Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2024-11-11 PL-CRC-2024-000019 Draft Cultural Impact Assessment Report for Lāʻīpala Makai PUD
DeVera, Ashley From: Daryn Arai <Daryn.Arai@outlook.com> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2024 10:58 AM To: Planning Internet Mail Cc: Matt Mansi; Ken Van Bergen Van Bergen; Sidney Fuke; Surprenant, April Subject: Cultural Impact Assessment Report for the proposed Laipala Makai Planned Unit Development Attachments: CRC Transmittal re CIA for Laipala Makai PUD 2024.11.12.pdf; CIA for the Laipala Makai PUD 2-13-2024 (reduced for email).pdf Aloha, Please find attached a request to the Cultural Resources Commission for its review of a cultural impact assessment that was prepared in support of a proposed 65-lot single family residential subdivision in Kapala'alaea 2nd, North Kona. Please contact me if there are any questions. Mahalo! Da ryn Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant Mobile: (808) 895-3218 i Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant November 12, 2024 Mr. Matthew Clark, Chair Cultural Resources Commission 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chair Clark: SUBJECT: Request for Cultural Resources Commission review of Cultural Impact Assessment Report for the proposed La`ipala Makai Planned Unit Development And relating to PL-REZ-2022-000014/REZ 07-075 &PL-SMA-2022-000012/SMA 07-024) Applicant: Hawaii One 1 Investors, LLC Tax Map Key: (3) 7-7-008:121; North Kona, Hawai`i As requested by the Leeward Planning Commission at its duly held public hearing on July 21, 2022 regarding the above-referenced applications, and as directed by the Cultural Resources Commission as a result of consultation held on June 8, 2022, please find attached an updated Cultural Impact Assessment for review and comment by the Cultural Resources Commission at its next available meeting. Please keep me informed of the scheduled meeting date so that we can assure proper attendance by Applicant representatives. Should you have any questions or require additional information to facilitate this meeting,please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Daryn Arai Enclosure: CIA for the proposed La'ipala Makai Planned Unit Development cc via email: Hawaii Onel Investors, LLC P.O.BOX 4501,HILO HAWAII 96720 PHONE: (808)895-3218 EMAIL:DARYN.ARAI@OUTLOOK.COM Cultural Impact Assessment f or the La`ipala Makai Planned Unit Development TMKs: (3) 7-7-008:121 and 001 (por.) Kapala'alaea 2nd A.hupua`a North Kona District Island of Hawai i DRAFT VERSION„ c. � Prepared By: tii't..:‘ :':,,.::::::::',.:11:Si`..t.,..,!,*-„,,:::: S. K au`i Lopes, B.A., .7,',411,,,,, vF ' '�tCandace Gonzales, B .A.,r ,, - .I - and I \+ ” Lokelani Brandt, M.A. Ai �� , Prepared For: ' -.: ��' "ti r ,� i -. :1111/4:1116: Aldersgate Home ''''' ''':"' �f � X146 e ° `rir.e. . -, 300 E. Esplanade Dr. Suite 1550 ,Sati" �4' 't#d e`:'�„zF-• A �: k t*.., -.. ^'P ` to .;.,F . 4:r z ▪ µ x - :.• , fi�,r E,�j Oxnard, CA 93036 i . /�'.. February 2024 f r -c_,... .: ° �£ .. f- ,M T: , �`. , ' . p_: IP Asim „,,,..: affiliates i I Archaeology•History•Anthropology•Architectural History Hilo Office:(808)969-6066 Fax:(808)443-0065 507-A E.Lanikaula Sireet,Hilo,HI 96720 Honolulu O{fice:(808)439-8059 Fax:(808)439-8087 820 Mililani Street,Suite 700,Honolulu,HI 96813 ASM Project Number 43070.00 Cultural Impact Assessment for the Li`ipala Makai Planned Unit Development TMKs: (3) 7-7-008:121 and 001 (por.) Kapala`alaea 2nd Ahupua'a North Kona District Island of Hawai`i affiliates 2:)1.71 Table of Contents CHAPTERS Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1 PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION 5 PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION 5 Climate 6 Geology and Soils 6 Prior Mechanical Disturbance, Vegetation, and Access 7 2. BACKGROUND 7 RESEARCH METHODS 8 CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT 8 KAPALA'ALAEA 2ND: A CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT 11 Lono: Association with Traditional Cultivation Practices and Makahiki 13 Chiefly Accounts in Kapala'alaea and The Greater North Kona 17 The Reign of Keawe, Alapa`i, and Kalani`opu`u 18 Early Historic Period Accounts 20 Death of Kamehameha and the Arrival of the First Company of Missionaries 24 Alahele Aina of 1848 25 Kuleana Act of 1850 27 Government Land Grant Program 29 Commission of Boundaries (1862-1876) 30 The Rise of Ranching and Agriculture 31 Kapala'alaea 2nd during the Early to Mid 20th Century and the Survey of Kelsey and Kekahuna 35 SUMMARY OF PRIOR STUDIES CONDUCTED IN THE PROJECT AREA 45 Haun and Henry (2006) AIS of Parcel 121 45 Gregg et al. (2006) AIS of Parcel 001 47 Kouneski and Kennedy (2007)BTP for Select Sites on Parcel 001 47 Haun and Henry (2017)BTP for Select Sites and Features within Parcel 121 49 Haun and Henry (2010)Data Recovery Plan for Select Sites within Parcel 121 50 Berrigan et al. (2018)Data Recovery Report for Select Sites within Parcel 121 50 Orr 2006 Cultural Impact Study 54 Gotay and Rechtman (2018, 2019) Monitoring and Preservation Plan for Parcel 001 54 Summary of Prior Studies Conducted within Kapala'alaea 56 3. CONSULTATION 61 INTERVIEW METHODOLOGY 62 NICOLE LUI 63 ELIZABETH DUNN 64 PETER MATLOCK 64 JANET MATLOCK 65 4. IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL IMPACTS 65 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii v Table of Contents IDENTIFICATION OF TRADITIONAL AND CUSTOMARY PRACTICES, VALUED CULTURAL RESOURCES 66 Valued Cultural and Historical Resources 66 Burials 66 Significance and Supportive Role of Kapala'alaea 2"d in the Kahalu`u Cultural Landscape 67 Kapala'alaea, the Makahiki Deity, and `Alaea(Red Ochre) 67 Ranching 67 Findings, Recommendations, and Conclusion 68 REFERENCES CITED 70 APPENDIX A. LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION LETTER 79 APPENDIX B. CRC RESPONSE LETTER TO THE LPC 81 APPENDIX C. KA WAI OLA PUBLIC NOTICE 83 FIGURES Page 1.Project area location 2 2. Tax Map(3) 7-7-008 showing project area in parcel 121 and proposed roadway easement from Ali`i Drive across a portion of parcel 001. 3 3. Google EarthTM satellite image showing project area. 4 4. Laipala Makai PUD master plan 5 5. Geology underlying the project area. 6 6. Soils mapped in the project area. 7 7.Hawai`i Registered Map No. 2060 by J. M. Donn(1901) showing project area in Kapala'alaea 2nd North Kona District,Island of Hawai`i. 12 8. Extent of Kona Field System (shaded gray)with the location of the project area 14 9. Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1850 by Emerson from 1891 showing portion of"The Great Wall" (Kuakini Wall)located to the north of the project area. 21 10. 1960 USGS map showing the Kuakini Wall alignment extending through a portion of the project area 22 11.Hawai`i Registered Map No. 34 prepared by J. P. Cooke in 1859 showing project areas in Kapala'alaea 2nd. 26 12. Coastal kuleana lots in Kapala'alaea 1st(shaded purple)and 2nd(shaded brown) 28 13.Mauka kuleana lots in Kapala'alaea 1st(shaded purple) and 2nd(shaded brown). 29 14.Article clipping from the Evening Bulletin (1898) showing coffee cultivation in Kapala'alaea 32 15. Portion of the 1928 USGS map showing alignment of the West Hawaii Railroad east of project area 33 16. Perryman's 1883 sketch depicting the areas between Keauhou and Keahuolu. 34 17. County of Hawai`i tax map ca. 1940 showing project area within lands owned by the Nahale, Green, and Pea families. 35 18. County of Hawai`i tax map ca. 1950 showing project area within lands owned by Christine Nahale and Jeannie Green. 36 19.Aerial photo from 1954 showing project area location 37 20. Map by Kekahuna dated January 13, 1954 showing the cultural sites in the vicinity of Lahae Heiau south of Kapala'alaea 2nd. 39 vi CIA for the Laipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii Table of Contents FIGURES Page 21. Kekahuna's map of coastal Kahalu`u dated January 28, 1954, showing Keawemua Heiau(red) and Lahae Heiau(yellow) 40 22.Article published by Kekahuna and Kelsey (1954a:4) about the history of Kapala'alaea 41 23. County of Hawai`i tax map ca. 1970 showing project area within lands owned by F.L. Smothers. 42 24. County of Hawai`i tax map ca. 1980 showing project area within lands owned by F.L. Smothers. 43 25. Project area as shown in a 1976 USGS historical aerial. 43 26. Project area as shown in a 1992 USGS historical aerial,note increased residential development to the north. 44 27. 2013 Google Earth aerial imagery showing unpaved road within the road corridor section of the project area 44 28. 2018 Google Earth aerial imagery showing areas mechanically impacted by bulldozing activities. 45 29. Haun and Henry's (2006:16) site location map annotated to show current project area and sites recommended for preservation. 46 30. Kouneski and Kennedy's (2007:22, 23) site location maps compiled to show the interim and permanent preservation buffers and approximate location of the proposed road corridor portion of the current project area. 49 31. Haun and Henry's (2017:15)map of Site 24534 showing Features C,F, G, and H with respect to the boundaries (depicted as dashed red line) of Parcel 121 and 001. 51 32. Haun and Henry's (2017:20)map showing the preservation buffers overlaid with the current project area boundaries. 52 33. Berrigan et al. (2018:5) site map showing locations of data recovery sites and features. 53 34. Berrigan et al. (2018:88)table showing a summary of the data recovery analysis 53 35. Photo showing the existing 4 meter breach in the Kuakini Wall (Site 6302; Gotay and Rechtman 2019:9) 55 36. Gotay and Rechtman(2019:12)preservation plan map showing locations of preservation sites and buffers within Parcel 001. 56 37. Stokes (1991:41)map of heiau in Kona annotated to show project area(red) and location of Keawemua heiau (green). 57 38. Reinecke's (1929:46) sketch of Lahai Heiau. 59 39. Ching et al.'s (1973)portion of Map 5 showing locations of sites documented mauka of the project area 60 40. La`ipala Makai master plan annotated to show extant historic properties. 67 TABLES Page 1. Traditional planting zones 15 2.Kuleana awards in Kapala'alaea Pt and 2nd 27 3. Land Grants in Kapala'alaea 2nd 29 4. Sites recorded by Haun and Henry(2006)within Parcel 121 of the project area. 46 5. Sites recorded by Gregg et al. (2006)within Parcel 001 of the project area. 47 5. Persons/organizations contacted for consultation. 62 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii vii 1.Introduction 1. INTRODUCTION At the request of Aldersgate Investment LLC, on behalf of Hawaii Onel Investors LLC(referred to hereafter as the Applicant), ASM Affiliates (ASM) has prepared this Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) for the proposed Laipala Makai Planned Unit Development (PUD; referred to hereafter as the proposed project) located on Tax Map Key (TMK)parcel(3)7-7-008:121 and a portion of TMK parcel(3)7-7-008:001,both of which are within Kapala`alaea 2nd Ahupua`a,North Kona District,Island of Hawaii(Figures 1,2,and 3). The request for this CIA is in response to the Leeward Planning Commission's(LPC)review of Hawaii Onel Investors LLC's Amendment to Change of Zone Ordinance No 09 8 and Special Management Area use Permit No. 07-024 for the proposed project. At their April 21, 2022,meeting,the LPC deferred action on the applications and requested that the Hawai`i County Cultural Resources Commission(CRC)be provided with an opportunity to review the proposed project to determine its impacts on the overall cultural landscape and whether those impacts have been adequately minimized or mitigated. The LPC questioned the level of effort undertaken by the Applicant to consult with lineal descendants in planning the overall project;whether lineal descendant access issues had been fully considered by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) and resolved in the Burial Treatment Plan; and whether additional lineal descendant access and open space requirements should be proposed to mitigate or minimize project impacts on the overall cultural landscape. A copy of the LPC's letter dated May 10,2022,is attached as Appendix A. On June 8,2022,the CRC convened their meeting and reviewed the written and oral public testimony,reviewed the subject permits and due diligence documents, and heard from and questioned the Applicant. After deliberation, the CRC moved to recommend that the Applicant conduct additional consultation with lineal and cultural descendants associated with the project area and neighboring ahupua`a. After the motion was approved by unanimous vote, Commissioner Ku`ulei Keakealani requested that consideration be made regarding concerns raised during the public testimony,one of which included an analysis of the remnant nature of cultural resources in the project area,as well as impacts to the site and place. A copy of the CRC's response letter to the LPC dated June 16, 2022 is attached as Appendix B. This CIA,which is intended to update the earlier 2006 CIA(Orr 2006),was conducted in compliance with Hawai`i Revised Statutes Chapter 343 and prepared pursuant to Act 50 and in accordance with the Office of Environmental Quality Control(OEQC) Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts,adopted by the Environmental Council, State of Hawaii, on November 19, 1997 (OEQC 1997). Act 50, which was proposed and passed as Hawaii State House of Representatives Bill No. 2895 and signed into law by the Governor on April 26,2000, specifically acknowledges the State's responsibility to protect native Hawaiian cultural practices. Act 50 further states that environmental studies". . . should identify and address effects on Hawaii's culture, and traditional and customary rights" and that"native Hawaiian culture plays a vital role in preserving and advancing the unique quality of life and the `aloha spirit' in Hawaii. Articles IX and XII of the state constitution, other state laws, and the courts of the State impose on governmental agencies a duty to promote and protect cultural beliefs,practices,and resources of native Hawaiians as well as other ethnic groups."This CIA is also intended to aid the LPC in determining the project's effect on the cultural landscape and whether those impacts have been adequately minimized or mitigated. The current report is divided into four main chapters. Chapter 1, the introduction, includes an overview of the proposed project as well as a physical description of the project area. To provide a cultural context of the project area, Chapter 2 includes cultural-historical background specific to the project area and the broader geographical region of Kapala`alaea 1st and Kapala`alaea 2nd, and at times the greater North Kona District with emphasis on the historic and culturally significant Kahulu`u makai area. This chapter also includes a summary of prior archaeological and cultural studies that have been conducted within or near the project area. The methods and results of the consultation process are then presented in Chapter 3.Lastly,Chapter 4 includes a discussion of potential cultural impacts as well as actions and strategies that may help to mitigate any identified impacts. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 1 1.Introduction N T. .......-- ii,u _....... N, —.......y \,,,,/ ,,,,,,\\ � . _. J . _. f p Project area l ' ' Hilo �■ Hawaii Pahoehoe f3�e,3ch /f #arkc ''''' .. White Sa" s Beach , ,-�• .• •. r 1 Park •• s e • • t.'ll 0� �� t B * a , I •• • •• , 1'•� a VI �7 ,4 . \ . •• i• • P 1 Ne iv 1 i '; \ 4$4 • • 1 • 1 22 I\.\\:,..\,.• _..............r. i _,,,,„ ( ( i d' • �• �" r .. ... • q ... j W ,.•• N , ,, 1,' , \ , , i c. , \ , , c, ...,-;-,.-'....:,..-,P..,'- • Kahain ‘,.,„ :\ Kahalua:p .• , Flet , y / Kalaau o Kah ent� NAL -tib{ "' • • , 1 f t ^ . a Project area Proposed Roadway AS r� affiliates f' !4.11`Mt.i Arcna.obgy•Hstory•Ethnography•ArcMttocrurai Htarory 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 Kilometers Copyright.. 21113'N.1101].11( ,_1.1 hii ,,oLlely_i-riihc,l. Isii.III RI. Garnin.FAO.NOAA.LS(,`, FP_\ L"i l'S(,S Figure 1.Project area location. 2 CIA for the La`ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 1.Introduction .10;ff, a .10--1 Dint WWI", 'wren, f "'"..".",,,--____,I_____, _,,,,,...,... ,p I.V•'7 or jr-jj al ..i'w*1•• t I I ---------°,,t---..\\ . . ....- ,...,,, ,.... .L---,., "<r_________Tf_....------'.. °"°_!.,•\ . ..E' i 1 Iii up— • „ 1 1 r .6....n :°''' ,',..1 ,,,,,,.4.,..-,. -,..“..,*. ,N, .,-,-. \ ”' 24 i ro cD 17 .'1 I '''''(-:77-7;----1' '51 `.t. 1 I ,. •:. so, .6 1,,el ..// 1 /.' f.F.I1r..... t ..'1.;71 P 1 -c-;; 1)hr ..„).: n't- --;"- :..', „------------F-' '., : o sm.,2 ---1—"------Ifr-. .- 6 I `,•'-' .1 • .•.., . ...:..;., - . - 4,. 1 \ 'II E > •tii -) i 1 'a -.= cI, '' -T„I• c - - t; - r, " = a ig Ps ''- t :0 ,f II' 1 - c i .F. ' i 1, \ I i - .z ; 4 .../X..,....,• I ! b -I...'.! .',••. ... Ci) 10 ,: ! 0 0 * \ W ; , - • i. t 'Z' . 4 ; I 1111: &gi I kJ *4 1 il 'Et1 ,./ / ) v i. \i\ i 1 4' 1 '-' 1 W k k LT z...5: •: ' ..4 u,' )j].--A-3'-' 1"-----7;03"------ i ' .'A.,- .__', a ,, n 1 I-. z « . ---.. _ "C a.) 4 I ., i . e I 17-4- 'i , *1* \ S '' \Z 1.1. . Ct C.) i'i 4 , Z x f 1‘ ..- 1 4 , x 64 '`'..i v n t t; , ., 1.. ct 6 -.I I , 1 I +a % , ti © i , jisi ` \ ' t,' Of , * 4 4 i 1 // a , ) ,la 1 1 11 'a).' 1 SI _ X ...i 7i 0 i h ' .li ...T ,,, ;.-. li 1 a)) 1 i. 0 ii* Z.'' Z. -, / !, minimmire . -.4-:,c t .! 01 g Z O ¢r, 1 ' 1 .... 1 -1 1 ,,:' 1 / T .‘ i ! ,& •C ,-17 ..., ., Y 1:i , k . , . K •, cz , k ' 1 .1:i ,. t / f / ',. C / 1 1 1 '—' N k / k ,,.„.,......,,, ,... ,.........,. IA a I A 4 6' . , ',.,,. cx, ( .. - \LA-- --....., _—_-1 „.„, lina, la aa ct e a) ;-, '4 ct 1 i,,''?... \ 1 --L- - ..t -. i ,,. .•'..-' • .4 (..) 1 5,. , q i , .- '.„, ,.•., , : 6- ç'1. Anre :.,':.• ( -/C---)) 411 ' i i ,,,\„, „‘ - ,, -717,,,, ,.._.„,,,,... C,?,,,,,,,i 7 \ , t _ • 1 % I ! ,, I a , ....... IAA, —- _r.l. .... tO ' < ,. : "1 6 i... ,, 47917 ; ii i I /f I I;' ' ••'. 01' 6...) • ' 1 i I • e I , , Al.aug, mm.9 4,ZII; OBS< *WM, --_____6_ ' ° .. V) k 00 1 ;'"" '''', _ .4,a • 1 , :•—_.____,,,„ CD ?;. :------ --11.-- ..--1\ .- 7.-;r.---a•----.41k... ..,„,j ,1 C) ,„ ,..„ ---,-,- __--....., s al Ill l-2-- l-2-- ------- ! ';', =:, (,,'' , _-,,,,, : ,, •-•";'-:--: , '.''',4rgi/::..!177 '._ --- '''';) (1'`' :---- ...., _ ,--;.i ,.;, "4",'-' °7 7'17---. A • ..-'-'-'- , -- ----"--.:-:--••"- ''' I.f .J. . .c. '="V'---,...."- -- '' - r ---- \tiri • ' '' ' li n - '1'" -Ti. 1-. - - '•• X Vrt I ' --, rn 1.^. .------ -..., -- " --- 1---1,-- 1 11 , • ,.! :, . , . ,, r,./.---. -...-'-; • ';'-i' .1,i''. ! I i • . ,.. ',I.'.,..,-. )1' "• c,..., ".--.-. 11,.,,. 7. - ,,,--. .A. ''2) -' -.,_ ip-•i. ,; ,4e, ::';.. ..•:,• .-., 0 ,i,.,_4JL:2,,E,., .LA - — N ' ? hi. .1...-'• .. '3-'' ! ''',- - ' 4 ' '''.7--- ,- - -.. : - . •`..I, N' - '''' --'-.--'.'"!. , , :,' 4 -'''• J.S.1- Z--1) . , i . •'-p• : ... , fil... . r :7%:: :; lif::::';';iFji‘.' I';',•.-.....-.;-......i.,:.:;2,', ',:-. :-:. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapalacalaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 3 1.Introduction N \)s,it ., ±, A v . rfi, Project area ` '• ,�. - Hilo 1 Hawaii If , 7 " 41 lb ' .7 l : .' y it. "2- tT . +► r 4 . 6r a y r% ' I, Ili. r l _ I �. M1 CJ. a 1,1 ct iik �. ' p 1,; t , : t , M I.... l. . t r.. s F. ti 0 fi • !4 ' I. 3 , / .,,,•• g, 1 Project area Proposed Roadway ASM 'F',', 61 affiliates i, i4.?t Archaeology•History.Ethnograp,y•Archdecturai Nmtory 0 0.1 0.1 0.2 Kilometers Rccnur,,Mapping Hawaii.Mazar.Emil,HI RI_(lamun, 11O_H I 1:v S(iti.I PA,Esri.USGS Figure 3. Google EarthTM satellite image showing project area. 4 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 1.Introduction PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Applicant is proposing to develop sixty-two roughly 7,500 square foot single family residential lots on the 11.4- acre TMK parcel 121.Additionally,the Applicant is proposing the construction of six drive courts,a roadway stubout, sidewalks, utility easements, landscaping, and the extension of the existing Naniloa Drive located within the neighboring White Sands Beach Estates Subdivision.The extended Naniloa Drive could serve as the main access road into the proposed subdivision.The Applicant is also considering the construction of a new 50-foot wide roadway that would provide access into the proposed subdivision from Alii Drive. The proposed subdivision includes about 5,000 square feet of open space and two preservation easements for a burial and archaeological site.A master plan showing the layout of the proposed Laipala Makai PUD is provided in Figure 14. The Laipala Makai PUD is a portion of a larger conceptual subdivision known as the Laipala Heights Project that was proposed in 2007 but has since never been constructed. As part of the Laipala Heights Project,Ka`imipono Consulting Services LLC prepared a Cultural Impact Study/Assessment(Orr 2006). During the CRC's review of the proposed project, they recommended that an updated CIA be prepared that includes consultation with lineal and cultural descendants and other relevant stakeholders. IyIJ,TFH PLAN hr.,i8lh 0-LOIS ,now ......rook ln:PWrelsorlsos -7......,. .,._....._ _ _.. .__._roof ' ...,,...._,,.. �., 3J sorrosYn' 15 } { eritosiflon Canova, 1 q 1 .7, uwee! "° syM„Y QJ ,,a. AN-sot smarm MAwi —_IOW Uri aIN'MV, isaso mos owiso ..n Earn Snow+Waal 7NX.13r'-'-.W.[:} I.,1 1paLI1.'Mated Id,FOsai., ..see rssa OM./Collfira.vlue Dez VP,+ Figure 4.Laipala Makai PUD master plan. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION Located roughly 0.25 miles north of the Kahalu`u Historic District(State Inventory of Historic Places [SIHP] Site 50- 10-37-04150), the project area is comprised of the 11.4-acre rectangular shaped TMK parcel(3)7-7-008:121 plus a 50-foot-wide access and utility corridor(totaling 0.807 acres)that meanders in an east-west(mauka-makai)direction through parcel 001's central interior. Collectively the project area includes a total area of roughly 12.2 acres that are within Kapala`alaaea 2nd Ahupua`a, North Kona, Island of Hawaii (see Figures 1, 2, and 3). At its makai (western) boundary,the project area is at 17 feet above mean sea level(amsl)and rises gradually to 115 feet(amsl)at its mauka (northeastern) most terminus. The north and south boundaries of parcel 121 are demarcated by historic ahupua'a boundary walls that extend makai along the boundaries of parcel 001 to the mauka edge of present-thy Alii Drive. The northern boundary of parcel 121 is bordered by the White Sands Beach Estate and the Keauhou View Estates subdivisions;to the east by the undeveloped Alii Highway Right-of-Way corridor,to the south by undeveloped lands owned by Kamehameha Schools;and the west by the undeveloped parcel 001 owned by Hawaii Two2 LLC. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 5 1.Introduction Climate The climatic pattern within central Kona, which spans south from Kailua to Honaunau, is influenced by two large, shied volcanoes, Huallai and Mauna Loa, which buffers much of Kona from the moisture-laden trade winds. Although the mountain-induced orographic rainfall generates minimal rain for Kona,local topography combined with daily heating and cooling patterns typically generates cloud formation and rain at about the 2,000 foot elevation(Cordy et al. 1991). As such, those areas located makai of the 2,000-foot elevation are often arid, such as the project area which received anywhere between 1.7 to 3.76 inches of annual rainfall.Unlike its windward counterparts,peak rainfall in Kona occurs during kau(thy season)which begins about April through September when the southerly(kona)storms carrying an abundance of moisture makes landfall(Giambelluca et al. 2013). The air temperature in the project area is consistently warm and dips as low as 71° Fahrenheit during ho'oilo (wet season; typically occurring between October through March)and increases to about 77°Fahrenheit during kau (Giambelluca et al. 2014). The name kona which refers directly to the dry and arid west and southwest sides of the islands aptly describes the district's environmental conditions(Andrews and Parker 1922). Geology and Soils The geology underlying the project area is comprised entirely of volcanic flows originating from Huallai dating between 11,000 to 30,000 years ago and is mapped in Figure 5 below as"Qh"(Sherrod et al.2021).The entire project area's soil type has been classified as Punalu`u highly decomposed plant material with a 2-10%slope and is mapped in Figure 14 as"120"(Soil Survey Staff 2022). ,F. 9R � •t 'iW► art ©Project area Qh.1 1.000-30.000 ;Proposed Roadway yeFlualalai Volcanies Project area H,I 0 0.1 0.2 ter, Hawan Kilometers ASMi Esri,CGIAR.USGS.Ism V HERE G it FAO NCAP. ,afjai, i S b�{ ' 11R 11111011 141 {Ulm. I 1.1ra n 6til 01 I ho I Figure 5. Geology underlying the project area. 6 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background T . + "' a`: 14 l t• w w e sa A . 122 n„"d,.# d..-. " 1211 i.. "`N,, m . fit ' ✓ 1.•, .IAS QProject arra I20•Punaluu highly 122,Punaluu-Lava flows I decomposed plant material. complex.10-20%slopes 2-IO°fo slopes Proieel area HIS Proposed Roadway 0 0.1 0.2 �- Hawa, Kilometers ASM r, rs,l.HERE Garmlo.EAo Sol S P y SIrfl.V 1 1 1 N INV( 1. A1100 S, I Mp3 t 11,I -1N II Su,l SI NOp0.USGS,EPR.E . ,V,..f„.3ff S p..',,'y ., In GGpliA.(SSE.PAR./FE/got-law:w:iWEA:ouh .. n:n hp.:...hndarAA..,,. :w Igo, OK II-:[r:i USGS Figure 6. Soils mapped in the project area. Prior Mechanical Disturbance,Vegetation, and Access Large portions of parcel 121 have been mechanically altered through prior permitted land clearing that occurred ca. 2018. This has left much of the parcel devoid of its natural topographic features and vegetation,which today consist mainly of ekoa(Leucaena leucocephala),kiawe(Prosopis pallida),opiuma(Pithecellobium dulce),lantana(Lantana camara),air plants(Bryophyllum pinnatum),and grasses and vines.Access to Parcel 121 is from Naniloa Drive.There is currently no vehicular access to Parcel 001,however,pedestrian access can be made from Alii Drive. 2. BACKGROUND As specified in the OEQC Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts (1997:1), "...the geographical extent of the inquiry should, in most instances,be greater than the area over which the proposed action will take place. This is to ensure that cultural practices which may not occur within the boundaries of the project area,but which may nonetheless be affected,are included in the assessment.”For this CIA,the ahupua'a of Kapala`alaea 2nd is considered the `study area',while the location of the proposed development activities is referred to as the `project area'. To generate a set of expectations regarding the nature of cultural resources and customary practices that might be encountered within the current project area and to establish a context within which to assess the significance of such resources, the background section begins with a general culture-historical context. This is followed by culture- historical background information concerning the history of Kapala`alaaea 2. Limited background information for North Kona,the broader regional designation in which Kapalaa`alaea 2 is situated, also falls within the parameters of the OEQC guidelines and ensures that a broader set of cultural practices and histories are considered.Following this background section is a discussion of relevant prior archaeological and cultural studies that have been conducted within and in the immediate vicinity of the project area. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 7 2.Background RESEARCH METHODS The culture-historical context and summary of previously conducted archaeological and cultural research presented below are based on research conducted by ASM Affiliates at various physical and digital repositories.Primary English language and Hawaiian language resources were found at multiple state agencies, including the State Historic Preservation Division,Hawaii State Archives,and the Department of Accounting and General Services Land Survey Division. Digital collections provided through the Office of Hawaiian Affairs Papakilo and Kipuka databases, Waihona`Aina,the Ulukau Hawaiian Electronic Library,and Newspapers.com.Lastly, secondary resources curated at ASM Affiliates'Hilo office offer general information regarding the history of land use,politics,and culture change in Hawaii,enhancing the broad sampling of source materials cited throughout this CIA. CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT While the question of when Hawaii was first settled by Polynesians remains contested,scholars working in the fields of archaeology,folklore,Hawaiian studies,and linguistics have offered several theories.With advances in palynology and radiocarbon dating techniques,Kirch(2011),Athens et al. (2014),and Wilmshurst et al. (2011)have argued that Polynesians arrived in the Hawaiian Islands sometime between A.D. 1000 and A.D. 1200. This initial migration on intricately crafted wa'a kaulua(double-hulled canoes)to Hawaii from Kahiki,the ancestral homelands of Hawaiian deities and peoples from southern Pacific islands, occurred at least from initial settlement to the 13r'' century. According to Fornander(1969),Hawaiians brought from their homeland certain Polynesian customs and beliefs:the major gods Kane,Ka,Lono,and Kanaloa(who have cognates in other Pacific cultures);the kapu system of political and religious governance; and the concepts of pu`uhonua (places of refuge), 'aumakua (ancestral deity), and mana (divine power). Archaeologist Kenneth Emory who worked in the early to mid-20th century reported that the sources of early Hawaiian populations originated from the southern Marquesas Islands (Emory in Tatar 1982). However, Emory's theory is not universally accepted,as Hawaiian scholars in the past and present have argued for a pluralistic outlook on ancestral Hawaiian origins from Kahiki(Case 2015;Fornander 1916-1917;Kamakau 1866;Kikiloi 2010; Nakaa 1893;Poepoe 1906). While stories of episodic migrations were widely published in the Hawaiian language by knowledgeable and skilled ku'auhau (individuals trained in the discipline of remembering genealogies and associated ancestral stories), the cultural belief that living organisms were hanau 'la(born)out of a time of eternal darkness(po)and chaos(kahuli) were brought and adapted by ancestral Hawaiian populations to reflect their deep connection to their environment.As an example, the Kumulipo, Hawai`i's most famed ko`ihonua (a cosmogonic genealogical chant), establishes a birth- rank genealogical order for all living beings(Beckwith 1951;Liliuokalani 1978). One such genealogical relationship that remains widely accepted in Hawai`i is the belief that kalo(taro)plants(in addition to all other plants,land animals, and sea creatures), are elder siblings to humans (Beckwith 1951). This concept of hierarchical creation enforces the belief that all life forms are intimately connected, evidencing the cultural transformations that occurred in the islands through intensive interaction with their local environment to form a uniquely Hawaiian culture. In Hawai`i's ancient past,inhabitants were primarily engaged in subsistence-level agriculture and fishing(Handy et al. 1991). Following the initial settlement period, communities clustered in the ko'olau (windward) shores of the Hawaiian Islands where freshwater was abundant. Sheltered bays allowed for nearshore fisheries (enriched by numerous estuaries) and deep-sea fisheries to be easily accessed (McEldowney 1979). Widespread environmental modification of the land also occurred as early Hawaiian kanaka mahi'al (farmers) developed new subsistence strategies, adapting their familiar patterns and traditional tools to work efficiently in their new home (Kirch 1985; Pogue 1978). Areas with the richest natural resources became heavily populated over time, resulting in the population's expansion to the kona(leeward) side of the islands and to more remote areas(Cordy 2000). Overview of Traditional Hawaiian Land Management Strategies Adding to an already complex society was the development of traditional land stewardship systems, including the ahupua'a. The ahupua'a was the principal land division that functioned for both taxation purposes and furnished its residents with nearly all subsistence and household necessities. Ahupua'a are land divisions that typically include multiple ecozones from mauka (upland mountainous regions) to makai (shore and near-shore regions), assuring a diverse subsistence resource base(Hommon 1986). Although the ahupua'a land division typically incorporated all of the eco-zones, their size and shape varied greatly (Cannelora 1974). Noted Hawaiian historian and scholar Samuel Kamakau summarized the ecozones that could be found in a given ahupua'a: Here are some names for the zones of]the mountains—the mauna or kuahiwi.A mountain is called a kuahiwi,but mauna is the overall term for the whole mountain,and there are many names applied 8 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background to one, according to its delineations (`ano). The part directly in back and in front of the summit proper is called the kuamauna, mountaintop;below the kuamauna is the kuahea, and makai of the kuahea is the kuahiwi proper. This is where small trees begin to grow;it is the wao nahele. Makai of this region the trees are tall,and this is the wao Lipo.Makai of the wao Lipo is the wao `eiwa,and makai of that the wao ma`ukele.Makai of the wao ma`ukele is the wao akua, and makai of there is the wao kanaka,the area that people cultivate. Makai of the wao kanaka is the `ama`u, fern belt, and makai of the 'ama`u the `apa'a,grasslands. A solitary group of trees is a moku la'au (a"stand" of trees) or an ulu la'au, grove. Thickets that extend to the kuahiwi are ulunahele,wild growth. An area where koa trees suitable for canoes(koa wa'a)grow is a wao koa and mauka of there is a wao la`au,timber land.These are dry forest growths from the `apa'a up to the kuahiwi. The places that are "spongy" (naele) are found in the wao ma`ukele,the wet forest. Makai of the `apa'a are the pahe`e [pili grass] and `ilima growths and makai of them the kula,open country,and the 'apoho hollows near to the habitations of men.Then comes the kahakai,coast,the kahaone, sandy beach, and the kalawa, the curve of the seashore—right down to the 'ae kai, the water's edge. That is the way ka po`e kahiko the ancient people] named the land from mountain peak to sea. (Kamakau 1976:8-9) The maka`Dinana (commoners, literally the "people that attend the land") who lived on the land had rights to gather resources for subsistence and tribute within their ahupua`a(Jokiel et al.2011).As part of these rights,residents were required to supply resources and labor to ali i (chiefs) of local, regional, and island chiefdoms. The ahupua'a became the equivalent of a local community with its own social, economic, and political significance and served as the taxable land division during the annual Makahiki procession (Kelly 1956). During the time of Makahiki, the paramount ali`i sent select members of his/her retinue to collect ho`okupu(tribute and offerings)in the form of goods from each ahupua'a. The maka`Dinana brought their share of ho okupu to an ahu (altar) that was marked with the image of a pua'a (pig), serving as a physical visual marker of ahupua'a boundaries. In most instances, these boundaries followed mountain ridges, hills, rivers, or ravines (Alexander 1890). However, Chinen(1958:1)reports that"oftentimes only a line of growth of a certain type of tree or grass marked a boundary;and sometimes only a stone determined the corner of a division." These ephemeral markers, as well as their more permanent counterparts, were oftentimes named as evidenced in the thousands of boundary markers names that are listed in Soehren(2004). Ahupua'a were ruled by ali i 'ai ahupua'a or chiefs who controlled the ahupua'a resources. Generally speaking, ali i 'ai ahupua'a had complete autonomy over the ahupua'a they oversaw (Malo 1951).Ahupua'a residents were not bound to the land nor were they considered property of the ali`i.If the living conditions under a particular ahupua'a chief were deemed unsuitable, the residents could move freely in pursuit of more favorable conditions (Lam 1985). This structure safeguarded the well-being of the people and the overall productivity of the land,lest the chief loses the principal support and loyalty of his or her supporters.In turn,ahupua'a lands were managed by an appointed konohiki, oftentimes a chief of lower rank,who oversaw and coordinated stewardship of an area's natural resources(Lam 1985). In some places,the po o law ai'a(head fisherman)held the same responsibilities as the konohiki (Jokiel et al. 2011). When necessary,the konohiki took the liberty of implementing kapu(restrictions and prohibitions)to protect the mana of an area's resources from environmental and spiritual depletion. Many ahupua'a were divided into smaller land units termed 'di and'di kupono (often shortened to 'ill ku). Ili were created for the convenience of the ahupua'a chief and served as the basic land unit which hoa`Dina(caretakers of particular lands)often retained for multiple generations(Jokiel et al.2011;MacKenzie 2015).As 'di were typically passed down in families, so too were the kuleana(responsibilities,privileges)that were associated with it. The right to use and cultivate 'di was maintained within the `ohana,regardless of the succession of ali`i 'ai ahupua'a(Handy et al. 1991). Malo (1951)recorded several types of 'ili,including the 'ill pa'a(a single intact parcel)and 'ill Tele(a discontinuous parcel dispersed across an area). Whether dispersed or wholly intact, 'di required a cross-section of available resources, and for the hoa`Dina, this generally included access to agriculturally fertile lands and coastal fisheries. Ili kupono differed from other 'di lands because they did not fall under the jurisdiction of the ahupua'a chief. Rather, they were specific areas containing resources that were highly valued by the ruling paramount chiefs, such as fishponds(Handy et al. 1991). Ali`i 'ai ahupua'a,in turn,answered to an ali`i 'ai moku(chief who claimed the abundance of the entire moku or district) (Malo 1951). Hawaii Island is comprised of six moku (districts) that include Kona, Ka`n, Puna, Hilo, Hamakua, and Kohala. Although a moku comprises multiple ahupua'a, moku were considered geographical CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 9 2.Background subdivisions with no explicit reference to rights in the land (Cannelora 1974). While the ahupua'a was the most common and fundamental land division unit within the traditional Hawaiian land management structure, variances occurred, such as the existence of the kalana.By definition,a kalana is a division of land that is smaller than a moku. Kalana was sometimes used interchangeably with the term `okana(Lucas 1995;Pukui and Elbert 1986),but Kamakau (Kamakau 1976)equates a kalana to a moku and states that `okana is merely a subdistrict. Despite these contending and sometimes conflicting definitions,what is clear is that kalana consisted of several ahupua'a and 'ill `aina. This form of district subdividing was integral to Hawaiian life and the product of advanced natural resource management systems. As populations resided in an area over centuries,direct teaching and extensive observations of an area's natural cycles and resources were retained,well-understood, and passed down orally over the generations. This knowledge informed management decisions that aimed to sustainably adapt subsistence practices to meet the needs of growing populations.The ahupua'a system and the highly complex land management system that developed in the islands are but one example of the unique Hawaiian culture that developed in these islands. Intensification and Development of Hawaiian Land Stewardship Practices Hawaiian philosophies of life in relation to the environment helped to maintain both natural,spiritual,and social order. In describing the intimate relationship that exists between Hawaiians and `aina(land),Kepi Maly writes: In the Hawaiian context, these values—the "sense of place"—have developed over hundreds of generations of evolving"cultural attachment" to the natural,physical, and spiritual environments. In any culturally sensitive discussion on land use in Hawaii, one must understand that Hawaiian culture evolved in close partnership with its' natural environment. Thus,Hawaiian culture does not have a clear dividing line of where culture and and nature begins. In a traditional Hawaiian context,nature and culture are one in the same,there is no division between the two. The wealth and limitations of the land and ocean resources gave birth to, and shaped the Hawaiian world view.The Yana(land),wai(water),kai(ocean),and lewa(sky)were the foundation of life and the source of the spiritual relationship between people and their environs. (Maly 2001) The `olelo no'eau(proverbial saying)"hanau ka `aina, hanau ke ali'1, hanau ke kanaka"(born was the land,born were the chiefs,born were the commoners),conveys the belief that all things of the land,including kanaka(humans), are connected through kinship links that extend beyond the immediate family (Pukui 1983:57). Aina or land, was perhaps most revered, as noted in the `olelo no'eau "he ali'1 ka `aina; he kauwa ke kanaka," which Pukui (Pukui 1983:62) translated as "[t]he land is a chief; man is its servant." The lifeways of early Hawaiians, which were dependent entirely from the finite natural resources of these islands, necessitated the development of sustainable resource management practices. Over time,what developed was an ecologically responsive management system that integrated the care of watersheds,natural freshwater systems,and nearshore fisheries(Jokiel et al. 2011). Disciplined and astute observation of the natural world became one of the most fundamental stewardship tools used by the ancient Hawaiians. The vast knowledge acquired through direct observation enabled them to detect and record the subtlest of changes,distinctions,and correlations in the natural world.Examples of their keen observations are evident in the development of Hawaiian nomenclature to describe various rains, clouds, winds, stones, environments, flora, and fauna. Many of these names are geographically unique or island-specific, and have been recorded in oli(chants),mete(songs),pule(prayers),inoa `aina(place names),and `olelo no'eau(proverbial sayings). Other Hawaiian arts and practices such as hula (traditional dance), lapa'au (traditional healing), lawai'a (fishing), mahi'al(farming)further aided in the practice of knowing the rhythms and cycles of the natural world. Comprehensive systems of observing and stewarding the land were coupled by the strict adherence to practices that maintained and enhanced the kapu and mana of all things in the Hawaiian world. In Hawaiian belief, all things natural,places,and even people, especially those of high rank,possessed mana or"divine power" (Pukui and Elbert 1986:235;Pukui et al. 1972).Mana was believed to be derived from the plethora of Hawaiian gods (kini akua)who were embodied in elemental forces, land, natural resources, and certain material objects and persons (Crabbe et al. 2017). Buck(1993)expanded on this concept noting that mana was associated with"the well-being of a community, in human knowledge and skills (canoe building, harvesting) and in nature (crop fertility, weather etc.)" (c.f. Else 2004:244). To ensure the mana of certain resources,places,and people,kapu of various kinds were implemented and strictly enforced to limit over-exploitation and defilement.Elbert and Pukui(1986:132)defined kapu as"taboo,prohibitions; special privilege or exemption."Kepelino noted that kapu associated with akua(deities)applied to all social classes, while kapu associated with ali'1 were applied to the people(in Beckwith 1971).As kapu dictated social relationships, they also provided"environmental rules and controls that were essential for a subsistence economy"(Else 2004:246). 10 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background The companion to kapu was noa,translated as "freed of taboo,released from restrictions,profane,freedom" (Pukui and Elbert 1986:268). Some kapu, particularly those associated with maintaining social hierarchy and gender differentiation were unremitting,while those kapu placed on natural resources were applied and enforced according to seasonal changes. The application of kapu to natural resources ensured that such resources remained available for future use. When the ali`i or the lesser chiefs (including konohiki and po'o lawai'a) determined that a particular resource was to be made available to the people,a decree was proclaimed indicating that kapu had been lifted,thereby making it noa.Although transitioning a resource from a state of kapu to noa allowed for its use,people were expected to practice sustainable harvesting methods and pay tribute to the paramount chief and the akua associated with that resource.Kapu were strictly enforced and violators faced serious consequences including death(Jokiel et al. 2011). Violators who escaped execution sought refuge at a pu`uhonua, a designated place of refuge or an individual who could pardon the accused(Kamakau 1992). After completing the proper rituals, the violator was absolved of his or her crime and allowed to reintegrate back into society. In summary,the layering and interweaving of beliefs,land stewardship practices, and the socio-political system form the basis of the relationship shared between the Hawaiian people and the land.It is through the analysis of these dynamic elements that we develop an understanding of the complexity of place. KAPALA'ALAEA 2ND: A CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT Situated on the leeward side of Hawaii Island, the project area is in Kapala`alaea 2nd (Figure 7), which is one of multiple ahupua'a that make up the central portion of the North Kona District.Kapala`alaea is bound to the east and south by Kahalu`u Ahupua`a, to the north by Kapala`alaea 1st Ahupua`a, and to the west by the Pacific Ocean. Although culture-historical information making explicit reference to Kapala`alaea 2nd(and 1st) is limited, historical references describing the neighboring lands of La`aloa and Kahalu`u abound. As such, the following background information contextualizes the subject ahupua'a of Kapala`alaea within a slightly broader regional context. Prior to 1859,Kona was a single moku(district)that extended from Kohala to Ka`n but during the 1859 legislative session, this moku was divided into two regions, Kona `Akau (North Kona) and Kona Hema (South Kona) (King 1935). The project area is within Kona`Akau(Figure 7),whose boundaries are commemorated in the `olelo no'eau (poetical expression) "Kona `akau,mai Keahualono a Pu`uohau"which translates to"North Kona,from Keahualono to Pu'uohau" (Pukui 1983:198). Kona `Akau was further divided into `okana or subregions that were comprised of multiple ahupua'a that shared topographic and environmental similarities.The lands comprising the subject ahupua'a of Kapala`alaea are within the `okana affectionately known as Kona kai `opua which has been interpreted as"Kona of the distant horizon clouds above the ocean" (Maly and Maly 2004:6). This subregion,which takes its name from the `opua or the billowy white clouds that perch on the horizon, is renowned in traditional mele (songs) and `olelo no`eau.The following `olelo no'eau recorded by Pukui(1983)speaks to the importance of observing Kona's horizon for the `opua which brought relief to the people as it was a sure sign of impending rain: Aia ka wai i ka maka o ka `opua. Water is in the face of the `opua cloud. In Kona,when the `opua cloud appear in the morning,it's a sign that rain is to be expected. (Pukui 1983:9) Ao `opiopio. Young cloud. A cloud that rises from sea level or close to the cloud banks and is as white as steam.When seen in Kona,Hawai`i, this is a sign of rain. (Pukui 1983:27) Kona, kai `opua i ka la'1. Kona,where the horizon clouds rest in the calm. (Pukui 1983:199) Mama Kona i ka wai kau mai i ka maka o ka `opua. Kona is lightened in having water in the face of the clouds. Kona is relieved,knowing that there will be no drought,when the clouds promise rain. (Pukui 1983:232) CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 11 2.Background IIAW.111 I I R1tt FOl Y Ht {VI V � t 11 A lAri1 i I F / - ... --..w.e.w....... " Kapala`alaea 1 • .-j. Kapala`alaea 2 } North Kona •- .. t " South Kona � t Project arca 1 Y ,... ...... M A U N A LOAA • �" „—.. - e • VOIr Figure 7.Hawaii Registered Map No. 2060 by J.M.Donn(1901) showing project area in Kapala`alaea 2nd,North Kona District,Island of Hawaii. While Kona is celebrated for its abundant `opua, it is also lauded in oral traditions for its tranquil waters and delightful climate. The famous saying"Ke kai malino o Kona" refers to the district's calm seas (Pukui 1983:186). Another saying, "Kona i ke kai ma`oki`oki" speaks of the innumerable streaks of color observable on Kona's ocean surface(Pukui 1983:199).The consistently pleasant weather and tranquil waters are often used to depict the traits and mannerisms embodied by Kona's native inhabitants. Such references are found in the following `olelo no'eau: '0 ko Kona mau no ia o ka la`i. Calm is typical of Kona. Said of a person from Kona who is always poised and calm(Pukui 1983:269) Pili aloha o Kona, ho`oipo i ka mdlie. 12 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background Love remains close to Kona,who woos the calm. Kona is a land beloved for its calm and pleasant weather(Pukui 1983:290). While Pukui et al.(1974)do not offer a translation of Kapala`alaea in their book Place Names ofHawai`i,through a lexicological analysis, Pukui and Elbert(1986) defined kapala as "to paint, to print, or to smear" and `alaea as a "water-soluble colloidal ocherous earth,any red coloring matter."When combined,Kapala`alaea can be translated as stained or painted with red ochre.The act of painting with `alaea is often associated with certain religious ceremonies, dying kapa (cloth), and even medicinal uses (Kekahuna 1955). Furthermore, archaeological excavations conducted within the project area has identified nodules of `alaea at some of the cultural sites in the project area(Berrigan et al. 2018). Additionally,"Kapala`alaea"is the name of a god who is associated with the annual Makahiki procession that was painted on one half of its body with `alaea(Kamakau 1964;Mookini and Kirtley 1977). Lono: Association with Traditional Cultivation Practices and Makahiki Kirch(1985:215)states that"Hawaiians were first and foremost cultivators of the land"and over the generations,they adapted and intensified their agricultural production to levels unseen elsewhere in greater Oceania. Careful observation of their natural environment allows Kona's native farmers to successfully produce an abundance of crops across diverse ecological zones and evidence of their adaptive agricultural endeavors is still visible today.Known for their exceptional work ethic,Kona's native farmers are praised in some `olelo no'eau one of which states"Kona po'o kit`i"which refers to the farmers returning from the fields with a load on their shoulders and a child sitting atop the load(Pukui 1983:199).Handy et al. (1991)in referencing an article from the Hawaiian language newspaper Ka Hoku O Hawai`i provided a general description of the vast and highly productive agricultural lands extending from Kailua to Keauhou during Kamehameha's reign: In the uplands above Kahalu`u,Keauhou,and Kailua,was a vast plantation named Kuahewa(huge), belonging to Kamehameha I. To protect these lands, which were cultivated for his people in the section,Kamehameha established the law that anyone who took one taro or one stalk of sugar cane must plant one cutting of the same in its place. Weary of war in 1812, Kamehameha went to Kuahewa and himself worked as a farmer. "This land that Kamehameha farmed is in the upland of Kailua, in Kaopua...on Honua`ula, on the hill called Paoloa and by the spring called Waiakauhi." (Hoku o Hawaii,May 3, 1927 in Handy et al. 1991:524) What Handy et al. (1991:524) described as "Kuahewa" is likely a portion of what has been referred to by archaeologists as the Kona Field System;an agriculturally fertile region that spans multiple ahupua`a across the North and South Kona districts and includes Kapala`alaea 2nd(Cordy 1995;Newman 1970;Schilt 1984).This predominately dryland agricultural complex has been understood to be a nearly continuous series of agricultural fields covering approximately 34,350 acres from Kau Ahupua'a in the north to Ho`okena Ahupua'a in the south(Figure 14),with an altitudinal range of 0-2,500 meters from the coastline to the forested slopes of Hualalai (Cordy 1995;Horrocks and Rechtman 2009).A large portion of the field system has been designated in the Hawai`i Register of Historic Places as Site 50-10-37-6601 and determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Drawing from archaeological evidence, Tomonari-Tuggle (1985) reported that by the 14th century, agricultural fields along with scattered residential areas in the adjacent ahupua`a of Kahalu`u were being developed about 4,000 feet inland at the lower edge of the hypothesized prime agricultural area and expanded further upland to its maximum limit.Tomonari- Tuggle (1985:22) added that the extent of the field system"was limited only by the barren expanded of aa lava that segregated the Kona slopes into productive and non-productive strips." The basic characteristics of this agricultural/residential system as presented in Newman (1970) have been confirmed and elaborated on by ethnohistorical investigations (Kelly 1983) and archaeological research(e.g., (Allen 2001; Burtchard 1995; Cordy et al. 1991;Kawachi 1989;Rechtman et al. 2001; Schilt 1984; Soehren and Newman 1968). Some of the defining features of the Kona Field System is the network of long field walls that extend in a mauka-makai direction. These walls are known by several names,all of which share a similar concept of the skeleton of the land, such as iwi `Dina(land bones) and kuaiwi(backbone) (Allen 2004; Cordy 1995).Handy et al. (1991:51) provided the following description of this concept, stating: Iwi(bone)or iwi kuamo`o (backbone)was the term applied to the line of rocks and refuse thrown up along the side of mo co `aina, or kihapai in clearing. These iwi or iwi `aina demarked the boundaries of plantations and arable holdings, and hence were also called palena,or bounds. They were not mere rubbish heaps,but for example on Hawaii,served for planting sugar cane round about the field of dry taro in upland Kona,Ka`u, and Kohala... In upland Kona they may be seen today buried in woods or occasionally bounding taro plantations still utilized. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 13 2.Background w fir ‘,.,,,:,:_.7).______ a �11r�',I 1` 1q{1 1 1 f `� W4 P11,°l //J Y 1_°'�I °` \\ 11,j hT/I a/-. Wawwae f et. l� O 1 w 1 ._.% J `//,/ 1° 1 'AI "PPP11�. (11 ^0-, PEs 6 d ik'I r /'. p IV P �� ( d of?v\ ul l a , l � 1 . /' �( Y _4,0 /` '1 3_7 , 44C' 'r..° ' ',I% I R x — o ] 4' ( ;a:aa.mv r°r � rte. A �,`,,App J.�.� I I ), .t IS i.:...*.,, ,,, �J - _ l Ati�v i a i s`�` I fr" `� �t „ ', 1 Zi-ir[ Iti /F£ n ' II �' ''�qy- 'C4 ti4 - > .s "1 '� 1 -.��j[l< .''cY�. �. j ; '` s x /+ a� f 'u r r i - Approxuntit _�i ,�,} ot........ C,wicel ma lncnlc,, N Figure 8.Extent of Kona Field System(shaded gray)with the location of the project area. Situated between the kuaiwi were other traditional features,some of which were used for planting and habitation such as mounds, terraces, modified outcrops, and platforms. In describing the method of planting sweet potatoes in rocky places, such as Kona,Fornander(1919-1920:164)stated: Planting in rocky places was called makaili.There was very little soil proper,the greater portion[of the field]being gravel,with rocks all around. There were also large holes resembling banana holes. Upon the sprouting of the potato vines gravel and stones are piled up around them,and by the time the hole was covered thick with leaves,the potatoes were large and grooved;they were ridge-formed but not very sweet;they were somewhat tasteless and insipid;not very palatable. The Kona Field System is generally considered a dryland complex; however, water control features, such as `auwai and modified waterholes,have been documented in areas where intermittent streams were present(Allen 1984; Kawachi 1989;Rechtman et al.2003;Schilt 1984).Historically,the various fields that make up the Kona Field System were thought to be a cohesive unit (Newman 1974), however, recent research and interpretation suggest the field system was more dynamic with distinct agro-ecological zones(Lincoln and Ladefoged 2014). Additionally,the field system is believed to have expanded as the regional population increased and the Hawaiian socio-political system became more centralized(Horrocks and Rechtman 2009;Rechtman et al.2001).This field system was a major source of food for the Island of Hawai`i as evidenced by written accounts from early European explorers and played a central part in Hawai`i's Precontact economy. Given the lack of major surface streams in this geologically young district,the Kona Field System relied primarily on rainfall,supplemented with innovative localized horticultural techniques(Lincoln and Ladefoged 2014).Observing the natural world for signs of impending rain was a skill that were mastered by some of Kona's ancient farmers. Kekahuna documented the following short story of an old farmer named Kauako`eko`e,who lived in the neighboring lands of Kahalu`u, a short distance southwest of the project area. Among other important lessons, the story of Kauako`eko`e reveals the wisdom held by some of Kahalu`u's ancient farmers in knowing their local environment and seasonal patterns,even when it is not evident to others.Kekahuna(1954:1)related that: In the days of old an old farmer named Ka-ua-ko`e-ko`e lived at the seashore. Just above his abode he had a large planting field(ko`ele)in which he planted sweet-potatoes and other crops. Once, during a very dry season, people were surprised to see him planting potato leaf-tops (ka— `uala). Loudly they called out in derision: "How foolish are you to plant potatoes during this dry season!" ("wahahe`e no ho`i kau kanu `uala i ke kau la!")/ But the old farmer only answered enigmatically, as he kept on with his work: "The rain is hovering over my back!" ("Ke haawe nei ka u ai ke kua!") 14 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background At last, when all Ka-ua-ko`e-kocc's potato slips were in the ground, and had had ample time to become firmly rooted, but when nothing was planted in the fields of his deriders, the rain came pouring down,and lasted for a considerable time.Hastily those who had made sport of the old man planted their fields. But all their potatoes produced nothing but an abundant growth of leaves (palula), and very poor tubers. The old farmer of whom they had made sport, however, grew an excellent crop of potatoes. From that day to this the old farmer's planting field is known as Ka-ua-ko`eko`e, thus keeping in mind the lesson taught,and commemorating its owner of long ago. Ethnohistorical research conducted by Kelly (1983) identified four vegetation zones (Table 3) within Kona spanning from sea level to about the 4,000-foot elevation. By maximizing the climate and resources of each zone, Kona's native farmers were able to nurture a diverse range of plants suited to the specific conditions of each. Furthermore, in Kona where there are no perennial freshwater streams, the farmers were dependent on rainfall. As such cultivating crops across a range of vegetation zones helped to ensure a year-round production of crops even if the environmental conditions in one zone became unfavorable. This method of crop production safeguarded against famine and is what allowed people to thrive. These zones correspond with bands of vegetation that run parallel to the coast,changes in elevation,rainfall,and flora.These vegetation zones were not fixed in nature rather they were semi- ephemeral divisions within an ahupua'a that shifted with the seasonal changes. Based on the information presented in Table 3,the project area is within the kula zone where the primary crops that were cultivated included `uala(sweet potato), wauke (paper mulberry), and ipu (gourd). Cordy (1995) further added that local lava flow patterns had a tremendous impact on the patterning of the agricultural fields. Older, 'a'a flows,including those found in the project area,typically have a more substantial soil base while younger pahoehoe flows can have very little soil accumulation. Table 1. Traditional planting zones. Zone Annual Rainfall(cm) Elevation(ft.)Range Primary Crops Kula 75-125 Sea level-500 `Uala,wauke,and ipu Kalu`ulu 100-140 500-1,000 `Ulu, `uala,and wauke 'Apa'a 140-200 1,000-2,500 Dry land kalo, `uala,kr,and ko Aim`u >200 2,500-4,000 Mai'a(both plantain and banana) While `uala was an important staple food wauke's fibrous bark was harvested and pounded to make kapa(bark cloth) that was used for everyday and ceremonial wear, and the ipu, when dried, was used as containers and hula (traditional dance) implements (Abbott 1992). In providing a general description of the kula zone, Cordy (1995:5) related that: This was the land from immediately behind the shore extending inland. It was generally dry and open land with few trees and considerable grass cover. In much of Central Kona, soil development is limited in these areas,and there is a fair amount of exposed lava bedrock. This land was planted primarily in scattered sweet potato patches, and it converted to pasture useages [sic] fairly by the mid-1800s. Aside from the practical approaches to cultivation,Kona's native farmers supplemented their hard work with pule (prayers)to invoke certain deities to encourage rainfall, and to promote fertility and abundance. The Kona District is closely associated with Lono,who was one of the four major akua(deities),and was considered the"rain maker"and associated with fertility(Handy et al. 1991:333).Lono was often associated with the Kona District for it was here that "Lono was believed to have lived in ancient times" and where he introduced food plants such as kalo (taro), `uala (sweet potato), uhi (yams), ko (sugar cane), mai'a (banana) and 'awa (kava) (Handy et al. 1991:329). It was from Hikiau Heiau in Kealakekua that Lono departed,promising to return.According to Kalokuokamaile,a native of Kona, temples dedicated to Lono were established throughout the district to invoke rain and fertility, and as such he was closely associated with agricultural practices of Kona(in Handy et al. 1991). Lono was also embodied in the southerly(kona)cyclonic storms that bring thunder, lightning, and heavy rain— a season that coincided with ho`oilo (wet season) and the annual roughly four-month-long festival called Makahiki where honor was given to Lono. Given the subject ahupua'a of Kapala`alaea is the name of one of several gods associated with the annual Makahiki ceremonies, it is perhaps appropriate to include a brief discussion about this important festival and its connection to the god named Kapala`alaea. The yearly rising of the constellation Makali`i (Pleiades) in the east during sunset, heralds the arrival of Lono and the opening of Makahiki. As detailed by Malo (1903:56) CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 15 2.Background There were now four months devoted to the observances of the Makahiki, during which time the ordinary religious ceremonies were omitted,the only ones that were observed being those connected with the Makahiki festival. The prescribed rites and ceremonies of the people at large were concluded in the month of Mahoe-hope. The keepers of the idols, however, kept up their prayers and ceremonies throughout the year. Having dedicated the remaining roughly eight months of the year to idol worship and at times war, Makahiki emerged as a much-needed respite from the everyday toils. Like other aspects of traditional Hawaiian society, Makahiki,which included festivities such as competitive sports,was guided by a series of rituals and ceremonies that involved both the maka`ainana and all`i. Prior to the start of Makahiki, the maka`Dinana undertook a significant harvest to gather necessary ho`okupu (offerings) that were to be presented to Lono and abstained from eating pork (except in temple services)which was a kinolau (embodiment)of Lono. The ho okupu were gathered and placed on an ahu (alter) that was constructed at the boundaries of ahupua'a in anticipation of the arrival of Lono. During the clockwise circuit of the island, Lono who was symbolically represented by a"staff surmounted by a small figure or head of the god above a cross bar from which hung a sheet of white bark cloth"known as the Akua Loa(Long God) made stops at each ahu to receive the ho`okupu (Handy et al. 1991:331). "The produce and land of each district was kapu until the tribute had been accepted as sufficient by the chief tax collector who accompanied the procession" headed by the Akua Loa (Handy et al. 1991:331). After the tax collector had determined the sufficiency of the ho`okupu, the kapu was lifted and the Akua Pa'ani emerged (god of play and body strenghtening) to promote competitive sports and other festivities. It will be noted here that the order in which the various Makahiki gods appeared differs amongst historians. Samuel Manaiakalani Kamakau (1964),in his book Ka Po'e Kahiko, wrote that during the island-wide circuit, the god Kapala`alaea followed the Akua Pa'an!and was discernable by the red ochre (`alaea) smeared on half of its body. Kamakau (1964:20) wrote that "on one side he was kapu, and on one side, free" but did not provide any additional clarifying remarks to indicate whether the side smeared in `alaea was kapu or not. In 1858, Zepherin "Kepelino" Kaho`ali`i Keauokalani, a descendant of Kamehameha I, published a comprehensive four-part series called Hooiliili Havaii(The Hawaiian Collection)(Mookini and Kirtley 1977).In his work,Kepelino lists Kapala`alaea as one of five gods that were involved the closing Makahiki ceremonies—this time for Kihawahine,a chiefess who was transformed into a revered aumakua mo'o(guardian lizard): During the period of the makahiki festival18(upon the last day),the god Loa,19 the god Poko,20 the god Ka-pala-'alaea,21 Ka-ho-ali'i, the god Ku'i,22 the god Pa'ani23 and all the gods were brought forth. The image of the goddess Kiha-wahine, in all her finely, in a pa'u24 and with all manner of clothing proper for her female nature,was then taken aboard a canoe.The paddlemen of this goddess took their places and cried out,announcing that the tabu of this goddess was immediately in effect, as though the goddess herself were actually there. Then the cry proclaiming a tabu on the approach of a sacred personage was announced as follows:"Kapuwo! [sic]25 Kapuwo! [sic]Kapuwo! [sic]to the tabu of Kina-wahine [sic]. Kapuwo! [sic] Death to those who move! Prostrate!"If there were a canoe on the sea at that time, those on the open top of the canoe must prostrate themselves or be killed by the keepers of this goddess. After the goddess passed by, then they could arise and go elsewhere.If they did not act fittingly they were killed. (Mookini and Kirtley 1977:50) While Lono is attributed with Makahiki and the wet season that brough rain clouds to the Kona District, wai (freshwater)is considered a kinolau(physical manifestation)of the akua Kane,who along with his companion Kanaloa (whose dominion was over the ocean), came to Hawaii from Kahiki(a land outside of Hawai`i). Legend has it that Kane and Kanaloa both enjoyed consuming `awa,a drink prepared by mixing the crushed root of the `awa plant(Piper methysticum)with fresh water.In their travels,they stopped at various places around the Hawaiian Islands and opened new freshwater springs from which they prepared their favorite drink (Handy et al. 1991). Kalokuokamaile shared that sometimes in Kona,the farmers built temples that were dedicated to Kane and Ka and sometimes they prayed to certain ki`i pohaku (stone images) that were sacred to these gods. It was also not uncommon for farmers to invoke these gods without the use of images or stones (in Handy et al. 1991). The `olelo no'eau "He huewai ola ke kanaka na Kane" literally translated as "man is Kane's living water gourd," highlights the relationship that Hawaiians have to freshwater, and thereby to Kane (Pukui 1983:68). Handy et al. (1991:64) sheds light on the spiritual relationship that Hawaiians have to water: Fresh water as a life-giver was not to the Hawaiians merely a physical element; it had a spiritual connotation. In prayers of thanks and invocations used in offering fruits of the land, and in prayers chanted when planting, and in prayers for rain the"Water of Life of Kane"is referred to over and 16 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background over again. Kane—the word means "male" and "husband"was the embodiment of male procreative energy in fresh water, flowing on or under the earth in springs, in streams and rivers, and falling as rain(and also as sunshine),which gives life to plants. Wai was not only valued for its life-giving properties,but also its purifying properties. The continuous mauka to makai flow of waiwhether underground or on the surface provided fresh drinking water, supplied water to irrigated fields, fishponds, recharged ground water supplies, and sustained productive estuaries and fisheries by transporting nutrients from the uplands to the sea (Sproat 2009). Wai was also utilized in purification ceremonies where it was mixed with alaea,pa akai(salt),and plants such as `plena(turmeric)to make an elixir known as The ekai which was used to cleanse people and spaces in preparation for ceremony and ritual(Pukui and Elbert 1986). Chiefly Accounts in Kapala`alaea and The Greater North Kona Historical records describing the presence of Hawaiian nobility in Kapala`alaea 2nd are limited to at least one account written by Kekahuna and Kelsey(1954b:4)who reported that Keawemua Heiau,located on the makai side of the road "on a slight elevation" was the residence of the high chief Pak'and his wife Konia,both of whom lived during the first half of the 19th century, as well as Konia's sister,Pauahinui. When Kekahuna undertook his survey in 1954,the intact portions of the heiau were observed at the coast of Kapala`alaea 2nd near the Kahalu`u boundary, however, he notes that"the heiau enclosure formerly extended about 50 feet above the road of today"and"commanded a beautiful view" (Kekahuna 1954:1). In addition to Keawemua Heiau, Kekahuna also reported that in immediately south in Kahalu`u stood Lahae Heiau,a heiau ho`oulu i'a(a heiau to replenish the sea with fish),and a ku'lila where fisherfolks placed their offerings. Aside from this account,the vast majority of accounts describing the presence of all`i in this area is centered at Kahalu`u, which is one of several recognized royal centers in Kona. The following paragraphs layout a brief history of Kona's ruling chiefs with emphasis on the lands of Kahalu`u. The Regin of`Ehunuikaimalino,`Umialiloa,Keawenuia`umi,and Lonoikamakahiki Sometime during the 16th century, chief `Ehuinuikaimalino (also referred to as Thu) was appointed by his father Knaiwa to rule over Kona,while a junior son,Hukulani ruled over Kohala.During`Ehu's reign,four of the six districts on Hawaii Island were ruled by an independent chief:Kulukulu`a in Hilo,Hua`a in Puna, 'Imaikalani in Ka`n,and it is believed that Liloa ruled over Hamakua(Cordy 2000). In addition to Thu,Kaaiwa had three sons from a previous wife,Kahoukapu,Hukulani,and Manauea,all of whom became the heads of Hawai`i's aristocratic families(Fornander 1880).Although the Thu line of chiefs grew to be somewhat powerful, Thu was ranked second to Liloa(Kelly 1983). According to Kamakau, Thu placed his son, Laeanuikaumanamana in Liloa'a royal court, and for some time they both resided in Waipi`o where Laea-nui assisted with the construction of the sacred stone slab known as Ka paepae kapu o Liloa. Upon the death of Liloa, his kingdom was passed to his eldest son Hakau who was later usurped by his half- brother,`Umi-a-hloa.However,the chiefs of Hilo,Puna,Ka`n,and Kona withheld their allegiance to`Umi.According to Kamakau(1992),by the time `Umi sought to gain control over Kona, Thu was of old age,and therefore Kona and Kohala were easily seized by 'Umi. With regard to the death of`Ehunuikaimalino, Malo (1951) noted that he was assassinated by some fishermen out in Keahuoln,Kona. During`Umi's unification of Hawai`i Island sometime during the 17th century,he moved his royal court to Kailua, Kona.Archaeological evidence(Cordy et al. 1991;Newman 1971; Schilt 1984)states that during this time,the Kona landscape was transformed into a vast agricultural field system,known today as the Kona Field System(see preceding section). 'Umi eventually took Mokuahualeiakea,the daughter of chief`Ehunuikaimalino,as his wife. She bore 'Umi a daughter named `Akahi`ilikapu. `Umi's reign is often celebrated as it marked a time of peace and increased productivity and a move towards craft specialization. According to Kamakau(1992:19-20): There was no kingdom like his.He took care of the old men,the old women,the fatherless,and the common people.Murder and thievery were prohibited.He was a religious chief,just in his rule... During`Umi-a-Liloa's reign,selected workers and set them in various positions in the kingdom.He separated those of the chiefly class (papa ali`i),of the priestly class,of the readers of omens (papa kilo), those skilled in the affairs of the land (po'e akamai o ka `aina), farmers, fishermen, canoe builders, warriors, and other skilled artisan(po'e pale `ike) in the work they were best suited for; and each one applied himself to his own task. . . `Umi-a-Liloa did two things with his own hands,farming and fishing.He built large wet taro patches in Waipi`o, and farming was done on all the lands. Much of this was done in Kona. He was noted for his skill in fishing and was called Pu`ipu`i a ka lawai`a(a stalwart fisherman). Aku fishing was his favorite occupation, and it often took him to the beaches (Ke-kaha) from Kalahuipua'a to CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 17 2.Background Makaula. He also fished for `ahi and kala. He was accompanied by famed fishermen such as Pae, Kahuna,and all of the chiefs of his kingdom.He set apart fishing,farming and other practices... Upon `Umi's death, his kingdom was divided between his two sons with Keli`iokaloa establishing Kona as his royal center and his younger brother Keawenuia`umi taking Hilo as his royal base. The rest of`Umi's children were commanded to dwell as chiefs under the two heirs. Keali`iokaloa, unlike his father was known for mistreating and oppressing his people,whereas Keawenuia`umi was revered as a chief who,like his father,cared for his constituents. When Keawenua`umi heard of his brother's unjust deeds,he was filled with compassion for his brother's people and sought to end his brother's reign. Keawenuia`umi readied his armies and they marched over the mountain from Hilo until they reached the mountainous region of Keauhou Ahupua'a to the place where their father`Umi had erected the famous Ahu A `Umi.From there,Keawenuia`umi's army descended to the shore at which time,his war canoes from Ka`n and Hilo began to arrive. The battle ensued and Keawenuia`umi drove his brother Keli`iokaloa north of Kailua where he was killed at Pu'u-o-Kaloa near Honokohau. Upon the death of Keli`iokaloa, Keawenuia`umi became the sole ruler of Hawaii Island(Kamakau 1992). Lonoikamakahiki, a 17d'-century chief, was the grandson of `Umi-a-Liloa by way of his son Keawenuia`umi. Kamakau(1992)related that Lonoikamakahiki ruled over the districts of Puna and Ka`n but while living with his wife, Kaikilani, whom he treated cruelly, they left Ka`n and settled in Kealakekua, Kona. The written history of Lonoikamakahiki describes him as ill-tempered and a chief that failed to heed the advice of his priest or counselors (Kamakau 1992). At one point during his reign, the district chiefs of Kona, Kohala, Hilo, and Hamakua rose in a rebellion against Lonoikamakahiki, however, with the help of the Puna chief, the rebellion was quelled and his authority as ali'1 nui of Hawaii Island was reinforced(Kamakau 1992).Also during his reign,Kamalalawalu,a Maui chief invaded Hawai`i but a poor war strategy led to his defeat and it is said that he was sacrificed at either one of two heiau(Ohi`amukumuku and Keeka)in the neighboring land of Kahalu`u(Barrera 1971;Kamakau 1992). Cordy (2000)reported that Kahalu`u was one of Lonoikamakahiki's primary residence. At least fourteen heiau were constructed around his royal residence and of the fourteen recorded heiau,two were near the project area vicinity, including Keawemua which was located at the coast of Kapala`alaea 2nd,and Lahai or Lahae which was situated a the coast in Kahalu`u but near Kapala`alaea 2nd-Kahalu`u boundary (Stokes 1991). Upon Lonoikamakahiki's death,his children did not inherit his rule; instead, authority over Kohala, Kona, and Ka`n passed to Kanaloa-kua`ana's descendants,Lonoikamakahiki's brother. The Reign of Keawe,Alapai, and Kalani`opu`u Like the early reign of Lonoikamakahiki, rule of Hawaii Island was once again divided amongst multiple ali'1. Conflict arose between the Kona and Hilo chiefdoms,leading to prolonged wars spanning several decades,ultimately resulting in the victory of the Hilo chiefs over their Kona-Kohala counterparts. Notably, during these tumultuous times, Kona was governed by Keakamahana(Kanaloa-kua`ana's granddaughter), whose royal court was situated in Holualoa. She was succeeded by her daughter Keakealaniwahine and Keawe, the son of Keakealaniwahine (Cordy 2000).In contrast to his mother,Keawe chose Honaunau as the location for his royal court.The conflicts and rivalries between and within the royal families of Hawai`i Island persisted.Keawe's eldest son,Kalananuiiamamao,was killed by his half-brother Kalaninuike`eaumoku. Following Keawe's passing, Kalaninuike`eaumoku attempted to assert control over the island but was ultimately unsuccessful(Cordy 2000). After Keawe's death, Alapa`inuiakauaua, Keawe's nephew, returned to Hawaii Island intending to avenge his uncle and put an end to the ongoing conflicts among the chiefs.His efforts proved successful as he managed to capture Kona and Kohala,thereby becoming the ruler of those districts.However,news of Alapa`i's plans reached his brother- in-law and Maui chief, Kekaulike, who promptly declared war in an attempt to restore the lands to the Kona and Kohala ali'1.Despite his endeavors,Kekaulike failed to achieve victory.Alapa`i,undeterred,resolved to continue the war with Kekaulike and planned a journey to Maui.Kekaulike fell ill during the journey and passed away en route to Kula on Maui.Before his demise, he designated his son,Kamehamehanui,as his successor.Learning of Kekaulike's death and the rise of his nephew, Alapa`i decided against waging war on his sister's son and redirected his efforts towards Molokai to assist his relatives who were under attack by the Oahu ali'1(Kamakau 1992). Falling ill, Alapa`i moved to Kikiako`i in Kawaihae, where his illness advanced. While at Mailekini heiau in Kawaihae, Alapa`i appointed his son Keawe`opala to rule over the island (Kamakau 1992). This, however, did not last long due to the shifting allegiances of Keawe`opala's ali'1.Kalani`opu`u was a fierce chief of Ka`n and to a fault enjoyed waging war on other ali`1. Several battles between Alapa`i and Kalani`opu`u took place, mainly due to Alapa`i's rise to power after Kalani`opu`u's father,Kalaninuiiamamao,the rightful ali'1 nui of Hawaii passed.After defeating Keawe`opala,Kalani`opu`u became the ali'1 nui of Hawai`i island.With no regard for another's rights over 18 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai`i 2.Background lands, Kalani`opu`u led several inter-island war campaigns, including one against the East Maui all'1, where he successfully captured the lands of Haim and Kipahulu. In a turn of events, Ke`eaumoku, who previously joined Kalani`opu`u's forces against Keawe`opala,began to rebel against Kalani`opu`u. This,however,did not end well for Ke`eaumoku, and eventually, he moved to Maui. Ke`eaumoku is also the father of Ka`ahumanu, Kamehameha I's favorite wife(Kamakau 1992) The inter-island wars against Maui and Hawai`i continued throughout Kalani`opu'u's reign between 1775-1779, however,one battle proved a great significance for the future leadership of Hawai`i Island and the greater archipelago. During the battle of Kalaeoka`ilio, Kalani`opu`u's nephew and favorite warrior, Kamehameha,was recognized as a great warrior and was given the name Pai`ea(hard-shelled crab)by the Maui ali'1 and warriors(Kamakau 1992:84). It was said that throughout this war campaign on Maui,Kalani`opu`u and Kamehameha visited Kahalu`u Ahupua'a periodically for ceremonial purposes. During these ongoing battles,one event in particular catalyzed a major shift in Hawaiian history. Once isolated from the Western world, Hawaii experienced its first European contact with the arrival of Captain James Cook in Kealakekua on January 17th, 1779.Less than a month later,the explorer was killed after kidnapping Kalani`opu`u over a stolen cutter. Following the death of Captain Cook,Kalani`opu`u's next major proclamation took place in Kohala. Here, Kalani`opu`u declared his son, Kiwala`o as his heir and his nephew, Kamehameha, as the caretaker of the war god, Kuka`ilimoku (Desha 2000). With an aging chief, Kalani`opu`u, Kamehameha I had already devised a plan to consolidate his rule over Hawai`i Island and expand his kingdom through intense inter-island warfare. Kamehameha I leveraged his relationship with certain foreigners,which allowed him to acquire Western items like ships and cannons—imports that would significantly alter traditional Hawaiian warfare. The Fall of Kiwala`O and the Rise of Kamehameha Prior to Kalani`opu`u's death,doubts arose among the ali`i and kahuna regarding Kiwala`o's ability to lead and uphold land claims during the kalai`aina(land redistribution process)process. These doubts persisted even after the capture of Ka`n chief Imakakoloa. During the ceremony at Pakini heiau,Kamehameha's advisors devised a plan. Although Kiwala`o was to present Imakakoloa's body, the plan was for Kamehameha to step in and offer the body himself. This action would release the kapu on the heiau and prevent Kiwala`o from gaining power from`Imakakoloa's mana. Consequently, the other ali'1 expressed their discontent with Kamehameha's actions, and Kalani`opu`u advised him to return to Kohala (Kamakau 1992:107-109). After the passing of Kalani`opu`u, Kiwala`o assumed control, prompting Kamehameha to leave Kohala and return to Kona to pay his respects to his late uncle. While at Hale o Keawe in Honaunau, Kamehameha and Kekahaupi`o participate in an 'awl ceremony alongside Kiwala`o. During the ceremony,Kamehameha was instructed to chew the `awa root and to prepare an `apu(bowl)of 'awl for Kiwala`o, however, the ceremony was not complete when Kiwala`o gave his `apu prepared by Kamehameha to his `aikane. When Kekahaupi`o saw this,he immediately slapped the `apu from Kiwala`o's hands,as this was an act of humiliation towards Kamehameha(Desna.2000). It wasn't long until Kiwala`o's next act of defiance, which occurred during the kalai`aina process. Kiwala`o, partly influenced by Keawemauhili, a Hilo chief, distributed lands to the high chiefs of the east, many of whom supported Kiwala`o. Upon learning of Kiwala`o's unjust land distribution, his brother and the chief of Ka`n, Keouakd`ahu`ula,went to see Kiwala`o in person to determine if his brother would fulfill his request for specific lands among which included Kahalu`u and Keauhou. Kiwala`o denied having any land left to distribute to his brother and in retaliation, Keouakd`ahu`ula cut down a grove of coconut trees in Keomo, Ke`ei, Kona signaling the start of the battle known as Moku`ohai (Kamakau 1992). Kiwala`o's was killed in this battle and Kamehameha was put in a promising position to rise at the sole ruler of Hawaii(Desha 2000). Thrum (1907) reported that sometime around 1782 after the battle of Moku`ohai,Kamehameha retreated to Kahalu`u where he built Hapaian`i heiau and installed Hewahewa as the priest of said heiau. According to TI (1963), nearly ten years of almost continuous warfare followed the death of Kiwala`o, as Kamehameha endeavored to unite the island of Hawai`i and conquer the islands of Maui and Oahu.Keouakd`ahu`ula, became Kamehameha's main rival on the Hawaii Island,and he proved difficult to defeat(Kamakau 1992).Around 1790,to secure his rule,Kamehameha began building the heiau of Pu`ukohola at Kawaihae,which was to be dedicated to his war god Kuka`ilimoku (Fornander 1996). When Pu`ukohola Heiau was completed in the summer of 1791, Kamehameha sent his two counselors, Keaweaheulu and Kamanawa, to Ka`n to offer peace to Keouakd`ahu`ula. Keouakd`ahu`ula was enticed to the dedication of the Pu`ukohola Heiau by this ruse and when he arrived at Kawaihae he and his party were sacrificed to complete the dedication(Kamakau 1992). The assassination of Keouakd`ahu`ula gave Kamehameha undisputed control of Hawaii Island by 1792(Greene 1993). In addition to Pu`ukohola, Kamakau (1992:180) reported that Kamehameha established several heiau "for the sacrifice of human beings"which included`Ohi`amukumuku and Kamaikeeka in Kahalu`u.Between 1792 and 1796, CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 19 2.Background after the dedication of Pu`ukohola,Kamehameha mostly resided at Kawaihae and worked the lands of the Waikoloa- Waimea region(Maly and Maly 2002).Kamakau(1992)added that after Kamehameha had secured rule over Hawai`i Island,he conducted a kalai`aina and gave the lands of Kahalu`u and Keauhou to Ke`eaumoku and Namahana,both of whom had shown their unwavering support for upcoming chief. By 1796, Kamehameha had conquered all the island kingdoms except for Kauai. It was not until 1810,when Kaumuali`i, ali`i nui of Kauai gave his allegiance to Kamehameha, that the Hawaiian Islands were unified under one ruler. (Kuykendall and Day 1976) At the time of acquiring Kaua`i,Kamehameha situated his royal court on Oahu,and then around 1812,he returned to Kailua,Kona where he lived out his remaining years(Desha 2000;Kamakau 1992). Early Historic Period Accounts In the decades following Western contact(1778),Hawai`i's interaction with the western world increased resulting in changes to the culture and the political economy.From the outset,relations between Hawaiians and the newly arrived foreigners were heavily influenced by the latter's need for supplies to replenish their ships (Major 2001). To accommodate this newly created demand, some of the work of the maka`ainana shifted from subsistence agriculture to the production of food and goods that could be traded with foreign ships(Wilkes 1845). The sandalwood (`iliahi; Santalum ellipticum) trade, established by Euro-Americans in 1790,became a viable commercial enterprise by 1805 (Oliver 1961) and was flourishing by 1810. Upon Kamehameha's return to Kailua, Kona around 1812, he was active in the sandalwood trade and ordered men into the mountains of Kona to cut the prized wood and carry it to the coast,paying them in cloth, kapa,food, and fish(Kamakau 1992). This new burden added to the breakdown of the traditional subsistence system as farmers and fishers were ordered to spend most of their time logging,resulting in food shortages and famine that led to a population decline.Once Kamehameha realized that his people were suffering,he"declared all the sandalwood the property of the government and ordered the people to devote only part of their time to its cutting and return to the cultivation of the land"(Kamakau 1992:204).Kamakau (1992) reported that in the uplands between Kailua and Keauhou, in the plantation named Kuahewa Kamehameha worked as a farmer. During this period, Kona served as the seat of traditional Hawaiian politics, however, historical records suggest that a large majority of the interactions with foreigners occurred at places like Kailua or Kealakekua, thus there are but few descriptions of the Kahalu`u area written by early visitors. As such, it has been hypothesized by Tomonari- Tuggle(1985:24)that during this period,"Keauhou and Kahalu`u probably remained,in large part,characteristically Hawaiian" and likely served as a retreat for Hawaiian ali'1. One such description recorded by Kamakau (1992:388) tells of a great hula that occurred in Kahalu`u in 1791 upon the birth of Kaluaikonahale Kuakini(also known as John Adams Kuakini),the son of Namahana and Ke`eaumoku: At the birth of the child [Kuakini] there was a great hula at Kaha-lu`u, and the name hula (hula inoa)was being danced for the birth of the new son to Na-mahana and Ke`e-au-moku.Visitors came to bring gifts (ho`okupu),and among them was Ka-mehe-`ai-ku who had gone away and hidden in the county and slept with a man and given birth to a child. She was a cousin of Ke`e-au-moku, and when she was discovered among the spectators at the hula Ke`eaumoku gave the child to her to suckle and gave with him the land of Keauhou;and Ka-mehe-`ai-ku took the little chief to Keauhou and there nourished him until he was grown. At his birth,Kuakini was given the name Kaluaikonahale but when his half-brother Kuakini died,he took on his name and became known as Kaluaiokonahale Kuakini.He was also known as John Adams Kuakini to foreigners and served as the Kia`aina(Governor)of Hawaii Island between 1820 and 1844(Kamakau 1992).Kelsey and Kekahuna (in Maly and Maly 2004:11)reported that when Kuakini died in 1844,"his body was prepared for burial on the shore of Kahalu`u." During his tenure as governor, aside from establishing several churches across the island, Kuakini's name has also come to be associated with a large stone wall that extends from Palani Road in Kailua through a portion of the proposed project area and into the neighboring lands of Kahalu`u. This feature, commonly known today as Kuakini Wall(Site 6302),is presumed to have been constructed during his tenure, however,prior studies(Henry et al. 1997; Kelly 1983;Maly 1996)that address its age and function have not made a definitive correlation between this wall and its association with Kuakini.Kelly(1983:76)stated that up until 1855 the Kuakini Wall was consistently identified as "the Great Wall", or "the great stone wall" and its attribution to Kuakini did not appear on historical maps until Emerson and Kanakanui's 1892 map titled Kailua Town and Vicinity (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1676). In the Mahele land records from the mid-19t century, native tenants often referred to this wall as a pa pipi (cattle wall). Despite the naming incongruities, it is a generally held assumption that this wall was constructed in segments and 20 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background augmented over the years"as the necessity arose to protect the coastal residents from horses, cattle,and pigs" (Kelly 1983:76). Hawaii Registered Map No. 1850 from 1891 (Figure 9) shows a portion of the wall extending between Holualoa to La`aloa 1st(north of the project area) and does not show the wall extending further south which suggest that that portion of the wall within the project area was constructed sometime after 1891. A more complete visual showing the extent of the wall through a portion of the project area is shown in a 1960 USGS map(Figure 14). "The Great Wa11" ` LAA0 t= RIL .®Project arca i_=i Proposed road ---Kuakini Wall N AHilo 77 "11 Project area, H,wa_ ASM e 0.35 0.7 affiliates 04.1t Eanhstar OeurapIno.s, IR1E,c1rrno ,usc>s.arA,esd.LSCS oK.i3omctcrs Figure 9.Portion of Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1850 by Emerson from 1891 showing portion of"The Great Wall" (Kuakini Wall)located to the north of the project area. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 21 2.Background If ?:.. . '�,,. •n s \‘`' r• I L -, o L� �r 1 BF1 999 �� N. '-_� _\ iI w ter � ,ter. 1 ... qq Dtft3Ct` anll9 Set�1s .• ilii W.a[ r 1 sr i 11•. ' I � Vii) r � is �'l ff• v J rr F 9 E I - h III uL 1 r1 '`-• ..k.,. I, '_ / ' � i I 11 1 2 ' f .: ; .)Cem f s Water I�wel - Ka., 1.0.. 1{ o val I S r .� m \ ' ti ', ' i •Kahaluti `x' [ �, I,� ; ixaaal �I �ptr Park I Kalaau o Kalak.hl I `:, i-N amu.. a t n \ c f'' , x} ' 1 \ ;; 1 i I I I'rojccl area r j Proposed road --- Kuakini\\a11 N A ,,,„1. PfU CLt 'I drCd�• Hawaii ASM ‘ler affiliates I ° 0 0.35 0.� ,_ •• , �,„•z',,,,,,, e3r<ihm, •creoek,pLu ,tsri,nese.(ram.,MO.norm.uses. •ELA.ra;,cscs v K11CMCrcrs Figure 10. 1960 USGS map showing the Kuakini Wall alignment extending through a portion of the project area. John Papa Ti,who was born on Oahu in 1800 and reared in the royal court related a short story about Akalele, a famed paddler from Kauai who resided for some time in Kamehameha I's court. `I'i's story does not name or describe Kapala`alaea in detail,nonetheless,he does make mention of the area.As the story is told,while at Kawaihae, Akalele in a single-haul canoe accompanied by Kamehameha and his crew in double-haul canoes set sail for Ka`awaloa.The canoes made a stop at Kailua and the area residents brought gifts including sweet potatoes,fowls,and pigs for Kamehameha. The canoes,fully loaded with vegetables and animals,departed Kailua and upon approaching Kahalu`u and Keauhou, Akalele began to challenge the king and his men to a race. The canoes raced down the coast and upon approaching `Awili in Ka`awaloa, Kamehameha called out to Akalele to turn his canoe into the narrow entrance and Akalele's canoe was the first to reach their destination, making him the winner of the impromptu competition(Ii 1993). Ti also tells a story of how the ali'1 wahine Kamamalu(wife of Kamehameha II) made a trip (ca. 1812)from Ka`n into Kona where she and a few others stopped in the neighboring lands of Keauhou. Ti also related information about the smallpox epidemic that had arrived in Kona and was wreaking havoc on the native population: They [Kamamalu and Kaohe] were greeted with the news that smallpox had reached Haleili,about ten ahupua'a way from Papa, where death was making havoc. It was said that some people from Oahu had caused the spread of the disease... Early Monday morning they departed and paused at Keauhou and Kahaluu for food. They moved on comfortably until they arrived at Kailua the same day. (Ii 1993:171) In the following excerpts, Ti provided insight into the various events, relationships, and cultural practices that were occurring at Kahalu`u and the other areas of Kona including Kailua and Kealakekua. Among other aspects of life in the royal court, Ti tells of Kamehameha's involvement with the sale of the aging ship Keoua,and a trip made by Kamehameha's to Kahalu`u where they observed a peculiar method of bounding the suspended coconuts: 22 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background It was decided by the king and the captains who conveyed the chiefs to Hawaii that the Keoua should be filled with sandalwood and sold with its cargo, for it was showing signs of age. The articles obtained through the sale were to belong to the king.A fine haole man from one of the foreign ships took it to China. Before the king and chiefs went to Kahaluu for a year,there were seen some strange coconut trees in the midst of a coconut grove. The leaves of some of them had been bent over the dried nuts and plaited from the base of the leaf to the trunk, thereby holding up the nuts. This was truly an uncommon procedure and one not seen by Ii anywhere else. We were told that no one was allowed to take the dried coconuts. All the chiefs who owned groves were on Oahu, and perhaps that was why caretakers of the land protected each chief's grove.Not long afterwards,when the people who were to consume the nuts returned,such bound-up trees were seen no more. Soon after the decision was made to sell the Keoua,the masts of the king's canoes were erected,and it was told aboard that he was sailing for Kahaluu. So those who were going,either by canoe or by foot,made themselves ready. The boy accompanied his young chief in the canoe fleet his father had brought from Honolulu,and landed at Kahaluu. However, when the sun was about to set and the father was ready to return to Kailua,the boy insisted on going with him. The father was opposed to the idea of Ii's leaving the young chief,but the boy said"That may be so,but you and Kaleiheana are being allowed to stay at Kailua as you wish.Though we have come to this island for the same reason,to serve Liholiho,the chief is not yet settled. Therefore, it would be well for us to go back together until we know what he is going to do." At these words Kaleiheana agreed that the boy go with them. They landed at Kailua,at their place in Papaula. The following days were ones of intense famine in Kailua, and the followers of the young chief suffered. The boy and his father went to stay for several days with a resident from nearby Keopu. It was here that Kaiwikokoole, a makuakane of the boy, met the lad and his father when he came with the king's farmers from Kuahewa. They brought food from the store houses of the king,kept for just such times as this. This makuakane[Kaiwikokoole]of the boy conversed with his father about their living in the house of a friend,and he asked permission to take the boy and keep him for some days because of the great famine. So it was decided that the boy should go with him, leaving his father in the house of their friend. In the upland of Kuahewa he lived on a farm where the tree ferns grew, located above the long trail mentioned before. This was a war trail when Umi the chief was victorious in battle. On the huge farm was a large number of 'al alo (men who ate in the king's presence) appointed by Kamehameha to take charge of the work. The boy lived in the upland [Kuahewa] with Kaiwikokoole for some time before Kaleiheana [another uncle] sent a messenger to fetch him. The messenger was named Kalaikane and he was a kaikunane relative of the boy's mother,whose name was the same. Papa's [`I'i's uncle and namesake who was the kahu of Kamehameha I] health had become much worse after the king and chiefs had left for Kahaluu. His friends and the boy's father gathered at Pahoehoe in Kaumalumalu,near Kailua,to be with him.The boy and his companion arrived there at dusk,to find that Papa could no longer speak clearly. Papa, who wanted to go to Hookena, his land in South Kona, was carried aboard a canoe in the harbor [Kailua], but the time for the makahiki celebration was drawing near and canoes were prohibited from sailing. They were waiting for the gods to be set up before the Hikiau heiau after their circuit of the island.Everyone was filled with fear of the kapu,but the boy's father felt a great pity for Papa, who fretted aboard the canoe, so he made ready to sail. However, he was strongly urged to wait until the chiefs had heard of Papa's wish. When the king and chiefs heard how Papa was they gave permission for him to leave,knowing that this was his last illness. However, when he received permission from his chiefs to sail, Papa no longer wished to do so because the wooded makahiki gods were about to arrive. Or perhaps his desire ceased when permission was granted. After the kapu days had passed,the gods arrived at Hikiau the most important heiau in the district of Kona. This was,I believe,the King's first year on Hawaii after his return from Oahu. It has been CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 23 2.Background said that the king spent the thirteenth year of the century at Lahaina;but if that is an error,this event took place in 1813. The chiefs who resided at Kaawaloa from the time they came from Kahaluu to await the gods at Hikiau, listened for news concerning the serious illness of Papa. When the time for the patient to depart this world was near at hand,he was borne on a litter to the dwelling house and laid down. A few days later he turned away and left his wife and all his people. A messenger was sent to inform the chiefs. (Ii 1959:113-116) Death of Kamehameha and the Arrival of the First Company of Missionaries Although Kamehameha had remained quite active during his latter years,by 1819,his health was in decline. On May 8th, 1819,Kamehameha died at his royal residence in Kamakahonu,and the ongoing cultural transformations that had been shaping Hawaiian culture since Captain Cook's arrival in the islands began to accelerate rapidly. On May 8th, 1819, Kamehameha died and his kingdom was left to his son, Liholiho (Kamehameha II). Upon the death of a prominent chief,it was customary to suspend all of the kapu that maintained social order, including the segregation of genders and social classes.Thus,following the Kamehameha's death,a period of'ai noa(free eating)was observed, along with the relaxation of other traditional kapu. It was the duty of the new king and kahuna to reinstate the ancient kapu and restore social order.However,during this pivotal point in history,traditional customs were altered(Kamakau 1992). Immediately after the passing of Kamehameha I, his son and designated successor, Liholiho, was promptly taken to Kawaihae to ensure his safety and to protect him from the impurities associated with the death of his father at Kamakahonu.Following the purification rituals,Liholiho returned to Kamakahonu but he did not reinstate the kapu. Kekuaokalani,who was delegated by Kamehameha I as the caretaker of the war god Kuka`ilimoku,was dismayed by his cousin's(Liholiho)actions.After several unsuccessful attempts to make peace with Kekuaokalani it was agreed that peace could only be sought through warfare.Liholiho's army led by Kalanimoku,and others made ready to march south from Kailua.Kalanimoku"then placed the carriers of food and water and marched his men to Keauhou,where they camped" (Kamakau 1992:228). Kalanimoku sent Kaheana(also known as Moehau)to seek Kekuaokalani in a last-ditch effort to make peace. Kaheana met Kekuaokalani at Lekeleke along the boundary of Honalo and Keauhou 2nd Kalanimoku's forces fired the first shots and Kekuaokalani's men returned fire resulting in the first injuries to Kalanimoku's army including two chiefs Kaikio`ewa and Holualoa. The two armies advanced where they met head- to-head at the battlefield in Kuamo`o, south of the project area. According to Stokes and Dye (1991:89), the battle primarily took place between Kekuaokalani Heiau in Ma`ihi and Lonohelemoa Heiau in Kuamo`o. The two sides armed with a mix of Western and traditional weaponry fought earnestly. Kekuaokalani's army, standing in favor of restoring and maintaining the ancient kapu of the land was defeated in this battle,thus leaving no resistance against Liholiho's move to rule under the laws of 'ai noa(Kamakau 1992). It has been estimated that as many as 300 graves of fallen warriors can be found at the Lekeleke Burial Ground located south of the project area along the Honalo- Keauhou 2nd boundary(Tomonari-Tuggle 1985). Ka`ahumanu, proclaimed herself Kuhina Nui (Premier). Not long after Kamehameha's death, Kaluaikonahale John Adams Kuakini was appointed by his sister,Ka`ahumanu,to the position of Kia`Dina (governor)for the Island of Hawaii. By December of 1819, Liholiho had sent edicts throughout the kingdom renouncing the ancient state religion,ordering the destruction of the heiau images,and ordering that the heiau structures be destroyed or abandoned and left to deteriorate. He did, however, allow the personal family religion, the aumakua worship, to continue (Kamakau 1992;Oliver 1961).With the end of the kapu system,changes in the social,spiritual,and economic patterns began to affect the lives of the common people. By October of 1819,seventeen Protestant missionaries had set sail from Boston en route to Hawai`i.They arrived in Kailua-Kona on March 30th, 1820,to a society whose long-standing kapu system had just been overturned. Some of the ali`i,who were already exposed to Western material culture,welcomed the opportunity to become educated in a Western style and adopted their dress and religion.During this period,the sandalwood trade was wreaking havoc on the commoners, who were weakening with the heavy production, exposure, and famine just to fill the coffers of the all i who were no longer under any traditional constraints (Kuykendall and Day 1976; Oliver 1961). The lack of control of the sandalwood trade soon led to the first Hawaiian national debt, as promissory notes and levies were initiated by American traders and enforced by American warships (Oliver 1961). The Hawaiian culture was well on its way toward Western assimilation as the industry in Hawaii went from the sandalwood trade to a short-lived whaling industry.Liholiho shifted the center of government from Kailua to Honolulu.The introduction of several new industries resulted in the uplands of Kona transforming to accommodate the coffee and tobacco industries as well as more diversified agriculture,including the rearing of livestock. 24 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background In 1823, British missionary, William Ellis accompanied by Joseph Goodrich and Reverend Asa Thurston and Artemas Bishop, toured the Island of Hawaii seeking out communities in which to establish church centers and schools for the Calvinist mission. In July of 1823,Ellis and his companions started their tour of the island and headed south along the coast of the Kona District. Of the overall environment,Ellis opined: Kona is the most populous of the six great divisions of Hawaii, and being situated on the leeward side, would probably have been the most fertile and beautiful part of the island had it not been overflowed by flood of lava... The northern part,including Kairua,Kearake'kua, and Honaunau, contain a dense population; and the sides of the mountains are cultivated to a considerable extent;but the south part presents a most inhospitable aspect. (Ellis 1917:139) Ellis approached Kahalu`u by foot from the north, stopping first in Pahoehoe Ahupua'a located a short distance to the north of the current project area,where he encountered workmen engaged in making canoes.After a momentary stop to share the gospel,Ellis continued south,passing through Kapala`alaea and onto Kahalu`u: We walked on to Pahoehoe, where we entered a large house, in which many workmen were employed in making canoes. About fifty people soon after assembled around us. We asked them if they would like to hear about the true God, and the way of salvation? They answered,Yes. I then addressed them for about twenty minutes on the first principles of the gospel.As soon as I began to speak,they all sat down,and observed perfect silence. Shorty after this service we took our leave,and proceeded along the shore to Kahaluu;where a smart shower of rain obliged us to take shelter in a house by the road side. While resting there,the voice of wailing reached our ears. We inquired whence it came?and were informed by the people of the house,that a sick person in the neighbourhood had just expired. (Ellis 1917:90) Reverand Artemus Bishop also described preaching at"Kahaluu,Keauhou, and Kainaliu,and to a large an [sic] attentive audiences,where the smallest number assembled could not be less perhaps than 500"(Bishop 1892). Population estimates collected by early missionaries reported that for the years between 1831 and 1832,the Kona District had about 12,400 residents with roughly 6,649 persons living within North Kona and the remaining 5,751 residing in South Kona. This number continued on a downward trend as census reports taken several years later between 1835 and 1836 reported a total district population of 10,954 of which 5,957 were residents of North Kona (Schmitt 1973). Mahele `Aina of 1848 By the mid-19t century, the Hawaiian Kingdom was an established center of commerce and trade in the Pacific, recognized internationally by the United States and other nations in the Pacific and Europe(Sai 2011). As Hawaiian political elites sought ways to modernize the burgeoning Kingdom, and as more Westerners settled in the Hawaiian Islands, major socioeconomic and political changes took place, including the formal adoption of a Hawaiian constitution by 1840,the change in governance from an absolute monarchy to a constitutional monarchy,and the shift towards a Euro-American model of private land ownership in a process known as the Mahele Aina. This change in land governance was partially informed by ex-missionaries and Euro-American businessmen in the islands who were generally hesitant to enter business deals on leasehold lands that could be revoked from them at any time. Moa Kauikeaouli (Kamehameha III), through intense deliberations with his high-ranking chiefs and political advisors,separated and defined the ownership of all lands in the Kingdom(King n.d.).They decided that three classes of people each had one-third vested rights to the lands of Hawaii: the Mo 7, the all`i and konohiki, and the native tenants (hoa`aina). In 1846, King Kauikeaouli formed the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles (more commonly known as the Land Commission)to adopt guiding principles and procedures for dividing the lands,grant land titles, and act as a court of record to investigate and ultimately award or reject all claims brought before them (Bailey in Commissioner of Public Lands 1929). All land claims, whether by chiefs for an entire ahupua'a or 'ill kupono or by hoa`aina for their house lots and gardens, had to be filed with the Land Commission within two years of the effective date of the Act(February 14, 1846)to be considered. This deadline was extended several times for chiefs and konohiki,but not for native tenants(Soehren 2004). The King and some 245 chiefs spent nearly two years trying unsuccessfully to divide all the lands of Hawaii amongst themselves before the whole matter was referred to the Privy Council on December 18, 1847 (King n.d.; Kuykendall 1938). Once Kauikeaouli and his chiefs accepted the principles of the Privy Council, the Mahele Aina (Land Division)was completed in just forty days (on March 7, 1848). The names of nearly all of the ahupua'a and CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 25 2.Background 'ili kupono of the Hawaiian Islands, as well as the names of the chiefs who claimed them,were recorded in the Buke Mahele (Mahele Book) (Buke Mahele 1848; Soehren 2004). As this process unfolded, King Kauikeaouli, who received roughly one-third of the lands of Hawaii,realized the importance of setting aside public lands that could be sold to raise money for the government and also purchased for fee simple title by his subjects. Accordingly,the day after the division when the name of the last chief was recorded in the Buke Mahele,the King commuted about two- thirds of the lands awarded to him to the government(King n.d.). Unlike Kauikeaouli,the chiefs and konohiki were required to present their claims to the Land Commission to receive their Land Commission Awards(LCA.)The chiefs who participated in the Mahele were also required to provide to the government commutations of a portion of their lands in order to receive a Royal Patent giving them title to their remaining lands. The lands surrendered to the government by the King and chiefs became known as"Government Land."The lands personally retained by the King became known as"Crown Land."Lastly,the lands received by the chiefs became known as"Konohiki Land"(Chinen 1958:vii; 1961:13). To expedite the work of the Land Commission, all lands awarded during the Mahele were identified by name only, with the understanding that the ancient boundaries would prevail until the lands could be formally surveyed. At the time of the Mahele, Kapala`alaea 1st was claimed and awarded to the chiefess Hazaleleponi Kalama, the wife of King Kauikeaouli, as `dpana (parcel) 2 of LCA 4452. According to Kalama's LCA documents, she had received Kapala`alaea 1st from her husband, King Kauikeaouli prior to the Mahele. On the other hand, the subject ahupua'a of Kapala`alaea 2nd,was initially claimed by the ali`i Kahonu but subsequently relinshed to the Government where it was included in the inventory of Government lands (Commissioner of Public Lands 1929; Soehren 2004). On August 9th, 1859, J. P. Cooke completed his survey of Kapala`alaea 2nd which is included below as Hawaii Registered Map No. 34 (Figure 14). Aside from noting the presence of the Alanui Aupuni (roughly the present-day alignment of Alii Drive) along the coast, Cooke's map does not include any other details about natural features, resources,or land use during this period. A,. � k FR 1.flA Ll31.N �1Ut n. 114-s.. `1 .- i aim( 3GE Ili K SUITR. ,- r 1 y .,tet ( ti ; , : ' t S f ig. .,,4 �¢' .. _ if Proje t Figure 11.Hawaii Registered Map No.34 prepared by J.P. Cooke in 1859 showing project areas in Kapala`alaea 2'. 26 CIA for the La`ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background Kuleana Act of 1850 As the Mo 7 and ali'1 made claims to large tracts of land during the Mahele,questions arose regarding the protection of rights for the native tenants. To address this, on August 6th, 1850, the Kuleana Act(Enabling Act) was passed, allowing native tenants to claim a fee simple title to any portion of lands that they physically occupied, actively cultivated,or had improved(Garovoy 2005).The Kuleana Act also clarified rights to gather natural resources,as well as access rights to kuleana parcels, which were typically landlocked. Lands awarded through the Kuleana Act were and still are,known as kuleana awards or kuleana lands.The Land Commission oversaw the program and administered the kuleana as LCA (Chinen 1958). Native tenants wishing to claim land were required to register their claim in writing by submitting a register to the Land Commission who assigned the claimant a number, and that number was used to track the claimant through the entire claims process. Subsequently,the claimant sought supporting testimony from two individuals(typically neighbors)to confirm their claim to the land. The document generated as part of this process was known as a Native or Foreign Testimony depending upon the language used by the claimant. Upon successful submittal of the required documents,the Land Commission rendered their decision,and if successful,the tenant was issued the LCA. Per the Indices of Awards (Commissioner of Public Lands 1929) eight hoa`aina, (Haki, Hipuu/Kipuu, Kaaha, Kahiamoe,Kaiama,Keauikalima,Naai,and Puhi)were awarded sixteen kuleana lots in Kapala`alea 1st and 2nd(Table 3). Of the eight awardees, three, Haki, Kaaha, and Kaiama's kuleana lots are within Kapala`alaea 2nd,whereas the remaining lots for the five awardees are in Kapala`alaea 1st. In all, some 17.95 acres spread across Kapala`alaea 1st and 2nd were kuleana lots.Lastly,of the seven awardees,four(Haki,Kahiamoe,Keauikalima,and Naai)are confirmed to have received both a coastal house (pa hale)lot and a mauka agricultural lot; one (Hipuu/Kipuu)received only a mauka agricultural parcel; and three (Kaaha,Kaiama, and Puhi)received only a coastal pa hale lot(Figures 12 and 13). Table 2.Kuleana awards in Kapala`alaea 1st and 2nd Awardee Ahupua`a LCA No. Royal Acres Year No. of Patent No. Awarded Parcels Haki Kapala`alaea 2nd 9235-B 3814 2.7 1857 2 Hipuu/Kipuu Kapala`alaea 1st 6082 3815 1.6 1857 1 Kaaha Kapala`alaea 2nd 5679 8544 0.15 1961 1 Kahiamoe Kapala`alaea 1st 5680 3737 0.82 1857 2 Kaiama Kapala`alaea 2nd 5675 8046 3.12 1896 2 Keauikalima Kapala`alaea 1st 2376 4033 3.64 1858 2 Naai Kapala`alaea 1st 6130 4038 2.48 1858 2 Puhi Kapala`alaea 1st 10642 3736 3.44 1857 4 Total - - - 17.95 - 16 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 27 2.Background NI '',744i -„R 1 e e -, 11 I, ( iliNir TO , , ,„ - di - Op ' i 1, :4,31 _ - .,�� �A , . , 1 as -j j; 2376 7 i. a , .A . w i. 'n N OProject area O LCA 44522 to O LCA(Kuleana Awards) O Land Grant I.Kalama Hilo Project tarea� H. ASMVg.6.' o 0.I3 affiliates t� ,, ite <«,row�,�, H au..\lasnn H,a Hear.,Ganmm�.Fno.NO AA.tis(s.Finn,F,d.a Kilometers Figure 12. Coastal kuleana lots in Kapala`alaea 1st(shaded purple)and 2nd(shaded brown). The western,proposed road corridor portion of the current project area, extends across portions of two kuleana awards specifically `apana 2 of LCA 5675 awarded to Kaiama and `apana 2 of LCA 9235-B awarded to Haki(see Figure 12).According to Kaiama's native register,which was submitted to the Land Commission in 1848,this lot was described as a"pahale, he pa kahiko loa mai, mai ka wa mai o Kamehameha I..."(house lot, a very ancient lot held since the time of Kamehameha I). In Kaiama's native testimony dated February 13, 1849,Naai and Puhi (who also received kuleana lots in Kapala`alaea 1st)testified to confirm Kaiama's land claim, stated that Kaiama held a total of seven parcels in the 'ili `mina of Kupepeiao and Ililoa which are in Kapala`alaea 2nd. Six of Kaiama's parcels were for agricultural use and are described as either a pauku(a small division of land usually under wetland taro cultivation or kahapai (dryland cultivated garden). Kaiama's seventh parcel which is within a portion of the project area, was a pahale.This pahale is described as being enclosed by a wall(paa i ka paia)and containing four houses.The testifiers also noted the presence of the Alanui Aupuni (Government Road) on the makai (western) side of this lot. Kaiama received these lots from Kahahana,who is presumed to be a konohiki for this area, during the reign of Kamehameha II(Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018). Concerning LCA 9235-B awarded to Haki,although there was no native register,testimony provided by Puhi and Kawahaku on February 13, 1848, indicates that Haki originally claimed six parcels. Similar to Kaiama's claim,five of Haki's six parcels were used for agricultural purposes and are identified as either kahapai or pauku. Haki's coastal pahele lot is described as enclosed by a wall (paa i ka paia) with one house which he has held since the time of Kamehameha I(Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018). 28 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background a ill t Aikk, ey 'LCA 9235 B:I r � r 4 • N =Project area D LCA 4452.2 to D LCA(Kuleana Awards)0 Land Grant H.Kalama Hilo Pro ec eea Hawa ASM 0 0.15 03 affiliates 4.114 e ,n1CM pingHuwadf,nw.._rsd,HP.RF r. .t o_ oan. s(.kP H d. Kilometers Figure 13.Mauka kuleana lots in Kapala`alaea 1st(shaded purple)and 2nd(shaded brown). Government Land Grant Program In conjunction with the Made, the reigning monarch, King Kauikeaouli authorized the issuance of Royal Patent Grants to applicants for tracts of government land. The process for applications was clarified by the"Enabling Act," which was ratified on August 6th, 1850. The Act resolved that portions of Government Lands established during the Mahele of 1848 should be set aside and sold as grants. The stated goal of this program was to enable native tenants, many of whom were not awarded or insufficiently awarded kuleana parcels during the Mahele,to purchase lands of their own.As Government lands,the remaining portions of Kapala`alaea 2nd that were not previously awarded as LCA were divided and sold as grants.A total of four grants totaling 181.95 acres were purchased in Kapala`alaea 2nd(Table 3).The locations of these grants are shown above(see Figures 12 and 13).Except for the western,road proposed road corridor portion of the project area,which is within LCA 5675 and 9235,the remaining portions are within the 94.25- acre Land Grant 3019 which was sold to Kaaipulu(sometimes spelled as Kaaipule)on March 3rd, 1866 for$47.12. A review of Kaaipulu's grant records did not reveal any information about land use practices. Table 3. Land Grants in Kapala`alaea 2nd Awardee Land Grant No. Date Acquired Acres Kaaipulu 3019 1866 94.25 Kekaukalima 1747 1855 18.5 Keoki/Keoke/Keoiki 1756 1855 34 Palauoleleo 3052 1867 35.2 Total 181.95 CIA for the La`ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 29 2.Background Commission of Boundaries (1862-1876) In 1862,the Commission of Boundaries(Boundary Commission)was established in the Kingdom of Hawai`i to legally set the boundaries of all the ahupua'a that had been awarded,by name only,as a part of the Mahele. Subsequently,in 1874,the Boundary Commission was authorized to certify the boundaries for lands brought before them. As a part of this process,the Boundary Commission gathered testimony from informants,who were typically older native residents who learned of the boundaries from their ancestors, relatives, or neighbors. The boundary information was collected primarily between 1873 and 1885 and was usually given in Hawaiian and simultaneously transcribed into English. Although hearings for most ahupua'a boundaries were brought before the Boundary Commission and later surveyed by government-employed surveyors, in some instances, the boundaries were established through a combination of other methods. In some cases, ahupua'a boundaries were established through surveys conducted on adjacent ahupua`a. In cases where the entire ahupua'a was divided and awarded as LCA and or Government-issued Land Grants (both of which required formal surveys), the Boundary Commission relied on those surveys to establish the boundaries for that ahupua`a. Although these small-scale surveys aided in establishing the boundaries,they lack the detailed knowledge of the land that is found in the Boundary Commission hearings. Because the entirety of Kapala`alaea 2nd was awarded as kuleana lands or sold as Land Grants,both of which required formal surveys, the Boundary Commission relied on the information from those surveys to establish the boundaries of the ahupua`a.Although no specific request was made to the Land Commission to settle the boundaries of Kapala`alaea 2nd, A.L. Judd, the attorney for the all'1 Charles Kana`ina filed an application with the Boundary Commission to settle the boundaries of Kapala`alaea 1st. A hearing was held at Keauhou on August 1 1th, 1873, and John G. Hoapili, who amongst other duties served as district magistrate and judge for North Kona, appeared before the Commission and testified that Kapala`alaea 1st is bound entirely by grants, makai by ocean and kuleana lots. Having heard this information, the Boundary Commission did not call any additional witnesses and this ahupua'a boundary was established using the information from these smaller surveys(Boundary Commission 1874:333-334). Although the Boundary Commission testimony for Kapala`alaea 1st and 2nd do not yield any detailed information about land use and resources, testimony gathered for the neighboring land of Kahalu`u did make mention of places and resources found along the Kapala`alaea 2nd-Kahalu`u boundary. The Boundary Commission met on August 9th, 1873 at the home of J.G. Hoapili to hear testimony for the lands of Kahalu`u. Excerpts from the testimony gathered for Kahalu`u that make explicit reference to Kapala`alaea 2nd have been cited below. Papa k.sworn,(very old man) I was born at Kahaluu,Kona,Hawaii at the time of the Holuanui[ca. 1813], and have always lived there... ...The [Kahalu`u]boundary runs out of the woods,walls,house is on Kaumalumalu,Kapaalaea 2nd [Kapala`alaea] ends on the mauka side of Hehenepuueo... Kaihumua k sworn I was born at Kahaluu N. Kona Hawaii at the time of the building Kiholo, and have always lived there and know a part of the boundaries... Kaumalumalu joins Kahaluu on north side in woods at Waialiipoa. I do not know the boundaries through the woods. Kapalaaea[Kapala`alaea]bounds Kahaluu on the north side from Wailipoa to sea shore. C.X. d Kapalaaea [Kapala`alaea] has been sold and patented. (Boundary Commission 1874:321- 323) From these snippets,we learn that the two individuals who provided testimony were born and raised in Kahalu`u which suggests a long history of residence and familiarity with the area.Mention of specific historical events including the holuanui likely associated with the massive holua slide built in Keauhou in honor of Kauikeaouli in ca. 1813— and the kiholo—believed to be a fleet of canoes built ca. 1804 were significant historical events in this area. Reference to forests including Waialiipoa(or Wailipoa) and coastal areas suggest that Kapala`alaea 2nd contained a mix of forest and coastal resources. Furthermore, mention of the sale of Kapala`alaea points to the changes in land ownership during the mid to late 19th century. 30 CIA for the La`Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background The Rise of Ranching and Agriculture In the decades after the Made Aina and the conversion to fee-simple ownership of land, ranching along with agriculture emerged as major industries in Kona. These industries drew native residents and populations of migrant laborers to centralized town centers (Tomonari-Tuggle 1985). In Kona, ranching, which began in the early 19th century,and later,sugar plantations grew to be the dominant industries.Many Hawaiian families and other long-time residents took up ranching as a full-time endeavor. According to Maly and Maly (2004:100) in Keauhou-Kahalu`u "and on nearly every ahupua`a to the north and south,were put into ranching"The prime grazing lands were typically located between the 1,500 and 4,500-foot elevation and were positioned above the lands,that during this same period, were being cultivated in coffee and other crops(Maly and Maly 2004). By the last quarter of the 19th century, through lease agreements and outright purchases, Henry Nicholas Greenwell, the son of William Thomas Greenwell and Dorothy Smales,went on to become one of Kona's leading ranchers and agriculturalist. Arriving in Kailua-Kona in 1850, Henry began as an agriculturalist, cultivating a Brazillian variety of naval oranges,an endeavor he abandoned in the 1870 before turning to coffee where he was able to substantially increase his land holdings.By 1881,he established Kealakekua Ranch and engage in dairy production and cattle ranching on a large scale (Henke 1929; Kona Historical Society 1992; Wright 1974). Henry married Elizabeth Caroline Hall in 1868 and they had four daughters and six sons,three of which,Francis(Frank),Arthur,and William Henry, also became some of Kona's leading ranchers. When Henry died in 1891,the ranch's management fell under the responsibility of his wife and sons. Like their father, the Greenwell brothers continued with ranching and went on to establish ranches of their own including Palani Ranch,Kealakekua Ranch,and Hokukano Ranch(Kona Historical Society 1992). Overall, the Greenwells held approximately 36,000 acres spanning from Ka`npulehu to Kealakekua, to include the project area (Kona Historical Society 1992). In an interview with Hannah Springer conducted for the Kona Historical Society in 1991, Sherwood Greenwell, the grandson of Henry Greenwell and son of Arthur Greenwell, spoke about the Greenwell lands, particularly their lower coastal lands extending between Kailua and Keauhou. Sherwoon Greenwell stated: ...we spoke of the lower lands as being sort of important to pout out quality grass fed cattle..that only happened as a method of getting good cattle off to ranches somewhere in the '30s probably the later'30s... the grasses and ekoa and all of those things weren't brought in until somewhere around 1929,30,31 somewhere around that time. Prior to that makai lands didn't contribute anything to the ranches.Dad [Arthur] sold land down in 1934 between Kailua and Keauhou because it was no good for ranching. Well, there weren't the guinea grasses or ekoa or the elephant grasses and those things came later... (Sherwood in Kona Historical Society 1992:VII-27) The early agricultural industries in Kona were focused largely on coffee and other fruits.Kona's coffee industry attracted growers of various ethnic backgrounds,many of whom had arrived in Hawaii previously as part of the mass immigration of contract sugar plantation laborers (Goto 1982). In Kona, many Japanese families took up coffee farming as a family endeavor as it provided them with greater economic independence that was not afforded to them during their sugar contract work (Kelly 1983). However, unlike sugar cultivation, coffee was a minor crop and its persistence is attributed"to the fact that it passed from a plantation type of industry to a small-scale enterprise"often maintained by families (Kelly 1983:87). The success of the coffee industry peaked slightly during the 1890s, as Hackfield and Company established a branch in 1898 in Kailua,which ultimately helped the small family-nm farms establish a market for their crop. It is indeterminate whether coffee was grown within the project area, however, an article published in 1898 (Figurel4) indicates that coffee was grown in Kapala`alaea likely in the vicinity of the Government Road mauka of the project area. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 31 2.Background KO LANDS. I1( dir{tra . 12 itcrolrl � Pt int tai r '1 `i( r'ti I irair°1wi ' rIl (.*# tank. , ct + " ,. y ( in *,,a, MO . Ott` '� SII 1111W t i ( ) � ` r`rLrM ��` IQ I"�' ��r+ 1 . All � Ce rxiC ��� I i milt `tr do 1 Vc;rr; odd . I IIr r"� ` l'`' � I# rr� E" . Si ( Ili t i X11. LC PIM , r.9 . � d( ]'' rtfc!1 (qui .;1,1,1 ' I . �'. tcor ft-arI )1 tl O ' I1I11 . :;01011 �r ,. , r , A rt .i . m h. , j Orrn ;(( .1, [ het [ t.ww 1 „ . hii k. ! til icr'i `'„h. Ilalr ��" r t I . JrI Lit ! I it 1 . E s r,iMklw"i . *t IblllI Hit qv buu a at la CI1 ) Figure 14.Article clipping from the Evening Bulletin(1898)showing coffee cultivation in Kapala`alaea. But by the late 1800s, sugar production,which was rather short-lived,had surpassed the earlier industries (Maly and Maly 2004). Sugar production was concentrated between the 600 to 1,500 foot elevation in the area between "Keopn-Wai`aha and Kaumalumalu, Kapala`alaea to Keauhou, and Honalo to Kalukalu-Onouli" (Maly and Maly 2004:98).The Kona Development Company,which was the longest-lived of the sugar plantations to operate in Kona in conjunction with the West Hawaii Railroad Company eventually built the West Hawaii Railroad,which operated between 1906 and 1926. That portion of the railroad built in Kapala`alaea is located to the east of the project area above the 600 foot elevation(Figure 15).While the tobacco industry wasn't as successful as the coffee industry,one thing Kona became known for was growing the most potent tobacco and coffee as recounted in the following 'olelo no'eau which compare the crops'potency to love: Ke kope ho`ohia`a maka o Kona The coffee of Kona that keeps the eyes from sleeping. This saying applies not only to coffee,but also to love. To be in love with a person of Kona is to lose much sleep(Pukui 1983:188) 0 Kona i ka paka `ona ke ha`u iho `oe kunewanewa. Kona of the potent tobacco—a draw would make one stagger. Kona is said to be a land of potent lovemaking(Pukui 1983:270) 32 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background n :;::::... li_ (N C. ati ' "ti�4 Y ti �i, xa O ' • ry ° y p .11 °�'r� i i 1 1 1 I ti . . 1 . , . lit\ ‘.\\ \\\ I. • .,� i ihnad i f 1 HI 14 4 'il I West Hawan Ra lk? - 1 11 r . 1LI' ' + ti ij It1 ; MI I , 10 lit '. ,,, .ii ( i. • 1 1 I, \ I,. iii y , I 1 t IL , ,Ilk\'1.1.4 1.'.ip v i'IA..i.' \10 lill 41111 OA K%\-\\•NIII "N\\\I\\I \\VI,'N1,-..1 •,\1, \ 4.11%11P. 11 �I * �I I,1 11111i:11F ii 1:e,\ v - `:, 1.... rt , . ' % . .. . , _ � �1 .� + '. + k, % ‘, IP, % \ % 'tt it jty\\111%: Ni.;:;;;:i;JAL., ''',IL k i e fx c I .. iii \ ail! 4,1 + AN 1 „` a ..• .1.:;..... • >,� _}._�_..,�7 •til• 1 5 -x � s�� I. i 1 1 + a I ; I 1 r l a.t i 1 �-elk' 1 Irl 1 ".—..-,I^ f.j' •I• i ? 'I 0 Project area 0 0.25 0.5 N Kilometers n //�1V ,. cHilo Pro ec_l Nawa. ASM V1 .6.' affiliates F i�'.1t4 iig6r.1'2013 ai r.I ng aphic 9nciety,i vbeA,h n.HhZ E. a min.FAO.NOAA.U505.SPA. ...., ,„—„,-.„.,rn�imwiainsah. Figure 15.Portion of the 1928 USGS map showing alignment of the West Hawaii Railroad east of project area. As the uplands of Kona bustled with ranching and agriculture, in the coastal areas, fishing, churches, and mercantile businesses continued to operate, thus keeping these rather small coastal communities thriving. Between 1855 and 1870,the vast majority of economic activities in Kona were occurring at Kailua and Keauhou Bay,both of which were active port centers. An article published by S.W.K. Haluapo in the March 2nd, 1871, edition of the Hawaiian language newspaper Ke Au `Oko'a offers a glimpse into the settlement and farming practices that were occurring in North Kona during this period: NO NA HALE ABOUT THE HOUSES Ua ku kinikini no na hale i kukulu is The homes built along the shore here ma na kapa kahakai o Kona nei. 0 na in Kona are numerous. The native hale kamaaina no Hawaii nei, oia na homes are thatched with pili and so hale pili maoli a pela aku a kakaikahi forth, while the wooden homes wale hoi na wahi hale i uhi is me na belonging to foreigners are scattered laau o ka haole, ua nui no na hale a about. Many homes are standing ku ana ma kahakai a mauka no hoi... along the shore and in the uplands. NA MEA ULU THE PLANTS 0 ka kalo, a me ka uala, a me ka ulu Taro, sweet potato,and breadfruit are na ai kamaaina, o na mea no hoi is e the food of the natives and are planted kanu nuiia nei e na kanaka. 0 ke kope by the people in great quantity.Coffee a me ka alani, ua hapa mai ka and oranges are half-fruited at this hoohuaia ana i ko laua mau hua time, they are completely affected by momona i keia manawa, ua pau boa i kakani (a plant disease occurring in ke kakani, a maloo pu no hoi kekahi, hot areas), some are also dry, and CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 33 2.Background aole he hua pono mai. 0 ka hapuu a there is no good fruit.Hapu`u and hoi me ka hoi, na ai kamaaina o keia are the native foods of this place wahi, ke hiki mai ka wa wi. I ka during times of famine. Apparently, nana'ku, ua hooikaika no na kanaka i the people have worked hard at ka mahiai ana, a nui na mea ulu. farming and many things are growing. (Haluapo 1871:1) (English translation by Lokelani Brandt) Between 1882 and 1884,Hawaiian Kingdom surveyor,Joseph S.Emerson conducted cartographic surveys of the North Kona region where he generated letters,field notebooks,and survey maps.Born on Oahu, J.S.Emerson(like his brother, Nathaniel Emerson, compiler of Hawaiian history) could converse in Hawaiian and had an interest in Hawaiian beliefs,traditions,and customs.As a result,his letters and field notebooks record more than coordinates for developing maps. While surveying, Emerson also sought out native residents of the lands he surveyed, as guides. Thus, while he was in the field, Emerson often recorded place names, residences, trails, and various features of the natural-cultural landscape.Accompanying Emerson was his assistant,J.Perryman,who prepared detailed sketches of the Kona landscape during the time of their surveys.Among the lands sketched by Perryman was the region extending between KeahuolU and Keauhou,which was drawn on October 31st, 1883, and includes three distinct view planes as they had observed from the Keauhou survey station(Figure 16). The uppermost portion of the page shows the view from Keauhou looking north toward Keahuolu including the coastal section of Kapala`alaea. The middle portion of the page, which shows the view to the west overlooking the project area,illustrates a cluster of homes,walls, coconut groves, and a road extending just inland of Keauhou Bay. Lastly, the bottom portion of Perryman's sketch shows the view to the southwest of Keauhou Bay. With regards to the project area vicinity,no specific cultural or natural features are shown in Perryman's 1883 sketch r �Cea6. . U.& " _+� "`r3 Approximate location M` .... r3 ofthe project area °. -f. ..•/w� +wFq' 4 1,M x . -- a err.,U44, )6901 rltarrt.a Sf /144• �w11-44,01f r. ""14`-' am`' + .4( • a Figure 16.Perryman's 1883 sketch depicting the areas between Keauhou and Keahuoln. 34 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background Kapala`alaea 2nd during the Early to Mid 20th Century and the Survey of Kelsey and Kekahuna By the late 19th and early 20th century, the development of the Kona uplands as an agricultural and ranching center was in full swing.With regard to the coastal lands,while the exact chain of ownership following Kaaipulu's purchase of Grant 3019 is not entirely clear, County of Hawaii records of ownership from the 1940s list a Christine Nahale, Jeannie N. Green,Elizabeth N. Pea, and Mysie N. Tinsdale as coowners of the roughly 81 acre Grant 3013 (Figure 17).Due to the quality of the 1940s TM map(see Figure 17)ownership of the two LCAw(No.5675:2 and 9235B:2) within which a portion of the project area is located,is not explicitly clear.At this time,the coastal lands makai of the present-day Alii Drive was subdivided into roughly seven lots. By the 1950s,that portion of Grant 3019 mauka of present-day Alii Drive was subdivided into two roughly 31-acre parcels with the project area being within Lot 3 owned by Christina Nahale and Jeannie Green(Figure 18). County fieldbook records from this time period list the land use as undeveloped pasture and a historical aerial photograph taken in 1954 (Figure 19) shows the project area as undeveloped. While the 1940 and 1950 TMK maps (see Figure 17 and 18) provide limited insight into understanding the cultural features on the landscape,Theodore Kelsey and Henry Kekahuna's survey of North Kona in the early 1950s offer a more detailed examination of the cultural features that were still present, at least along the southern coastal portion of Kapala`alaea 2nd,at that time. l e P A leis O r ., /asZ ---- N -\ x+ Gr n'` '" / -- E , 111 ' c0.- /?- l \ Gz w. . _rn P ~ - \` \ f A - _`.. _ ZR R /668 // N ____ 0 x p .z 1 °I L p/o _e.,.. .ens L A A A 2'1 n i;T I' z 1'dk t. A E A l.1 c +t 4 I A fie01.'k.. .r - A r—� .✓ °'" A ',!;."'.4,72Z 14 o'�. MF:: x rw.- / _..: I A z�- rl CJ•. '� A C S} rf 1 ..L d "-) r -q. � P A L A Sols -- fI P A H . . -- � , L 7 .0O c w ��.. R _ .�c. ��.�,�-. -. ... lam'-RAPACw AL ASA P- d[RCX 3EC).N KON HAwAIf n n 110 0 0.1 0.2 r I Project arca v Kilometers Figure 17. County of Hawaii tax map ca. 1940 showing project area within lands owned by the Nahale,Green,and Pe`a families. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 35 2.Background - - P A - ,sr.f rasp N ' • �"-",_ H R. V l Ss <. LH O ._.—. _----._..�� \ A--,11 f \ --�� +P,v s5e,_,:,y G H o 1' .., r I , ter, " ��- te —E� te' _ f..:j. - '4 A C y/ A lhN,,,-,.)yy A 1 / ryr a 44. 111 r �"° ___.__ '-_.- --4. _._ -L _- _ .._ JJ jFe I F d r ar e. -z P A ,asz i :N �,., e E ' " L 1 n ! ---- ;.T -4 ! u;,irk., ..,..c..i.k, -0' -1.T'. i �_.. 0 0.1 0.2 F .1 Project area v Kilometers Figure 18. County of Hawaii tax map ca. 1950 showing project area within lands owned by Christine Nahale and Jeannie Green. 36 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background ''' 5 m ''a �• •rya, e .4tOt„,4t ,• ." `J,, N' "t', 14,°'.., 6 Ni Atilt a, ' F � � 1 4,u�'�'� �� r /P4 $.+. �" �h M r yy;� 11, , w al 9� .t)''' is r '4'� !, � ° '� w✓Y N R f W ,(. prp 7��r' 4 w m", fm� a �" , • a r 1, ,y .' ' , `4 ,P:"`t, t'''4''• '"4 '14, ';').‘,:e.' , Ilso 4 ;//ii4N41°4 t: f#,,i 0 'mJ �d *� q y 40 ' qtr, b ti 1, > y . rProject arca 0 0.25 0.5 N 1 Kilometers n ,/�,1v Haa Project area. Hawaii ASMr`el affiliates 1,4.11 Figure 19.Aerial photo from 1954 showing project area location. Detailed knowledge of coastal North Kona during the mid 20th century comes from the work of historian, Theodore Kelsey and Maui-born cartographer,Henry Kekahuna.Recognizing that the remnants of Hawai`i's ancient culture were rapidly disappearing from the landscape,between 1953 and 1954,the duo undertook an extensive study to map the remnant cultural sites in different parts of North Kona and compile historical information they gathered from elder native informants. Their work has proven most useful in understanding the past land use along with the practices and beliefs associated with area between Kahalu`u and Kapala`alaea. In January 1954,Kekahuna published two maps, one dated January 13 and the other dated January 28 (Figures 20 and 21)showcasing the heiau and other cultural sites located between the northern portion of coastal Kahalu`u to the southern boundary of Kapala`alaea. Although Kekahuna's January 28th map depicts the sites as four neatly organized rectangles (labeled A through D in Figure 21)along the coast, his map dated January 13th(see Figure 20) shows how these four features along with Keawemua Heiau (which was at the coast of Kapala`alaea 2nd) were interconnected. The January 13th map shows how Keawemua Heiau was connected to Lahae Heiau via a wall, the rocks of which were used in the construction of the "Beach Road" along with numerous leveled and paved areas, house foundations,enclosures,walkways,a cavern,rock walls,and two ku`ula(labeled as feature C and D in Figure 21)that were connected via a walkway and stairs. The southernmost ku`ula (feature C)was used as the place where fishers placed their first catch and the northernmost ku`ula(feature D)was where fishers went to conduct ceremonies to ho`oulu i'a(increase fish). Historical notes included on Kekahuna's map (see Figure 21)have been transcribed below and provides insight into the physical condition of the sites,including Keawemua Heiau located in Kapala`alaea 2nd makai of the project area. Kekahuna's notes also sheds light on the nearby Lahae Heiau (labeled as feature A in Figure 21), historical figures, specific cultural practices,and the natural resources present in the area at the time of their visit. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 37 2.Background Ke-awe-mua Heiau: The entire seashore from Ku`e-manu Heiau, on the northern shore of Kaha- lucu Bay,extending northward to the land of Kapala-`alaea,adjoining Kaha-lu`u,and some distance beyond, is low and bowlder-strewn. Fishermen frequent it with surrounding-nets (`upena ku`u), modern throw-nets(`upena kiola(Kepani),and anglers(kamokoi). At the boundary of these lands (`ahu-pua`a) [sic], on the Kapala-`alaea side, once stood the now totally destroyed heiau of Ke-awe-mua,through which have passed the old and present government roads. The heiau enclosure formerly extended about 50ft above the road of today.Present owner L. Okamura. The temple is of historic interest as being the dwelling place of Chief Pak'and his wife Konia, parents of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop,and that of Konia's sister Pauahi-nui,mother of Princess Ruth Ke-`eli-ko-lani. The site was on a slight elevation about 15ft above sea-level,and commanded a beautiful view. The waves of Lahae: Old-timers said that when the waves of Lahae crash with a roar it is a sign of rough weather;but when they break with a loud wailing sound (`alala ke kai) a person of chiefly rank will soon pass away. Archeological Remnants of Lahae Area A.Remnant of Lahae Heiau: Overall measurements 24'-W. x 96'-L.At the northeast corner was a wall built on a low ledge that extends northward to connect with Ke-awe-mua Heiau. The rocks of this wall as those of the main heiau, were removed for the construction of the road and property walls. B.House-foundation,measuring 32'-W.x 61'-L. C. A small-sized ku`ula,measuring 18'-W.x 18'-L. x 4.5'-H. D.A heiau to replenish the sea with fish(heiau ho`oulu i`a),measuring 27'-W.x 62'-L.x 6'-H. 38 CIA for the Ld'ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background L..Qk,ra,a9---Kv�a/-.al ea icrkAac.Aha-paa�. .� N eoaner Khn-I ,d K�a/ nl Ea I I C.) a I , Y ' m c II �z Z. G e,, r '. , A . ic, ,si S ---) 1 y I I 3.; „,.. Mi Z �c _ , .M H .a,W I J3 rc ti = a _ f --z ti 4 +, H e, do, y a 11 •,..,_ °�I 6'-d ; ct ' ;a H ' I lt3`" o h .t ` i 2 'fie :01 -,. y' \ �. ,+.-� -t- ' e a S I F 7 ms,� , a r _ hf 1,1' cn a�,, o w mil ,„ \( _\ ;.. .a ..-'gl k \ . _o = ti E` � ..i i c.., o*�O.h F' „, -,s.� o a al • _ it _,. ,k v f 3 ,i ,`` .l s 1 ' 5 l U -, / x 4 kj i bA �� u s -' s-K h E an 4 3 i wx ..; A m .tt ii 3 1� �s rl • �T-aelorrJbs_pr:u Yae.4 J a�r s �c h i1 L��. _ y R y \ x xf_ z tie ; 'C W ' sd o^ lye Q i 4,..:,.....,.. , o tJ �y(!`� f QI — ` ___ tip` .1 •� o y,r �t l'..�V��° 'dam°:,s���, ____jj v Ctt o Q w�! CV I 'Cr 0. P., 11 QI �I _ CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 39 2.Background E i.','\,,, p z e CI p ° i I 4E1 k y,c + t� i 4� o ^ "k0 1111'1 r o ° + �b a o r Z i i 1� _a'«a tea_16 - b�C p :,-/7:\t ii,:z:::. ) -H.- ---- r.---,'',.. A;' ..,,-..-k P y 9 ,, 4 W �� :Js E` 3 c n n a"m O $ Sya ,o` k= 2°• Ke Coe e t aAacr....},y i ,!,-1 ,!.).Z.3 trde \ ,,,,t,i i, ,.9,..;i-6,,,.',6.!,,,''-'„.„ ,,.' I° t.iit \ t, ;:,,,t n,..,.,...z 9',,o.-.1.-....x t t t''a Z o w s.°'-:: Ct y bx °; io°p p1 aF 'n d0. p k�b iN -C) ,!"no-hh rlfy44 � Hy po v t1j% Eg -, a,,r,- CC -,k- w x -� o ��°° K4.S`k:b s�4' *,U''c° iii ��� m vac b ,,`4 ' Ka Lar Mo. ® -t. i y^ i- ct �y (Lowe lmehnrpt i bs ... Ir 9 r'� " r y.a `g�ea durrra,. � 4• _--- a,� -+s,s�; ^: 5 a E Ka Car a IN-kvkel,, k'^ - `c i,s v �" .e. "iso .4"1- 2. ab° L4Ua Maao � I- a u� (shack raerp i n -k -r `o"..%1 � e c Y i� .4.....:)..-:is 'LZ`E, -may g•p a��:)„t O . a -c ti IWwt141 kFr tAa-p ti by -.- $ E ,43,...,4 En (La wpa�e/arJkt 9raRo!(y a ` o�it room./ksea.) k e eEB '-i Kv a u-5lree ,_=1 4$t CO NT ma's Allier)yoke em;,.r r °� ® -� .. . , ._ -•..)aa, N ta,fenlatirarou'ni1 wras[au . 2° p 1� I RI t El 'rb . w,br .,..°4 Ka Lae b.r9a-na4a-'e/ t �p Ey.q a 1t C F Z� (! C/k ret.toi,r wet) MFnelwnr,w4to t ' k egg,�,,,,'vt .t'p `@� nkad to Kr,paint.). w 4 te,2'i „2r" E` •c t t` �-, • 'Ye` 1 1 4 ',7 4 -p; na 3_,...., a 0 Canor-!adni eaa-f Ko-maba`akY' o 's�:"e ps ; ¢,T 'q•= .tv Ka Lar a Pee t Ea S o v. ;1.p� ` ., tb •� Ka Mitt-kr°a Carr ? kms- :t-x Frl 0.4 0e0d 4 P. $ C) )),=6-MCare 4 °1 t. p S ,,...t sm.,(�orsor lendin J rE b ti]�A: ct Ka Lee o Lilaa �. 1Y o aV 8'" 1 +i><°1,-c° •t Ka tv v4, �2 •z�$ L c° 1 N i.10.0,00401;40., ren,d44sfalfF aof,'y Ia�+ n 'o` �a1.`ny Yui'�'2'!� y pnr 1 TM^o �� 4� c Z ,__ Q / z .)..lav` Z Y W 4!-]• 'i N �E -E cb`�Ea4 - e �..' ',.? k% i-, '��a }q3 qv 7y. w 40CIA for the Ld'ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background Concerning the areas mauka of the"Beach Road"Kekahuna's notes(see Figure 21)identified several culturally significant places including the supernatural stone of Hakinaloa, which was linked to a"deity associated with the stars" but was destroyed "during the widening of the old government road under the supervision of Mr. Davis Spaulding" (see notes on Kekahuna's January 28th 1954 map). Kekahuna reported that when the blast was initiated, Mr. Spaulding and an individual named Kalua`i were were fatally blown down to the seashore at Lae 0 Liloa and that two other indivuduals Iokapa and Iokia sustained severe injuries. Kekahuna also identified the site of a large"pu`a- tree" whose leaves were roasted with pig and said to have tasted like lu`au (taro leaves). Nearby, Kekahuna also identified the residence of Hinamoa, the high priest of Ku`emanu Heiau, a temple dedicated to surfing. Hinamoa is credited with saving Kahalu`u Bay from Kaleikini and the menehune, who attempted to close off the bay by constructing a wall. To confuse the menehune, who worked only between sundown and sunrise, Hinamoa sent a resounding crow, forcing the menehune to abandon their work. Lastly, Kekehuna identified the planting fields and house site(on the makai side of the"Beach Road")of Kauako`eko`e,a wise old farmer who knew to plant his sweet potato and other food plants ahead of the rainy season,to yield the best crops (see the story of Kauako`eko`e in the section titled Traditional Cultivation Practices above). After conducting their field surveys, Kekahuna and Kelsey compiled the gathered information into a series of articles which they published in the Hawaii Tribune-Herald, titled Kamehameha In Kailua (Kekahuna and Kelsey 1954a).The comprehensive thirty-seven-part series,which was printed between February 28 to April 5, 1954,focused on select areas between Kailua and Honaunau. The specific segment dedicated to Kapala`alaea(as well as Holualoa, Kaumalumalu,and Kahalu`u)shown below in Figure 22 was featured in a single article published on March 18th, 1954 (Kekahuna and Kelsey 1954a). Although the information about Kapala`alaea in this article is concise and mirrors the notes shown in Figure 21,it offers valuable insights into the culture-history of Kapala`alaea. APAtA I'ALAIEA„ Adjoiningthe northern bounory of the Targe 1anci-clivi imn eahu ;R"a) of Kahn-i11'u i. pai -4 aims, which invites a brief visit , There, on a slight elevation on tho seaward i ie of the road (now : Lw karnut 's property) niay frniiid the little that remains of a helm' of special interest known a Ke-.aww'cymwiWithin this temple tvt !old dwelt. Chief Pa'ki' and big wifoy "hictess onia, mother of Princess Bernice F.a iabi Bishop, to whom noted Bishop Museum and Kir - e ii a in e b Bove' and Girl . hi , in i1Ole- 1a1loF are nobly metmorials„ In company with tiv, other tor the renowned rinCe :... lived Chieless auf.hi-not, mother� of Prim:C.55 Ruth a-iali- ,o-1_a« Figure 22.Article published by Kekahuna and Kelsey (1954a:4)about the history of Kapala`alaea. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 41 2.Background In the decade following Kelsey and Kekahuna's survey,the ownership of the roughly 31-acre parcel(Lot 3)was transferred to Elizabeth Pea who appears to have sold the parcel to the Hawaiian Trust Company. On December 30, 1969,the Hawaiian Trust Company sold the 31-acre parcel along with LCAw. 5675:2 to F. L. Smothers(Figure 23) for the sum of$635,367 (see Smothers v. Renander, 1981 No. 7485 Hawaii Court of Appeals). Smothers appears to have held this parcel at least until sometime around the 1980s (Figure 24). Although the project area remained undeveloped, two historical aerial photographs from 1976 (Figure 25) and 1992 (Figure 26)depicts the growth and expansion of the adjacent residential community to the north,west,and southwest of the project area.Careful analysis of these historical aerial photographs also show some of the built features in the project area and adjacent vicinity, most notably rock walls, some of which are shown extending in a mauka-makai direction marking the boundaries of Kapala`alaea 2"d and more specifically the northern and southern boundaries of the project area. Although subtle, shorter mauka-makai oriented walls are also shown along with walls extending perpendicular to the ahupua'a boundaries. A review of historic Google Earth aerial imagery spanning from 2001 to 2017 indicates minimal changes in the project area,except for a few land modifications.Notably,the imagery shows that sometime between 2010 and 2013, a rudimentary unpaved road extending mauka from Alii Drive where it breached a historic wall (Figure 27). This unpaved road closely aligns with the road corridor portion of the current project area. However, imagery from 2018 showed extensive land clearing within Parcel 121 of the project area(Figure 28). The land clearing work appears to have commenced from the southern end of Naniloa Drive and into much of Parcel 121 except the western section (roughly 0.91 acres)—the boundaries of which are demarcated by temporary orange construction fencing—and the eastern section mauka of a wall(roughly 0.64 acres). A review of prior archaeological studies conducted on this parcel as well as within the broader Kapala`alaea 2"d sheds light on the types of built cultural features that have been historically documented in the project area. The following section includes a summary of relevant studies. G-.7-7. -1 -c _;-%,ate _ -/ �•--, _ r ..�� -\ `/I'll ✓ , \,;,....6-"..r..„ .tea"' - _ Y }—�. .. ^.:, -^~~_ am_ Z.o �- c - R, Ary a p j31 P � r Bst -G..j C N O E 4�... `(.a . �'-- ax —. o _ _ K.;: : :1 tam - t° {---;,--i---,-- -'; -� 1 _ aM' _ O A Jam• ,- , ;, { _ . i.§ r '= 0,, ..i� - E A- ac. .--ter,-_-'—��-'— C a P -, _ _� .w 3 3 is 17. l 4...P ....A-,•7-_;:,-1,,„ T•s3, ..a�; .. e ' A-s £` a i p a_ _ x �•'x41'^ 12, , _ 9 • ,.�I�jf . . 4,d'.t r_-.mss," .4._'t..Y,-.,*.—,• u,+^x A;HwW ri `3 _.,,,.� _.... ,. �.w 0 0.1 0.2 Project area D Kilometers Figure 23. County of Hawaii tax map ca. 1970 showing project area within lands owned by F.L. Smothers. 42 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background 12.\t s P ',l� -4 ➢� .tl 4 n I las ! �` ..r.� bb x 7 G 14k •x p ' 'rt.':.-------- M ~ �C e4'fi q -- f ,e A /c6a ,"-1----" C"g`�7�Na 11 ^..1141,,' q 1,' I 4 —o• R iE" n ___'t:244 _7_677_7_ Ir ..� a � P.r. +( w L �� g O� „,, J l.r l "'1 _- '.-- I• S. tA'rA I 1) t ro ---..� • i -{ C_ r Vie, 4 _ y_._—. .4"------�i ! Y )�ry K- cl l A 1 i'J , G L jos A A I 1 01C P (((FCS A :'Ps :-�—�'_ _"'"�7 el •I Mei l/ X .'. Gv. Ac..�o,FN .1. 6 A e�€, — - 1, a 11' r r -__` -- ^`.TA%��oonofS dXiEP U R .11 "1, Ac-, M A .....,v °a s,a'ls.P .t Y� 7 :X08 R PAIq£HDP!d-NAPAC.t„u 4 eA l-(BEACH ICC.}/L NONA°NAWAf1• - °'° - E n.x0 0 0.1 0.2 11 Project area -Kilometers Figure 24. County of Hawaii tax map ca. 1980 showing project area within lands owned by F.L. Smothers. •fid"'", '�„„„, ,' „`„ k",ie,; r .°i- .4* a,Pf),'";;,gw s1." 4,,.., ° :,+w."` t w ii: 'Fm 5. � 'fi kel :c n ',.._-..,;;,,,,, ° °---:,,,,4'4,:t4k,i3;i.,1:,i,,44:'.',i..,:,,,,T,:,-47.,,,,t - .- ... ,_,,, ., ,, .- ,„°, , ; ° , ,, , , s jy r jC; pC 01l ctcr. : r U n inn : ,: —1 Project area Figure 25.Project area as shown in a 1976 USGS historical aerial. 43 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background �y ray 41 Its•,'1/174- 'n 47'C..41:11.,a'"'13, 11.,V{",'irkP(,"" „:70-0:7,,40M4,,..„ y N y �Mh P 4t,o:f1P, •� a i.;,•-,"'.$ �h� pf ��� � "` ln� i i�a y,�-k c '' V # � x� „4 W '. � 1`1 ,."'"r t' a f 4 r "'' ',i1-4::44�y ;,. ''", v ti - .'1{ m 9"�"!t' 1 r r ..>.} h t ' '', ' " yp" lt •M, ' t:v .4vw ' ,. I )r " , "',.r z. J{ # v rt d t a.e n {:1S T r �' n "�, r pP ts«{ ,� n w" dF a I� +" / J U"� �" Yr {' # ak 4" .1 rr p d r �,' r "B' 6", "��».. � Ri�'K$o� r a to a ,yg k',,,,."y "$ ' `x' ,.si' " r � �« 1 d `4:4nnm ,:;44.k.,4,, W'a r,; t-, ,.., (y.M�i,tk ," -,,,,,,,*,(41, Md' � �F ii:: I rtn r a �, Jif �, ��ig A` . � � y ,,.rr a tl ",,, ,,• e.. '�.“ . 10,4 ,«',{':'„t ,.'"ka,th�.., ; ,0'i,, �ra7! r `F+k x q9• d'T. 0 :„ sx.r' ' '� '.a°i,, ;l . t',Sr r i i X ,'' �.^ "'�p r' p �,` Jr° j. 4. Y � „ „ .. 1 v o r P ° x .�y'.:"v i 44 lir 5,w4 ,�. , , p 145,..,„4', d nl4 I1, fR ' r5 44%,. yh lr`F4 ' {dr CC" r �:tf x {f , !4.r 'tMk e 4r rir 44,k •p W M , C" sg py f . '� r ?. ' . Yr .. ,„..„4-,,,,,, ,iim'J r / i,F�"a� � p � e" , { ^ d. p + :fes x „.. " g r , !"t , +a^w"',",', `t ° t _1, , ," ✓ aaf ,_ - 0' • N, �" ", ro- 'fir. ,.. ` ,, + ' liqf 1Y.110 Itt ,,. 4 r #r �v ""' P 1 d e L1 `.'} S '�4 5 .eta 4( H ' p;.y!A � �'w J •t�' 31NP.°A rQ'uPid'�' tee. , ;: s ,s , Pr : w � } , per 1,: tsok ,4„a ... .+, srn ,; " "�';.° 7{ r'AF, 2 r 4 r' J ',. .. t `W k= '' r'' 0 •hlcrcls r� ' • k'a Mi ' �y� ai ` f • � r`pX� • I R y, 0 50 IOU `,4 iv ,,44""r <,i ,lv ii. 42'',.0(0,0°P',7-4.,"A,i-4,,,,,,,,,, „[yr:ol{, .tYpl:f •"r i 0 Project area a. ""., ° Is , Figure 26.Project area as shown in a 1992 USGS historical aerial,note increased residential development to the north. P • *le { , $ '.r m ,. n` _ ,fir •,. x ri 1. ,'. �.,, uta 4 r ,, '" •_ �. ,. " �r N ,. Breach in wall .. 4" ;., y ! t • '716 , ' 4 Uniavedroad ;W" '' a �?• x t , * A D Pro�e�t are. N illitoiltias. . 1 _11•, 1 Figure 27.2013 Google Earth aerial imagery showing unpaved road within the road corridor section of the project area. 44 CIA for the La`ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai`i 2.Background • "1 dlr �' �e c is ♦, t --41 •ri ' 1111 wtg, • Undisturbed area 1dei I Undisturbed area ,i Grubbed area Breach in wall\ M o- Unpaved road I Project area ,A Google Earth Figure 28.2018 Google Earth aerial imagery showing areas mechanically impacted by bulldozing activities. SUMMARY OF PRIOR STUDIES CONDUCTED IN THE PROJECT AREA Except for two studies conducted during the early 20th century, since the 1970s, mandated archaeological studies prompted by the passing of federal and state legislature have resulted in the preparation of several archaeological/cultural studies within Kapala`alaea 2nd,many of which have occurred in the project area. While there have been a number of studies conducted on adjacent lands namely Kahalu`u(to the south)and La`aloa(to the north), for the purposes of this study,a chronological summary of those studies conducted within the project area is presented first,followed by other studies conducted within the broader Kapala`alaea 2nd Ahupua`a. Haun and Henry(2006)AIS of Parcel 121 The first set of archaeological surveys to be undertaken in the project area began in 2005 when Haun&Associates conducted an inventory survey Haun and Henry(2006)of Parcel 121,wherein they recorded fourteen sites comprised of 172 component features(Table 4)shown in Figure 29.Four of the fourteen sites had been previously identified in prior studies and ten were newly recorded. The 172 features identified included 120 modified outcrops, fifteen mounds, fourteen platforms, eight enclosures, five terraces, five walls, three pavements, one lava blister, and one walled platform. Haun and Henry (2006)interpreted these features as having agricultural purposes(n=145),used for permanent(n=16)and temporary habitation(n=3),functioning as both a permanent habitation and burial(n=1),having ceremonial significance (n=4), and used for livestock control (n=3). Haun and Henry's (2006) findings revealed a consistency between the documented sites and features and those anticipated within the kula zone of the Kona Field System, as established by earlier archaeological studies. Haun and Henry (2006) also observed a concentration of habitation features in the makai (west) section of Parcel 121. Notably,within Site 24534, an element was identified that held potential as a heiau, as discerned from its size and the presence of coral offerings and corresponding depressions suggestive of idol support, and within Site 24842 was a burial component. All documented sites were considered significant under Criterion d for their value in understanding land use patters from the late Precontact to the Historic Period;two sites(Site 24534 and 24248)were also considered significant under Criterion e for their ritual importance and as a burial site. Of the fourteen sites,three(Site 6366,6368,6369)were recommended for no further work,two (Sites 24534 and 24842)were recommended for preservation,and the remaining nine were recommended for data recovery (see Table 4). On November 21, 2006, Haun and Henry's (2006) inventory survey report was reviewed and accepted by the DLNR-SHPD (Log No: 2006.3733; Doc. No.: 0611MK24) with a project effect determination of`effect,with agreed upon mitigation commitments.' CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 45 2.Background Table 4. Sites recorded by Haun and Henry (2006)within Parcel 121 of the project area. SIHP Site Significance Recommended Number* Site Type Function Criteria Treatment 6366 Wall Livestock Control d No further work 6368 Complex Livestock Control d No further work 6369 Complex Agriculture d No further work 24534 Complex Ceremonial,Permanent Habitation d, e Preservation 24838 Lava Blister Temporary Habitation e Data Recovery 24839 Platform Temporary Habitation e Data Recovery 24840 Platform Permanent Habitation e Data Recovery 24841 Platform Temporary Habitation e Data Recovery 24842 Complex Permanent Habitation,Burial d, e Preservation 24843 Platform Permanent Habitation d Data Recovery 24844 Complex Permanent Habitation d Data Recovery 24845 Pavement Permanent Habitation d Data Recovery 24846 Complex Permanent Habitation d Data Recovery 24847 Complex Agriculture d Data Recovery *Site numbers are preceded by 50-10-37- 120 no SD 90 l00 r 0 60 120 t80ft fen Aro 0 20 40 60A+ 6366 11.. 1.1411.16 Brnaerl�*/ M OtAQ 70 A ''Or OAU ° '. Az AX °AV ,_ 60 eA11C pp� !.� • • 44 r SO 0 Qe �!0 BM' At °Ay b �.� , ,.•o..VI 0EF FS CV O t.'OO-B& 'AC •F__74k .•....° •.r�Ml7 gj H ,./nllul Al. A OAI. PJI 0 CC csA__ flit 0 P 0UUpT .M f.•. CM ®O O �Q9ML 0 B(? ,UO.BV. :36 pV,p.Y 'i • CF l .• F.I. ,f, CX cY O� on. 0 B' 0B6 x Y If F' t 1 .' 0 PC 3 3140"c 8.'t O DEO o6X 0 �. K 24141 - alow l L A BQ 0110Q` pp�7 Uci '!�i OM ?4146 ut30 i OD11 ° 17T UP O _ 6364 DV °D) "%41/61 riep 19 24842 DMO •DY c®link dl •DX OA-Ariadarral Farer+of 966 24647 Comma manval-10ft Project area I—_,Proposed road []Sites recommended for preservation Figure 29.Haun and Henry's(2006:16)site location map annotated to show current project area and sites recommended for preservation. 46 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background Gregg et al. (2006)AIS of Parcel 001 At the same time that Haun&Associates were undertaking their study of Parcel 121,Archaeological Consultants of the Pacific(ACP)conducted an inventory survey with subsurface testing Gregg et al. (2006)of Parcel 001 (the makai, road corridor portion)of the current project area. ACP's survey area included the entirety of the current Parcel 001 as well as two other TMK parcels,TMK: (3)7-7-008:099 and TMK(3)7-7-010:072(these two parcels have since been consolidated into Parcel 001).The field survey resulted in the identification of four previously documented sites along with seven newly identified sites with a combined total of fifty-four component features;all of which are listed below in Table 5 and their locations shown in Figure 30.Furthermore,subsurface testing was carried out at fourteen features, which resulted in the identification of human remains at four sites(Site 24530,24531,24532,and 24534).Within the cave burial(Site 24530), Gregg et al. (2006)identified two burials. At Site 24531, a minimum of seven burials were identified within features E through J. At Features B and C of Site 34532, two burial features containing two individuals were identified. Excavations at Site 24534(which straddles Parcel 121 and 001),led to the identification of five burials within Features C,D,E,F, and J and Gregg et al. (2006)also identified Features G and H as possible burial sites. Although no excavations were carried out at Features G and H, Gregg et al. (2006) concluded that the similarity in site morphology to other known burial features of the same site indicated that these features are likely burials. Radiocarbon dates for one site (Site 24534 Feature B) indicated a most probable age range of A.D. 1730 to 1810.All sites were considered significant under Criterion d.Additionally,Site 6302 was considered significant under Criteria a,b,and c; Site 6366 and 24039 were considered significant under Criterion c,and the four sites(Site 24530, 24531,24532,24534)containing burials were considered significant under Criterion e.Of the eleven sites,three were recommended for no further work, and the remaining seven were recommended for preservation (see Table 5). On May 22, 2006, Gregg et al.'s (2006) inventory survey was reviewed and accepted by the DLNR-SHPD (Log No: 2006.1598;Doc.No.0605JT31). Table 5. Sites recorded by Gregg et al. (2006)within Parcel 001 of the project area. SIHP Site Significance Recommended Number* Site Type Function Criteria Treatment 6302 Wall Boundary wall a,b,c,d Preservation 6366 Wall Boundary wall d,c Preservation 24038 Wall Boundary wall d No further work 24039 Wall Boundary wall d,c Preservation 24529 Wall Ranching d No further work 24530 Cave burial Burial d,e Preservation and monitoring 24531 Burial complex Burial d,e Preservation and monitoring 24532 Burial and agricultural Agriculture and burial d,e Preservation and complex monitoring 24533 Agricultural complex Agriculture d No further work 24534 Burial/habitation/agricultural Burial,Habitation, d,e Preservation and complex Agriculture monitoring 24535 Agriculture/ranching complex Agriculture and ranching d No further work *Site numbers are preceded by 50-10-37- Kouneski and Kennedy (2007) BTP for Select Sites on Parcel 001 As a follow-up to ACP's inventory survey (Gregg et al. 2006) and as part of the mitigation commitments, in 2007 ACP prepared a burial treatment plan that included consultation with Mr. Clarence Medeiros and Ms. Ruby Keana'aina-McDonald(Kouneski and Kennedy 2007)for Site 24530 and portions of Sites 24531,24532,and 24534, which collectively contained a minimum of seventeen burials. The burial treatment plan specified `preservation in place'for all four sites with a 40-foot temporary buffer and a 20-foot permanent buffer around each site.Details about the interim and permanent protective buffer are as follows: CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 47 2.Background Interim Protection Methods In order to ensure the protection of Site 24530 and Features 24531:B,E,F,G,H,I,&J,24532:B& C, and 24534:C,D,E,F, G,H, &J during the operation of heavy equipment in the early stages of development, prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, temporary construction fencing will be erected surrounding the areas in which these are located.A buffer zone extending 40ft(12.2m)in width out from the exterior of the site/features will be established and the construction fencing will be placed around the perimeter of that zone [see Figure 33]. A qualified archaeologist will then conduct an on site pre-construction briefing with the construction crew in order to make the locations of the recommended preservation zones known to the construction crew. Long Term Preservation Measures Following the operation of heavy equipment on the subject property, a permanent buffer zone of 20ft(6.1m)will be established surrounding the preserved site/features [see Figure 33]. Within the "no build setback" of the permanent buffer zone, all non-indigenous vegetation will be cleared by hand. The buffer zone will then be landscaped with indigenous flora such as ti (Cordyline terminalis), noni (Morinda citrifolia), hala (Pandanus odoratissimus), and naupaka (Scaevola sericea). Provisions will be made for the routine maintenance of this landscaped buffer zone. Provisions shall also be made to allow access to the preserved sites for recognized ethnic organizations and/or individuals for whom the interments are of significance. (Kouneski and Kennedy 2007:21) In addition to the protective measures described above,Kouneski and Kennedy (2007)also provided provisions for routine maintenance of the buffer zone, access for recognized lineal and or cultural descendants, along with Covenant Conditions and Restrictions which would require disclosure of the burial sites and its protective measures to future landowners.Kouneski and Kennedy's (2007:22, 23) site location maps showing the interim and permanent preservation buffers have been compiled and annotated to show the burial preserves with respect to the proposed road corridor portion of the current project area(see Figure 30). This burial treatment plan was presented to the Hawaii Island Burial Council(HIBC)on April 19,2007.The HIBC offered four recommendations which were to be addressed before the final approval of the burial treatment plan in a letter dated May 29, 2007 (Log No.: 2007.1644;Doc No. 0704KL09): 1. That the exposed portion of SIHP Site 24530 be sealed to protect the burial(s)within the site. 2. That a 10 ft. no build setback be established from the 20 foot permanent buffer and the temporary buffer be increased from 40 to 70 feet. 3. That an archaeological monitor be present during grubbing and grading on the property. 4. That the HIBC be allowed to review subdivision,development,and grading plans once they are finalized and submitted to the County of Hawaii for review and that the County of Hawaii be notified of this request. 48 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 2.Background Property$O YY sue 6366 _,—.--..,...}3. 1 -F '.s' EJB> ' _ 0 I "F n . p4532 F site G 0 20m • 1 1-______1 •i dII Site 6302 i "�-'I D c A ;- c& ( (bp i • �. n� - Site 24535 i O Eiji • .� - -eat lits StI/e24S]a - C i �-�_ I• i s i I Site 24529 Site 24533 ALP!DRIVE �(reoclingw/II/) ' VP"i,• . - A .� ( : KI B. B A4�eM Site24038 ! Sitc24 't r L 0 KEY J._._ _���tr w Casa BtmalFeat ues: A 0 Project area 1 Proposed RoadSite 0 0.01 0.0. °Permanent Buffer i7i Temporary.Buffer Kilometers Figure 30.Kouneski and Kennedy's(2007:22,23)site location maps compiled to show the interim and permanent preservation buffers and approximate location of the proposed road corridor portion of the current project area. Haun and Henry(2017)BTP for Select Sites and Features within Parcel 121 In 2017, as a follow-up to their 2005 inventory survey of Parcel 121,Haun&Associates prepared a burial treatment plan(Hann and Henry 2017)for Site 24842 and those features,Features C,D,E,G,and H of Site 24534 that extended into Parcel 121 (Site 24534 straddles the boundaries of Parcel 121 and 001; see Haun and Henry's(2006)and Gregg et al.'s(2006)site location maps in Figures 29,30,and 31).Haun and Henry's(2017)burial treatment plan specified `preservation in place' through avoidance and protection(conservation)with a 20-foot permanent protective buffer. Concerning the interim protective buffer for Site 24842,Haun and Henry (2017) specified a buffer of 50 or 70 feet from the edge of the site,whereas the interim buffer for Features C,F,G,and H of Site 24534 ranged from 37.5 to 70 feet from the edge of the features, which was intended to allow access into the property from Naniloa Drive. The permanent and interim buffers,however,extend only to the western boundary of Parcel 121.This plan also called for the presence of an archaeological monitor during the initial grubbing and grading of the parcel, a metes and bounds survey of the burial preserves that would be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyance, the installation of signage, details regarding landscaping and maintenance of the burial sites and features and buffers,access for recognized lineal and or cultural descendants, and a provision for any inadvertently discovered human skeletal remains that may be encountered during ground-disturbing activities. Haun and Henry's (2017:20) map showing the preservation buffers overlaid with the current project area boundaries is shown in Figure 32. On March 16, 2017, Haun& Associates presented the burial treatment plan to the HIBC who made the determination to preserve the burial site/features in place. At a subsequent HIBC meeting held on April 20,2017,the HIBC recommended that the DLNR-SHPD accept the plan. In a DLNR-SHPD correspondence letter dated May 8, 2017 (Log No.: 2017.00649;Doc. No. 1704.KH02), the DLNR-SHPD formally accepted Haun and Henry's(2017)burial treatment plan. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala` la a 2,North Kona,Hawaii 49 2.Background Haun and Henry(2010)Data Recovery Plan for Select Sites within Parcel 121 As part of mitigation efforts,in 2010,after completing their 2005 inventory survey(Hann and Henry 2006)and burial treatment plan(Hann and Henry 2017),Haun&Associates prepared a data recovery plan(Haan and Henry 2010)for Parcel 121 as well as several TMK parcels located mauka of the project area and makai of Kuakini Highway (TMK: [3] 7-7-008:105, 113,and 119). This plan was reviewed and accepted by the DLNR-SHPD in a letter dated May 27, 2010 (Log No.: 2010.0034; Doc No.: 1005MD37). On August 15, 2016, Haun & Associates formally requested SHPD's concurrence for incremental implementation of the Data Recovery Plan,focusing solely on Parcel 121, and received concurrence for step one of the two-step verification process in a letter dated October 31, 2017 (Log No.: 2017.02069; Doc. No.: 1710SL02). The data recovery plan for Parcel 121 proposed to incorporate the analysis of twenty previously tested features at nine sites (Site 24838, 24839, 24840, 24841, 24843, 24844, 24845, 24846, and 24847 shown below in Figure 33; see Table 4) and additional data recovery excavations for eight features at five of the previously tested sites. Berrigan et al. (2018) Data Recovery Report for Select Sites within Parcel 121 The subsequent data recovery report(Berrigan et al. 2018)prepared by Haun&Associates reported a total of thirty test and excavation units encompassing some 39.05 square meters were excavated in twenty-one features (inclusive of one subsurface feature)at nine sites. Occupancy of those sites where radiocarbon samples were collected returned with a date ranging from A.D. 1669 to 1814.The information from the data recovery indicates that of the 21 excavated sites/features, the majority (n=12) were interpreted as open-air non-residential structures that were likely used as resource processing and staging areas;a casual daytime shelter(n=1),a partially roofed men's workshop(n=2),roofed men's workshop (n=2), and agriculture (n=4) The table shown below in Figure 34 includes a summary of the data recovery analysis. A number of artifacts were also recovered during the excavations including several types of manuports (corals, waterwork basalt cobbles and pebbles, and red ochre nodules), expedient tools (coral abraders, a shell scraper, volcanic glass), informal tools (coral abraders and files, avian bone picks, mammal bone awl, and a scoria abrader),formal tools(basalt groundstone,basalt adze preform,basalt adzes,and adze flakes),composite tools (two-piece bone fishhook,bonito lure, octopus lure), gaming pieces (konane stones), and tool manufacturing debris (shell fragments, modified bone,basalt debitage,volcanic glass core and debitage). Berrigan et al. (2018) concluded that the data recovery efforts have enhanced our understanding of land use in Kapala`alaea 2nd, surpassing the information obtained through the archaeological inventory survey alone. 50 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background 'II'S'Nll}� • , . y r l eun■e l Layer I.-11014rtelLr,7 wt,ldl,...•1-,Wt.—u,:1.,,a..J.! INS 1h 1wa1.I-4'er}drrWh+..z,,,."'Sk':t'rYrl;rrrh • • ,11.-141%till611; ;,'k"I*N:1154114..1A M, ("WAWA••-•A.74,..prtitril I.,.7, Ili.1 • ,r�i.b *• \ T^...I1+ AC.,+w tl r \ �r1.151 �n\ CI ,x xi,13'1'x0 c.ycwYainA rind Henry4)000 proteel aim • licinr.w mind quail%rkletio r _ _ _ _ 10L.hi I:d�pr Ibf ptnrtir•r. u • • f 101,1 s.' 4 ■ ' Irl. " • P ■ 111L cv duixlwt VE■Inre �» 4 4 TktI1M•1/ �. ill wi 5b .1 r.•." tcifl P9r..Ir'. „1z's 11•+.�� ;•-, Figure 31.Haun and Henry's(2017:15)map of Site 24534 showing Features C,F,G,and H with respect to the boundaries(depicted as dashed red line)of Parcel 121 and 001. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 51 2.Background - .,� f I ' � l t "`,► park Fea. C -- ‘ ,, Fea. F I '► Fea. IG ,� * I /Site 24534 / ♦ ii. 7 • 1 1 r Fea. H . 5CY —\\> 41 • 1 1 • P • `T I I1 MI f I f //1\ st f 4 f 1 Wes rn project area boundary 3 1 1 f --- f •• f I •s r r -* ( 4.t -........--._......... - .,.. . . /01, !IL %I • i 11� fr Site 24842 ` r • i / c , l 1 I Permanent buffer wall —sem l • 1 r 6f 60 fNo Bund setback - • • r •f • 1 1 Temporary buffer •. •. _ - _1 -i - L _ _ _ - _ _ _ - ,_.. — _... ._ ..�' Project area I Proposed road Figure 32.Haun and Henry's(2017:20)map showing the preservation buffers overlaid with the current project area boundaries. 52 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background 120--.---1." ❑Project area 110 i. 0 300 feet 100 90 ji A in SO 0 100 meters - l 1 Project Area 5366 1 ` .R Boundary N ) 1itT ,, } IND further work _ AR ' AS �. AC' RPi AN p m • AW I 70 AY .AU i' •AD I•.AM E-• a AX 'AV 24847 AZ • -BB �'`AL G � � 60 BA • BC �\ I • • \ \ � 24840 C5 cP BE 1",BH 1`'� al V 668tr �� n� � 7, - -Nanlloa nrtve - 50 '\ �^\ CO __ •BG •BF tBI..S AI••• ADS /:// 1 ,lr '''Cf i' Ei CA G•-ca BL . AH 1 ACj. 1 ,/,,,,....,..., im// ! \ 248446 •EF • f4/ 'CD Trench 1-...-71-'''CN CH cE BN BM BK\• IAF. "-24847 69 it4� �F i `` q EH h '•cc CA 8R ... ..BPD .BTG AE " AB - i` INo furtther work) s. 24841 a B �� 24847 , 18 ,H T,,, _t CM CK• CD- CO • B4 •`BVD 24838 •ry „� C h� f 24847 vBU 'v� X�.W V i F �._5 EL El CX CY ,` • DA BYE .g5 .. G I!_ EK,� 'r pp. 24847 T s H *E '`` Ec 4IPDB•DC •a•P 0. D f • 24845 DE. -.Bx p EB RV -.\ M J 4s_ B • •OF \ 249391.4 , 24534 A EGDR DG (Preservation) •EA 24844 p5 •on DI •DN • .\ 1i DT \DK•�DJ Op DV DP • DO -pM�;DL !\ - Project Area Boundary •DLJ •D7- 24843 pN •N _ - • PW• ,. 195 meters to Alli Drive 245426368 =r.-=-=Rock wall (Preservation( '` (No further work) ,A=Agricultural Feature of Site 24847 DY \[ ontour interval.left •DX Site numbers pre-filed try 50-10-10- \ _ - 24840=Data recovery site 24838=Tested site discussed in this report Figure 33.Berrigan et al. (2018:5) site map showing locations of data recovery sites and features. Tot910 5.2.Summary of Data Recovery.dn&ysio for KcopoIa'rdoca 2nd Protect Area f+Mit,nnti Clwre.d AIS lnfened rola Rec.nor SITE- Feature Type Data Reco.rey Feal are Atr., Ar4lnet SWf.,l encs ua:rc or,/ Me:t Likely 0102 Function 4narys IS interred Feature- (Types Bolded Analysis inferred Area t,5.e.xed D0 i.ty i.,..,,,,,,,, BcnOty Age Binge. Site 8 unction wish-mere recited( Feature.Fetlttlon ,.7 m 0515 9w{MITI 20000. The pun r¢nur:-.-:0+•'•.r r. ;;,..try Ha6,11,,' 29838 u,Slot or 0asua14,nl,,ne t',c ser Irl 4 0.233 0 4 S 1-S,r::t„•;r...c•.ori. • - .n•r•,.r.-.iii..i 24839 ,I I.r.fr.nn aµns.5n 5015007 02., 1 4 0 I DO 0 2 0 ..,,..,..,e,...l..... r....... .lyd 24840 1. .,11. nann.,....n..iw area 7.3,'A 425 2 2 0.1 ,.,• -04:.:4-0..:,:. I,,'',,•:r 7-4%41 "1.11011 upen.a.r 00.015 aca 14,.'9 I.00 1 I 01,.b i,n ally n;vlae soca, . , NMI a ,.-. ..,, rsw•F.•..:I, 7-4%43 -...1 100.4 3.311 46 2G l i7 A51726.1914 24844-A/AL -1•,.;. 1'”1151 I ir, open.....ar,...,1v.Mea 75.4 I.25 6 1.5 r:r.n.0:n1flatitehierr I A4n5ul,u-...,1.400 I 24844-8 99'11:r•an.un.500.1 45.2 1 D0 31 17 -. 24845 3 2 21 1 74%40-A -•.+me0t noo,t•n,em91rnly r✓c.1 48.1 1001 l3 i 6 24846.5 1o1,e 1000.110015100..00.1 .I7,2 i nil 520 •17 1 24841•C • ....m , r 1,,,0 4,11,51 e:.•>c,vu :74,u 3.00 141 ,.:,1 939 AD 1684.1752 .1a,11.110, ,.i.. 71016-0 11511 lir np.n.c.1.ol.ny.11.1 _113 1125 '0 3.1 r,r.�..,..�.n r..ct.... .'.,',�•..•I,d.,.,r. 1 2184n 3-E -1.,.,r r• open:..,„mr ty 5.m 153 1 041 ll 4 .'...".." 24846-F -1..I,.l„ 005.01.1001.1 wea 24.0 4.00 7 i fI l 21 ••r`.:'•" 24848-G vpi:,..,.•e.u,.ry.v., 3.I.9 025 I NG4 r0a 04845-H '115)04 n::.0.,9.:11 0)) 31.4 5.110 021 1 7411 .195 4111009.1739 ',i.,- prnia..oniee.•,.�e _I A01669-1790 2484G-I I ncra.uel. of 3.00 14 2,579 124 An 16821796 24047.08 T.-i l:. 55'I.r w•.•• 23..0 S$0 D !1 D 24047-CE .• -. r, .lw.al 5 2 _ 1 00 n 11 n 248:17-EU ..,1,��,•,In, �•: s�;.,,wa 11A lou] D n 1 24247-CW W,11.. ,,,nrnlr,rai 47.5 2,80 3 I"l 1 R. T raa1 9.10710 red 21 pail,try Is stores ,1e: 8 1 so h+e tLure Figure 34.Berrigan et al. (2018:88)table showing a summary of the data recovery analysis. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 53 2.Background Orr 2006 Cultural Impact Study In addition to the archaeological investigations conducted,Kaimipono Consulting Services LLC undertook a Cultural Impact Study/Assessment(Orr 2006)in 2006 for the Laipala Heights Project that was planned for Parcel 121 of the current project area as well as several mauka parcels (TMK (3) 7-7-08:099, 105, 113, & 119). The purpose of that study was to gather information about traditional cultural practices, ethnic cultural practices, and pre-historic and historic cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed development project. In addition to including some culture-historical context,Orr(2006)also conducted five ethnographic interviews.The study's findings indicated that the families of Kaaipulu-wahine, Nahale, and Green were residents within the lands encompassing the project area. Regarding the archaeological inventory assessments, the territory of Kapala`alaea 2nd was primarily utilized for agricultural purposes, habitation, ceremonial activities, and burials. It was observed that there was a single heiau present in Kapala`alaea 2nd. Furthermore, the secondary usage of Kapala`alaea 2nd's lands involved cattle grazing, while the mauka lands above the project site were employed by the military. Summaries compiled by Orr(2006)from previous oral histories revealed that many of the individuals interviewed during the period from 1980 to 1981 had affiliations with the coffee industry, along with involvements in areas such as ranching,financial matters,and the hotel business. A majority of these interviewees were of Japanese descent and initially began their careers in the coffee sector.Oral histories gathered in 1992 centered on the ranching community, disclosing that many ranches on Hawaii Island were interconnected through family ties, mutual assistance, or land transactions. Regarding cultural resources and practices,it was reported by Orr(2006)that there was no identified freshwater source in Kapala`alaea 2nd. Freshwater sources were noted only in the neighboring ahupua'a of Kahalu`u. Midden remains collected from the Kapala`alaea archaeological surveys indicated that marine resources were extensively utilized by the indigenous inhabitants until the lands were"abandoned." Additionally, collected literature suggested that the lands of Kapala`alaea 2nd may have functioned as a potential support system for the ali`i who either resided in or were interred within the adjoining Kahalu`u Ahupua`a. In summary,Orr(2006:89)found that there were"no apparent on-going cultural resources or practices related to subsistence,residential or religion"occurring within the proposed project area,"other than the remains of sites/features typical of traditional ahupua'a lifestyle and use."Orr(2006)however,recommended that cultural consultants,namely the Kahulamu and Nahale `Ohana,both of whom have ancestral ties to these lands,be afforded the opportunity to to walk through the proposed project area prior to any bull-dozing or grading and recommended that they be a part of an advisory group.Orr(2006)also cautioned of the possibility of inadvertently encountering unmarked burials or human remains and specified that all applicable State laws be followed. Lastly, some of the consulted parties expressed concern over the density of the proposed project design, and affordability, and recommended that any future street names reflect the history or the names of people who once lived in the area(i.e. former LCAw awardees or Grant awardee),and they highlighted the importance of having a completed burial treatment plan prior any ground disturbing work. Gotay and Rechtman (2018,2019)Monitoring and Preservation Plan for Parcel 001 As part of the mitigation commitments for Parcel 001 that was surveyed by Gregg et al. (2006), in 2018, ASM Affiliates prepared an archaeological monitoring plan(Gotay and Rechtman 2018)and a preservation plan(Gotay and Rechtman 2019)for the three(non-burial) sites that Gregg et al. (2006)recommended for preservation(see Table 5), namely Sites 6302, 6366, and 6368 (24039). At that time, the landowner, Kaulupehu Land LLC was proposing to develop the Alii Kai Planned Unit Development described as a 33-lot subdivision with associated roadways and infrastructure. The monitoring plan called for the installation of temporary orange construction fencing to mark the buffer of the preservation sites along with a pre-construction briefing to ensure that the location of the preservation sites are clearly identified and protected during any ground disturbing work. Furthermore, the monitoring plan specified that one qualified archaeological monitor is required for each piece of ground altering machinery and outlined procedures for any inadvertent discoveries,reporting,and curation of any recovered items. As part of the same proposed project,the preservation plan(Gotay and Rechtman 2019)for the three walls, Site 6302,6366,and 6368(24039)specified a treatment avoidance and protection as well as rehabilitation of any collapsed section. The plan also called for a metes and bounds survey that would be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances. The interim preservation buffer was set at 40 feet from the edge of where whereas the permanent buffer was set at 10- feet from the edge of site. Regarding the details of the permanent preservation measures, Gotay and Rechtman (2019:11)stated: 54 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background For the long-term preservation of SIHP Site 6302, a 10-foot(3 meter)preservation buffer will be established on either side of the wall measured from its outer edge, and a single breach of the wall (incorporating the existing breach[Figure 35])will be permitted for the new PUD roadway,which will not exceed 64 feet(19.5 meters)in width... The ends of the wall created by the new breach will be stabilized with a dry-stacked facing over the exposed core filled interior; rocks removed from this breach will be used in the stabilization and to rebuild minor collapses and stabilize the site where needed elsewhere. No development activities will be permitted within the boundaries of the buffer zone;however,landscaping will be permitted within the buffer zone,but limited to shallow rooting species. Their site map showing the locations of the preservation sites and buffers with respect to the then-proposed Alii Kai Planned Unit Development is shown below in Figure 36. '+y, �ti � , ,r {, i I xh� ', N` Ymr, k Y r,k e �} oral K Cck 4lee I y• am _ 4. 8 ir f / .9, s _ r �p • • i .x e , r Y Figure 35.Photo showing the existing 4 meter breach in the Kuakini Wall(Site 6302; Gotay and Rechtman 2019:9). CIA for the La`Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 55 2.Background MULTI-FAMILY 201H UNITS 10 SETBACK 20 PEFIMANENT BUFFER F, 40 TEMPORARY BUFER i Site 6366 1 z r � Ni 1 I �: � --- _ , I;7_�- -� t'l r 13 Iss 1 i 11 1 1 1 .1 j) _ �� , �_ III L.s _1 - i i� v\ y �\ �_ �'°l } ._._ 1I Ali L.I, 115.. 1 L �' ELTTI tar _1 , n ` L5- I I c.. - ✓ I {� 17" s�� -^tip L--n I �;'1 �' 1.� {.II 'e � _____,: - ti � , Site 6302 — r �� E�I.$ xtant breach \ri) ', \- — ----------' ____. li{ r 241rr %'! l !--I-,-,-_-__//rig `. ;ii 6368I) .... . Site (24039) 10-foot(3-meter)permanent preservation buffer boundary 0 50 100 ----- 40-foot(12-meter) interim burial treatment buffer boundary Fccr N Project area boundary Figure 36. Gotay and Rechtman(2019:12)preservation plan map showing locations of preservation sites and buffers within Parcel 001. Summary of Prior Studies Conducted within Kapala`alaea The following paragraphs include a chronological summary of prior studies conducted within the immediate vicinity of the current project area. Among the earliest archaeological investigations carried out on Hawaii Island was an island-wide survey of heiau by John Stokes(1991).Serving at the Bishop Museum beginning in 1899,Stokes managed the institution's library and provided oversight to its collections.In 1906,he embarked on a journey to Hawaii Island to document various heiau sites including Keawemua Heiau located at the coast (makai of the project area) in Kapala`alaea 2nd Ahupua`a(Figure 37).Regarding this heiau, Stokes recorded the following: Keawemua Heiau Heiau of Keawemua, said to have been a heiau in the land of Kapalaalaea, North Kona. Only a platform to which this name was applied was found,adjoining the east side of the government road. It was said by resident natives to have been the site of Paki's house. (Stokes 1991:64-65) 56 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background }.t a}{ \1 \ 4 and , _ Kmahu I d ti '1\\\\\'''14'.'iL)co ' ._1........:11 40•m q ra'en;� Pu'uotna ` '• 1 i-I t'r rk Lono 'yam'�r� i dIaf"pa'u ,= . 1 Kawahma r- . ,:I • Haukalua PAtihiolo %' HAMAKUA - sLf tahaa !.M. I.y,,,,,,..< -• i Hak oKane Hakla'au Mokuah7' 'MIA' „1,•,11'.'. ''''' ' ' '.4,/' r"2— Psoumi KAPUANONI // Hanakalau'ai I. �4 rc NSpaLAM HA'U[F4.AN1 11�•�:; Ia — - ---- Ke'ekC khl Koka _wKamoa Pt } --. ........4".. � _ _ ---_ ,;e72:-. .--- , _---- ' 'i�La'aho na ma Kcawe w Hslm{tkupa .1101b)----0.0,- J.:<----:-------...=--------, Opukaha Ku' mu Ohramukumuku2 lir _ r_ _ Kkua<kx an lo'okuku lU �� _ --Lonohekrnoa Kualaoui 11►ns Ak) LIkanipd 11011111. HtKt ;_..:.:•-• M1 Pa 'ikapahu Ho'apalahuh �immii 1 __ HShapo Koa al 1``Kahauwawaka "A l e'A L 'A Htikihnw Halt LIMO It 6 iiir 6 iffil Mak.ahuna i°;s( 1t.IC OCEAN KAT K ONA DISTRICT` HAWAPI ISLAND Io Sim Figure 37. Stokes(1991:41)map of heiau in Kona annotated to show project area(red)and location of Keawemua heiau(green). CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 57 2.Background In 1929,under the aegis of the Bishop Museum,John Reinecke(1929)undertook an archaeological survey along the western coast of Hawaii Island. This survey encompassed the coastal regions of Kahalu`u and neighboring ahupua'a,which are near the current project area. While Reinecke's survey did not extensively cover Kapala`alaea 2nd he did mention these lands while describing Kahalu`u's coastal heiau located near the Kapala`alaea 2nd and Kahalu`u boundary(Figure38).In contrast to Stokes(1991),Reinecke specifically identified Lahai Heiau and Ohikiloa Heiau(referred to as Sites m-n in Figure 38)as heiau positioned within the lands of Kapala`alaea. He only uses the name "Keawemua" to indicate the vicinity where these heiau are situated. Reinecke's description of the site, as conveyed to him by Kahulumu,a kama aina informant is detailed as follows: Site m-n:LAHAI and OHIKILOA or OHIKIMAKILOA HEIAU.Part of Lahai and of Ohikiloa are in Kapalaalaea land,but are said to pertain to Kahalu`u. See the plan for a rough sketch of Lahai, page [see Figure 38]. The northernmost platform, which appears to have been occupied in more modern times by a house platform,was the seat of the kahuna;the large platform was occupied by the king; the small one next south of the infant princess; the large broken-down platform by the guard; and the southernmost by the queen and her attendants. (This is according to Kahulumu). Ohikimakiloa was named for the watchman who occupied it. The place at which Lahai is located is named Keawemua,after a strong man. In 1973, an archaeological surface survey was conducted by the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii as part of the proposed Alii Drive Realignment project (Ching et al. 1973). Their survey corridor extended north from Kahalu`u to Kahului Ahupua`a,encompassing a segment of Kapala`alaea 2nd along the mauka boundary of the current project area. Within Kapala`alaea 1st and 2nd eight sites that included walls (Site 6365, 6366, 6368), two house compounds (Site 6367, 6370), a u-shaped shelter (Site 6369), and a lava bubble (Site 6384) were documented and their locations shown in Figure 39. Later in 1979,the Archaeological Research Center Hawaii carried out several studies on a 155-acre area,known as the Ginter property, that extended south from Pahoehoe to Kapala`alaea 1st Ahupua'a and extended makai from Kuakini Highway to roughly the same elevation as the makai portion of Parcel 121 of the current project area.In 1980, Hammatt and Clark (1980) conducted archaeological mapping, testing, and salvage excavations to follow up on recommendations made during a reconnaissance survey by Hammatt (1979) on the 155-acre property. The 1979 reconnaissance survey documented sixty-six archaeological sites. During Hammatt and Clark's 1980 study, an additional twenty-five sites were identified,bringing the total number of documented archaeological sites to ninety- two of which twenty-eight were within Kapala`alaea 1st. The site types documented in Kapala`alaea 1st included platforms of various sizes(Site 4538,4544,4545,4549,4552,4554,4555,4556),agricultural complexes(Site 4539, 4540,4548,4553),an ahu (Site 4541),possible burials (Site 4542, 4550),walls (Site 4543,4547,4551,4591, 6302, 6365, 6366), and a clearing mounds (Site 4546), a livestock enclosure (Site 4585), and a cave (Site 6485). Of these sites,additional testing was conducted at nine sites(Site 4541,4542,4544,4545,4550,4552,4554,and 4556).Testing results indicated that the primary functions of these sites were residential, related to clearing mounds and served as work or storage structures. For the possible burial identified during the surface survey, a mitigation strategy was recommended,involving the reinterment of the remains into Site 4538.Regarding the remaining archaeological sites, Hammatt and Clark (1980) recommended complete clearance, as none of the sites were deemed significant for preservation. Additionally, it was proposed that Sites 4577 and 4583, along with their surrounding features be integrated into the development of a natural park area. A decade after Ching et al. (1973)completed their survey of the Alii Drive Realignment corridor,Hommon and Rosendahl (1983) returned to the 300-foot wide highway corridor survey area to provide an updated site condition assessment of the previously documented sites and to conduct a reconnaissance survey of the newly added proposed road corridor alternatives that were not part of the original survey by Ching et al. (1973). Within Kapala`alaea 1st Hommon and Rosendahl(1983)revisited the two ahupua'a boundary walls (Site 6365 and 6366), and identified an ash deposit(Site 9857).In Kapala`alaea 2nd,they revisited the ahupua'a boundary wall(Site 6368)and recorded three complexes(Site 9859,9860,9861)comprised of multiple features.Given the nature of the proposed project,Hommon and Rosendahl(1983)recommended that more intensive survey work be undertaken and that a detailed preservation and data recovery plan be prepared to mitigate the impact on the sites within the selected alternative corridor. They also recommended that a Memorandum of Agreement be drawn up between the various parties involved in the highway project prior to the commencement of any work. 58 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 2.Background .�• c+ ' * m f ry P. ! .,rte ..7.;.: +' T :f : �{'S d moi] f, ■ ; • ` � -'' ? ', ) . / . /////dri .i 7 h ,...,,,,, .. ,. .. fieai. / . , f TIT L ^„ s r Jv_ ±t eriN � 1 I J G ie M1i :15) .i•' -- 4Wif 14 .., c f ,I P14:. .. - . ..C.'''."----..-----11 4 , -,... . 1 fi.1 pig 11 I ��+.,/ . .. 1 — , . , N ei.. '' Tia.1n e. Queen Tole ,Form Ilk I ti, • Y 1 L'i."amu 44:4 wN ..i x.V.,...,\..+" [,... Ar 1 4 i. x. L 11\.\\,\.• ' L \ Figure 38.Reinecke's(1929:46)sketch of Lahai Heiau. CIA for the Lt'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 59 2.Background 'V \ ` . '1x x 4'-tt sN Er 0 0 0.1 0.1 \ x v656,-1( ,ya 4 Kilometers All ---"—(\..*‘ \ i ir i I R ' 4 V I S l rr �• �j N I I � �1 f \,/( ( it] / lA ' ,'• .,_/- 4:."----* ''.1) Nt(/ 01 i i _,. ,&;Y I\ 1 \ ! :, / ___ Oct ii Or f \(// /'/ / '...."-...---\p/ lit `f. l �/ , V41`...., ` ,,,,, ...),...., ' es 1• ,. ,)/ . , e V--'111::,:j':—.7-, -",---,1 ' 4---f7 'r i r i( --1-4, , , it/ , --7---N, \ ) ( ( 1 i ; , ., s. i ca . \ '\, .''') ; \ J - - 1 I r t 1 �- )ii Ii ( i (,) j /.....'',..j }� I f 6385C \� t\ `'y ..) 1 7 / / - ..`I `\`,* �y + 1 ,1 t , _. • ; I .„.., /// ,' / ,J,j. k. ,,..7,...:‘,...._: , j d 5 ) / Til ,. . 1..e. - i A ( ! If f• 4.,:o.,..44?7 ) ( 7/ c7N } } . b tt O t If r,f' ,' iffie ., % 7 It, I I /1p.(,))? )()(f) . ____ _\,,)i , / - 4 ill ) ji --.L '\'t7 —�. ase •. v ��f�f _ \* ) ' ( _, --,',H,,,_.,___ ,A. , t M t \ ` LIY • r ' ci ' .\' - k—N: 1 \\.. . . .. _ ...._. . . . . Project area " I *Site 6363 .� w ()) , ; Site 6365,6366,6368 �. 'Site 6369 1*SSite ite 6367 wv� * 6370 4 1?\,: • j 1 �\ *Site 6384c. 0 i ) L\\\. :390 \ti JJJ r,C yrig .s:201 Naticna e or hic Query Tubed r. Figure 39. Ching et al.'s(1973)portion of Map 5 showing locations of sites documented mauka of the project area. 60 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 3. Consultation In 1985, Cultural Surveys Hawaii Inc. conducted a reconnaissance survey (Hammatt et al. 1985) of a 31.9-acre property located mauka of the current project area in Kapala`alaea 2nd and makai of Kuakini Highway.A total of forty- nine archaeological sites were documented, encompassing various features including a cemetery enclosure, agricultural and habitation complexes of various sizes,a lava blister,burials and possible burials,platforms,terraces, a rock-lined hearth, walls, c-shaped shelters, modified outcrops, habitation enclosures, mounds, and a large cleared area.Additionally,CSHI's survey noted the presence of telephone poles lining the southern perimeter of Kapala`alaea 2nd(Kahalu`u Ahupua`a), as well as a family residence and an enclosed cemetery located 300 feet makai of Kuakini Highway.Marking the northern,western, and eastern boundaries of the property are cattle walls, ranging from three to five feet in height. Notably,based on information provided by the landowner, the site of the Green family home and cemetery once hosted a U.S.military detachment established in the 1940s,which included an underground storage tank for diesel fuel. Situated just a short distance away from the family residence is another former military campsite, designated as Site 29 by Hammatt et al. (1985). Generally,the property owner indicated that the remaining expanse of the property was largely untouched and utilized as grazing grounds for cattle. In 1997, Paul H. Rosendahl Inc. returned to the 155-acre Ginter parcel to conduct an archaeological inventory survey(Henry and Wolforth 1998). Their study reviewed previous work conducted on the parcel by Hammatt(1979) and Hammatt and Clark(1980),as well as a field check and updated site descriptions for all previously recorded sites, and selected testing to comply with the updated archaeological standards. Of the eighty previously documented sites, Henry and Wolforth (1998) found that thirty-one had been destroyed. Five new sites (Site 21399-21403) were identified and three previously identified sites(Site 4557,4576,and 6384))were respectively incorporated into other previously identified sites(Site 4558,4577,and 6370).One site was determined to not be a cultural construct and was therefore omitted from the overall site count. In sum,Henry and Wolforth(1998)recorded a total of 50 extant sites within the 155-acre study area. The site types recorded in the Kapala`alaea 1st portion of their survey area included walls(Site 4543,4547,4551,4591,6302,6365,6366),two caves(Site 6384,6485),platforms(Site 4538,4544,4552, 4555,4556),planting areas(Site 4539,4540),terraces(Site 4545,4553),mounds(Site 4541,4542),complexes(Site 4546), enclosures (Site 4548, 4885), a habitation complex (Site 4549), and a habitation/agricultural complex (Site 4554).Of the fifty documented sites,forty-nine were assessed as significant.Thirty-eight sites were recommended for no further work,data recovery was recommended at eight sites,and preservation was recommended for four sites. In summary,the archaeological work conducted within the project area and the neighboring lands sheds light on the Precontact and Historic Period land use within this area. Some of these studies have highlighted the close connection between the lands of Kapala`alaea 2nd and the neighboring Kahalu`u Ahupua`a. 3. CONSULTATION Gathering input from community members with genealogical ties and long-standing residency or relationships to the study area is vital to the process of assessing potential cultural impacts on resources, practices, and beliefs. It is precisely these individuals that ascribe meaning and value to traditional resources and practices.Community members often possess traditional knowledge and in-depth understanding that are unavailable elsewhere in the historical or cultural record of a place. As stated in the OEQC(1997) Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts,the goal of the oral interview process is to identify potential cultural resources, practices, and beliefs associated with the affected project area. It is the present authors' further contention that the oral interviews should also be used to augment the process of assessing the significance of any identified traditional cultural properties. Thus, it is the researcher's responsibility to use the gathered information to identify and describe potential cultural impacts and propose appropriate mitigation as necessary. This section of the report begins with a description of level of effort undertaken to identify persons believed to have knowledge of the study area,followed by the interview methodology.This section of the report concludes with a presentation of the interview summaries that have been reviewed and approved by the consulted parties. In an effort to identify individuals knowledgeable about traditional cultural practices and/or uses associated with the current project and study area, a public notice containing(a) locational information about the project area, (b) a description of the proposed project,and(c)contact information was printed in a newspaper with state-wide readership. A public notice was submitted to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) on April 12, 2023, for publication in their monthly newspaper,Ka Wai Ola.This notice was published in the May edition of Ka Wai Ola and a copy of the public notice is included in Appendix C of this report.From the public notice,zero responses were received. Additionally, ASM staff contacted eighteen individuals via phone, postal mail, and email: Nicole Lui; Jimmy Mederios, Jeanie Ngalufe, Mahealani Pai, Malia Kipapa, Olivai Pascuita, Ann Eashabarr, Jennifer Ching, Bob CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 61 3.Consultation Douglas, Elizabeth Dunn, Antonio Eshabarr, Janet Matlock, Peter Matlock, Jordan Kea Calpito, Christian Omerod, E. Kalaniola Wilson Hamm, and Clarence Mederios. These individuals were identified as persons who were long- time residents of the area and were believed to have knowledge of past land use, history, or cultural information. Additionally,some of these individuals provided public testimony at the Land Use Commission hearing and provided information or spoke about traditional cultural practices and cultural resources within the project area. Each of the persons contacted was provided with a consultation packet that contained maps of the project area, a description of the proposed project, and the proposed plans. Of the seventeen people contacted,three,Nicole Lui,Elizabeth Dunn, and Peter Matlock agreed to be interviewed for this study and Janet Matlock provided an email response,all of which are summarized below. Table 6. Persons/organizations contacted for consultation. Name Affiliation Date Contacted Results Nicole Lui Cultural Descendant 06/05/2023 see summary below Jimmy Mederios Kuleana Consulting LLC 01/09/2024 Requested prior 01/10/2024 archaeological studies via 01/16/2024 phone. Studies provided. 01/25/2024 Followed up but no response. Jeanie Ngalufe Area resident 08/17/2023 no response 10/09/2023 Mahealani Pai Cultural Descendant 08/29/23 no response 09/19/2023 Malia Kipapa - 09/19/2023 no response 10/18/2023 Olivia Pascuita Area resident 09/19/2023 no response 10/18/2023 Ann Eshabarr Area resident 10/09/2023 no response 10/18/2023 Jennifer Ching Area resident 10/09/2023 no response 10/18/2023 Bob Douglas Area resident 10/09/2023 no response 10/18/2023 Elizabeth Dunn Area resident 10/09/2023 see summary below Antonio Eshabarr Area resident 10/09/2023 no response 10/18/2023 Janet Matlock Area resident 10/09/2023 see response below 10/18/2023 Peter Matlock Area resident 10/09/2023 see summary below 10/18/2023 Jordan Kea Calpito State Historic Preservation 10/06/2023 provided list of recognized and Christian Division-Burial Sites Specialist descendants Omerod E.Kalaniola Wilson Cultural Descendant 10/10/2023 no response Hamm Clarence Medeiros Cultural Descendant 10/10/2023 no response INTERVIEW METHODOLOGY Prior to the interview, ASM staff provided information about the nature and location of the proposed project and informed the potential interviewees about the current study. The potential interviewees were informed that the interviews were completely voluntary and that they would be given an opportunity to review their interview summary prior to inclusion in this report. With their consent, ASM staff then asked questions about their background, their knowledge of past land use, and the history of the project area, as well as their knowledge of any past or ongoing cultural practices. The informants were also invited to share their thoughts on the proposed development and offer mitigative solutions. The interviews were conducted in various ways; over the phone, email, and video conference. Below are the interview summaries that have been reviewed and approved by the consulted parties. 62 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 3. Consultation NICOLE LUI On June 26, 2023 ASM staff Kau`i Lopes spoke with Ms. Nicole Lui via phone to discuss the proposed Laipala Makai project. The discussion was brief and was centered around Ms. Lui's genealogical ties to the ahupua'a of Kapala`alaea 2nd and the cultural significance of the area.Ms.Lui is a Cultural Monitor and Archaeology field worker for Kulaiwi Archaeology. She is a descendant of North Kona through ancestral ties of many families of North Kona. She submitted her descendancy claim for a different Tax Map Key(TMK)within Kapala`alaea in 2010.Ms.Lui spoke about her mo`oku'auhau (genealogy) and identified Clarence Mederios, an interviewee from the previous CIA(Orr 2006), as her cousin. They share a common ancestor through Henry Clark who first married Clarence Mederios' kupuna wahine (grandmother). Henry Clark then married Keakaonaalii, daughter of the High Chief Kinimaka, who was known to have 16 punalua(multiple wives),two of which were located on Hawai`i Island.Keakaonaalii,however, was a"product of punalua"and later had a son named Kaelemakule.Kaelemakule eventually went on to become the only Hawaiian Merchant of his time and owned his own store at Kailua-Kona.Kaelemakule held other offices such as Post Master, Road Supervisor, Tax Collector, School Teacher and Business man. Ms. Lui shared that her relationship to Kapala`alaea comes from Kaelemakule, whose grand aunt was Loe, the wife of Ka`iama who was awarded the LCA No. 5680. Loe was the sister of Kinimaka and received the ahupua'a of Holualoa 4 /Palau`eka (LCA 7228)in 1846 after the death of Ka`iama. Regarding land genealogy,Ms.Lui shared that the ahupua'a of La'aloa just north of Kapala`alaea 1st and 2nd was named after an actual person. La`aloa, a high chiefess of ancient time, married high chief Holualoa and had many children;descendants of this union still live in Kona. Ms. Lui continued to share the significance of La`aloa's name, meaning very sacred and how this ahupua'a was identified by Reverend Desha as the area where Kekdhaupi`o, Kamehameha's favorite warrior,learned lua(traditional fighting). Concerning the name Kapala`alaea,she referenced Kamakau identifying Kapala`alaea as one of the main Makahiki gods that participated in the island circuit, accompanied by Kihawahine,and because of this Ms.Lui believes that the entire ahupua'a is highly significant. As far as cultural practices in Kapala`alaea, Ms. Lui related that she doesn't have enough knowledge to speak about what was practiced in the area and what continues to be practiced. She did mention kupuna Anna Alapai who had land in Kapala`alaea which was later sold. Anna Alapai was the wife of kupuna Joseph Kahananui, Kona's last known kahuna pule (priest). Ms. Lui explained that her mom and papa used to help Uncle Joe when he was called upon to bless spaces and help people. She added that she grew up in the 60s and 70s, and by that time Kapala`alaea and the surrounding ahupua'a were utilized as ranch lands that remained clear of bushes due to the cattle. In talking about the historic sites that were identified through the prior archaeological studies,Ms.Lui explained that there are burials near the project area as well as a portion of the Kuakini Wall. She added that during the ranching era,the Kuakini Wall was breached by bulldozer so that the cattle could roam. The significance of this wall marks the connection to Kuakini, who through historical documentation is known to have built this wall. The conversation continued to Ms.Lui's concerns for the project and suggestions she has for the project moving forward. Concerning the potential impact this project may have on the cultural landscape of the area, Ms. Lui expressed that if she had her way,she would say no to the project development. She noted how at one point,all the lands in this area belonged to mostly Hawaiian families and is sad to see that currently,it is not. She believes that the affordability of the single-family homes aren't affordable for the existing kama`Dina to purchase and the specific demographic the project caters to are for those who are richer than most.Furthermore,she noted that the source of water for all of Kona is provided by a single source, the Keauhou Aquifer, and with some of the well pumps out of commission, will continue to strain the water resources and lower the water pressure for everyone. She feels that additional water studies need to be conducted to alleviate the strain on the aquifer and determine if there is adequate capacity to provide enough water to the proposed 65 house lots in addition to the rest of Kona. As far as the development plans, she hopes that more green spaces will be included as well as the subdivision not being gated.Lastly,her main concern for the overall project is the access. She wants to make clear that access to iwi kupuna and the Kuakini Wall are not restricted. This came up as she shared about how in prior years with other subdivision access to burials,she was not able to get consent as ownership changed and the contact information for the new or past owners were not provided. At the end of the conversation, Ms. Lui provided the contact information for Jeanie Naluafi and recommended that ASM staff reach out to her. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 63 3.Consultation ELIZABETH DUNN On October 12th, 2023, Ms. Elizabeth Dunn contacted ASM staff, Mrs. Candace Gonzales via email,in response to an October 9th,2023,email sent by Mrs. Gonzales regarding the proposed project and the nature of the current study. An interview with Ms. Dunn was attempted over the phone on October 17th, 2023, however,the interview was later conducted by sending questions via email to Ms.Dunn on October 18th,2023.Ms.Dunn's response was received on November 2"d, 2023. Ms. Dunn was born and raised in California and is a current resident of the neighboring subdivision,Alii Heights,where she has resided for just over four years.Ms.Dunn stated that she has learned of the past land uses of the area through reading archaeological reports for various developments in the area and through her personal observations. Not being from the area,Ms. Dunn is unable to speak to the historical or traditional land uses of the area and is unaware of any current cultural practices occurring in the area.Having said that,she went on to state that the proposed development would"preclude" any cultural practices and resources present. Ms. Dunn expresses concerns over the deterioration of the boundary wall located along Alii Drive, stating that there are noticeably fewer stones present today in comparison to just two years ago. She went on to state that it is"disingenuous"to continue with a project that would remove archaeological sites and continue to damage the wall. Ms. Dunn recommended not developing on these particular parcels but if development should proceed, certain provisions should be made. Ms. Dunn recommended reducing the number of lots and making the parcels larger, "to match the R-7.5 zoning of Keauhou View Estates."Ms.Dunn argued that larger lots would allow the development to "better avoid"cultural resources through creating buffers in all areas where cultural resources are known or believed to exist.Lastly,Ms.Dunn mentioned the makai parcel(parcel 001),where the fifty-foot road buffer is proposed having an application submitted to extend the parcel's status as a Special Management Area(SMA)and expressed curiosity about the application and the parcel's current status. PETER MATLOCK On November 1st,2023,Mr.Peter Matlock contacted ASM staff,Mrs. Candace Gonzales via email,in response to an October 18th, 2023, email sent by Mrs. Gonzales regarding the proposed project and the nature of the current study. An interview with Mr.Matlock was conducted via Zoom video communication on November 13th,2023.Mr.Matlock is an educator, specializing in bioeconomy and sustainable agriculture,working in partnership with the University of Hawaii at Hilo to develop sustainability projects and potentially an Institute for Tropical Bioeconomy. He splits his time between working on bioeconomy demonstration projects with a leading California-based research institute and UH Hilo,while living full-time in his Kailua-Kona home on Hawaii Island.Mr.Matlock purchased his first property in Hawaii in 2008 and rented it out on a long-term basis to local residents.He sold this first property and moved into his current home in 2018,and has been residing in Kailua-Kona since. In the time that Mr. Matlock has resided Kailua-Kona, he has witnessed the degradation of the environment, including the ocean, in the area. Since 2018,Mr.Matlock has witnessed many developments in the area surrounding his home and across the West Side of Hawaii Island, and has been proactive in educating himself through tracking the projects, submitting testimony, and reviewing related documents. Through his endeavors, he has come to know more about the history of the area and has seen the impacts the developments have had on the community. When asked about the past uses and cultural resources of the project area,Mr.Matlock began by stating that it is a culturally significant place. He went on to explain that due to Hawai`i's complex past and the current recovery of the Hawaiian culture,the Hawaiian people,and their cultural identity,places such as this area are becoming even more culturally important.Mr.Matlock not only mentioned the entire area of Kailua-Kona's significance as the location of multiple Hawaiian royal centers but also the ingenious agricultural system developed by Native Hawaiians. This expansive system,known as the Kona Field System, once provided such an abundance that it allowed Kamehameha I to bring all of the islands under a single rule, says Mr.Matlock in referencing multiple studies. He went on to state that the walls in the area,often mistaken as"mere cattle walls,"coupled with the other archaeological features present, are able to provide insight into how Hawaii once was able to and can again practice sustainable agriculture. Mr.Matlock is concerned with how the proposed project is benefiting the Kailua-Kona community as well as all of Hawaii. He stated that the archaeology in the project area and its vicinity are becoming rare and are vital for reestablishing the Hawaiian cultural identity. Due to the importance of the insights they may provide, these archaeological features are cultural resources that should be preserved and studied,and even possibly restored. 64 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts Mr. Matlock made mention of ever-evolving technology that supports archaeological studies through an increasing number of dimensions, stating that archaeological tools just"keep getting better and more informative," thereby presenting unknown future opportunities to study these features and unlock the "body of knowledge" they possess. Mr. Matlock stated that this is an "important touchstone" of Hawai`i's past, providing "clues to the key elements of sustainable agriculture and lifestyle in Hawai`i."Mr.Matlock recommended these features be preserved and managed in conjunction with the native Hawaiian community. JANET MATLOCK On November 1St, 2023,Mrs. Janet Matlock contacted ASM staff, Mrs. Candace Gonzales via email, in response to an October 18th,2023,email sent by Mrs. Gonzales regarding the proposed project and the nature of the current study. Mrs. Matlock has previously given testimony before the Cultural Resource Commission regarding the proposed project and was asked to provide input on the cultural impacts of the proposed project. On November 1St,2023,Kailua Kona resident Janet Matlock replied:"It is my nature and professional training to seek the middle ground in most circumstances,and I again attempted to do so here.I re-reviewed and reflected on the documents forwarded,as well as all the documents filed with the LPC[Leeward Planning Commission] and the CRC [Cultural Resource Commission]. Having done so, I fail to find any cultural benefit to building this project. Additionally, I cannot see any way to "lessen the effects (cultural impacts)" of the desecration of the Great Wall of Kuakini(the 50'access road referenced),and the numerous pre-and post-contact archeological sites on these parcels." 4. IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL IMPACTS The OEQC guidelines identify several possible types of cultural practices and beliefs that are subject to assessment. These include "...subsistence, commercial, residential, agricultural, access-related, recreational, and religious and spiritual customs" (OEQC 1997:1). The guidelines also identify the types of cultural resources, associated with cultural practices and beliefs that are subject to assessment.These include other types of historic properties,both man made and natural, submerged cultural resources,and traditional cultural properties. The origin of the concept and the expanded definition of traditional cultural property is found in National Register Bulletin 38 published by the U.S. Department of Interior-National Park Service(Parker and King 1998).An abbreviated definition is provided below: "Traditional cultural property"means any historic property associated with the traditional practices and beliefs of an ethnic community or members of that community for more than fifty years. These traditions shall be founded in an ethnic community's history and contribute to maintaining the ethnic community's cultural identity. Traditional associations are those demonstrating a continuity of practice or belief until present or those documented in historical source materials,or both. "Traditional" as it is used, implies a time depth of at least 50 years, and a generalized mode of transmission of information from one generation to the next,either orally or by act."Cultural"refers to the beliefs,practices,lifeways, and social institutions of a given community. The use of the term"Property" defines this category of resource as an identifiable place. Traditional cultural properties are not intangible, they must have some kind of boundary; and are subject to the same kind of evaluation as any other historic resource,with one very important exception.By definition, the significance of traditional cultural properties should be determined by the community that values them. It is however with the definition of"Property" wherein there lies an inherent contradiction, and corresponding difficulty in the process of identification and evaluation of potential Hawaiian traditional cultural properties,because it is precisely the concept of boundaries that runs counter to the traditional Hawaiian belief system. The sacredness of a particular landscape feature is often cosmologically tied to the rest of the landscape as well as to other features on it.To limit a property to a specifically defined area may actually partition it from what makes it significant in the first place. However offensive the concept of boundaries may be, it is nonetheless the regulatory benchmark for defining and assessing traditional cultural properties. As the OEQC guidelines do not contain criteria for assessing the significance of traditional cultural properties, this study will adopt the state criteria for evaluating the significance of historic properties,of which traditional cultural properties are a subset. To be significant the potential historic property or traditional cultural property must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship,feeling, and association and meet one or more of the following criteria: CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 65 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts a Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past; c Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period,or method of construction;represent the work of a master;or possess high artistic value; d Have yielded,or is likely to yield,information important for research on prehistory or history; e Have an important value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with cultural practices once carried out,or still carried out,at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs,events or oral accounts—these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity. While it is the practice of the DLNR-SHPD to consider most historic properties significant under Criterion d at a minimum, it is clear that traditional cultural properties by definition would also be significant under Criterion e. A further analytical framework for addressing the preservation and protection of customary and traditional native practices specific to Hawaiian communities resulted from the Ka Pa`akai 0 Ka Aina v Land Use Commission court case.The court decision established a three-part process relative to evaluating such potential impacts:first,to identify whether any valued cultural, historical or natural resources are present and/or past or ongoing traditional customary practices;and identify the extent to which any traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised;second, to identify the extent to which those resources and rights will be affected or impaired;and third,specify any mitigative actions to be taken to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist. IDENTIFICATION OF TRADITIONAL AND CUSTOMARY PRACTICES,VALUED CULTURAL RESOURCES The culture-historical background information paired with the results of the consultation revealed the following with respect to valued cultural,historical,or natural resources and/or past or ongoing traditional customary practices. Valued Cultural and Historical Resources Prior archaeological studies conducted within Parcel 001 and 121 reveal that these parcels contained a rich and diverse assemblage of valued cultural and historical resources. Such resources include cultural sites associated with Precontact and Historic Period practices including agriculture, tool manufacturing, ritual, temporary and permanent habitation, burial, and ranching-related and ahupua'a boundary walls. The distribution of sites suggests that the mauka half of Parcel 121 was largely(but not exclusively)used for agricultural purposes,whereas the makai half of Parcel 121 down to Alii Drive contained a diversity of site types including those associated with Precontact temporary and permanent habitation including kuleana parcels,agriculture,tool manufacturing,ritual,and burial.However,the majority of the historic properties once located on Parcel 121,except for Sites 24534(burial/habitation/agricultural complex)and Site 24842 (burial) were destroyed through prior permitted land clearing(in ca. 2018). The archaeological studies have documented several walls, including Site 6302 (Kuakini Wall) along with two ahupua'a boundary walls (Site 6366 and 6368 [24039])that extended along the northern and southern boundaries of Kapala`alaea 2nd.The location of these sites within and in the immediate vicinity of the project area are shown below in Figure 40. Burials To date, there are at least seventeen confirmed burials contained within five sites that are distributed across Parcels 121 and 001. Within Parcel 121 are two known burial sites: Site 24842 and a portion of Site 24534. While there are no known burials within the proposed road corridor portion of the project area on Parcel 001, there are three burial sites(Site 24530,24531,and 24532),two of which are adjacent to the proposed road corridor(see Figure 40).All of these burial sites have SHPD-approved treatment plans that outline both interim and permanent protective measures along with access rights for lineal and cultural descendants. 66 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts PROJECT INFORMATION MASTER PLAN TAKMAF NET Tem it' 1 nkE4 OFIOT 9rtE 11.115 ACRES OS NUM13EF OF LO FS 681tOn ■Burial prrscrvcs ❑Preservation sites(Walls) _not in pud application _y podIIoatlon r �tlaIV@CGlllt ewpp!. I saottssa (� LVL 111 oy I lx] 1j�f� / + 3 rttlsa: "' 1,,-,,:l e) _ II 1 � _ ✓ sw:nf. ♦+ .' 0 L". , 1:111 —:— 4' ge , baA.HagnM1wnxnen �'V ANN ) r !W, n_____----. ,ry �,'' LutaLl rel , ,mmeulllityM Ww,..;wt.yt.1n, Skif L Lp ,smedwaY --VV:MVeolagicel tltiveceurt —roatlrvay atub- —wine,Shaewel ke nitcHItl.t. ecnnnmmnun�ae spa eo L I'pal \ North Kana,ffti..0 MK(3J 7-7LQ8�L I '�Dari irerceror�,uc a ] a ('ti-prerme.]nxut dmelepmept .300€ast E planade Drrtae,Salle 1550,Oxnard.Chttfo n+a,43036, =2„203.13 No314 4 Figure 40.La`ipala Makai master plan annotated to show extant historic properties. Significance and Supportive Role of Kapala`alaea 2nd in the Kahalu`u Cultural Landscape The abundance and diversity of documented cultural and historical resources on Parcels 121 and 001 indicate that this area was extensively utilized during the Precontact Period and well into the Historic Period when ranching emerged as a major industry.The presence of sites attributed to ritual practices in the project area parcel,coupled with historical accounts documenting the chiefly residences and heiau at the coast of Kapala`alaea 2nd suggest that this ahupua`a and its inhabitants likely played a supportive role in the broader cultural rituals and practices centered at Kahalu`u. Comparatively,a similar type of intra-ahupua`a relationship is also seen with Keauhou,the lands that border Kahalu`u to the south. Kapala`alaea,the Makahiki Deity, and `Alaea (Red Ochre) The culture-historical background information revealed that the name Kapala`alae is associated with the subject ahupua`a,as well as an important deity connected with the annual Makahiki procession.This deity,who was smeared (kapala)with red ochre(`alaea)on half of its body was part of the island-wide Makahiki procession of deities. The data recovery excavations undertaken on Parcel 121 of the project area identified several specimens of `alaea nodules which are a culturally valued natural resource at the no longer extant Site 24846 Feature I. As noted, `alaea is a culturally valued mineral utilized in certain Makahiki rituals,particularly those associated with the deity Kapala`alaea as well as other purification, medicinal, and domestic rituals and customs. It is unclear whether the `alaea nodules found at Site 24846 Feature I were sourced from the project area or if this mineral was gathered from another location and imported to the site. Ranching The archaeological studies conducted in the project area have documented the presence of ranching-related infrastructure,most notably stone walls that were used mainly for livestock control.Any such walls that once existed within Parcel 121 have since been destroyed, however, ranching-related sites and features remain on Parcel 001. As described in the oral histories gathered by the Kona Historical Society (1992) and Orr(2006), during the early 20th century, the project area parcels were part of the landholdings of the Greenwell family. Based on the oral history information provided by Sherwood Greenwell,before the 1930s, the coastal lands were not preferable for ranching mainly because they lacked the necessary grasses and vegetation essential to livestock production. However, it was CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 67 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts only after the 1930s,when grasses and ekoa were introduced to Kona's coastal lands,that cattle ranching in this area gained viability and became a more practical endeavor. Several of the consultees who participated in Orr's (2006) study also shared recollections of ranching in Kapala`alaea during the 20th century. FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS,AND CONCLUSION The individuals consulted as part of the current study generally did not endorse the proposed project.They emphasized that the project area parcels are integral to the diminishing cultural landscape along Alii Drive,and developing these parcels would further exacerbate the loss of landscape. Respondents conveyed a shared concern about the interconnectivity of Kona's remaining cultural sites and their pivotal role in shaping and preserving the cultural identity of Kona's dwindling indigenous population. The consulted parties all agreed that the implementation of the proposed project would intensify feelings of loss and contribute to the destruction of Kona's cultural heritage. Some felt that the density of the development would not allow for an appropriate level of protection for the cultural sites and urged for an alternative design. It is imperative that the developer make concerted efforts to hear and mitigate these concerns. The following recommendations, which take into consideration the sentiments shared by the consulted parties,are intended to help the developer avoid or mitigate impacts to the above-identified resources and practices. It is important to note that these recommendations are not exhaustive or definitive solutions but rather are intended to offer guidance for moving forward. The primary source of identified cultural impacts arises from the planned construction of the proposed road corridor on Parcel 001 with impacts to burials and Kuakini Wall(Site 6302)being the primary concern. Although no burial sites are presently known within the proposed road corridor, it is important to note that the road alignment would traverse near three burial sites (with each site sometimes containing multiple burials) and would remove a portion of Kuakini Wall.To avoid impacting the burial sites and Kuakini Wall,it is recommended that Naniloa Drive, or another existing route,be used for access to the proposed development, and that no development activities occur within Parcel 001. Opting not to develop the road would help ensure the preservation of the cultural and historical integrity of the burial sites,Kuakini Wall, and other extant cultural and historical resources present on Parcel 001. In this way impacts to burial sites and other extant cultural resources would be avoided altogether. Ideally,to offset the loss of cultural sites on Parcel 121,help protect a portion of the rapidly diminishing cultural landscape of this area, and completely eliminate the possibility of further impacts to the above mentioned cultural sites, Parcel 001 be set aside as a cultural preserve. If the construction of the new road corridor is pursued,then it is recommended that all SHPD-accepted interim and permanent protective measures for the sites on Parcel 001 be fully adhered to and that the remaining portions of Parcel 001 (on either side of the roadway)be set aside a cultural preserve. Regarding potential cultural impacts associated with Parcel 121, while only two extant sites (a portion of Site 24534 and the entirety of Site 24842)remain on the parcel,significant data has been generated from the data recovery efforts conducted there. To further mitigate the loss of cultural sites on Parcel 121, it is recommended that the information obtained from the archaeological data recovery efforts be utilized to develop interpretive materials that tell the history of this area. These materials could take the form of a booklet or pamphlet provided to future residents of the Laipala Makai PUD,or interpretive signage installed throughout the property. It is also recommended that the artifacts and cultural materials collected during the data recovery(see Berrigan et al.2018:16)should be brought back to the property,and that the project proponent work with the SHPD and the descendant community to arrange for their proper curation and potential future display or return to the land.Consideration should be given to creating an on-site storage facility as part of the proposed development,or to partnering with other stakeholders in the community to do so at a nearby location,so that all of the artifacts recovered from the property can be stored in a secured facility nearby. Exploring partnerships with descendant community members, educational institutions (i.e. Hawai`i Community College Palamanui Campus,University of Hawaii at Hilo),or other Kona-based cultural-educational groups(such as Kamehameha Schools) to facilitate future research opportunities or the creation of interpretive and educational materials using the artifact collection is also recommended. Some interpretive themes could even focus on the use of alaea in Makahiki traditions and practices within Kapala`alaea and North Kona. Such efforts could contribute to preserving the history of the sites and provide opportunities for descendant community members to actively participate in the management and interpretation of their heritage. To mitigate impacts on ranching-related resources,it is recommended that the ahupua`a boundaries walls located along the northern and southern boundaries of Parcel 001 and 121,as well as Kuakini Wall,be preserved in accordance with the Preservation Plan prepared by Gotay and Rechtman(2019) and incorporated into the overall design of the proposed development.It should also be noted that while the burial treatment plans(Haun and Henry 2017;Kouneski and Kennedy 2007)contain provisions for access by lineal and cultural descendants,the proposed development plans do not identify how and from where descendants would access the burial sites. The development plans should be 68 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i 4.Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts revised to reflect an area where descendants can park their vehicle(s)and access the burial sites. It is imperative that, if the developer proceeds with the project,any future residents of the La`ipala Makai Subdivision be made aware that 1)burials exist on the property; and 2) descendants may visit the burials and can do so without harm or harassment from residents. In conclusion, the findings of this CIA study underscore a shared sentiment among the consulted parties, who expressed strong opposition to the proposed project due to the potential adverse impacts on the above-identified resources and practices. The opposition to the project, regarding its potential impact on burial sites and cultural landmarks such as Kuakini Wall, highlights the need for conscientious planning and alternative designs that have a stronger emphasis on cultural preservation. Conducting the background research for this project, consulting with community members who so willingly gave their time and knowledge, and recommending feasible actions that may mitigate potential cultural impacts was done so with aloha, for both the land and the people whose heritage is intimately connected to this landscape. If the proposed project moves forward, we recommend that it be done so in the same spirit and practice. It is our hope that the project proponent will embrace the community input and do their part to help preserve and honor the rich cultural legacy of Kapala`alaea for generations to come. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 69 References Cited REFERENCES CITED Abbott,I.A. 1992 La'au Hawai`i, Traditional Hawaiian Uses of Plants.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Alexander,W.D. 1890 A Brief History of Land Titles in the Hawaiian Kingdom. In Hawaiian Alamanac and Annual for 1891.Press Publishing Company,Honolulu. Allen,M. S. 1984 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Waiono Meadows Development Project Area, Puapua'a 1st and 2nd, Holualoa 1st and 2nd, North Kona, Island of Hawaii (TMK:7-5-15:2,12 and 7-6- 2:1,14).Paul H.Rosendahl,Ph.D.,Inc. 119-070584.Revised 1984.Prepared for Waiono Meadows Ranch,Ltd.,Kurtistown,HI. 2001 Gardens of Lono: Archaeological Investigations at the Amy B. H. Greenwell Ethnobotanical Gardens,Kealakekua, Hawai V.Edited by M. Allen.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 2004 Bet-hedging strategies, agricultural change, and unpredictable environments: historical development of dryland agriculture in Kona, Hawaii. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 23:196-224. Andrews,L. and H.H.Parker 1922 A Dictionary of the Hawaiian Language. Board of Commissioners of Public Archives of the Territory of Hawaii,Honolulu. Athens,J. S.,T.Rieth,and T. S.Dye 2014 A Paleoenvironmental and Archaeological Model-Based Age Estimate for the Colonization of Hawaii.American Antiquity 79(1):144-155. Barrera,W.,Jr. 1971 Archaeological Excavations and Survey at Keauhou, North Kona, Hawaii. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum Report 71-10. Revised 1971. Prepared for Kamehameha Developmental Corporation,Honolulu. Beckwith,M.W. 1951 The Kumulipo A Hawaiian Creation Chant.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 1971 Kepelino's Traditions of Hawaii. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 95. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Berrigan,D.M.,D.Henry,and A.E.Haun 2018 Archaeological Data Recovery for Sites 50-10-37-24838,-24839,-24840,-24841,-24843,-24844, -24845,-24846,and-24847 in the land of Kapala`alaea 2nd,North Kona District,Island of Hawai`i, (TMK: [3]7-7-008:121.Haun and Associates 1317-081218.Draft Edition.Prepared for Aldersgate Investment,LLC,Kailua-Kona,HI. Bishop,A. 1892 Journal Kept at Kairua, Hawaii. The Friend [Honolulu]. March 1892. Electronic document, https://hmha.missionhouses.org/items/show/1632,accessed January 27,2021. Boundary Commission 1874 Boundary Commission Book Vol. A, No. 1, Reel#1. Microfilm. Mo`okini Library, University of Hawaii at Hilo.Hawaiian Reference Collection. Buck,E. 1993 Paradise remade: The politics of culture and history in Hawai'i. Temple University Press, Philadelphia. 70 CIA for the Ld'ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i References Cited Buke Mahele 1848 Buke Kakau Paa no ka mahele aina i Hooholoia iwaena o Kamehameha III a me Na Lii a me Na Konohiki ana,Hale Alii,Honolulu. Burtchard,G. 1995 Population and Land Use on the Keauhou Coast,the Mauka Land Inventory Survey,Keauhou,North Kona, Hawaii Island. Part I: Narrative Volume. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. Draft. Revised 1995. Prepared for Belt Collins and Associates and Kamehameha Investment Corporation,Honolulu. Cannelora,L. 1974 The origin of Hawaii land titles and of the rights of native tenants. Security Title Corp. Case,E. M.K. 2015 I Kahiki Ke Ola: In Kahiki There is Life Ancestral Memories and Migrations in the New Pacific. Ph.D.Thesis,Victoria University of Wellingtom,Wellington. Chinen,J. J. 1958 The GreatMahele:Hawaii's Land Division of 1848.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawaii.Privately published. Ching,F.,E.Neller, S.Palama,and P.B. Griffin 1973 The Archaeology of North Kona, from the Ahupua'a of Kahului to the Ahupua'a of Kahalu`u. Surface Survey:Realignment ofAli`i Drive.Hawaiian Archaeological Journal 73-2.Archaeological Research Center of Hawaii,Inc. Commissioner of Public Lands(Office of the Commissioner of Public Lands of the Territory of Hawaii) 1929 Indices of Awards Made by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Star Bulletin Press,Honolulu. Cordy,R. 1995 Central Kona Archaeological Settlement Patterns. State Historic Preservation Division, DLNR, State of Hawaii.Revised 1995.Prepared for Planning Department,County of Hawaii. 2000 Exalted Sits the Chief The Ancient History of Hawai`i Island.Mutual Publishing,Honolulu. Cordy,R.,J. Tainter,R.Renger,and R.Hitchcock 1991 An Ahupua'a Study: The 1971 Archaeological Work at Kaloko Ahupua'a, North Kona, Island of Hawai V. Western Archaeological and Conservation Center Publications in Anthropology 8. U.S. Department of the Interior,National Park Service,Tucson,AZ. Crabbe,K.,K.Fox,and H.K. Coleman 2017 Mana Lahui Kanaka Mai na kupuna kahiko mai a hiki i keia wa. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Honolulu,accessed 2019-04-29. Desha, S. 2000 Kamehameha and his warrior Kekuhaupi`o. Translated by F. N. Frazier. Kamehameha Schools Press,Honolulu. Ellis,W. 1917 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of a Tour of Hawaii, or Owhyee; with remarks on the History, Traditions,Manners, Customs and Language of the Inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands.Reprint of the London 1827 Edition ed. The Advertiser Historical Series No.. 2. Hawaiian Gazette Co., Ltd., Honolulu. Else,I. 2004 The Breakdown of the Kapu System and Its Effect on Native Hawaiian Health and Diet. Hulili: Multidisciplinary Research on Hawaiian Well-Being 1 (1):241-255. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 71 References Cited Evening Bulletin 1898 Kona Lands.Evening Bulletin [Honolulu]. June 8 1898. Fornander,A. 1880 An Account of the Polynesian Race: Its Origins and Migrations, and the Ancient History of the Hawaiian People to the Times of Kamehameha I,vol.II. Trabner&Co.,London. 1916-1917 Fornander Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-lore. Memoirs of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum,vol. IV.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1919-1920 Fornander Collection of Hawaiian Antiquities and Folk-lore. Memoirs of the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum,vol. VI.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1969 An Account of the Polynesian Race: Its Origins and Migrations, and the Ancient History of the Hawaiian People to the Times of Kamehameha I. Edited by J. F. G. Stokes. Charles Tuttle& Co., Inc.,Tokyo. 1996 Ancient History of the Hawaiian People,vol. II.Mutual Publishing,Australia. Garovoy,J. 2005 "Ua koe ke kuleana o na kanaka" (Reserving the rights of Native Tenants): Integrating Kuleana Rights And Land Trust Priorities in Hawaii.Harvard Environmental Law 29:523-571. Giambelluca,T. W.,Q. Chen,A. G.Frazier,J.P.Price,Y.-L. Chen,P.-S. Chu,J.K.Eischeid,and D.M.Delparte 2013 Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawai`i.Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 94(3):313-316. Giambelluca, T. W., X. Shuai, M. L. Barnes, R. J. Alliss, R. J. Longman, T. Miura, Q. Chen, A. G. Frazier, R. G. Mudd,L. Cuo,and A.D.Businger 2014 Evapotranspiration of Hawaii. Revised 2014. Prepared for Water Resource Management, State of Hawai`i. Gotay,T. and R.B.Rechtman 2018 Archaeological Monitoring Plan for the Alii Kai Village Planned Unit Development,TMK: (3)7- 7-008:001, Kapala`alaea 2nd Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. ASM Affiliates Project Number 26880.Prepared for Kaupulehu Land LLC. 2019 Archaeological Preservation Plan for SIHP Sites 6302,6366,and 6368(24039)within the Proposed Alii Kai Village Planned Unit Development, TMK: (3)7-7-008:001,Kapala`alaea 2nd Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. ASM Affiliates Project Number 26880. Prepared for Kaupulehu Land LLC. Goto,B. 1982 Ethnic Groups and the Coffee Industry in Hawaii. Hawaiian Journal of History 16. Electronic document,http://hdl.handle.net/10524/432. Greene,L. 1993 A Cultural History of Three Traditional Hawaiian Sites on the West Coast of Hawaii Island. Revised 1993.Prepared for United States Department of the Interior,National Park Service,Denver Service Center. Gregg,E.,M.Elison,and J.Kennedy 2006 An Archaeological Inventory Survey Report for a Property Located at TMK:7-7-08:01,99&7-7- 10:72 in Kapala`alaea 2nd Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. Archaeological Consultants of the Pacific,Inc.Revised 2006.Prepared for Mr. Tom Stewart,Kapa`au,HI. Haluapo, S. W.K. 1871 Na Mea hou o ka Lai malino a Ehu. Ke Au Okoa [Honolulu]. March 2: 1. Electronic document, www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed October 26,2023. 72 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i References Cited Hammatt,H.H. 1979 Archaeological Survey of 155 Acre (Ginter) Parcel in Pahoehoe, La`aloa and Kapala`alaea Ahupua'a,Kona,Hawaii Island. Arch Inc.,Lawa`i.Revised 1979. Hammatt,H.H.,D.Borthwick,and D. Shideler 1985 Archaeological Reconnaissance of a 31.9-Acre Parcel,Kapala`alaea,Kona,Hawaii Island. Cultural Surveys Hawaii,Inc.Revised 1985.Prepared for First Investment Corp.,Ltd. Hammatt,H.H. and S. Clark 1980 Archaeological Testing and Salvage Excavations of a 155 Acre (Ginter) Parcel in Na Ahupua'a Pahoehoe,La`aloa and Kapala`aea,Kona,Hawai`i Island.Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc. ARCH 14-152 III.Revised 1980.Prepared for Pacific Basin Resorts,Inc.,Lawa`i,HI. Handy,E. S. C.,E. G.Handy,and M.K.Pukui 1991 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Haun,A.E. and D.Henry 2006 Archaeological Inventory Survey, TMK: 7-708:121,Land of Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. Haun and Associates 422-092005. Revised Revised September 2006. Prepared for c/o Ms. Charlene Davis, Clark Realty Corporation,Keaau,HI. 2010 Archaeological Data Recovery Plan,Land of Kapa`alaea 2,North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK 3-7-7-08:105, 113, 119, 121). Haun& Associates 476.4-032107. Final. Prepared for Kona Heights LLC,Kailua-Kona,HI. 2017 Final- Burial Site Component of An Archaeological Preservation Plan, Site 50-10-37-24842 and Portions of Site 24534,TMK(3)7-7-008:121,Kapala`alaea Ahupua`a,North Kona District,Island of Hawaii. Haun and Associates 1316-042117. Final. Revised 2017. Prepared for Aldersgate Investment,LLC and Hawaii Onel Investors,LLC. Henke,L. 1929 A Survey of Livestock in Hawaii. University of Hawaii Research Publication 5. University of Hawaii,Honolulu. Henry,D. and T.Wolforth 1998 Settlement and Agriculture in the Central Kona Field System Kula: Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Ginter Parcel, Lands of Kapala`alaea 1st, La`aloa 1st and 2nd, and Pahoehoe 4th, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii(TMK: 3-7-7-08:11). Paul H. Rosendahl,Ph.D.,Inc. 1809- 090498.Prepared for Towne Development of Hawaii,Inc.,Hilo,HI. Henry,J.D.,J. Jimenez,and M.Kirkendall 1997 Phase 1(d) - Data Collection, Phased Intensive Archaeological Survey, Alii Highway Phased Mitigation Program,North Kona District,Island of Hawaii. Vol. I.Paul H.Rosendahl,Ph.D.,Inc. 1320-043097.Prepared for R.M. Towill Corporation,Hilo,HI. Hommon,R. 1986 Social Evolution in Ancient Hawaii. In Island Societies:Archaeological Approaches to Evolution and Transformation, pp. 55-88. Edited by P. Kirch. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Hommon,R.and P.H.Rosendahl 1983 Archaeological Investigation of the Alii Drive Realignment Corridors, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. Science Management,Inc.Revised 1983.Prepared for Belt, Collins&Associates. Horrocks,M. and R.B.Rechtman(CrossRef) 2009 Sweet potato(Ipomoea batatas)and banana(Musa sp.)microfossils in deposits from the Kona Field System, Island of Hawaii. Journal of Archaeological Science 36 (5):1115-1126. Electronic document, http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/50305440308003221, accessed 2017/12/30/01:17:23. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 73 References Cited Ii,J.P. 1959 Fragments of Hawaiian History. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 70. Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1963 Fragments of Hawaiian History. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 70. Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1993 Fragments of Hawaiian History. 2nd revised ed. Originally published 1959. Edited by D. Barrere. Translated by M. K. Pukui. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 70. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Jokiel,P.,K.Rodgers,W. Walsh,D.Polhemus,and T. Wilhelm 2011 Marine Resource Management in the Hawaiian Archipelago: The Traditional Hawaiian System in Relation to the Western Approach.Journal of Marine Biology 2011:1-16. Kamakau, S.M. 1866 Ka moolelo o Kamehameha I: Mokuna III. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 22 December: 1. Electronic document,https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed 08/28/2020. Kamakau, S.M. 1964 Ka Po'e Kahiko: The People of Old.B.P.Bishop Museum Special Publication 51.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1976 The Works of the People of Old, Na Hana a ka Po'e Kahiko. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 61.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1992 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii.Revised ed.Kamehameha Schools Press,Honolulu. Kawachi, C. 1989 Pua'a 2, An Upland Habitation and Agricultural Complex in North Kona, Hawaii Island. M.A. Thesis,University of Hawaii,Department of Anthropology,Honolulu. Kekahuna,H. 1954 Kahal-u`u, N. Kona, Hawaii.Bernice P Bishop Museum. 1955 Kaleiopapa Heiau.Bernice P Bishop Museum. Kekahuna,H. and T.Kelsey 1954a Kamehameha in Kailua XIX.Hilo Tribune-Herald[Hilo,Hawaii]. March 18, 1954. 1954b Kamehameha in Kailua XVIII.Hilo Tribune-Herald[Hilo,Hawaii]. March 17, 1954. Kelly,M. 1956 Changes in Land Tenure in Hawaii, 1778-1850.Manuscript.Hawaiian-Pacific Collection,Master's thesis.University of Hawaii at Manoa. 1956. 1983 Na Mala 0 Kona: Gardens of Kona.A History of Land Use in Kona,Hawai`i.Departmental Report Series.Department of Anthropology,B.P.Bishop Museum,Honolulu 83-2.Revised 1983.Prepared for Department of Transportation, State of Hawaii. Kikiloi, S.K. 2010 Rebirth of an Archipelago: Sustaining a Hawaiian Cultural Identity for People and Homeland. Hulili: Multidisciplinary Research on Hawaiian Well-Being 6:73-115. King,R. 1935 Districts in the Hawaiian Islands. InA Gazetteer of the Territory of Hawaii,pp.214-230.Edited by J. W. Coulter.University of Hawaii,Honolulu. n.d. Hawaiian Land Titles. n.d. Electronic document, https://ags.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads, accessed May 15,2020. 74 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i References Cited Kirch,P. V. 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 2011 When did the Polynesians Settle Hawaii? A Review of 150 Years of Scholarly Inquiry and a Tentative Answer.Hawaiian Archaeology 12:3-26. Kona Historical Society 1992 Documenting the History ofRanching in Kona:An Oral History.Kona Historical Society,Kalukalu. Kouneski,E. and J.Kennedy 2007 A Burial Treatment Plan for a Property Located at TMK: 7-7-08: 01 & 99 and 7-7-10: 72 in Kapala`alaea 2nd Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii, Revised March 2007. Archaeological Consultants of the Pacific,Inc.Prepared for Mr.Tom Stewart,Kapa`au,HI. Kuykendall,R. 1938 The Hawaiian Kingdom 1778-1854. Foundation and Transformation, vol. 1. 3 vols. University Press of Hawaii,Honolulu. Kuykendall,R. and A. G.Day 1976 Hawaii:A History; From Polynesian Kingdom to American Statehood. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,New Jersey. Lam,M. 1985 The Imposition of Anglo-American Land Tenure Law On Hawaiians.Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law 23:104-128. Liliuokalani 1978 An Account of the Creation of the World According to Hawaiian Tradition, Translated from Original Manuscript Preserved Exclusively in Her Majesty's Family.Pueo Press,Kentfield. Lincoln,N.and T.Ladefoged 2014 Agroecology of pre-contact Hawaiian dryland farming: the spatial extent,yield and social impact of Hawaiian breadfruit groves in Kona, Hawaii. Journal of Archaeological Science 49:192-202. Electronic document,http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/50305440314001861. Lucas,P. 1995 A Dictionary of Hawaiian Legal Land-Terms. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation. University of Hawaii Committee for the Preservation and Study of Hawaiian Language, Art and Culture, Honolulu. MacKenzie,M.K. 2015 Native Hawaiian Law,A Treatise.Kamehameha Publishing,Honolulu. Major,M. 2001 An Agricultural History of Kealakekua. In Gardens of Lono:Archaeological Investigations at the Amy B. H. Greenwell Ethnobotanical Gardens, Kealakekua, Hawai V. Edited by M. Allen. B. P. Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Malo,D. 1903 Hawaiian Antiquities (Moolelo Hawaii). Translated by D. N. B. Emerson. Hawaiian Gazette Co., Ltd.,Honolulu. 1951 Hawaiian Antiquities. Second ed. Translated by N. B. Emerson. B. P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 2.B.P.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 75 References Cited Maly,K. 1996 Alii Highway Phased Mitigation Program,Phase I(e)—Intensive Survey:Oral History Component, North Kona District, County of Hawaii, Island of Hawaii. Volume IIa and IIb: Informant Interviews IIa& Ilb. Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph. D., Inc. 1359-110196. Revised 1996. Prepared for County of Hawaii,do R.M. Towill Corporation,Honolulu. 2001 Malama Pono I Ka `Aina—An Overview of the Hawaiian Cultural Landscape. Kumu Pono Associates.Revised 2001. Maly,K. and O.Maly 2002 He Wahi Mo`olelo No Ka `Aina A Me Na `Ohana 0 Waiki`i Ma Waikoloa(Kalana 0 Waimea, Kohala), A Me Ka`Aina Mauna: A Collection of Traditions and Historical Accounts of the Lands and Families of Waiki`i at Waikoloa (Waimea Region, South Kohala), and the Mountain Lands, Island of Hawai`i(TMK Overview Sheet 6-7-01).Kumu Pono Associates,LLC Report HiWaikii61- 111202.Prepared for Waiki`i Ranch Homeowner's Association,Kamuela,HI. 2004 `Aina Lei Alii- Keauhou A Me Kahalu`u Ma Kona, Hawaii: A Cultural Sythesis for the Royal Lands of Keauhou and Kahalu`u, District of Kona, Island of Hawaii(TMK Overview Sheet 7-8- 10).Kumu Pono Associates HiKeau90(012104).Prepared for Tsukazaki Yeh&Moore,Hilo,HI. McEldowney,H. 1979 Archaeological and Historical Literature Search and Research Design: Lava Flow Control Study, Hilo,Hawaii.Department of Anthropology,B.P.Bishop Museum.Revised 1979.Prepared for the U.S.Army Engineer Division,Pacific Ocean. Mookini,E. T. and B.F.Kirtley 1977 Kepelino's "Hawaiian Collection": His "Hooiliili Havaii," Pepa 1, 1858. Hawaiian Jounral of History Collection,Volum 11, 1977.Hawaiian Historical Society.Honolulu. Nakaa, G. W. 1893 He moolelo Hawaii: Mokuna II: Ke kumu mua o ko Hawaii nei kanaka. Ka Nupepa Kuokoa [Honolulu]. 4 February: 4. Electronic document, https://www.papakilodatabase.com, accessed 08/28/2020. Newman,T. S. 1970 Hawaiian Fishing and Farming on the Island of Hawaii in A.D. 1778. Department of Land and Natural Resources,Division of State Parks, State of Hawaii,Honolulu. 1971 Hawaii Island Agricultural Zones, Circa A.D. 1823: An Ethnohistorical Study. Ethnohistory 18 (4):335-351. 1974 Hawaii Registers of Historic Places Form: 10-37-6601,Kona Field System.Revised 1974. OEQC(Office of Environmental Quality Control) 1997 Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts, as Adopted by the State of Hawaii Environmental Council in 1997 and amended in 2000. Electronic document, http://oegc2.doh.hawaii.gov/OEQC Guidance/1997-Cultural-Impacts-Guidance.pdf. Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018 Kipuka Database.Electronic document,http://kipukadatabase.com/kipuka. Oliver,D. 1961 The Pacific Islands.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Orr,M. 2006 Cultural Impact Study/Assessment, Laipala Heights, Kapala`alaea Ahupua`a, District of North Kona,Hawaii Island. Kaimipono Consulting Services,LLC. Revised October 24, 2007. Prepared for Group 70 International,Inc. 76 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i References Cited Parker,P. and T.King 1998 Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties.Revised ed.National Register Bulletin 38.U.S.Department of the Interior,National Park Service, Cultural Resources. Poepoe,J.M. 1906 Moolelo Hawaii Kahiko. Ka Na`i Aupuni [Honolulu]. 21 June: 1. Electronic document, https://www.papakilodatabase.com,accessed 08/28/2020. Pogue,J.F. 1978 Moolelo ofAncient Hawaii.Translated by C. W.Kenn.Topgallant Press,Honolulu. Pukui,M.K. (editor) 1983 `Olelo No'eau:Hawaiian proverbs&poetical sayings.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Pukui,M.K. and S.H.Elbert 1986 Hawaiian Dictionary:Hawaiian-English,English-Hawaiian.Revised and english ed.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Pukui,M.K., S.H.Elbert,and E.Mo`okini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii.Revised and Expanded ed.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Pukui,M.K.,E.W.Haertig,and C. A.Lee 1972 Nana I Ke Kumu (Look to the Source),vol. 1.Hui Hanoi,Honolulu. Rechtman,R.B.,M.R. Clark,and D. S. Amerine 2003 Archaeological Inventory Survey of a Portion of the Kona Gold Coffee Plantation (TMK:3-7-8- 02:6, 10), Kahalu`u Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii, Volume I. Rechtman Consulting,LLC 0071.Revised 2003.Prepared for Kona Gold Coffee Plantation,Inc.,Kea`au,HI. Rechtman,R.B.,K.Maly,M.R. Clark,D.Dougherty,and O.Maly 2001 Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Ki`ilae Estates Development Area(TMK:3-8-5-05:19,22, 26, 27), Ki`ilae and Kauleoli Ahupua`a, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii. Rechtman Consulting,LLC 0034.Revised 2002.Prepared for Ki`ilae Estates,LLC,Kea`au,HI. Reinecke,J. 1929 Survey of Kahalulu. Sai,D.K. 2011 Ua Mau Ke Ea Sovereignty Endures: An Overview of the Political and Legal History of the Hawaiian Islands.PU`a.Foundation,Honolulu. Schilt,R. 1984 Subsistence and Conflict in Kona, Hawaii, An Archaeological Study of the Kuakini Highway Realignment Corridor. Departmental Report Series 84-1. Revised June 1984. Prepared for Department of Anthropology,Bernice P.Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Schmitt,R. 1973 The Missionary Censuses of Hawai V. Pacific Anthropological Records 20. Department of Anthropology,Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Sherrod,D.R.,J.M. Sinton, S.E.Watkins,and K.M.Brunt 2021 Geologic Map of the State of Hawai`i. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. USGS Numbered Series. Scientific Investigations Map 3143. 1:100,000 and 1:250,000 scale. Electronic document,https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3143,accessed February 18,2022. Soehren,L. 2004 A Catalog of Hawaii Place Names Compiled from the Records of the Boundary Commission and the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Title of the Kingdom of Hawaii. Part 3: Kona. 2004. Electronic document,http://ulukau.org/cgi-bin/hpn,accessed September 14,2016. CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 77 References Cited Soehren,L. and T. S.Newman 1968 Archaeology of Kealakekua Bay. Office of the Lieutenant Governor,Honolulu. Soil Survey Staff(United States Department of Agriculture,Natural Resources Conservation Service) 2022 Web Soil Survey.Electronic document,http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov. Sproat,D.K. 2009 Ola I Ka Wai:A Legal Primer for Water Use and Management in Hawaii. Ka Huh Ao Center for Excellence in Native Hawaiian Law,Honolulu. Stokes,J.F. G. 1991 Heiau of the Island ofHawai'is A Historic Survey of Native Hawaiian Temple Sites.Edited by T. S. Dye. Bishop Museum Bulletin in Anthropology 2.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Tatar,E. 1982 Nineteenth Century Hawaiian Chant.Pacific Anthropological Records.Revised 1982.Prepared for Department of Anthropology,B.P.Bishop Museum. Thrum,T. G. 1907 Heiaus and Heiau Sites Throughout the Hawaiian Islands. Island of Hawaii. In Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1908,pp. 38-47.Edited by T. Thrum. Thos. G. Thrum,Honolulu. Tomonari-Tuggle,M.-J. 1985 Cultural Resource Management Plan, Cultural Resource Management at the Keauhou Resort. Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. 89-060185. Revised 1985. Prepared for Kamehameha Investment Corporation,Hilo,HI. Wilkes, C. 1845 Narrative of the United States Exploring Expedition During the Years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, and 1842,vol. III.Lea and Blanchard,Philadelphia. Wilmshurst,J.,T.Hunt, C.Lipo,and A. Anderson 2011 High-Precision Radiocarbon Dating Shows Recent and Rapid Colonization of East Polynesia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108:1815-1820. Wright,J. C. 1974 Greenwell Store National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form. Revised 1974. Prepared for U.S.Department of the Interior National Park Service. 78 CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii Appendix A APPENDIX A. LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION LETTER lulitahall 1), Roth �•,� . Zenilp]gym A!apor - armor Lee 1 Lord - ~4 '.1 Jeffrey W.Ilarraw In,veur ;.. • Deprly Diovriar •iri`t w -III •.df C.1.1 Ilnn.:,i'i .,tlicc 1-I f 'I:�ill Ir tililvJ County of Hawa l+ il�'Ib.ala 1_ ,--. I-1 .Ili!S+X 'nl",•\y PLANNING DEPARTMENT ,S9,N,nfil-4'1 NI:It lis" 2022 Ms.Geraldine Bell,Chair Comity of tfawai`i Cultural Resources Commission clo Kamuela Plunkett 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 Ililo,Ilawai`i 96720 1)ear Chairperson Bell: Subject: Request for Consultation Landowner: HawaiiOne1 Investlrrs.id.(' Request: Amendments to Chan,wc of'Zone Ordinance Nu.99 8 and Special Management Area Ise Permit'+i,.Is -1121 TNIK: (3)7-7-008:121,I'ah+rrho4:-1'', iialpala'alaea 2"d. North Kona.Ilsawaai'i .1! heir meeting on April 21, 2022.. llleI P1aiiniiig Jr:Lion on shL. appliCaiioi and reque<t.d ll;al rhQ pro..'06I an opportunity to ri1l,'1', 111,2 hrr]11nr:+'i1 ileil it to I"i.:t.r1111r1,2 tis impact:, On [I1,2 overall cultural Lutci ,r[,e:Incl t•h_tIiC1 1h,f•:itrrP;I_i:hay<Ilevll adegualelt 1Ttinilnictd Ln luiii;:at�d. .111, I l''[ I, ,tri,2,lli. i1:1.1 rlu s,lirn rlh,alr the lev,d *1' eon,:illl,lll,,rl tiir{r line:-1 a.,,wr,L1.1'It; in I;trinili .the,.. i i]I ,2I,Iintrll.liun 01 the project: 1111 Ther Iin,2,rC -1,2 ,2cndarlt a«t° su,2 11;111 bc.m gull .I n ;i ,,tl il% the Stale IIistorie I'r, cr,:+llo,l U,'•ir.il,ll I:..'1}'}ls cutcl r .,.,1,.rl in ilr: Burial .11....1t. l'l,ln: .,nd \lh rll4r ldiliiirn"II linaal 1 r,2nd:rstl .,.. ;: :In,l 1 H I'I 1,:1 _ :•,Iuirclnents hc,itl 1 he 1lrtrpotieci Lu 1111iigaLC tsl t1111111111•;C 111ViCCi 111111;k:(:-.•:',11 I ,,1.JI•all CLIIILintI Ilii >,2:q+,2. ;ipplieant, f Lwaii One Invesl1•rM. 1 i C 67-1+11. sin le-iatnily re,.iJlcnlral snhcfirr•ion and reLlled in11TT,.11',nt:nt: . n lhE ulyc,2l nr,I.rl,• h1 ,girder 1,', 1;i ill[ate this l,r,,110. c:J r_I_ ,2 Inhln_rIt" the. :,r,2 rcyueAing ih,2 li ll.11l111,7, imi._11l"1111,211[' to Chang,2 ul' erne l'Irrfrl,,u e o.ts`a N. .01)01 Il sc;,,ned the 11,{:15-aer •.uhl i i•r.;l+crl'. liH,iil an Agncultura1 5-acres (A-5a)to a Sinzie-1-"nnlily Residential-7.500 square Leel(RS-7.5).oned district: ■ A five (5)-year time extension to Condition E (Time to Secure Final Subdivision Approval);and WWA'.41I1I1111 ILI u.I4111V III LCWII it V.I ✓t* WNj CellaMV IA' ,NQW11 QJrvrnmilar,itereivac/I kugr nifarllgrittoliimiLwomtv,A. CIA for the Ld'ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 79 Appendix A [ieraIdine Bell,Chair i._'rtilntl'nI lla\ ai-i Cultural Resources Commission i .t F;amuck' Plunked \[a1 10.2022 Pa2e 2 ■ An amendment Condition K(Drainage Improvements)to allow for the option of bonding the drainage improvements or the use of other acceptable forms of surety in lieu of the construction of drainage improvements, prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. In addition. the applicant is regik2 ting :i nun In 0l c (5)-year time extension to Condition 4 (']'rine to Secure Final Subdivision ;1l,I+r.+r:iI 1 SNIA lI sa Permit No. 07-024. which was appiuvcd to allow the developmem ,+I a 65-rot, single-family residential subdivision and IC]ate(' improvements on the subiei:E 11rtl] 'rty". Based on the preceding and pm-snail! to kale 4-3t1). i_,HltnIission Review 01 'r!pr+sed Proiects uithilt the County of lImai-i o1'the CRC Rtil.•s Nracti,.., ,lid Pro,: :IiC reyutsting a com;altation with the CRC. To assist the CRC in llteir r ,i ;. we are ineludin a link to a folder containing the applicmion for iimendmenis. and :ircliacolo ical studies and apps )vols (e.g., .lrchaeological Inventoxv Survey,Archaeologi iI I)rii:, Pce.,s ,r,..Plan, Burial Treatment Plan,and SHPT?approval.acceptance letters). In addition, for context. we will include the Background arid. Director's Recommendation Reports that were provided to the LPC. 'Chose documents can be found at the following link:ltttps:Hrecords.hawaiicounlvgoviweblinkilrfoi'115940'RotAi'l.aspN Should you have any questions,please contact Christian Kay of this office at(80X)961-8136. Sincerely. eH 'a seem 2e4^,c sneer,:bray as 2012 11;07 NM ZENI)O KERN Planning Director CRK:jaa llmho llptamiin{gTubb e,wpwin60\i'Iaylplanning Cormni$,sinit.Niers",(..cRL'Hawtiioneinvnimenb7L1.Cfransmilini.c0c CC(via email): Daryn Arai,Land Use Planning Consultant 80 CIA for the LtPIpala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii Appendix A APPENDIX B. CRC RESPONSE LETTER TO THE LPC •Mitchell D.Roth o <y os� • '•'�.'• Geraldine Bell.Chair A,-ayor I" Natalie Kurashinra,Vice Chair � T t1 Matthew Clark = Kilotiana Hirano Roberta`'Ku'ulei"Keakealani Kealohamrioptu a Kinney- Nicole Lui County of Hawaii Scott Mahoney PLANNING DEPARTMENT Aaron Spielman CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Aupui i Center • 101Pauahi Street,Suite 3 • Hilo,Hawai`i 96720 Phone(808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742 June 16,2022 Zendo Kern,Director Hawai`i County Planning Department 10] Pauahi St#3 Hilo,HI 96720 Leeward Planning Commission Hawai`i County Planning Department 101 Pauahi St#3 Hilo,H196720 Dear Mr. Kern and the Leeward Planning Commission, SUBJECT: The Cultural Resources Commission's response to the Leeward Planning Commission's request for consultation related to Hawaii Onel Investors— LLC's request to amend Change of Zone Ordinance No.09-8 and Special Management Area Use Permit No.07-024 related to the development of a proposed 65-lot,single-family residential subdivision at parcel(3)7-7-008:121, Pahoehne 1st,Kapala`alaea2nd,North Kona,Hawaii. FILE: PL-INT-2022-002432 On June 8,2022,the Hawai`i County Cultural Resources Commission(CRC)held an official meeting according to the provisions of Chapters 91 and 92 Hawai`i Revised Statutes and Chapter 2, Article 44 of the Hawai`i County Code,to deliberate the subject request for consultation from the Leeward Planning Commission(LPC)_This meeting,and in preparation thereof,allowed the CRC the opportunity to review written and oral testimony from the public,review the subject permit request and due diligence documents,and to hear from and question Hawaii Onel _Investors LLC representatives. Upon this deliberation,the CRC moved to recommend that the developer perform additional consultations with lineal and cultural descendants from the proposed parcel and neighboring ahupra'a,The motion was approved by unanimous vote.After the vote,Commissioner Ku`ulei Keakealani asked that consideration be made regarding concerns mentioned in public testimony. These were namely,impacts of traffic,water usage,infrastructure, roadways, and remant nature of cultural resources in the area, as well as impact to the site and place. www.cohpinmingdepecon Hawai`t County is anEqual OpporrunioTrowder dE'mployer pl.nning@co.hawaii.lhi.us CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 81 Appendix A Mr,Zendo Kern,Director;and Leeward Planning Commission Hawai`i County Planning Department Page 2 June 16,2022 As Chair,I am including Commissioner Keakealani's additional comments herein,although the commission did not vote on it. If you have any questions concerning this response from the CRC,please contact Kamuela Plunkett at kamuela.plunkett@hawaiicounty.gov. Mahalo, r3 Geraldine Bell Cultural Resources Commission Chair KP:kit \\COI301\planning\publiclwpwin60\Cultural_Resources_Conunission\ProiectslHawaii Onel Investors Change of Zone&SMA USE IMK 77008121\2022-06-16 CRC LETTER TO LPC via PI,ANNINC3 IDIRECTOR.doc Cc: Daryn Arai—daryn,Arai@outlook.com Christian Kay—christian.kay@hawaiicounty.gov 82 CIA for the Ld'ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapala`alaea 2,North Kona,Hawai i Appendix A APPENDIX C. KA WAI OLA PUBLIC NOTICE of CAL. ASM lLILlir pact for proposed ,....rmala Pi;A rifled project located in the Kapaia'al.aea 2nd .Ahupua'a., Nortli Kon.7. Dis7riet,. Island of I I:iv:al.-1. tie Ai.... roject kid es wiL roughly 11.4 Tax Map Key 1:"1"MK ;J:")S:1?C. is i cc f Lur.a"iina 'ii ,Liihlood 7.ina) 2nd.. AS} k r:formarion about 7esources ind or proeet J.nd or ongoilv that have or the is also seeldr..,!., prevc...o. on L.u.c..n-aftii V2Lied resourci.. CI.Li roman. 7 : have aid s.re any ,itch Lopos, Ing CIA for the Ld'Ipala Makai Planned Unit Development,Kapalacalaea 2,North Kona,Hawaii 83