Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
May 17, 2018 Agenda Packet
MEETING OF THE KAUA'I COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION THURSDAY, MAY 17, 2018 I B RN 10 ' '`' 3:00 p.m. (or soon thereafter) L3hu'e Civic Center, Moikeha Building MEETING ROOM #2Al2B 4444 Rice Street, Lxhu'e, Kauai AGENDA SWEARING IN OF COMMISSIONER B. ROLL CALL C. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA D. APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 15, 2018 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. Rutgard Residence - 4380 Amaama Road TMK: 5-5-004:008, Hanalei Bay, Kauai Proposed nomination of the historic property to the National Register of Historic Places. a. Director's Report pertaining to this matter. i May 17, 2018 K.H.P.R..C. Meeting Agenda Page 2 2. Roman Catholic Church TMK: 2-8-013:004, K61oa, Kauai Re -roof and window replacements of the I st chapel (re -roof) , 2nd chapel (re - root), Main church (re -roof & window replacement), and existing residence(re- roof & window replacement). a. Director's Report pertaining to this matter. 3. Fujii Residence (David and Sara DeZerega) TMK 1-8-008:061, Puoio Raod, Hanapdpd, Kauai Demo of residence fire damaged residence. a. Director's Report pertaining to this matter. J. COMMISSION EDUCATION COMMITTEE K. KAUAI HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORY UPDATE COMMITTEE L. HISTORIC PRESERVATION PUBLICITY COMMITTEE M. HANAPEPE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT COMMITTEE N. SELECTION OF NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS 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: If you need an ASL Interpreter, materials in an alternate format, or other auxiliary aid support, or an interpreter for a language other than English, please contact Lani Agoot at (808) 241-4917 or lagoot@kauai.gov at least seven calendar days prior to the meeting. BR_'_A'FTjTj )BJIIIjI ve[IJ COUNTY OF KAUA'I KAUA'I HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B MINUTES A regular meeting of the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission (KHPRC) was held on February 15, 2018, in the Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B. The following Commissioners were present: Chair James Guerber; Vice -Chair Anne Schneider; Althea Arinaga; Lawrence Chaffin Jr.; Gerald Ida; and Stephen Long. The following Commissioners were absent: Commissioner Deatri Nakea (excused); and Commissioner Victoria Wichman (excused). The following staff members were present: Planning Department: Myles Hironaka (arrived 3: 04 p.m.); Deputy Planning Director Ka`aina Hull; Shanlee Jimenez; Alex Wong; Boards and Commissions Office Staff. Commission Support Clerk Sandra Muragin. The following staff member was absent: Deputy County Attorney Jodi Higuchi-Sayegusa. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:01 p.m. ROLL CALL Deputy Planning Director Ka`aina Hull: Good afternoon Chair and members of the Commission, roll call. Commissioner Arinaga. Ms. Arinaga: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Chaffin. Mr. Chaffin: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Ida. Mr. Ida: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Long. Mr. Long: Here. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Schneider. Ms. Schneider: Here. Mr. Hull: Chair Guerber. Chair Guerber: Here. Mr. Hull: You have a quorum Mr. Chair. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is approval of the agenda. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we approve the agenda. Ms. Arinaga: Second. Chair Guerber: Any discussion? (Hearing none) Any objections? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: Motion passes Chair. APPROVAL OF THE JANUARY 18, 2018 MINUTES Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is approval of the January 18, 2018 minutes. Ms. Arinaga: Move to accept. Ms. Schneider: I'll second. Chair Guerber: Any discussion? (Hearing none) Any objections? (None) Motion carried 6:0. HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Hull: This next agenda item is agenda item E. Hearings and Public Comment. This is for individuals in the audience that may want to testify on any agenda item prior to it coming up. I see that there is only one member of the audience, and I believe she wants to speak during the actual agenda item. So we will hold off on that, Mr. Chair. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS Mr. Hull: This next agenda item is, there are no announcements. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 19 COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Hull: There are no communications. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Review for Historic Importance of a 1.39 acre parcel located in "Aliomanu, `Aliomanu Ahupua`a, Koolau Moku, further identified as Tax Map Key (TMK) (4) 4-9-004:013, Owner: `Aliomanu Beach Living Trust a. Director's Report pertaining to this matter Mr. Hull: So we're on to agenda item H. Unfinished Business. Mr. Wong: Aloha, Alex Wong for the record. Mr. Wong read Supplement #1 To Planning Director's Report dated 1/29/18 for the record. (Document on file) Mr. Hull: For the Commissioner's edification the original Director's Report still stands as the Department has not found any reason to warrant a determination of historical integrity as far as architectural historical significance is concerned. Commissioner Ida pointed out that there could be historical significance on the site, but if it's archeological in nature it would take a significant amount of our research on behalf of the Department, which we quite honestly just don't have the resources to do that type of survey at this time. As of now the report stands that there is no architectural significance on the site. Ms. Schneider: So we need a motion to not... Mr. Hull: The Department is recommending this body find that there is no architectural significance on the site, architectural historical significance to the site; however, it's really at the discretion of this body where it wants to go. Chair Guerber: Do I hear a motion that there is no historical significance? Or there is historical significance? We need one or the other. Ms. Schneider: Based on what we've been presented with I make a motion that there's no historical significance to the structure. We don't know about the archeology and only testing will be able to tell us that. Ms. Arinaga: I second. Chair Guerber: Any discussion about this? (Hearing None) We have a vote. All in favor say aye? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: Motion passes Chair. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 19 2. Discussion on the status of the Certified Local Government. Mr. Hull: The next agenda item is, agenda item for discussion on the status of the Certified Local Government. This is again a place holder for when KHPRC has the resources to send staff over to have discussions with the CLG or when the Department has updates concerning their CLG status and any upcoming events or happenings. At this time the Department has no reports and of course SHPD (State Historic Preservation Division) is not here and not present. There really is no discussion on the CLG. NEW BUSINESS 1. Lihu`e Post Office TMK: 3-6-5:10, Lihu`e, Kauai Proposed Sale & Relocation of Services a. Letter (1/18/18) from Daniel B. Delahaye, USPS Federal Preservation Officer Request for Section 106 Consultation Mr. Hull: The Commission is in receipt of a letter dated January 18, 2018 from Daniel B. Delahaye who is the USPS Federal Preservation Officer, request for Section 106 consultation with this body. Just as a refresher the United States Postal Service has put Lihu`e and Kauai on notice that it intends to or is looking at relocating postal services, and ultimately selling the Lihu`e Post Office on the open market. The sale of it has been determined by the USPS to be apast. Potentially (it will) impact the historic property and therefore they're subject to Section 106 consultation which means they're required to consult with various parties. This body being identified as a consulting party to the process on what their findings are and you have that in the packet from Mr. Delahaye. Their findings are that ultimately the sale and transfer of the site on the open market will not have a detrimental effect on the historical integrity of the property. Much of that is predicated on the proposed private covenant that the USPS has provided in which they are stating that it ensures that the architectural integrity of the site will be maintained under the proposed covenants. It's open to you folks for your discussion and comment. I will urge this body ... the USPS gave each consulting party 30-days to provide comments and that 30-day window for both this body and the Planning Department runs up this weekend. As short notice as it is quite honestly action is necessary today. Chair Guerber: We have 2-days. Ms. Schneider: And the lease covenants, how are they enforced? And who enforces? Mr. Hull: There is a Covenant Holder and so they ultimately have to find somebody to hold that covenant. I can say that in a phone conversation with Mr. Delahaye he did inquire whether or not the County of Kauai would be interested in being a Covenant Holder and given the County of Kaua`i's participation in the Certified Local Government and its mission for historic preservation, I do think the County of Kauai could be an appropriate Covenant Holder. However, there are issues with the proposed covenant as drafted that we don't feel is adequate to ensure the protection and historic integrity of the site. If we ever entered into that we would have to resolve that. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 19 Chair Guerber: So the covenant would have to be rewritten to cover... Mr. Hull: In our interpretation of it, correct. If the Commission ... I drafted a letter. What happened was back in March the USPS entered into Section 106 consultation and they identified multiple parties as consulting parties. Those parties that they intend to consult for the historical review of the site and its possible disposal it identified; the National Trust Register Preservation, Historic Hawaii Foundation, the L-lhu`e Business Association, the County of Kauai Planning Department, as well as the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission. There were two others. When they initiated Section 106 consultation I received an email from USPS initiating 106 consultation and you folks are listed and we are listed. About 10 minutes after I received that email the same person that sent it to me, sent an email retracting those Section 106 consultation. I interpreted it as they were not entering into 106 consultation. Unbeknownst to me they didn't intend to send that retraction. While Lfliu`e Business Association, Historic Hawaii Foundation, and the National Trust did enter into 106 consultation (and) provided comments, we and this body did not because the Department was under the impression that it was not occurring. I contacted the USPS right after Christmas to inform them that we had not been provided, the Department nor this body was not provided the opportunity to participate in 106 consultation because of that retraction email, and I sent the email as proof that I wasn't lying. That's immediately when Mr. Delahaye who is the Historic Preservation Officer of the entire Federal United States Post Office program contacted us to say they will reinitiate 106 for just the County of Kauai Planning Department, and for this body. So that's what you have before you. I have speculated and I am sorry I didn't get to you earlier, we've been kind of scrambling and working with the County Attorney's Office a draft letter that the Department will be providing as a consulting party to this whole Section 106 process. And if Chair, if you allow me, I kind of want to go over briefly some of the points. Chair Guerber: Are you going to read the whole letter? Mr. Hull: I don't think it's necessary, we have bullet points and I can go over the introduction and the bullet points explain each of those bullet points briefly. It's about 7-8 pages long so I don't want to put the Commission through that. He sent his ... this is in direct response to his letter proposing closure and litigation measures. So this is our response and ultimately if this body wants to provide its own response that's what you guys are entertaining today. Mr. Chaffin: Excuse me. What's the date of this? Mr. Hull: Forgive me the letter is dated February 15, 2017, it should be 18. That's why we have "Draft" on there. I literally finished the first last sentences a few minutes ago. But we'll be sending that tomorrow, scrubbed and edit it down. But the letter opens, "Dear Mr. Delahaye, Thank you for your letter dated December 1, 2017 initiating the Section 106 process and granting the County of Kaua `i Department of Planning and the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission independent consulting party status for the future sale of the above referenced property. The subject property was listed on the Hawai `i and National Registers of Historic Places in 1989, and to this day the property maintains the historical and architectural integrity that was in place when listed in 1989. The subject property was listed on the Registers of Historic Places under the Secretary of the Interior's Applicable National Register Criteria A February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 19 and Criteria C, in that the subject property is A) associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; and C) the subject property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction. " And then our letter goes bullet point, by bullet point through a series of objections, so I'll just go through those bullet points. The first objection I made, "The County of Kaua `i Department of Planning OBJECTS to the defining of the Undertaking solely as a sale/transfer of the property out of federal ownership. The removal of the postal service from the Historic Li -hue Post Office is also an Undertaking separate and apart from the sale/transfer; however, the removal of postal services is not listed." The essence of this is that the Section 106 review process that they have engaged both you folks as well as us is strictly on the sale. The Department as well as other organizations, including the Historic Hawaii Foundation, and the National Trust Register Preservation object to this because while the sale could potentially detrimentally affect the historical integrity of the site. That is our position that the postal services are integral to the historical significance of the site in that it was listed under Criteria A and C not just for architectural importance, but because of the role that the federal postal service plays at that site. It's intimately connected to its historic significance and therefore to parse out the removal of those services the County of Kauai feels it's inappropriate, and a separate Section 106 process should be initiated for the removal of postal services there. The second objection that the County of Kauai has is that "The County of Kaua `i Department of Planning OBJECTS to the limited Area of Potential Effect." When a Federal agency is proposing an undertaking and their doing Section 106 review they have to identify the area of potential effect. They have identified in their undertaking solely just the property which the Department, and again as well as Historic Hawaii Foundation, and the National Trust Register Preservation End as inappropriate, because it is immediately adjacent to the Lihu`e Civic Center Historic District. In that the Federal Postal Services operates in conjunction with this historical district and that the APE or Area of Potential Effect should be expanded in the proposed undertaking with the United States Post Office. The third bullet point is "The County of Kaua `i OBJECTS to the proposed National Register Addendum/Additional Information de -listing Criteria A from the Nomination Form/Sheet." In the packet you have from Mr. Delahaye he has provided two separate sets of documents. One is the covenant that would, what their claiming, ensure that the next holder or owner of the property would have to adhere to strict preservation standards. The other document they submitted is an addendum to the National Register Nomination form. The Department is in agreement with much of what he provides in the addendum, in fact the addendum provides additional information on the interior space and recognizes the significance of some parts of the Lihu`e Post Offices interior space that isn't recognized on the '89 listing. However, in the addendum there is a ... the USPS marked Criteria C and left out Criteria A and we strongly object to that. Because the fact that again it was originally listed with Criteria A that it's a major contributing, or part of, or associated with events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history here in Hawaii. That is our next objection. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 19 The following objection after that is "The County of Kaua `i OBJECTS to the proposed Draft Preservation Covenant which could result in additional adverse effects." And we specifically state that "The County of Kaua `i, Department of Planning appreciates the proposed preservation covenant that would accompany the transfer of title of the subject property. However, the Department of Planning concurs with the assessment given by the Historic Hawai `i Foundation (HHF) in their Section 106 comments. " In which they stated "A covenant that provides adequate legal protection of the historic property needs to include at least the following sections: " And there's a whole array. I am not going to go through them with you all, you can see them, of different things that should be included within the covenant. Some of these are actually included in the covenant proposed by LISPS, but many of them are not. And many of the ones that are included are fairly lacking in specificity and this is the part where I was talking about earlier. The Department may be a willing participant in the covenant, but it's not until they are able to rectify these deficiencies would we be willing to enter into that program. Those two objections were just primary objections with the way in which USPS is proposing to mitigate any potential detrimental impact to the historical integrity of the site. The last two objections are just flat out calling a spade a spade and so the next objection states "The County of Kauai OBJECTS to the final decision made by the LISPS to close the Li -hue Post office prior to initiating the Section 106 process." Federal laws are very clear that any Federal agency participating in undertaking that could detrimentally affect or impact a historical property need to engage in the Section 106 review process prior to making a final decision. Tom Samra who is Vice President of USPS operations posted a letter, excuse me sent a letter to the County of Kauai on November 29th informing the County of Kauai that a final decision had been made to sell the post office and relocate services. And the very next day is when they posted at the post office a notice to engage the public in Section 106 consultation as well as they began engaging with you folks and us on January 18th. While we do have concerns about it and we have comments I guess in the beginning about the mitigation measures to the covenants as the addendum to the register overall, the whole process quite frankly is a bit shibai. Chair Guerber: So the 106 process is meant to help them make a decision. Mr. Hull: Correct. Chair Guerber: But they already said they made a decision first and then they're going through this sham. Mr. Hull: Correct. Chair Guerber: Of 106. Mr. Hull: Correct. That's kind of our final statement as far as the overall process and where that goes. The last statement is just something we had to bring up. When they posted in December 1 st to engage the public in Section 106 they had a posting outside of the post office notifying the public that they have 30-days to comment on whether, or provide input, on whether or not the public concurred or has comments on the finding of no detrimental effect on the historical site through the closure. There was no documentation provided to the public to comment on. We February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 19 raised this concern with the USPS on a letter, the same letter that raised the concern that you folks haven't been able to engage in 106. We raised a concern that the public could not engage in 106 because the documentation wasn't provided. Mr. Delahaye contacted me and said they will be reinitiating the public Section 106 consultation process and a new posting was posted outside of the United States Post, the Lihu`e Post Office on January 18th the same time the letter was sent to you folks and to the Planning Department. Staff member Alex Wong recently went over to the Lihu`e Post Office to see if the posting was there, and it is, and it states that documentation will be provided at the front counter. When Mr. Wong approached the front counter and asked for the documentation the front counter informed him that there was no documentation available and was unaware of what to provide him. He did take Mr. Wong's contact information and state the post master will contact him in the future, but today Mr. Wong has not been contacted by any representative of the U.S. Post Office unveiling these documents to him. So we're objecting yet again to say, you're failing to meet the necessary criteria to engage the public in Section 106 review. So that is our letter in a nutshell. We provided that for you folks if you want to utilize some of that language for your own action, it's available. If you folks want to go and create some of your own letters of comments that of course is definitely your prerogative. I know Ms. Griffin is here to specifically speak on this item. But I leave it to the discretion of this body. Ms. Schneider: Could we have a letter in support of the County's objections? Chair Guerber: We sure can. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we have a letter in support of the County's objections to the way the 106 process has been portrayed to us and the ongoing closure of the post office. Chair Guerber: Do we want to list each objection that he specifies here? Ms. Schneider: Yes. Chair Guerber: Multiple motion, make this motion multiple motions. Ms. Schneider: To include all the objections that were included in the Planning Departments letter. Chair Guerber: We're looking for a second. Larry? Mr. Chaffin: Yes. Chair Guerber: Second from Commissioner Chaffin. Mr. Chaffin: Yes. Chair Guerber: Any discussion? February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 19 Mr. Long: I feel that's an appropriate way to approach the motion. I believe that certainly myself, is (in) support of all of the points and recommendations made by the Planning Department in their letter. And I would like to add what one might consider a safety net mitigation comment. That is if at the end of this 106 process, and hopefully it will be carried out in proper manner, that if the post office is sold to another entity, that I noticed in the covenants provide for a new owner is an item of uses. The post office as we all know is the center of the community and holds a social fabric of a community together within a historical context of the downtown Lihu`e historic district. And that a mitigating factor, if a new owner purchases the building, that within the covenants there be a provision that there needs to be a similar use in the front of that building. So if the post office moves their operation, the social fabric as it relates to the historic context of L-liu`e historic district, will not be torn apart and that we can maintain the use if not the ownership. Mr. Hull: I think ... we don't have our illustrious County attorney here but I believe for clarity sake we need a motion to amend the existing motion to allow that. Chair Guerber: So you made that motion to amend it? How about a second? Ms. Schneider: I second. Chair Guerber: So now we have an amended motion on the table and a second, the amended motion. Any other discussion? Mr. Hull: Probably for simplicity sake maybe if you take a vote on Commissioner Long's motion, and therefore if it holds then it will hold with Anne's motion. But Anne's motion would still be open. Chair Guerber: Let's have a vote. All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Chaffin: Can you clarify or site what that motion is? Chair Guerber: This is the motion to support the letter individually... Mr. Hull: No, the one you just voted on was the.... Chair Guerber: The original one with his amendment. Mr. Hull: No, it was Stephen's motion to amend. So essentially it includes Stephen's motion to require a mail type service or something similar at the front of the building and that now includes it within Anne's motion but the overall motion has not been voted on. It's still open. Chair Guerber: So we're still open. We're just voting on the amendment. Mr. Hull: Including (inaudible) February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 19 Mr. Chaffin: I have a question. Is this too vague that we're not being specific as to what the use is? Could it be a place that sells socks? Chair Guerber: Well, the post office currently doesn't sell socks. The post office now provides mail service, so what we want to do to maintain that service for the historic district that all the people that now want to cross the street... Ms. Schneider: To keep the fabric... Chair Guerber: To place their mail, to get their mail, continue to do that. That's the motion in a very simplified way. That we maintain the historical significance of the post office even if the U.S. Post Office isn't in that building. Mr. Hull: Correct. So ultimately it's to have a mail service use or something similar in nature to that use at the front of the building and ultimately the Covenant Holder, if one is found, would be the responsible party for interpreting what is similar in nature to that mail type usage. Chair Guerber: Should we specify what these, those things are or should we wait? Mr. Hull: It's at the discretion of this body coming from the Planning Department and familiarity with land usage it's a never ending... Ms. Schneider: So what do we need now, a second? Mr. Hull: Well your motion is still on the floor. I think you... Chair Guerber: We voted on the amendment. Mr. Hull: No, the vote is already taken on the amendment. So the amendment passed and is now part of the overall motion. We're still engaging in dialogue and discussion on whether or not additional language is going to be added to Commissioner Schneider's motion and also to, I would recommend the opening to a certain point the discussion up to the general public. Chair Guerber: I would like that. Should we take a vote first? Mr. Hull: No, so the vote would end it. Chair Guerber: Now we're doing (inaudible). Let's open it up to the public. I am suspending the rules at this point. Pat Griffin: Good afternoon Chair Guerber and Commissioners, my name is Pat Griffin and I feel privileged to be here with you today on this unfortunate topic. The work that the Planning Department has done on this is excellent and it follows strong objections from Historic Hawaii Foundation and from the National Trust for Historic Preservation. One of the issues with Ann Sarver's Facilities Headquarters person from her letter of last spring was that area of potential effect, when the post office is defining it simply by the properties boundary. She had mostly February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 19 inaccuracies on when the surrounding properties were built. We are now in an historic building which she dated it '78 instead of '64 to '66, and there were several others. That area of potential effect is really important because it supports the idea of a covenant, being to have some P.O. (Post Office) boxes remain in that post office building. And I know since you all are preservation experts at this stage you know that we judge things in the historic preservation by areas of integrity. One of those areas of integrity is association and that building has always since 1939 been associated with post office activities. It will affect other historic properties not only this Civic Center historic district, but the historic museum, the historic Civic Center. A thousand people are employed by the County. There are a lot of P.O. boxes so I would encourage a strong statement about that, and also to repeat all of those additional issues and it's in the Planning Departments letter. You can also go back to Historic Hawaii Foundations letter to list those. It's a little difficult not to get angry at some of the things because in fact the first letter that went up at the post office was last February 1 st saying that it was no longer necessary, and listed to be sold at fair market value. Then they said wait a minute we haven't done this. But Samra talks about the public meetings, but they didn't as being part of the open process, but they didn't have any sign in sheet, they took no notes, and they were proforma. So this 30-day period, as president of the Lihu`e Business Association I wrote on April 27th asking to be a consulting party and I have not heard anything since. Anything you can do to support the Planning Department by saying this is not a true Section 106 review process would be helpful. To recap, I think that actually listing additional covenants that should and having them run with the deed so they are attached in perpetuity and adding that ability to retain some post office presence there through P.O. boxes. Objecting to the process itself because if any of these organizations (like) Historic Hawaii, National Trust, actually formally object to the Section 106 process as having been inadequate, you will have documented that also. Thank you. Chair Guerber: Any questions? Mr. Ida: You're here today as a private citizen? Ms. Griffin: I am. But for full disclosure I sit on the Board of Trustees of the Historic Hawaii Foundation. Mr. Hull: Pat, I know that you have some familiarity with the artwork that was at the post office. In reviewing the register nomination forms the artwork was actually catalogued and would appear to be a contributing element to the historic significance of this site. Do you have any insight as to where that artwork is now? Ms. Griffin: Generally, the current post master said there are 3 pieces of artwork. I think that she's confused. There are two pieces that were done by Marguerite Blasingame at the, during the work progress administration in the depression. The last I heard from a previous post master was that they were in the administrator's office. I know that Joline knows about them, what happened is (the) comp blower was vandalized and the bottom section of that got broken off. I've asked the National Trust because there is some evidence that at least some artwork in public buildings has to remain in the public, it doesn't get sold with the building. I haven't been able to ascertain (and) I don't know if it's just a certain period that required that or if all the public art. But if you're going to talk to Mr. Delahaye that is a really good question to ask. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 19 Mr. Hull: The art isn't there right now? Ms. Griffin: No, after it was vandalized the comp blower was removed and then they put up some sort of security or something that there was an ads holder that was above the door that goes into the post masters office in the back part, and that one came down because there's some obstruction there now. But those are important pieces, Marguerite Blasingame also did the beautiful art deco bridges at Ala Moana Beach Park, if you've admired them and did wonderful piece of Pele at the Volcano House and other artwork around the islands. Mr. Hull: In your capacity as a member of the public would you be amenable or advisable to the motion that the artwork be restored and returned to its original place in the covenant? Ms. Griffin: If it's sold with the building it will enter (and) probably become a private ownership. So I think the first thing to do is to establish whether it must remain in public domain. Chair Guerber: You're saying that the artwork is historic in itself? Ms. Griffin: It's historic in itself and it is a part of (the) public heritage. Chair Guerber: Any other discussion? Ms. Griffin: Thank you. Chair Guerber: We have before us a motion. Mr. Long: If I may add potentially two amendments to the existing motion on the floor. Mr. Hull: So Commissioner just for clarity sake because I know Sandra (Muragin) will be drafting these minutes. You may want to start off with I would like to make a motion to amend. Mr. Long: I would like to make a motion to amend the current motion that is open on the floor with two points. One is to underscore the bullet point request by the Planning Department in their February 15, 2018 letter to the Federal Preservation Officer of the United States Postal Service that the government and the postal service are here to serve us the citizens of this country, and we have a process called Section 106 to make sure that the government operates in a way that looks out for the citizens. It's very clear from the testimony presented by the public and the Planning Department that Section 106 has been violated and not been processed in a proper, and correct, and legal fashion, and I would propose that the Section 106 process be done from brand new start all over and be done properly. Secondly, there is some artwork associated with the post office that is mentioned in the National Register of Historic Places application and that artwork should be located, identified, restored, and remain in the public domain not sold and become private property with the building. Ms. Arinaga: I second. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 19 Chair Guerber: So this motion ask and demands that the 106 process starts again from scratch in good faith from the government and that we want to be consulted with it all along the way. Ms. Arinaga: And the second part of that would be... Chair Guerber: That the artwork be preserved, restored, and returned, and remain in the public domain not part of a private sale. Mr. Chaffin: I have a question on the term restore. What does that mean? Chair Guerber: There are museums around the country that restore artwork that will take upon themselves that they will repair tears, blotches, whatever and they will actually do the restoration so you can (inaudible), as close as they can so it looks as good as it was before. Any more discussion? Mr. Ida: I really like making them do it all over again. My experience with 106, I've seen so many times where I think the government is trying to slide everything under. So yes, I totally agree. Chair Guerber: Yes, this property is very vital to this community in a historic sense. So let's have a vote. carried 6:0. All in favor of these motions? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? (None) Motion Mr. Hull: Motion carried. So that again was the motion to amend the original motion so (it) now includes these two other points of... Chair Guerber: Are we ready to vote on the original motion? Mr. Hull: You want to ask for further discussion. Chair Guerber: For further discussion? Mr. Hull: I think I'll say to all parties here (we) are looking at the fact that the Section 106 process has just been not executed in good faith, and I think this body has seen several proposals under Section 106 particularly because of the highway improvements that you guys see and over the past few years you know... Ms. Schneider: Like for the consultant much more than us. Mr. Hull: They want to enter into a memorandum agreements with you folks, they want to bring you guys to other meetings, and it's an ongoing dialogue the DOT (Department of Transportation) has had with you folks on projects that have very little impact on historical sites in some situations. And low and behold we have this other agency coming that is a clear impact to historical resource and... Ms. Schneider: And an impact to this town. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 19 Mr. Hull: And I can also say that the Department on behalf of the Commission did request that Mr. Delayhaye or a representative from USPS be present to engage in a dialogue. Mr. Delayhaye stated that could not occur. The Department requested his reconsideration and that you do indeed send a staff member to engage in a dialogue to have a meaningful discussion towards the 106 consultation and again he did have to decline. He did mention that if there are any questions that the Commissioners or the Commissioners as a whole have he would be more than willing to answer them to the best of his ability. When I responded in the email would that extend the 30-day window? I didn't get any response yet. Chair Guerber: Is there anything we can say to make it stronger? Mr. Hull: From the Departments position I think this is sufficient. Mr. Chaffin: Could there be clarification that it doesn't have to be in person on the site. Could it be done through telecommunications, video, or some other such... Mr. Hull: We can follow up with Mr. Delayhaye and to see if he is able to perhaps engage in a Skype type of dialogue with this body. But for the purposes of the fact that 30-day window does close in the next few days the Department would recommend that you folks take action here today, and then we'll follow to see if he can engage in ... say a video dialogue or teleconference. Chair Guerber: All in favor of this motion say aye? (Unanimous voice vote) Opposed? Mr. Chaffin: Whatever the motion is. Chair Guerber: It's the original motion that Anne proposed. Chair Guerber: Are there any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: The motion passes. 2. Appointment of investigative committee members (Permitted Interaction Group) to discuss, explore, and survey other parts of Island of Kauai to update the Kauai Historic Resource Inventory. Once formed and the task completed, the investigated committee will present its findings to the Commission in a duly noticed meeting for decision -making. Ms. Schneider: I would like to continue doing this. I know Stephen is going to be off the commission in the next couple of months so we need another person at least to participate. Chair Guerber: Must the members of this committee be Commissioners? Ms. Schneider: Yes. Mr. Hull: Technically yes. We did check with the County Attorney's office. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 19 Ms. Schneider: Jim, if you have some free time and Ku'ulei, if you have some free time. Chair Guerber: How much time does it take? I have no time. Ms. Schneider: It doesn't take that much. We go out, we look at properties, and we figure we try to get to Kapa`a, maybe beach neighborhoods as the district. Chair Guerber: Okay, I'll do it. Mr. Hull: Generally there will be a nomination to it and then a vote. So... Ms. Schneider: I nominate Jim. Mr. Hull: And then I guess if a Commissioner would be willing to nominate Commissioner Schneider. Mr. Long: I nominate Commissioner Schneider to be on this PIG. Mr. Hull: So that's two. Mr. Long: I also nominate Victoria Wichman. Chair Guerber: That's three. Mr. Hull: Three is a sufficient number. If there are any other Commissioner's that are interested, they can have more. Ms. Schneider: I nominate Ku'ulei if she has time. Ms. Arinaga: I will. Mr. Hull: Commissioner Arinaga. Mr. Ida: I have a question. What is the Kauai Historic Resource Inventory? Mr. Hull: Under both the Certified Local Government program as well as the Historic Preservation Review Commissions enabling ordinance the County of Kauai is required to maintain a Historic Resource Inventory of sites here on the island, and it's essentially... for the most part it adheres to the Secretary of Interior's standards to recognize historically significant sites here on Kauai above and beyond say the 50 year threshold. So you have the 50 year threshold that now it's only placed on non-residential structures and all those can be considered historic. The loose way of describing the inventory is, it's above and beyond the 50 year cycle but it's not quite as high as the State or National Register. It's just an inventory that the County of Kauai recognizes these as historically significant and in many situations of course qualify to be nominated to the State or National Register, but it's up to whether or not the landowner wants those nominations to occur. So where it comes into the actual regulatory review or this body's February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 19 authority under Hawaii Revised Statutes, any non-residential structure over 50 years old is considered historic. For years it was every structure over 50 years or older is historic, so therefore any of those structures that were proposed to get a building permit or zoning permit and for alterations or changes or demolitions the Department would send to you folks for your review. Now that the Hawaii Revised Statutes have been changed to say its only non-residential structures over 50-years old that are considered historic. The County of Kauai utilizes this Historic Resource Inventory particularly for residential structures to say it has been identified as a historically significant structure, and if you are proposing to do any alterations you have to go before the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission for their review and comments. Does that make sense? I might have been a little long winded on that. Mr. Ida: Yes, but so this does not include pre -historic... Ms. Schneider: Oh no it does include, it does include archaeology. Mr. Hull: Myles, does the historic inventory include pre -historic sites. Mr. Hironaka: The existing historic inventory includes registered sites. Mr. Hull: So registered pre -historic sites. Mr. Hironaka: Yes, correct. Mr. Ida: Registered with whom? Mr. Hironaka: Registered with the State or the National Register. Mr. Ida: Oh, you mean it has to be on the National or the State Register? Mr. Hironaka: Well just for clarification, the current just includes that. Mr. Hull: So the current inventory, the one we first hired the consultant services back in the `80's to catalog historically significant sites on Kauai, those would automatically include the National or State Register sites. But then the inventory went above and beyond that to recognize other structures or buildings or sites that are of historic significance. But from what I am understanding from Myles, that the further up, beyond the National and State Register didn't include pre -historic sites. Mr. Ida: But it can. Mr. Hull: But it can, yes. Chair Guerber: And does this PIG determine whether it will or not? What is the purpose of this? Ms. Schneider: We have been looking at structures. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 19 Chair Guerber: Structures? Mr. Hull: Yes, and its not to say that the PIG could not entertain pre -historic. I think the reason being that the expertise of this body have been primarily architectural as well as the services that was rendered on the original survey. But that's not to preclude that Commissioner Ida with your expertise if you wanted to join the PIG and look at other sites as well. I think that would be appropriate if you wanted to join in. Mr. Ida: Good to know. Chair Guerber: Where are we? Mr. Hull: So currently we have Commissioner Schneider, Commissioner Arinaga, Chair Guerber, and Commissioner Wichman nominated to the Permitted Interaction Group. If there are no others the Department would recommend closing the nomination. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we close the nomination Ms. Arinaga: Second. Chair Guerber: All right, all in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Any opposed? (None) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: Not to be parliamentarian, that was just a motion to close the nomination. Now you have to have a motion to approve the nomination. Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we approve the nominations. Ms. Arinaga: Second. Chair Guerber: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? (Hearing None) Any objections? (None) All in favor? (Unanimous voice vote) Motion carried 6:0. Mr. Hull: The motion passes. For the Commission and Commissioner's own edification should any other Commissioner like to join the PIG there is still one more slot available that would ... no, sorry, that's four. Actually there would be no other slots available, I apologize. And with that we concluded the agenda Chair. COMMISSION EDUCATION COMMITTEE KAUA'I HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORY UPDATE COMMITTEE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PUBLICITY COMMITTEE February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 19 HANAPEPE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT COMMITTEE SELECTION OF NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS Chair Guerber: Next meeting. Do we know when the next meeting would be? Mr. Hull: It will be the third Thursday of March. Currently we don't have any potential projects but if we get some we will be forwarding you the agenda. ADJOURNMENT Chair Guerber: Can I have a motion to adjourn? Ms. Schneider: I make a motion that we adjourn. Ms. Arinaga: Second. Chair Guerber: All in favor... Mr. Chaffin: What were the dates again? Mr. Hull: It's the third Thursday of the month. Chair Guerber: These meetings are always on the third Thursday of every month unless notification (or) unless there's nothing to review, which the Planning Department will tell us about that. Mr. Long: I have a question. When we did the historic surveys with the previous PIG the work that Myles did to prepare the site tours was extraordinary. And with the absence of his recommendations, I am just hoping that the Department can find the resources to support that kind of effort in the future for this new PIG, whose community it hasn't been decided yet. But one for consideration might be Kapa`a Town. Ms. Schneider: Kapa`a, I think the baby beach area. Chair Guerber: So those notes are preserved right? Mr. Hull: Correct. Chair Guerber: Digitally? Is that how it's done? Mr. Hull: Yes, correct. So Myles was taking care of it and I think we will be working resources wise (on) who, what staff member will be going along, whether it's Myles, or whether Alex will be picking up the reins, we'll have that in the discussion. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 19 Mr. Long: Alex has been terrific also. Ms. Schneider: And we want to thank the Department for providing the support. Chair Guerber adjourned the meeting at 3:59 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Sandra M. Muragin Commission Support Clerk () Approved as circulated. () Approved with amendments. See minutes of meeting. February 15, 2018 KHPRC Meeting Minutes Page 19 of 19 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service 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 "NA" 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: Fish House No. 1 Other names/site number: Rutgard Residence Name of related multiple property listing: NA (Enter "NIA" if property is not part of a multiple property listing 2. Location Street & number: 4380 Amaama Road City or town: Hanalei State: HT County: Kauai Not For Publication: E Vicinity: ❑ 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I 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 _X meets does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance: _national _statewide X local Applicable National Register Criteria: _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 T a a rAPR 19 2018 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: FX] Public — Local Public — State Public — Federal Category of Property (Check only one box.) Building(s) ❑x District Site 17 Structure Object Sections 1-6 page 2 Date of Action Number of Resources within Property (Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing 1 1 buildings 0 0 sites 0 0 structures 0 0 objects 1 1 Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register 0 6. Function or Use Historic Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) DOMESTIC/single dwelling Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions.) DOMESTIC/single dwelling Sections 1-6 page 3 7. Description Architectural Classification (Enter categories from instructions.) OTHER: Hawaiian Plantation Materials: (enter categories from instructions.) Wood Post & Concrete Pier foundation, 7 3/" x 3/" heartwood Redwood tongue & groove and shiplap siding, asphalt shingle roof. 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 general 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 Fish House No. 1, built in 1945 after the end of World War 11, is a modest one-story, Hawaiian Plantation Style single family resort Beach House located on the beachfront in the center of Hanalei Bay, Kauai. The foundation is simple wood post and concrete pier construction. It has single wall framing and siding of heartwood Redwood. The compact 34'x36' original structure has a centrally organized floor plan, with an open Kitchen / Living Area and a full length Lanai along the north Hanalei Bay view elevation. The original 3 Bedroom 2 Bath home has had a modern third Bathroom and Laundry added in 2002 that is compatible with the original exterior architectural features. A historically significant 16'x27' open covered Entry Lanai was constructed in 1954. The roof is a simple hip roof. This home was built in a series of three existing adjacent homes by Lihue Plantation Co. as a summer cottage for their managers. There is an existing 384 SF non-contributing 16'x24' Guest Cottage on the property that was built in 1968 in a simple rectangle. The lot is sparsely landscaped and remains open where the original volleyball court once existed. Section 7 page 4 Narrative Description In 1938 there was a 16'x24' Garage constructed that was demolished in 1945 to build the existing nominated Fish House No. 1. The historic modest one-story 34'x36' Hawaiian Plantation Style single family resort Beach House structure and historically significant covered Lanais additions were constructed entirely of heartwood Redwood (Sequoieideae). The foundation construction is of 4"x4" (actual size) wood posts that bear directly on 12"x12" concrete footings. It has single -wall 2"x4" wood framing with vertical siding. An unusual feature is that the siding on the North beachfront and South entry elevations is 7 1/" x V shiplap siding and the siding on the two sides is 5 1/a" T&G. There are no vertical siding board & batons, so the shiplap siding on the North Tradewinds elevation and South Kona winds elevations may have been used to protect the wood from the harsh weather conditions. The exterior 16'x27' covered open Entry Lanai ceiling has 71/4" x 3/" T&G siding that runs perpendicular to the beachfront. The simple hip roof is modern asphalt shingles, installed after Hurricane Iniki (1992). The interior exposed single wall framing, siding and window & door frames are painted white. The interior of the house has not been altered and the original door and window openings have been retained. The window frames are 1 "x4" and the door frames are 1"0" (actual size). The roof support columns for the Entry Lanai (1954) are 5 1/2" x 5 %2", which demonstrates the conversion from `actual' to `dressed' framing sizes that is used in more contemporary construction. Roof framing screened vents are 4"x22" and site constructed. This home was originally built in a series of three very similar adjacent homes by the Lihue Plantation Co., as summer cottages for their managers on Hanalei Bay. All three have a very similar floor plan, roof profile and detailing, which can be seen in the adjacent Neighbor's Fish House No. 2's identical enclosed North Elevation 8'x34' enclosed Lanai. This Beach Home is designed in the Hawaiian Plantation Style. It has many architectural and design features reflecting a strong Hawaiian Plantation influence from Charles Dickey and the `Asian' modernism of Frank Lloyd Wright. This includes the open spacious covered Entry Lanai on the opposite side of the prevailing NE trade winds, covered full length 8'x34' North Elevation Lanai (1954) with expansive views of Hanalei Bay over the County Park that lies between the house and the beach. The original screened North Elevation Lanai has been `glasses in' using the existing column and fenestration openings to retain the original historic aesthetic integrity. The roof is a single pitched 4:12 hip roof, with a 42" overhang that protects the exterior siding from the coastal trade winds and winter sea spray. The effectiveness of the large roof overhangs is evidenced by the excellent condition of the Redwood siding. The original structure does not have gutters and downspout, as do the new exterior Lanai Laundry Area and Master Bath additions (2002). This subtly differentiated the existing building from the new construction. There have been three minor revisions / additions to the original structure that were done in a historically sensitive manner that conform to The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation: Section 7 page 5 1. The 6'-6" x 7'-8" new Laundry Area (2202) was added onto the existing covered Entry Lanai and does not obscure the original existing T&G Redwood siding. This was done to protect the historic materials that characterize the property. 2. The 11'-6" x 6'-8" new Master Bath (2002) is constructed between the existing windows and does not obscure the original hot water closet or outdoor shower & shower entry door. The addition has an identical 4:12 roof pitch and the window trim is also 1"A" Redwood. The new work is differentiated from the old by installing an aluminum gutter. It is compatible with the massing, scale, and architectural features of the original home to protect the historic integrity of the structure. 3. The existing North elevation screened Lanai has replaced with glass, within the existing screened openings. The renovation has been detailed identically to the adjacent Fish House No. 2, recently `glassed -in' North Elevation Lanai. The original Redwood swing screen door into the original screened Lanai has been retained and preserved. Despite the non-contributing alterations, the structure and property retain the historic integrity of the original home and site. There is also a non-contributing, legal non -conforming Guest Cottage built in 1968 on the property, approximately 35' from the historic home. This 16'x24' Guest Cottage is a simple 384 SF rectangular building with a simple gable 4:12 sloped roof. The fenestration is 4" jalousie windows with aluminum hardware typical of 1960's construction. It is non-contributing because it has a very different architectural aesthetic from the Main House. The property consists of one lot totaling 0.3723 acres (16,217 SF) and is centrally located on Hanalei Bay along Amaama Road, immediately behind the County Park that runs along a portion the beachfront of Hanalei Bay. The front of the property is at the corner of Weke Road and the flat lot slopes gently to the beach and ocean. The open estate grass lawn between the historic home and Weke Road is framed by mature towering Coconut trees and Ironwood Pines (Disambiguation). There is a 6' high Ironwood hedge along Weke and Amaama Roads, which is similar to other historic home property line hedges along Weke Road. The expansive open yard is landscaped at the perimeter with cultural plant materials, such as Ti Plants, Red Ginger and Plumeria trees. The original pre -cast 12" diameter concrete stepping stones to the Entry Lanai and existing outdoor shower have been retained. The exterior recreational space has been retained where the original sand volley ball court existed, as evidenced by the existence of an original 8'-4" high 2 318" diameter volley ball net support pipe. The structure suffered little damage from the tsunami of 1957 or Hurricanes Ewa (1983) and Iniki (1992). The structures remain in excellent condition and retain their historic integrity of design, materials, workmanship, setting, feeling and association. This is one property and home on Hanalei Bay, along with the Faye, Sanborn and Wilcox Beach Houses, that has maintained its original historic character, architectural integrity and site aesthetics. The Sanborn and Wilcox Beach Houses are currently on the National Register. Section 7 page 6 1. i 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.) 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. ❑x 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 ElB. Removed from its original location C. A birthplace or grave D. A cemetery F] E. A reconstructed building, object, or structure F—I P. A commemorative property ❑ G. Less than 50 years old or achieving significance within the past 50 years Areas of Significance (Enter categories from instructions.) Architecture Section 8 page 7 Period of Significance 1945-1954 Significant Dates 1945; 34'x36' Main House Constructed 1954; 14'x27' Exterior Covered Entry Lanai and 8'x34' Screened Lanai Constructed Significant Person (Complete only if Criterion B is marked above.) Cultural Affiliation NA Architect(Builder Lihue Plantation Co. 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 three Hanalei Fish Houses were built on three adjacent lots by The Lihue Plantation Co. in 1945, immediately following the end of World War II in May -April of 1945. Fish House No. 1 -- No, 3 were built at a time when Hanalei was transitioning from an agriculturally based community, growing rice and taro, to a more leisure resort population. They were built for their Managers and extended families to enjoy summer beach homes on Hanalei Bay. The level of significance for the architecture of Fish House No. 1 is local. This Application is for Fish House No. 1, which is designed in a Hawaiian Plantation Style, emulating the architectural design aesthetic of Charles Dickey. The recreational beach home has a modern `Asian' simplicity reminiscent of the Japanese influence in Frank Lloyd Wright's Section 8 page 8 contemporary architecture. It has a similar floor plan to the other two adjacent Fish Houses. Fish House No. 1 is smaller in scale compared to the larger Hawaiian Summer Beach Houses built by the most prominent of local Hawaii / Kauai families on Hanalei Bay. Fish House No.1 meets National Register Criterion `C' in the area of Architecture as one of the remaining residential examples of a Hawaiian Plantation Style Beach House with Estate Grounds, built with the highest quality of Redwood materials and craftsmanship on Hanalei Bay, Kauai. The 1945--1954 Period of Significance is documented because the original 34'x36' home was built in 1945 and the 16'x27' Entry Lanai and 8'x34' North elevation Lanai were added in 1954. Narrative Statement of Significance (Provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance.) In compliance with The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, from the time of the construction of Fish House No. 1 in 1945 to the present, the house and all other improvements have been maintained with the highest degree of respect for the integrity of the existing architectural design and have not been altered in any way as to detract from the historic significance. Minor additions have been made, such that the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment have been unchanged. Distinctive historic features, finishes and construction techniques have been preserved. Any new work that has been performed has been compatible with the massing, size, scale, architectural features and property environment of the historic buildings and site. The first tax record for the property is for a Garage in January 1, 1938, owned by The Lihue Plantation Co. [1] January 1, 1954 the existing 16' x 24' Garage was torn down and the nominated historic home was constructed. December 9, 1968 the property was bought by the Eagle County Development Corp. January 27, 1972 the property, house and neighboring Fish House No. 3 were purchased by Frank N. Wright. February 10, 1978 the property was bought by Malcom S. Smith, a prominent Kauai family and owner of Smith's Paradise, in Kapaa, Kauai, Hawaii. February 4, 1986 the current owners, Linda Rutgard, bought the property. It is logical that this property was initially owned by the The Lihue Plantation Co. because they were a prominent local business and were the primary landowners in Hanalei Town during the 1800's, and still have descendants living in Hanalei. At the turn of the 1800's Hanalei was an agricultural community growing rice and taro. In the Teens and Twenties Hanalei was Section 8 page 9 transformed into a vacation destination by many visitors and local families from around Kauai. The Albert Spencer Wilcox Beach House (1899), near the Hanalei River, the Kauikeolani Estate, the Faye House and the Sanborn Beach House (1910), on Hanalei Bay Beach. [8] are on the National Register of Historic places. Albert Wilcox was born in Hanalei, on the North Shore of Kauai, to his immigrant parents who arrived there by ship in 1836. "Albert married Emma Kauikeolani Napoleon Mahelona in 1898. He owned this 0.3723 Acre property as part of their estate named Kauikeolani, meaning "a beautiful vision that comes in the early morning mist". The estate included a substantial amount of the Hanalei Valley. [8] Hanalei, meaning `wreath making', is located within the Kauai Koolau District and encompasses Hanalei Bay. [4] Fish House No. 1 was designed in a Hawaiian Plantation Style, reminiscent of Charles Dickey, combined with a modern `Asian' simplicity similar to the 1950's work of Prank Lloyd Wright. [6] Specific Hawaiian Plantation Style architectural features include the 4:12 single hip roof, large 42" overhangs, large covered exterior Entry Lanai, full length covered Lanai along ocean elevation, single wall construction of heartwood Redwood and awning windows. Ripley and Dickey's A.F. Judd Residence, Honolulu (1899) and Irene Li Brown Bungalow, Honolulu (1899) are excellent historical precedent examples. [6] `Dickey returned to Honolulu in late 1925 from the San Francisco Bay Area ... with hopes to develop a "most charming", perhaps distinct, Hawaiian Style, "in which broad Lanais, interior courts, fountains and the like will play an important part". Upscale houses incorporated the new style, as did business and government buildings. A Hawaiian Style of Architecture featuring the Dickey roof and open, flowing interior -exterior spaces thus blossomed' [9], as seen in the architectural design and detailing of Fish House No. 1. In Fish House No. 1 one can see a modern unadorned design aesthetic expressed in the compact rectilinear building mass. There is an `Asian' design aesthetic of balanced simplicity, integrated design features and openness between the interior and exterior that is reminiscent of the Japanese influence in Frank Lloyd Wright's contemporary architecture. Fish House No. 1 exhibits a high degree of integration of architectural aesthetic and structural construction elements typical of the strong architectural regionalism of Hawaiian Style Beach Homes found along Hanalei Bay Beach. One can also see the influence of Dickey from the Hanalei Elementary School (1926) and Waioli Mission House (1837), Hanalei, built by Dickey's father William Alexander. [6] Fish House No. 1 is among the Beach Homes that survived the March, 1957 tsunami along with the Albert Spencer Wilcox Beach House (1899), Sanborn Beach House (1910) and Faye Beach House 1917. [7] The Sanborn and Faye Beach Houses are a Hawaiian Cottage Style. The Faye Beach House has a Northern European Chalet Design. Section 8 page 10 Fish House No. 1 is significant because it was built by The Lihue Plantation Co. in a group of three nearly identical homes in a more modern style with distinctive Hawaiian Plantation Style architectural components from the past applied with modern design aesthetics and materials exhibited in post -World War 11 resort homes. During World War II, Hanalei Bay Town was protected in part by a mass of barbed wire on the beach. At the end of the War in April / May of 1945 Hanalei Bay Beach sand could not be see due to the mass of rusted barbed wire. Immediately after the War, the beach was cleaned and Fish Houses No. 1-3 were constructed. [11]. AmFac, a reginal sugar cane land owner, sub -divided what has become the historic Kahoe Road neighborhood above Kalihiwai Bay. Many of the homes there were constructed using Hicks Homes building packages, whose primary building material was 7 1/" x 1/" Redwood Heartwood Tongue & Groove siding, along with all the other structural elements. The same materials were initially imported from the Pacific NW to Kauai to build Fish Houses No. 1-3. [12]. This was typical of the older Hawaii beach homes, yet was becoming prohibitively expensive by the 1970's. The original Redwood framing remains in excellent condition. Redwood is particularly resistant to the wet tropical'conditions, as well as being an insect repellant. The Entry Lanai and original screened North Elevation Lanai were added in 1954. The comparatively large open covered Lanai was typically located on the leeward side of many Hawaiian beach homes. It creates expansive opportunities for indoor / outdoor living, unique to Hawaii. The original Hanalei Beach Houses were built at a time when Hanalei was transitioning from an agriculturally based community, growing rice and taro, to a more leisure resort population. Financial resources from the production of rice and then sugar and pineapple created considerable wealth. Hanalei has long been recognized as among one of the most beautiful resort destination beaches in the world. Hawaii has had a long history of the society elites having Beach Homes. Kings (Ali'i) Kamehameha IV, Kamehameha V, Kalakaua and Queen Liliuokalani had resort Beach Homes in Waikiki. The `Outer Islands' also had their beach front retreats, as exemplified by Kamehameha's Beach House at Kaunakakai, Big Island, Queen Emma in Lawai, Kauai and the early Nineteenth Century Beach Homes built on the Island of Kauai at Kipu Kai, Poi Pu and Hanalei Bay by wealthy European immigrants to Hawaii, typically engaged in large agricultural plantations of sugar cane and pineapple or in providing utilities. [ 121 On March 30, 1817 the Cleopatra's Barge, owned by the Crowninshield family, sailed from Salem, Massachusetts to Europe. While there, George Crowninsheld entertained politicians and gave tours of the 100' long opulently furnished and painted hermaphrodite Brig. It is also rumored that he hoped to escort napoleon from his exile on Saint Helena Island to America. On November 16, 1820 King Kamehameha II purchased the yacht for over one million pounds of sandalwood, worth approximately $80,000 at the time. On May 10, 1823 it was renamed Ha 'aheo o Hawaii (Pride of Hawaii). In July 1821 King Kamehameha II spent two weeks on Kauai entertaining King Kaumuali'I on the yacht. On September 16, 1821 King Kamehameha quietly left Kauai with King Kaumuali'I on board, which effectively exiled him. On April 6, Section 8 page 11 1824 when King Kamehameha 11 was in England to visit King George IV. Ha'aheo o Hawaii was in Hanalei Bay, perhaps scouting a potential rebellion as retribution for the exile, and the yacht ran aground on Middle's Reef in Hanalei Bay. The Fish House No. 1 property is located at the center of the 1.5 mile crescent shaped Hanalei Bay Beach. In front of the house just to the west is Middle's Reef. [4] The reason that the home has been known locally as Fish House No. 1, is because that was where all of the `Hukilaus' occurred during the summer on Hanalei Bay. Huki means pull and Lau means fish in Hawaiian. When a school of fish were spotted in Hanalei Bay by the Konohiki (the individual responsible for spotting the fish), the entire community was mobilized. Standing ready on the water's edge were two 25' long, 8' wide, heavy plank constructed flat bottom and transom row boats sitting on balsam wood rolling logs. The stern was piled high with fishing nets weighted on one side. The two -person row boats were approximately 100' apart and each sat next to a large wooden post with a turnstile on top. At the end of the nets was a long length of rope to allow the boats to go out into the Bay as far as possible to surround the school of fish from both sides. Once the school had been surrounded, the net was closed by the most experienced Hawaiian swimmers who could hold their breath the longest. It was their job to sew the nets together. Upon surrounding the fish, the entire community would pull both ends of the closed net, with the assistance of the turnstile winches, to the beach chanting Huki Huki. An array of fish were typically caught, including Aku, Opelu, Kavakava, and the occasional Mahimahi & Ono. The fish were distributed amongst the community by filling up each individual's shirt with fish to take home. An amount of fish was always held back for a community feast on the beach park in front of Fish House No. 1, called a Hukilau. [ 11 ]. Fish House No. 1 Entry Lanai was where the nets were repaired and became a community social center, particularly because there was a County Park in front of the property. The start date of the Period of Significance is 1945, the year the Main House was constructed. The end date was determined as 1954, when the two exterior Lanais were constructed. The structure remains in excellent condition and retains its historic integrity of design, materials, workmanship, setting, feeling and association. It has not been altered in any way as to detract from the historic significance. Section 8 page 12 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography (Cite the books, articles, and other sources used in preparing this form.) County of Kauai Tax Office Records: 1. Bureau of Conveyances Book 5204 2. Bureau of Conveyances Book 5503 [Obsolete] Kauai Historical Society for: 3. Aerial Photographs of E. Hanalei Town & Bay 4. 002.2 The Kauai Papers, Book 5, Hanalei Place Names 5. Griffin, Pat. Lihue Root and Bunch of a Hawai 'i Town. Lihue, HI: Kauai Historical Society, 2014. 6. Jay, Robert. The Architecture of Charles Dickey Hawaii and California. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press, 1992. pp. 68 & 136. 7. Johnson, Robert. "Kauai Hurt Worse Than in '46 Wave" Honolulu Star Bulletin. Honolulu, Hawaii. Wednesday, March 13, 1957: P.1. 8. "History of Kauikeolani, Hanalei Land Company, LLC, Hanalei, Hawaii". Home Page www.hanaleiland.com. January 20, 2018. 9. Hibbard, Don. Buildings of Hawaii. University of Virginia: University of Virginia Press, 2011. pp 32-33 10. Rutgard, Linda. Personal Interview. Hanalei, Kauai, Hawaii: January 22, 2018. Phone: 858-922-6854. 11. Faye, Alan. Personal Interview. 4209 Liholiho Road, Princeville Hawaii: January 23, 2018. Phone: 808-826-7630. 12. Wikipedia, King Kamehameha Hawaii. https://www.gohawaii.com/culturelhistory/king- kamehameha Sections 9-end page 13 Previous documentation on file (NPS): 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): 13. Geographical Data Acreage of Property: (1) TMK Parcel totaling 0.372 Acres (16,217 SF) Use either the UTM system or latitude/longitude coordinates Latitude/Longitude Coordinates (decimal degrees) Datum if other than WGS84: (enter coordinates to 6 decimal places) 1. Latitude: 22.202515 Longitude:-159.502645 2. Latitude: Longitude: 3. Latitude: Longitude: 4. Latitude: Longitude: Or UTM References Datum (indicated on USGS map): NAD 1927 or ❑ NAD 1983 Sections 9-end page 14 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.) TMK NO.(4) 5-5-004: Parcel 008 4380 Amaama Road, Hanalei, Hawaii 96714 The Historic Main House is on Parcel 008. Parcel 008 shares its western boundary with the eastern boundary of Parcel 007. Parcel 008 has its northern boundary parallel to the Ocean and fronts along Kauai County Hanalei Bay Beach. It has naturally occurring coconut trees and Ironwood Trees. Parcel 008 shares an eastern boundary that is the County of Kauai Amaama Road Right of Way. It is planted with an Ironwood Hedge. Parcel 008 shares a southern boundary that is the County of Kauai Weke Road Right of Way. It is planted with an Ironwood Hedge. The side property lines are essentially parallel and run north south to form a rectangle. Parcel oo8 is bordered on the sides and across Weke Road by similar residential properties. Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected.) The boundaries were selected because there is one legal TMK Lot of Record that is owned and improved by one Owner. 14. Form Prepared By name/title: Stephen W Long / President organization: Stephen W Long & Associates, Inc. street & number: PO Box 22343 59 city or town: Princeville state: HI zip code: 96722 e-mail: slong808@gmail.com telephone: 808-652-8000 date: January 29, 2018. Revised per Hawaii SHPD Letter dated February 7, 2018. Additional Documentation Sections 9-end page 15 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. • Additional items: (Check with the SHPO, TPO, or FPO for any additional items.) Photographs Submit clear and descriptive photographs. The size of each image must be 1600x1200 pixels (minimum), 3000x2000 preferred, at 300 ppi (pixels per inch) or larger. Key all photographs to the sketch map. Each photograph must be numbered and that number must correspond to the photograph number on the photo log. For simplicity, the name of the photographer, photo date, etc, may be listed once on the photograph log and doesn't need to be labeled on every photograph. Photo Log Photo 1 of 17. Hanalei Bay, Kauai ... West Photo 2 of 17: Hanalei Bay, Kauai... West Photo 3 of 17: Weke & Amaama Roads Intersection ... NW Photo 4 of 17: Front Entry and Two Houses... West Photo 5 of 17: Main House East Elevation... West Photo 6 of 17: Main House South Elevation... North Photo 7 of 17: Main House SW Elevation ... NE PHOTOS & PDF's 8 — 22 Would not attach to the Application and are attached separately to the Cover Email Photo 8 of 17: Main House New Laundry ... NE Photo 9 of 17: Main House New Bath Addition ... NE Photo 10 of 17: Main House Lanai ... North Photo 1 I of 17: Main House Lanai View North ... North Photo 12 of 17: Main House NW Elevation ... SE Photo 13 of 17: Main House North Elevation.. South Photo 14 of 17: Main House East Elevation ... NW` Photo 15 of 17: Cottage South Elevation & Lawn ... North Photo 16 of 17: Northern Property Line at Park... South Photo 17 of 17: Neighbor's Fish House No. 2... South PDF 18 TMK Map PDF 19 Rutgard Residence USGS Map PDF 20 Kauai Assessor's Information PDF 21 Rutgard Site Plan, Photographic Key Plan & Exterior Elevations PDF 22 Rutgard Floor Plan & Exterior Elevations Sections 9-end page 16 Name of Property: Fish House No.1, Rutgard Residence City or Vicinity: Hanalei County: Kauai State: Hawaii Photographer: Kauai Historical Society Date Photographed: March 15, 1929 Description of Photograph(s) and number, include description of view indicating direction of camera: 1 of 17: Hanalei Bay, Kauai... West Sections 9-end page 17 . ..... ........ ....... . . ...... ..... .. ........ Name of Property: Fish House No. 1, Rutgard Residence City or Vicinity: Hanalei County: Kauai State: Hawaii Photographer: Kauai Historical Society Date Photographed: December 1968 Description of Photograph(s) and number, include description of view indicating direction of camera: 2 of 17: Hanalei Bay... West Sections 9-end page 18 Name of Property: Fish House No. 1; Rutgard Residence City or Vicinity: Hanalei County: Kauai State: Hawaii Photographer: Stephen Long Date Photographed: January 20, 2018 Description of Photograph(s) and number, include description of view indicating direction of camera: Photographs Nos. 3-17 are photographs taken by Stephen Long January 20, 2018 attached as separate PDFs below and keyed to the Site Plan, Sheet 1 of 4 of the Construction Drawings (PDF No. 21). Sections 9-end page 19 f E ]0.� i i; A� .T�-'_'- r.}� `r��t..9'�y.F 'ry��C �.Y` �. � p Ii �f C �� �. �).i • .i. .i any 4-_1 � Y,. � 4t ICJ �Z i 9 \.I '" ���' '•r : m h� ti- ro y - -�' t, i p A -;I j:- k=, Al � End ' .`t . i!^•'..�—��,�„ai;i�«�`" � .h, � s ti. ✓ Vie._ ,. �., .'�r.� r� -�".,� t �n i i r,. : y i 'All � � A V j T � � Vo Y T NE IN we ,lam'" r � ° ✓ ��, �,�'� L� w.4'� �F -gam ��� � i� r! � �, A AW Ali - ! E. } {I � �0:>•-:.;,b,� � ♦.'^� rY-� r �+ .,,-+', a , �: a, a +.l'F!'I:; s�', �l ,�,tr t . s,, � --.�, }..:., � 4 � E �� u' . t - t ; � # ti`egs{; �. �F�.:: � � `fit _ j _# [! ,�^: .. � ,1� .::�, .�.._ y„s? i h {.I 1 h , ih ti k �l yari 74 OR 19 R e � j n - r - . Jby IF Lr lot AL -'ilop ` t .� �'.���= '�9i r�s ~jw— . • � A if �_ _-ti , upc {au O a ' a - , Ilk tj 1 y Ya fn � y1�: Ql _ n a d Pp,t/ ' —.- 9m J� limeE pgODUM NEWS WNNEGT ADWY Ihnpscl! rwrw,W[gppo4p+'Mra�rt9ns'f�M�p1a$s'B�IWt�ltllNo'enu[lp�}yWliQtlSi�ch { nsrps;liwww. u sgs.gnvl uses stare MyAttnuar 1 J WV[at] Map Locator MAp iocatlnn pins dropped or searcned for by addnss/piace pro"de products wMiIA a tB m3lo tadias or spe4Ned location. ;l you hove any questlons or issues please dck here to email usBsstare®usgs.gov {mallto: a sgutnre.o sgs.govisu6lscr-Map•laca rorR82dQueatlai I, Jump to Popular Areas GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK r f ! CI'C� �gentBafas In_Neiahb�t,i'heod Recent Sales In. Area Owner Name/ Type RUTGARD.IdNOA HI PERS RES TR / Fee Owner Melling Address 1867 SPINDRIFT OR LA JOLLA, CA 92D37 Location Address 4380 AMAAMA RO Tax Chum0licatlon VACATION RENTAL Neighborhood Code 5514-1 Legal Information Year Tax Cloomfieatton 2018 VACATION RENTAL Year Built Effective Year Built 1945 1956 Year Built Effective Year Built 1968 196E Previous Palxei Next P lancet Owner and Parcel Information Today's Date Parcel Number Project Name Parcel Map Land Area (acres) Land Area (approximate sti It) Assessment Inrormatiod Show Historical As =Mlilrta Total Market Total Assessed Volvo value $ 5,044,300 $ 5rO44,300 Improvement Information Living Area Bedrooms/Full Bath/Hal( Bath 1,350 312/0 Living Area Bedrooms/Full Both/Half Bath 384 0/1/0 Other Building and Yard Improvements Description Quantity WOOD DECK RAILING t, Permit Information Total Exemption $0 Year Built P002 January 28,24)18 550040090000 - "NANI NANI HALE" TYR show Poecal Map D.3723 16,217 Total Not Taxable Value $ 5,044,300 sketch Sketch Building t sketch Skalch Euliding 2 Date Permit Number Reason Porten Amount 05/30/2003 0300000873 ADD $ 1,300 10/24/2002 0200002496 LANA] $ 14,000 Sales information Sale Date Price instrument V Insfinent Type Instrument Description Onte Recorded Document # Cart A Book/Page Convayanca Tax 06/02/1987 $ 0 0000000000 O1/1011994 $ 0 9400038586 FEE CONVEYANCE 03/04/1994 0 OVID/1994 S 0 9400038505 FEE CONVEYANCE 03/0411994 0 Current Tax Bill Information Tax Period Description original Due Date Taxes Assessment Tax Credits Net Penalty interest Tax 2017.2 Real Property Tax 02/201201B $ 2.059.09 $ 0,00 $ 2,059.GR $ 0.00 Tax BIII with irterestcomputed through 02120/2010 $ 2,059.09 $ 0.00 1 $ 2,059.08 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 Recent Sales In Nalahborhoed ReSMt ntesInArea Previous Parcel (text Parcel Return to Mein Search Page The Kauai County Tax Assessor's Orrice makes every effort to produce the most accurate information possible. No Warranties, expressed or Implied, are pravkded for the data herein, Its use or Interpretatlon. Webslte updated: January 28, 2018 01010 by the knuai County Ux Astener's Me i Wehslte deahla hyg blew Ie n¢I 4 Area 21 Document Typo Other Amount Due $ clan $ 2,059.08 g a.00 $ 2,059.08 Kauai Nome 1 vf+"v ' Wqn i 1 v)I YrivTMlj 2 0: do cl 4 W 1 d�Yti7lM1 Yoh+'� � a d 3y , io J II @ rJ 1+1'7'1 `s9 jha �-h17� Ci }�-�1 h�.l� inn �iJ00� ��bG� r' 9 H n \ B9 E a r a 'i 3 �Ys . 8 m 3 19 rK 1 Fp g �J I i cr ] N > � / .. ®Lm� CL �a xa al air f a N y EOm O w ll1 y r AReI. aG Ale.S C.uN �W S,d �r.+1 M94W3 54iiN6 ' �xtsT. D„SE 4L.�kca I�] (eA fed ♦ms-6 � Tul E A S T ! E L E V A T i o 1.1- /q Oa• 2•i4o cc R.wW.... 6,-P.0 Oow r! J.buw /O'er a a•. 2- Fw. � u•,.k ..s.+. ��.r. ra rxu� ® R-. iA 11 aMf. "bu•uc �IJJ INI 3^q�''., T. a15T..1} O3'. L` FM PsnAv, /awli •! v i 1 N 6 R-- 14 O t4 VW tO 5*7 L V—Fo x ( n4PuiTe]i A✓1 9 w FPSJ�IJ4 ® eiRdn3 W E �][i�Ys�OJ - wa0 /lr Fp�wtw � �1 rhl+ (� P -7,-T q^ sT a &p- tl t C_J P B—Q c 6Y..e— i n7Pum+4.rt c..nr. FiOoR- LA 1' T--.--�ll Michael A. Dahilig Director of Planning COUNTY OF KAUA`I PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ka`aina S. Hull Deputy Director of Planning DIRECTOR'S REPORT Kauai County Historic Preservation Review Commission I. SUMMARY Action Required by KHPRC: II. PROJECT DATA Consideration of the subject parcel and the proposed nomination of the historic property to the National Register of Historic Places PROJECT INEORAIVITION Parcel Location: Hanalei Bay, Hanalei Tax Map Key(s): (4) 5-5-004:008 Area: 16,217 sq ft LAND USE DESIGNATIONS & VALUES Zoning: Open State Land Use District: Urban General Plan Designation: Natural Owner(s): i Linda Rutgard III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND USE BACKGROUND The subject lot of record is located at 4380 Amaama Road in Hanalei, Waioli Ahupua`a, Halelea Moku, Kauai. The subject lot of record is privately owned by Linda Rutgard, and is approximately 0.3723 acres (16,217 sq ft) according to County of Kauai Real Property records. It is located within the County of Kaua`i's Open Zoning District, State Land Use Urban District, and.General Plan Designation Natural. IV. RECOMMENDATION The PIanning Department SUPPORTS the nomination application provided by the nominee, and recommends that KHPRC refer to the application for further detailed A r �r r • 1MAY 17 2018 AP 018 TMK: (4) 5-5-004:008 April 19, 2018 Page 2 of 2 information on the historic integrity and character of the subject property, Fish House No.1. The Commission is further advised that this report does not represent the Planning Department's final recommendation in view of the forthcoming public hearing process whereby the entire record should be considered prior to decision making. The entire record includes but is not be limited to: a. Government agency comments; b. Testimony from the general public and interested others; and c. The land owner's response. By ALEX W N Planner Approved & Recommended to Commission: By KA`AMA S. ULL Deputy Director of Planning Date: 3 !V cm PROPOSED RENOVATION PROJECT FOR: ST. RAPHAEL'S CATHOLIC CHURCH PERUrrgl&213 OWNER: ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH TMK: (4) 2-8-013-004 . KOLOA, KAUA'I, HAWAI'I g 2. EXISTING "2ND CHAPEL" BUILDING PROPOSED ROOF & WINDOW REPLACEMENT ;7 ... a MRWYET OlbeAleT P - .• 4: ` \ / MW4Me ppMhM lYeePef K A nWL' LREcro U _ ❑L EX) P N RGH a o J ZLo O ��-5 T - - (4) 2 8 013-004 / z w o_ LLiMK: �(EX.) OOMS (EX 15i CHAPEL p a- " (oc 3 ENE ' O HEN¢ 0 a z o _ BYO - - _ — IL SITE PLAN iee.._' _i•-. '�/ YICrI kT Nar,ozr - SNEEfNCr G10 IRI kl 0 q .2 .k � 9mZu c Cl r ) P@ \ E - 2 !� WIN § )\ < / . § E k H K 75 2 MD � § � ..� f � � � ( | ; ; m § 2 m \� � \ >l ( � • � | � | � || || PROACP RENOVATIONS TO EX. CHAPEL(Cr }s q | FOR:SI RAmAEeaCATHOLIC cuCH �|| OWNER: CATHOLIC __w__TE o«w | \ { kKAUn«_I . . . . 1 p PROPOSED RENOVATION PROJECT FOR: ST. RAPHAEL'S CATHOLIC CHURCH �R.,�,a OWNER: ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH TMK: (4) 2-8-013-004 KOLOA, KAUX I, HAWAI' 1. EXISTING "1ST CHAPEL" BUILDING PROPOSED ROOF REPLACEMENT - 7wx.er ;weiYd' 3 KA � - � ova „. �IaECTo ❑ -- }— W s wwt: omNcr +~H@LLlM�IN H RCH H EL � d' EL U O U � TMK: (4) 2-8 013-004 � S K Z :j a _ a 7ROOMS 1 I w-_� R. z 4� ❑ (EX7SSTCHAPEL W M° k co �� \v�V, O F in Q — I a001�-Y g �z ovawer. SITE PLAN YIG IT woTTosv BHFEfreR 1 ST CHAPEL, CIRCA 1842 - SCOPE OF WORK -- Sfi'-4' p+ . U.) 3-0 N)Irt I�SIncnv�¢�o) i I r rro.) � /rye -RmA l ml. fF5Q1.mw AS KOU AND Al i i i i a F L EX. CrAPFAMU, w I cl I I 9� L----------- 1___________J (EAVE) _ "EXISTING" STONE CHAPEL. CIRCA 1842 FLOOR PLAN W EXISTING FLOOR PLAN SQF FI FVATIONS ��� (L T U T U� SIDE ELEVATIONS C9 cii Z U 4" Is,-4, 4' 0) Q = EX. RAFTER W IX TRIM X © ® 1 Q V TJ o JIS J O _ IPfpSTINC H[N RW F 1 I I O_rL0 I•-' {L mow_ a off= it LV �P a I V y Eig Ill 0 Ho 4 EX. RAFTER W/ IX TRIM G REAR FlkyAT)6N FRONT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION ROOF PLAN ;, ASSM Rµ vaC @011618 EXISTING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXISTING ROOF PLAN a)I�trna Lb1�9 mare apa Proposed Re -roof &Window Replacement St. Raphael's Church - "2nd Chapel" Circa 1854 .Owner: Roman Catholic Church Kauai Historic Preservation Commission Review Date: 05.17.1 S PROPOSED RENOVATION PROJECT FOR: ST. RAPHAEL'S CATHOLIC CHURCH ll1'& 9 OWNER: ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH TMK: (4) 2-MI3-004 KOLOA, KAUA-I, HAWAI'I 3. EXISTING "RESIDENCE" BUILDING PROPOSED ROOF & WINDOW REPLACEMENT �v 1D(.)RECFOR� � KA ruuMu o¢nncr :- ❑� � w 2 a U TMK: (4) 2-8-013-004 171 CHAPEL - I o i c -ccc EN E10 I{Ex 3 3 f o tL ViGI E i Y MAP Nd O SITE PLAN �— �rPm 2ND CHAPEL, CIRA 1854 SCOPE OF WORK Q o� ,E (Ezl 10. 9180.E an�rFe ix0.Qlr+,OUT �AACF/MEA09r (Ev-} S%FF54� 90. \11EPL IQn.xn -xenMcc w/ f W .na as s«cc[s mw (xY �w m.l w/ ©-1�awvrrur� c .1 ax e.w er rcae a[o-ren 3ftFPLACEIXFA$pMwrFiiEriQ0. [kY 3' cav Fex. (Icnrna¢n7 - Ot>;1 ,. vm. ,rvw T„RWOgVI Crm.7 - �� ©mro� (ex7 ro..x.uan wmor -P/PFIem, M[7 +OW IAVYERS. AS -mrex¢ w/ Pvl em. FRUEp wM00w ro wTcx w/ 4 �1 vn. mwm eanm ro rnm, •aaeo.u- Q rw/ sr I,�n � ,xrnar lornlu iamn rand, oFcaic mc�aa .ruerm ,o wrsl rauo, rocrrc mumors (,w-7 $3'`' S's e E'*FI �j9�j9e9 "� � � a .—®RFPIAGEE�QSIINi YY0. FAAMFD WR�PAIS € a 8 � RIGHT ELEVATION u-ir ter_- ---------1'.� ,e I II I • ip ,uTpr QrarFce�rxw,wEvvaRCH aanaoFwc /,� la �V�gBCF0.6W®E O SECTION ELEVATION LOUVER afFj U2U =ti<S=z 1),Z ® I ® LOUVER DETAILS C3 p ELEVATION REAR ELEVATIONv _FRONT a© Qxsavcax maFw rexMwcrwraoFec 9 o II 1' +rgolex WEp�� /� /1� REPVLERF45CwY�EN REQV. O a 4 0 © { I © o W ` O z z y o0�x r wLL Fit 1 jr - I1R.N 4f�t - WINDOW DETAILS �. «owroors LEFT ELEVATION uamaolr s�rrro EXISTING FLOOR PLAN I ROOF PLAN EXISTING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS �a�1 ass 1ST CHAPEL, CIRCA 1842 SCOPE OF WORK IrEwwi axl c v�x¢c novas �-Illrea / twt +aor eo w� aw+ r----------r---------- � . Esc, ..! �1 w, rexu/nmr .s ranuxm ' I i I I I 1 I I i I EX_ CrAPFI 1 1 I Q i vl I = - r r (EAVE} "EXISTING' STONE CHAPEL, CIRCA I 42 FLOOR PLAN EXISTING FLOOR PLAN SIDE ELrVAnays - SIDE ELEVATIONS 4- 16'-4" 4" %. RAFTER W IX TRIM © E ENE N EX RAFTER W/ IX TRIM REAR FE.F.VATION FRONT ELEVATION REAR EVE FRONT ELEVATION ROOF PLAN EXISTING EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXISTING ROOF PLAN -1 LLI a � U �. % j � U U}=0 XI-2 ILA Q z Oyv_ J O = U v 4 O&Z 0� Waa ZWZ29 Lu Q u wnaarl n aaoraon srlffr xa c?1a9 Proposed Re -roof Project St. Raphael's Church - "'I st & 2nd Chapels" I n/^jtrod uci ng 1 orel M�pr0 �d0bctfl6 lmpreva upon tt Cm hTMe akaGQ�ST![pWleaaeYS Beet9ut+fa Westmed by aMm mvathvig amn.mm�e ggwitN,IaIV^ . [ou�txstnhclplassmatto amvluu molvpraoeeam. menvre Il®mualed agr ttmdmwn bervuen'ealpr 61ena todewbgym vib tho 9h0 dle amd -II, mmvm roof UxWedk110aaumwn palMmiiatYOt W! I�flTralCfeagve, alo!$g taylar Ilm[aYadart Landmark Pro° pronrutle�taopmrslF.lesser:°o-oe�ewerran4. Architect BO is designed specifically - tweapnagx vso rmcueTeerao sr�wa9Dw�9wlKr,! for the professional ' L&Em. 1e'Md'"ar'eab roofing contractor • IDry_ arsumsmprommeD •�S Z WMPHaam. r9yplppadeWL9Dl0Xo AIbla. thattakespridein CetWnTaetlsraeermtCORaFTeotlHprvtlddg0a0aDU¢d.7 • a4 W 51ealfflg 3n prodding more to agxresswace�..rranty s�ucnp� their customer. f Ita9upe�gd b tlnappaMlbt..ff..Ft d edatwrw �wlpa rar ula mrnm_.oa mar u.tmanaDw.avaa.°s. LANDMARK®PRO Architect 80 'Q IJMrtlk RO A1� 8D speelso.tlons • gr0 afara0enrc • e.m4MelQIs WlmisrpaYtea • gagrolefarluwleeealledm - uld4eeaaaTad rme.q • Issrnneueeilmna • co-nar LoeStrtr.nMatioe F ids • MeddNcwnz.t.arae aadarce,afeex • �� r.mwrw°wsaa. LANDMARK PRO Arthitectso COLOR PALETTE Max Def Resawn Shake N.D.[ Calves •Imkdeeper_ wah [4es DBF•e rio.r lelYaeB of LV eta[! pY. 11�a{� yy/ gets higlR�, neew ugtrW neon arameue app�mm oee! deplR e! ealsr.Mdtlea nMeeaF WaubeY yerirootshkwtleo¢u .M n:Fal:a,ei EXISTING RESTROOM (showing Arch Sa roofing) ' Owner: Roman Catholic Church ROOFING MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS Kauai Historic Preservation Commission Review Date: 05.17.18 LANDMARK®PRO Architect 80 'Q IJMrtlk RO A1� 8D speelso.tlons • gr0 afara0enrc • e.m4MelQIs WlmisrpaYtea • gagrolefarluwleeealledm - uld4eeaaaTad rme.q • Issrnneueeilmna • co-nar LoeStrtr.nMatioe F ids • MeddNcwnz.t.arae aadarce,afeex • �� r.mwrw°wsaa. LANDMARK PRO Arthitectso COLOR PALETTE Max Def Resawn Shake N.D.[ Calves •Imkdeeper_ wah [4es DBF•e rio.r lelYaeB of LV eta[! pY. 11�a{� yy/ gets higlR�, neew ugtrW neon arameue app�mm oee! deplR e! ealsr.Mdtlea nMeeaF WaubeY yerirootshkwtleo¢u .M n:Fal:a,ei EXISTING RESTROOM (showing Arch Sa roofing) ' Owner: Roman Catholic Church ROOFING MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS Kauai Historic Preservation Commission Review Date: 05.17.18 Michael A. Dahilig Director of Planning COUNTY OF KAUA`I PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ka`aina S. Hull Deputy Director of Planning DIRECTOR'S REPORT Kauai County Historic Preservation Review Commission L SUMMARY Action Required by KHPRC: II. PROJECT DATA Parcel Location: 1 Koloa Consideration of the subject parcel and existing structures for roof and window replacement. Tax Map Key(s): f (4) 2-8-013:004 I Area: 114.55 acres / 633,798 sgft LAND USE DESIGNATIONS & VALUES Zoning: I Open (0) State Land Use District: ! Agriculture General Plan Designation: I Natural, Residential Community I Owner(s): I Roman Catholic Church I III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND USE BACKGROUND The subject lot of record is located at 3011 Hapa Road in Koloa. The subject lot of record is approximately 14.55 acres (633,798 sqft) in size, and it is located in Waikomo Ahupuaa, Kona Moku, Kauai Island, Hawaii. It is located within the County of Kaua`i's Open (0) Zoning District, State Land Use Agriculture District, and General Plan Designation Natural and Residential Community. The property is the home of the historic St. Raphael Church in Koloa, and was founded in 1841. The church falls under the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Honolulu and its Bishop. St. Raphael's is reportedly the oldest Catholic Church in Kauai, and the parish was established by Father Arsenius Walsh. According to the Applicant, Nalani Mahelona — Licensed Professional Architect, the current roof material is a composite. Furthermore, Ms. Mahelona also disclosed that. St. Raphael's Church installed this composite roof sometime between the post-Iniki roof 1 1:,b *1,6 Cq• 'MAY 17 2018 TMK: (4) 2-8-013:004 May 17, 2018 Page 2 of 7 installation and today. St. Raphael's currently desires to install Landmark Pro Architect 90 with this proposed roof and window replacement permit application. Based on the historic information on file at the Planning Department, there is no mention of the type of materials used on the original roof or any iterations of the original roof which include: the 1893 addition of a wooden steeple to the existing bell tower, the 1933 removal of the bell tower and construction of the permanent adobe tower at the left of the sacristy, and the 1936 renovation and church expansion that doubled its seating capacity. EXISTING STRUCTURES & PERMIT HISTORY According to the St. Raphael Church website and documentation, the first stone chapel was built by Father Walsh in 1842. In 1941, in preparation for the church's celebration of its centennial anniversary, the 17 acre property was cleared of the overgrown cactus and kiawe and the stone ruins were discovered. No attempt was made to restore the entire 15 ft. wide by 45 ft. long chapel. Instead, only the 15 sq. ft. chapel sanctuary was rebuilt by the parishioners. The front was left open so all might see the alter; and two iron gates, a gift from Koloa Plantation, were installed at the front. The reconstruction of the small chapel was completed in 1942. The present day church of St. Raphael's Church was originally completed in December of 1854. In 1933, under the supervision of Father Celestine, the bell tower was removed and a permanent adobe tower was added to the left of the sanctuary. Then in 1936, Father Philibert enlarged and renovated the church to double its seating capacity, selecting S. Nakano of Waimea as the contractor for the job. The original rectory, completed in 1850, was one of four stone structures built by Father Walsh during his seventeen years in Koloa. The original structure burned down in 1900. Parishioners decided to restore the historic structure and transform it into a parish hall in 1939. Today, the building is used for religious education. There are two grottos on the St. Raphael property. The first was constructed in 1880 over the mouth of a lava tube. It was originally dedicated to "Our Lady of Lourdes", and was modified in 2008 to be the "Risen Christ" grotto. It is located some distance makai of the church and can be found at the end of today's "stations of the cross" pathway, constructed in 2008. Every Easter Sunday, Mass is held here at daybreak. The second grotto, which was dedicated to "Our Lady of Lourdes" was completed and blessed in 1941. The large two-story rectory that was severely damaged during Hurricane Iniki has since been demolished and removed from the property. After Hurricane Iniki, funding was made available to build the new church assembly hall (also referred to as the St. Raphael Community Center) just makai of the original church. It was finally completed and formally blessed in 2012. TMK: (4) 2-8-013:004 May 17, 2018 Page 3of7 Below is a list of the recorded permit history: 1. Permit No. Z-15 8-73 — Construction of a Rectory. B-207-12-73. 2. Permit No. Z-656-76 — Construction of a Parish Hall. B-896-4-76 on April 29, 1976. 3. Permit No. OEP R102352 — 30% replace rafters for church. Applicant: Roman Catholic Church on January 19, 1995. 4. Permit No. OEP R106854; Z-IV-95-6; U-95-5; V-95-2; SP-95-2 — Demo & Rebuild damaged Assembly Hall with classroom/office. Applicant: Roman Catholic Church on May 19, 1995. 5, Permit No. Z-472-00 — Construction of Garage and Storage. Applicant: Roman Catholic Church on January 18, 2000. 6, Permit No. Z-25-03 — Renovation and addition of lanai and carport. Applicant: Roman Catholic Church on September 9, 2002, 7. Permit No. Z-78-08 — Concrete walkway. Applicant: St. Raphael Church on July 30, 2007. 8. Permit No. Z-605-10 — Demo the Rectory damaged by Iniki. Applicant: St. Raphael Church on June 23, 2010. 113 1 U-1 VLII-im.va- IQIAD Ie l�►� It is apparent that the main church building underwent many architectural changes over the several eras of its existence. These changes would have understandably reflected the practical function of the building as it met the needs and budgets of the Roman Catholic Church and the St. RaphaeI's parishioners. Based on conversations with the architect, Nalani Mahelona, and based on the limited historical descriptions and photos of the main church over the years, it is believed that the roofing material most likely associated with the post- 1936 expansion of the main church building was a type of wood shake. For the sake of historic preservation and historic architectural integrity, the cariiest version of the church building that can be maintained today, could only be the post-1936 aesthetic associated with the adobe tower and building expansion. V. AGENCY COMMENTS TMK: (4) 2-8-013,004 May 17, 2018 Page 4 of 7 The original National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form, submitted on February 9, 1979, noted that: The structures are all of masonry construction, one or two stories in height, and associated with the heritage of Kaua`i's pioneer Catholic Church. Although built in various periods of the church's history, the buildings remain a coherent grouping due to their similar scale, use of materials and consistent association with the church. There are two intrusions within the district, the present rectory and parish hall, both of which were constructed in the 1970's. The church has been very conscientious with regard to the preservation of their property over the past thirty years and continues to maintain the buildings' good condition. On April 26, 1979, the Hawaii Historic Places Review Board received a Statement of Appeal from John J. Scanlan, dated April 25, 1979. In the appeal, Scanlan asserted: The designation of ownership for the property is incorrect; Some of the buildings on the site are not historical and should not be included. The inclusion of the entire 17.36 acres is not justified. Except for the Kiaimoku Grotto 44, there has been no historical significance indicated for the land outside of the stacked stone wall enclosure; and there is a new description and area for this parcel of land. In the time since this nomination form was completed (in 1979), Hurricane Iniki destroyed both the large, two-story rectory built in 1856 and the 1939 parish hall that replaced the site of the other original 1850 rectory, which was destroyed by fire circa 1900. Subsequently, the only remaining original structure, from Father Walsh's 1840s establishment of the Catholic Church in Koloa, is the main Roman revival -style church sanctuary and 1933 adobe tower. VI. EVALUATION In reviewing the proposed project site for historical significance, the following should be considered: 1. The U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines, and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) should be considered when evaluating a property's potential for designation as "historically significant". The U.S. Department of the Interior's four National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) Criteria for evaluation should also be considered to insure that the County of Kauai remains consistent with national standards. TMK: (4) 2-8-013.004 May 17, 2018 Page 5 of 7 Criteria A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; Based on the information on record at Real Property Assessment and the Planning Department, the existing historic structures can be linked to the long established history of the Roman Catholic Church and its presence on Kauai since the 1840s. This specific church, established 1854 in Koloa, is widely known as the first Catholic Church on Kauai. The continued presence, use, and preservation of the church's historic religious properties does represent a sustained and well - documented historic trend, and therefore this historic property does meet National Register Criteria A. Criteria B. That are associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; Based on the information on record at the St. Raphael Church and the Planning Department, the existing structure and the property itself can be directly linked to Father Robert Arsenius Walsh (1804-1869), Irish -British Apostle to Hawaii, and well-known Catholic missionary and distinguished local resident who has contributed greatly to the history of Kauai, Hawaii, and the United States. Father Walsh established the first Catholic Church on Kauai, St. Raphael's in Koloa on December 25, 1841. He lived on Kauai for 17 years, ministering to natives and local residents on Niihau and Kauai, and in that time oversaw the construction of the original church and rectory buildings on this property. Based on the continued association of the historic structures to Father Walsh and the significance of the first introduction of the Catholic religion to Kauai, this historic property does meet National Register Criteria B. Criteria C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; Although the original church has undergone several architectural changes since its initial construction in 1854, the entire history of the church building has been well -documented over the years, Criteria C may need to be revisited following the updated review provided by SHPD. If substantial architectural features and materials from the original Father Walsh construction remain intact, then there is strong evidence that the modern preservation of the original structures meets National Register Criteria C. TMK: (4) 2-8-013:004 May 17, 2018 Page 6 of 7 Criteria D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. + Based on the information gathered by the Planning Department, it is not likely that this structure(s), as it stands today, will yield information important in history or prehistory due to the numerous renovations, alterations, and repairs performed. VII. CONCLUSION Based on the information contained in the Report's Findings and Evaluation, the Planning Department concludes that the St. Raphael Church property is historically significant and the proposed roof and window replacement may have an adverse impact on the historic integrity of the existing structures. VIII. RECOMMENDATION Based on the foregoing evaluation and conclusion, the Planning Department recommends that the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission SUPPORT the proposed roof and window replacement plan with some reservations. In light of the Applicant's future plans to submit a new National Register of Historic Places Nomination form, the Planning Department recommends that the KHRPC formally request that SHPD review and comment on the Applicant's proposed changes to the roof and windows, and the potential effect these proposed changes may have on the nomination and approval of the historic property on the State and National Register of Historic Places. Pending further comment from SHPD, the Planning Department recommends that the KHPRC advises that the Applicant adheres to the following conditions: 1. Applicant should make efforts to maintain the historic form and character, to the greatest extent possible, of the historic St. Raphael Church structures — in particular, the windows and roofing. 2. Applicant should make efforts to use building and construction materials that are best suited, and most accurately congruent to, the historic (circa 193 6 for the main church, and circa 1942 for the small chapel) appearance of the chapel structures. 3. Applicant shall provide physical samples of the proposed roofing material to the Planning Department prior to Planning Department approval of the applicable zoning permit(s). The roofing material should be similar in appearance (i.e. color and texture) to a wood shake style. 4. Applicant should not install vinyl windows, which will have a detrimental effect on the historic architectural integrity of the structure and the nomination of the historic building on the National and State Historic Registers. The Applicant should install TMK: (4) 2-8-013:004 May 17, 2018 Page 7 of 7 wood framed windows that are consistent with the post- 1936 aesthetic associated with the adobe tower and building expansion. The Commission is further advised that this report does not represent the Planning Department's final recommendation in view of the forthcoming public hearing process whereby the entire record should be considered prior to decision making. The entire record includes but is not be limited to: a. Government agency comments; b. Testimony from the general public and interested others; and c. The land owner's response. By �/ ✓� ALEX WONG Planner Approved & Recommended to Commission: By KA`AINA . HULL Deputy Director of Planning Date: l u j� Michael A. Dahilig Director of Planning COUNTY OF KAUA`I PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ka`aina S. Hull Deputy Director of Planning DIRECTOR'S REPORT Kauai County Historic Preservation Review Commission I. SUMMARY Action Required by KHPRC: II. PROJECT DATA Consideration of the subject parcel and the proposed demolition of a historic structure (residence) damaged by fire. ft Parcel Location: Hanapepe Tax Map Key(s): (4) 1-8-008:061 Area: 16,031 sq ft LAND USE DESIGNATIONS & VALUES Zoning: General Commercial State Land Use District: Urban General Plan Designation: Neighborhood General Owner(s): DeZerega Family Trust III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND USE BACKGROUND The subject lot of record is located at 4505 Puolo Road in Hanapepe, Hanapepe Ahupua`a, Kona Moku, Kauai: The subject lot of record is privately owned by the DeZerega Family Trust, and is approximately 0.368 acres (16,031 sq ft) according to County of Kauai Real Property records. It is located within the County of Kaua`i's General Commercial Zoning District, State Land Use Urban District, and General Plan Designation Neighborhood General. According to Real Property Assessment Records, the 890 sq. ft, residence was originally constructed in 1934, and the effective year built is 1976. The historic structure was never nominated for the National or State Register of Historic Places, and has apparently undergone substantial architectural changes since original construction in 1934 — most notably the 1976 renovation recorded by Real Property Assessment. N• & • � MAY 17 2018 TMK: (4) 1-8-008:061 May 17, 2018 Page 2 of 2 According to media outlets, at approximately 10:30am on Wednesday March 21, 2018, the house caught fire while one of the residents was at home. Kauai Fire Department was called immediately, and the fire was extinguished by 11 am. The fire was reported to have caused about $300,000 in damage to structure and personal contents. The Planning Department currently has only a brief profile for this historic structure. The structure was covered in the 1994 survey conducted by Spencer Mason Architects and MLS. In the reconnaissance survey, it was noted that the residence on the lot included a "hip roof with corrugated metal, tongue and groove siding, and an inset corner porch". Photocopies of the residence prior to the fire and photos of the fire damage are attached as Exhibit `A'. IV. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department SUPPORTS the property owner's proposal to demolish the historic structure, and recommends that KHPRC refer to the testimony of the applicant for further detailed information on the current status of the property, and any imminent plans for the damaged structure and overall parcel. The Commission is further advised that this report does not represent the Planning Department's final recommendation in view of the forthcoming public hearing process whereby the entire record should be considered prior to decision making. The entire record includes but is not be limited to: a. Government agency comments; b. Testimony from the general public and interested others; and c. The land owner's response. By ALEX WONG Planner Approved & Recommended to Commission: By KA`AINA S. HULL Deputy Director of Planning Date: I v / �� Exhibit 'A' i _ _ I � s 3j f_ IR aI�t� Id {d •, } i u Z 1 �t ;_ y `.• �Y f" Ir iC r 1.� �� I i _ kk r > t 1: tit IF— f 4 --' ,� -. s �;. "y'. �: Y... �..y rq_F,�y';:'�r'£WY ,"`spr. -Wt� '�.._ .:^�s•l"-^'_ad ,.w.�-l� ,3„s�'�+A'^�io': . e.. �ii:.'�,�C�,ie;'�