2024-03-05 PL-SMA-2023-000046 Center for Biological Diversity & Sierra Club of Hawaii Opposition Testimony (Submitted by Maxx Phillips, Esq.)

Home

Legal Grounds for Denial: 1. Cultural and Historical Preservation: o Failure to follow past Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS)recommendations has resulted in the destruction of over 100 cultural sites. The lack of a burial treatment plan, preservation plan, cultural monitoring plan, and access plan for lineal descendants has been a primary contributing factor. o Hawai`i Administrative Rules (HAR) Chapter 11-200-27 states, in part, "[a] supplemental statement shall be warranted when the scope of an action has been substantially increased, when the intensity of environmental impacts will be increased,when the mitigating measures originally planned are not to be implemented, or where new circumstances or evidence have brought to light different or likely increased environmental impacts not previously dealt with." o The SMA permit application contains an Addendum Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS), which states, in part, "[b]y the time of the Tulchin et al. (2006) survey, more than 100 cultural sites had been destroyed in the coastal portion of Punalu`u, Wailau, and Ninole ahupua`a and none of the mitigation recommendations presented in any of the earlier archaeological studies had been followed through on." Because mitigation recommendations of past AIS have not been followed,historic and cultural sites, including burials and heiau,have been destroyed since efforts to develop Punalu`u began 50 years ago. o All SHPD approvals for the project area should have been completed years ago by prior developers. Because these were not, irreparable harm to a large number of historic, cultural, and burial sites which have been destroyed or damaged. Applicant makes no attempt to specifically identify and discuss the impact of the destruction of these sites on traditional and customary practices and the cultural landscape of Punalu`u. o All SHPD approvals for the project area should have been completed years ago by prior developers. Because these were not, irreparable harm has been inflicted upon a large number of historic, cultural, and burial sites. Applicant makes no attempt to specifically identify and discuss the impact of the destruction of these sites on traditional and customary practices and the cultural landscape of Punalu`u. o The restaurant was built on top of burials. On January 21, 1988 Sam Kaluna and Chris Bengay identified burials under existing structures at Sea Mountain (page XII-153 of the 1988 FEIS). This development threatens further desecration of these burials. o Further, in what was once a heavily populated area, there are likely unknown burial sites that will be inadvertently discovered and damaged should the project be allowed to proceed. Additional consultation with lineal and cultural descendants and sweeps of the project area should be completed as well. The county has an affirmative duty to protect these cultural and historic resources. Approval of the SMA permit at this time would violate that obligation. The Planning Department's recommendations do not adequately mitigate negative impacts.