii State Historic Bridge Inventory & Evaluation, which was completed in November 2013, the bridge is eligible but not listed on the National or Hawaii Register's. The bridge does perform an important transportation link to and from the greater Lihu`e region carrying approximately 17,000 vehicles per day. Here's our location map to show you where that bridge is down in the valley. It expands Kapaia Stream down there under Kuhi6 Highway as the highway curves and you can see the curve in the highway. A little background. We did have a community meeting back in July of 2015 to review and discuss some design alternatives and made an initial presentation to this body at its August 6, 2015 meeting. As I mentioned we probably gave some general information. You may recall a fellow with a strong Kentucky accent, Mr. John Smith. He gave the presentation and he is now employed out of our Hawaii district office on the Big Island, still serving the DOT but over there at the other end of the island chain. At that time my understanding is the Commission requested the DOT return at a future date as more information on the project becomes available and here we are today. Also there was some early consultation done for the draft EA (Environmental Assessment) and that was done in late 2016. The draft EA was prepared following a public review and comment period at a second community meeting held in February, earlier this year. We published the final Environmental Assessment in April 23, 2017 incorporating all the comments that we received from the (inaudible) the draft Environmental Assessment. The Section 106 process is referred to earlier as relating to the National Historic Preservation Act is still in progress and for that reason we are today here seeking input from the KHPRC regarding the bridge project based on the updated information we have to present to you today. The existing bridge that's out there, the Kapaia Bridge is a three -span concrete bridge constructed in 1933. The bridge is approximately 30 feet wide and it's about 157 feet long as the alignment curves over the Hanama`ulu River and it's also referred to as Kapaia Stream. I'm not sure actually what the correct terminology is. As you're driving towards Hanamd'ulu, Kuhi6 Highway rises approximately 30 feet from the Maalo Road intersection to the Kapaia Road intersection as you cross the bridge. The existing bridge has two 11 foot lanes and there are narrow shoulders of about 2-1/2 feet on each side of the 11 foot lanes currently. Again, the existing bridge has parapet walls that are curved as they follow the alignment and they're paneled with a sloped cap. The concrete piers that support the bridge, they are also paneled and you're probably aware that there's a county water main attached to the makai. side of the bridge and a county sewer main attached to the mauka side of the bridge. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: I have a question on those two lines. Are they clearly marked so that someone doesn't get confused between the sewer and the water? July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 29 Mr. Dill: To the layman I don't believe they are. But the folks who own and maintain those, the County Waste Water Division of Public Works and the County Water Department are very familiar with those and they won't have a problem identifying which is which. To a layman, I don't think a layman would know the difference. I don't really see that as an issue. When you get to the pictures and you're probably aware these things are hanging on the side of the bridge, so they're elevated up in the air. The ordinary person would have no reason to ever go near or try to do any work on those things. It's only going to be what I refer to as the experts that are going to be going near those and they know. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: They know, hopefully. Mr. Dill: The interior spans are supported by pier walls on spread footings and I have some pictures and I'll show you what that is all about. The abutments are supported on concrete piles. So this is a typical section of the existing bridge configuration. Again there are two 11 foot lanes and about a 2-1/2 foot shoulder and another 1-1/2 on each side which allows for those parapet walls. You can see the highway is super elevated through this stretch, which means instead of our typical crown cross section the whole thing is tilted to one side because of the curve that I referred to early to help accommodate the traffic going through that section of the highway. It shows on either side the 2 foot diameter existing water main on the right, 2 foot diameter existing sanitary sewer on the left side. This is actually a portion of the old bridge plans, so I can point out some of the things I was talking about. Here are the piers 1 and 2, and here's sort of an elevation view of the two piers. This is the paneling I was talking about in each of those piers and these are each sitting on what we refer to as a spread footing. Just kind of sits on the ground and spreads out the load underneath, compacted soil underneath. The bridge is also supported on either end by abutments, there's one here and one here and again, in perspective view, here's an abutment and here's an abutment. They are supported on these which are called piles that get driven down into the ground. There's seven at either end. There's abutments on piles at either end and a pier sitting on a spread footing, two of them within the bridge. So that's the existing Kapaia Bridge and this picture showing the same thing. You can see the existing piers with the panels. You can also see in here running along the side, the existing, and I can't remember if that's the water or the sewer main, but this is the makai side of bridge. This is from different views showing the same side of the bridge and then showing the utility line, water or sewer main, running along the side. You see a little bit of the piers right here. You can make out on this side the paneling that exist on the existing parapet wall on that side, matched on the other side. Another view of the bridge. This shows you how narrow the shoulders are here, 2-112 feet and I'll get into this little more later but not many provisions here for safe accommodations for bicycles or pedestrians. Purpose and need for the project. Whenever we identify a proj ect and its going to be federally funded we want to start by identifying what is the purpose and need for this project. For Kapaia Bridge there are structural concerns and the bridge is functionally obsolete. Elaborating a little bit on that, based on bridge inspections because we're required to inspect our bridges at a minimum bi-annually, every 2-years, based on those inspections there's concerns about the integrity of the structure. The bridge is showing signs of age and deterioration that comes in the form of cracks on the bridge and of spalling, which is portions of the concrete coming loose and falling away and it can often expose the'rebar underneath. The rebar becomes exposed and it July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 29 begins to corrode and deteriorate and loses its strength. The bridge is showing signs of those things. According to the National Bridge Inspection Standards they rate the bridge a 4 on a scale of 0 to 9, 9 being excellent and 0 being failed and beyond corrective action. Four is considered poor condition, it shows advance section loss. That's the loss of the concrete deterioration and scour, that's down and around in the stream area around the bottom of the piers. Also areas of extensive honeycombing which is what happens to concrete as it deteriorates, and numerous locations with exposed reinforcement, that's the rebar, the steel inside that comes exposed and becomes subj ect to corrosion from the environment. The bridge was originally designed for two 15 ton trucks, as opposed to our current criteria. The state legal load for bridges is 44 tons, so you can see it's quite a bit of difference between the design then and today. It was designed for less than what it's considered to be the current state legal load for highways. It's also considered functionally obsolete in that it lacks adequate shoulders and/or any accommodations for bicycles and pedestrians. I mentioned that this particular location is included in the statewide bicycle and pedestrian masterplans for inclusion of facilities to accommodate pedestrian to walk along Kuhio Highway. Right now there's no safe accommodation in this area. The existing approach guardrail ends do not meet currently accepted traffic safety standards and our plan is to update those to meet the current criteria. So in a nutshell we plan to upgrade the structural integrity of the bridge and address the geometric deficiencies and design the bridge to meet the current trick loading codes. Cultural resources. We of course did during an investigation with regards to cultural resources. Our Archaeological Inventory Survey revealed 1 I cultural resources in the area. They are historic and indeterminate in age, most likely associated with sugar plantation and plantation camps and all of those sights have been researched and documented in the Archaeological Inventory Survey. Project alternatives. Of course we always look at the no -action alternative as one of our required to look at. In this situation of course doing nothing doesn't meet purpose and need, so it didn't take us very long to discard that alternative. We also have to look at the alignment of the bridge. The alignments we looked at were three, the existing alignment versus the mauka alignment and also a makai alignment, so look at three of those. Regarding the bridge span, you remember that the existing bridge is a three -span bridge, it's got two piers so basically it exists with three -spans. We looked at practical and today's day and age and single -span bridge, a two -span bridge, and the scope of the project. We looked at what we could do to widen and rehabilitate the existing bridge versus a total replacement of the existing bridge. So getting into those particulars a little further regarding alignment. About the alignment, if you're familiar with the area there are significant hillsides on the mauka side. A mauka alignment would have required some significant excavation of those existing hillsides and would have had the most environmental and cost impacts. A makai alignment, down the valley there's a home not too far from that existing bridge and so obviously we would have to move that residence in order to make the inakai alignment work. We had a significant conflict there with an existing structure that was somebody's home. Looking at the existing alignment because it's along the existing alignment, that would minimize environmental impacts and impacts to existing structures. It would minimize cost for us and also provides the smoothest alignment for best drivability because moving it mauka or makai it would have introduced sharper curves and kinks in the road that drivers would have had to negotiate. Keeping it along the current alignment provided the best July 27, 2017 KIIPRC Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 29 solution from a drivability standpoint. Regarding the spans, use of the single -span bridge versus a two -span bridge provides improved hydraulic efficiency and minimizes environmental impacts in the streambed. What that means is they can see this shows a proposal for a single -span bridge all the way from one existing abutment to the next existing abutment. Right now we have two piers in the stream, somewhat like that. A single -span would generally be more or less centrally located than that. That would mean that pier would be in the middle of the stream and that means it would have an impact on the capacity of that stream to carry, say flood waters and increase flood waters, compared to a no -span of course which gives you the most free flow available of waters so the best hydraulic efficiency. Also environmental impacts in the streambeds because you don't have to go down there and build a new pier so it minimizes the amount of construction that we have to do down in the stream bed. The scope of the bridge. We did look at what it would take to address this bridge by widening the existing bridge and strengthening the existing bridge, rehabilitating it. To restore the structural integrity of the bridge and bring it up to current standards we would have had to add additional girders which would not match the existing T-beams. Those T-beams are part of that historic character of the bridge, but it wouldn't have been possible to match those because of the way those girders are designed. They would have been different and you'll see in a future slide here what those girders are looking like in our proposal, they wouldn't have matched. If we widen that deck, remember part of the problem with this bridge, it is functionally obsolete and it doesn't provide any accommodations for bicycles or pedestrians. To widen that existing deck would mean we would have to remove almost the entire existing deck. Because of the age related deterioration it would have to be replaced anyway because of the condition that it is in. Because the bridge is proposed to be widened, the existing capped concrete parapet would need to be replaced to meet current crash tested requirements. That entire parapet wall would have to be replaced anyway because it doesn't meet our current requirements. Those railings must be crash tested and meet national standards for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles. Finally, since the bridge is already 84 years old it would be reasonable to expect no more than 50 years, and I would think if that, of usable life in the bridge if we took this approach. You'd have a lot of old parts of the bridge mixing with new parts, very difficult to get a rehabilitated bridge like this to match the proposed life for an entirely brand new bridge. The estimated cost would be comparable to the cost of replacement structure in the end as well. Based on the analysis of all those alternatives our frugal alternative is a single -span replacement bridge along the existing alignment, that's our preferred alternative. For this project now a new right-of-way would not be required for the bridge because it's along the existing alignment, but in order to construct it we would need to construct a mauka by-pass bridge which would require about 12,000 square feet of temporary right-of-way during construction and I'll get into that a little more later. A single -span bridge would likely require a temporary intermediate pier during construction in proximity to the river so we would have a temporary intermediate pier that goes on to support the construction sequencing. Hydraulic efficiency would be improved by removal of the two existing large pier walls that exist there today. Replacement railings will be reconstructed with the historical theme so it will match the existing railings, but would meet the current crash testing standards. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 29 Here's a typical section showing the proposal. The lanes existing are 11 feet. We are showing ... this is right out of our draft EA, it shows an 11 or 12 foot lane for the proposal and we would likely go with. an 11 foot lane. On each side we got a 5 or 6 foot bike lane and a 5 or 6 foot sidewalk. I imagine what we would end up with is an 11 foot lane with a 5 foot bike lane and 5 foot sidewalk, probably another 18 inches or so on either side. So the dimensions I gave you, if you take the minimum dimensions, it would be at 42 feet wide plus 3, so a 45 foot wide bridge as compared to the existing bridge, if you recall, is a 30 foot bridge, out to out. So it would be 15 feet wider or 7-112 feet wider on either side of the existing bridge. I mentioned the mauka bypass, or mauka detour, or actually the mauka diversion bridge because it's going to divert traffic during construction. We're proposing to put it on the mauka side because the existing house is right about here and we don't want to impact that residence. This diversion would involve tight S curve roadways. Remember I did talk about the mauka alternative as one of the permanent options we looked at. In order to build this for a permanent bridge those S curves would be much larger radius curves and a lot more construction. Since this is temporary we're going to have tighter curves, we're going to slow down traffic during construction but it's not something we want to do on a long term basis. Long term we want to keep the traffic moving through here. If we were to do a mauka permanent bridge it would be a much larger radius on these curves here, and these curves here, which would push this bridge out a lot more along something like this to make it work which is why that option for a permanent alternative was discarded. As you know, the mauka area consists of steep slopes and heavy vegetation and to help minimize cost a longer two -span bridge with an intermediate pier is planned. Maintaining this alignment keeps a significant distance away as much as possible from existing residences. In summary, Kapaia Bridge provides an important transportation link to and from the greater Lihu`e region considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The existing bridge is structurally deficient and functionally obsolete as alternative transportation modes like walking and cycling are not addressed. A single -span replacement bridge along the existing alignment is the preferred alternative with a temporary mauka diversion bridge during construction. That ends our formal presentation and I'll be happy to take any question. Ms. Schneider: Larry, in the single -span bridge is the deck going to be deeper than it would have been with the two piers? Mr. Dill: You mean thicker? Ms. Schneider: Yes Mr. Dill: I believe that's a yes. You know the answer to that question Milton? I believe that because you have to beef up the span, I imagine it would be a thicker deck with bigger girders. Ms. Schneider: And you're going to remove the (inaudible). Mr. Dill: Correct. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 29 Ms. Schneider: And it's a problem with doing that, in terms of it's in the river? Mr. Dill: Well it will just be one of the construction challenges they'll have to face in doing the bridge, but that's all been addressed in the proposal we're doing. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: I have a question. Is there any signage proposed at the start of this situation indicating that there could be problems or are people just going to barge into it. Mr. Dill: You mean during construction? Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Prior to construction and during construction. Mr. Dill: Yes, absolutely. In fact you notice our bridge project we have going on just west of the tree tunnel, if you noticed bridge 70, there was signage. I am more than happy to heat if you have any concerns about the adequacy or not of the signage that was provided, but everything there posted so traffic is going to dissipate this bridge project. So we'll do the same thing. Chair Wichman: Any other questions? I have a question about the temporary bridge. I am sure that Cultural Surveys has done a survey of this area and so there's no impacts, archaeological or historical? Mr. Dill: They're here, so they can answer that. But they did do an Archaeological Inventory Survey, identified 11 sites and documented all those 11 sites. Chair Wichman: None of those would be impacted? Mr. Dill: They will be impacted by the project. Chair Wiclunan: They will be impacted. Mr. Dill: Yes, yes. If you'd like to hear more I can ask Cultural Surveys to come up. Ms. Arinanga: I'd like to add on. If it will be impacted then what happens? You said it will be impacted. Mr. Dill: Yes. Ms. Arinanga: So what are the plans? Mr. Dill: In a situation like this, the plan is to document. Documenting those sites is the mitigation. Chair Wichman: Documenting and recovery, right? So it's just whatever's there you're just... Mr. Dill: I don't believe there's any plan for recovery right now. But can I ask Cultural Surveys.... July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 29 Cultural Surveys Hawai`i Project Manager, William Folk: Hello, my name is Bill Folk, I work with Cultural Surveys Hawaii. The archaeological sites in this portion of the valley are all to the best of our knowledge related to plantation agriculture. They're small rock terraces, couple of rocks high, maybe 6, 8 or 10 feet long helping to hold up the side of an embankment where road might be and some ditch features that moved the water for the old sugar plantation water control . processes. We've documented them by.mapping them, photographing them, and describing them in our inventory, survey report. We don't have any further recommendations of documentation for them. We don't recommend any further work for the archaeological site and those would need to be destroyed for the construction of the bridge. We don't see that as an issue however SHPD, to the best of our knowledge, has not been consulted, has not approved the inventory survey report. I'm not sure, I believe HDOT submitted it to them but I don't have documentation right now to provide, to say they've accepted the report and agree with that recommendation. But our recommendation for the archaeological sites or historic properties is no further work. Mr. Dill: I believe we submitted it to them in December of last year. Yes, December of last year, so we haven't gotten a response from them. Unidentified, speaker: (inaudible) Chair Wichman: Right, we understand that challenge. Mr. Folk: In that case we would be waiting for them to provide review comments on the report and that typically may change the status of one of the historical properties. In the manner that they might say we want you to record this, or save it, and then it would just have to become part of the engineering design to avoid those things. We believe that's unlikely for these particular types of historic properties that are in the gulch within the project area. They may ask for monitoring, so that gives some of these historic properties going to be impacted, like dug through or dug up, we would then have an opportunity to do additional below surface work on these properties by documenting it in cross sections and perhaps taking some kinds of soil deposits or whatever might be available for dating. At present there's no indication that there's anything there other than plantation era water control features that are fragmented and obviously not in use anymore. That's the status of the Archeological Inventory Survey. Mr, Guerber: In the plantation era what was there? Was there a camp there? Were people living there or was it just water diversion and retaining walls? Mr. Folk: There's no records that we have found of any kind of a camp. Hanamd`ulu was the camp but it was not in the gulch. It's where Hanamd`ulu is today. The water control is basically ditches, culverts for their roads where they crossed Kapaia Stream to get from one field to another, and possibly moving some water from reservoirs upstream up into the fields. But again they are very fragmented and so tracing them outside of the project area is not useful, although if we needed to we could possibly retrieve some of the sugar company's older maps. To date we haven't been real successful with that, although we have tried. It's mostly water control for the fields and water diversion or culverts under their roads for the operation of the sugar plantation. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 29 Chair Wichman: Commissioner Arinaga. Ms. Arinaga: Do you have any photographs to share of these sites? Mr. Folk. We do. Would you like me to pass this around? Ms. Arinaga: That would be great. Mr. Folk: May I do that? Chair Wichman: Mr. Folk, I also have a question about, you said you did a surface survey and photos, basically it's all surface work that you've done, right? Mr. Folk: Well we did some individual subsurface testing as well but mostly with shovels and in the vicinity of some of the sights too, those that we might have had questions about. We do have some excavation for testing and it shows just the standard more the basic sea horizon soils there, mostly they're reddish brown clay loams. Nothing, no buried A horizons or cultural materials other than the actual rock type structures themselves, which are as I said typically like a bullwork, or buttressing, or embankment, You build a couple of stones high to keep the dirt level behind it so you can park your truck or your car over there that type of structure. Chair Wichman: Thank you. Any other questions? Ms. Arinaga: One more question. I know the town of Hanamd`ulu has been very, they've been working on preserving their historical area. Were there any opportunities for the residents to provide input of these sights? Mr. Folk: Well, on those sights specifically there was. We had a (Section) 106 meeting a few months ago, maybe a little longer than that in the community center in Hanamd`ulu. Mr. Dill: At King Kaumuali`i School, Ms. Arinaga: Was there any interest in preserving anything? Mr. Folk: Not really, very little. Most of the interest was on whether or not they were going to block the bridge to build a new one and the sewer pipe issues, that kind of thing. Ms. Arinaga: Thank you. Mr. Hull: Chair, the Department has a couple of questions. Chair Wichman: Yes. Mr. Hull: Larry, the SHPD comments didn't come in for the 11 cultural resources in potential impact but do you have SIIPD on replacement of the bridge at all? July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 29 Mr. Dill: I don't think we received SHPD on anything. Mr. Hull: Okay. Then the proposal right now..... . Mr. Dill: I don't want to throw SHPD under the bus, they lost their Kauai person... Mr. Hull: We understand the proposal right now is a replacement bridge that is a significant departure from the original design. In particular among other things it's going to the single -span as opposed to the double -span and the primary purpose is to mitigate environmental impacts. Mr. Dill: And to improve the hydraulic efficiency of the stream. If there's a big flood, remember the flood that we had ... when was that? A few years ago? There was a lot of water that came down, it brought a lot of debris. A lot of the debris hung up under the bridge and so the more clear we keep that bridge the safer it is basically. Mr. Hull: The, maybe you did it but I missed it, the railing or lattice work, is it going to be similar in nature too? Mr. Dill: There's no lattice work. There are those parapet walls that are paneled and they will be paneled in a similar manner and it will have the same sort of cap on top. Mr. Hull: The last question I have is, what 343 document do you do? Is it an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) or EA? Mr. Dill: EA. Mr. Hull: Okay so the question I have, I don't know if you can answer right now is, if this is under (HRS) 6E historic structure, being that it's over 80, over 50 years old and also eligible for the National Registry, how did you conclude to a finding of no significant impact when you're removing a historic structure? Mr. Dill: I am going to defer to Milton, if you can speak for that question. Unidentified Speaker: As far as... Chair Wichman: Excuse me, please state your name for the record. Wilson Okamoto Corporation Milton Arakawa. My name is Milton Arakawa. I'm with Wilson Okamoto Corporation and we were the firm that did the Environmental Assessment for the state. As far as any kind of contact with SHPD it's not like nothing has occurred. As you know when you do any kind of project we still have to get approval from SHPD on the area of potential affect. So the project information was circulated to them and they're aware of the project. They gave us approval to do that for the area of potential affect and on that basis we went out and solicited comments from the community. We had two Section 106 meetings with the community and submitted the Archaeological Inventory Survey to SHPD back in December and we haven't July 27, 2017 KBPRC Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 29 received a final concurrence from SHPD at this point. Up to this point we have not received any other comments from SHPD to the contrary. Mr. Hull: Thanks. Chair Wichman: Any questions from the Commissioners? Thank you. Mr. Hull: To that point Commissioner, if you want to wait for SHPD's input I think it's your prerogative. As Mr. Dill pointed out, as we've become well aware they've lost not only Mary Jane but Anna as well, their resources are severely lacking. Whether or not we will get something back from them, it will remain to be seen. Mr. Dill: I understand and appreciate it would be better if we had comments from SHPD at this point. From our perspective we want to move forward with our project, so I'd appreciate anything you can do for us. Chair Wichman: I understand they only have, they have limited time, then you can bypass that. Mr. Dill: And we're well beyond that limited time. Chair Wichman: Right, exactly. Mr. Dill: We haven't always pulled the trigger on that limited time. We try to work with them. Chair Wichman: Absolutely. Mr. Dill: Understanding the situation. Chair Wichman: We understand the situation with SHPD, but for this Commission... Ms. Hi chi= Sae sa: Perhaps we can get the point of a motion and then we can have discussion. Chair Wichman: Okay. Commissioners, any other... Mr. Dill: Can we add a little more to that discussion? Chair Wichman: Yes, please. Mr. Folk: I just wanted to try to give a little more clarity to SHPD's rules and regulations. They are working diligently to get their backlog up and they do have new personnel working. That may be something that could come fairly quickly. It's a fairly typical review of an inventory survey and their comments would probably at the most be additional work during the construction of bridge, such as archaeological monitoring and that sort of support. In terms of your question about its eligibility, pretty much any historic property today in the regulations through the federal and through (HRS) 6E in the state, if it's a historic property and it's July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 29 identified, its eligibility to the State or National Register is basically covers all historic properties. Once it's found in the field and it's identified as a historic property, being something that's older than 50 years old, in this case archaeology, then a significance is assigned to it. The significance is related to the A, B, C, D that.you see in the state and federal regulations. This is trying to identify what kind of significance does it has. In this case the significance is that we're assigning to these and we anticipate that SHPD will agree with is that it's of the lowest category, which means it's important in the sense that it provides information to elements of our history or being our community over the many years. That automatically makes it eligible to be nominated. Once you get beyond the significance than you have to determine its eligibility. If it's eligible than we have things like the bridge itself that the architectural branch of the State Historic Preservation Division and the Federal Highways and the Advisory Council. for Historic Preservation in the federal level that's more appropriate type of historic property to be actually nominated, to be reviewed for eligibility. Whereas a few stones from a plantation ditch or culvert under an old plantation road, the likelihood of that actually ever being assigned an eligibility level that would make it an appropriate thing to nominate to the National or State Registers are extremely low. Ms. Schneider:. Our one concern is with the bridge. Mr. Hull: Yes, I think those comments are well taken. Commissioner Schneider's point, the concern with the eligibility, wasn't with the 11 cultural sights it was more specifically with the fact that the bridge is eligible and how essentially did the DOT come to the FONSI fording of no significant impact, on a historic structure that is going to be demolished. Of course SHPD says indeed photo documentation is a mitigated measure enough to constitute no significance. It was just a question to make sure all basis were covered. Mr. Dill: If I can add on to that too... Mr. Folk: Good, because now you've stepped beyond my qualifications. Ms. Schneider: We would all be more comfortable if we had some comments from SHPD. Mr. Folk: Yes, they should be the architectural (inaudible). Chair Wichman: Thank you Mr. Folk, Mr. Dill: As I mentioned in one of the slides .... from slide number 2, "According to Hawai `i State Historic Bridge Inventory and Evaluation (November 2013), is Eligible, but not listed on the National or Hawai `i Registers", so that's a huge page out of a document that's pertinent to the Kapaia Bridge because it's a statewide inventory. This bridge eligibility status is eligible but they are different, it's not just a yes or no on the eligibility status. A highest rating is a high preservation value bridge which is identified as having unique or exemplary characteristics of a bridge side that exhibits high end degrees of historic integrity. A bridge like that would probably not end up in a FONSI, it almost definitely wouldn't be there because its eligible and it sort of meets the minimum criteria for consideration to be nominated. That's significantly different from a bridge of high preservation value that's been identified as high preservation value. This July 27, 2017 KBPRC Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 29 bridge, and they've defined eligible in this document as not unique or the best example of the type, but may become a rare example of a bridge type in the future and or reflects the characteristics of its bridge type. I don't know if that helped to explain but it's not considered a high preservation value bridge which would likely not result in a FONSI determination in an Environmental Assessment. Does that help? Mr. Hull: Yes, it does to the point, even eligibility aside, even (HRS) 6E with the nonresidential over 50 years old. You still have the historical classification and I think the concern being if SHPD weighed in during the 343 process and you got at least some guidance that indeed ... do you do documentation? Yes, so the documentation, if the guidance is the documentation, is a mitigating measure, that negates significant impact to historic structure then I think we could rest easy. But I think there's a little leeriness as far as is this body supposed to sign off of it as well without that official guidance of SHPD. Mr. Dill: Yes understood. Hawaii Department of Transportation Fred Reyes: Fred Reyes, I work with Larry Dill here at HDOT Kauai. I think the minimum we would do would be HAER (Historical American Engineering Record) documentation. I think pretty much certain we would do that. I do have an inventory form from our State Historic Bridge Inventory if you're interested for this particular bridge. I'll pass this on. Mr. Dill: We will be doing an HAER report for this bridge, it will be documented. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: I would just like to double my concern. On one side of the bridge is a pipe that has water, on the other side is a pipe that has sewer. I am just concerned that someone doesn't get them confused. Are there some designations on one or both on what they contain? Mr. Dill: They're not labeled. Mr. Rem I believe they're both (inaudible). That would be up to the County if they wanted to label. Mr. Dill: Right. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Well that's a major concern in my mind. Mr. Dill: Okay. Ms. Higuchi- Sayegusa: Just to remind us all. We're all, we're advising or helping, assisting the state in fulfilling its historic preservation duties and so if there's concern on aesthetic, designs or architecture than I would say that sort of within the realm on this body. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: I'm concerned what is in that, in those two pipes... Mr. Guerber: Or them getting crossed. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 20 of 29 Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Yes, or someone.... Mr. Guerber: I don't think that's our purview. That's kind of a utility question. When you're saying, when they're rebuilding the road that they don't get the pipes crossed. Mr. Chaffin Jr.: No, someone doesn't by accident get the sewer line hooked up to the water line the possibility of that, and maybe it's not our purview. Chair Wichman: No, it's not really. What we're looking at is the historical aspects of this bridge and it says it is designated as a criteria C and there is some concern about the uniqueness of this bridge. Mr. Dill did mention that in the future it might be more important as well because there are not that many bridges built this way. This is going to be a complete demolition, right? So no more. Mr. Guerber: Larry, how rare is the architecture of this bridge? Mr. Dill: Well there are other examples of this type of bridge, how many I don't know. Do you have any ideas on the numbers? Mr. Hull: I am going to ask this for recordation purposes if you can come to the microphone. Mr. Arakawa: Milton Arakawa. As far as the Kapaia Bridge, Larry mentioned it was part of the Historic Bridge Inventory Study which was done. These are all the historic bridges statewide. Kapaia Bridge is fairly common for the type of bridge that was built in the 1930's. It's concrete T-beam type of bridge. It's not a unique case where it's like one of a kind type of construction. Chair Wichman: Okay, thank you. Any questions from the Commissioners? Ms. Schneider: Do we have time to wait for the state to give us their recommendation or do we need to act now? Mr. Hull: It's at your discretion. I think you can ask the applicant what their timelines are. Ms. Schneider: Would we be holding you up terribly if we wait for the (inaudible). Mr. Dill: Yes. We are getting into a time crunch with our funding, I believe by October, I think its October. This is a federally funded project. We have to finish the right-of-way work that's only a couple of months and this is one of the factors we need to get done. I should have mentioned earlier this will be recorded in the HAER report, so it will be well documented before this bridge is taken down. I can't speak for SHPD, but I am pretty sure if this bridge was a concern for SHPD in what we're doing they would have responded by now. That's speculation on my part. Chair Wicbman: Yes and is this bridge a safety hazard as it is? July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 21 of 29 Mr. Dill: I won't say it's a safety hazard. I will say it's a concern because of the conditions I noted structurally. Also with the original design, the original design was not built or designed for the loads we have on our highways today. Obviously we don't want to wait for the bridge to fall down before it becomes a safety hazard, but it's a concern for us. Chair Wichman: Thank you. Any other questions? Mr. Guerber: So our job is to think about archaeology and architecture. Chair Wichman: Yes. Mr. Guerber: We need to judge on those two criteria and I think we've seen that there's,no archaeological, that we can tell, there's no archaeological evidence that there's anything to preserve here. You might discover something in your excavation, I am sure you'll stop it and do something about that. The other one is the architecture part. I think we needed to concentrate on that and make a decision today whether it's really architecturally worthy of preservation. I think we should let them go ahead with the project. Mr. Hull: Just for discussion purposes, the Commission has been getting used to when applications come before you. You are an advisory body either to the Planning Department or to the Planning Commission in their actions. The Department has made the moves and adjustments as why we have such rigorous parliamentary procedures today is because we have, begun mandating your recommendations as a condition of approval on zoning permits at the Planning Department level and recommending ' it to the Planning Commission level. That's where your comments generally stand and I have to say for this particular application you don't have that same leverage with the Planning Department because they're, not because of DOT but because they're in a roadway that doesn't have zoning. There is no zoning permit for this application so we don't have the proverbial stick over Larry on this one. If Larry was coming in to do something on a structure like say he was moving DOT operations into the Kauai Museum, indeed we would have a zoning permit, and he wanted to make alterations. The zoning permit, he would have to adhere to on the standards. Under this particular proposal before you wherever you go, I just want to lay out there the Department can't mandate anything on this particular proposal and your comments in this situation will be advisory to Larry and his staff. Ms. Schneider: Who can we request (inaudible)? Mr. Dill: Certainly, Chair Wichman: Commissioner Arinaga. Ms. Arina a: I have a question. If you don't hear from SHPD do you just continue and move on? Mr. Dill: Ultimately, yes. Chair Wichman: Yes, that is part of the rules. July 27, 2017 KHPAC Meeting Minutes Page 22 of 29 Mr. Dill: Actually we. should have•already (inaudidble). Ms. Nakea: So I've gone back and forth in my thinking during the course of this presentation and discussion and one of the comments you said you think that if they had, SHPD, had real reservations you would have heard by now? You did say that, right? Mr. Dill: I believe that. Ms. Nakea: I'll go with you on that, right, right. Also that the bridge is not very unique and then there's the part about if we restore it, the prediction is that it's going to be good for 50 years and will cost as much as building a whole new bridge. I'm now leaning towards we should just go with the go ahead. I just wanted to explain my thinking. Is now a good time to do that? Mr. Hull: Yes, if you are looking to making a motion, being two Commissioners have already voiced desire to move ahead with it. The Department would recommend any motion for approval also be contingent upon meeting any additional standards and if SHPD provides additional requirements that they meet those requirements as well. Ms. Arina a: One last question. How long will the project take? Mr. Arakawa: Construction time roughly 12-18 months. Chair Wichman: Any other questions? Did you have something to say? Mr. Reyes: Fred Reyes, DOT Highway. To complete the Section 106 process Federal Highways Administration would issue a determination letter, I believe to SHPD, correct me if you will. SHPD has a time window to provide their comments or challenges. Mr. Dill: So there are regulatory requirements for SHPD's response time. You get to the end of that since it's a federally funded job. Federal Highways (Administration) will actually make a determination to move forward without SHPD's recommendations or comments. So we would request and they would contact SHPD and we would have to go through the process to move that forward. We've done that in the past, where we've come close to deadlines we need to meet or we start losing funding. Federal Highways and SHPD understands that too. Chair Wichman: Any other questions? Mr. Guerber: I move we approve this project. Ms. Arinaga: I second. Chair Wichman: We have an approval and a second. Any more discussion? (None) All those in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Thank you Mr. Dill. Thank you Mr. Folk, Mr. Reyes. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 23 of 29 3. Appointment of investigative committee members (Permitted Interaction Group) to Interact with the DOT on behalf of the KHHPRC as a party to the Memorandum of Agreement for the Hanapepe Bridge Replacement Project, Project No. HI STP SR50(1), Waimea District, Kauai Island, K61oa Ahupuaa, TMK: [4] 1-9-007: 001 Hanapepe Canal, [4] 1-9-007:013, [4] 1-9-007:034, [4] 1-9-007 Kaumuali`i Highway Right -of -Way, [41 1-9-010:015, [41 1-9-010:014, [4] 1-9-010:046, [4] 1-9-010:050, [4] 1-9-010 Kaumuali`i Highway Right-of-way. Mr. Hull; This agenda item was before you in November and DOT came to you not only with the proposal which the Commission seemed fairly receptive towards but also a Memorandum of Agreement to enter into, or to have this body enter into as a party in the proceedings as they move forward. You voted back in November to go through a Permitted Interaction Group or to form a Permitted Interaction Group to be a parry to the proceedings. This has been placed on the agenda for you to appoint the members. We will take nominations of no more than four individuals to that PIG. Ms. Schneider: I nominate Victoria Wichman. Chair Wichman: I have a question first. This PIG or Permitted Interaction Group, is this for the interpretive of this bridge or is this for the whole process or both? Mr. Dill: I apologize, I didn't really come prepared to address this particular agenda item. However, if it's the Memorandum of Agreement for the Hanapepe Bridge replacement project then this would be as a, not a signatory occurring party to the MOA (Memorandum of Agreement), is that correct? This MOA is a Memorandum Agreement which is between Federal Highways Administration, Highway Transportation and SHPD. I assume you're being invited, and I apologize if I don't have my terminologies correct here, not as a main signatory but as a consulting party. Do you know Jodi? Ms. Higuchi- Sayegusa: Yes, I think it was a..... Mr. Hull: Yes it was a signatory, Larry. Mr. Dill: You're signing as a concurring party, but not as one of the main members of the MOA. It would be basically what those agreements established. I guess I would term it as mitigation measures due to the impacts of the project to the existing bridge. They would be seeking your input and recommendations on what the proposals were by the DOT as they pursue this project. Chair Wichman: Right, but I also understand they were going to put up like a kiosk or some sort of interpretive for this bridge because of the historical nature of that area. Mr. Dill: I believe that's part of the proposal, that's correct, yes. And this would be your opportunity to discuss that and make sure that gets documented and inserted into the MOA. Mr. Hull: As the designs come out if this PIG is formed than it would participate in the design review process as it moves forward. July 27, 20171UVRC Meeting Minutes Page 24 of 29 Chair Wichman: Any questions Commissioners? Ms. Schneider: (inaudible) Chair Wiclunan: Commissioner Long, Stephen Long. Ms. Higuchi- Sayegusa: Just a reminder it's two or more but less than a quorum.. Quorum here is four I believe. Mr. Hull: Five. Ms. Higuchi- Sayegusa: Five? Five. So up to four members. Chair Wichman: Do we take nominations for this, or do people volunteer? Mr. Hull: The Commissioners need to be nominated. I think Commissioners can also indicate they want and are willing to volunteer. Chair Wichman: If somebody's not here, I mean it's infamous for people who don't attend they get nominated. Commissioner Long was very, very interested in this bridge, but would he want to be on a committee for this? I don't want to have him nominated if he's not here to agree to it. So what would you all like to do? Mr. Guerber: I would think I should nominate him, if he wishes to accept it.... Chair Wichman: Withdraw. Are there any other nominations? Ms. Nakea: I don't feel like I have enough expertise in that area. Mr. Hull: So just for the record we have a nomination for Commissioner Long and Chair Wichman. Chair Wichman: And we should have at least four? Mr. Hull: No more than four. Chair Wichman: The part about the interpretive part would have to be decided right now? Mr. Hull: The only thing going on right now is the nominations of the Commissioners to the PIG. Once that PIG is formed Myles has already been in contact with them, and I think they are ready to submit paperwork and designs to the PIG. Mr. Dill: For what it's worth, I would encourage you if you have any interest to participate because Steve obviously is an architect and has expertise in that area, but it doesn't require that. What this is, is mitigation for the benefit of the public to appreciate the historic nature of the bridge that was there. Anybody that's a member of the public can have input to that. Your j ob, July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 25 of 29 I'm not the guy to be telling you this stuff. Your job would be to see that something appropriate is done to memorialize the Hanapepe Bridge. Could be interesting, who knows, might be free food. Chair Wichman: There's a lot of good history there. So we have two nominations, Stephen Long. Mr. Guerber: I nominate Deatri (Nakea). Chair Wichman: We have three nominations now, Commissioner Long, Commissioner Nakea, and myself Chair Wichman. Do we motion that? Mr. Hull: I need a motion to close the nominations. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we close the nominations. Mr. Guerber: I second that. Chair Wichman: Okay. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: The motion was technically to close the nomination, now you have gone through this process before. Now you would need a motion to approve the nominations. The motion's just to close it. I turn to Jodi as our parliamentarian process. Ms. Hi uguchi- Sayegusa: It's to form the scope and context of who's going to serve in the Permitted Interaction Group. The motion would be just to memorialize the members and the scope of the PIG. Chair Wichman: Do we have a motion? Mr. Guerber: Yes. Whatever yes. Ms. Arinaga: I move that we accept the nominees to the PIG. Chair Wichman: Commissioner Arinaga just motioned to accept the nominees. Do we have a second? Ms. Nakea: I second. Chair Wichman: Commissioner Nakea seconded. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. We have a Permitted Interaction Group, Mr. Dill: Can I ask, what prompted this to be on the agenda at this time? July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 26 of 29 Mr. Hull: Well they came back in November and made that offer to this body to be part of the proceedings. It wasn't agenda'd until recently, we got some documentation from I believe Central Federal Lands requesting the input of the PIG. We realized we didn't form the PIG. Mr. Dill: Okay just wondering because this project is moving along. COMMISSION EDUCATION COMMITTEE 1. List of upcoming educational opportunities for historic preservation training. Mr. Hull: This is another request from a previous meeting that a list be provided of possible training programs. The first one I'd like to bring your attention to is the green flyer, which is a Historic Kauai Foundation training that's coming up on August 2nd. They are really wonderful, it's coming shortly. It is an all -day session if you can attend it. It is free. If you can attend it's as good a training as you'll find here in Hawaii. I have the majority of the Planning Department staff attending it as well. You log online and sign up with your various information. So you have that and that's very shortly on the horizon. The other list that you have is a list generated by the National Preservation Institute and it has an array of different trainings on the mainland starting in September and going all the way through to June of 2018, Many of these training are absolutely wonderful and thorough and well prepared. The only time we've sent commissioners on training is through the CLG grant program. Currently with the manner in which SHPD is lacking in resources, I would not anticipate us wining an award for one of these training programs. If you so desire we can submit that application. I can tell you the grant we were just awarded for the nomination of the Hanapepe Bridge, they had it for a year and a half almost and we just got the award recently. Myles's hair got a few shades grayer just to figure out how quickly to spend $2,000.00 dollars because the fact it was just two thousand dollars but the process is so truncated and then the timelines so tight it's hard to get the applications through. We barely made it in the slimmest margin for the nomination of Hanapepe Bridge grant application. If you want to attempt to apply for something I welcome any input and desires to try and go and we can draftthose applications but it looks fairly limited as far as our opportunities of actually winning a grant in the next year or two from the CLG program. Ms. Schneider: I would encourage everybody to go to Historic Kauai (foundation training). Mr, Hull: Yes. Chair Wichman: Yes, absolutely they do great workshops here. Mr. Hull: So those are the list of the trainings. If you have any interest you can log onto both websites. The National Preservation Institute, you can actually click on these links if you go to the website and they give a much more thorough description of each of those training sessions. Chair Wichman: Thank you Ka'aina. Ms, Nakea: Thank you for compiling the list. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 27 of 29 KAUA'I HISTORICAL RESOURCE INVENTORY UPDATE COMMITTEE 1. Update on the Permitted Interaction Group (PIG) for updating the Kauai Historic Resource Inventory. Mr. Hull: I believe Stephen went on the last one by himself. The Department just requests a deferral on this agenda item until Stephen's here. Chair Wichman: Do we need a motion for that? Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we defer this until Stephen is here. Ms. Arinaga: Second. Chair Wichman: All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. HISTORIC PRESERVATION PUBLICITY COMMITTEE DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS (August 24, 2017) Mr. Hull: The next agenda is scheduled for August 24, 2017. Just as a heads up, both myself and the Director will be out of country during this meeting so I won't be here to clerk for you. Marie Williams, who is the Long Range Division Chief will be here to clerk you through that meeting. It's looking relatively light. I can say one thing of interest that is coming up on the agenda where, I not sure if you noticed, in your packet by the Kapaia Bridge application was the few pages for the Kapaia Swinging Bridge. That was a clerical error on my part and I apologize for that. You'll be getting that application at the August 24th meeting, but there was some confusion with which Kapaia, so they both ended up in your packet, I apologize for that. You will be receiving that for reviewing that in the August 24th meeting. Mr. Guerber: Who's doing that bridge? Mr. Hull: Ron Agor is the representative and with that we have no further agenda items. ADJOURNMENT Chair Wichman: Motion to adjourn? Mr. Chaffin Jr.: Second. Ms. Arina a: Motion to adjourn. Ms. fEguchi- Sayegusa: Sorry to clarify, who had the motion? July 27, 2017 K11PRC Meeting Minutes Page 28 of 29 Chair Wichman: Commissioner Arinaga and the second was from Commissioner Chaffin. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Thank you. Motion carried 6:0. The meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Sandra M. Muragin Commission Support Clerk Date: (} Approved as circulated. (} Approved with amendments. See minutes of meeting. July 27, 2017 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 29 of 29 40 NANAtf1sAY NAf11MWA18AY NAFNA /tKnu�.ear M WA NAPAUCOA57 aAN+Ht1LA POIUfA1E ��,f ILIA 4 V KAUA1 niA wuw Qwy uercA uufa euF uNueArewer Kaurrev xnwwvu (4/1 3 — 7 — 001, 01 /® l r/ 3 S&.26 wnner:n ear aa�.e Nu<eoa PROJSGf r OA LOCATION N4WP rF'E&IY WIN PROZOT W •S-""" �'� "J ABBREYIATfONS: DRAWIN,C�GONTENTS: _ R AO ASPHALT CONCRETE JNT JOINT COVER e�FET ' ^-"•N• I� ,.y ARCH ARCHITECTURAL JBT JOIST P-I 51TE PLAN ep- mR+�` BD BOARD BATTEN KD KILN DRIED A•01 PLAN 6w!:•Yr�•' ESD T BATT BOARD AND BDR"I EELROCM B. BOTTOM OF fOMW. KIT KO KITCHEN KNOCK out A`En ELNATION°i B6 BOTTOM 6RADE IAv LIN LAVATORY LMEN 6.01 SECTION-DrAILe •�' BM BOAM J. LINEAR FEET - MIX4 EI.K 04IL73N6 BLOCK MET METAL BOW BOTTCIT OF WALL OC ON CENTER BRG'G BRACING B7JN BEI POW PAVETIENT BB BOTH SIDE9 PROJgCTD,1SGRIPTION ' CMd GONORRETSMXNRYIMIT PH R PAPER HOLDER RADIIIe RFCOMBTRIICTION OF THE KOPAIA B'JEf9Je1GN BRIDGE f �b •�.�+ + . CONC CONCRETE RF ROOF CENT CONTMIIOJE CJ. CONTROL JOINT eC III j F+•HM+a use GTR COATER vl;IN SCREEN GW COLD WATER eH EHELH1H141 S DIMPLE e& 1 p SI t PDLE DDP BLi I DIM oIMBr9IGtJ N STAINLIM OTE& PROJECT NOTES: LOT III 7.S4 A m TMK: (4) 3•T•CC4:009 DR COCR BTL eTEEL DI— PISFGe71. TB TOM BAR • i DW DISHWASHER TM TOP OP BANG 3%26 Aaas TFFC: (4) 3•T•0FJ1:001 k 16 TOP GRADE BTRIlOTi1RE AREA w3 eP ' ^ EA L644 MI WAY TOP OP CF FOOTING Tim .k EM EKIERIOR TOW TOP CF WALL 6TR4CTIIRE HEIGHT 79 fiEE'T AVERAGE _r f s FF FINIeH FLOOR �� IWNDER OOCYPANOY eWINGIw BRIDGE FIN N IH VERT VD4 VERTICAL VENT TO OUNCE AIR BWLDINGPe TYTYPE VN '� _ FT6 6LB FOOTING GI.11 D LAMINATED SENT WA WAS H WACHERr9R'r1;R WASHER ZOFiIN3 A!3RI0111,7uRL GB GRAB BAR jj .• GYP BD Co*` M BOARD ' •.Y AA HDR HDWR HEADER HARDWARE - q J i d1 dP Hw HORIZ HEIGHT HORIZONTAL f HW HOT WATER a J INt INTERIM INSILL IN949IL.ATIATICN � \ NOl N A °�naW�mr amlwa: w,� eli�mk=� d�dl 6e un mr ro�muw,, V �aa PS t Q` O a_ 'm'yom �Yg �qOO dY •, amY00 Z n-17 d i ;E d�FF d4 V, I(OHIO: 4 0 ago I -A 4,1.1 A., ... .. .. .... ;e"Ill AIA SNIN51NO BRIOM SITS P�.AN roriTM i Q CmENERAL NOTES: L AB50WTPLY NO WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN THE 5TREAM. THE CONTRAG70R SHALL TAKE PRECAUTIONS TO PROTECT THE STREAM AT ALL TIMES. 2, ALL MATERIALS AND GONSTRUGTION SHALL CONFORM TO HANAII DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION. 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE, PRIOR TO GONSTRUGTION, THE LOGATION OF ALL UTILITIES AND 5HALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING AND MAINTAINING ALL, UTILITIES HITHIN THE PROJECT AREA, 4. THE CONTRACTOR 5HALL VERIFY DIMENSIONS OF THE EXI5TIN5 STRUCTUFE SHOHN ON THE5E PLAN5. SCOPE OR UJOR< THE CONTRACTOR 5HALL TAKE ALL FIELD MEASUREMENTS NECESSARY TO ENSURE PROPER FIT OF (I REMOVE AND REPLACE BRIDGE HALKNAY AND I75 COMPONENTS THE FNISHED NORK AND 514ALL A55UME FULL RE5PON5I5ILITY FOR THEIR ACGURAGY. FIELD MEASUREMENTS SHALL AL50 BE SUBMITTED FOR REFERENGE- BY THE REVIENER. THERE SHALL BE NO ® REMOVE AND REPLACE EXI57JNG RAILING5 CLAIM MADE BY THE GONTRAGTOR FOR NORK PERTAINING TO SUCH MODIFIGATIONS A5 MAY BE REMOVE AND REPLACE EX15TIN5 GABLES REQUIRED DUE TO MINOR DIFFERENGES BETHEEN AGTUAL MELD CONDITIONS AND THOSE SHORN BY ® REMOVE AND REPLACE TONERS THE DETAILS AND DIMEN5ION5 ON THE PLAN5. REPAIR CONCRETE AS NEEDED 5- THE GONTRAGTOR 5HALL REFER TO THESE PLAN5 AND THE PROVIDED ORIGINAL EXI5TIN5 PLANS TO GOMPLE'TE THIS PROJECT TO REPLICATE THE EXISTING SRIDOE AS GLoSE AS P0551ELE. (V REPAIR ANCHOR A5 NEEDED fPJ )EST PIER I (FJ EAST PIER 2 f� NEST AGHOR 0 PIER 3 ❑ EA5T AWAM 2 2 0 4 s 5�. � Yo 4 F a — 5 s'-0• Ir e �� FLAN no. ssx� r, u ThI• �nM woe p�kei CMd, 6e antler ,my Jeh��x/r�wll�en. SGOP� OF UJOfci'� N O REMOVE AND REPLACE BRIDGE MLKWAY AND IT5 GOMPONENT5 N"5B1" ® ® Q2 REMOVE AND REPLAGE EXISTING RAILINGS �3 REMOVE AND REPLAGE EX15TING GABLES ® REMOVE AND REPLACE TOWERS r'under my o'Np'P OO REPAIR GONGRETE A5 NEEDED 2 LO ©WIRE MESH AT 3-�1/8" APART aU .] x NOTES: F x GONTRAGTOR 514ALL V1517 THE 51TE AND VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS OF ALL w am °3�n EXISTING BRIDGE COMPONENTS, 1NGLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO BOLT5, BIDS MmT METAL BRAGKET5, GABLE5, LUMBER FOR TOWER5, LUMBER FOR BRIDGE FRAMING AND WALKWAYS, ETG. UNLE55 OTHERK15E NOTED, REPLAGE ALL a � TYPICAL ELEVATIONS OF TOWARL BRIDGE COMPONENTS MATGHIN5 EXISTING DIMEN51ON5. om � � w saq 0 �Y Qa J NEST TGN& N TWIR IN N 3 CABLE 9DIXP ----- — — — — — — — N _ ... ... �_S — — — — �--- — GABLES WIZ OCv- § Hw v1s"E7$ICH wQ�p Sa 3 im V4• VERrcAMES o ® ofy o- roR a o. I 2 6 2 E TOYER NO. z 2 6 7_w�r--Yr �xFF I Y+ALKv41Y O U d WALrY O YW.KNAY O A a I6PIBR4 p PER 7 Y KA�AIA 3WINC:II�ICF Bi�IGC7E oc�ner W WIL OR N PIER 3 fEJ PIER I q, a�n ao.zaiT STREAM ELEVATION WAFE-3A'. No' Aaet Nc A-2.0 . r �.-•?Ti !; r -'y ,A: .F' . ,•..: "� k .. .}.r _ ���}I'-'•.-:Y i,l ' _xr.: p'. -BUA- : 'on _ ;]'_n`y Auµl> lu........._- �{ I1 II,II •` - 5 ':�i r 5 L III • l ��� $�L411WIAF-I UGTFIf.11CLL�W f •1 '� � '.d:' s I - i ti i � i y '- - - � I ' .�_y �A] is ai ]atc. .1; • ' t qf. } yyS� , i Jlns> 2 4niu`K� :Wawa_ Reri]t . 1 F low - fl.G• J Ire' 'A' _ �i: I :��� r'Y Ai r..rli5y }S�r r '� ., SCIaLc s. / b��' vivo Ow rPI if f ,sir l,�F ,�� �. - - 4cF.,. •.. Yi ili l}IWir d -� s -_"' 'h�iA�CiT-7e:1kE'7Ak "-L'r 1' '��� 3- y` ls,l�• Y ';�_ �•a e-` � �- ��..—.,p., , Is _ � _ r . .��'�"..� .Y ;e�+' q� ti� WAi P � ; • 3 �'Cf i`b AID ati�_G``,`.�tlll-OrA �L�* -, tl1 I y QQ S � t � l� ^, `I } � �'�!�`3 .l .�� � x �� �"�"Y1'�1 'W'44. �''$: ' _ y _ 1S'� J •C -A� �r r t � � � .r"s�?"-"f-- f 1' -��^'' - - � f'� � -iJ�, - v.• 1�1.'A` �'Y`lii ��� ,� � i - Cl, d' - �; s < J 15 h-i f �T_ 1'+ s- �� ! L 4 IT lWl' .tCr[�►w:2 �"�,'1Cjl- L,j.AI.� ,��,•• { •, o�YV '�-"3++MFl4 _ _ j "'h]-(j1. $� .: ii pp f _ _ �4.J' I�I. 7iA� _-•,b,c4 i,l rf�l `. >•'� :.j,,. i75'�W!4s'7,T-g4W nR :1 •'� �i. D'3dJ3QVY $i}i�i' - - - 2 �� �� : I _ i''� ',� t;.. .�` fie..., ,;"Lc .` '•���a'9--�j� ' S � 11 �d�a. ��a� t �4 tn- s e, • �N � y.,., _ J I^k� ry _ rnt-'� r ; r N -. 'LY r f j,lr:l �bkc�-m• �Y -' 11��{r# �d, e f, �e��� 4 '- T r °I u S � ` � ��iu � �"". ._Kf,.c'R•psA•! .�fwY .� 1 5 i 4 A:, s:--. S - i s y 14 '1I', S F•k'S4" 5 � �G _ _ I9a _ ! ` I i j� +�4sFpiti o`,Ursn erraao� "C A� �' �['' " -r {' -- :��.} - fi �--_-M1 z � �y y •x �'-7 �1)� - � '— 1 ti �I` D ` Lx{ Yr `r -fi, ,sue, F }�3 1 I ' ��_ I r7t- 17f � l� 4F� ° >✓����yN.o��.,t .N-. -� L G . � -�� ! F' r r �� _ .,,, ]i.....'.,r- '.',,:}..- 'r ''„b,>: ;yak„-�a:?a, id'a�:-....-i'_L.�dr.•>i:..-,...�Xa�F„'"k <�.. .: ?....:xrz, •':'a* �...., :. - A.�`„,`Ir`. t... ,. ..... N Cps P s9£WIReI sear iM1lx worx woz emPi�mtler umn September 19, 2017 Ka'aina Hull Deputy Planning Director Kauai County Planning Department RE: Gulick Rowell Mission House, Waimea Kauai Dear Mr. Hull, I am writing to introduce my project to your department and alert you to an urgent repair that we need to undertake. I would like to present the proj ect to the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission at their September 28, 2017 meeting. The State Historic Preservation Division has determined that "no historic properties affected." In 2016 I purchased the Gulick -Rowell Mission House in Waimea, Kauai with the intention of restoring it and creating a community resource. On the National and State Historic Register since 1972 (SHP 30-05-9314), the house, unoccupied since 2003 is in a most lamentable condition. Our non-profit organization, Hale Puna, is developing the overall plan for the building and site with Glenn Mason of Mason Architects. We must replace the "temporary" shingle roof that was installed in 1994 after Hurricane Iniki. Rain is coming through and damaging floors and ceilings. We will install a plywood barrier and a metal roof on top of that. The original hand hewn ohia rafters appear to be in good shape. The original house was built in 1829 by Peter Gulick and the roof featured cedar shingles boiled in whale oil. In 1927 the house was remodeled adding electricity and bathrooms. At that time a metal roof was installed. The story of the house includes it's transition from a missionary residence to housing for the growing Waimea Sugar Company. Our guide for restoration will be the 1927 remodel. I have spent over a year meeting with potential contractors and builders and because of the nature of the job and the lively building industry on Kauai I had been unable to find someone available with the desire, knowledge and sensitivity to do the work. Jim Cassell, a local builder with an extensive background in historic restoration on the Westside of Kauai has agreed to do the work but he has a very small window of availability before he begins work on another project. So time is of the essence. Many thanks, Jim Ballantine (808) 631-3455 Am CEP 2 2017, - .: -.� -- .,< t �%- ,, �i �_ .}� : � ,_k� �� .� ___ _- � �---_-__.._ � - w t F .'` _ -. I +' ! _ .� � ' y �__ __ _ .:.«�r r � :.per_.-r .- _ _=3- _ s. K�9 Y1 I &I Ii1 .r^ I Rom- �/r ,jl'. �I'l,, i Ilvn Knl annP O .r eiEv..zz""w (nxuneo> �5 k PRAFT TOPO6RAFHI6 5URVEY "P 5HOAIN6 LOT it `r " Land Gourt Applfc.atlor col KIIGIAOLA, WAIMEA, "UA'I, HMHAIVI er rE rn �w�R xr y:mH9w Yax Map Key: (4) 1-2-06, 34 Ghent, 61— M.-r Gatos o{ �srvalj: G-apC. 2-13, 2016 ADDRESS TAX MAP KEY LAND AREA IMPROVEMENTS ZONING 2004 ASSESSMENTS: LAND IMPROVEMENTS TOTAL 2004 PROPERTY TAX FLOOD DESIGNATION UTILITIES PRESENT USE HIGHEST & BEST USE GENERAL CONDITION PROPERTY DATA KIKIAOLA LAID COMPANY, LTD. TMK: 4"" 1--2-06-34/"Gulick" Kikiaola, Waimea, Hawaii' 471°-1-2-06-34 1.357 Acres Two story single-family dwelling containing 4 bedrooms and 11i baths; said dwelling contains 4,004 square feet and it had been built in 1850. Project District - ST-C $217,900 57,500 $275,400 $25.00 Property has been submitted to the agriculture dedication program for advantageous property tax treatment HUD Flood Zone Classification Zone X; FEMA Flood Insurance Firm Panel #150002-0160-C Dated March 4, 1987 There is one water meter present Improved Residential Use Improved Residential Use The property shows deferred maintenance. The project also is historically significant. 11 M72F • �. yr f�.I ee . ty -� #« - giEF Iql 1�S }n �} ,✓ y! m dl a { ®� t ,:inn 1 ��'f� ll �� a yP' 1 i I�` 111 1�215{tl /� YU� �M+ a •*,+., .; T I� i�"+1H �'•til��l��Y;l� �lbw�� � 1+ `"""^^' .,w,,..e. ��`�1� �� � a k �� �'^' F.or _-^""'4ll• oia ®rr,,:a„ • �1N,a19 �� { vs. 9 1+ a r 4 lz 42 ili:'urr �jY . . F ..nrluj �i� + � e � r � er x•�M w• a.ee ai +•`q me 4 TOJ6'N LPTJ as PSs'�.,..��� � _...--._.__.....».._.___..��.;r�:.�:�_--......_,w.�..... .._...� 1. � yp rvx L � 41 xl� DA STA7C Gi11MAll� ~—•. y TAX AAA MURTy 0ISM 1 G•I SONL fbklLJ OF XMIACLA, WArXZA X4VAr.,: WHAVFAlJ' sua✓ECrTOCMAGE COMA�Nina p�accu, SCALRIhcai00f1_ PROPERTY DATA FOR TMK: 4" 1-2-6-31 __---_-=W- T M K D A T A 4--1-2-6-31 MELE RD Owner: KIKIAOLA LAND CO LTD /ETAL Tax Payer: KIKIAOLA LAND CO LTD Tenure: FEE Annual Tax: $1,041.46 Tax Bill : P 0 BOX 367, WAIMEA, HI 96796 USA Assessed Value Exemption Size Bldgs: 0 Dwellings: 0 Land: 189,700 0 4.03 acres PITT:100 Zoning:0 Tot Bldg: 0 0 0 sq ft Use: 0 TOTAL: $189,700 PROPERTY DATA FOR TMK: 4" 1-2-6-34 -__----_=-T== T M K D A T A 4-1-2-6-34 9567 HUAKAI RD Owner: KTKIAOLA LAND CO LTD /ETAL Tax Payer: KIKIAOLA LAND CO LTD Tenure: FEE Annual Tax: $25.00 Tax Bill : P 0 BOX 367, WAIMEA, HI 96796 USA Assessed Value Exemption Size Bldgs: 1 Dwellings: i Land: 217,900 217,900 1.36 acres PITT:100 Zoning:PD Tot Bldg: _57,5D0 57,500 3,756 sq ft Use: 0 TOTAL: $275,400 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING DETAILS 4-1-2-6-34 Bldg: 1 of 1 Card: 1 of 1 Class: D Roof Design: Gable Structure: Wood Material: Shakes Attic: None Ceiling: Plaster ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _ = ROOMS ==== - = BATHS ==== Framing: Double wall Family Rms: 0 Full Baths: 1 Exterior Wall: Stucco Bedrooms 4 Half Baths: 1 Interior Wall: Single wall/Wood Rec Rooms 0 Add'1 Fixt: 2 Rec Room area: 0 ( OX 0) Total Rms 7 Total Fixt: 7 Central AC/Heat: None Flooring Hardwood Floor Construction: Wood joist Foundation: Stone Basement: None ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ == FLOOR AREAS == (est)Year Built: 1850 Style: Other ILIA 0 Effective year built: 0 Stories: 2.0 1st story 1588 Physical condition: FR Shape: Recta 2nd story 1588 Cost & Design Factor: 0% Bldg Type: 113 Wood House Addl story 0 Economic Factor: 0% Occupancy: Single-family Half story 828 Percent complete: 0% TOTBLDG 1: 4004 Gross building value: 8,892 Attic 0 Building value: 53,400 Unfin Bsmt 0 Deck Rail Wood 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 ------------------------ BUILDING ADDITIONS Lower Level 1st Story 2nd Story Wood deck Wd cpt cnc fl Concrete deck Uncld prty enc Concrete deck Uncld w/bnstr Concrete deck Uncld w/bnstr Bldg # Style Stories Year built Beds 1 other 2.0 1850 4 +--7-+----------34---------- 6 #2 6 I +--7-+-7--+------35----------+ j 1 I ! 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I ! [ 25#3 25 1 I 24 ! I I I I I 1 ! I l I I I I I i I l l 1 46 46 44 46 ++ 1 +-7--+ 1 I 62 1 +W-4+ I I I 1 I I I [ I I I 1 1 I ! I l I 117 1 1 I 22 I 1 1 17 I ( I I 31 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I ! +4-+-----+----34-----+----+ 1 1 I I 1#6 10 #5 ! I I � +-7--+-----w. ----- 41--------------+ ---------------------- 3rd Story Area 68 42 175 Half story 828 912 149 Baths 1/2 Baths Sq ft 1 1 4004 14 STATUS REPORT ) ^ L G r 3 Maximum liability limited to r $2,500.00 This report (and any revisions thereto) is issued solely for the convenience of the titleholder, the titleholders agent, counsel, purchaser or mortgagee, or the person ordering it. SCHEDULE A Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Incorporated, hereby reports that, subject to those matters set forth in Schedule "B" hereof, the title to the estate or interest to the land described in Schedule "C" hereof is vested in: KIKIAOLA LAND COMPANY, LIMITED, a Hawaii corporation, as Fee Owner This report is dated as of October 3, 2002 at 8:00 a.m. Inquiries concerning this report should be directed to MICHELLE SASAKI. Email msasaki@tghawaii.com Fax (808) 532-31G5 Telephone (808) 533-5882. Refer to Order No. 200249023. 200249023 Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Inc. HONOLULU, HAWAII Page I SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS �. Real Property Takes - Information pending. Tax Key: (4) 1-2-006-034 Area Assessed: 59,124 sq. ft. Land Classification: IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL 2. The terms and provisions, including the failure to comply with any covenants, conditions and reservations, contained in the following: INSTRUMENT : AGREEMENT DATED September 14, 1993 RECORDED Document No. 93-151109 PARTIES Kikiaola Land Company, Ltd. and State of Hawaii. RE Historic Preservation Covenant for a period of five years '9ND OF SCHEDULE B 200249023 Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Inc. Page 2 HONOLULU, HAWAII SCHEDULE C All of that certain parcel of land situate at Kikiaola, Waimea, District of Waimea, Island and County of Kauai, State of Hawaii, described as follows: LOT 11, area 59,124 Square Feet, more or less, as shown on Map 8, filed in the Office of the Assistant Registrar of the Land Court of the State of Hawaii with Land Court Application No. 937 (amended) of H. P. Faye, Limited; Being land(s) described in Transfer Certificate of Title No. 54,022 issued to KIKIAOLA LAND COMPANY, LIMITED, a Hawaii corporation. BEING THE PREMISES ACQUIRED BY DEED GRANTOR WAIMEA SUGAR MILL COMPANY, LIMITED, a Hawaii corporation GRANTEE KIKIAOLA LAND COMPANY, LIMITED, a Hawaii corporation DATED January 1, 1953 FILED Land Court Document No. 145508 RECORDED Liber 2655 Page 69 END OF SCHEDULE C 200249023 'Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Inc. Page 3 HONOLULU, HAWAII GENERAL NOTES 1. There is hereby omitted from any covenants, conditions and reservations contained herein any covenant or restriction based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin, unless and only to the extent that said covenant (i) is exempt under Chapter 42, Section 3607 of the United States Code or (ii) relates to handicap but does not discriminate against handicapped persons. 2. Lots 10 and 1-A-4 have been conveyed to the State of Hawaii. 200249023 Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Inc, Page 4 HONOLULU, HAWAII GUIDELINES FOR THE ISSUANCE OF INSURANCE A. Taxes shown in Schedule B are as of the date such information is available from the taxing authority. Evidence of payment of all taxes and assessments subsequent to such date must be provided prior to recordation. B. Evidence of authority regarding the execution of all documents pertaining to the transaction is required prior to recordation. This includes corporate resolutions, copies of partnership agreements, powers of attorney and trust instruments. C. If an entity (corporation, partnership, limited liability company, etc.) is not registered in Hawaii, evidence of its formation and existence under the laws where such entity is formed must be presented prior to recordation. D. If the transaction involves a construction loan, the following is required: (1) a letter confirming that there is no construction prior to recordation; or (2) if there is such construction, appropriate indemnity agreements, financial statements and other relevant information from the owner, developer, general contractor and major sub -contractors must be submitted to the Title Company for approval at least one week prior to the anticipated date of recordation. Forms are available upon request from Title Guaranty of Fawaii. E. Chapter 669, Hawaii Revised Statutes, sets forth acceptable tolerances for discrepancies in structures or improvements relative to private property boundaries for various classes of real property. If your survey map shows a position discrepancy that falls within the tolerances of Chapter 669, call your title officer as affirmative coverage may be available to insured lenders. F. The right is reserved to make additional exceptions and/or requirements upon examination of all documents submitted in connection with this transaction. G. If a policy of title insurance is issued, it will exclude from coverage all matters set forth in Schedule B of this report and in the printed Exclusions from Coverage of the policy. Copies of the policy forms are available upon request from Title Guaranty of Hawaii. 200249023 Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Inc. Page 5 HONOLULU, HAWAQ DATE PRINTED: 10/08/2002 STATEMENT OF ASSESSED VALUES AND REAL PROPERTY TAXES DUE NAME OF OWNER: ICI IKIAOLA LAND CO LTD LEASED TO TAX MAP KEY DIVISION ZONE SECTION PLAT PARCEL HPR NO. (4) 1 2 006 034 0000 CLASS: 1 AREA ASSESSED: 59,124 SF ASSESSED VALUES FOR CURRENT YEAR TAXES: 2000 This certifies that the records of this division show the assessed values and taxes on the property designated by Tax Key shown above are as follows: BUILDING $ 53,400 EXEMPTION $ 53,400 NET VALUE $ 0 LAND $ 217,900 EXEMPTION $ 217,900 NET VALUE $ 0 TOTAL NET VALUE $ 0 Installment (1 - due 8/20; 2 - due 2/20) Tax Installment Tax Penalty Interest Other Total Year Amount Amount Amount Amount Amount 2000 2 12.50 12.50 PAID 2000 1 12.50 12.50 PAID 1999 2 12.50 12.50 PAID 1999 1 12.50 12.50 PAID 200249023 Title Guaranty of Hawaii, Inc. Page 6 HONOLULU, HAWAII DAVIT Y. ICE GOVERNOR OF AAWAH aw O STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION K AKUHIHEWA BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD, STE 555 KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 September 11, 2017 Jim Ballantine PO Box 565 Waimea, Kauai, Hawaii 96796 Dear Mr. Ballantine: SUZANNE D. CASE CHMRPEk5ON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL. RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT KEKDA KALUNIWA PIRsr DEPUTY JEFFREY T. PEARSON 1)EPUTYDIRECTOR- WA7M AQUATIC RCSOUACES RDATINa RNLI oCEANRECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEVANCrS COMMISSION ON WA'TERRESOURCE MAa7ACEMEN'r CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESQURCES ENFORCEMENT R.NOIREERING FORRSTRYAND WMDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAUOOLAW E ISLAND MPRV E COMMISSION LAND STATEPARRS IN REPLY REFER TO. LOG NO: 2017.01945 DOC NO: 1709KN09 Architecture SUBJECT: Chapter 6E-10 Historic Preservation Review Gulick Rowell Mission House —Roof Framing and Material Repairs 9567 Huakali Rd. Kauai, HI 96796 Owner Name: Jim Ballantine Kapena Ahupua`a, Mana District, Island of Kauai TMK: (4)1-2-006:034 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this request for Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E-10 review. The submittal included land property data, a TMK map, the roof framing plan, and photographs, and the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) received this submittal on August 31, 2017. The Gulick Rowell Mission House is listed on the Hawaii and National Registers of Historic Places (SIHP 930-05- 9314; NR #79001027), Per the 1972 nomination, "A corrugated metal, Hawaiian gable roof covers the second floor porch with a lower pitch, while the higher pitch creates the attic space." The original house was built in 1829 by Peter Gulick and the roofing material was cedar shingles boiled in whale oil. The house was remodeled in 1927 and the roofing material was changed to corrugated metal. The scope of work includes replacing the existing shingle roofing material, which was installed in 1994 after Hurricane Iniki, with new corrugated metal roofing. Given the current and ongoing roof leaks that are causing floor and ceiling damage, the repair and replacement of deteriorated features are necessary. The proposed project will not affect the design, workmanship, materials, location, setting, association and feeling of the historic building and will follow Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. Based on this submittal, SHPD has determined "no historic properties affected". Please contact Kaiwi Yoon, Architecture Branch Chief, at (808) 692-8032 or atKaiwi.N.Yoon@hawaii.gov regarding architectural resources or this letter. Aloha, ,4�w 2�9WlfgP Alan S. Downer, PhD Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer cc: mdahilig@kauai.gov T. ,1.. A . 'SEP 2 8 2017 Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr. Mayor Wallace G. Rezentes,.Jr. Managing Director Lyle Takata L i �� Cry tot County Engineer 17 SE' 12 P 2 :38 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS County of Kauai, State of I3awai`i l;l's y 4444 Rice Street, Suite 275, Llhu`e, Hawaii 96 TEL (808) 241-4992 FAX (808) 241-6604 September 11, 2017 Ms. Victoria Wichman, Chair Kauai Historic Preservation Commission c/o Kauai County Planning Department 4444 Rice Street, Suite A473 Lihue, HI, 96766 Subject: NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT, SECTION 106 CONSULTATION HANAPEPE ROAD RESURFACING, AHUPUA`A OF HANAPEPE DISTRICT OF WAB/1EA, ISLAND OF KAUA`I FEDERAL -AID PROJECT NO. STP-0545(002) TAX MAPKEY(S): (4)1-8-08, (4)1-9-03, (4)1-9-04, (4)1-9-05, (4)1-9-11 Dear Ms. Wichman, On behalf of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the State of Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT), the County of Kauai would like to invite you to participate in consultation for the subject resurfacing project. The proposed project is located in the town of Hanapepe on Hanapepe Road. The project spans the entire length of Hanapepe Road, from the eastern intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway (`Ele`ele side) to the western intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway (Waimea side). This proposed project is a federally funded County project. It will be considered a federal action and undertaking, as defined by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended (2006). Therefore, the FHWA will require compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, NHPA, and other federal requirements. The FHWA has authorized the HDOT and local public agencies to act on behalf of the FHWA regarding the NHPA Section 106 notification and consultation. This letter is to initiate Section 106 consultation with the Kauai Historic Preservation Commission (KIIPRC) in accordance with Title 36 of the Code ofFeder'al Regulations (CFR), Section 800.3. Overview of the undertaking The proposed project is located on Hanapepe Road, in the town of Hanapepe, Kauai Island, Hawaii. The area of potential effect (APE) is confined to the existing Hanapepe Road right-of- way, along the entire length of the street from the eastern intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway (`Ele`ele side) to the western intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway (Waimea side) but doesn't T•0)0 ' SEP 2 8 2017 Kauai Historic Preservation Commission September 11, 2017 Page 3 knowledgeable about the proposed project area, or any descendants with ancestral, lineal or cultural ties to or cultural knowledge or concerns for, and cultural or religious attachment to the proposed project area, we would appreciate receiving their names and contact information. We would appreciate a written response within 30 days from date of receipt, to Devin Quinn via email at dquinngkauai.gov or by U.S. Postal Service to the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division, 4444 Rice St. #1.75, Lihu`e, 11196766. Please feel free to contact County of Kauai Project Engineer Devin Quinn by telephone at (808) 241-4995, or Project Manager Michael Moule at (808) 241-4891 if you have any questions. We look forward to working with the SHPD on these needed improvements. Sincerely, / 6-'Lyl abates Acting County Engineer Enclosure c: FHWA (M. Otani), CoK-DPW (M. Moule), HDOT (C. Yamasaki) Mow All ol Ilk 'C ff FOR s 40 01 ti AllIR �a r. a .: a REGISTERED HISTORIC • PLACES ., APE OD[ATTp' , Federal Highway Administration HANAPEPE ROAD DESIGN CONCEPT DESIGN CONCEPT PRINCIPLES This section describes the potential design concept developed by the project team based on community input received at the various charrette and focus group meetings. The design principles that guide the design concept include: • Respect the cultural history of Hanapepe Town • Provide continuous pedestrian paths that are flush with the road and provide amenities such as shade trees and benches that create a walk -friendly environment • Improve pedestrian crossings of Hanapepe Road • Provide a slow speed shared environment that respects all modes of travel • Improve configurations of selected intersections to increase safety • Maintain on -street parking and increase off-street parking as much as feasible • Improve wayfinding and gateway treatments • Improve roadway drainage to mitigate impacts to properties adjacent to Hanapepe Road The historic features of Hanapepe Town are important to the community. The design process must respect the historic heritage of Hanapepe Town and comply with rules issued by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). The consensus at the charrette community meetings favored pedestrian paths flush with the road with amenities such as shade trees and street furniture such as benches to create a walk -friendly environment. The flush pedestrian paths would be located within the existing right-of-way, thereby easing its interface with existing walkways on private property. The flush paths also make it easier for pedestrians to traverse from one side of the street to the other during events such as Friday Art Night. Another benefit of flush paths is that they minimize changes to the flow of the existing roadway drainage and, in turn, changes to the roadway drainage system. The formal pedestrian crossings of Hanapepe Road at Ko Road, Kona Road, and Hana Road are proposed to be improved to increase driver awareness of the crossings, to calm traffic in the vicinity of the crossings, and to shorten crossing distances where feasible. Additionally, new pedestrian crossings are proposed at the path to the Swinging Bridge, in the Puolo Road to Aaron's Kitchen area, and at Moi Road. These improvements include enhanced pedestrian markings and signing, bulb -outs to narrow crossing distance, and roadway medians to calm traffic and provide pedestrian refuge. Hanapepe Road is already a low -speed environment with a speed limit of 25 mph. In actuality, speeds appear even lower most of the time. By appropriately configuring Hanapepe Road with relatively narrow travel lanes and calming measures such as medians and bulb -outs, the low -speed environment can be sustained and enhanced, allowing bicyclists and pedestrians to share the road with auto drivers. Providing a slow speed environment is a key facet of a Complete Streets policy and contributes to traffic safety. Consistent with these efforts, selected intersections will be improved: Hanapepe Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 48 Road/Kona Road, Hanapepe RoadlHana Road, Hanapepe Road/Moi Road, Kaumuali' i Highway/Hanapepe Road (east), and Kaumuali' i Highway/Hanapepe Road (west), Most of these improvements help to facilitate pedestrian crossing and to slow vehicles as they proceed through the intersections. It was clear through the community meetings that maintaining parking is an important priority for businesses and for the community. As such, the conceptual plan strives to maintain as much on -street parking as feasible. Additionally, the plan encourages seeking additional off-street parking areas. Wayfinding and gateway treatments were discussed earlier in this report but there is clearly need to enhance both. To achieve a consistent program of wayfinding and gateway signing, a dedicated study, which takes into consideration the historic issues and a theme that would be desirable, is needed. However, during the design of the phase, wayfinding and gateway treatments will be included to the extent allowed for these types of projects. Use of flush pedestrian paths minimizes the need to modify roadway drainage, but there are some drainage issues identified during the charrette community meetings that need to be addressed in the design phase of this project. One such drainage issue is in the vicinity of Ko Road where storm water runoff from other areas is not properly handled by the existing storm water drains. At times, this impacts the businesses in the area. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 49 DESIGN CONCEPT ILLUSTRATIONS WEST END OF HANAPEPE ROAD This section of Hanapepe Road is characterized by less adjacent development frontage and more unoccupied lands than other sections. The existing 22-foot wide travelway of Hanapepe Road would be maintained throughout this section, but the design concept adds 5-foot wide paved shoulders. From Kaumuali`i Highway to Moi Road, the 5-foot shoulder is only located on the makai side of Hanapepe Road due to the constraints created by the existing drainage channel on the mauka side of the road. East of Moi Road, the design concept includes 5-foot shoulders on both sides of Hanapepe Road. Two intersection improvements are included within this section: at Kaumuali`i Highway and at Moi Road. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 50 KAUMUALV I HIGHWAY / HANAPEPE ROAD WEST OSalt Pond Country Store © Open Draiange Ditch © Residential 0 Mariko's - Alter roadway geometry at Hanapepi5/-Kaumuali'i Hwy intersection R 4 . ay Add 5-ft shoulder In addition to a 5-foot wide paved shoulder on the makai side of Hanapepe Road, the major improvement this location is a minor reconfiguration of the Hanapepe Road approach to the intersection. The reconfiguration results in Hanapepe Road •� _ mil. - . 1 Hanapepe Road O o 7 intersecting Kaumuali'i Highway closer to a 90-degree angle, encouraging drivers to be more cautious while turning into and out of Hanapepe Road. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 51 HANAPEPE ROAD / MOI ROAD OStanwood H Kanna DDS © Existing Parking Lot .Alter roadway geometry at interseetioh Add 5-ft shoulder Han$PbPe Road + III t�V i The intersection modification consists primarily of removing the channelized right turn and modifying the corner to a smaller radius on the makai-bound Moi Road approach. This is Add 5-ft shoulder i in response to community concerns that vehicles on Moi Road do not always respect the STOP sign on their approach. The channelization gives the impression of a free right, and the Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 52 goal of removing this channelization and reducing the turn radius is to encourage drivers to be more cautious when entering Hanapepe Road. Additionally, it may be beneficial to reduce the turn radius on the east-mauka corner of the intersection to facilitate safer pedestrian crossing at this intersection. This intersection currently operates as a two-way, unsignalized intersection with STOP -sign control on the Moi Road approaches. As this project moves into the design phase, it would be prudent to evaluate warrants to make this an All -way STOP intersection or to re -orient the STOP sign control to the Hanapepe Road approaches. Although not specifically part of the Hanapepe Road project, it is also desirable to extend the 5-foot shoulders along Moi Road between Hanapepe Road and Kaumuali`i Highway and along the east side of Moi Road mauka of Hanapepe Road. In conjunction with these pedestrian improvements, it is recommended to evaluate the installation of crosswalks across both Hanapepe Road and across Moi Road at this intersection. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 53 HANAPEPE ROAD - MOI ROAD TO AARON'S KITCHEN OAnahola Granola © Aaron's Kitchen : S- ^—� Hanapepe Road - - Add 5-R shoulder From Moi Road to the vicinity of Anahola Granola, 5-foot wide paved shoulders are recommended on both sides of Hanapepe Road. Starting in the vicinity of Anahola Granola, parallel parking is shown on the mauka side up to Awawa Road. On the makai side, parallel parking starts in front of 3607 Hanapepe Road and extends to Puolo Road. In an effort to keep parking adjacent to the commercial businesses and to Add 5-ft shoulder • t V h < maintain existing parking, the parking is located outside of the 5-foot wide paved shoulder. A rendering of Hanapepe Road incorporating this design concept in the vicinity of Aaron's Kitchen is shown following the next page. In the future, as this area redevelops, the configuration could be modified to include flush pedestrian walkways, similar to the configuration recommended for the east part of Hanapepe. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 54 HANAPEPE ROAD AARON`S KITCHEN TO HANAPEPE RIVER BRIDGE Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 55 Rendering ofHanapepe Road in Front of Aaron's Kitchen Hanap6pe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 56 HANAPEPE ROAD BETWEEN HANAPEPE RIVER BRIDGE AND KONA ROAD �� Ret r�eect�on Parallel Street Parking 90-degree Street Parking —� of Hand .. _ Y.Wi ta:Roads; add cr- I a^.:, _ Hanapepe Road 0 Napa Auto Parts © Wheatley Electric Inc. © Ueoka Store 0 G&K Auto Repair Shop, LLC © Kanaka Kash / Brooks of Kauai OKauai Dental Lab / Dr. RK Ancheta / Business Decisions Hawaii Inc 0 Abandoned Building Add pedestrian crosswalk Add 5-ft Flush Sidewraik a' both sides of the rg@dwo A complete reconfiguration of the Hanapepe Road/ Iona Road/Nana Road intersection is proposed. This is currently configured as two closely spaced T-intersections with Hanapepe Road being the through road and Iona Road and Hana Road the intersecting streets. Because of the alignment 0 _ �^� - 90-degree Street Parking- LI - 44 4 of the roadways, drivers often seem confused as to who has the right of way. Additionally, the one -lane configuration of the Hanapepe River Bridge makes it important that the drivers approach the bridge cautiously and be able to visually verify whether the bridge is clear for travel. Having Hanapepe Road Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 57 as the through movement often results in drivers approaching the one -lane bridge too quickly from a direction with limited visibility of the bridge. The design concept reconfigures this area by making Hana Road the through movement. Vehicles on the Hana Road approach have a better view of traffic on the one -lane bridge, and are better positioned to be the continuous movement. Hanapepe Road from the east and Iona Road are controlled by STOP signs and drivers must turn onto the one -lane Hanapepe River Bridge. Having these two approaches STOP before continuing to the bridge makes vehicles on these lower visibility legs approach the one -lane Hanapepe River Bridge slower than if they were the continuous movement. The crosswalks were also reconfigured and provide a safer and more logical path to the walkway across the one -lane bridge. East of the intersections, 5-foot wide flush pedestrian walkways are provided on both sides of Hanapepe Road except adjacent to Napa Auto Parts and Wheatley Electric where the walkways are provided only on the makai side of Hanapepe Road On -street parking is preserved as much as possible using a combination of 90-degree and parallel parking stalls. The existing 90-degree parking stalls are maintained in front of Napa Auto Parts, Wheatley Electric, Inc. Trendsitions, and G&K Auto Repair Shop on the makai side of Hanapepe Road. 90- degree parking is also maintained on the mauka side, nearing Kona Road. To the extent possible, parallel parking stalls are maintained on the mauka side of Hanapepe Road in front of Kauai Dental Lab building, Brooks of Kaua'i building, and two other residential buildings to the west of Brooks of Kauai. There are open lot areas for some of the parcels. Parking stalls were not shown in these areas to assure that access to the parcel is maintained. The flush pedestrian paths are continued across these parcels as a visual reminder for vehicles to be aware of pedestrians. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 58 HANAPEPE ROAD - VICINITY OF KONA ROAD w� Parallel Street Parking 0 Provid 'bid' alk Add 5-ft Flush Sidewalk Add Crosswalk in front of entrance,: Bulbou to sho�%en to Hanapepe Swinging Bridge crossw lk distance calla scaping © O to makb in t rsectitn a gate ay area © � - y y 1 1 r �flad ;,r„P - - 1.0 � D m m 1 90-degree Street Parking Add 5-ft Flush Sidewalk Provide Sidewalk Bulbo.ut to shorten crosswalk di 1 f x `#4 ..' i d 0 Aloha Theater © Path to Hanapepe Swinging Bridge American Savings Bank ® Kama'aina Cabinets & Koa Wood Gallery © JJ ohana's 0 Aloha Spice Company Parking Storybook Theater of Hawaii Q State Property ©Hanapepe Hawaiian O Banana Patch Studio ® Bobbie's Aloha Spirit Congregational Church QRobert's / Jacqueline on Kaua'i Q Giorgio's Art Gallery (D Hanapepe Cafe (D Hanapepe Artworks QAmy -Lauren's Gallery (DDawn M. Traina Gallery The 5-foot flush pedestrian walkways on both sides of Hanapepe Road are proposed to continue through the Kona Road intersection into the heart of Hanapepe Town. To enhance pedestrian safety, a new crosswalk is proposed on Hanapepe Road in the vicinity of the access to the Hanapepe Swinging Bridge. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 59 90-degree on -street parking stalls are maintained on the makai side of Hanapepe Road, from American Savings Bank to the Hanapepe Artworks building, while parallel parking stalls are maintained on the mauka side of Hanapepe Road from JJ Qhana's to the entrance of Hanapepe Swinging Bridge access. There is some loss of on -street parking (4) as the 90-degree parking stalls in front of Robert's are converted to parallel parking and 4 parallel parking stalls are eliminated adjacent to Banana Patch Studio (2), Giorgio's Studio (1), and the Hirano Property (1). Rendering of Hanapepe Road near Kona Road The design concept includes a reconfiguration of the Kona Road/ Hanapepe Road intersection. Currently, the intersection has a large undefined area. To tighten up the intersection and reduce pedestrian crossing distances, bulb -outs were added at both Kona Road corners and at the mauka side of the T- intersection. A new crosswalk is proposed on Hanap6p6 Road to the east of Kona Road. Below are renderings that illustrate how this improved segment of Hanapepe Road might look. Rendering of Hanapepe Road near Roberts Hanapep® Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 60 HANAPEPE ROAD NEAR KO ROAD O Public Parking Lot t © Dr. Hirano DDS © AT&T Station O Little Fish Coffee Shop © Taro Ko Chips Factory OBert's Auto Repair Relocate existing crosswalk at sharp curve area Add 5-ft Flush SWewalk �I Existing I 90-degree parking �yanaPepe Road to remain Ko Roe a Parallel Street Paddrtg— I J O Sidewalk Bulbout to shortem of F�Provide landscaped island to slow down traffic, s also, to create a secondary gat Concept design at Hanapepe Road/Ko Road intersection 5-foot flush pedestrian walkways are proposed to continue on both sides of Hanapepe Road through most of this segment. After the sharp curve, the mauka walkway terminates at the l s aik distance y imge r r r �1 �1tlt�t�t. ?' Replace Existing f Sidewalk idewalk s'` O istripe with i concrete sidewalk to connect' a with existing sidewalk' m on, the makai side 0 AT&T service building. The makai walkway continues and then joins the existing raised sidewalk in the vicinity of Taro Ko Chips Factory. Hanapepe Road resurfacing Charrette Report 61 Parallel parking stalls are proposed along the makai side of Hanapepe Road up to the building housing Little Fish Coffee. The existing parallel parking stalls along Hanapepe Road from the Taro Ko Chips Factory to Kaumuali' i Highway would remain. The design concept proposes improvements at the sharp curve in Hanapepe Road near Ko Road. It is proposed to narrow Hanapepe Road by installing a raised median at the curve. This median would serve to moderate traffic speeds and to provide pedestrians with a refuge. The existing crosswalk would be relocated to a point that allows improved sight distance in both directions. This improvement addresses the concerns expressed by the community regarding pedestrian safety at this location. The proposed median design may need to be deferred until a planned structural retrofit for the Kaumuali' i Highway bridge over Hanapepe River is completed. Presently, this bridge has weight restrictions and, therefore, large/heavy vehicles which cannot currently use the bridge are detoured onto Hanapepe Road and then to Ko Road to a ford in the Hanapepe River. After crossing the river, heavy vehicles then use Awawa Road and Hanapepe Road to return to Kaumuali ' i Highway. These large vehicles will not be able to negotiate the narrowed section formed by the proposed median. The Hawai' i Department of Transportation has indicated that it plans to implement improvements that will allow the bridge to handle the trucks that now divert to Ko Road within the medium -term future. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 62 KAUMUALI' I HIGHWAY / HANAPEPE ROAD EAST nap&pra Road - — ANTL ` P peg Street Parkin! Existing r Signs This segment has an existing 5-foot raised sidewalk on the makai side of Hanapepe Road with parallel parking stalls adjacent to it. Although it may need to be implemented by the Hawai ' i Department of Transportation and not be eligible to be part of this project, a reconfiguration the Kaumuali' i Highway/Hanapepe Road intersection is suggested in the design concept. One of the concerns expressed by the community was the speed of the vehicles turning from Kaumuali ' i Highway into Hanapepe Road. As currently configured, this right turn is an angled turn that can be accomplished at relatively high speed. The proposal is to realign the intersection and reduce the turn radius by placing a landscaped island in this angled turn area, making the entry into Hanapepe Road a more deliberate maneuver. The intent is to "' { -yy - - •-&t� Alt 00'rmtry at i eotion; al -so; pt'av'r elands 5e bulbout ta�, oreatg sense t '6 #n y� �e slow the vehicles turning into Hanapepe Road and transitioning them into the much lower speed environment through town. Because westbound Kaumuali ' i Highway is downgrade on this approach and vehicles volume and speed are a concern, this reconfiguration may need to also include a deceleration lane to move right -turning vehicles out of the through travel lane. Additionally, there was discussion regarding improving the pedestrian crossing of Kaumuali ' i Highway. This is an unsignalized intersection and the volume and speed of vehicles on Kaumuali' i Highway make it difficult for pedestrians to cross at times. Potential actions could include creating a median pedestrian refuge area and installing pedestrian -activated rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) at the site. Hanapepe Road Resurfacing Charrette Report 63 NPS Form 10-900 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service OMB No. 1024-0018 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "NIA" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. 1. Name of Property Historic name: Hanapeepe Road Bridge Other names/site number: Name of related multiple property listing: NIA (Enter "NIA" if property is not part of a multiple property listing 2. Location Street & number: Hana e e Road City or town: HanapMe State: Hawaii County: Kauai Not For Publication: ❑ Vicinity: ❑ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, 1 hereby certify that this _ nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property meets does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: _national X statewide X local Applicable National Register Criteria: X A B X C D Signature of certifying official/Title: Date State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government In my opinion, the property _ meets does not meet the National Register criteria. Signature of commenting official: Title : Date State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 1 National Register of historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB Nc. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Name of Property 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that this property is: entered in the National Register determined eligible for the National Register determined not eligible for the National Register _ removed from the National Register _ other (explain:) Signature of the Keeper 5. Classification Ownership of Property (Check as many boxes as apply.) Private: ❑ Public -- Local ❑x Public — State F I Public — Federal Category of Property (Check only one box..) Building(s) District Site Structure Object Sections 1-6 page 2 Kauai Hawaii County and State Date of Action United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 1 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Name of Property Number of Resources within Property (Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing 1 Kauai Hawaii County and State buildings sites structures objects Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register None 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) Transbortation/Road Related Bridge Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) Transportation/Road Related Bridge Sections 1-6 page 3 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 1 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Kauai Hawaii Name of Property County and State 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions.) Other: Concrete Deck Girder Materials: (Enter categories from instructions.) Principal exterior materials of the property: concrete Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current physical appearance and condition of the property. Describe contributing and noncontributing resources if applicable. Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the genera[ characteristics of the property, such as its location, type, style, method of construction, setting, size, and significant features. Indicate whether the property has historic integrity.) Summary Paragraph The Hanapepe Road Bridge traverses the Hanapepe River, connecting one side of the town of Hanapepe to the other. It is a single lane, concrete, deck girder bridge, which is 194' long and 18' wide from curb -to -curb. The four span bridge runs east -west over the river and has an elevated, concrete walkway on its makai (south) side. Although it is situated in a commercial area, it has a tranquil setting, as it is now on a secondary road, the result of the 1938 belt highway [now Kaumualii Highway], with its own historic bridge, bypassing Hanapepe and handling the majority of the traffic. On both the up and down stream sides of the bridge levees form the banks of the river to provide flood control. The bridge is in fair condition, and retains its historic integrity of design, materials, workmanship, setting, location, feeling and association. Narrative Description The Hanapepe Road Bridge carries Hanapepe Road over the Hanapepe River. This reinforced concrete, deck girder bridge has a four span concrete deck, which is 194' long with a curb to curb deck width of 18'. The deck has an asphalt overlay, and a 6" waterline mostly buried in fill and AC runs along the inside of the north parapet. Sections 9-end page 4 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service! National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0019 Hanapepe Road Bridge Kauai Hawaii Name of Property County and State The superstructure consists of two concrete girders that support transverse, reinforced concrete floor beams, which are spaced 5' on center. The two girders also serve as the parapets. The 3' high parapets are solid, with the mauka parapet surmounted by an approximately 10" high, 2' - 3" wide, beveled cap and the makai by a concrete walkway. The date 1911" is incised at both ends and in the middle of the mauka parapet, and on the west end of the makai parapet. Three concrete piers, approximately 48'- 6" apart, support the superstructure. The impressions from their wood formwork are readily apparent on the piers, as well as both faces of the parapets. All three piers are submerged in water from 1.5' to 10' deep. The bridge is also supported by concrete abutments with concrete rubble masonry wing walls on both the upstream and downstream sides. A 4'-8" wide concrete sidewalk was added along the top of original downstream (makai) parapet in 1927. A steel frame supports the concrete sidewalk as it extends out over the water on the downstream side of the bridge. Steel knee braces support the frame and are bolted into the downstream parapet's fascia. The sidewalk is a 4" thick concrete slab, reinforced with square rebars spaced 4" on center in the transverse direction. A straight run of eight concrete steps access the walkway from the east and at the west end a set of nine concrete steps running perpendicular to the bridge serve a similar function. A 2.5" diameter pipe railing is mounted to both sides of the concrete sidewalk and its steps. The east approach to the bridge features a low concrete approach wall on the mauka side, and a low masonry rubble wall on the makai side. A sidewalk runs up to the elevated walkway's steps. The levee's southeast concrete wall ties into the masonry rubble approach wall. The west approach to the bridge has no approach walls, and the Seto building, which is listed in the Hawaii Register of Historic Places, sits next to the bridge on its mauka side. The Hanapepe Road Bridge retains its historic integrity. The elevated walkway was constructed in 1927 and is over fifty years of age, having achieved historic significance in its own right. Sections 9-end page 5 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service I National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hana epe Road Bride Kauai Hawaii Name of Property County and State 8. Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria (Mark 'Y' in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property for National Register listing.) ❑x A. Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. B. Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past. F] C. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. D. Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. Criteria Considerations (Mark "x" in all the boxes that apply.) A. Owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes B. Removed from its original location C. A birthplace or grave D. A cemetery ❑ E. A reconstructed building, object, or structure F. A commemorative property ❑ G. Less than 50 years old or achieving significance within the past 50 years Areas of Significance (Enter categories from instructions.) Transportation Engineering Sections 9-end page 6 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service! National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-001a Hanapepe Road Bridge Name of Property Period of Significance 1911-1927 Significant Dates 1911, 1927 Significant Person (Complete only if Criterion B is marked above.) N/A Cultural Affiliation N/A Architec"uilder Engineer: Joseph H. Moragne Builder: George R. Ewart, Jr. and T. Brandt Kauai Hawaii County and State Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph (Provide a summary paragraph that includes level of significance, applicable criteria, justification for the period of significance, and any applicable criteria considerations.) The Hanapepe Road Bridge is historically significant at the local level under criterion A for its associations with the development of land transportation on Kauai in the early twentieth century. It 'is also significant at the state level under criterion C as an excellent and rare example of a reinforced concrete deck girder bridge in Hawaii. The 1911-1927 period of significance was chosen as this was when the bridge was completed and when the elevated walkway was added. Sections 9-end page 7 United States Department of the interior National Park Service 1 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Kauai Hawaii Name of Property County and State Narrative Statement of Significance (Provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance.) The Hanapepe Road Bridge is significant for its contributions to the development of Kauai's transportation system, and the inception of the Kauai Belt Road. Fallowing the annexation of Hawaii by the United States in 1898, the Organic Act of 1900 abolished the Islands' Department of the Interior, and charged the newly formed Office of the Superintendent of Public Works to oversee the expenditure of territorial funds for road and bridge work. In 1905, with the establishment of county governments, these local jurisdictions were granted the power to tax and spend, as well as the responsibility to build and maintain their roads and bridges. However, the counties still relied heavily upon the territorial, and in turn the federal, government for funding for internal improvements. To aid such endeavors the 1911 Territorial Legislature passed Act 166 which allowed for the issuance of territorial bonds for the purpose of developing belt highways on each of the main islands. Loan Commissions, comprised of the County Superintendent of Public Works, the chair of the County Board of Supervisors, and three residents of an island, were formed for each of the counties and given the responsibility of overseeing the expenditure of the bond moneys allocated to the County. Prior to the establishment of the federal aid program for highways in 1925, bridges along the belt highways in Hawaii were designed by county engineers using moneys awarded by the Loan Commissions. Each County had its own bridge design capability within the County Engineer's Office. The 1911 Territorial Legislature appropriated $100,000 for Kauai's Belt Road and bridges. The Hanapepe Road Bridge was the first erected on Kauai with these funds and contributed to the development of the county's belt road plan which connected the previously isolated communities on Kauai's west and east sides with a paved highway and a series of concrete bridges. The Hanapepe Road Bridge is one of five bridges constructed by this 1911 program to remain in operation, and the only one on Kauai's west side. Only two other bridges associated with the early expansion of the belt road up the island's west side remain standing, Wailana Bridges #3 and # 4, on Maluhia Road. Both of these bridges are simple concrete slab bridges which have been widened and were built with County funds in 1910. These two are the only bridges on Kauai older than the Hanapepe Road Bridge. Prior to this concrete deck girder bridge a metal truss bridge spanned the Hanapepe River at this location. The County was in the process of replacing Sections 9-end page 8 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 1 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Kauai Hawaii Name of Property County and State this bridge, when the Territorial funding became available leading to the County using the Belt Road moneys to construct the bridge. The bridge was built on the former bridge's abutments. County Engineer J. H. Moragne prepared the plans and specifications for the bridge's reinforced concrete superstructure and piers. The contract was awarded to George R. Ewart, Jr. and T. Brandt for the low bid of $11,950 in August 1911, and the bridge was completed in March 1912. The Garden Island predicted the bridge would be "a handsome piece of concrete architecture," [Garden Island, July 25, 1911, p. 1] and upon its completion rightfully declared it was without equal on Kauai [Garden Island, March 5, 1912, p. 1]. The distinctive elevated 1927 sidewalk addition was designed by the County Engineer of that time, R. L. Garlinghouse at a cost of $2,600.42. It is the only known example of such a bridge walkway to remain in Hawaii. The bridge is also significant as an excellent example of an early twentieth-century reinforced concrete deck girder bridge. The first reinforced concrete girder bridges were built in France circa 1893, and the earliest known bridges of this type appeared in the United States during the opening decade of the twentieth century. In the 1910s, several state highway departments issued standardized plans for concrete girder bridges, with Maryland's State Roads Commission including a design for a through girder bridge in their state's first standard bridge plans in 1912. Although girder bridges were common from the 1910s through the 1930s, this form was usually employed on shorter bridges. The use of concrete girders faded during the 1940s and post -World War II period in favor of steel I-beam and pre- cast concrete spans due in part to the cost of scaffolding and formwork. Reinforced concrete girder bridges generally consist of cast -in -place, monolithic decks and girder systems. The primary members of a girder bridge are the girders, the deck, and, in some cases, such as the Hanepepe Road Bridge, floor beams. The deck does not contribute to the strength of the girders and only serves to distribute live loads to the girders. If floor beams are used, they are part of the superstructure and not the deck. The girders extend above the deck, to form the bridge's parapets. This arrangement of members makes it virtually impossible to widen a girder bridge. As a result, most bridges built in this manner have been replaced because their roadway widths were too restrictive for the safety of modern traffic. The Hanapepe Road Bridge is the oldest reinforced concrete deck girder bridge in the islands and also the longest bridge of its type in the state. With a maximum span of forty-eight feet and a total length of almost two hundred feet, the bridge was significantly larger and more technically complex than other bridges constructed during this period. The only other surviving concrete deck girder bridge on Kauai, and in the state, is the single span Nawiliwili Bridge with its dual travel ways, which was completed in 1920. Designed by Joseph Hughes Moragne, Kauai's County Engineer, the Hanapepe Sections 9-end page 9 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 1 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NP5 Form 10-900 OMB No. 1424-0018 Hanapepe Road Bride Kauai Hawaii Name of Property County and State Road Bridge is an early example of the use of formal engineering expertise in bridge making in Hawaii Of all the early bridge engineers in Hawaii, Moragne is considered to have produced the most technologically innovative work for his time. Moragne, was born and educated in Alabama. Prior to his arrival in Hawaii in 1898, he served in the U.S. 2nd Regiment, 5th Engineer Battalion during the Spanish-American War. He worked with the Territorial Survey Department on the island of Hawaii and the Territorial Department of Public Works before moving to Kauai to become the that islands' first County Engineer in 1907. Moragne introduced the use of reinforced concrete for bridges on Kauai beginning in 1909 with the Huleia Cane Haul Bridge, the earliest known reinforced concrete bridge in the territory. He also engineered the Kauai Belt Road, which was constructed from 1910-1920, and engineered the Kokee irrigation system. In addition to the Hanapepe Road Bridge, extant bridges designed by Moragne for the belt highway include: the Waioli Bridge (concrete through girder, 1912), the Waipa Stream Bridge (concrete T-Beam, 1912), Waikoko Stream Bridge (concrete through girder, 1913), and the Hanalei River Bridge (steel truss, 1912), all of which were part of the belt highway on Kauai's eastern shore. In 1919 this talented engineer left the County to work for Lihue Plantation. Under their employ he designed numerous irrigation ditch systems, as well as the Hanalei and Kaapoko Tunnels, which were 6,028 feet and 3,558 feet long, respectively. He retired from the plantation in 1937. Thus the Hanapepe Road Bridge is significant not only as a rare west side reminder of the early efforts to construct a Belt Highway on Kauai, but also for its concrete deck girder design. It is the oldest and longest concrete deck girder bridge in the State and may possibly be one of the few bridges of this type and length to survive throughout the United States. Sections 9-end page 10 United States department of the Interior National Park Service 1 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Name of Property 9. Major Bibliographical References Kauai Hawaii County and State Bibliography (Cite the books, articles, and other sources used in preparing this form.) Garden Island, "Belt Road Commission Holds Preliminary Meet", May 16, 1911, page 1 Garden Island, "Supervisors Meet", June 13, 1911, pages 2 and 6 Garden Island, "Supervisors' Monthly Report", July 18, 1911, page 1 Garden Island, "Loan Commission", July 26, 1911, page 1 Garden Island, "County Fathers in Their Usual Meeet [sic]", August 8, 1911, page 1 Garden Island, "Tenders, Concrete Bridge", August 8, 1911, page 6 Garden Island, "Loan Fund Meets", September 26, 1911, page 6 Garden Island, "Loan Fund Men Praised", January 9, 1912, page 1 Garden Island, "New Bridge is Pau", March 5, 1912, page 1 Garden Island, "Civil Engineer Joseph H. Moragne," April 21, 2011 Hawaii Heritage Center and School of Architecture, University of Hawaii, State of Hawaii Historic Bridge Inventory and Evaluation, Honolulu: Department of Transportation, 2008 KAI Hawaii, Inspection Report, Bridge Inspection and Appraisal, Bridge Number 007190071119004 Hanapepe Bridge, Lihue: County of Kauai Department of Public Works, 2007 Parsons Brinckerhoff and Engineering and Industrial Heritage, A Context for Common Historic Bridge Types, Washington D. C.: National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Council and National Research Council, 2005 MKE and Fung Associates, State of Hawaii Historic Bridge Inventory and Evaluation, Honolulu: Department of Transportation, 2013 Spencer Mason Architects, Historic Bridge Inventory. Island of Kauai, Honolulu: State of Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Division in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, 1989. Sections 9-end page 11 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service / National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Name of Property Previous documentation on file (NPS): Kauai Hawaii County and State preliminary determination of individual listing (36 CFR 67) has been requested previously listed in the National Register previously determined eligible by the National Register designated a National Historic Landmark recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey # !recorded by Historic American Engineering Record # recorded by Historic American Landscape Survey # Primary location of additional data: X State Historic Preservation Office Other State agency Federal agency Local government University Other Name of repository: Historic Resources Survey Number (if assigned): 10. Geographical Data Acreage of Property less than one acre Use either the UTM system or latitude/longitude coordinates Latitude/Longitude Coordinates Datum if other than WGS84: Bing Maps (enter coordinates to 6 decimal places) Latitude: 21.910163 Longitude: 159.590084 Sections 9-end page 12 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 1 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form HPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Name of Property Or UTM references Datum (indicated on USGS map): E-1 NAD 1927 or F� NAD 1983 1. Zone: Easting: Northing: 2. Zone: Easting: Northing: 3. Zone: Easting: Northing: 4. Zone: Easting: Northing: Verbal Boundary Description (Describe the boundaries of the property.) Kauai Hawaii County and State The property being nominated includes all the property owned by the County of Kauai in 2017 as described by the portion of Tax Map Key (4)-1-9-011: 999 which extends over the Hanapepe River. Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected.) This is the parcel of land associated with this bridge since its construction. Sections 9-end page 13 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service! National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 Hanapepe Road Bridge Kauai Hawaii Name of Property County and State 11. Form Prepared By name/title: Funiz Associates organization: street & number: 1833 Kalakaua Avenue, Suite 1008 city or town: Honolulu state: Hawaii zip code: 96815 e-mail: proiectsgfunghawaii.com telephone: (808)-941-3000 date: September 15, 2017 Additional Documentation Submit the following items with the completed form: • Maps: A USGS map or equivalent (7.5 or 15 minute series) indicating the property's location, • Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. Key all photographs to this map. 0 Additional items: Owner: County of Kauai Department of Public Works 4444 Rice Street, 4 175 Lihue, Hawaii 96766 Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: This information is being collected for applications to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate properties for listing or determine eligibility for listing, to list properties, and to amend existing Ilsbngs. Response to this request is required to obtain a benefit in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.460 et seq.). Estimated Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 100 hours per response including time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and completing and reviewing the form. Direct comments regarding this burden estimate or any aspect of this form to the Office of Planning and Performance Management. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 1849 C. Street, NW, Washington, DC. Sections 9-end page 14 Photo Log Name of Property: Hanapepe Road Bridge City or Vicinity: Hanapepe County: Kauai State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: December 7, 2015 View of the downstream side from the south 1 of 5 Sections 9-end page 1 Photo Log Name of Property: Hanapepe Road Bridge City or Vicinity: Hanapepe County: Kauai State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: December 7, 2015 View of the west approach from the west 2of5 Sections 9-end page 2 Photo Log Name of Property: Hanapepe Road Bridge City or Vicinity: Hanapepe County: Kauai State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: December 7, 2015 View of the east approach from the east 3of5 Sections 9-end page 3 Photo Log Name of Property: Hanapepe Road Bridge City or Vicinity: Hanapepe County: Kauai State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: December 7, 2015 View of the upstream parapet from the southeast 4 of 5 Sections 9-end page 1 Photo Log Name of Property: Hanapepe Road Bridge City or Vicinity: Hanapepe County: Kauai State: Hawaii Photographer: Don Hibbard Date Photographed: December 7, 2015 View of the downstream parapet and walkway from the northeast 5 of 5 /110� %%�- Sections 9-end page 2 Sections 9-end page 3 USGS Map Sections 4-end page 1 TMK Map 18009D040000 L80090050000 180090060000 i80090070000 t 180090080000 8009009000D 190120160000 790100000 191 90120460090 180090110090 190120480000 190110130000 80090500000 199110200000 01101700 190040230000 190110160000 19011009D000 190 99 000 19 1 000 180989990900 004 190100370000 1 004026001 w 1 12012061 190120210000 190120130000 1202/0000 1800805200DO y 1 1901003190DO IN \ __--e 190070010000 Sections 9-end page 2 199120470900 190040160000 19OD59050000 Elevations II ry --- ----------- -Lr I.r-1r-Ir�r�r�r-I�r� r ----------- �f ,r�rrr�r'�� r bar,: any or wu � — a,Y�cawxr: miaAR,u ev NORTH ELEVATION rYxY ,a Zm= tWt+1AJRY rtt�� O 1 i1139YWK-_ � © Y e 7 �ssiM� T -MAM G.m ru,u - - - VL �-v -- -- - - --v -- -- - - -I+ , io{iiV II 4'.T� M� �j I x Yx d M4 awns Otikl[11eM eY � SOUTH ELEVATION xuv_vie- i-v Sections 9-end page 3 Shanlee Jimenez From: Kaaina Hull Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 1:48 PM To: Shanlee Jimenez Subject: FW: Presenting Kaua'i Modern! Events in Lihu'e and Honolulu this October From: Lehua Kauhane[mailto:lehua.kauhane@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 4:11 PM To: Kaaina Hull <khull@kauai.gov>; Tiffani Yim <tiffyim@gmail.com> Subject: Fwd: Presenting Kauai Modern! Events in L►hu'e and Honolulu this October ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Historic Hawaii Foundation <Member e,historichawaii.org> Date: Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 10:34 AM Subject: Presenting Kauai Modern! Events in Lihu`e and Honolulu this October To: Lehua <lehua.kauhane9gmail.com> View this email in your browser 1 q•1' ' SEP 2 8 2017 IT !I �, .. - ' _ _- .�,-ice _ _ :y,:✓, ��'!�:-i 4V ■ AMr vcai L_ciiva, Historic Hawaii Foundation & Docomomo US Hawaii Chapter are partnering to bring you two free presentations, a ticketed walking tour and a new booklet titled, what else? Kauai Modern! Please join us to learn more about Kauai's Mid -Century Modern Architecture at these events in Uhu'e and Honolulu. 2 FREE EVENTS • Uhu'e Modern Architecture Presentation & Talk Story Friday, October 6 5:00- 7:00 PM Uhu'e Civic Center, Moikeha Conference Room 2A/213 • Honolulu Modern Architecture Presentation & Talk Story Wednesday, October 11 5:00- 7:00 PM Ward Village Courtyard (formerly IBM Building), Honolulu Registration required. Click here for more information and to register. WALKING TOUR • The Uhu'e Walking Tour Saturday, October 7 Tour 3:00-5:00 pm Pau Hana 5:00-7:00 pm Meet in front of the Lihu'e Civic Center, 4444 Rice Street, Uhu'e Pau hana at Ha Coffee Bar, 4180 Rice Street 3 Tickets required. Click here for more information and to purchase tickets. Want to purchase the booklet? Click here to prepay & reserve your copy. This program is supported by a grant from the Hawaii Council for the Humanities. ,0,4 I'l CO�TNCIE FOR THE `Q� HUMANITIES HHAWAI I FOUNDATION Copyright © 2017 Historic Hawaii Foundation. Ali rights reserved. Our mailing address is: 680 iwilei Road. Suite 690, Honolulu, HI 96817 Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your references or unsubscribe from this list