Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-10-13 KCDP Meeting Packet County of Hawai‘i KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaiʻi 96720 (808) 961-8288 • Fax (808) 961-8742 C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D. Mayor John Pelletier, Chair Raymond Kirchner Vacant Shane Palacat-Nelsen Charles Young Nancy Pisicchio, Vice Chair Charla Thompson Vacant Roselyn Molina NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of the following matters to be considered by the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) Action Committee (AC) in accordance with the provisions of Sections 92-3.7 and 92-7, Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (HRS). This meeting will be held in person at the location listed in this notice and by Interactive Conference Technology (ICT) through Zoom. DATE: Tuesday, October 13, 2026 TIME: 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m. LOCATION: West Hawaiʻi Civic Center, B2 Conference Room 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 ZOOM: https://www.zoomgov.com/meeting/register/v2QZv267SAOLYOBfYvlKIA INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE TECHNOLOGY (ICT): A meeting held by ICT shall be automatically recessed for up to 30 minutes to restore communication when audiovisual communication cannot be maintained with all members participating in the meeting or with the in-person location identified in this notice. The meeting may reconvene when either audiovisual communication is restored, or audio-only communication is established after an unsuccessful attempt to restore audiovisual communication. If it is not possible to reconvene the meeting as provided in this subsection within 30 minutes after an interruption to communication, the meeting will be automatically terminated. PUBLIC TESTIMONY: The public may provide oral testimony at the meeting by joining Zoom or attending in-person at the physical location listed above. Although not required, to register in advance for oral testimony please contact staff at CDP@hawaiicounty.gov or (808) 961-8288. Interested persons who want to provide oral testimony may do so either at the time the committee takes public statements on the agenda, or at the time the specific agenda item is called. Please note that public testimony may be limited to three (3) minutes in length per agenda item. Although not required, to ensure timely delivery of written testimony to committee members, it is requested that written testimony be submitted by 4:30 p.m. at least two business days prior to the meeting via email to CDP@hawaiicounty.gov. Please specify the agenda item for which written testimony is being submitted. All written testimony will be a part of the public record and may be submitted by email or hard copy. Hard copy submissions should include one original and nine copies. 2 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The AC will consider approving the draft minutes from the September 8, 2026 meeting. III. PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON AGENDA ITEMS: Pursuant to Section 92-3, HRS, interested persons may provide oral testimony either at this time or when the applicable agenda item is called. IV. THIRD-PARTY REPORTS; GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS: The AC may receive and discuss information from third-party reports by any government official not included in a publicly noticed agenda. The AC may only make decisions on matters originally raised by third-party reports from any government official at a later meeting, where the agenda provides notice of decision-making on the matter. V. BUSINESS 1. Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Presentation: Presentation by Bethany Morrison, Long Range Planning Division Manager, on the KOSN project and Final Report completed in January 2026, including an overview of the project, planning process, and recommendations in the Final Report. 2. KOSN Subcommittee Report and Recommendations: Kari Kimura, Chair of the KOSN Subcommittee, will present the Subcommittee’s report and recommendations regarding the KOSN project and Final Report. 3. KOSN Plan Discussion and Action: The AC will discuss the KOSN Final Report and the KOSN Subcommittee’s findings and recommendations and may take action regarding the KOSN Plan, including (1) recommending transmittal of the KOSN Plan to the Hawaiʻi County Council for its consideration; (2) considering and taking action on the KOSN Subcommittee Report and recommendations; (3) considering a letter to the Planning Director stating the AC’s position on the Subcommittee Report and recommendations; and (4) making recommendations to the Planning Department regarding a process for considering future amendments or updates to the KOSN Plan. VI. PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA VII. PROPOSED NEW BUSINESS: The AC will discuss potential agenda items for future meetings. VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS • Arborist Advisory Committee Update • Bill 147 Update • Apply for the Kona CDP Action Committee through the Mayor’s office website at: https://www.hawaiicounty.gov/our-county/boards-and-commissions • The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, November 10, 2026 IX. ADJOURNMENT 3 NOTICE: This agenda and all related documents are available in the Planning Department’s Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee folder via the County of Hawaiʻi Public Documents Repository: https://records.hawaiicounty.gov/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=9059&dbid=1&repo=PublicDocuments These documents may also be requested from the Planning Department by calling (808) 961-8288 or emailing CDP@hawaiicounty.gov. The recorded video of this meeting will be uploaded to the Planning Department’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@cohplanningdepartment A person desiring to submit oral or written testimony shall indicate their name and whether the testimony is on their behalf or as a representative of an organization or individual. Anyone who requires an auxiliary aid or service, other reasonable modification, or language interpretation to access this meeting please contact the Planning Department at (808) 961-8288 or CDP@hawaiicounty.gov as soon as possible, to arrange for accommodations. If a response is received after the five-business days deadline, we will try to obtain the auxiliary aid/service or accommodation, but we cannot guarantee that the request will be fulfilled. “Other reasonable modification” refers to communication methods or devices for people with disabilities who are mentally and/or physically challenged. Upon request, this notice is available in alternate formats such as large print, Braille, or electronic copy. If you are a lobbyist, you must register with the Hawai‘i County Clerk within five days of becoming a lobbyist. (Article 15, Section 2-91.3(b), Hawai‘i County Code). A lobbyist means, “any individual engaged for pay or other consideration who spends more than five hours in any month or $275 in any six-month period for the purpose of attempting to influence legislative or administrative action by communicating or urging others to communicate with public officials.” (Article 15, Section 2-91.3(a)(6), Hawai‘i County Code). Registration forms and expenditure report documents are available at the Office of the County Clerk-Council, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720. Meeting Packet QR Code: KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE JOHN PELLETIER, Chair KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1 ACTION COMMITTEE 2 COUNTY OF HAWAIʻI 3 DRAFT MINUTES 4 September 8, 2026 5 Call to Order 6 Chair John Pelletier called the meeting of the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) 7 Action Committee (AC) to order at 12:03 p.m. The meeting was held in person at the West 8 Hawaiʻi Civic Center – B2 Conference Room and online via the Zoom platform. 9 The full YouTube video of this meeting can be found here: 10 https://youtu.be/iaswyrxM0d4?si=NT4drYQu_x8yrygl 11 Roll Call 12 Members Present (in person): 13 • John Pelletier, Chair 14 • Nancy Pisicchio, Vice Chair 15 • Charles Young 16 • Raymond “RJ” Kirchner 17 • Charla Thompson 18 Members Present (via Zoom): Shane Palacat-Nelsen (arrived at 12:16 p.m.) 19 Members Absent: Roselyn Molina 20 Planning Department Staff Present: 21 • Janice Hata 22 • Kawelo Kalili 23 • Jessica Lahip (via Zoom) 24 There were approximately four members of the public in attendance. 25 Approval of Minutes 26 At approximately 12:06 p.m., the Committee considered the July 14, 2026 draft meeting 27 minutes. Committee Member Kirchner moved to approve the minutes and Committee 28 Member Young seconded the motion. There being no corrections or discussion, the 29 motion passed unanimously. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 03:12] 30 Public Testimony on Agenda Items 31 Chair Pelletier called for public testimony on agenda items at approximately 12:06 p.m. 32 Sue Aronson provided a brief update from the Mayor’s West Hawaiʻi wastewater task force, 33 including discussion of Kealakehe wastewater planning, a potential land exchange 34 KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE Minutes of September 8, 2026 2 involving Department of Hawaiian Home Lands property, archaeological considerations, 35 and the R-1 upgrade. Jeff Zimpfer of the National Park Service stated that the Kaloko-36 Honokōhau visitor center currently relies on a holding tank and that the Park Service is 37 interested in connecting to the nearby public sewer system. No additional testimony was 38 offered at that time. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 03:40] 39 Third-Party Reports; Government Officials 40 Pursuant to Hawaiʻi Senate Bill 405 (2025), signed into law as Act 72, the AC may receive 41 and discuss information from third-party reports by any government official not included 42 in the publicly noticed agenda, but may not make decisions on matters raised through 43 such reports until a later meeting with proper notice. 44 Chair Pelletier called for third-party reports from government officials. No third-party 45 reports were presented. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 05:55] 46 Business 47 1. Kona Community Development Plan Review and Evaluation: Discussion and 48 possible action regarding the AC’s duties under Chapter 16 of the Hawaiʻi County 49 Code to monitor the progress and effectiveness of the Kona CDP and consider the 50 need for amendments. The AC will discuss undertaking a chapter-by-chapter review 51 of the CDP as a framework for fulfilling these responsibilities, utilizing the 52 Implementation Matrix included in Chapter 5 (Action Plan). Discussion may include 53 evaluating implementation of the Action Plan, reviewing progress toward achieving the 54 Kona CDP’s Guiding Principles and objectives, identifying changing conditions or 55 emerging issues affecting the Plan, and establishing a process for identifying 56 recommendations. 57 This item was called to order at approximately 12:09 p.m. No public testimony was 58 provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 06:20] 59 Vice Chair Pisicchio presented a proposed framework for beginning a structured 60 review of the Kona CDP. She recommended starting in November, placing the review 61 on each monthly agenda, and generally limiting discussion to approximately 30 62 minutes so other Committee business could continue. She proposed using the 63 Chapter 5 implementation matrix as the principal framework because it summarizes 64 CDP goals, policies, actions, responsible parties, and implementation responsibilities. 65 [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 07:59] 66 Vice Chair Pisicchio suggested a template worksheet of the Implementation Matrix 67 could help AC members go through the review of the actions and see the various 68 agencies that are assigned to lead the work. The proposed outcomes included 69 reacquainting Committee members and the public with the 2008 Kona CDP; 70 identifying near-term implementation opportunities; preparing a summary “report 71 card” on implementation, accomplishments, challenges, and unfulfilled actions; 72 KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE Minutes of September 8, 2026 3 identifying potential amendments; and considering improvements to the CDP 73 program. Committee Member Kirchner emphasized that Chapter 6 also calls for an 74 annual report card and requested that the framework contemplate continuing annual 75 reporting. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 11:04] 76 Committee Member Kirchner recommended that the AC incorporate an annual report 77 card into the review plan and publish it each year for public review. [SEE YOUTUBE 78 TIMESTAMP 12:34] 79 Committee members generally supported the framework and discussed the 80 importance of keeping the effort manageable, maintaining continuity beyond the 81 current Committee membership, improving accountability among agencies assigned 82 implementation responsibilities, identifying priorities, and using the review to invite 83 responsible agencies to explain implementation status. Members also expressed hope 84 that the process would renew public interest and participation in the Kona CDP. [SEE 85 YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 15:30] 86 Vice Chair Pisicchio moved to approve the proposed framework for beginning a 87 structured review of the Kona CDP, including the discussed annual-reporting concept, 88 and to begin placing the review on the agenda starting in November. Committee 89 Member Kirchner seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. [SEE 90 YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 22:49] 91 This item concluded at approximately 12:26 p.m. 92 2. Formal Request to the Department of Environmental Management on the 93 Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant: Discussion regarding the status of the 94 Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant, including its ability to serve existing and future 95 development. The AC may consider potential action, including requesting that the 96 Director of the Department of Environmental Management provide an update at a 97 future meeting on the facility’s treatment capacity, planned expansion efforts, and 98 considerations for serving nearby projects, including the proposed new medical facility 99 in Kona. 100 This item was called to order at approximately 12:27 p.m. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 101 23:29] 102 Committee Member Kirchner proposed inviting the Department of Environmental 103 Management (DEM) Director to a future meeting to discuss the Kealakehe facility, 104 including treatment and environmental compliance, service area expansion, the 105 Kealakehe Regional Park, the proposed Kona hospital complex, public sewer 106 expansion, and conversion of cesspools. Discussion emphasized the relationship 107 between wastewater infrastructure and major community facilities, environmental 108 protection, and the proliferation of private treatment systems. [SEE YOUTUBE 109 TIMESTAMP 24:15] 110 KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE Minutes of September 8, 2026 4 Committee members and public participants discussed prior plans for reclaimed water 111 use, lift station infrastructure, financing constraints, nature-based treatment concepts, 112 and the need to understand funding options for wastewater improvements. Vice Chair 113 Pisicchio noted that a Kona CDP public facilities financing plan had been prepared 114 around 2010-2011 and suggested staff attempt to locate and distribute it for possible 115 future discussion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 25:30] 116 Committee Member Kirchner moved to transmit a letter inviting the DEM Director to 117 provide an update. Vice Chair Pisicchio seconded the motion. During discussion, staff 118 suggested strengthening the letter by citing applicable Kona CDP wastewater policies, 119 objectives, actions, and assigned implementation responsibilities. The Committee 120 agreed that staff could incorporate those references and that the Mayor and Planning 121 Director should be copied. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 30:41] 122 The motion to send the letter, as discussed and refined, passed unanimously. [SEE 123 YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 51:06] 124 This item concluded at approximately 12:54 p.m. 125 3. Community Development Plan References for Committee Recommendations: 126 Discussion and possible action regarding a proposal to reference applicable goals, 127 policies, actions, or implementation measures from the Kona CDP when developing 128 AC recommendations, correspondence, and testimony related to matters within the 129 AC’s advisory responsibilities. 130 This item was called to order at approximately 12:55 p.m. No public testimony was 131 provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 51:38] 132 Committee Member Kirchner explained that Action Committee recommendations 133 should be clearly tied to the Kona CDP so the public and decision-makers understand 134 the basis for the AC’s involvement. Members agreed that citing specific CDP provisions 135 strengthens the credibility and authority of AC correspondence and helps keep the 136 Committee focused on its advisory responsibilities. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 137 52:20] 138 Members noted that the AC already uses this approach in many instances, including 139 its prior Bill 147 testimony. The Committee reached general agreement to continue 140 consistently referencing applicable CDP provisions in future recommendations and 141 correspondence. No motion was made and no formal action was taken. [SEE 142 YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 52:51] 143 This item concluded at approximately 12:59 p.m. 144 4. Committee Testimony Regarding Bill 147: Discussion and possible action regarding 145 Bill 147, including an update on the bill’s status, consideration of AC testimony, and 146 authorization for a designated AC member to present testimony on behalf of the 147 KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE Minutes of September 8, 2026 5 Committee at future Hawaiʻi County Council or Council Committee meetings, 148 consistent with any position adopted by the AC. 149 This item was called to order at approximately 1:00 p.m. No public testimony was 150 provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 56:55] 151 Chair Pelletier summarized recent action on Bill 147 relating to transient 152 accommodations. He reported that the Planning Commissions had recommended 153 excluding Multiple-Family Residential (RM) and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) 154 zoning districts from areas where unhosted vacation rentals would be allowed, 155 consistent with recommendations previously advanced by the AC. He also noted 156 testimony from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs supporting related concerns. The County 157 Council Policy Committee on Planning, Land Use, and Economic Development had 158 postponed further consideration to September 15, 2026. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 159 57:45] 160 Because the Council’s meeting cycle can occur more frequently than the AC’s monthly 161 meetings, Chair Pelletier requested authorization to present oral testimony on behalf 162 of the Committee at upcoming meetings, limited to the positions previously adopted 163 by the AC. Committee Member Kirchner moved to authorize the Chair to represent the 164 Committee’s position on Bill 147, and Committee Member Young seconded the 165 motion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:01:17] 166 The motion passed unanimously. Chair Pelletier stated that he would continue 167 updating the Committee on the bill’s progress. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:04:26] 168 This item concluded at approximately 1:07 p.m. 169 Public Testimony on Matters Not on the Agenda 170 Chair Pelletier called for public testimony on matters not on the agenda at approximately 171 1:08 p.m. No testimony was provided at that time. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:04:57] 172 Proposed New Business 173 Committee Member Kirchner proposed a future agenda item to develop a process for the 174 Chapter 6 annual report card called for in the Kona CDP. Members discussed the 175 distinction between the Chapter 5 implementation review approved earlier in the meeting 176 and the broader Chapter 6 indicators and reporting process. Several members expressed 177 support for eventually addressing Chapter 6 but preferred first gaining experience with 178 the Chapter 5 review. A motion to place the Chapter 6 item on the November agenda did 179 not pass. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:05:38] 180 Committee Member Thompson requested follow-up related to the next Tree City USA 181 application, including the annual mayoral proclamation and Parks and Recreation budget 182 information. Staff agreed to assist with agency contacts. Members also discussed 183 KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE Minutes of September 8, 2026 6 continuing to monitor Bill 147 and following up on previously transmitted letters to the 184 Department of Water Supply and Department of Public Works. [SEE YOUTUBE 185 TIMESTAMP 01:18:42] 186 Announcements 187 Chair Pelletier called for announcements at approximately 1:25 p.m. 188 Committee Member Thompson and Vice Chair Pisicchio summarized their participation 189 in an Arborist Advisory Committee meeting regarding Tree City USA and broader 190 community tree planning. Discussion included the potential expansion of the Arborist 191 Advisory Committee’s role, the value of a County arborist position, tree maintenance 192 standards, and the importance of urban trees for shade, flood mitigation, and community 193 infrastructure. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:22:36] 194 Chair Pelletier summarized guidance from Corporation Counsel concerning AC meeting 195 procedures. He stated that the Action Committees operate under modified parliamentary 196 procedures and may allow a more flexible exchange with the public, while still ensuring 197 required opportunities for public testimony and maintaining the Chair’s responsibility to 198 keep discussion orderly and on topic. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:30:40] 199 The Planning Department announced that applications continue to be accepted for the 200 Kona CDP Action Committee through the Mayor’s Office Boards and Commissions 201 process. The next meeting was announced for Tuesday, October 13, 2026. [SEE 202 YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:32:23] 203 Committee Member Young reported on a recent State Department of Land and Natural 204 Resources hearing regarding aquarium fish collecting in West Hawaiʻi and discussed the 205 value of coordinated County and State advocacy. Committee Member Palacat-Nelsen 206 similarly emphasized the importance of creating avenues for County community 207 perspectives to be heard at the State level. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:32:42] 208 The Zoom meeting connection was briefly disrupted at approximately 1:30 p.m. [SEE 209 YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:36:15] 210 Randy Botti, attending from the B2 Conference Room, introduced himself and expressed 211 interest in becoming more involved in Kona community planning efforts, particularly the 212 Kona Open Space Network and shoreline access. Chair Pelletier encouraged Mr. Botti 213 and other interested residents to consider applying to serve on the Action Committee. 214 [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:39:53] 215 Adjournment 216 Chair Pelletier adjourned the meeting at approximately 1:48 p.m. [SEE YOUTUBE 217 TIMESTAMP 01:45:00] 218 KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE Minutes of September 8, 2026 7 These minutes and all related documents are available in the Planning Department’s Kona 219 Community Development Plan Action Committee folder via the County of Hawaiʻi Public 220 Documents Repository. These documents may also be requested from the Planning 221 Department by calling (808) 961-8288 or emailing CDP@hawaiicounty.gov. 222 To: Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP) Action Committee From: Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Subcommittee Re: Adopting and Implementing the Kona Open Space Network Plan The KOSN Subcommittee, which has been involved in the Kona Open Space Network planning effort for over ten years, is very grateful for the County’s support in developing this vital, high-priority plan for our community. The Jacobs’ Kona Open Space Network report you are receiving, covers the benefits, development methodology, open space network maps and proposed improvements for this network. With this communication, we are formally submitting our favorable recommendation for the adoption of the KOSN plan. As the KCDP Action Committee helps to shepherd this plan towards formal adoption and implementation, we humbly offer the following input. Please keep in mind that the Kona Open Space Network plan provides an initial foundation and framework for an enhanced and safer open space network for walking and biking throughout the Kona urban area. It is meant to be an adaptive, dynamic plan intended to evolve as Kona evolves utilizing ongoing community input. Concurrent with adoption of this plan, a process for amending this plan needs to be proposed and adopted. Strong involvement by the Kona community is essential for identifying highly desired amendments to the open space network. The community could bring these proposals to KCDP Action Committee meetings for public discussion. Widely supported proposed amendments could then be periodically recommended by the KCDP Action Committee to the County Planning Department. The County Council and Planning Department Director will need to determine the appropriate approval authority for these recommended amendments. To gain traction in implementing this plan and being mindful of current County financial constraints, the KOSN Subcommittee developed a list of specific, doable near-term projects which will improve connectivity and safety in the open space network. Other longer-term projects are also included which would greatly enhance open space connections for walking and biking throughout the Kona urban community. These proposed improvements can all be found in the Jacobs’ report. We are prepared to share our thoughts with you on prioritizing several projects for initial implementation when we meet with you to discuss the KOSN plan (please see Attachment 1). This discussion should be helpful for the KCDP Action Committee in developing recommendations to the County on Kona community priorities for consideration in the County budget and PONC process. We look forward to meeting with you to discuss all of this and answer any questions you may have. Sincerely and on behalf of the KOSN Subcommittee, Kari Kimura, Chair Communication No. 2026-14 Attachment 1 Prioritized KOSN Improvement Projects for Initial Implementation Consideration The following improvement projects are doable and would help gain traction and community excitement in the initial implementation of the KOSN plan: 1. Puhi Springs parcel (TMK 750060010000) PONC acquisition (project P-36) 2. La’aloa-Walua Trail Connector (project P-39) 3. Pier to Brewery Block Corridor (project P-32) 4. Kealakehe Parkway Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane (project P-18) Additionally, there are two long-term projects that could be phased in over time and begun initially by establishing maintained firebreaks that will improve the emergency resilience of the Kona urban area. Former HFD Chief Kazuo Todd attended one of the early Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) planning meetings held on 1/11/2024. Chief Todd encouraged the KOSN planning team to identify opportunities during our investigations which would improve the emergency resilience of the Kona urban area. The planning team has identified two such opportunities that the County owns which could become important permanent fire breaks for adjacent subdivisions and provide access for the HFD during emergencies. Both of these locations are currently overgrown with nonnative vegetation that could restrict HFD access for firefighting and contribute fuels to any fire which may occur in those areas. One of the locations is also adjacent to a busy highway, and historical research has shown a majority of wildfires in Hawaii occur along highways. The two locations identified are: 5. The Ali’i Drive Bypass ROW, especially the segments adjacent to subdivisions (see KOSN projects P-20 and P-23) 6. The segment of the old Kailua - Keauhou Middle Road north of Lako Street to the highway (portions of this old road became part of the Walua Trail). We recommend that these emergency resilience opportunities be brought to the attention of the proper County authorities, in honor and memory of Chief Kazuo Todd. THIRD DRAFT KOSN RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Kona Community Development Plan was adopted by ordinance in 2008. WHEREAS, the Environmental Resources chapter, Objective ENV-2, called for developing an Open Space Network. Action ENV–2.1a directed the County of Hawaiʻi to budget for and hire a consultant to prepare the Open Space Network Program. WHEREAS, the Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee, along with its Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) subcommittee, has guided this project’s progress over the years. Since 2015, the KOSN subcommittee has defined the plan’s vision and goals and helped shape the project’s scope. WHEREAS, the County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department initiated the Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Plan project, with Jacobs Engineering Group as the primary consulting firm. From 2023 to 2025, the Plan was developed with lead consultant Jacobs Engineering Group through community workshops and GIS mapping. WHEREAS, on October 13, 2026, the Kona Open Space Network subcommittee presented its Final Report to the Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee. In its Report, the KOSN subcommittee submitted its favorable recommendation to adopt the KOSN Plan. WHEREAS, on October 13, 2026, the KCDP Action Committee voted to forward the KOSN Plan to the Hawaiʻi County Council with a favorable recommendation for approval, and requested that the Planning Director forward the Kona Open Space Network Plan to the Hawaiʻi County Council. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII, that the Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Plan is a community-driven initiative under the Kona Community Development Plan designed to connect public parks, neighborhoods, and historic sites while preserving vital green spaces. The KOSN Plan establishes an integrated network of hubs and links. This network elevates open space to the level of essential infrastructure. THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, concurrent with adoption of this plan, the County Council establishes the following process for reviewing and recommending amendments to the Kona Open Space Network Plan. As provided by HCC Chapter 16, Section 16-6, the CDP Action Committee is directed to: (1)Provide ongoing guidance and advocacy to advance implementation of the CDP goals, objectives, policies, and actions; Communication No. 2026-15 THIRD DRAFT KOSN RESOLUTION Proposals to amend the Kona Open Space Network as identified in the Illustrative Plan (Figures 1-5 in Chapter 3) or the KOSN Projects Summary Table (Chapter 4) shall be placed on the Kona CDP Action Committee agenda for public discussion and recommendations. The KCDP Action Committee may then submit recommendations regarding proposed amendments to the County Planning Director to be forwarded to the County Council. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the County Clerk shall transmit a copy of this resolution to Director Jeffrey Darrow, Department of Planning Kona Open Space Network Nishimura, Kristen [COMPANY NAME] [Company address] January 2026 Communication No. 2026-16 with gratitude to HACBED and Cultural Surveys Hawaii for their contributions to this eƯort i Preface The Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) emerges from a broad community vision to strengthen the relationship between Kona’s people, landscapes, and cultural heritage. Rooted in decades of work carried forward through the Kona Community Development Plan (Kona CDP), the KOSN affirms that open space is not only non- or low-developed land, but also essential community infrastructure that supports health, cultural continuity, mobility, climate resilience, and long-term quality of life. Throughout the planning process, community members emphasized that Kona’s open spaces carry meaning. They are places of cultural practice, learning, recreation, stewardship, and gathering. They include trails that trace ancestral movement, shoreline areas central to subsistence and ceremony, dryland forests that support rare ecosystems, and neighborhood parks where families connect and play. These places form the backbone of Kona’s identity and the foundation upon which future generations will continue to build community. The KOSN builds on these foundations to outline a coordinated, interconnected system of hubs—places of natural, cultural, social, or recreational significance—and linkages that connect them, including trails, shoreline access routes, greenways, and mauka–makai pathways. Together, these elements create a resilient open-space structure that reflects Kona’s unique physical landscape and cultural values. The framework presented in this report draws from years of dialogue, planning, cultural consultation, field observations, geographic information system (GIS) analysis, and community engagement. It incorporates perspectives from kūpuna, cultural practitioners, community volunteers, County of Hawai‘i (County) staff, landowners, and agency partners. Their insights reinforced several guiding imperatives: preserve and enhance shoreline access, maintain cultural integrity, protect sensitive ecological areas, support safe multimodal travel, and promote compact, livable communities surrounded by accessible open space. The KOSN is a dynamic plan designed to grow and adapt alongside Kona’s evolving needs. It is intended to guide public investment, support stewardship partnerships, and inform land-use decision-making for decades to come. More importantly, it represents a collective commitment to honor Kona’s past, care for its present, and safeguard its natural and cultural landscapes for future generations. ii Executive Summary The Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) is a community-driven framework that strengthens the connections between Kona’s people, cultural landscapes, and natural systems. It reflects nearly two decades of visioning, planning, and public engagement rooted in the Kona Community Development Plan (Kona CDP), which called for a coordinated system of open spaces, shoreline access, trails, parks, cultural sites, and multimodal corridors that support healthy, resilient, and connected communities (County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department 2019). The KOSN establishes an integrated network of hubs (significant natural, cultural, recreational, and community sites) and linkages (the trails, greenways, multimodal paths, and mauka–makai corridors that connect them). This network elevates open space to the level of essential infrastructure, supporting mobility, cultural stewardship, climate resilience, recreation, and daily community life. The KOSN plan outlines the physical structure of this network, identifies priority projects, and provides an implementation roadmap that aligns County of Hawai‘i (County), state, and federal initiatives. Developed through extensive workshops, geographic information system (GIS) analysis, field verification, and collaboration with cultural practitioners and community members, the KOSN plan translates local knowledge and values into a practical, long-term strategy for enhancing access, protecting resources, and improving quality of life. Key outcomes of the KOSN include the following: • A cohesive system of hubs and linkages connecting shoreline parks, historic trails, neighborhoods, schools, cultural sites, and upland landscapes • More than 20 miles of proposed multimodal improvements, including greenway- style corridors and enhanced pedestrian and bicycle routes • Strengthened mauka–makai connections reestablishing historic and cultural pathways from upland neighborhoods to coastal gathering places • Critical cultural and ecological protections, supporting wahi pana (storied places), anchialine ponds, dryland forest areas, and sensitive shoreline sites • Strategic open-space acquisition opportunities, including Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PONC)-eligible parcels that expand public access and safeguard cultural landscapes iii • A multi-decade implementation plan detailing governance, funding tools, partnerships, stewardship strategies, and risk-management structures The KOSN is designed to be adaptive, evolving with community needs and environmental conditions. It complements the General Plan (County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department 2005), the Kona CDP, the County’s multimodal transportation objectives (County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department 2022), and ongoing state and federal initiatives such as the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail, Na Ala Hele, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) resilience programs, and State of Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) conservation strategies. By establishing clear priorities and creating a shared framework for decision-making, the KOSN positions Kona to protect its most cherished resources while improving access, safety, and resilience for generations to come. The network embodies a vision of a Kona where open space is abundant, culturally grounded, ecologically healthy, and easily accessible—supporting a thriving, connected, and resilient community. Picture 1. Kamakahonu/Ahuʻena Heiau iv Acknowledgments The Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) reflects the dedication, knowledge, and care of many individuals and organizations who contributed their time, expertise, and aloha throughout the planning process. This effort would not have been possible without the commitment of community members who have stewarded Kona’s landscapes for generations and who continue to advocate for safe access, cultural integrity, and environmental resilience. Picture 2. KOSN Subcommittee Members (L-R): Nancy Pisicchio, Lele Kimball, Mary Metcalf, Janice Glennie-Palma, Kari Kimura. Far left: Shirley David v The County of Hawai‘i Planning Department provided project leadership, coordination, and guidance, ensuring the KOSN remained grounded in community values and aligned with broader County goals for mobility, cultural preservation, and climate resilience. The Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) Action Committee and KOSN Subcommittee played a central role in defining the project vision, reviewing draft materials, assisting with engagement, and ensuring continuity with decades of community planning. Their long-standing dedication to Kona’s open spaces is reflected throughout this report. Cultural practitioners, kūpuna, and community leaders generously shared their ʻike, histories, and place-based knowledge. Their insights helped shape how the network honors wahi pana, preserves cultural landscapes, and restores traditional mauka–makai connections. Partner agencies and organizations, including the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), State of Hawai‘i Department of Transportation (HDOT), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and Na Ala Hele Trail and Access Program, provided technical guidance and helped ensure alignment with state and federal resource management frameworks. Schools, nonprofit organizations, land trusts, environmental groups, and local volunteer organizations contributed hands-on observations, stewardship perspectives, and community priorities that strengthened the KOSN’s relevance and feasibility. Finally, we extend appreciation to the residents of Kona, who participated in open houses, workshops, surveys, and mapping exercises. Their stories, experiences, and aspirations shaped every aspect of the KOSN and reaffirmed that Kona’s open spaces are deeply valued, widely used, and essential to community life. This KOSN plan belongs to all who envision a Kona where cultural heritage is honored, natural landscapes are protected, and communities are connected through a resilient and accessible open-space network. vi Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) 1. What is the Kona Open Space Network (KOSN)? The KOSN is a coordinated system of parks, trails, cultural sites, shoreline access, natural resources, and community spaces woven together through hubs and linkages. Its purpose is to make Kona safer and more connected, culturally grounded, and environmentally resilient. 2. Why is open space important in Kona? Open spaces support health, cultural practice, mobility, recreation, ecological resilience, and quality of life. In Kona, they also reflect traditional Hawaiian land-relationships, such as mauka–makai stewardship. 3. What does the KOSN actually do? The KOSN does the following: • Identifies important natural, cultural, recreational, and civic places (that is, hubs) • Connects them through safe trails, shoreline routes, and multimodal corridors (linkages) • Highlights opportunities for safer walking and biking, cultural stewardship, shoreline access, ecological protection, and community gathering spaces • Provides a framework for future investments over decades 4. Does this plan change how I use my property? The KOSN is a conceptual plan, not a regulatory document. It does not impose new zoning or land-use restrictions. Proposed linkages rely on existing public roads, public easements, or potential future acquisitions, not new regulations on private land. 5. Is the KOSN a construction plan? No, the KOSN is not a construction plan. The Illustrative Plan, which consists of a set of conceptual design maps, was developed to help the community visualize the existing open space network and potential future improvements. These maps present ideas and concepts rather than detailed engineering drawings. Decisions about construction, such as where, when, and how projects will be built, occur later through the County’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP), ongoing community review, and coordination with partner agencies. vii 6. How was the community involved? KOSN development included more than 2 years of engagement, as follows: • Public open houses • Workshops with the Action Committee and KOSN Subcommittee • Community walk-throughs • Review of draft concepts • Cultural practitioner consultation Local knowledge significantly shaped the hubs, trail routes, shoreline connections, and cultural stewardship strategies. 7. What are hubs and linkages? Hubs are important places such as parks, cultural sites, fishponds, trailheads, civic spaces, schools, and shoreline areas. Linkages are connections such as trails, sidewalks, multimodal corridors, mauka–makai paths, and greenways. Together, they form an interconnected open-space system that supports movement, cultural practice, recreation, and ecological function. 8. Will culturally sensitive sites be opened to the public? Some areas require managed access, protection, or continued confidentiality. Their inclusion in planning ensures proper stewardship, not increased visitation. Cultural practitioners guided many of these decisions. 9. What areas of Kona does the KOSN cover? The network spans from Kohanaiki to Keauhou Bay, organized into the following five subareas: 1. North Kona 2. Central Kona 3. Kailua-Kona Urban Core 4. Mid-Ali‘i Drive Corridor 5. South Kona/Keauhou Each subarea has unique hubs, linkages, and opportunities. viii 10. What kinds of improvements are included? The KOSN plan includes the following: • Safer pedestrian and bicycle connections • Shoreline access improvements • Mauka–makai linkages • Neighborhood trail connections • Greenway-style corridors • Cultural site stewardship • Opportunities for open-space acquisition (for example, Puhi Springs) 11. How will these improvements be funded? Future projects may use the following: • County CIP • Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PONC) acquisitions • State programs (DLNR, HDOT, Na Ala Hele) • Federal grants (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA], FEMA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA], NPS) • Partnerships with nonprofits, landowners, schools, and volunteer groups 12. Who is responsible for implementing the KOSN? The following coordinated structure is recommended: • County Implementation Team (Planning, Department of Public Works [DPW], Department of Parks and Recreation [DPR]): Leads project delivery • Technical Advisory Group: Made up of cultural, environmental, and agency partners • Community Stewardship Network: Supports maintenance and cultural care • County Council and Mayor: Provides oversight and funding approval 13. Will this plan reduce traffic? By creating safer, continuous walking and biking routes, the KOSN provides people with viable alternatives to driving, especially for short trips to schools, parks, shoreline access points, and the village core. These non-car options can help reduce local traffic congestion and promote healthier, more sustainable transportation choices. ix 14. How does KOSN support climate resilience? Greenways and open-space buffers act as resilience infrastructure. The KOSN helps address the following issues: • Wildfire risk • Stormwater management • Coastal hazards and sea-level rise • Habitat protection • Watershed and mauka–makai ecological health 15. What happens next? Next steps include the following: • Prioritizing near-term projects (safety upgrades, signage, small trail gaps) • Seeking funding and partnerships • Updating maps and GIS datasets • Preparing detailed engineering where needed • Continuing cultural consultation and community communication • Building a stewardship network across Kona 16. Where can I learn more or get involved? Community members can participate through: • CDP Action Committee meetings • KOSN Subcommittee activities • Public workshops and open houses • KOSN StoryMap Your voice helps shape how Kona’s open-space network grows. x Contents Preface .................................................................................................................... i Executive Summary .................................................................................................. ii Acknowledgments .................................................................................................. iv Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) ......................................................................... vi List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................... xiii 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Context: Why Open Space Matters in Kona ....................................................... 2 1.2 Historical and Geographic Setting .................................................................... 3 1.3 Policy Foundations .......................................................................................... 3 2 Project Chronology ............................................................................................ 5 2.1 Background .................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Early Vision and Foundations (2005–2008) ........................................................ 5 2.3 Exploration and Capacity Building (2010–2013) ................................................. 6 2.4 Formalizing the Concept: Subcommittee Work (2014–2017) .............................. 6 2.5 County Commitment and Unexpected Delay (2018–2022) ................................. 6 2.6 Project Launch and Community Engagement (2023) .......................................... 7 2.7 Draft Illustrative Plan Development and Community Feedback (2025) ................. 8 2.8 Refinement and Final Illustrative Plan Preparation (September–December 2025) . 9 2.9 Key Takeaways .............................................................................................. 10 3 Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Plan ............................................................ 13 3.1 Purpose of the KOSN Plan .............................................................................. 13 3.2 Foundations of the Illustrative Plan ................................................................. 14 3.3 How the Illustrative Plan Was Developed ........................................................ 15 3.4 Structure of the Network: Hubs and Linkages .................................................. 15 3.5 Understanding the Draft Illustrative Plan ......................................................... 16 3.6 Key Takeaways from the Illustrative Plan ......................................................... 25 3.7 What the Illustrative Plan Tells Us ................................................................... 26 xi 4 Proposed Improvements .................................................................................. 27 4.1 Overview of KOSN Recommended Improvements ........................................... 27 4.2 Project Categories ......................................................................................... 31 4.3 Quantitative Summary of Improvements ......................................................... 36 4.4 Rough Order of Magnitude Cost...................................................................... 41 5 Project Implementation ................................................................................... 45 5.1 Why Implementation Matters ......................................................................... 45 5.2 Alignment with County, State, and Federal Planning Frameworks ...................... 46 5.3 Governance and Partnership Structure ........................................................... 48 5.4 Funding and Resource Strategy ...................................................................... 50 5.5 Risk Management and Contingency Planning .................................................. 51 5.6 Monitoring and Adaptive Management ............................................................ 51 5.7 Summary and Next Steps ............................................................................... 54 6 Where Does This Leave Us? .............................................................................. 56 7 Bibliography .................................................................................................... 58 Appendices Appendix A: 2017 Kona Open Space Network Subcommittee Report Appendix B: Comments Received on the Draft Illustrative Plan Appendix C: Workshop Summaries Appendix D: Kona Open Space Network Proposed Improvements Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed Chart Appendix E: Summary of Project Information Appendix F: Annotated Bibliography Literature Review Appendix G: Literature Review by Cultural Surveys Hawaii Appendix H: Public Engagement Plan Appendix I: Parcel Selection Methodology Appendix J: Scoring and Priorities xii List of Pictures Picture 1. Kamakahonu/Ahuʻena Heiau .......................................................................... iii Picture 2. KOSN Subcommittee Members (L-R): Nancy Pisicchio, Lele Kimball, Mary Metcalf, Janice Glennie-Palma, Kari Kimura. Far left: Shirley David .................................. iv Picture 3. Coastal View of Kona District .......................................................................... 1 Picture 4. Aimakapā Fishpond Sand Berm ....................................................................... 4 Picture 5. Paved Access Road to Kohanaiki Beach Park .................................................... 5 Picture 6. Open House on August 29, 2023, to Launch the KOSN Project ........................... 7 Picture 7. Community Members Reviewing Draft Illustrative Plan Maps During the West Hawai'i Civic Center Open House on June 28, 2025 ......................................................... 8 Picture 8. December 4, 2025, Community Celebration .................................................... 9 Picture 9. Presentation of the KOSN Plan ...................................................................... 11 Picture 10. One of Several Site Visits Conducted ........................................................... 15 Picture 11. Kona Mauka as Seen from Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail ........................ 26 Picture 12. Gathering Under the Pavilion at Kailua Beach ............................................... 34 Picture 13. Looking Makai at Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail ...................................... 44 Picture 14. Looking Makai from Kealakehe/Pualani Estates ............................................ 55 Picture 15. Ai'opio Fish Trap ......................................................................................... 57 List of Figures Figure 1. KOSN: North Kona Subarea ............................................................................ 19 Figure 2. KOSN: Central Kona Subarea .......................................................................... 20 Figure 3. KOSN: Kailua-Kona Urban Core ...................................................................... 22 Figure 4. KOSN: Mid-Ali'i Drive Corridor ......................................................................... 23 Figure 5. KOSN: South Kona/Keauhou Subarea .............................................................. 24 List of Tables Table 1. KOSN Projects – Summary Table ...................................................................... 28 Table 2. Summary of KOSN Project Types by Category .................................................... 37 Table 3. Approximate Extent of KOSN Improvements ..................................................... 38 Table 4. ROM Summary by Zone ................................................................................... 42 xiii List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ADA Americans with Disabilities Act ala loa long trails generally following the path of least resistance along natural contours of the land; connect/intersect shorter coastal trails and mauka– makai trails CDP community development plan CIP capital improvement program County County of Hawai‘i COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic of 2019 CZM coastal zone management DLNR Department of Land and Natural Resources DPR Department of Parks and Recreation DPW Department of Public Works FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration GIS geographic information system HCC Hawai‘i Community College HDOT Hawai‘i Department of Transportation heiau temple(s) HI Hawai‘i ʻike knowledge k thousand [dollars] kahakai coastline KOSN Kona Open Space Network kūpuna elders loko iʻa managed fishponds LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund M million [dollars] makai oceanward xiv mālama ʻāina care for the land mālama i ke kai care for the ocean mauka mountainward NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPS National Park Service OCCL Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands PONC Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission R&D Research and Development RACI Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed ROM rough order of magnitude ROW right-of-way SHPD State Historic Preservation Division SS4A Safe Streets for All TAP Transportation Alternatives Program USD U.S. dollar(s) USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wahi pana storied places 1 1 Introduction The Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) represents a community-centered initiative to safeguard, connect, and enhance the open spaces of West Hawaiʻi. Unlike traditional planning efforts that focus primarily on infrastructure or zoning, the KOSN elevates open space to the level of essential public infrastructure— equivalent in importance to roads, utilities, and housing. Its purpose is not simply to preserve undeveloped lands, but to intentionally shape a resilient, culturally grounded, and accessible network of places that strengthen ecological health, support cultural practices, and improve daily life for residents and visitors. The Kona region, extending along the western slopes of Hualālai, is distinguished by landscapes of exceptional ecological and cultural value. These include dryland forests, anchialine ponds, coral reef systems, heiau (temples), royal complexes, historic ala loa (long trails), and mauka–makai (mountain to ocean) trails, and shoreline areas that have supported community life for generations. Kona’s communities blend deep Native Hawaiian traditions with diverse modern lifestyles, creating a dynamic environment where cultural integrity and contemporary needs must be thoughtfully balanced. Today, Kona faces increasing pressures: rapid population growth, rising visitor demand, expanding residential development, and the growing impacts of climate change. These forces challenge the ability of natural systems to function, stress shoreline access and mobility networks, and threaten the continuity of cultural landscapes. Without coordinated planning, fragmentation of open spaces and loss of cultural continuity could diminish the very qualities that define Kona’s identity. The KOSN responds to these challenges with a clear and forward-looking framework. It identifies existing open-space assets—parks, trails, cultural sites, forests, and coastal areas—and weaves them into an integrated system of hubs and linkages. This approach ensures that open spaces are not dispersed elements, but interconnected components of Picture 3. Coastal View of Kona District 2 a regional landscape system. Through planning, community engagement, and multimodal access strategies, the network aims to do the following: • Support safe and connected walking and biking routes • Sustain traditional cultural practices and protect wahi pana (storied places) • Enhance coastal and upland access • Steward ecological resources and • Promote a more livable, healthier built environment In doing so, the KOSN creates a living framework—one that adapts to the needs of current and future generations while honoring Kona’s rich natural and cultural heritage. 1.1 Context: Why Open Space Matters in Kona Open space in Kona is a lived and culturally meaningful reality. For Native Hawaiians, the traditional ahupuaʻa system integrated forest, upland, midland, coastal, and ocean areas into a continuous unit of stewardship. Practices such as mālama ʻāina (care for the land) and mālama i ke kai (care for the ocean) reflect a worldview in which ecological health and community well-being are inseparable. Open spaces today continue to shape how people live, gather, and connect: • Families depend on accessible parks, trails, and beaches for recreation and daily activity. • Fishers, surfers, paddlers, and cultural practitioners rely on shoreline and nearshore resources. • Ecosystems—dryland forests, reef systems, wetlands, and anchialine ponds— require space and protection to function. • Residents need safe alternatives to driving, especially as Kona’s roadways become more congested. • Visitors seek meaningful experiences grounded in cultural history and natural beauty. Open space acts as ecological infrastructure that absorbs stormwater, reduces wildfire risks, buffers coastal hazards, and supports biodiversity. It also functions as cultural infrastructure that sustains identity, strengthens community bonds, and provides opportunities for learning and stewardship. Global planning practice increasingly recognizes the critical role of open spaces in creating resilient cities. Greenways, trail systems, and park networks have become vital tools for 3 improving public health, adapting to climate change, reducing traffic, and managing growth. The KOSN mirrors these trends while grounding them in the unique cultural and environmental context of Hawaiʻi Island. 1.2 Historical and Geographic Setting Kona’s distinctive geography shapes both its historical significance and its modern planning needs. Lava flows extend from the slopes of Hualālai to the shoreline, creating stark contrasts between upland forests and arid lowlands. Rainfall patterns shift dramatically across short distances, influencing where communities settled, where agriculture thrived, and how people traveled between mauka and makai. Historically, Kona was a major center of Native Hawaiian life. Chiefs built heiau, managed loko iʻa (fishponds), established agricultural terraces, and created a network of trails that supported subsistence, ceremony, and trade. Coastal villages and fishing grounds played central roles in daily and spiritual life, while upland forests provided essential resources and watershed functions. In the modern era, Kona has become a major economic hub, drawing residents and visitors with its climate, coastline, and cultural attractions. Kailua-Kona today hosts commercial districts, civic facilities, tourist destinations, and expanding neighborhoods. Yet development has created discontinuities—neighborhoods isolated from parks, trails interrupted by roadway expansions, and cultural landscapes threatened by increased visitation and land conversion. Through the KOSN, the region’s open spaces are re-envisioned not as isolated remnants, but as components of a coherent, interconnected system that reflects Kona’s past and present. 1.3 Policy Foundations The KOSN is anchored in a multilevel policy framework that spans federal, state, County, and community planning systems. At the community level, the Kona Community Development Plan (Kona CDP) articulates a vision centered on compact, village-scale growth framed by connected open spaces, cultural resource protection, and greenway networks (County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department 2019). The KOSN operationalizes this vision. At the County level, the Hawaiʻi County General Plan (County of Hawai‘i Planning Department 2005) establishes broad goals related to mobility, environmental stewardship, 4 hazard mitigation, cultural protection, and climate resilience—all advanced by KOSN’s integrated network. At the state level, DLNR programs such as Na Ala Hele and Legacy Land Conservation Program support trail access, cultural resource protection, and land conservation, while the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) governs coastal management. At the federal level, the National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provide regulatory guidance, cultural stewardship frameworks, and funding opportunities that reinforce open-space preservation and resilience strategies. The KOSN serves as the bridge between these layers, translating policy into spatial strategies, project priorities, and a long-term implementation framework. Picture 4. Aimakapā Fishpond Sand Berm 5 2 Project Chronology The development of the KOSN reflects nearly two decades of community visioning, research, policy formation, and collaborative planning. What began as an idea embedded in the 2008 Kona CDP has evolved into a comprehensive framework for protecting, enhancing, and connecting Kona’s open spaces. This chapter outlines the major phases that shaped the KOSN, from its early community- driven aspirations to the completion of this finalized plan. 2.1 Background The KOSN is the product of a long-term, community-centered planning process led by the County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department in partnership with the Kona CDP Action Committee, its KOSN Subcommittee, local organizations, cultural practitioners, and the broader public. This chronology traces the key milestones that informed the structure, priorities, and implementation strategies of the KOSN. 2.2 Early Vision and Foundations (2005–2008) The origins of the KOSN plan can be traced to the development of the Kona CDP. Through extensive engagement with residents, cultural practitioners, landowners, and community organizations, the Kona CDP identified the need for a coordinated open-space network that does the following: • Protects and connects cultural landscapes and natural systems • Maintains shoreline access • Provides safe walking and biking routes • Supports compact, village-oriented growth • Sustains Kona’s unique sense of place When the CDP was adopted in 2008, the call for a Kona Open Space Network became an explicit community priority and a guiding pillar for future work. Picture 5. Paved Access Road to Kohanaiki Beach Park 6 2.3 Exploration and Capacity Building (2010–2013) Between 2010 and 2013, the Kona CDP Action Committee advanced the CDP’s open- space vision through research, mapping, and strategic exploration. During this phase, the committee’s actions included the following: • Studied national and international case studies of open-space networks • Identified potential trail corridors and greenways • Evaluated geographic information system (GIS) and data needs • Explored funding mechanisms and partnerships The committee concluded that the initiative required more formalized planning and recommended that the County include the KOSN in its CIP. This step positioned the project for future technical work and investment. 2.4 Formalizing the Concept: Subcommittee Work (2014–2017) To move from vision to implementation, the Action Committee formed a dedicated KOSN Subcommittee composed of community volunteers and County Planning staff. The Subcommittee-developed foundational 2017 Kona Open Space Network Subcommittee Report (Kona Open Space Network Subcommittee 2017) did the following: • Defined the concept of hubs and linkages • Identified potential corridors and cultural landscapes • Documented community priorities • Outlined opportunities for connectivity and access • Recommended hiring a consultant to advance the technical and planning components This report, provided in Appendix A for reference, established the philosophical and structural basis for the KOSN plan and ensured continuity with the original CDP vision. 2.5 County Commitment and Unexpected Delay (2018–2022) Following the Subcommittee’s recommendations, the County allocated CIP funds in 2018 and 2019 to hire a consultant team to begin KOSN development. However, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic caused significant delays in procurement and project kick-off. Despite these challenges, community interest in the KOSN remained strong, and the County reaffirmed its commitment to launching the project once conditions stabilized. 7 2.6 Project Launch and Community Engagement (2023) The KOSN officially launched on August 29, 2023. A public Kick-Off Open House was held at the Makaʻeo Pavilion at Old Kona Airport Park to accomplish the following: • Introduce the goals and structure of the project • Invite residents to share open-space priorities and concerns • Highlight cultural, ecological, and mobility themes • Initiate a multi-year engagement process The open house marked the beginning of collaborative planning between the consultant team, County staff, and the community. Picture 6. Open House on August 29, 2023, to Launch the KOSN Project 8 2.7 Draft Illustrative Plan Development and Community Feedback (2025) Throughout 2024 and early 2025, the project team undertook several key activities to advance the KOSN plan: • GIS analysis and mapping • Field verification of trails and accessways • Coordination with cultural practitioners and land managers • Workshops with the KOSN Subcommittee These efforts culminated in the draft Illustrative Plan, a set of conceptual design maps that visually convey the core ideas and foundational concepts of the KOSN plan. The maps illustrate the spatial arrangement of identified open space hubs and the linkages connecting them, such as trails and multimodal corridors. Serving as a clear and accessible representation of the KOSN vision, the Illustrative Plan helps stakeholders and the community understand the plan’s framework and visualize potential future improvements. On June 28, 2025, the County hosted a Community Walk-Through and Talk-Story Event at the West Hawaiʻi Civic Center. Participants reviewed and provided comments on the draft Illustrative Plan, including the hub and linkage framework and project ideas. Their valuable input helped refine project priorities, identify opportunities to enhance access and cultural protection, and highlight important considerations for implementation. Picture 7. Community Members Reviewing Draft Illustrative Plan Maps During the West Hawai'i Civic Center Open House on June 28, 2025 9 2.8 Refinement and Final Illustrative Plan Preparation (September– December 2025) Following public review of the draft Illustrative Plan, the project team integrated community feedback, finalized mapping, identified implementation actions, and established stewardship, funding, and governance frameworks. This refinement phase included the following: • Incorporating cultural, ecological, and mobility considerations • Responding to community feedback (Appendix B) • Coordinating with agency partners • Preparing the long-term implementation strategy The KOSN plan, including the final Illustrative Plan, was completed in December 2025 and presented at a Community Celebration on December 4, 2025, again at the Makaʻeo Pavilion. This event honored the collective effort behind the KOSN plan and shared the final network vision with residents, partners, and stakeholders. The KOSN plan is designed not only as a planning document but as an adaptable tool capable of guiding long-term conservation, recreation, cultural stewardship, and multimodal mobility across Kona. Picture 8. December 4, 2025, Community Celebration 10 2.9 Key Takeaways The development of the KOSN plan reflects nearly two decades of steady visioning, community dedication, and collaborative planning. What began with the early aspirations of the 2008 Kona CDP grew through years of research, volunteer leadership, cultural consultation, policy development, and County support. Across this entire period, several themes consistently define the KOSN’s evolution. 2.9.1 Deep Community Roots The network originated in the values and priorities expressed through the Kona CDP and was nurtured by long-standing community leaders, volunteers, cultural practitioners, and County partners. This foundation ensured continuity even as conditions changed and new challenges emerged. 2.9.2 Resilience and Continuity Despite delays—including those created by the COVID-19 pandemic—the vision remained intact. The commitment of the Action Committee, Subcommittee, and broader community sustained momentum until the formal launch of the planning process in 2023. 2.9.3 Broad Collaboration Landowners, cultural practitioners, nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and residents contributed to the planning process and thought development. Their shared effort ensured that the KOSN plan remained culturally grounded, environmentally responsible, and reflective of lived community experience. 11 Picture 9. Presentation of the KOSN Plan 2.9.4 A Structured, Data-Informed Approach The planning process blended place-based knowledge with best-practice tools: GIS analysis, field verification, multimodal planning methods, cultural consultation, and community workshops. This produced a concept that is technically sound and transparent in its methodology. 2.9.5 An Iterative, Community-Shaped Process Public engagement, particularly in 2023 and 2025, shaped the draft Illustrative Plan and its refinement. Mapping, review sessions, workshops, and talk-story events helped confirm priorities, identify gaps, and build a shared understanding of how Kona’s open spaces can function as a unified system. 2.9.6 A Future-Oriented Strategy The final stage of the process, marked by the December 4, 2025, Community Celebration at Makaʻeo Pavilion, affirmed the community’s collective commitment to steward Kona’s landscapes with care. The KOSN plan stands as a living, adaptive framework designed to 12 guide open-space protection, cultural stewardship, multimodal mobility, and ecological resilience for decades to come. 2.9.7 A Foundation for Future Action More than a single document, the KOSN represents a long-term approach to shaping Kona’s growth while preserving the natural and cultural qualities that define its identity. It honors the legacy of community visioning and establishes a clear pathway for future conservation, recreation, and resilience initiatives. Altogether, these elements form the foundation upon which the KOSN’s framework, recommendations, and implementation strategies are built. 13 3 Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Plan 3.1 Purpose of the KOSN Plan The KOSN plan provides the spatial framework for the KOSN. It illustrates how natural areas, cultural landscapes, shoreline resources, civic spaces, and neighborhoods can function as a coordinated system through a structure of hubs and linkages. Rather than prescribing individual projects, the KOSN plan defines the underlying logic that guides all subsequent recommendations, including the following: • What places anchor the network • How these places relate to one another • Where gaps in connectivity exist • How to create a cohesive, accessible open-space system Project-specific improvements are presented separately in Chapter 4, Proposed Improvements, ensuring that the KOSN plan stands as the foundational vision for the network. A Reader’s Guide to the KOSN Plan The KOSN plan is the heart of the KOSN. It shows the vision for how open spaces throughout Kona—that is, parks, trails, shoreline areas, cultural sites, and natural landscapes—can be connected into a single, easy-to-understand system. Here’s what the KOSN Plan is meant to show you: 1. What places matter most These are the hubs of the network—important cultural sites, natural areas, parks, schools, shoreline destinations, and community spaces. 2. How those places connect The plan highlights mauka–makai routes, coastal pathways, neighborhood connectors, and greenway corridors that make it possible to travel safely and comfortably between places. 3. Which areas need better connections The plan reveals where trails end abruptly, where sidewalks are missing, or where cultural sites have limited or sensitive access. 4. How the landscape is organized The network follows Kona’s natural layout, as follows: • Uplands to shoreline • North to south along the coast • Across neighborhoods through key gathering points 14 5. What the community helped shape The plan is built on community knowledge; that is, what people shared about trails, cultural sites, shoreline access, and local conditions during workshops and discussions. 6. Why this plan matters for the future The Illustrative Plan creates a framework for future improvements. It helps guide the following: • Where new connections make the most sense • How open spaces can support cultural practices • Which areas should be preserved or restored • How people can move safely without relying on cars 7. What comes next This chapter explains the vision of the KOSN Illustrative Plan; Chapter 4 identifies the specific improvements that would bring this vision to life. 3.2 Foundations of the Illustrative Plan The conceptual framework was developed through three complementary inputs: community knowledge, technical analysis, and field verification. 3.2.1 Community Knowledge and Cultural Insight Residents, practitioners, and Subcommittee members shared place-based knowledge of trails, cultural landscapes, shoreline access points, neighborhood conditions, and areas requiring protection or managed access. Their insight revealed information not visible in GIS datasets alone. 3.2.2 Technical Analysis and GIS Mapping The consultant team analyzed natural systems, cultural resources, slopes, hydrology, vegetation, land tenure, and mobility corridors to identify potential hubs and linkages and evaluate opportunities for improving connectivity. 3.2.3 Field Verification Site visits by staff and Subcommittee members confirmed trail conditions, safety constraints, shoreline access, and informal walking routes, ensuring accurate representation of on-the-ground conditions. These combined foundations grounded the Illustrative Plan in both community expertise and technical rigor. 15 Picture 10. One of Several Site Visits Conducted 3.3 How the Illustrative Plan Was Developed Between August 2023 and December 2025, a series of workshops, follow-up meetings, and comments received helped refine the conceptual framework. Participants identified priority open-space resources, reviewed mapping drafts, clarified cultural sensitivities, and refined potential linkages. The following consistent themes emerged across the workshops: • Strengthening mauka–makai connectivity • Improving multimodal safety and comfort • Protecting historic trails and culturally sensitive sites • Enhancing shoreline access • Preserving viewsheds and ecological resources • Recognizing neighborhood-scale routes and connections • Ensuring transparent and culturally grounded engagement Workshop details are summarized in Appendix C. 3.4 Structure of the Network: Hubs and Linkages A central element of the KOSN is the classification of open-space assets into hubs and linkages. 3.4.1 Hubs Hubs are places of high cultural, ecological, recreational, or community significance, such as parks, fishponds, cultural landscapes, trailheads, civic facilities, or lava viewsheds. They function as major activity nodes and anchors within the network. 16 3.4.2 Linkages Linkages are the corridors that connect hubs. They include shoreline routes, historic trail segments, neighborhood pathways, mauka–makai connections, sidewalks, shared-use paths, utility easements, and informal walking routes. Together, they support the following: • Walking, bicycling, and everyday mobility • Cultural practice and stewardship • Ecological connectivity • Access to parks, shoreline, and neighborhood destinations 3.5 Understanding the Draft Illustrative Plan 3.5.1 KOSN Spatial Overview At the broadest scale, the network is shaped by three dominant spatial orientations: • North-South coastal connectivity along Aliʻi Drive, Queen Kaʻahumanu Highway, and the Ala Kahakai Trail • Mauka–Makai corridors linking uplands to shoreline areas • Greenway nodes and hubs where multiple accessways converge To communicate this structure, the Illustrative Plan is divided into five detailed map sheets corresponding to the planning subareas described in Section 3.5.2. Across these maps, the draft Illustrative Plan shows the following: • Top-scoring sites from the community evaluation • Proposed hubs and half-mile activity areas • Existing and conceptual linkages • Coastal resources requiring protection or managed access • Priority mauka–makai and north-south connections Community feedback refined the Illustrative Plan as follows: • Corrected multimodal paths • Clarified culturally sensitive areas • Adjusted hub boundaries • Removal/generalization of sensitive site locations • Identification of safer alternatives to high-traffic corridors These refinements are integrated into the final Illustrative Plan. 17 3.5.2 Regional Framework The Illustrative Plan is organized into the following five planning subareas, each contributing unique resources and connectivity opportunities to the overall network: 1. North Kona: Kohanaiki to Kaloko-Honokōhau 2. Central Kona: Kealakehe to Kailua Village 3. Kailua-Kona Urban Core: Kailua Bay and surrounding neighborhoods 4. Mid-Ali‘i Drive Corridor: Kailua South to Hōlualoa Royal Center 5. South Kona/Keauhou: Hōlualoa to Keauhou Bay Each subarea contains its own set of hubs and linkages but collectively forms a continuous system across the region. Understanding the Illustrative Plan The Illustrative Plan is designed to help community members understand how Kona’s open spaces, trails, cultural sites, and neighborhoods relate to one another. Each plan map sheet highlights different pieces of the network, but they all follow the same basic structure. 1. Look for the Hubs Hubs are major places of interest, such as parks, fishponds, cultural sites, schools, trailheads, or important viewpoints. These are the anchors of the open-space system. 2. Follow the Linkages Linkages show the connections between hubs and may comprise the following: • Shoreline trails • Sidewalks or shared-use paths • Mauka–makai accessways • Utility corridors • Historic trails Linkages show how people could move safely and comfortably across Kona without relying solely on cars. 3. Notice the Spatial Patterns The maps show three main orientation patterns, as follows: • North-south coastal routes • Mauka–makai connections • Greenway nodes and hubs where multiple paths come together These patterns form the skeleton, or outline, of the network. 18 4. Compare Existing and Future Connections Some linkages already exist; others are conceptual. The Illustrative Plan helps identify the following: • Where connections are strong today • Where gaps need to be filled in the future 5. Use the Illustrative Plan for Local Context Each Illustrative Plan map sheet covers a smaller region: North Kona, Central Kona, the Kailua-Kona Urban Core, Mid–Aliʻi, and South Kona/Keauhou. Viewing the network in subareas makes it easier to understand how your own neighborhood fits into the bigger picture. 3.5.2.1 North Kona Subarea (Kohanaiki to Kaloko-Honokōhau) Figure 1 illustrates the northern gateway to the KOSN, spanning from Kohanaiki through the cultural landscapes of Kaloko-Honokōhau. The map highlights a mix of natural habitat areas, lava field viewsheds, educational institutions, and shoreline cultural sites that together anchor the open-space framework in this region. These features illustrate how ecological resources, traditional landscapes, and modern community assets coexist within a rapidly developing corridor. The map also highlights significant gaps in connectivity, particularly mauka–makai access between upland neighborhoods and the shoreline and the absence of continuous multimodal routes along primary east–west corridors. Opportunities for new neighborhood-scale linkages are visible throughout this geography. Taken as a whole, Figure 1 provides the foundation for understanding how North Kona’s diverse places can form a connected northern district within the larger network. 3.5.2.2 Central Kona Subarea (Kealakehe to Kailua Village) Figure 2 presents the Central Kona area, where cultural landscapes, major civic institutions, commercial centers, and shoreline resources converge. This map highlights the importance of Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park, Honokōhau Harbor, and fishpond complexes as cultural anchors alongside civic destinations such as the West Hawai‘i Civic Center and surrounding service hubs. Together, these features demonstrate Central Kona’s role as a major regional crossroads supporting cultural practice, governance, commerce, and recreation. The map also reveals fragmented inland-to- shoreline connections and discontinuities along east–west multimodal corridors such as Palani Road and Kealakehe Parkway. Strengthening these routes is essential to creating a unified system where residents and visitors can safely and comfortably move between cultural sites, civic facilities, shoreline areas, and neighborhoods. Figure 2 demonstrates how these elements fit together and where connectivity is most needed. Ane Keahokālole Kaʻiminani Dr Hwy A l a n u i T r a i l O l d M a m a l a h o a H w y Hawaii Belt Rd Hina Lani St K oh a naiki R d Kekaha Kai State Park Kekaha Kai State Park Access Road Kekahakai State Park HonuaulaForestReserve HonuaulaForestReserve Queen Kaʻahumanu Hwy Kah i l i h i l i St T r ail t o th e S e a Hawaii Belt Rd Ala Kahakai National HIstoric Trai l Makalawena Trail 6 6 9 10 13 46 37 48 49 6 22 6 6 9 10 13 46 37 48 49 6 22 Kohanaiki Beach Park O'oma Beach Park Sand Beach Mākole'ā Black Wāwahiwa'a Point Pūhili Point Point Kalihi Point Unualoha Pu'ukala Point Mākole'ā Point R = 1 M il e R = 1 M il e P-36 P-11 P-34 P-14 P-37 P-33 P-30 P-09 P-13 P-24 OP-3 OP-5 OP-7 P-36 P-11 P-34 P-14 P-37 P-33 P-30 P-09 P-13 P-24 OP-3 OP-5 OP-7 P-36 P-11 P-34 P-14 P-37 P-33 P-30 P-09 P-13 P-24 OP-3 OP-5 OP-7 EllisonOnizukaKonaInternationalAirport EllisonOnizukaKonaInternationalAirport Kaloko-HonokohauNational Historic ParkKaloko-HonokohauNational Historic Park Hulikoa Dr NorthKona South Kona SouthKohala Kona UrbanArea Boundary KEY MAP Figure 1 - North Kona Subarea Map Credits: © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA, Resource Mapping Hawaii, Vantor, DLNR Da t e E x p o r t e d : 1 1 / 2 4 / 2 0 2 5 9 : 4 5 P M LEGEND Streams Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources PreservationCommission (PONC) AcquiredParcels Parks and Reserves Existing Site Planned/Proposed Projects Vehicular or Multimodal Path -Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Trail Trail - Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Kona Open Space Site Location Planned/Proposed Linkages Open Space Hub Planned/Proposed by KOSN Planned/Proposed by Others Public Beach Access Along Aliʻi Drive Vehicular or Multimodal Path Existing Linkages Site Number Name Natural Social Cultural 6 Critical Habitat Area 9 Hawaii Belt Road - North Area 10 Hawaiʻi Community College – Pālamanui 13 Hoʻona Fishing Village 22 Ka iminani Dr. 24 Kaloko Fishpond37Makalei Fire Station 46 Trail to The Sea 48 Viewshed of Lava Fields along Queen Kaʻahumanu Hwy 49 Volunteer Fire Station OP-3 Ane Keahokālole Hwy Extension OP-5 Kapuahi St. Extension OP-7 Potential New Road (Oomawaena Rd) Site Number Name Natural CulturalSocial ʻ ʻ ʻ P-09 Establish Trails in Ag Area for Nearby Neighborhoods P-11 Hale Wawaloli Visitor Center P-13 Improved Ped/Bike Connection on Hina Lani St Between Ane Keahokālole and Queen Ka ahumanu Hwys P-14 Ka iminani Dr and Ane Keahokālole Hwy Ped/Bike Lanes P-24 Makako Bay Dr. Ped Path Improvements P-30 Ped/Bike Access Across Queen K at Ka iminani P-33 PONC Parcel(s) P-34 Potential Mauka-Makai Connecting Trails P-36 Potential PONC Parcel to be Acquired P-37 Queen K Ped/Bike Improvements North of Town ʻ Planned/Proposed Projects by Others Existing Sites KOSN Planned/Proposed Projects Site Number Name Natural CulturalSocial 0 1,500 Feet 1 inch equals 4,000 feet P-36 P-10 P-37 P-26 P-29 P-13 P-28 P-15 P-17 P-18 P-31 OP-1 OP-3 OP-6 2 13 6 12 21 23 24 27 46 32 34 35 40 42 48 50 52 4 15 CenterShoppingCommonsKona CenterShoppingCoastKona DistrictProjectMakalapua R = 0.5 Mile R = 0.5 Mile R = 1 Mile R = 1 Mile R = 1 Mile R = 1 Mile 2 13 6 12 21 23 24 27 46 32 34 35 40 42 48 50 52 4 15 Kaloko-HonokohauNational Historic ParkKaloko-HonokohauNational Historic Park CenterShoppingCommonsKona CenterShoppingCoastKona DistrictProjectMakalapua Kailua Beach Point Noio Maliu Point P-36 P-10 P-37 P-26 P-29 P-13 P-28 P-15 P-17 P-18 P-31 OP-1 OP-3 OP-6 P-36 P-10 P-37 P-26 P-29 P-13 P-28 P-15 P-17 P-18 P-31 OP-1 OP-3 OP-6 Q u e e n K aʻa h u m a n u H w y T r a il t o t h e S e a Hina Lani St Old M a m a l a hoa H i g h w a y Hawaii Belt Rd K o h anaiki R d Honokoha u Tr a i l P ala ni Rd A n e K eohokālole H w y K e al akehe P kw y Hale Makai Pl Hulikoa Dr North Kona South Kona KEY MAP Figure 2 - Central Kona Subarea Map Credits: © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA, Earthstar Geographics, DLNR 0 1,500 Feet 1 inch equals 2,600 feetDa t e E x p o r t e d : 1 1 / 2 5 / 2 0 2 5 3 : 4 2 A M Kona UrbanArea Boundary LEGEND Streams Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources PreservationCommission (PONC) AcquiredParcels Parks and Reserves Existing Site Planned/Proposed Projects Vehicular or Multimodal Path -Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Trail Trail - Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Kona Open Space Site Location Planned/Proposed Linkages Open Space Hub Planned/Proposed by KOSN Planned/Proposed by Others Public Beach Access Along Aliʻi Drive Vehicular or Multimodal Path Existing Linkages Site Number Name Natural Social CulturalSite Number Name Natural CulturalSocial Planned/Proposed Projects by Others Existing Sites KOSN Planned/Proposed Projects 1 ʻAimakapā Fishpond 2 ʻAiʻōpio Fishtrap 3 Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail 4 Bowling Alley 6 Critical Habitat Area 12 Honokōhau Small Boat Harbor15Joseph Rock Arboretum 18 Kailua-Kona Skate Park 21 Kailua Fire Station 23 Kaloko-Honokōhau Park 24 Kaloko Fishpond 27 Kealakehe High School 32 Kona Commons Shopping Center34Kuleana Education Academy 35 Laʻi ōpua Community Center & West Hawaii Community Health Center 40 Old Kona Airport State Recreation Area 42 Protected Coastal Corridor (Extending from Kikaua Point to Keauhou Bay) 46 Trail to The Sea 48 Viewshed of Lava Fields along Queen Kaʻahumanu Hwy 50 Walking Trails and Shoreline Access at Keahuolu Point 52 West Hawaiʻi Civic Center OP-1 Ala Kahakai Trailhead Hub OP-3 Ane Keahokālole Hwy Extension OP-6 Kealakehe Parkway Extension ʻ P-10 Future Kealakehe Regional Park P-13 Improved Ped/Bike Connection on Hina Lani St Between Ane Keahokālole and Queen Ka’ahumanu Hwys P-15 Kaiwi St Ped/Bike Improvements P-17 Kamakaeha Ave Improvements P-18 Kealakehe Pkwy Ped/Bike Lane Improvements P-26 Multimodal Route Improvements P-28 Palani Rd Multimodal Improvements P-29 Palani Rd Ped/Bike Improvement Queen K to Ane K P-31 Ped/Bike Path to Maka'eo Pavilion, Skate Park and Walking Trail at Old Airport P-36 Potential PONC Parcel to be Acquired P-37 Queen K Ped/Bike Improvements North of Town 21 3.5.2.3 Kailua-Kona Urban Core (Kailua Bay and Surrounding Neighborhoods) Figure 3 focuses on the Kailua-Kona urban core, the region’s most active area for walking, commerce, cultural engagement, and shoreline recreation. It highlights historic landmarks such as Hulihe‘e Palace, Moku‘aikaua Church, and Kamakahonu National Historic Landmark, along with heavily used parks, the pier, civic facilities, and coastal open spaces. This concentration of community and visitor destinations makes the urban core the most walkable and culturally vibrant segment of the open-space network. At the same time, the map shows where gaps exist, particularly along Ali‘i Drive and through inland streets leading to Old Kona Airport Park. Enhanced connections between shoreline paths, commercial areas, and civic amenities are key to strengthening the public realm in this district. Figure 3 helps readers understand how cultural, recreational, and mobility functions overlap and why continuous multimodal routes are essential here. 3.5.2.4 Mid-Ali‘i Drive Corridor (Kailua South to Hōlualoa Royal Center) Figure 4 highlights the Mid-Ali‘i Drive corridor, a diverse landscape where established neighborhoods, cultural sites, historic trail systems, natural stream corridors, and coastal viewpoints intersect. Key features include the Judd Trail, Sadie Seymour Botanical Gardens, Kealakowa‘a Heiau, and the Walua Trail system, all of which contribute cultural depth and recreational value to this area. The varied topography, including steep mauka– makai slopes, shapes both opportunities and challenges for connectivity. The map makes evident the gaps in both north-south and mauka–makai mobility, especially where existing trails end abruptly or where crossings along busy corridors are limited. Walua Trail emerges as a critical spine through the region, with significant potential to support continuous nonmotorized movement. Figure 4 helps articulate how cultural stewardship, recreational access, and neighborhood mobility intersect in this transitional corridor. P-36P-35 P-27 P-21 P-32 P-29 P-25 P-15 P-22 P-17 P-31 8 14 17 18 20 21 25 32 33 19 36 38 40 4 5 CenterShoppingCommonsKona CenterShoppingKona Coast VillageShoppingKona Inn DistrictProjectMakalapua R = 1 Mile R = 1 Mile Pal a n i R d Queen Kaʻahumanu Hwy Makala Blvd Aliʻi Dr A l a n u i T r a i l Hualala i R d A n e K e o h o k āl o l e H w y H e n ry S tr e e t Lo l o ku St Kuakini Hwy Luhia St Ka makaeha Ave K a i w i St P-36P-35 P-27 P-21 P-32 P-29 P-25 P-15 P-22 P-17 P-31 P-06P-06 8 14 17 18 20 21 25 32 33 19 36 38 40 4 5 CenterShoppingCommonsKona CenterShoppingKona Coast VillageShoppingKona Inn DistrictProjectMakalapua Keiki Beach Queen's Bath Airport Beach Old Kona Kūkāʻilimoku Point Kailua Bay Ōneo Bay Wai‘aha Beach Park NorthKona SouthKona KEY MAP Figure 3 - Kailua-Kona Urban Core Map Credits: © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA, Resource Mapping Hawaii, Vantor, DLNR 0 1,500 Feet 1 inch equals 1,100 feetDa t e E x p o r t e d : 1 1 / 2 8 / 2 0 2 5 1 2 : 3 3 P M Kona UrbanArea Boundary LEGEND Streams Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources PreservationCommission (PONC) AcquiredParcels Parks and Reserves Existing Site Planned/Proposed Projects Vehicular or Multimodal Path -Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Trail Trail - Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Kona Open Space Site Location Planned/Proposed Linkages Open Space Hub Planned/Proposed by KOSN Planned/Proposed by Others Public Beach Access Along Aliʻi Drive Vehicular or Multimodal Path Existing Linkages Site Number Name Natural Social CulturalSite Number Name Natural CulturalSocial Existing Sites KOSN Planned/Proposed Projects 4 Bowling Alley 5 Brewery Block 8 Hale Hālāwai Park 14 Huliheʻe Palace 17 Kailua-Kona Public Library 18 Kailua-Kona Skate Park 19 Kailua-Kona Village Farmers Market 20 Kailua Bay & Pier 21 Kailua Fire Station 25 Kamakahonu National Historic Landmark (Ahuʻena Heiau) 32 Kona Commons Shopping Center 33 Kona Community Aquatic Center 36 Makaʻeo Pavilion 38 Mokuʻaikaua Church 40 Old Kona Airport State Recreation Area P-06 Ali'i Drive Ped/Bike Improvements P-15 Kaiwi St Ped/Bike Improvements P-17 Kamakaeha Ave Improvements P-21 Kuakini Hwy Ped and Bike Improvements P-22 Kuakini to Old Airport Existing Bike Lane Improvements P-25 Makala Blvd Improvements & Add Crosswalk P-27 Old Airport to Ali'i Dr. Bike Lane Improvements P-29 Palani Rd Ped/Bike Improvement Queen K to Ane K P-31 Ped/Bike Path to Maka'eo Pavilion, Skate Park and Walking Trail at Old AirportP-32 Pier to Brewery Block Pedestrian High Traffic Area P-35 Potential Pier - Old Airport Ped/Bike Path Connection P-36 Potential PONC Parcel to be Acquired P-06 P-33 P-21 P-08 P-03 P-38 P-39 P-40 P-05 P-20 OP-4 OP-2 7 8 16 1719 41 44 45 43 51 4 28 Walu a R d O ni Oni S t Hu a l a l a i R d Hualalai Rd K u a k i n i H w y W a l u a Tr ail Rai l r o a d B e d Old We s t H a w a i i Judd Trail H e n ry S t r eet J u d d Trail Old Wa ll e d Tra il Na n i K a il u a R d A l iʻi Dr Lak o S t Walua Rd Kuakini Hwy Royal P o i n c i a n a D r P-06 P-33 P-21 P-08 P-03 P-38 P-39 P-40 P-05 P-20 OP-4 OP-2 7 8 16 1719 41 44 45 43 51 4 28 Beach Honl’s Kamoa Point Point Puapua'a Kahului Bay Hōlualoa Bay H o n u a u la Stre a m W a i a h a S t r e a m R = 1 Mile R = 1 Mile North Kona South Kona KEY MAP Figure 4 - Mid-Ali'i Drive Corridor Map Credits: © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA, Resource Mapping Hawaii, Vantor, DLNR 0 1,500 Feet 1 inch equals 2,000 feetDa t e E x p o r t e d : 1 1 / 2 8 / 2 0 2 5 3 : 1 7 P M Kona UrbanArea Boundary LEGEND Streams Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources PreservationCommission (PONC) AcquiredParcels Parks and Reserves Existing Site Planned/Proposed Projects Vehicular or Multimodal Path -Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Trail Trail - Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Kona Open Space Site Location Planned/Proposed Linkages Open Space Hub Planned/Proposed by KOSN Planned/Proposed by Others Public Beach Access Along Aliʻi Drive Vehicular or Multimodal Path Existing Linkages Site Number Name Natural Social CulturalSite Number Name Natural CulturalSocial Existing Sites KOSN Planned/Proposed Projects Planned/Proposed Projects by Others 4 Bowling Alley 7 Hale Hālāwai o Hōlualoa 8 Hale Hālāwai Park 16 Judd Trail 17 Kailua-Kona Public Library 19 Kailua-Kona Village Farmers Market 28 Kealakowaʻa Heiau & Kona Educational Center Sadie Seymour Bontanical Gardens 41 Old West Hawaii Railroad Bed 43 Pualani Park 44 Stream Floodways along Honuaula Stream 45 Stream Floodways along Waiaha Stream 51 Walua Trail North Trailhead P-03 Add Mauka-Makai Connection to Honl's Beach P-05 Add Walua Trail to Kealakowa'a Connector P-06 Ali'i Drive Ped/Bike Improvements P-08 Crosswalk at Oni Oni St Across Kuakini to Walua Rd Intersection P-20 Keiki He'enalu Trail P-21 Kuakini Hwy Ped and Bike Improvements P-33 PONC Parcel(s) P-36 Potential PONC Parcel to be Acquired P-38 Walua Non-motorized Vehicle Trail North Section P-39 Walua Non-motorized Vehicle Trail South Section P-40 Walua Rd Signage Improvements OP-2 Ali'i Drive Bypass OP-4 Judd Trail Realignment P-19 P-36 P-33 P-33 P-04 P-12 P-02 P-16 P-39 P-07 P-01 P-23 OP-4 OP-2 Plan AreaManagementBayKeauhou R = 0.5 M il eR = 0.5 M il e R = 0.5 Mile R = 0.5 Mile La'aloa Ave Kahalu'u Beach Park Keauhou Bay Mile Marker 4 - Beach Beach ParkMagic Sands Beach ParkPāhoehoe Mākole'ā Beach Point Kamoa He'eia Bay K e a l i i St Kamehameha III Rd W alu a R d T r ailKeauhou W a l u a Tr ail Ali'i D r K u a kini H w y J udd T r ai l Ju d d T r a il Kaluna St Trail to Kainaliu Ali'i Dr P-19 P-36 P-33 P-33 P-04 P-12 P-02 P-16 P-39 P-07 P-01 P-23 OP-4 OP-2 31 11 16 39 47 29 3026 31 11 16 39 47 29 3026 Plan AreaManagementBayKeauhou Kona UrbanArea Boundary North Kona South Kona KEY MAP Figure 5 - South Kona/Keauhou Subarea Map Credits: © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA, Resource Mapping Hawaii, Vantor, DLNR 0 1,500 Feet 1 inch equals 2,500 feetDa t e E x p o r t e d : 1 1 / 2 8 / 2 0 2 5 5 : 0 2 P M Site Number Name Natural Social CulturalSite Number Name Natural CulturalSocial Existing Sites KOSN Planned/Proposed Projects Planned/Proposed Projects by Others OP-2 Ali'i Drive Bypass OP-4 Judd Trail Realignment 11 Historical Helani Congregational Church 16 Judd Trail 26 Kamehameha III Birthplace - Kauikeaouli Stone 29 Keauhou Shopping Center 30 Keauhou Small Boat Harbor 31 Keauhou Trail 39 Ohiʻa Cave Historic Preserve Observation Deck 47 Viewshed along Kamehameha III Road P-01 Add Kam III Ped/Bike Lane from Kealii St to Walua Rd P-02 Add La'aloa Ave Markings and Signage P-04 Add Signage to Kaluna and Kealii St P-07 Ali’i Dr Keauhou Area Ped/Bike Lane P-12 Improve Walua Rd Ped/Bike Connection to Kam III P-16 Kaleiopapa St Ped/Bike Lane P-19 Keauhou Resort Golf Mauika Course – Possible Park/Open Space P-23 La'aloa Firebreak Park P-33 PONC Parcel(s) P-36 Potential PONC Parcel to be Acquired P-39 Walua Non-motorized Vehicle Trail South Section LEGEND Streams Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources PreservationCommission (PONC) AcquiredParcels Parks and Reserves Existing Site Planned/Proposed Projects Vehicular or Multimodal Path -Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Trail Trail - Partially Accessible/UnknownAccessibility Kona Open Space Site Location Planned/Proposed Linkages Open Space Hub Planned/Proposed by KOSN Planned/Proposed by Others Public Beach Access Along Aliʻi Drive Vehicular or Multimodal Path Existing Linkages 25 3.5.2.5 South Kona/Keauhou Subarea (Hōlualoa to Keauhou Bay) Figure 5 illustrates the South Kona and Keauhou area, home to some of Kona’s most significant cultural landscapes—including the birthplace of Kamehameha III—and major shoreline recreation areas. The map highlights important cultural sites, historic mauka– makai routes, scenic upland view corridors, neighborhoods, and resort-associated amenities that collectively define the character of this southern district. Connectivity challenges are also evident, particularly along Ali‘i Drive, where shoreline destinations attract substantial activity but lack continuous multimodal safety features. Inland neighborhoods show limited direct access to the coast, and discontinuities in trail systems constrain broader mobility. Figure 5 shows how improved mauka–makai routes, shoreline linkages, and upland trail extensions can strengthen access, cultural continuity, and community resilience in the southern portion of the network. 3.6 Key Takeaways from the Illustrative Plan The process of developing the Illustrative Plan revealed several core insights, as follows: • Kona’s open-space assets are abundant but fragmented; the Illustrative Plan reveals how they can function as a coordinated system. • Each subarea contains distinct cultural, ecological, and community anchors that underpin the network. • Connectivity gaps, especially in safe multimodal routes and mauka–makai access, limit mobility today. • Community knowledge provided essential insight into informal routes, cultural sensitivities, and practical constraints. • Cultural stewardship requires protection or managed access for certain landscapes. • Mobility and open spaces are deeply interconnected; even small improvements can significantly improve network continuity. • Cross-agency coordination is essential for long-term success. • The hubs-and-linkages framework provides the spatial foundation for selecting and prioritizing projects. 26 3.7 What the Illustrative Plan Tells Us The Illustrative Plan demonstrates that Kona is rich in natural landscapes, cultural sites, shoreline resources, civic areas, and distinct neighborhoods, but these assets are not yet fully connected. The Illustrative Plan shows the following: • How each area contributes a unique set of resources • How gaps in connectivity hinder safe movement • How a unified network can support daily life, cultural practice, ecological resilience, and community identity The Illustrative Plan lays the groundwork for implementing a healthier, more connected, and culturally grounded future for Kona. Picture 11. Kona Mauka as Seen from Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail 27 4 Proposed Improvements 4.1 Overview of KOSN Recommended Improvements The proposed improvements depicted in the Illustrative Plan represents the physical expression of the plan’s connectivity goals. They translate a conceptual framework— grounded in community values, local knowledge, and landscape heritage—into an actionable set of projects that can be phased over time. Each recommended improvement was developed through Subcommittee input, field observations, and coordination with County, state, and federal agencies. Collectively, these improvements aim to do the following: • Enhance accessibility through multimodal infrastructure, safer crossings, and clearer wayfinding • Protect natural and cultural resources through sensitive design and managed access • Unify Kona through continuous, legible linkages between neighborhoods, parks, shoreline areas, schools, and cultural sites To support implementation, improvements are grouped as follows: • Geographic Zone (A through F) • Timeframe (near-term, mid-term, or long-term) The following sections summarize recommended actions by zone. 4.1.1 Project Zones To make implementation manageable and geographically coherent, improvements are grouped into six zones: • Zone A: Keauhou to Lako. Corresponds to Figures 4 and 5. • Zone B: Laʻaloa to Walua. Corresponds to Figures 4 and 5. • Zone C: Lako to Kailua Village. Corresponds to Figures 3 and 4. • Zone D: Kailua Village to Old Airport. Corresponds to Figure 3. • Zone E: Harbor to Airport. Corresponds to Figures 1, 2, and 3. • Zone F: Long-Term Regional Concepts. 4.1.2 Project Timeframes Each zone has a mix of trail connections, greenway corridors, multimodal roadway upgrades, and access improvements. Table 1 and Appendix E provide a polished summary of improvements by zone. 28 Table 1. KOSN Projects – Summary Table Project No. Project Title Project Type Description Zone Phase/ Timeline ROM Cost [a] P-01 Kamehameha III Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane Multimodal roadway improvement Continuous shared-use shoulder and markings A Near-term (1 to 5 years) $600k to $1.2M P-04 Kaluna and Keali‘i Street Signage Access and wayfinding Bicycle/pedestrian route signage on alternative streets A Near-term $75k to $150k P-07 Ali‘i Drive (Keauhou) Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane Multimodal roadway improvement Shoulder clearing, striping, signage A Near-term $250k to $600k P-12 Walua Road Connection Improvements Multimodal roadway improvement Shoulder enhancements and shared-roadway signage A Near-term $600k to $1.2M P-40 Walua Road Wayfinding Access and wayfinding Corridor-wide pedestrian/bicycle signage A Near-term $75k to $150k P-16 Kaleiopapa Street Shared-Use Lane Greenway-type corridor Paved shared-use shoulder with parking management A Mid-term (5 to 10 years) $500k to $1.2M P-02 La‘aloa Avenue Markings and Signage Multimodal roadway improvement Advisory bike lanes and consistent wayfinding B Near-term $50k to $150k P-39 La‘aloa–Walua Trail Connector Trail connection Firebreak/easement-based pedestrian trail B Mid-term $150k to $400k P-05 Walua Trail → Kealakowa‘a Connector Trail connection Signed on-street route with signalized crossings C Near-term $75k to $150k P-21 Kuakini Highway Shoulder Improvements Multimodal roadway improvement Pedestrian/bicycle shoulders along highway C Mid-term $1.5M to $3.5M 29 Project No. Project Title Project Type Description Zone Phase/ Timeline ROM Cost [a] P-08 Oni Oni Street Crosswalk Safety enhancement Formal marked crossing C Mid-term $300k to $900k P-06 Walua Road (Makai) Enhancements Greenway-type corridor Shared-use zones, signage, corridor definition C Mid-term $600k to $1.2M P-32 Pier → Brewery Block Corridor Access improvement Wayfinding and pedestrian connectivity D Near-term $250k to $750k P-36 Puhi Springs Parcel Acquisition Open space/ greenspace Mauka–makai open-space and evacuation corridor D Mid-term/ Long-term $5M to $10M P-29 Palani Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane Multimodal roadway improvement Continuous facility and new crossing D Mid-term $1.2M to $2.5M P-15 Kaiwi Street Pedestrian/Bicycle Enhancements Greenway-type corridor Key connector with signage and markings D Mid-term $300k to $800k P-25 Makala Boulevard Access Improvements Access and safety Crosswalks and park connectivity D Mid-term $300k to $600k P-18 Kealakehe Parkway Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane Multimodal roadway improvement Markings and intersection integration E Near-term $250k to $600k P-14 Ka‘iminani and Ane Keohokālole Lanes Greenway-type corridor Continuous pedestrian/bicycle lanes to HCC–Pālamanui E Near-term $1.2M to $3M P-13 Hina Lani Street Enhancements Multimodal roadway improvement Striping and new crossings E Mid-term $400k to $1M P-30 Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway Crossing (Ka‘iminani) Regional safety improvement Protected mauka–makai crossing F Long-term (10+ years) $400k to $1M 30 Project No. Project Title Project Type Description Zone Phase/ Timeline ROM Cost [a] P-37 Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway Multimodal Enhancements Regional corridor improvement Signage, signals, future separated path F Long-term $4M to $12M P-23 La‘aloa Firebreak Park Open space/ greenway Firebreak converted to linear park F Long-term $3M to $8M P-20 Keiki He‘enalu Trail Trail connection (concept) Upland–shoreline neighborhood connector F Long-term $200k to $500k [a] Rough order of magnitude (ROM) costs are presented in U.S. dollars. HCC = Hawai‘i Community College No. = Number 31 While the maps and zone descriptions show where each project is located, many community members also want to understand what kinds of improvements are being proposed and how they fit together. The following section organizes the recommended projects into several project categories based on their primary function, such as improving safety, filling in trail gaps, or creating new greenspace connections. Looking at the plan this way helps show how individual projects add up to a more complete, connected network across Kona. 4.2 Project Categories The KOSN Recommended Improvement Projects can be understood not only through the geographic Zones A through F, but also through the types of improvements they represent. The project types described in Sections 4.2.1 through 4.2.6 summarize the functional purpose of the recommendations shown in the Illustrative Plan. These categories translate a diverse list of corridor-level, neighborhood-scale, and long-term conceptual improvements into a clear, thematic structure. Importantly, the projects in each category were developed through field observations, community feedback, and the lived knowledge of Kona residents serving on the Subcommittee. The categories reflect the physical conditions, safety challenges, and mobility needs expressed by the public, as well as opportunities identified through existing rights-of-way (ROWs), easements, and planned County or state initiatives. 4.2.1 Category 1: Trail Connections and Local Pathway Extensions These improvements address short but strategic gaps between neighborhoods, schools, and existing trails. They use existing public corridors wherever possible to expand safe mauka–makai movement and cultural access. Key Trail and Pathway Connections La‘aloa to Walua Connector (Zone B) • Establishes a trail connection using the existing firebreak and public easement between La‘aloa Avenue and Walua Road. • Requires coordination with adjacent properties and verification of easement documentation. Walua Trail to Kealakowa‘a Connector (Zone C) • Adds signage and striping from the Walua Trail via Lako Street to reach Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway, using the existing signalized crossing. • Provides managed access to Kealakowa‘a Heiau. 32 Keiki He‘enalu Trail Concept (Zone F) • Provides a long-term neighborhood connector linking Ali‘i Drive (Banyans) to Kahakai School. • Uses the Ali‘i Bypass ROW and provides opportunities for stormwater, firebreak, and greenspace functions. Road-Based Trail Extensions The following near-term and mid-term improvements function as de facto trail corridors through signage, pavement markings, and shoulder enhancements: • Kamehameha III Road pedestrian/bicycle lane (Zone A) • Walua Road pedestrian/bike upgrades (Zones A and C) • Kaleiopapa Street shared-use improvements (Zone A) Category Summary These projects emphasize the following: • Short, strategic trail gaps rather than long-distance realignments • Use of existing corridors to create new public access • Improved connectivity to neighborhood destinations, schools, and historic sites 4.2.2 Category 2: Greenway-Type Corridors and Linear Mobility Routes These are longer, continuous walking and biking routes along major spine roads. They provide shaded, comfortable everyday mobility between civic, residential, and shoreline destinations. Representative Projects Walua Road Corridor (Zones A and C) • Enhances corridor as a shared walking and biking route with markings, shoulder improvements, and gateway signage • Connects multiple neighborhoods and intersects with trail connections described in Category 1 Makala Boulevard and Kaiwi Street Connections (Zone D) • Improves signage and crosswalks to strengthen the link between Kailua Village, Old Industrial, and the Old Airport Park 33 North Kona Spine Routes: Kealakehe Parkway, Ka‘iminani, and Ane Keohokālole Highway (Zone E) • Adds continuous pedestrian/bicycle lanes and signage creating a north-south mobility spine parallel to Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway These greenway-type routes enhance comfort and reliability for people traveling on foot or by bicycle, while supporting broader objectives such as safe school access and connections between commercial, residential, and shoreline areas. 4.2.3 Category 3: Multimodal and Roadway Safety Enhancements These improvements rely primarily on striping, signage, shoulder widening, and safer crossings to reduce conflicts and improve walking/biking comfort. Key Corridors and Improvements Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway (Zones C through F) • Improves pedestrian/bicycle signage and signal integration; long-term opportunity for separated trail • Requires HDOT coordination Palani Road (Zone D) • Adds a pedestrian/bicycle lane or path connecting Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway to Ane Keohokālole Highway • Adds a new crosswalk at Kamakaeha Kamehameha III Road, Kaleiopapa Street, Oni Oni Street (Zones A and C) • Establishes shared pedestrian/bicycle lane markings, shoulder widening, and improved crossings Kaiwi Street, Makala Boulevard (Zone D) • Establishes marked paths, signage upgrades, and additional crosswalks 34 Picture 12. Gathering Under the Pavilion at Kailua Beach Ka‘iminani Drive and Hina Lani Street (Zone E) • Improves pedestrian/bicycle lane markings and connections to Ane Keohokālole Highway Category Summary These enhancements do the following: • Improve safety where pedestrians and cyclists already travel. • Reduce vehicular conflict points. • Promote multimodal travel without major construction. 4.2.4 Category 4: Access Improvements and Connections to Key Destinations These strengthen links to cultural and recreational areas—including heiau, shoreline access points, civic spaces, and schools—through signage, path improvements, and better neighborhood routing. 35 Representative Access Improvements Pier-to-Brewery Block Pedestrian Corridor (Zone D) • Enhances a heavily used pedestrian link between the Kailua Pier and Kuakini Highway Access to Kealakowa‘a Heiau (Zone C) • Includes a managed-access connection integrated with Walua Trail improvements Neighborhood access routes in Keauhou and La‘aloa (Zone A and B) • Uses signage and markings to improve connections to existing sidewalks, streets, and recreational assets 4.2.5 Category 5: Open-Space and Greenspace Opportunities These include long-term acquisitions and corridor transformations that support recreation, ecological function, and cultural stewardship. Examples Puhi Springs Parcel (Zone D) • Offers a significant long-term acquisition that would create a mauka–makai connector with stormwater and parkland functions La‘aloa Firebreak Park Concept (Zone F) • Reimagines the Ali‘i Bypass ROW as a community greenway/firebreak corridor with recreational benefits These opportunities demonstrate how mobility corridors can double as community greenspaces. 4.2.6 Category 6: Long-Term Regional Connections These reflect multi-agency projects requiring future coordination and funding partnerships. Long-Term Concepts • Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway crossing at Ka‘iminani (major safety upgrade) • North-of-Palani multimodal enhancements requiring HDOT partnership • Keiki He‘enalu Trail neighborhood connector Table 2 provides a simple crosswalk that shows which types of improvements are planned in each zone. This makes it easier to answer questions like, “What kinds of projects are 36 happening near where I live?” or “Where are the main safety and connectivity upgrades happening across Kona?” Bringing the Project Categories Together Taken together, the project categories in this section show how the KOSN is more than a list of separate projects, but is instead a connected network designed to support everyday life in West Hawaiʻi. Each category plays a different role, but all share the same goal: making it easier and safer for people to move, gather, and connect with place. Trail connections and local pathways help fill in small but important gaps where people already walk. Greenway-type routes and corridor improvements create longer, more comfortable options for walking and biking between homes, schools, parks, and shops. Roadway safety upgrades make busy streets safer for everyone, whether they drive, walk, or bike. Access improvements strengthen connections to cultural sites, village centers, the shoreline, and community gathering spaces. Open-space opportunities and long-term concepts make sure that today’s investments can grow into a broader outdoor network for future generations. 4.3 Quantitative Summary of Improvements The Illustrative Plan illustrates a wide range of proposed improvements, including trail connections, mobility corridors, multimodal roadway upgrades, open-space opportunities, and shoreline access points. Using the scale bars and alignment lengths shown on the maps, the following approximate measurements were developed to describe the overall scope of the network. These values are intended to reflect general scale and order of magnitude,1 not engineered survey distances. 1 Caveat on Quantitative Estimates: All distances, acreages, and counts provided in this section are approximate and were derived from the scale bars and graphic alignments shown in the Illustrative Plan (Figure 1 to 5). These values are intended to describe the relative scale and extent of proposed improvements, not to serve as surveyed measurements or engineering design data. Actual project lengths, acreages, and locations will be refined through future phases of planning, design, and agency coordination. The estimates presented here should therefore be understood as planning-level approximations that communicate scope rather than prescriptive project specifications. 37 Table 2. Summary of KOSN Project Types by Category Project Type Representative Projects (Project Numbers) Zones Nature of Improvements Trail Connections and Local Pathway Extensions La‘aloa–Walua Trail Connector (P-39); Walua Trail → Kealakowa‘a Connector (P-05); Keiki He‘enalu Trail (Long-Term Concept [P-20]) B, C, F Short, strategic trail links; easement-based connections; improved access to cultural sites; long-term neighborhood trail concepts Greenway-Type Corridors/Linear Mobility Routes Walua Road Corridor (P-12); Kaiwi Street and Makala Boulevard Connectors (P- 15, P-25); Kealakehe Parkway (P-18); Ka‘iminani Drive and Ane Keohokālole Highway Pedestrian/Bicycle Lanes (P-14) A to E Continuous walking/biking routes; shoulder improvements; corridor signage and striping; informal “greenway-like” mobility spines Multimodal and Roadway Safety Enhancements Palani Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Corridor (P-29); Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway Multimodal Enhancements (P-37); Oni Oni Street Crossing (P-08); Kaleiopapa Street Shared-Use Improvements (P-16) A to F Marked pedestrian/bicycle lanes, shoulder widening, safety crossings, traffic-calming interventions, HDOT-coordinated improvements Access Improvements to Key Destinations Pier-to-Brewery Block Pedestrian Connection (P-32); Kealakowa‘a Heiau Managed-Access Route (P-05); Neighborhood Access Enhancements in Keauhou and La‘aloa A, C, D Enhanced pedestrian access to historic sites, civic spaces, schools, village centers, and shoreline areas Open Space and Greenspace Opportunities Puhi Springs Acquisition (P-36); La‘aloa Firebreak Park Concept (P-23) D, F Parkland creation, greenway/firebreak dual function, stormwater benefits, new mauka– makai open-space connections Long-Term Regional Mobility Concepts Ka‘iminani Drive Crossing at Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway (P-30); Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway Separated Shared-Use Path (Concept [P-37]); Keiki He‘enalu Trail (P-20) E to F Projects requiring major capital investment, ROW coordination, or state-led implementation 38 Table 3. Approximate Extent of KOSN Improvements Improvement Type Approximate Length/Quantity Representative Corridors or Areas (Figures 1 - 5) Trail Connections and New Pathway Links ~5.5 to 6 miles Shown on Figure 5: Walua North and South sections (2.5 miles); Judd Trail realignment (0.75 mile); La‘aloa to Walua connection (0.5 mile); Kealakowaʻa connector (0.25 mile); Kainaliu Trail extension (1.25 to 1.5 miles). Greenway-Type Corridors/Continuous Pedestrian–Bike Routes ~11 to 13 miles Shown across Figures 1 through 5: Walua Road corridor (~3 miles); Kuakini Highway improvements (~1.5 miles); Aliʻi Drive pedestrian/bicycle corridor (~3.5 to 4 miles); Ane Keohokālole Highway (~2.5 miles); Ka‘iminani corridor (~1 to 1.5 miles). Multimodal Roadway Improvements ~10 to 12 miles Shown on Figures 2 through 5: Palani Road (~1.25 miles); Kamakaeha Avenue (~0.5 mile); Maka‘eo path to Old Airport (~1 mile); Hina Lani (~1 miles); Kealakehe Parkway (~1.25 miles); Queen Kaʻahumanu segments (~3 miles); Kaleiopapa + Keauhou area (~1 mile). Neighborhood Access Improvements/Small Connectors ~15 to 20 individual nodes Mapped icons across Figures 1 through 5: Includes crosswalks, short pedestrian/bicycle lanes, mauka to makai neighborhood spurs, access links to beaches and parks. 39 Improvement Type Approximate Length/Quantity Representative Corridors or Areas (Figures 1 - 5) Open Space/Parkland Opportunities 3 to 4 parcels/ ~40 to 60 acres Shown on Figures 3 through 5: Puhi Springs parcel (~15 to 20 acres); La‘aloa Firebreak Park corridor (~20 to 30 acres); additional PONC parcels such as P-36 and P-33 (~5 to 10 acres each). Shoreline Access Nodes ~18 to 22 nodes Shown on Figures 3 through 5: Includes access along Aliʻi Drive beaches, Magic Sands, Honl’s, Kahaluʻu, Keauhou, Puale‘i, Oneo Bay. Long-Term Regional Connectors ~4 to 5 miles (conceptual) Includes Queen Kaahumanu Highway separated path concept (~2 miles); Kaʻiminani crossing and extension (~1 mile); Keiki He‘enalu Trail (~0.75 to 1 mile); Judd Trail realignment (~0.75 mile). ~ = approximately PONC = Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission 40 The measurements in Table 3 help show the overall scale of what the KOSN can provide for the community. Together, the planned improvements create more than 20 miles of walking, biking, and trail connections across Kona, linking neighborhoods, parks, beaches, cultural sites, and everyday destinations. Much of this network is made up of familiar roads and paths that people already use but with improvements that make them safer, more comfortable, and more continuous for everyone. The shorter trail connectors—like the links to Walua Trail, Judd Trail, and Kealakowaʻa—fill in missing pieces where people often walk informally today. The longer greenway-type corridors along Aliʻi Drive, Walua Road, Kuakini Highway, Ane Keohokālole Highway, and Kaʻiminani Drive form the backbone of the walking and biking network, stretching across Kona’s communities from Keauhou to the airport. The plan also includes targeted roadway safety upgrades that improve everyday travel for students, kūpuna, workers, and visitors. These multimodal projects add crosswalks, continuous shoulders, protected walking routes, and clearer bike facilities—small changes that add up to a safer and more walkable Kona. In addition to mobility improvements, the plan highlights opportunities to expand and protect open space. Parcels such as Puhi Springs and the La‘aloa Firebreak corridor have the potential to become community assets, supporting recreation, cultural interpretation, habitat, and climate resilience. Finally, the shoreline access points illustrated in the maps reinforce one of Kona’s most important qualities: the community’s connection to the coast. Nearly two dozen access points ensure that people can continue to reach beaches, fishing areas, and cultural landscapes along the shoreline. Together, these improvements show how the KOSN can grow into a cohesive, connected system—one that reflects community values and supports safe movement, cultural stewardship, and access to the places people love. 41 4.4 Rough Order of Magnitude Cost Basis of Cost Estimation All cost estimates in this chapter are Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) values prepared for long-range planning purposes only. ROM estimates are not based on detailed engineering, topographic survey, environmental analysis, or site-specific cultural review. Actual construction costs in Hawai‘i may vary substantially due to geographic conditions, labor availability, inflation, land ownership constraints, environmental permitting, and material shipping costs. Each project will require a refined cost estimate during its design and permitting phase. The ROM figures presented here should therefore be interpreted as preliminary indicators of general scale, not as budget commitments by the County or partner agencies. 4.4.1 How to Interpret These Costs The cost ranges presented in this section are best understood as indicators of relative scale, rather than precise forecasts. They help answer the following types of questions: • Which types of projects are generally lower-cost and easier to implement? • Which improvements require longer timelines, more coordination, or larger investments? • How do costs vary across Kona’s regions and project types? Because conditions vary widely across the study area, costs are shown as ranges rather than single values. This approach reflects uncertainty related to terrain, permitting, cultural and environmental review requirements, ROW constraints, labor availability, and construction timing, especially in Hawaiʻi. 4.4.2 What Drives Cost Differences Across Projects Rather than varying randomly, KOSN project costs are influenced by a small number of consistent factors, as follows: • Project Type: Signage, striping, and safety upgrades tend to be lower-cost, while separated paths, greenways, and land acquisition represent higher-cost investments. • Location and Jurisdiction: Projects along state highways or within shoreline and conservation districts require additional coordination and permitting. 42 • Length and Complexity: Multi-mile corridors and projects involving crossings, drainage, or grading cost more than short neighborhood connections. • Land Ownership: Open-space acquisitions and park development significantly increase overall cost ranges in certain zones. These factors explain why some zones emphasize modest near-term investments, while others include long-term projects with larger cost ranges. 4.4.3 Unit Cost Assumptions (Planning-Level) Unit cost assumptions used to develop the ROM estimates are summarized in Table 4. These values reflect Hawaiʻi-adjusted planning-level costs informed by County CIP records, HDOT projects, federal guidance, and industry-standard construction cost indices. To account for higher construction costs in Hawaiʻi, a 1.65× construction multiplier was applied, consistent with recent County and state transportation projects. 4.4.4 How Costs Vary Across Kona’s Regions Rather than presenting separate detailed tables for each zone, the following narrative summarizes how costs differ across the KOSN study area based on project mix and complexity. Detailed zone-level cost breakdowns are provided in Appendix E. Table 4. ROM Summary by Zone Zone Primary Cost Drivers ROM Range Zone A Roadway pedestrian/bicycle upgrades $2.1M to $4.5M Zone B Signage and trail connection $0.2M to $0.55M Zone C Highway improvements and crossings $2.5M to $5.75M Zone D Corridors and land acquisition $7.1M to $14.65M Zone E Multi-mile arterial corridors $1.85M to $4.6M Zone F Long-term regional concepts $7.6M to $21.5M These ROM estimates are intended to do the following: • Support long-range planning and prioritization • Inform funding and grant strategies • Improve transparency about relative project scale They are not final construction budgets, funding commitments, or implementation schedules. Zone A – Keauhou to Lako Costs in this zone are driven primarily by roadway-based pedestrian and bicycle improvements, including Aliʻi Drive, Kamehameha III Road, and Walua Road. These 43 improvements emphasize striping, shoulder enhancements, and shared-use treatments, resulting in a moderate overall cost range relative to project extent. Zone B – Laʻaloa to Walua This zone includes a limited number of targeted improvements, such as signage and a short trail connection using an existing firebreak and easement. As a result, Zone B represents the lowest overall investment range among the zones. Zone C – Lako to Kailua Village Zone C costs reflect state highway coordination, enhanced crossings, and shoulder improvements along Kuakini Highway, as well as neighborhood connectors. These factors increase both complexity and cost compared to purely local street improvements. Zone D – Kailua Village to Old Airport This zone includes a mix of corridor improvements and the Puhi Springs parcel acquisition, which significantly influences total cost. Land acquisition and long-term open-space opportunities account for much of the higher cost range in this area. Zone E – Harbor to Airport Costs in Zone E are driven by longer, continuous corridor improvements along Kealakehe Parkway, Kaʻiminani Drive, and Ane Keohokālole Highway. While primarily roadway-based, the length and connectivity goals result in a moderate-to-high total range. Zone F – Long-Term Regional Concepts Zone F includes the most capital-intensive, long-term concepts, such as major highway crossings, regional trail connections, and large open-space or firebreak park opportunities. These projects require multi-agency coordination and extended implementation timelines, resulting in the highest cost ranges. When considered as a whole, the KOSN represents a multi-decade investment comparable in scale to other region-wide transportation, parks, and resilience systems. The system- wide ROM cost range reflects a combination of incremental near-term safety and access improvements, medium-term corridor upgrades, and long-term regional connections and land acquisition efforts. These investments are not expected to occur all at once and will be implemented over time through a mix of County, state, federal, nonprofit, and private funding sources. 44 Picture 13. Looking Makai at Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail 45 5 Project Implementation Implementation is the essential bridge between the KOSN vision and the on-the-ground improvements that will shape Kona’s future. While the preceding chapters describe the network framework and recommended projects, this chapter outlines how the KOSN will be delivered: through coordinated governance, multi-agency partnerships, diversified funding, careful risk management, and a long-term commitment to stewardship and adaptive management. The KOSN is designed as a multi-decade initiative, unfolding through phases as resources, partnerships, and opportunities align. This chapter provides the strategic foundation necessary to guide that long-term work. 5.1 Why Implementation Matters The KOSN represents a major community vision centered on cultural integrity, multimodal access, environmental resilience, and equitable access to open space. Implementation transforms these aspirations into the following meaningful outcomes: • Safer and continuous pedestrian and bicycle routes, supporting daily mobility, recreation, and active lifestyles • Cultural resource protection, including restored or managed-access cultural sites and interpretive spaces that share Kona’s history • Climate-resilient landscapes, such as floodway parks, green infrastructure corridors, and shoreline buffers • Equitable distribution of parks and pathways, ensuring communities from Keauhou to Kohanaiki benefit from high-quality open space • Community stewardship, empowering residents, cultural practitioners, and schools to care for public landscapes Implementation is therefore not just construction; it is the sustained process of coordination, partnership, and stewardship required to maintain a resilient and culturally grounded open-space system. 46 5.2 Alignment with County, State, and Federal Planning Frameworks Successful implementation requires alignment with broader policy frameworks at all levels of government. Consistency with County, state, and federal programs ensures that projects do the following: • Qualify for funding • Navigate permitting smoothly • Reinforce long-term planning priorities • Benefit from interagency expertise 5.2.1 County Policy Framework County of Hawai‘i General Plan (County of Hawai‘i Planning Department 2005) The General Plan establishes County-wide goals related to mobility, cultural resource protection, scenic and open-space preservation, and equitable access to public spaces. The KOSN operationalizes these goals through a system of corridors, hubs, and connected open spaces. Kona Community Development Plan (Kona CDP) (County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department 2019) The Kona CDP provides a comprehensive framework guiding sustainable growth, land use, transportation, cultural preservation, and environmental care in the Kona region. The KOSN advances this framework by emphasizing the protection of natural and cultural resources, enhancing safe multimodal transportation options, and creating a resilient, accessible open space system. By implementing the CDP’s Open Space Network Program, the KOSN establishes a connected network of hubs and linkages that offer accessible open spaces. Through this integrated approach, the KOSN supports sustainable land use, cultural preservation, and the long-term well-being of the community. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) The CIP is the County’s multi-year planning and budgeting process for funding major public infrastructure projects. It ensures that essential infrastructure is developed and maintained in coordination with community growth and priorities. The KOSN plan aligns with the CIP by identifying priority open space and multimodal transportation projects that can be phased and funded through the CIP. By integrating the KOSN’s hubs, linkages, and recommended improvements into the CIP process, the plan supports coordinated investment in infrastructure that advances sustainable growth, enhances public access, and improves community well-being in the Kona region. 47 Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Fund (PONC) The PONC is essential for acquiring parcels that support shoreline access, cultural preservation, and ecological resilience. The Illustrative Plan strengthens PONC nominations by doing the following: • Identifying priority parcels • Illustrating their network function • Documenting community justification 5.2.2 State Frameworks Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) Relevant DLNR divisions and their mandates include the following: • Na Ala Hele: Trail access, historic trail guidance • State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD): Cultural resource review • OCCL: Shoreline permitting and conservation district compliance Coordination with DLNR is critical for cultural landscapes, coastal areas, and trail projects. Hawai‘i Department of Transportation (HDOT) Several KOSN corridors intersect state highways. HDOT partnership expands access to the following: • Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) • Safe Streets for All (SS4A) • Complete Streets initiatives • Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) transportation formula funding Hawai‘i Coastal Zone Management (CZM) KOSN supports CZM goals by improving shoreline access, enhancing resilience, and incorporating climate adaptation strategies. 5.2.3 Federal Frameworks Federal partners contribute technical expertise, permitting guidance, funding opportunities, and cultural landscape stewardship. Key agencies and their relations to the KOSN are as follows: • Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Active transportation, multimodal corridors, reconnection projects • FEMA: Hazard mitigation, green infrastructure, floodway parks 48 • NOAA: Shoreline resilience, dune restoration, climate adaptation • NPS: Ala Kahakai Trail coordination, cultural landscape management • USFWS: Habitat restoration and species protection Alignment with federal programs strengthens funding competitiveness and regulatory clarity. 5.3 Governance and Partnership Structure Implementing the KOSN will require coordination among many partners, including County departments, state agencies, community organizations, and landowners. To help make this process transparent and understandable, the County uses a Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed, or RACI, framework to clearly define who is involved in each project and what role they play. A RACI chart is a simple planning tool that answers the following common questions: • Who is leading this project? • Who makes the final decisions? • Who provides technical or community input? • Who should be kept informed as the project moves forward? Using a RACI framework helps reduce confusion, avoid duplication of effort, and ensure accountability as projects move from planning into design, funding, and construction. It also helps community members understand how decisions are made and which agencies or organizations are involved in each step. The RACI framework used for the KOSN used the following definitions and associations: • Responsible (R): The organization or group that leads the work or carries out the day-to-day tasks. • Accountable (A): The entity with final approval authority and overall responsibility for the outcome. • Consulted (C): Agencies, organizations, or community groups that provide input, expertise, or review. • Informed (I): Parties that are kept updated on progress and decisions, but are not directly involved in implementation. This framework promotes efficiency and reduces ambiguity during implementation. Appendix D contains the RACI matrix for the proposed projects discussed in Chapter 4. 49 KOSN implementation requires a coordinated governance model. The recommended structures are discussed in the following sections. 5.3.1 County Department in Charge of Project Implementation (Accountable) The following departments are responsible for implementation of various KOSN projects: • Planning Department: Planning projects • Department of Public Works (DPW): Design projects • Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR): Projects pertaining to park spaces • Research and Development (R&D) The responsibilities of those departments include the following: • Coordinate annual CIP and grant work programs • Oversee design, engineering, and construction • Maintain the KOSN GIS database • Facilitate environmental review and permitting • Produce annual progress reports • Support stewardship agreements 5.3.2 Technical Advisory Group (Consulted) The Technical Advisory Group ensures cultural, environmental, mobility, and regulatory standards. Potential Technical Advisory Group members include the following: • DLNR (Na Ala Hele, SHPD, OCCL) • HDOT • USFWS • NPS • NOAA and watershed partnerships • Cultural practitioners and historians • Universities and conservation groups 5.3.3 Community Stewardship Network (Responsible Partners) The Community Stewardship Network comprises local organizations, cultural groups, and schools that contribute to maintenance and interpretation. Member roles may include the following: • Native vegetation restoration • Trail and shoreline stewardship • Cultural interpretation and education • Light maintenance and monitoring • Citizen science and community data collection 50 This structure fosters shared responsibility and long-term sustainability. 5.3.4 Council and Mayor (Informed) The County Council and Mayor’s Office maintain policy alignment, approve budgets, and receive regular updates. 5.4 Funding and Resource Strategy The KOSN relies on a diversified funding strategy involving public agencies, private partners, nonprofit organizations, and community groups. County Funding Tools • CIP • PONC • Operating budgets • General obligation bonds • Fair Share fees State Funding Tools • TAP • Safe Routes to School • Legacy Land Conservation Program • Na Ala Hele partnerships • State of Hawai‘i Department of Health (DOH) 319 watershed grants • Green Fee Federal Funding Tools • FHWA TAP and Reconnecting Communities • SS4A safety grants • FEMA Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) • Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) • NOAA Coastal Resilience Program Public–Private Partnerships • Trail easements • Resort-area shoreline access coordination • Sponsorships for restoration, signage, and cultural interpretation 51 Community and Philanthropic Resources • Hawai‘i Community Foundation, Trust for Public Land, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation • Adopt-a-Trail programs • Youth stewardship initiatives Long-Term Stewardship Endowment A future KOSN Trust Fund may support stewardship, cultural programming, maintenance, and ecological restoration over time. 5.5 Risk Management and Contingency Planning Long-term implementation involves uncertainty. Risks include financial constraints, environmental impacts, regulatory delays, cultural considerations, and maintenance capacity limitations. To address these risks, the KOSN incorporates the following mitigation strategies: • Diversifying funding sources • Implementing projects in phases • Maintaining clear RACI assignments • Conducting early cultural and environmental consultation • Establishing stewardship partnerships • Using resilient materials and context-sensitive design practices A yearly risk review process will be used to reassess priorities, respond to emerging challenges, and maintain implementation momentum over time. 5.6 Monitoring and Adaptive Management Monitoring supports accountability and continuous improvement throughout implementation of the KOSN. The monitoring framework tracks progress across key outcomes related to connectivity, environmental health, cultural stewardship, equity, and community engagement, ensuring that investments remain aligned with community values and long-term goals. Because the KOSN is a multi-decade effort involving multiple agencies and partners, monitoring is designed to be practical, transparent, and scalable, rather than overly technical or burdensome. Monitoring and adaptive management work together to allow the 52 KOSN to respond to changing conditions, community input, funding availability, and project performance over time. For each metric, the monitoring framework is structured around the following four guiding questions: • Who is responsible for tracking progress • What outcomes are measured • When data are collected and reviewed • How information is documented, reported, and used to guide decisions 5.6.1 Roles and Responsibilities for Monitoring RACI monitoring responsibilities align with the governance structure described in Section 5.3 and are distributed as follows: • County Department in Charge of Project Implementation (Accountable) Oversees the monitoring program, ensures consistency across departments, maintains records, and prepares annual progress reports. • Responsible County Departments (Responsible) DPW, DPR, Planning Department, and R&D collect and manage data related to construction, maintenance, park access, and GIS mapping. • Technical Advisory Group (Consulted) Provides guidance on ecological indicators, cultural resource protection, regulatory compliance, and data interpretation. • Community Stewardship Network (Responsible Partners) Supports on-the- ground monitoring through volunteer reporting, stewardship activities, and community-based data collection. • Mayor and County Council (Informed) Receive regular updates and use monitoring results to guide policy direction, budget decisions, and CIP priorities. 5.6.2 Monitoring Metrics: Who, What, When, and How The KOSN monitoring framework tracks the following five core metric categories: • Connectivity and Access Metrics Connectivity and access metrics are tracked by DPW and the Planning Department, with coordination from HDOT where projects occur on state facilities. These metrics measure progress toward completing miles of trails and shared-use paths, improving or adding shoreline access points, and delivering safe routes to schools. Data are updated annually as projects are completed and reviewed during CIP programming cycles. Information is 53 documented through GIS mapping maintained by the County Department in Charge of Project Implementation, project completion records and as-built plans, and summaries included in the annual KOSN progress report. • Ecological Health Metrics Ecological health metrics are monitored by DPR, R&D, and Technical Advisory Group partners such as DLNR and watershed organizations. These metrics track acres of restored or enhanced habitat, changes in tree canopy coverage and shade, and the stabilization or mitigation of erosion-prone areas. Baseline data are collected prior to construction, with follow-up monitoring conducted every 1 to 3 years depending on site sensitivity. Data sources include field assessments, photo documentation, GIS layers showing restoration areas, and integration with watershed and climate resilience datasets. • Cultural Stewardship Metrics Cultural stewardship metrics are overseen by the Planning Department in coordination with cultural practitioners and the SHPD. These metrics document cultural sites with managed access, interpretive features such as signage or cultural markers, and practitioner involvement in project design and long-term stewardship. Monitoring occurs at key project milestones (such as during design, construction, and opening) and is reviewed annually. Documentation includes consultation records, cultural access protocols maintained by the Planning Department, and narrative reporting where qualitative context is more appropriate than numerical scoring. • Equity and Accessibility Metrics Equity and accessibility metrics are tracked jointly by the Planning Department and DPR. These measures assess residents’ proximity to parks, trails, and open space; the completion of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-accessible improvements; and the distribution of investments across communities. Metrics are reviewed annually and during major plan updates using GIS-based equity analyses, ADA compliance checklists, and comparative reviews of improvements by region and neighborhood. • Community Engagement and Stewardship Metrics Community engagement and stewardship metrics are tracked by DPR in partnership with the Community Stewardship Network. These metrics capture volunteer hours contributed, stewardship events held, and participation by youth and schools. Information is tracked on an ongoing basis and summarized annually using event logs, volunteer sign-in records, and partner reports from schools and nonprofit organizations. Key outcomes are shared through public-facing KOSN-related information platforms, such as the existing KOSN StoryMap. 54 5.6.3 Reporting and Transparency Monitoring results will be shared through multiple channels, including the following: • Annual KOSN Progress Reports • A KOSN-related public information page, such as the existing KOSN StoryMap • Briefings to the Mayor and County Council • Community meetings and stewardship partner updates This transparent approach allows residents and decision-makers to understand how projects are progressing, where investments are being made, and how community input continues to shape implementation. 5.6.4 Adaptive Management: Using Data to Improve Outcomes Adaptive management ensures that monitoring results are actively used to refine KOSN implementation over time. This includes adjusting project phasing based on funding availability or maintenance capacity, modifying designs in response to ecological monitoring or cultural input, prioritizing future projects where access gaps or equity needs are identified, and strengthening partnerships where community involvement is strong. An annual review process, led by the County department in charge of project implementation with input from the Technical Advisory Group and Community Stewardship Network, will assess monitoring results and recommend adjustments to priorities, design approaches, or partnerships. Monitoring supports continuous improvement as the KOSN evolves over time. 5.7 Summary and Next Steps Implementation of the KOSN will advance through a coordinated set of near-term actions that lay the groundwork for long-term success. Early-phase projects will be programmed into the County’s CIP and aligned with state and federal grant cycles to support phased delivery. Public transparency and access to information will be strengthened through the launch of a public-facing KOSN webpage or the re-launch of the existing KOSN StoryMap following the transfer of project data from the consultant platform. At the same time, implementation will focus on initiating stewardship and restoration activities at priority sites, reinforcing the role of community partners in caring for public spaces. Operations and maintenance plans will be completed to ensure that new investments are supported over time and remain safe, accessible, and well maintained. 55 Together, these next steps establish a clear path from planning to action. The KOSN provides a long-term, community-grounded, and resilient framework to guide investment, stewardship, and collaboration, helping shape Kona’s landscape for generations to come. Picture 14. Looking Makai from Kealakehe/Pualani Estates 56 6 Where Does This Leave Us? After nearly two decades of visioning, dialogue, mapping, cultural consultation, and community work, where does Kona stand? The KOSN shows that open space in Kona is not an afterthought, nor simply undeveloped land left between buildings. It is a living system that supports daily life, cultural connection, ecological resilience, and community identity. The planning process revealed something profound: Kona already has the pieces of an extraordinary network—historic trails, shoreline access points, parks, cultural landscapes, dryland forests, and gathering spaces. What has been missing is a unifying framework that helps these places function together, rather than as isolated assets. The KOSN is a framework that provides a clear and culturally grounded way to understand how open spaces relate to one another, how people move between them, and what actions are needed to preserve these relationships for future generations. It acknowledges that community values—mauka–makai access, cultural stewardship, shoreline protection, safe mobility—are inseparable from Kona’s future livability and resilience. The maps, concepts, and recommendations in these pages do not build themselves; they guide the work that comes next. Implementation will require collaboration across County departments, state and federal agencies, cultural practitioners, community groups, landowners, and everyday stewards. It will require aligning funding, addressing constraints, and continuing to listen to community voices with respect and transparency. It will also require flexibility: that is, as Kona’s needs evolve, the network must evolve with it. The December 4, 2025, Community Celebration at Makaʻeo Pavilion was a reminder of why this work matters. Residents, kūpuna, youth, practitioners, planners, and partners came together not simply to mark the end of a process, but to affirm a collective responsibility: to care for Kona’s open spaces with intention and aloha. That responsibility extends beyond this document and into the everyday decisions—large and small—that shape Kona’s future. Moving forward, the work will be iterative, collaborative, and ongoing. But with this framework in hand, Kona is better equipped than ever to build a future where open spaces remain abundant, connected, culturally grounded, and resilient—woven into the fabric of community life for generations to come. 57 Picture 15. Ai'opio Fish Trap ʻŌlelo Hoʻopau — A Closing Reflection “Aloha ʻāina ke kuleana, ʻaʻole he koho.” Love for the land is a responsibility, not a choice. As Kona grows and changes, the open spaces that sustain its identity—its kahakai, its wahi pana, its trails, its forests—ask us to remember our reciprocal relationship with place. Ke KOSN ka uluna e moe ai ka manaʻo no ka wā e hiki mai ana—he ʻōnaehana i ulana ʻia e ka lehulehu, no ka lehulehu. The KOSN is the foundation upon which our shared future rests—woven by the community, for the community. E ola mau ka ʻāina. E ola mau ke kaiāulu. May the land thrive. May the community thrive. 58 7 Bibliography This bibliography compiles all major sources referenced during the development of the KOSN. It includes County and state planning documents, federal resources, academic and technical literature, cultural and historical works, community sources, and GIS datasets used to inform the analysis and recommendations. County and State Planning Documents County of Hawaiʻi Mass Transit Agency. 2018. Transit and Multimodal Transportation Master Plan. https://records.hawaiicounty.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?dbid=1&id=134194&page=13&c r=1. County of Hawaiʻi Mass Transit Agency. 2022. Transit and Multimodal Transportation Master Plan Supplement. https://www.konahub.info/county-hawaii-transit-and-multi-modal- transportation-master-plan-supplement-2022?document=1. County of Hawaiʻi Mass Transit Agency. 2023. Hele-On document Library and Links. https://www.heleonbus.hawaiicounty.gov/resources/document-library-and-links. County of Hawaiʻi Parks and Recreation. 2023. County of Hawaiʻi Parks and Recreation. Official website. https://www.parks.hawaiicounty.gov/. County of Hawai‘i Planning Department. 2005. County of Hawai‘i General Plan. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/301643/6372046 64141830000. County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. 2019. Kona Community Development Plan. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community-planning/cdp/kona. Hawaiʻi Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife. 2023. Hawaiʻi Island Forest Reserves. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/forestry/frs/reserves/hawaii-island/. Hawaiʻi Department of Land and Natural Resources, Engineering Division. n.d. Floodplain Management Resources. https://waihalana.hawaii.gov/fpm-publications/. Hawaiʻi Department of Land and Natural Resources, Natural Area Reserves System. 2023. Hawaiʻi Island Natural Area Reserves. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/ecosystems/nars/hawaii- island/. 59 Hawaiʻi Department of Land and Natural Resources, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands. 2023. Conservation District Subzone Maps. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/occl/subzone- maps/. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation. 2010. Complete Streets Legislative Report. https://files.hawaii.gov/dotadmin/library/legislature/2011/ACT%2054-%20SLH%202009%2 0REPORT%20-2011-%20-%20COMPLETE%20STREETS%20TASK%20FORCE%20- Part%201%20of%202.pdf. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation. 2022. Storm Water Post-Construction Best Management Practices Manual. https://www.stormwaterhawaii.com/wp- content/uploads/2022/07/PC-BMP-Manual_220718-FULL.pdf. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation. 2023a. Bicycle Planning. https://highways.hidot.hawaii.gov/stories/s/Bicycle-Planning/v4zn-nbn4. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation. 2023b. Pedestrian Planning. https://highways.hidot.hawaii.gov/stories/s/Pedestrian-Planning/a6mu-vr5z. Kona Soil and Water Conservation District. n.d. Watersheds Overview. http://kswcd.org/watersheds.html. Kona Open Space Network Subcommittee. 2017. Kona Open Space Network Subcommittee Report. Legacy Land Conservation Program. 2023. Planning Resources. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/ecosystems/llcp/planning/. Federal Resources Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2023. National Risk Index Technical Documentation. Zuzak, C., C. Goodenough, M. Stanton, A. Mowrer, B. Sheehan, P. Roberts, and J. Rozelle, authors. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_national-risk-index_technical- documentation.pdf. Federal Highway Administration. 2018. Guidebook for Measuring Multimodal Network Connectivity. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/multimodal_con nectivity/. National Park Service. 2019. Kamakahonu National Historic Landmark. https://www.nps.gov/places/kamakahonu.htm. 60 National Park Service. 2023a. Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail. https://www.nps.gov/alka/. National Park Service. 2023b. Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park. https://www.nps.gov/kaho/. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. n.d. Critical Habitat Resources. https://www.fws.gov/project/critical-habitat. U.S. Geological Survey. n.d. Northwest-Pacific Islands Region. https://www.usgs.gov/regions/northwest-pacific-islands. Academic Books and Peer-Reviewed Literature Bentrup, G. 2008. Conservation Buffers: Design Guidelines for Buffers, Corridors, and Greenways. U.S. Forest Service. Bremer, L., N. Demaagd, C. Wada, and K. Burnett. 2021. “Priority watershed management areas for groundwater recharge and drinking water protection: A case study from Hawai‘i Island.” Journal of Environmental Management, 286, 112186. Carr, S., M. Francis, L. Rivlin, and A. Stone. 1992. Public Space. Cambridge University Press. Francis, M. 2003. Urban Open Space: Designing for User Needs. Island Press. Jacobs, A. 1996. Great Streets. MIT Press. Rosenberg, D., B.R. Noon, and C.E. Meslow. 1997. “Biological corridors: Form, function, and efficacy.” BioScience, 4710, 677–687. Speck, J. 2018. Walkable City Rules: 101 Steps to Making Better Places. Island Press. Cultural and Historical Works Beckwith, M. 1970. Hawaiian Mythology. University of Hawai‘i Press. Fornander, A. 1996. Ancient History of the Hawaiian People. Mutual Publishing. Kamakau, S.M. 1961. Ruling Chiefs of Hawai‘i. Kamehameha Schools Press. Kamakau, S.M. 1968. Tales and Traditions of the People of Old. Bishop Museum Press. Maly, K. 2001. Mālama pono i ka ʻāina: An Overview of the Hawaiian Cultural Landscape. https://www.drylandforest.org/wp- content/uploads/2019/01/HwnCultrlLandscapeMaly.pdf. 61 Malo, D. 1951. Hawaiian Antiquities Moolelo Hawaii. Pukui, M.K. 1983. ʻŌlelo Noʻeau: Hawaiian proverbs and poetical sayings. Bishop Museum Press. Local and Community Sources Kaʻahahui ʻO Ka Nāhelehele. 2018. Kona Open Space Network. https://www.drylandforest.org/dry-forest-corridors/kona-open-space. Kona Coast Waterkeeper. 2021. Waterkeeper Program. https://www.finsecaelection2020.org/kona-coast-waterkeeper. Liliʻuokalani Trust. 2023. Liliʻuokalani Trust. Official website. https://onipaa.org/. Nature Conservancy of Hawai‘i. 2023. The Nature Conservancy. Official website. https://www.nature.org/. County of Hawaiʻi Parks and Recreation. 2023. County of Hawaiʻi Parks and Recreation. Official website. https://www.parks.hawaiicounty.gov/. Cost Estimation References Federal Highway Administration. 2015. Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide. U.S. Department of Transportation. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/separated_bikela ne_pdg/. Federal Highway Administration. 2016. Small Town and Rural Multimodal Networks. U.S. Department of Transportation. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/small_towns/. Hawaiʻi County Department of Public Works. 2022–2024. Capital Improvement Program Bid Summaries and Project Cost Records. https://www.hawaiicounty.gov/departments/public-works. RSMeans. 2024. City Cost Index: Honolulu, HI and Hawaiʻi County. RSMeans Construction Cost Data. https://www.rsmeans.com/. Trust for Public Land. 2023. Conservation Economics and Hawaiʻi Land Acquisition Benchmarks. U.S. Forest Service. 2025. Trail Construction and Maintenance Notebook. U.S. Department of Agriculture. https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/fs_media/fs_document/trail- maintenance-notebook.pdf. 62 GIS and Mapping References County of Hawaiʻi GIS Portal. 2023. GIS portal. https://gis.hawaiicounty.gov/arcgisportal/. County of Hawaiʻi ArcGIS Online. n.d. https://hawaiicountygis.maps.arcgis.com/. Hawaiʻi Statewide GIS Program. 2023. State GIS portal. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/. Hawaiʻi State Geoportal. 2023. State of Hawaiʻi geoportal. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/. Kona Open Space Network. 2024. StoryMap. https://arcg.is/Ora550. Appendix A: 2017 Kona Open Space Network Subcommittee Report Communication no. 2017-04 November 15, 2017 Attention: Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee Re: Kona Open Space Network Subcommittee Report Following please find the report from the Kona Open Space Network Subcommittee which includes recommendations for moving forward the development of Kona’s open space network as described in the 2008 Kona Community Development Plan. The subcommittee met four times on 9/12, 9/29, 10/20 and 11/13 and worked between these meetings to develop this report. Included in the report are the subcommittee’s recommended vision, goals, action and additional considerations for Kona’s open space network development. It is recommended that this effort initially focus on the Kona urban area, since this is the area of highest development activity. Also attached is an illustrative map included solely as one possible example of potential hubs and links in Kona’s open space network, which was created by one of the subcommittee members. The map is for illustration and example purpose only and should not be construed as a recommendation by the subcommittee. The subcommittee would like to acknowledge the contributions from the following community members who also helped with the preparation of this report: Tina Clothier (PATH), Kirstin Kahaloa (Blue Zones Project), Lele Kimball, Mary Metcalf (Ka Ahahui O Ka Nahelehele) and Jim Sogi. If the Action Committee concurs, we request that this report be placed on the January 2018 Kona CDP Action Committee agenda for review and discussion. Respectfully submitted, Kari Kimura Shirley David Janice Palma-Glennie Communication no. 2017-04 Page 1 Kona Open Space Network Vision Kona is known for its interconnected open space network, harmoniously integrated in and around its built environment, supporting the health and wellbeing of the community and preserving sensitive natural and cultural resources. The Kona Open Space Network consists of: A living accessible coastal corridor including nearshore waters where residents and visitors alike can enjoy world renowned coastlines, beaches and clean coastal waters; Culturally important natural resource areas that are appropriately stewarded and where traditional cultural practices can continue and thrive; Multifunctional open spaces, corridors and view planes integrated throughout and surrounding the urban area that maintain a sense of place; Regional paths, trails, greenways and greenbelts along contour corridors linked with mauka-makai connectors that create an urban trail network providing enjoyable and functional walking and biking access to open spaces and key destinations; Neighborhoods where residents can walk following natural, shaded corridors to park and playground areas; Learning landscapes for schools, residents and visitors who have access to natural educational spaces and interpretation of culturally significant areas and natural heritage that enhance connection with the land. Goals Create and maintain a network of open spaces in the Kona District urban area that enables public access to nature and encourages healthy, active lifestyles. Create a functional, safe and attractive trail, corridor, bike path and sidewalk network that is separated from traffic where possible and allows movement around Kona with minimal reliance on the automobile. Encourage the rural and agricultural character of Kona with compact and walkable urban centers surrounded by open space. Communication no. 2017-04 Page 2 Goals (continued) Anticipate and mitigate risks from natural hazards, climate change and conflict between built infrastructure and natural processes through appropriate design, policies and enhanced ecosystem services of the open space network. Incorporate shoreline setback areas to the extent practical and available for realizing shoreline linear parks along as much of Kona’s coastline as possible. Preserve, restore and steward sensitive natural and cultural resources and native ecosystems that are identified as part of the open space network. Provide interpretative opportunities and educational material in the open space network to help school children, residents and visitors learn, appreciate and interact with Hawaii’s natural and cultural resources. (Refer to Appendix A for examples of the vision and goals.) Recommended Action: Hire a consultant who will work with key stakeholders and subject matter experts to: 1. Develop and facilitate a community awareness campaign including targeted outreach and education to elicit community input, buy-in, financial support and stewardship. 2. Identify natural and/or culturally important areas for the Kona urban area open space network that may: • Qualify for development rights transfer sending areas; • Be prioritized for acquisition through PONC or other land trust or land stewardship organizations; • Qualify for funding for protection and restoration through government agencies, the future Kona Treasures Fund nonprofit or other nonprofits; • Be designated as no build or no development areas, natural hazard or climate change mitigation open space buffers, or shoreline no-build setbacks; • Be prioritized in urban areas for compatible green infrastructure, low impact uses or as green belt areas; • Be proposed as desired parks or other open space. 3. Assess, design and create a GIS map of the Kona urban area open space network which will include existing and planned public access (unrestricted or managed) hubs and links, including without limitations and as appropriate: • Cultural, historic, educational and natural heritage sites; • County, state and federal parks and recreational areas; • Greenway corridors, hiking trails, urban trails networks, the Ala Kahakai Trail, planned Na Ala Hele trails, suitable public easement corridors; • Existing and planned bike share facilities and bike paths and lanes; • Shoreline, ocean access and coastline areas suitable for open space or future parks; Communication no. 2017-04 Page 3 • Anchialine ponds, sensitive ecological areas; • Forest or natural area reserves, watershed management areas, critical habitats, game management areas; • Floodways, natural drainage areas, and flood zones suitable for inclusion. • Suggested connections to open space areas outside the urban area open space network where those connections are naturally contiguous. 4. Develop recommendations for implementing the open space network that: • Prioritize project implementation and property acquisition based on significant value, extensive public use, imminent threat of development, no other alternative means of protection and other agreed on criteria. • Articulate key policy revisions and mechanisms needed to achieve the open space network vision such as: ◦ Regulations and incentives ◦ Transfer of development rights policy and transfer areas (sending and receiving) ◦ Stormwater management policies ◦ Urban forest policies including species selection, installation and maintenance ◦ Policies for sidewalks, urban trails and bikeways including those along roadways and in new developments • Identify appropriate funding and legal mechanisms including recommendations for creating the Kona Treasures Fund nonprofit. Additional Considerations: Need to determine the Open Space Network Program’s overall management and funding, and how it integrates with other programs called for in the KCDP. These include amongst others: ◦ Kona Treasures Fund ◦ Kona Mauka Watershed Partnership Program ◦ County Cultural Resources Commission ◦ Anchialine Ponds Management Program ◦ Stormwater Management Program ◦ Adopt-a-Corridor Program ◦ The Official Transportation Network Map and Multi-Modal System Other considerations needed include: ◦ Utilizing legal mechanisms such as conservation easements, public access easements, zoning overlays, development agreements, etc. ◦ Consulting with land owners and developers to determine appropriate open space areas within private parcels ◦ Identifying stewards for maintaining select portions of the open space network ◦ Connecting with future open space networks beyond the Kona Urban Area Communication no. 2017-04 Page 4 Definitions from the KCDP (Note * definitions are added for clarity) Corridor* — A lineal geographic area allowing safe access and movement across the landscape for people and wildlife. (Refer to Greenway definition) Flood Corridors — Includes FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 100-year flood plains and planned flow ways. Greenbelt or Greenway — Areas of largely undeveloped, wild agricultural land surrounding or neighboring urban areas. (From KCDP Policy LU -2.2, 3.: The Greenbelt is a strategic planning tool to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. …The Greenbelt may also serve multi- purpose uses, such as for drainage, sensitive resource preserves or wildfire protection buffers.) Greenfield — An area that is undeveloped or used for agriculture. Refers only to undeveloped open space within the Kona Urban Area between TODs, TNDs and infill. Greenway — An open space corridor in largely natural conditions which may include trails for bicycles and pedestrians. Open Space —Undeveloped land or water body which is free of structures and equipment, except for those incidental to the land’s open space uses. Open space may include the following: flood protection, creating a sense of special separation from incompatible land uses, areas for agricultural operations, passive recreation, active recreation, conservation uses, or historical site preservation. Urban Area — The Kona Urban Area spans from the Kona International Airport to Keauhou (*and mauka to Mamalahoa Highway). The majority of future growth shall be directed within this area. Communication no. 2017-04 Page 5 Appendix A. Examples for the Kona Open Space Network Vision and Goals Examples of possible hubs in the open space network: • Educational spaces (interpretive and educational centers, botanical gardens) • Recreational spaces (parks, playgrounds, sports fields, ballparks, skate parks) • Coastal corridor natural areas (beach parks, Kaloko-Honokohau National Park, NELHA, O’oma, shoreline access areas, snorkeling, diving and surfing areas) • Community gathering spaces (civic centers or plazas, Hale Halawai, community gardens, Makaeo Pavilion) • Protected and managed cultural and historic sites open to the public (heiau, burial grounds, historic sites, sacred landscapes, Hulihee Palace) • Natural or climate change hazard areas identified for buffers, green infrastructure or ecosystem services • Scenic view areas and view planes • Culturally significant natural areas and sensitive natural resource areas Examples of culturally significant natural areas and sensitive natural resource areas • Nearshore marine ecosystems (coral reefs, wetlands, Anchialine ponds) • Native plant ecosystems (dryland forests, coastal region) • Subsistence and gathering landscapes (coastal zone, coconut groves, fish ponds, cordage gardens, la’au lapa’au, kalo lo’i) • Productive agricultural landscapes • Mauka forest watershed recharge areas • Stream and flood channel riparian areas and buffers Examples of possible links in the open space network: • Shorelines (including the KCDP vision of a 17 mile long protected stretch of open coastline from Makaeo north to Kikaua Pt) • Historic, ancient or natural area trails (The National Park’s Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail, future Na Ala Hele trails) • Walua Road walking and bike path • The old West Hawaii Railroad bed • Walking and biking path along Ane Keohokalole Hwy • Kona Village Grand Alii Esplanade • Linear parks that function as urban trail network, greenbelt or greenway, flood mitigation, native ecosystem corridors, learning landscapes • Regional contour corridors and greenways linked with mauka-makai connector paths • Flood corridors and flood contour swales • Scenic heritage corridors (Alii Drive) • Connections to multimodal transportation hubs and key destinations. Examples of natural hazards or climate change risks that could be mitigated with appropriate open space design, policies or enhanced ecosystem services: • Lava risk • Severe storm or hurricane • Flooding from intense rainfalls Communication no. 2017-04 Page 6 • Erosion and runoff of soils, pollutants and biological hazards • Wildfire • Tsunami • Sea level rise leading to coastal erosion or subsidence • Rising temperatures, humidity and heat index • Strong winds Example strategies to mitigate conflict between built infrastructure and natural processes: • Buffers between incompatible land use such as sensitive coastal and riparian water resources • Buffers around native ecosystem areas • Natural corridors that allow movement of species across the landscape • Natural hazard or climate change no build zones and buffers • Site level design to minimize impervious surface areas; incorporate rainfall capture through bioswales or collection for later irrigation use, etc. • Keyline contour swales in flood areas that overlap with greenway corridors to reduce runoff volume and increase infiltration Examples of ecosystem services provided by green infrastructure and planting of appropriate native or hardy non-invasive trees and vegetation: • Flood control by intercepting, filtering and storing water in natural aquifers (e.g. increase tree canopy cover and infiltration potential) • Reduced erosion and stormwater/pollutant runoff (e.g. using bioswales) thus minimizing harm to ocean reefs and human health • Soil formation and retention • Shade, cooling and windbreaks for enhanced livability and energy conservation • Improved air and water quality • Noise reduction • Traffic calming • Improved psychological health • Conversion of carbon dioxide to oxygen and storage of carbon (climate change mitigation) • Beautification, aesthetics and increased property values Examples of benefits from integrating native plants in the open space network: • Links remaining fragments of native ecosystems (dry forest, coastal) via corridors to enhance biodiversity, overall health and long-term sustainability • Mitigate threat of extinction for Hawaii’s endangered native flora and fauna species • Provide wildlife habitat and corridors for safe migration • Conserve community character and heritage • Provide support for Hawaiian cultural practices (e.g. subsistence or gathering) • Provide public educational opportunities to interact with nature and learn about native species Communication no. 2017-04 Page 7 Appendix B. Open Space Network Example Illustrative Map Appendix IV – Examples of Land Use and Financial Planning, Strategy, Policy Efforts Note that this list is not intended to be exhaustive but illustrative of tactics to apply or changes to be made in order to realize the Kona Open Space Network. A. Land acquisition or easements. B. Regulations and incentives. C. Transfer of development rights, conservation easements, zoning overlays. D. Watershed, stormwater, and flood corridor management policies. E. Urban forest policies that increase native plant populations. F. Trail and bikeway standards for new developments. G. Changes to Chapter 2, Article 42 (PONC) to allow and fund planning districts to develop open space plans that conform to their respective Community Development Plans (CDP). H. Implementing a strategy, goal, policy or action included in the Kona CDP (see Appendix II). Appendix V – Definitions The following definitions originate in the Kona Community Development Plan. Additions or clarifications are noted with an ‘*’. Corridor* — A lineal geographic area allowing safe access and movement across the landscape for people and wildlife. (Refer to Greenway definition) Flood Corridors — Includes FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 100-year flood plains and planned flow ways. Flow Way — Proposed man-made drainage or designated channels. Green Infrastructure* — an interconnected system of natural areas and open space that conserves ecosystem values, helps sustain clean air and water, and provides benefits to people and wildlife. Greenbelt or Greenway — Areas of largely undeveloped, wild agricultural land surrounding or neighboring urban areas. * A greenway may also be an open space corridor in largely natural conditions which may include trails for bicycles and pedestrians. Greenfield — An area that is undeveloped or used for agriculture. Refers only to undeveloped open space within the Kona Urban Area between TODs, TNDs and infill. Open Space —Undeveloped land or water body which is free of structures and equipment, except for those incidental to the land’s open space uses. Open space may include the following: flood protection, creating a sense of special separation from incompatible land uses, areas for agricultural operations, passive recreation, active recreation, conservation uses, or historical site preservation. Urban Area — The Kona Urban Area spans from the Kona International Airport to Keauhou (*and mauka to Mamalahoa Highway). The majority of future growth shall be directed within this area. Appendix B: Comments Received on the Draft Illustrative Plan Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 1 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response Add Heiau Add heiau throughout the KOSN Map The decision not to display these locations is intentional. Our goal is to help preserve and protect culturally significant areas. Sharing exact details publicly can put these sites at risk of unwanted visits, which may cause harm. Expand project area boundary Add Connections Outside of the Kona Urban Area -- including Kaloko and Holualoa, and especially to parks or open space “destinations” such as new parks that are mauka of the KOSN. We will add connections outside of the Kona Urban Area. Increase Recreational Opportunities Increase Recreational Opportunities -- including single track recreational trails onto the KOSN. Recreation is also important to connecting in KOSN for family and youth buy-in. Our current focus is on preserving existing open space to support the quality of life for Big Island residents. For this reason, new projects are not being added at this time. However, we are continuing to track ideas for the future, with the goal of identifying opportunities that could strengthen and expand the open space network as this effort grows. Review Historical Maps Consider looking into 1950 Henry Kekahuna maps from the Bishop Museum to identify what might be added as an additional site. Historical maps such as the 1950 Henry Kekahuna collections are valuable cultural resources. However, the focus of the Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) plan is to illustrate how existing and proposed key sites connect within an interconnected network, rather than to locate all cultural sites or identify additional ones. This comment is appreciated and has been noted for awareness. Categorize Spaces Consider depicting sites within categories of spaces.A list of sites shown and their respective categories will be included in the report. Resources Many areas on Aliʻi Drive are of Historic Registry, such as Kamakahonu, Keolonahihi, Keakealaniwahine, Kahaluʻu, and Hōnaunau. These were suggested to be included in the Kona Open Space Mapping. If it is determined that there is a need to identify all the Historic Registered sites and make them known, these areas will be included in the report. Paved Path Extension to Mamalahoa and Palani Junction A well used public paved path that should extend past Ane Keohokālole and go through Mamalahoa and Palani Junction This is shown on the KOSN plan. Smaller Scale Open Spaces Needed Smaller Scale Open Spaces Needed in industrial areas or in spaces where people work. Suggestions include creating pedestrian areas, hubs to eat lunch or take a break, or trails that connect to other open areas This project is focused on creating a connected network of open spaces by building on areas that already exist. While new spaces are not being created through this effort, ideas like these are valuable for understanding community needs and may help guide future opportunities. Increase Tree Canopies Planting more trees to create shady areas We will place this on the projects list for future Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 2 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. Green Space Improvements Are there planned improvements in the green spaces at the old airport park? Each recommended improvement in the KOSN plan was developed through Subcommittee input, field observations, and coordination with County, state, and federal agencies to enhance accessibility and protect natural and cultural resources. The KOSN plan does not include specific green-space improvements within the Old Airport Park. However, it does recommend multimodal roadway improvements along the length of the Old Airport recreational area, including potential signage and safety upgrades for pedestrian and bicycle paths. If additional green-space improvements become a priority for the community, they can be raised through the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) Action Committee. Liliʻuokalani Trust (LT) sites Connecting with Liliʻuokalani Trust on Makalapa Project District and Area Makai -- Liliʻuokalani Trust (LT) has sites for future development. Recommend connecting with LT during planning and entitlements. There are cultural sites on property for access by the community. We have been in contact with the Liliʻuokalani Trust since the beginning of this project. We will continue to review their planned projects in or near the project area to ensure they align with the goals of this effort. No Action (comment in support) Positive to Have Highways Near Coastline -- as it creates a natural gap. We agree that highways near the coastline can create a natural separation between the sea and the mountain. In the project area, the Queen Kaʻahumanu Highway already runs parallel to the coast and serves as the divide between mauka and makai areas. 7; 64; 65 No Action (comment in support) Support for Multiple Sites -- for sites #7, 64, 65.We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 16 No Action (comment in support) Support for Proposed Linear Park -- part of Site #16 Gateway/Linear Park along Aliʻi Bypass Corridor. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. Improve Trail Access Trail Improvements -- access to trail at old airport road needs improvement. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 36 Improve Signage Signage at Entrance of Site #36 Kaloko Honokōhau National Historical Park -- signage at the entrance of the Historical Park We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 3 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response needed, such as to pick up trash, respecting the area, etc.opportunities arise. 63; 64 New Site - Add Kuakini Wall Preserving Remainder of Kuakini Wall -- north of Sites #63 (Parcel Near County Parking Lot) and 64 (Parcel with Natural Spring and Mauka-Makai Access). The 1950ʻs Bishop Museum Map shows Laniakea, a remnant of a missionary home from Thurston, as well as Kaʻai Pui Springs. This is an important cultural site. However, it is not an open space intended for public visitation (between many private parcels), and therefore it will not be highlighted as part of this effort. Amend Policy for Open Space Requirements Increasing Open Space Development -- increase park requirements in subdivisions to 20% in Hawaiʻi County Code This recommendation is outside the scope of the current project. However, we will share it with the County for consideration as part of their Island-wide policy efforts. New Site Emergency and Fire Mitigation in Heavy Residential or Vegetation Areas -- create firebreak or bolt areas. This may be through a natural firebreak between a mauka to makai access road or through Aliʻi Drive Bypass/Parkway and Kuakini Highway. There are also low power lines on Kuakini which may pose a fire hazard. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. Safety improvements Aliʻi Drive Improvements -- safety improvements for pedestrians and bikers due to increased traffic. Safety measures will be included in projects to help ensure the well-being of people using open spaces, including for Alii Drive. Limit Development Avoiding Continual Development -- in the mauka areas of Map 4, as there are issues tied to water and a desire to protect plants and animals in the area. This recommendation is outside the scope of the current project. However, we will share it with the County for consideration as part of their island-wide policy efforts. Improve Signage Shoreline Public Access Signage and Maps -- a need to renew shoreline public access signs. Specific areas mentioned are the trail near the Hale Kai o Kona condo and areas near Aliʻi Drive. It may be beneficial to add maps as well near the public access signage. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. New Site: Mauka-Makai Access Road Building a Mauka to Makai Access Road -- developing a mauka to makai access road. Link to Map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Znk0SJWWkfQzuaY3OGofZblBgB_ 1YAdr/view We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. (Currently, the marked-up parcels are all owned by a private developer.) Limited Access Trail Considerations Reviewing Limited Access Trails in Map -- specific comments and suggestions to the limited access trails on Map 4. Suggestions include shifting and extending trails, addressing traffic concerns, limiting development, and protecting areas with cultural and natural artifacts. While these are broad in nature, they highlight important themes—such as safety, cultural preservation, and environmental protection—that will continue to guide this effort. We will keep these considerations in mind as we refine and evaluate potential projects. Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 4 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response 1) Protecting Areas --as they are home to hoary bats and cultural artifacts such as a canoe building area. Note Major Waterways 2) Note Major Waterways -- two major waterways exist in the area, including Holualoa Stream. We will note the major waterways on the maps. Limit Development 3) Limiting Development and Adding to PONC -- to ensure there is no development in the area. This recommendation is outside the scope of the current project. However, we will share it with the County for consideration as part of their island-wide policy efforts. Add Historic Kukani Wall to Legend 4) Adding Historic Kukani Wall to Map Legend -- created to keep cows out of Kona. The walking path along the wall goes for many miles. The wall is also a feeding ground for pueo. Link to Map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/16JTAtgJ6IUvJ2BdCcbv2bUdqliURi mHA/view We acknowledge the historic significance of the Kuakini Wall. However, it is not an open space intended for public visitation (between many private parcels), and therefore it will not be highlighted as part of this effort. Trail Inter-connectivity 5) Create a Connector Between Two Trails -- for vehicle access.We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 17 Trail Extension 6) Extending Trail Near Lako Street -- as there is a partially accessible trail / unknown accessibility near Site #17 (Hale Hālāwai o Hōlualoa) that may be good to extend. Link to map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q8nkibZ- UtEYZgHExZq9aLSFWMbVsGRy/view?usp=sharing We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. Mitigate Congestion at Lako St 7) Mitigating Congestion -- known as “Lako Blocko”, where there is a large build up and congestion of cars. Link to map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZnYJJGQg7tMCZ6FCdhNqkMlgB3 KR-AiB/view?usp=sharing Projects proposed near areas of congestion will undergo traffic impact assessments as part of the due diligence process. 42 Limit Development Stopping Development at Site #42 (Keauhou Resort Golf Mauika Course) -- suggesting that no additional condos or resorts be built next to the golf course. This recommendation is outside the scope of the current project. However, we will share it with the County for consideration. 4 Trail Improvements Adding and Maintaining Trails -- walkable trails and bike trails that are maintained. Identifying which areas might be paved if there are no archaeological sites in the area. Others share that the road near the hub area may be difficult to create due to the large amount of archeological sites. We will look for opportunities to add and maintain trails, as well as other forms of access, where it makes sense to improve connections to open spaces. Any proposals will take into account cultural and archaeological sensitivities in the area. 4 New Trail Segments Segments to Build -- creating possible segments through Aliʻi Bypass/Parkway around Laʻaloa and Queen Kalama. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 5 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response opportunities arise. 4 Limit Development Forego Development -- throughout Aliʻi Bypass/Parkway. Others suggested to stop any grading as well. Private property rights limit our ability to restrict development in these areas. However, we will continue to encourage preservation and support opportunities that align with the goals of protecting open space. 4 Public Safety Identify Evacuation Plan -- creating a Tsunami Evacuation Plan on Aliʻi Bypass/Parkway. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 4 Natural Corridor Creating a Natural Corridor -- through Aliʻi Drive Bypass /Parkway where proposed linkages by KOSN and others intersect between the Bypass/Parkway and Walua Road. Reference: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q8nkibZ- UtEYZgHExZq9aLSFWMbVsGRy/view?usp=sharing We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. Preservation Preservation of Keolu-Kainaliu Road -- for its natural environment and cultural and historical value. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. New Site Add Joseph Rock Arboretum -- 48 acres near Kealakehe Elementary and Intermediate schools. This is not currently a site on KOSN Map 2. We will add the site to the map. 86 New Site Adding a Site Mauka of Site #86 (West Hawaiʻi Civic Center) -- from the PONC list. We will add the site to the map. Adjust Hub Location Shifting the Hub in Map 2 Mauka -- to include all of the proposed regional parks. We will revise the hub to include the proposed regional parks. New Site Adding Puhi Springs to KOSN, Map 4 -- in top left Hub, Puhi Springs is in historic Kailua Village. Ensure that it is recognized as Kamakahonu. We will add the site to the map. New Site - Honl's Beach Honl’s Beach Add mauka to makai trail. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. New Site - Honl's Beach Honl's Beach Add Easements -- looking into specific easements that may be near Honl’s Beach. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. New Site - Honl's Beach Honl's Beach Add Walking Path from Kuakini Trail that leads to Honl’s Beach We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 6 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response New Site - Honl's Beach Honl's Beach Add Existing Trail between Walua Road and Aliʻi Drive. Link to map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FHUsAgFTjmu37nXxRuWLaNdpS2 3lFdoJ/view?usp=sharing We will add the existing trail to the map. New Site - Honl's Beach Honl's Beach Add Protection Near Honl’s Beach -- as there are caves and family burial near Honl’s beach between Kuakini Hwy and Walua Rd. Link to map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q8nkibZ- UtEYZgHExZq9aLSFWMbVsGRy/view?usp=sharing To help protect cultural sites, we will not publicly display or advertise their specific locations in our plans. New Site Adding and Protecting Costa Caves -- on the southern part of Aliʻi Drive Bypass/Parkway where "planned/proposed by others" starts. To help protect cultural sites, we will not publicly display or advertise their specific locations in our plans. New Site Open Space at Lowest Area on Map -- as it was on the Mayor’s list to acquire for PONC. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. New Site Keauhou Parcel -- as it was purchased with PONC funds. The parcel also requires signage. We will add the site to the map. Will add the signage to the projects list for consideration. New Site Existing PONC Sites -- that are within the KOSN area.We will add the site to the map. New Site Connecting a Trail System Within Kealakekua -- as a cultural anchor. Kealakekua is south of the Kona Urban Area Boundary, so it is beyond the project scope. Access for Lineal Descendants Access for Lineal Descendants - access to areas specifically for lineal descendants. We cannot limit access to a specific group. One of the key criteria for inclusion in the KOSN is that an existing open space must be publicly accessible. Add Overlay of Preserved Spaces and Boundaries Add Overlay of Preserved Spaces and Boundaries -- an overlay of preserved spaces and parks and boundaries would be helpful to have alongside this map. We will add the "reserve" and "parks" to the map. New Site - Heʻeia Bay Foot Trail Add Heʻeia Bay Foot Trail -- as there is a foot trail to get to the bay below Kamehameha III Road. We will add the existing trail to the map. 8 Extension Site #8 (Ane Keohokālole Highway Extension) -- continue to extend.We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 66 Add Trails Site #66 (Ped/Bike Route Connecting Ane Keohokālole Hwy and Mahilani Dr) -- near Makalei estates, adding trails in the ag areas The east segment of #66 is in the ag area within the Kona Highlands and Coastview subdivisions. We can propose a Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 7 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response within Kona Highlands and Coast View.few more trails to connect the subdivision (e.g. Kapuhahi Street and Koi Street) and Site #66. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 78 Trail Access Site #78 (Trail to The Sea) -- provide access to the Trail to the Sea.Much of the Trail to The Sea has not been surveyed and its accessibility confirmed. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 15; 66 Comment in support Trails Near Sites #15 (Critical Habitat Area 3) & 66 (Ped/Bike Route Connecting Ane Keohokālole Hwy and Mahilani Dr) -- support of trails. We will consider Critical Habitat Area 3 as a good area for adding more trails. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 10 Safety improvements Site #10 (Biking/Walking Routes Improvement for Palani Rd) -- there is a definite need for safe shoulder lanes. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 23 Safety improvements Site #23 (Hina Lani Street Shoulders Improvement for Walking/Biking) -- shoulder improvements are needed. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 59 Connectivity Site #59 (Old Airport and Aliʻi Drive Connection) -- creating more connections to Site #59. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 38 Add Heiau Adding Ahuʻena Heiau to Site #38 -- as it is celebrating its 50th year of restoration. It is already included in Site #38. 63 Parking Site #63 (Parcel Near County Parking Lot) -- use the Site for parking. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 18 Parking Creating Resident Stalls In Site #18 (Hale Hālāwai Park) -- Hawaiʻi County residents only parking stalls. We cannot limit access to a specific group. One of the key criteria for inclusion in the KOSN is that an existing open space must be publicly accessible. 26; 46 Protect Cultural Sites Protecting Sites Mauka of Sites #26 (Hōlualoa Royal Center) and #46 (Keolonāhihi State Historical Park) -- as archeology reports show mauka and makai trails that are cultural sites. Link to map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q8nkibZ- We will add the site to the map. Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 8 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response 72 Policy Proposed Park for Site #72 (Puapuaʻa PONC Parcels) -- whether Site #72 (Puapuaʻa PONC Parcels) can be made into a park. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 84 Add Arboretum Adding an Arboretum -- a desire to see an arboretum in green spaces near Site #84 (Walua Trail North Trailhead). We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 84 Adjust Site Location Moving Road Into Green Section -- would like to see the road near Site #84 (Walua North Trailhead) moved into the green section, from the neighborhood. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. The “green section” referenced in the comment is privately owned and not under public jurisdiction. Therefore, relocating the road into this area is not feasible at this time. Any future changes to the road alignment would require coordination with the property owner, compliance with land-use regulations, and evaluation of broader planning and access needs. 84 Trail Extension Extending Walua Trail -- a Walua Trail extension would be a great option to get more pedestrian traffic into town. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 78 Review Accuracy Review Where Site #78 (Trail to The Sea) Connects -- feedback that the Site 78 Trail to The Sea does not join at Hina Lani Street and instead continues makai, into Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park. We will revise the trail to continue the trail into the Kaloko- Honokohau National Historic Park. 69 Review Accuracy Kikaua Point Review -- as it is in the Kūkiʻo Resort, north of the KOSN boundary. Should be noted as it is currently part of Site #69 (Protected Coastal Corridor from Kikaua Point to Keauhou Bay) on Map 5. We acknowledge that the historic trail does extend beyond the KOSN boundary. Site #69 reflects the presence of the broader coastal linkage. Review Easement and Policy Old Government Road -- Kaloko, south, an illegal chain link fence across a public easement. Clarity whether Old Government Road is protected under Public Highway Act of 1892. Additional research is needed. Review Ownership 4WD Access Point -- a question was raised regarding ownership of the vertical 4WD access point between the makai entrance of Kekaha Kai State Park Access Road to Mākoleʻā Point and whether or not it can be reopened. Link to map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ziyM6Ir2Ui53sDcL5U9m83VkCsB a85Gb/view?usp=drive_link We will check with the Parks Department. 5 Clarify Proposed Project Clarity on Site #5 (Alanui Trail Realignment) -- describing what the If Alanui Trail realignment becomes a project, we can Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 9 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response Alanui Trail realignment will look like. A request was to have an explanation in the final project writeup. explore what the proposed trail would look like.For this project, we are concerned with identifying its location relative to the existing open spaces--Ala Kahakai Trail Hub, Kaloko- Honokohau Park, Aimakapa Fishpond--to determine the accessibility to these open spaces. 11 Review Accuracy Trail East of Sites #11 (Bowling Alley) & #34 (Kailua Fire Station) -- clarity on the source of the trail and where it connects to. Information is from the project team (KOSN Subcommittee). 68 Review Accuracy Site #68 -- reviewing whether this current site should remain listed in the KOSN since it is not a fenced-in area. The presence of a fence or enclosure is not a criterion for inclusion in the KOSN. 73 Label Site Label Road Near Landfill -- below Site #73.Will revise the map. 64 Add PONC Site Adding Site #64 (Parcel with natural Spring and Mauka-Makai Access) as a PONC Site -- if this site can become part of the County PONC. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 71 Parking Parking in Site #71 -- whether paved areas will have more parking as people are currently parking in the neighborhoods. We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 84 Open Space and Ownership Open Space Near Site #84 -- a question was asked if there is open space available near the Walua trail. It may be part of Kamehameha Schools. On Lako Street, there is parking past Lako Street, a large parcel which may also be part of the KOSN. The large undeveloped parcels next to the trailhead are privately owned lands. Therefore, the City does not have jurisdiction over their use or development. However, their location and potential value to the open space network are recognized, and the City may explore future discussions with the landowner regarding possible collaboration or planning opportunities. Cesspool to Sewer Conversion Sewage Improvements -- including if any cesspool conversions can take place and what those costs may be. While this is an important consideration, it is not included within the scope of this project. 7 Site Clarification Site #7 Name Clarification -- throughout the map, labelling Aliʻi Bypass/Parkway correctly as the name seems to be used interchangeably. We will use Aliʻi Bypass and use the name consistently so as to minimize confusion. 16 Site Clarification Labeling Site #16 (Greenway/Linear Park along Aliʻi Bypass Corridor) as a Trail -- clarifying the label of Site #16 (Greenway/Linear Park along Aliʻi Bypass Corridor) as a recreation We will revise the site to show the correct location. 16 Label Site Identifying Grave Areas in Site #16 (Greenway/Linear Park along Aliʻi Bypass Corridor) -- Site #16 may have a connecting point where there are potential graves. Link to map for visual: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q8nkibZ- The decision not to display these locations is intentional and reflects our commitment to the preservation and protection of culturally significant areas. Comments from 6-28-2025 Open House 10 Site #Comment Topic Comment Response UtEYZgHExZq9aLSFWMbVsGRy/view 29 Clarify Location and Accessibility Site #29 (Judd Trail) Clarification on Location and Accessibility -- whether the dashed line below Site #29 is actually Judd Trail. Others shared that Judd Trail is not accessible. A question was asked to clarify if Judd Trail goes through Hoʻomanua Aliʻi subdivision. The trail data received from the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) identifies the Judd Trail at its current mapped location. During the meeting with the Subcommittee and DLNR, we reviewed this alignment and agreed to retain the existing trail location. Based on Google Street View, the segment makai of Kuakini Highway appears to be at least partially on private land and not publicly accessible. Accordingly, the accessibility classification for this segment has been updated to “partially accessible/unknown accessibility.”. 29 Clarify Location Site #69 (Protected Coastal Corridor from Kikaua Point to Keauhou Bay) and Site #29 (Judd Trail) Connection -- whether the Trail below Site #69 (Protected Coastal Corridor from Kikaua Point to Keauhou Bay) is part of Judd Trail or the trail realignment. Others suggested seeing if the realignment is possible as there was a developer who attempted to completed this project We will place this on the projects list for future consideration and potential implementation as opportunities arise. 29 Clarify Location Start of Site #69 (Protected Coastal Corridor from Kikaua Point to Keauhou Bay) -- as Kikaua Point starts above the map. Clarification is needed as it is believed to start from Keauhou Bay through the end of Network Map. We will revise the site to show the correct location. Aloha Open Spaces Network Ohana,7-14-25 How fortunate that we are early in our development process in Kona. We have the opportunity and the responsibility to plan carefully for open spaces and even some extended open spaces to accommodate footpaths and bike paths that will serve our growing community with functionality and beauty. The community where I grew up was just strawberry and corn fields and dairy cows when I moved in at the age of two. Yet, my 1.54mi square tract in Orange County (Rossmoor in Los Alamitos) had wide enough streets to easily accommodate two way traffic and parked cars. Every house had a shade tree planted between it’s spacious sidewalk and the road. We had a lovely park and built five elementary schools along the main thoroughfare to serve the young families buying tract homes and the adjacent community. In other words, it was well thought out right from the start with plenty of room to handle growth. As a pre teen all the way through college, I joined so many others commuting by bicycle to school, work, the beach five miles to the south, etc. I rode my bike everywhere, typically 20 miles a day. My hope is that Kona’s planners have the foresight to build into our roadways and all new developments, the easements to accommodate transportation lanes, off the highway and along the lava flow, to allow for a “safe lane”, a corridor for bikes and pedestrians. Plan for open spaces with soft paths for runners and shade canopy see (Waihou Spring Trail, 2463 Olinda Rd, Makawao, HI 96768 in Maui for a great example) I am currently pursuing Tree City USA designation for Hawaii County and am actively in the process to revive the Kona Outdoor Circle in order to help implement portions of this goal. I have a keen interest in the Kona Open Space Network as we share common goals. I have some specific suggestions to move us in this direction: 1. The Mayor to select a County Arborist. 2. The establishment of an arborist committee with an expanded role, beyond the recommendation of exceptional trees. As is referred to in the Hawaii County Code article 10, section 14. Hawaii County Code: Section 14-58-59 (in conjunction with Hawaii Revised Statutes, Section58-2). There shall be an arborist advisory committee consisting of six members who shall be appointed by the mayor. The committee shall include the following: the planning director, or the director’s designee; one member who shall be actively employed in the practice of landscape architecture; and four other members selected on the basis of active participation in programs of community beautification, or research or organization in the ecological sciences, including ethnobotany, or Hawaiiana. (1984, ord 84-22, sec 1; am 1992, ord 92-12, sec 1.) My hope is that the arborist committee would have an even broader and more specific scope. The arborist committee would would be instrumental in the development of the Hawaii County Planting Plan. This would be vital in planning which types of trees and vegetation are suitable for our open green spaces within our unique climate zones. 3. Develop a County of Hawaiʻi Tree Manual. (The Maui County Planting Plan is a very complete example of such a manual.) https://www.mauicounty.gov/DocumentCenter/View/11115/MAUI- COUNTY-PLANTING-PLAN-WHOLE-3rd-Revision?bidId= 4. Move a portion of the Walua Trail off of an existing residential road Immediately west of the Walua Trail off of Lako street is a swathe of land. I think Kamehameha Schools may own that property. It is between the residential neighborhood’s Walua Rd., currently filled with pedestrians, bikes, strollers and dogs and the Lako Shell gas station, Kona Nissan and Kona Auto Center. The cars that belong to the owners of the homes there are tasked with dodging all of these obstacles. It is terribly unfair and dangerous to all concerned. Why not create an arboretum there; a green space with foot and bike paths to serve as a green space for our community. Label the trees and use it to educate our keiki about our trees and vegetation and create a shady, safe place to walk and commute. Let’s think ahead and do the best thing for all of us. Let’s make our island the envy of all the islands and a favorite destination our visitors will want to experience and explore. Charla Thompson charlaphotography@gmail.com 808-987-5063 1 Nishimura, Kristen From:Arquitola, Shannon <Shannon.Arquitola@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent:Tuesday, September 9, 2025 1:08 PM To:Nishimura, Kristen Subject:[EXTERNAL] FW: Input This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization. Hi Kristen, This came through the KOSN email. Sharing. Mahalo, Shannon From: Arquitola, Shannon Sent: Tuesday, September 9, 2025 1:08 PM To: 'Jake Boggs' <jp80665@gmail.com> Cc: Planning – KOSN <KOSN@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: RE: Input Aloha Jake, Mahalo for reaching out and for sharing your experience walking and biking in Kona, along with your thoughtful ideas. I whole-heartedly agree that we need to make changes so people can feel safe on our roads and enjoy the many benefits of alternative transportation options. It’s clear how much you care about making our community more walkable and bikeable, and your perspective from Nani Kailua Dr. and Hienaloli is especially valuable as we move this project forward. We’ll make sure your input is included in our notes and helps inform the next steps. Appreciate your support and feedback! Mahalo, Shannon Arquitola|Planner County of Hawai‘i Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite No. 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Telephone: (808) 961-8137 Email:shannon.arquitola@hawaiicounty.gov Website:https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/ 2 From: Jake Boggs <jp80665@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, September 5, 2025 12:12 PM To: Planning – KOSN <KOSN@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Input Aloha, My name is Jake Boggs, I live on Nani Kailua Dr. here in Kona. I was sorry to have missed the public talk story in June with you guys and was recently looking over the website again and wanted to share my experience navigating, the paths that you have listed in my area. First off, I love the idea of a more walkable and bikeable Kona. There is so much potential to de-center cars in our daily navigation. Currently though biking or walking on the shoulder, or no shoulder, of the highways and roads is uncomfortable and dangerous. I live on Nanikailua Drive, and regularly walk up to Hienaloli with by daughter in a backpack or stroller. I've enjoyed this walk for many years now. I can say that Hienaloli especially is an extremely popular pedestrian path, from the intersection with Hualalai to back in the pastureland on the north end. I love it and would live to see it designated and maintained like Walua Rd is. Right now I can't push a stroller on most of the middle section because of the potholes. My talks with the county about its condition and the illegal dumping lead to the conclusion that the county nor the state wanted to take authority of fixing the road, too bad. Being able to bike or walk out the old railroad bed or connect a trail to Walua would be exciting. If the history of the railroad bed could be displayed that would be even better. I used to ride down to Ali'i Drive but the car traffic on lower Hualalai felt too unsafe to continue. We need off the street bike and walking lanes. I don't want to write too much, so I'll just say thank you all for working on this critical project. If there is a way I could become a little involved, at least on my neighborhood paths and trails, I would like to help. I have experience in backcountry navigation, trail clearing, as well as a hodgepodge of other skills. Mahalo, Jake C. Kimo Alameda,Ph.D. co`''< o.'`y Matthew Clark, Chair Mayor 7 ; l i,;Desmon Haumea,Vice ChairrM: ,. 4.%' 0 'i Darde Gamayo Roberta"Ku`ulei"Keakealani rrE oF•H'r• '" Kealohanuiopuna Kinney Nicole Lui Janet Six County of Hawaii Aaron Spielman PLANNING DEPARTMENT CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Aupuni Center • 101Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawai`i 96720 Phone(808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742 MEMORANDUM October 8, 2025 TO: JEFFREY DARROW, DIRECTOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROM: MATTHEW CLARK, CHAIR MatwtR`ZGrWk(ftl al- 025k10 40 41 MS CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION SUBJECT: KONA OPEN SPACE NETWORK (KOSN) DRAFT PLAN Location: North Kona, Hawai'i Island TMK: Various The Cultural Resources Commission (CRC), at its public meeting held on September 10, 2025, reviewed the Kona Open Space Network draft plan in consideration of Hawai'i Island's cultural resources in the North Kona area. Below is a summary of comments and recommendations offered by the Commission at the meeting. The CRC requests consideration of the distribution of archaeological sites within the hubs, especially where access routes intersect, and how these sites relate to one another. Given the numerous known and documented sensitive sites in the area, consider addressing the broader cultural landscape rather than focusing on sites individually as each site is connected, working together to create a larger landscape. Ensure that proposed access is appropriate and sensitive to cultural resources. Consider additional Public Access, Open Space, Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PONC) properties within the area, such as Puapua'a Iki. Heiau and other sensitive sites, which have been and continue to be important places of ceremonial practice, carry an obligation of kuleana. Respectful conduct is expected at these locations. The commission noted that heiau holds the same cultural significance as www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov Hawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning@hawaiicounty.gov Jeffrey Darrow, Planning Director Page 2 October 8, 2025 churches and strongly advised against including them in the open spaces of the plan to ensure the protection of these sacred sites. Commissioners expressed concerns regarding the use of the terms "open spaces" and recreation" in the plan.They cautioned against encouraging walking and biking access to significant cultural areas, especially in areas that are not currently frequented. KOSN is urged to exercise great care in selecting methods to protect and preserve sensitive sites and burials. Interpretive signage may help educate the public, but Commissioners cautioned that signage is often disregarded and, without enforcement, may not prevent damage or desecration of sensitive sites. Digital tools such as QR codes or story maps could support interpretive signage and help to reduce vandalism of physical materials. The CRC recommends identifying funding sources and partnering with stewardship groups to assist in the management and maintenance of sites. Engage and inform the community throughout the development of the plan. Recognize that "links" should not be geographic features, but the stewards who hold the kuleana for caring for these sites. The CRC urges strong consideration of enforcement measures for the protection of sensitive areas. The CRC expressed appreciation for the opportunity to comment and requested to be kept informed as the plan continues to develop. KT:ad V:\PL\PL\planning\public\wpwin60\Cultural_Resources_Commission\Projects\Kona Open Space Network\2025-09-10 CRC Comment Memo re Kona Open Space Network.docm CC: KOSN 1 Nishimura, Kristen From:Arquitola, Shannon <Shannon.Arquitola@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent:Monday, November 10, 2025 1:49 PM To:Nishimura, Kristen Cc:Qiu, Selena; Morrison, Bethany J Subject:[EXTERNAL] RE: CRC Sites This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization. Hi Kristen, Thank you for your review and recommendations. We concur with the list of sites for removal. Additional comments noted below: 38 – Kamakahonu –Keep 46 -Keolonāhihi State Historical Park –Remove o Although it is a State Historical Park, one of the CRC members expressed significant cultural sensitivities regarding the site. In the future, if DLNR makes improvements that include appropriate protections for this culturally sensitive area, we can consider incorporating it into future plans. 74 -Royal Hōlua Slide –Remove 64 –Parcel with Natural Spring and Mauka-Makai Access o Clarification - Is site 64 the same site as Puhi Springs (included in removal list below)? o Recommend changing description of 64 to remove “Natural Spring” and instead, land acquisition for “Mauka-Makai Access” Thank you! Mahalo, Shannon From: Nishimura, Kristen <Kristen.Nishimura@jacobs.com> Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2025 10:41 AM To: Arquitola, Shannon <Shannon.Arquitola@hawaiicounty.gov>; Morrison, Bethany J <Bethany.J.Morrison@hawaiicounty.gov> 2 Cc: Qiu, Selena <Selena.Qiu@jacobs.com> Subject: CRC Sites Hi Shannon, Bethany— Based on our review of the CRC letter, we recommend removing these sites from the KOSN map to address the CRC’s stated concerns: Site Number Name Comments 20 Hapaialiʻi Heiau Not open to the general public -Considering removing from list to address the concern from CRC 26 Hōlualoa Royal Center The site is part of the Hōlualoa 4 Archaeological District, listed on the National Register of Historic Places and managed by the State of Hawai‘i. Access is limited and interpretive - not a recreational open space. Considering removing from list to address the concern from CRC 49 Kuʻemanu Heiau It is managed by the County of Hawai‘i Department of Parks and Recreation. Open to the public for viewing, but: Visitors must stay on designated paths - Considering removing from list to address the concern from CRC 50 Kuamoʻo Burials/Lekeleke Burial Grounds Owned by Kamehameha Schools -the site is a protected historic area. Listed on the Hawaiʻi Register of Historic Places and the National Register of Historic Places Accessible for cultural interpretation, but not for recreation - Considering removing from list to address the concern from CRC 70 Puʻuoina Heiau Part of the Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park -Viewing is allowed, but entry onto the heiau structure is prohibited to protect its cultural integrity. Considering removing the Heiau from list to address the concern from CRC but will keep the National Park in the site list. <Null>Puhi Springs (Approximate Location) Considering removing from list to address the concern from CRC The sites listed below are cultural spaces, but not culturally sensitive. Therefore, we recommend keeping them on the KOSN plan. We have a question: site 39 (formerly 38)--Kamakahonu National Historic Landmark (Ahuʻena Heiau)–is a heiau, but since it is a national historic landmark we recommend keeping on the KOSN plan. What do you think? Our notes in red. 3 Site Number Name Site Notes 1 ʻAiʻōpio Fishtrap Part of Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park, US National Park Service 2 ʻAimakapā Fishpond Part of Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park, US National Park Service 4 Ala Kahakai Trailhead Hub Hub connecting historic trails 6 Aliʻi Bypass Corridor Linkage with cultural characteristics 7 Aliʻi Drive Additional Walking and Bike Path Linkage with cultural characteristics 16 Greenway/Linear Park along Aliʻi Bypass Corridor Linkage with cultural characteristics 17 Hale Hālāwai o Hōlualoa Historic site listed on both the Hawai‘i State Register of Historic Places and the National Register of Historic Places. The structure was reconstructed in 1990s. The property is leased from the State of Hawai‘i and is actively used and managed by Living Stones Church with several events each week. 22 Hawaiʻi Community College –Pālamanui Site with cultural characteristics 25 Hoʻona Fishing Village (Ho‘ona Historic Preserve)State-owned archaeological site. The preserve is accessible via a shoreline public access route through the Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawai‘i Authority (NELHA) area. Visitors are expected to stay on designated paths, not disturb archaeological features, and avoid entering grave sites. Activities include sightseeing, hiking, and viewing anchialine ponds and tide pools. 28 Huliheʻe Palace Division of State Parks, museum. In 1973, Hulihe‘e was placed on the National Register of Historic Places. 29 Judd Trail Historic Trail -mostly inaccessible 32 Kailua-Kona Village Farmers Market Site with cultural characteristics 36 Kaloko-Honokōhau Park US National Park Service 37 Kaloko Fishpond Part of Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park, US National Park Service 38 Kamakahonu National Historic Landmark (Ahuʻena Heiau) National historic landmark -Located on the grounds of King Kamehameha’s Kona Beach Hotel in Kailua-Kona. Today, the Kamakahonu National Historic Landmark is maintained by Ahu'ena Heiau Inc., a nonprofit organization focused on the preservation and maintenance of ancient Hawaiian structures, foundations, and burial sites and the appreciation of Hawaiian history. 39 Kamehameha III Birthplace The site is a small historic park, registered with the National Park Service and maintained by the Daughters of Hawaiʻi. A plaque was placed at the site in 1914 to commemorate his 100th birthday. The Daughters of Hawaiʻi also maintain a small enclosure with traditional Hawaiian artifacts near the stone. 4 45 Keauhou Trail Historic trail 46 Keolonāhihi State Historical Park State-owned archaeological and cultural site. DLNR - Final Master Plan for its improvements were published in Sep 2023 58 Ohiʻa Cave Historic Preserve Observation Deck Scenic overlook -open to public visitors 62 Old West Hawaii Railroad Bed Historic railroad, mostly inaccessible 64 Parcel with Natural Spring and Mauka-Makai Access Natural springs in Kona may have historical and cultural associations. This particular spring is not designated as a culturally sensitive site. 69 Protected Coastal Corridor (Extending from Kikaua Point to Keauhou Bay) This corridor serves as a linkage connecting multiple culturally significant sites. The corridor is included here to emphasizes the importance of preserving this connection to maintain cultural integrity and continuity. 74 Royal Hōlua Slide National Historic Landmark -open to the public for viewing and hiking, but: Visitors can only walk along portions of the slide and nearby trails. Interpretive signage explains its history and cultural significance. 78 Trail to The Sea Historic trail 80 Viewshed of Lava Fields along Queen Kaʻahumanu Hwy Viewshed with cultural significance 82 Walking Trails and Shoreline Access at Keahuolu Point Publicly accessible walking trails (some segments may have limited accessibility due to trail condition) Thank you! Kristen NOTICE - This communication may contain confidential and privileged information that is for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any viewing, copying or distribution of, or reliance on this message by unintended recipients is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Appendix C: Workshop Summaries C-1 Appendix C: Workshop Summaries The following summaries document the key themes and contributions from the workshop series conducted between August 2023 and November 2024. These workshops formed the backbone of the Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) planning process by grounding technical work in community knowledge, cultural insight, and on-the-ground experience. Full transcripts and meeting notes are retained in project files with the County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. C.1 Workshop 1 — Kick-Off Open House Date: August 29, 2023 Location: Makaʻeo Pavilion, Old Kona Airport Park The Kick-Off Open House introduced the community to the KOSN initiative. Participants reviewed early concepts, shared priorities for open-space protection, and identified access challenges and cultural considerations. Key messages included: • Protect shoreline access and ensure it remains culturally and recreationally usable. • Improve mauka–makai trail opportunities and restore traditional accessways. • Address safety gaps for walking and biking, especially on major corridors. • Preserve wahi pana (storied places) and culturally sensitive landscapes. • Ensure meaningful, ongoing community involvement. This workshop confirmed broad community support for establishing an integrated open- space network for Kona. C.2 Workshop 2A — Parcel Selection Date: January 11, 2024 Location: West Hawaiʻi Civic Center Workshop 2A focused on identifying parcels and corridors with the greatest potential to contribute to the KOSN network. Participants brought detailed place-based knowledge that informed the initial mapping of priority sites. Major themes were as follows: • Strengthening mauka–makai connectivity and shoreline access • Protecting and restoring historic trails, including Judd Trail and coastal ala loa segments • Enhancing walkability and shade in urban and suburban corridors C-2 • Identifying PONC parcels and other lands for potential preservation • Addressing wildfire risk and environmental resilience • Recognizing the importance of both small neighborhood parks and larger regional linkages This workshop defined the first set of parcels recommended for further evaluation. C.3 Workshop 2A Follow-Up — Geographic Information System (GIS) Review and Prioritization Setup Date: February 27, 2024 Format: Hybrid/GIS Walk-through Participants refined and expanded the list of potential parcels and corridors through a detailed GIS review. Participants recommended additional cultural sites, coastal access points, upland routes, and neighborhood connectors—including the Aliʻi Bypass Corridor, Oʻoma and Puapuaʻa parcels, and several historic trails. Key insights: • Some trail segments require managed access due to cultural sensitivity. • GIS maps must accurately reflect existing easements and public-access rights. • Priority sites include those with strong cultural, ecological, or mobility value, even if current access is limited. • Planning must consider multiple time horizons (10-year, 50-year, and 100-year visions). Participants then selected top sites across Natural, Cultural, and Social categories for the scoring exercise. C.4 Workshop 2B — Scoring and Prioritization Date: April 17, 2024 Format: Hybrid Workshop 2B focused on scoring sites using established criteria that considered cultural significance, ecological value, access potential, safety, feasibility, and alignment with community goals. Key takeaways: • Several sites scored high in cultural significance, particularly Judd Trail, Keauhou Trail, Kaloko-Honokōhau, and Road to the Sea. C-3 • Participants stressed balancing public access with cultural protection, recognizing that not all sites should be promoted or widely advertised. • The group emphasized the need to improve inland alternatives to Aliʻi Drive for pedestrian and bike safety. • Importance of small neighborhood connectors was reaffirmed. • GIS corrections and improved interpretation were identified as next steps. This workshop established the top 20 scoring sites that would anchor the draft Illustrative Plan. C.5 Workshop 2B Follow-Up — Refinement of Scoring and Early Draft Concept Development Date: May 28, 2024 Format: Hybrid Participants revisited the scoring results, discussed clusters of sites that should function as hubs, and refined site relationships based on cultural, ecological, and mobility considerations. Primary insights: • Some lower-scoring sites remain important due to sensitivity or future-cultural value. • Clarification of land tenure, easements, and jurisdictional issues is critical. • Workshops reinforced the need for interactive public engagement, not static presentations. • Participants agreed that the network should not elevate exposure of culturally sensitive sites, even if included in internal planning layers. The refinements from this workshop shaped the structure of the draft Illustrative Plan. C.6 Workshop 3 — Draft Illustrative Plan Review Date: September 16, 2024 Location: West Hawaiʻi Civic Center Jacobs presented the draft Illustrative Plan, which included the following: • Top 20 scoring sites mapped and categorized • Half-mile hubs representing activity centers • Existing and proposed linkages • Coastal resource considerations C-4 Key themes from community feedback: • Maintain accuracy of trail conditions and mauka–makai access. • Preserve the integrity of culturally sensitive shoreline locations. • Improve connectivity through Pālamanui, Kealakehe, and mid-Aliʻi neighborhoods. • Prioritize shaded, walkable, and safe multimodal corridors. This workshop confirmed the conceptual structure for the KOSN. C.7 Workshop 3 Follow-Up — Map Refinements and Cultural-Sensitivity Review Date: November 7, 2024 Format: Hybrid This meeting focused on refining the Illustrative Plan and confirming cultural and access considerations. Key actions: • Adding missing multimodal paths (Ane Keohokālole Highway, Makalei Drive) • Correcting site labels, spellings, and hub boundaries • Addressing culturally sensitive areas near Kahaluu and within Kaloko-Honokōhau • Extending Walua Trail further south to reflect true usage • Identifying safe alternatives to high-traffic areas like Kuakini Highway • Requesting further consultation with Kamehameha Schools and Na Ala Hele These refinements directly informed the final Illustrative Plan. C.8 Summary of Community-Identified Priorities Across all workshops, the following themes consistently shaped the KOSN: • Mauka–makai access: Restore historic connections between uplands and shorelines. • Cultural stewardship: Protect culturally sensitive sites and engage practitioners early. • Multimodal mobility: Improve walkability, bike access, shade, and safety. • Ecological resilience: Address wildfire, flooding, erosion, and invasive species. • Neighborhood-scale improvements: Prioritize small connectors that complete everyday routes. • Respect for wahi pana: Map sensitive areas for planning purposes without encouraging visitation. C-5 • Transparency and collaboration: maintain public trust through open, iterative engagement. These priorities form the foundation of the final KOSN plan. Appendix D: Kona Open Space Network Proposed Improvements Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed Chart D-1 Appendix D: KOSN Proposed Improvements RACI Chart Zone Project R A C I A Ali‘i Drive Keauhou area pedestrian/bicycle lane DPW County Planning Community, Cultural Practitioners HDOT, FHWA A Signage for Kaluna and Kealii Street DPW County Planning Neighborhood Groups HDOT A Kamehameha III pedestrian/bicycle lane (Kealii → Walua) DPW County Planning Schools, Residents HDOT A Add Walua Road (Kamehameha III → La‘aloa) + pedestrian/bicycle improvements DPW County Planning Community, Na Ala Hele HDOT A Walua Road signage (Kamehameha III → Lako) DPW County Planning Neighborhood Groups HDOT A Kaleiopapa Street pedestrian/bicycle lane DPW County Planning Keauhou Businesses, Kamehameha Schools HDOT B La‘aloa Avenue markings and signage DPW County Planning Residents HDOT B Trail connection La‘aloa Avenue → Walua Road HDOT/DPW County Planning Homeowners, Na Ala Hele Mayor/Council C Walua Trail → Kealakowa‘a connector DPW County Planning Na Ala Hele, Cultural Practitioners SHPD, HDOT C Kuakini Highway pedestrian/bicycle improvements HDOT HDOT County; Community FHWA C Oni Oni Street crosswalk (Kuakini) HDOT HDOT Community Associations County, FHWA C Walua Road (makai) improvements DPW County Planning Residents HDOT D Pier → Brewery Block pedestrian improvements DPW County Planning Businesses, Cultural Practitioners HDOT D-2 Zone Project R A C I D Puhi Springs (PONC Acquisition) Planning/PONC Mayor/Council Cultural Practitioners, Community DLNR, PONC Commission D Palani Road pedestrian/bicycle (Queen Ka‘ahumanu → Ane Keohokālole) HDOT HDOT County, Community FHWA D Kaiwi Street pedestrian/bicycle improvements DPW County Planning Community HDOT D Makala Boulevard improvements DPW County Planning Business Community HDOT E Kealakehe Parkway pedestrian/bicycle lane DPW County Planning Schools, Residents HDOT E Ka‘iminani Drive and Ane Keohokālole pedestrian/bicycle lanes HDOT HDOT County, Pālamanui FHWA E Hina Lani Street pedestrian/bicycle upgrades HDOT HDOT County, Neighborhoods FHWA F Ka‘iminani Highway crossing HDOT HDOT County, Community FHWA, Council F Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway improvements north of Palani HDOT HDOT County, Community FHWA F La‘aloa Firebreak Park DPW/Planning County Planning Cultural Practitioners, Fire Safety DLNR, Mayor F Keiki He‘enalu Trail DPW/Planning County Planning Neighborhoods, Schools, Cultural Groups HDOT, Council County = County of Hawai‘i DLNR = State of Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources DPW = Department of Public Works FHWA = Federal Highway Administration HDOT = State of Hawai‘i Department of Transportation PONC = Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Fund RACI = Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed SHPD = State Historic Preservation Division Appendix E: Summary of Project Information E-1 Appendix E: Summary of Project Information Project No. Project Title Project Type Description Zone Phase/Timeline ROM Cost (USD) P-01 Kamehameha III Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane Multimodal roadway improvement Continuous shared-use shoulder and markings A Near-term (1 to 5 years) $600k to $1.2M P-04 Kaluna and Keali‘i Street Signage Access and wayfinding Bicycle/pedestrian route signage on alternative streets A Near-term $75k to $150k P-07 Ali‘i Drive (Keauhou) Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane Multimodal roadway improvement Shoulder clearing, striping, signage A Near-term $250k to $600k P-12 Walua Road Connection Improvements Multimodal roadway improvement Shoulder enhancements and shared-roadway signage A Near-term $600k to $1.2M P-40 Walua Road Wayfinding Access and wayfinding Corridor-wide pedestrian/bicycle signage A Near-term $75k to $150k P-16 Kaleiopapa Street Shared- Use Lane Greenway-type corridor Paved shared-use shoulder with parking management A Mid-term (5 to 10 years) $500k to $1.2M E-2 Project No. Project Title Project Type Description Zone Phase/Timeline ROM Cost (USD) P-02 La‘aloa Avenue Markings and Signage Multimodal roadway improvement Advisory bike lanes and consistent wayfinding B Near-term $50k to $150k P-39 La‘aloa–Walua Trail Connector Trail connection Firebreak/easement-based pedestrian trail B Mid-term $150k to $400k P-05 Walua Trail → Kealakowa‘a Connector Trail connection Signed on-street route with signalized crossings C Near-term $75k to $150k P-21 Kuakini Highway Shoulder Improvements Multimodal roadway improvement Pedestrian/bicycle shoulders along highway C Mid-term $1.5M to $3.5M P-08 Oni Oni Street Crosswalk Safety enhancement Formal marked crossing C Mid-term $300k to $900k P-06 Walua Road (Makai) Enhancements Greenway-type corridor Shared-use zones, signage, corridor definition C Mid-term $600k to $1.2M E-3 Project No. Project Title Project Type Description Zone Phase/Timeline ROM Cost (USD) P-32 Pier → Brewery Block Corridor Access improvement Wayfinding and pedestrian connectivity D Near-term $250k to $750k P-36 Puhi Springs Parcel Acquisition Open space/greenspace Mauka–makai open-space and evacuation corridor D Mid-term/Long- term $5M to $10M P-29 Palani Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane Multimodal roadway improvement Continuous facility and new crossing D Mid-term $1.2M to $2.5M P-15 Kaiwi Street Pedestrian/Bicycle Enhancements Greenway-type corridor Key connector with signage and markings D Mid-term $300k to $800k P-25 Makala Boulevard Access Improvements Access and safety Crosswalks and park connectivity D Mid-term $300k to $600k P-18 Kealakehe Parkway Pedestrian/Bicycle Lane Multimodal roadway improvement Markings and intersection integration E Near-term $250k to $600k E-4 Project No. Project Title Project Type Description Zone Phase/Timeline ROM Cost (USD) P-14 Ka‘iminani and Ane Keohokālole Lanes Greenway-type corridor Continuous pedestrian/bicycle lanes to HCC–Pālamanui E Near-term $1.2M to $3M P-13 Hina Lani Street Enhancements Multimodal roadway improvement Striping and new crossings E Mid-term $400k to $1M P-30 Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway Crossing (Ka‘iminani) Regional safety improvement Protected mauka–makai crossing F Long-term (10+ years) $400k to $1M P-37 Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway Multimodal Enhancements Regional corridor improvement Signage, signals, future separated path F Long-term $4M to $12M P-23 La‘aloa Firebreak Park Open space/greenway Firebreak converted to linear park F Long-term $3M to $8M P-20 Keiki He‘enalu Trail Trail connection (concept) Upland–shoreline neighborhood connector F Long-term $200k to $500k No. = Number ROM = rough order of magnitude USD = U.S. dollar Appendix F: Annotated Bibliography Literature Review Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography Document No.: 230922203245_C0EB9278 Version: 0 Kona Open Space Network Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 i Executive Summary The following Literature and Resource Review takes elements from the Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) planning scope of work, organizes them into groups that will be continually assessed during the course of this project, and provides the initial list of the materials the team has reviewed that will help define complex subjects. Definition and agreed meaning are important when looking at space, place, and community. By effectively working from the same sheet of music, as it were, the literature and publicly available resources all help us to build consensus on the impacts of natural spaces, community spaces, and cultural spaces as we map and grow the existing network. The document breaks the elements of opens space into natural, community, and cultural sections, where materials for individual elements and their background are discussed and cited. This review of resources is a start for dialogue and collaboration taking place during this project; relevant references will be included in the bibliography in the final KOSN plan. These resources all largely celebrate the elements of open space and provide greater detail and emphasis on focusing on people when considering space, which is why we elected to specifically consider community and culture as part of this exercise. Lists of examples are included in each group and are also provided for hubs and linkages. These lists will both grow and become more specific as the project moves forward. Some of the elements and groups have also been assigned an initial qualitative criteria statement in bold. These statements connect this review as we qualitatively assess options going forward. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 ii Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ i Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................... iv 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 2. General Elements of Open Space ...................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Hubs ................................................................................................................................................................................1 2.2 Linkages (Links) ..........................................................................................................................................................4 3. Natural Elements of Open Space ....................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Overview of Natural Spaces....................................................................................................................................7 3.2 Coastal Corridor Natural Areas .............................................................................................................................8 3.3 Shorelines......................................................................................................................................................................9 3.4 Greenway Corridors ................................................................................................................................................ 10 3.5 Drainage, Floodways, and Floodzones ........................................................................................................... 10 3.6 Watershed Management and Recharge Priority Areas ............................................................................ 11 3.7 Forest Reserves, Critical Habitat, and Natural Area Reserves ................................................................ 12 3.8 Creating Co-benefit for Weather, Natural, and Climate Impacts through Open Space ............... 13 4. Social and Community Elements of Open Space ........................................................................................ 14 4.1 Overview of Social and Community Spaces .................................................................................................. 14 4.2 Open Space Education and Natural Heritage .............................................................................................. 15 4.3 County, State, and Federal Areas ...................................................................................................................... 17 4.4 Community Gathering Spaces............................................................................................................................ 18 4.5 Bike Lanes, Paths, and Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 19 4.6 Accessibility, Active Transportation, Micromobility, and Shared Use Mobility ............................... 20 4.7 Transport Corridors ................................................................................................................................................ 21 5. Cultural Elements of Open Space ................................................................................................................... 21 5.1 Overview of Cultural Spaces ............................................................................................................................... 21 5.2 Historic, Ancient, or Natural Area Trails ......................................................................................................... 23 5.3 Protected and Managed Cultural and Historic Sites ................................................................................. 23 5.4 Historic, Urban, and Natural Trails and Recreational Spaces ................................................................ 24 5.5 Game Management Areas ................................................................................................................................... 24 5.6 GIS ................................................................................................................................................................................. 25 5.6.1 Final GIS Data, KOSN StoryMap ........................................................................................................... 25 5.6.2 Initial GIS Resources ................................................................................................................................. 25 6. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................ 26 7. Additional Resources ......................................................................................................................................... 26 Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 iii Tables Table 1. Examples of Hubs ...............................................................................................................................................................4 Table 2. Examples of Linkages ........................................................................................................................................................7 Table 3. Examples of Natural Spaces ...........................................................................................................................................8 Table 4. Examples of Social and Community Spaces ......................................................................................................... 15 Table 5. Examples of Cultural Spaces ....................................................................................................................................... 23 Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 iv Acronyms and Abbreviations DLNR Department of Land and Natural Resources DOE Department of Education DOFAW DLNR Division of Forestry and Wildlife EPSCoR National Science Foundation’s Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research FHWA Federal Highway Administration GIS geographic information system GMA Game Management Area GMA Game Management Areas HCEOC Hawaiʻi County Economic Opportunities Council KCDP Kona Community Development Plan makai oceanward mauka mountainward NARS Natural Area Reserves System NELHA Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority NELHA Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaiʻi Authority NNBF Natural and Nature-Based Features NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration OCCL Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands PATH People for Active Transportation Hawaii PATH People for Active Transportation Hawaiʻi PPS Project for Public Spaces PUC Primary Urban Center SMA Special Management Area UHERO University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization USDOT United States Department of Transportation Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 1 1. Introduction The uniqueness and range of spaces in Kona allows the Jacobs team to think about open space in many ways, considering urban, suburban, and natural spaces; natural, social and community spaces; and also cultural spaces. This literature review casts a wide net but also considers the catch within that net. The elements considered in the following sections directly link to the vision and mission articulated in the scope of work. Each element is defined using relevant literature and web sources to provide concrete examples of terminology like hubs and linkages, and their wide applicability. We also provide nuance for deep discipline subject matter expertise like culture and history. Finally, we tie the literature and insight it provides to propose the criteria that we will use to assess places, spaces, and communities. As we progress and engage with the community, we will capture the learning and adapt our method. We will also grow this list of sources so that we have clear and defensible understanding of the work we have done to set a strategy, determine priorities, and craft tactics to build the open space network as a whole. The elements of open space presented in Section 2 are the groupings we will use throughout the planning process. It is intended to be an organizing principle and not a hard and fast set of rules. The team and community understand that cultural spaces can, and often are, hubs of activities centered around a critical public space. While our definitions may not be wholly comprehensive, we intend to give adequate nuance to each element so that we can build consensus on what is important and also what may be missing. It is important to note that the project will be using these elements going forward, so agreeing to the principles herein is important to efficient progress. While not comprehensive, this work provides guidelines and goalposts for our data collection exercise. As explained in the geographic information system (GIS) section, the following groups of elements, elements and examples will be collected and examined. Future issuances of reports will continue to use the following organization but also provide detail and nuance needed to plan the open space network to maximize users needs. 2. General Elements of Open Space The following are general elements of open space considered for this literature review. 2.1 Hubs Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this space, place, or asset bring people together? The Kona Community Development Plan (KCDP) defines the purpose of the Open Space Network Program, “to enhance opportunities for residents and visitors to access Kona’s Environmental Resources for recreational, educational, subsistence, or gathering purposes.” The KCDP provides possible hub examples such as parks, cultural sites open to the public, and natural beauty vantage points and views, and possible linkage examples such as bikeways, trails, scenic and heritage corridors, public accessways, flow ways, and linear parks. The Open Space Network Program should also identify public access management to manage access, ownership, maintenance, and sensitivity of resources and identify public areas with high traffic for prioritized funding, maintenance, safety, and educational signage. The KCDP states that high-priority areas in Kona should be identified for public acquisition based on the following criteria: significant value, extensive public use, imminent threat by private development, and lack of alternative means of protection. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 2 The KCDP defines Smart Growth Principles for the Kona community to bolster economic development, achieve healthy communities and a clean environment, and increase housing, commercial, and transportation options. The smart growth principle relevant for the Kona Open Space Network is to “protect and preserve open space, natural beauty, agricultural lands, cultural and environmnetal resources.” The KCDP emphasizes an overall future land use strategy for “compact, village-style development” rather than the “current trend toward sprawling lot-density developments, disconnected subdivisions and business centers, and a general decline in the quality of life.” The land use strategy should integrate individual planning decisions into a larger mutually planned program comprised of community, government, and private sector entities. The KCDP defines relevant Village Design Guidelines (Attachment B in the KCDP), to “incorporate natural features, open space, and cultural features.”  County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. 2019. Kona Community Development Plan. September. Accessed September 22, 2023. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/cdp/kona. Open Space: People Space examines the nature and value of people’s access to outdoor environments. Led by Edinburgh’s OPENspace research center, the debate focuses on current research to support good design for open space and brings expertise from a range of discipline. Highly visual, and containing contributions from leading names in landscape, architecture, and design, this volume provides a rare insight into people’s engagement with the outdoor environment; looking at the ways in which the design of spaces and places meets people’s needs and desires in the twenty-first century. Embracing issues of social inclusion, recreation, and environmental quality, the editors explore innovative ways to develop an understanding of how the landscape, urban or rural, can contribute to health and quality of life.  Travlou, Penny. 2007. Open Space People Space. Catharine Ward Thompson, ed. Taylor and Francis. Making Sense of Cities provides an up-to-date, vibrant and accessible introduction to urban geography. It offers readers a sense of the patterns and processes of urbanization and the spatial organization of cities, recognizing the significance of globalization, economics, politics, and culture from a range of perspectives. Above all, the book provides a relevant approach, inviting readers to engage with competing theories of the urban and to assess these theories against the background of their own opinions and personal experience.  Badcock, Blair. 2002. Making Sense of Cities: A Geographical Survey. Routledge. Town-making is another approach to planning, and has applicability outside the urban core. This approach allows the project team to connect the policy and planning frameworks, as articulated in the KCDP, with the landscape or village scale. Given the size of the study area, it is useful to have a variety of tools to understand the range of spaces and places that will inform the future open spaces network.  Duany, Andres. 2006. Towns and Town-making Principles. Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, ed. Rizzoli. Hele-On is a service of the County of Hawaiʻi (County) Mass Transit Agency and provides the following services:  Countywide public transit services on fixed and flex routes countywide  A Hele-On Kākoʻo program for American’s with Disabilities Act complementary paratransit service in Hilo, Kailua-Kona, and Puna  A shared ride taxi program with three taxi companies in Hilo  Countywide senior and persons with disabilities transportation service in partnership with Hawaiʻi County Economic Opportunities Council (HCEOC) Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 3  A vanpool program in partnership with Commute with Enterprise  10 HIBIKE bikeshare stations in Hilo and Kailua-Kona in partnership with PATH (People for Active Transportation Hawaii). Hele-On transports approximately 588,000 passenger trips a year on a fleet of more than 30 buses and vans, and includes a trolley. Transit services are provided under contract with Roberts Hawaiʻi, taxicab companies, Enterprise Holdings, HCEOC, and PATH. Their Kona Hub resource provides a range of detail on ‘hubs’ from a transit perspective, as well as other relevant material on connectivity.  Hele-On. 2023. Document Library and Links. https://www.heleonbus.hawaiicounty.gov/resources/document-library-and-links.  County of Hawai’i. 2018. Transit and Multi-modal Transportation Masterplan. https://records.hawaiicounty.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?dbid=1&id=134194&page=13&cr=1.  County of Hawai’i. 2022. Transit and Multi-modal Transportation Masterplan Supplement 2022. https://4d8e06f5.isolation.zscaler.com/profile/b3ca1af1-b8ca-404e-829c-4477191f167c/zia- session/?controls_id=7eb9c54c-b853-4f67-a87f- be4493758b2c&region=pdx&tenant=f33dec5f0e4e&user=08d5af678f79611993915e625f79b7bfe8 a6881d199d5d82e7ca0377618cddc6&original_url=https%3A%2F%2Fkonahub.info%2Fcounty- hawaii-transit-and-multi-modal-transportation-master-plan-supplement-2022&key=sh- 1&hmac=a0f6c4a37a006444a4288ed58b233263dbc183fea262cef4a47bcd0f006cef4c. The work of Mark Francis and the Landscape Architecture Foundation, such as Urban Open Space: Designing for User Needs, is also important to defining open spaces and having an agreed language. Their Case Study Method for Landscape Architecture is also useful for detailed observation of specific open space opportunities identified as part of this program.  Francis, Mark. 2003. Urban Open Space: Designing for User Needs. Landscape Architecture Foundation. Washington D.C. Island Press. There are also a range of federal resources available for more general considerations of environment, hydrogeology and weather. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the International City/County Management Association, and Rhode Island Sea Grant released “Smart Growth for Coastal and Waterfront Communities.” Developed in consultation with the national Smart Growth Network, the interagency guide builds on the network’s 10 smart growth principles to create coastal and waterfront-specific strategies for development. The guide includes an overview of the unique development challenges and opportunities along the water and provides specific approaches to development that include a description of the issues, tools and techniques, and case studies. “Smart Growth for Coastal and Waterfront Communities” is intended for planners, local government officials, developers, residents, and other stakeholders.  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2009. Smart Growth for Coastal and Waterfront Communities. https://www.crmc.ri.gov/guidesreports/Coastal_Smart_Growth.pdf. Based on these resources, the team organized and expanded the examples of hubs presented in Table 1. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 4 Table 1. Examples of Hubs Hub Types Examples Educational Spaces  Schools  Libraries  Community Centers Recreational Spaces  Parks  Playgrounds  Sport fields  Ballparks  Skateparks  Surf Spots  Bodysurfing Spots  Private Recreation (Golf, Tourism, Pools, and similar) Coastal Corridor Natural Areas  Kaloko-Honokōhau National Park  Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority (NELHA)  ʻOʻoma Beach  Beaches  Shoreline access areas  Specific snorkeling, diving, and surfing areas Community Gathering Spaces  Hale Hālāwai  Makaʻeo Pavilion  Civic Centers  Plazas  Community Gardens Protected and Managed Public Cultural and Historic Sites  Heiau  Huliheʻe Palace  Burial grounds  Historic sites  Sacred landscapes Natural or Climate Change Hazard Areas  Riparian Buffers  Green infrastructure  Ecosystem services (zones or corridors) Scenic View Areas and Visual Character Spaces  Areas of scenic beauty and expansive views Culturally Significant Natural Areas and Sensitive Natural Resource Areas  Community favored natural spaces  Identified protected spaces 2.2 Linkages (Links) Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this link or corridor connect one or more community hubs with other hubs or local community? Essentials of Urban Design explains the fundamental concepts of urban design, providing the understanding and tools needed to achieve better design outcomes. The resource is equally useful for Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 5 designing places and evaluating designs. Each chapter outlines the key steps in designing or assessing a different type of development. All common types of urban development are addressed, from infill buildings to whole urban growth areas, residential to employment uses, and centers to public transport interchanges. For each development type, widely accepted urban design principles are explained, and general guidance provided.  Sheppard, Mark. 2015. Essentials of Urban Design. South VIC, Australia. CSIRO Publishing. Cities for People takes into account changing demographics and changing lifestyles. Gehl emphasizes four human issues that he sees as essential to successful city planning. He explains how to develop cities that are lively, safe, sustainable, and healthy. Focusing on these issues led Gehl to think of even the largest city on a very small scale. For Gehl, the urban landscape must be considered through the five human senses and experienced at the speed of walking rather than at the speed of riding in a vehicle or train. This small-scale view, he argues, is too frequently neglected in contemporary projects. In a final chapter, Gehl makes a plea for city planning on a human scale in the fast- growing cities of developing countries. He concludes the book with a “Toolbox” that presents key principles, overviews of methods, and lists of keywords.  Gehl, Jan. 2010. Cities for People. Island Press. Time Saver Standards for Urban Design is the world’s foremost professional reference on the physical design of cities and urban places including communities and civic and public places. Scope of the work is international and topics include preservation, renewal, patterns of settlement and sustainability. Key Features include: international coverage including recent sustainability initiatives; topics from allied disciplines such as transportation engineering, bioregionalism and environmental engineering; heavily illustrated.  Watson, Donald. 2003. Timesaver Standards for Urban Design. McGraw-Hill. New York. Urban Form and Accessibility addresses the growth of global urbanization places great strains on energy, transportation, housing and public spaces needs. As such, transport and land use are inextricably linked. Urban Form and Accessibility: Social, Economic, and Environment Impacts consolidates key insights from multidisciplinary perspectives on the relationship between urban form and transportation planning. Synthesizing the latest cutting-edge research, the book translates academic evidence into practice. Starting with an overview of the key concepts relevant to each discipline, the book covers critical elements such as governance, travel behavior, and technological disruption, showing how to move toward a more sustainable society for all city inhabitants.  Mulley, Corinne and John D. Nelson. 2020. Urban Form and Accessibility. Elsevier. Walkability Catchments Catchments refer to the approximate distance by various modes to activities of daily living, social, and community facilities. Walking, biking, transit, and personal vehicles are typical examples, but a variety of new modes (for example, e-bikes and scooters) and old (boating or motorcycles) may be uniquely relevant to local communities.  Duany, Andres and Robert Steuteville. 2021. “Defining the 15 minute city.” Public Square, a CNU Journal. Congress of New Urbanism. February 8. https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/. In 2016 the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published a for Developing Pedestrian and Bicycle Performance Measures that presents methods for measuring walking and bicycling performance and activities and embedding them into the transportation planning and decision-making process. Building on the 2016 guidebook, this resource focuses on pedestrian and bicycle network connectivity and provides information on incorporating connectivity measures into state, metropolitan, and local transportation planning Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 6 processes, as well as case studies. Connectivity measures can help transportation practitioners identify high-priority network gaps, implement cost-effective solutions that address multiple needs, optimize potential co-benefits, and measure the long-term impacts of strategic pedestrian and bicycle investments on goals such as improving safety, system efficiency, network performance, and access to key destinations.  United States Department of Transportation Federal Highways Administration. 2018. Guidebook for Measuring Multimodal Network Connectivity. February. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/multimodal_connectivity/?_gl=1*1acs4b5*_ga*MTE3NDM2 MDc1NC4xNjcyOTM5ODUy*_ga_VW1SFWJKBB*MTY5NTMxNzE2My4xMS4xLjE2OTUzMTcxOTIuMC4wLjA. Ian McHarg’s Design with Nature has done much to redefine the fields of landscape architecture, urban and regional planning, and ecological design. The book has also left a permanent mark on the ongoing discussion of mankind‘s place in nature and nature‘s place in mankind within the physical sciences and humanities. Design with Nature offers a practical blueprint for a new, healthier relationship between the built environment and nature, and provides scientific, technical, and philosophical foundations.  McHarg, Ian L. 1995. Design with Nature. 25th Anniversary Edition. Wiley. In The Language of Landscape, Anne Whiston Spirn argues that the language of landscape exists with its own syntax, grammar, and metaphors, and that we imperil ourselves by failing to learn to read and speak this language. To understand the meanings of landscape, our habitat, is to see the world differently and to enable ourselves to avoid profound aesthetic and environmental mistakes. Offering examples that range across thousands of years and five continents, Spirn examines urban, rural, and natural landscapes.  Spirn, Anne Whiston. 2000. Language of Landscape. Yale University Press. The 101 Walkable City Rules are practical arguments, illustrated for clarity, and packed with specifications as well as data to illustrate benefit costs of walkability. For ease of use, the rules are grouped into 19 chapters that cover everything from selling walkability, to getting the parking right, escaping automobilism, to making comfortable spaces and interesting places.  Speck, Jeff. 2018. Walkable City Rules: 101 Steps to Making Better Places. Island Press. Urban Retail Planning is another useful toolset for urban corridors, understanding how retail corridor function will be an important counterpoint to understanding natural and distant spaces.  Gibbs, Robert. 2012. Principles of Urban Retail Planning and Development. Wiley. Based on these resources, the team organized and expanded the following examples of linkages (Table 2). Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 7 Table 2. Examples of Linkages Linkage Types Examples Shorelines  KCDP vision of 17-mile-long stretch of protected open coastline from Makaʻeo north to Kīkaua Point  Shoreline setbacks  Shoreline linear parks  Beaches Historic, Ancient or Natural Area Trails  Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail  Nā Ala Hele trails Formal Transportation Assets  Walua Road walking and bike path  Old West Hawaiʻi Railroad bed  Ane Keohokālole Highway Walking and bike path  Kona Village Grand Aliʻi Esplanade  Scenic heritage corridors (Aliʻi Drive)  Connections to multimodal transportation hubs and key destinations Linear Natural Spaces  Mauka (mountainward)-makai (oceanward) connector paths and greenways  Urban trail network  Greenbelt  Greenway  Flood mitigation areas  Native ecosystem corridors  Learning landscapes  Regional contour corridors  Flood corridors and flood contour swales 3. Natural Elements of Open Space 3.1 Overview of Natural Spaces Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Is this a natural or nature-adjacent space? Natural Spaces are very complex systems-of-systems that we can examine with either the wide aperture of an ecologist or by using deep expertise in subjects such as soil, water, and air. We will take the work completed to date to characterize and contextualize the uniqueness of Kona. This context and character will help us focus on legacy, but revise and update based on what we learn from community. In general, we will keep the ecosystem point of view in this analysis of open space. However, we will also consider critical subjects like biodiversity and natural processes. Human-nature interaction has deep roots in conservation, restoration, and stewardship. The concept of nature is not static, and we must consider the value that time creates within our ecosystems and how small changes impact the trajectory of these spaces. We understand the complexity of these systems changing over time and will leverage an understanding of both the represented ecosystem and the future of the natural space. Table 3 shows examples of natural spaces considered and relevant to the project study of natural spaces. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 8 Table 3. Examples of Natural Spaces Natural Space Types Examples Nearshore Marine Ecosystems  Coral reefs  Wetlands  Anchialine ponds Native Plant Ecosystems  Native dryland forests  Native plant coastal regions Subsistence and Gathering Landscapes  Coastal zones  Coconut groves  Loko iʻa (Native Hawaiian fish ponds)  Cordage gardens  Laʻau lapaʻau (Native Hawaiian traditional medicine practice with plants)  Kalo loʻi (Native Hawaiian taro farm)  Productive agricultural landscapes Mauka Forest Watershed Recharge Areas  Mauka forest areas and other watershed recharge in the study area Stream and Flood Channel Riparian Areas and Buffers  As identified by state geospatial resources Hazard Areas Benefiting from Open Space Integration  Wildfire risk  Lava risk  Severe storm or hurricane  Flooding from intense rainfalls  Erosion and runoff of soils, pollutants and biological hazards  Tsunami  Sea level rise leading to coastal erosion or subsidence  Rising temperatures, humidity, and heat index  Strong wind 3.2 Coastal Corridor Natural Areas Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this space, place, or asset protect and celebrate the shore and sea? Kaloko-Honokōhau National Park is a kīpuka, a place of cultural and spiritual significance to Hawaiians, providing a look into the culture and lifestyle of the people who thrived along the rugged coast. The park encompasses Kaloko Fishpond (loko kuapā – fishpond style with the wall built on the reef), ʻAimakapā Fishpond (loko puʻuone – fishpond style near shore, typically with a sand ridge wall), and ʻAiʻōpio Fishtrap, which were traditionally managed by Native Hawaiians to sustainably farm fish to feed the community. The park features many historical kiʻi pōhaku (stone petroglyphs), ancient Hawaiian heiau (temples), native plants, native wildlife, anchialine pools (more than 200), tidepools, and coral reefs. It also includes the National Historic Landmarked archaeological site known as the Honokōhau Settlement.  National Park Service. n.d. Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historic Park. https://www.nps.gov/kaho/index.htm. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 9 Anchialine Pools form in the Kaloko-Honokōhau National Park where water pools in the crevices and cracks of lava near the shore. Anchialine pools are unique aquatic ecosystems made of brackish water, which is a mix of fresh groundwater from the mountains and salt water from the ocean. The state of Hawaiʻi is the only state in the U.S. that has these brackish water anchialine pools. The indigenous ʻōpaeʻula (red shrimp)— of historical and cultural Hawaiian significance—is commonly found in these anchialine pools.  National Park Service. 2021. Anchialine Pools: Kaloko-Honokōhau National Park. https://www.nps.gov/kaho/learn/nature/anchialinepools.htm. The National Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority (NELHA) Hawaiʻi Ocean Science and Technology Park in Kailua-Kona is an outdoor demonstration site for emerging renewable energy, aquaculture, and ocean- based sustainable technologies. The site is part of the KCDP proposed 17-mile protected coastline vision.  National Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority. 2023. Hawaii Ocean Science & Technology Park: Powered by NEHLA. https://nelha.hawaii.gov/. Ecological Principles for Managing the Use of Land provides a foundation of definitions and agreed principles for including ecology in planning programs and projects.  Dale, V.H., S. Brown, R.A. Haeuber, N.T. Hobbs, N. Huntly, R.J. Naiman, W.E. Riebsame, M.G. Turner, and T.J. Valone. 2000. “Ecological Principles and Guidelines for Managing the Use of Land.” Ecological Applications. Volume 10, number 3. pp. 639–70. June. https://doi.org/10.2307/2641032. 3.3 Shorelines The KCDP has a vision of a 17-mile-long protected stretch of open coastline from Makaʻeo north to Kīkaua Point at the Kūkiʻo development (KCDP Policy LU-1.6). Most of the area is publicly owned and has been set aside for park purposes. The area would encompass Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historic Park, the portion of Kohanaiki that will be deeded to the County under the existing Special Management Area (SMA) permit, the makai portion of ʻOʻoma 2, NELHA, and state lands makai of the airport runway. The KCDP states that the County should explore alternatives for the application of an SMA Major Permit to dedicate open space for a shoreline linear park along as much of Kona’s coastline as possible. The priority is to maintain a minimum of 1,000-foot open space no-build setback for undeveloped lands adjacent to the shoreline, and structures makai of the setback should be for public recreation and ocean-dependent facilities like harbor improvements.  County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. 2019. Kona Community Development Plan. September. Accessed September 22, 2023. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/cdp/kona. Oʻoma Beach Park is a public beach park with access to shoreline just north of Kailua-Kona. North of Kohanaiki Beach Park. This beach is part of the proposed 17-mile protected coastline vision.  Hawaii Beaches. n.d. Ooma Beach. https://www.hawaiibeaches.com/beach/ooma-beach/. Kohanaiki Beach Park is a surfing beach area. Anchialine ponds are located behind the beach. Located north of Kaloko Fishpond, which is part of Kaloko-Honokōhau National Park. This beach is part of the proposed 17-mile protected coastline vision.  Hawaii Beaches. 2023. Kohanaiki Beach Park (Pine Trees Surfing Beach). https://www.hawaiibeaches.com/beach/kohanaiki-beach-park-pine-trees-surfing-beach/. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 10 3.4 Greenway Corridors KCDP refers to greenways as “an open space corridor in largely natural conditions which may include trails for bicycles and pedestrians.” Conservation Buffers Design guidelines for buffers, corridors, and greenways and other materials from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service provide a useful set of materials for thinking about context and character of greenways and riparian boundaries.  Bentrup, G. 2008. Conservation Buffers—Design guidelines for buffers, corridors, and greenways. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. http://dx.doi.org/10.2737/SRS- GTR-109. Biological corridors: Form, Function, and Efficacy provides general background on the makeup of corridors.  Daniel K. Rosenberg, R. Barry, E. Noon, and Charles Meslow. 1997. “Biological Corridors: Form, Function, and Efficacy.” BioScience. Volume 47, Issue 10. pp 677–687. November 1. https://doi.org/10.2307/1313208. 3.5 Drainage, Floodways, and Floodzones The KCDP describes an environmental resources policy for flood corridors, to include the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 100-year floodplains and planned natural flow ways identified by the Stormwater Management Program for Kona, which has yet to be developed by the County and is written as an action item in the KCDP. FIRM floodplains and planned flow ways may serve as open space amenities, such as linear parks and greenbelts between urbanized areas.  County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. 2019. Kona Community Development Plan. September. Accessed September 22, 2023. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/cdp/kona. This Kona Soil and Water Conservation District shares the floodways and Watershed Management Plan. A watershed is a catch basin for rainfall, fog, mist, and dew that produces clean water. The watersheds in North and South Kona begin in the higher elevation forested mauka regions and end makai, at the shoreline. The water drains from the watersheds to the sea by streams and floodways or seeps through soils and lava rock to the freshwater aquifers.  Kona Soil and Water Conservation District. n.d. Watersheds. http://kswcd.org/watersheds.html. The State of Hawaiʻi Department of Public Works – Engineering Division is responsible for the management and enforcement of Hawaiʻi County Code, Chapter 27 – Floodplain management.  State of Hawaiʻi Department of Public Works Engineering Division. n.d. Floodplain Management. https://www.dpw.hawaiicounty.gov/divisions/engineering/floodplain-management. The National Risk Index is a dataset and online tool to help illustrate the U.S. communities most at risk for 18 natural hazards, including coastal flooding. The index was designed and built by FEMA in close collaboration with various stakeholders and partners in academia; local, state and federal government; and private industry. Local resources on flood risk are particularly important and include Wai Hālana and Department of Land and Natural Resources DLNR).  Zuzak, C., E. 2023. National Risk Index Technical Documentation. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. Goodenough, C. Stanton, M. Mowrer, A.S heehan, B. Roberts, P. McGuire, and J. Rozelle (authors). https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_national-risk- index_technical-documentation.pdf.  Wai Hālana. n.d. Floodplain Management. https://waihalana.hawaii.gov/fpm-publications/. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 11  Department of Land and Natural Resource, Engineering Division. n.d. National Flood Insurance Program Flood Maps. https://dlnreng.hawaii.gov/nfip/floodmaps/ 3.6 Watershed Management and Recharge Priority Areas Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this intervention positively impact the quality and quantity of the communities freshwater? The KCDP defines a strategy under the Environmental Resources section for “Turning Stormwater Management into an Asset.” Kona’s steep topography and undefined drainageways present a challenge in managing stormwater runoff. The KCDP calls for the need to identify drainageways where major stormflows would be directed, provide a buffer to drainageways, and design recreational or open space amenities to manage the stormwater in these drainageways. For example, linear parks serve as both recreational spaces and beautiful open spaces for the community while also managing storm water for flood control, stormwater runoff quality, and groundwater recharge through the implementation of green infrastructure. The State of Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation (HDOT) describes specific post- construction storm water best management practices, including Low Impact Development strategies, which can be incorporated into the design of hubs, links, and spaces in the open space network.  County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. 2019. Kona Community Development Plan. September. Accessed September 22, 2023. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/cdp/kona.  Productive Parks. n.d. Linear Parks: Their Importance and Maintenance Considerations. https://productiveparks.com/linear-parks-their-importance-and-maintenance-considerations.  Environmental Protection Agency. 2017. Green Infrastructure in Parks: A Guide to Collaboration, Funding, and Community Engagement. June. Accessed September 25, 2023. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2017-05/documents/gi_parksplaybook_2017-05- 01_508.pdf.  State of Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation. 2022. Storm Water Post-Construction Best Management Practices Manual. February. Accessed September 25, 2023. https://www.stormwaterhawaii.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/PC-BMP-Manual_220718- FULL.pdf. Authors Bremer et al. worked with a local water utility in Hawaiʻi to develop a novel framework for prioritizing investments in native forest protection and restoration for groundwater recharge and applied it in the utility’s priority aquifers and recharge areas.  Bremer, Leah, Nathan Demaagd, Christopher Wada, and Kimberly Burnett. 2021. “Priority watershed management areas for groundwater recharge and drinking water protection: a case study from Hawaiʻi Island.” Journal of Environmental Management. Volume 286. Elsevier. The University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO) team provides an analysis of the relative effectiveness of watershed conservation and restoration efforts in terms of groundwater recharge benefits in Hawaiʻi County Department of Water Supply (DWS) priority aquifers and recharge areas in Kohala, Kona, and Kaʻū. With financial support from DWS and the National Science Foundation Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) ʻIke Wai project, this study builds upon a previous effort funded by the Hawaiʻi Community Foundation. UHERO has a range of other indicators that might provide background for financing environment considerations.  The Economic Research Organization at the University of Hawaii. 2020. Identifying Priority Watershed Management Areas for Groundwater Recharge Protection on Hawaii Island. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 12 https://uhero.hawaii.edu/identifying-priority-watershed-management-areas-for-groundwater- recharge-protection-on-hawaii-island/. Kona Coast Waterkeeper is a member of Waterkeeper Alliance, a global movement to protect water resources currently uniting more than 350 Waterkeeper Organizations and Affiliates in more than 47 countries. Under the local leadership of Kona Coast Waterkeeper Dr. Rick Bennett, the collective mission is fishable, swimmable, drinkable and reusable waters. The organization is committed to finding solutions to reduce land-based pollutants and improve water quality.  Waiwai Ola Waterkeepers Hawaiian Islands. 2021. Kona Coast Waterkeeper. https://waterkeepershi.org/kona-coast-waterkeeper. 3.7 Forest Reserves, Critical Habitat, and Natural Area Reserves Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this space, place, or asset protect natural habitats, natural corridors, and critical or complex places in particular? DLNR’s Hawaiʻi Forest Reserve System is managed under the guidance of the Hawaiʻi State Constitution, Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (Chapter 183) and associated Hawaiʻi Administrative Rules (Chapter 104). The DLNR Puʻuwaʻawaʻa Forest Reserve, Honuaʻula Forest Reserve, and Waiʻaha Springs Forest Reserve are in close proximity to the project area—mauka of the project area—and the management of these upland areas have overall ecological impacts on the Kona area and watershed. The DLNR Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) focuses its resources to protect, manage, restore, and monitor the natural resources of the Forest Reserve System. Keeping with the original intention of the Forest Reserve System, DOFAW provides recreational and hunting opportunities; aesthetic benefits; watershed restoration; native, threatened, and endangered species habitat protection and management; cultural resources; and fire protection, among many other services. The public is generally welcome into any forest reserve provided it is not dangerous or detrimental to human life or the sensitive resources.  Department of Land and Natural Resources Division of Forestry and Wildlife. 2023. Hawaii Island Forest Reserves. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/forestry/frs/reserves/hawaii-island/. The DLNR also manages a Natural Area Reserves System (NARS) to preserve specific land and water areas which support the natural flora and fauna and geological sites of Hawaiʻi. We explored DLNR’s NARS system and found no reserves within the project area. Waiea Natural Area Reserve and Kīpāhoehoe Natural Area Reserve are the nearest reserves—south of the project area.  Department of Land and Natural Resources Division of Forestry and Wildlife. 2023. Hawaii Island Natural Area Reserves. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/ecosystems/nars/hawaii-island/#map. Critical habitat areas are defined by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services as such, “when a species is proposed for listing as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act, we identify specific areas that are essential to its conservation.” Critical habitat areas support the conservation of species by guiding cooperation within the federal government. The State of Hawaiʻi Geographic Information System (GIS) Program identifies geospatial data of several critical habitat areas within the project area. The Office of Planning staff merged and dissolved individual species layers into one consolidated layer for use in determining whether a location is within or outside of a critical habitat area, regardless of species.  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. n.d. Critical Habitat. https://www.fws.gov/project/critical-habitat.  State of Hawai’i Geographic Information System. n.d. Hawaii Island Critical Habitat Areas. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/30213672abf34059a8efe117888268b0/explore?location=19. 789663%2C-156.054503%2C9.84. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 13 3.8 Creating Co-benefit for Weather, Natural, and Climate Impacts through Open Space Wildland-urban interface is a complex issue at planning and landscape scales. Public agencies, homeowners and community members all benefit from having thoughtful design. One significant venue of considering planning, landscape, and other design scales is the ability to achieve co-benefit. Having emergency management and climate science available when we discuss open space allows us to align, coordinate, and sometimes bundle our efforts. Aside from efficiencies gained from this exercise, we often see instances where investing in sustainability or resilience is achieved through open space planning. There is a wide and growing body of knowledge on that subject. When considering Kona, we will be sensitive to the need to tailor this knowledge to this unique landcover, and the complexities of living in close proximity with nature. Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this space, place, or asset benefit current and future ecosystem services or address conflicts between built and natural environment? A variety of toolkits are available to assist the process of maximizing the value of green infrastructure and open spaces. The team will assess these toolkits for relevance to the Hawaiʻi Biome: CTC & Associates LLC. 2012. Comparison Of Permeable Pavement Types: Hydrology, Design, Installation, Maintenance and Cost. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/23787.  Sun, Fanglin and Richard T. Carson. 2020. “Coastal Wetlands Reduce Property Damage During Tropical Cyclones.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Volume 117, number 11. March 2. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1915169117.  Webb, Bret; Scott Douglass; Brenda Dix; Susan Asam; Charlotte Cherry; and Beau Burhing. 2019. Nature-Based Solutions for Coastal Highway Resilience: An Implementation Guide. United States Department of Transportation.  Todd S. Bridges, Kelly A. Burks-Copes, Matthew E. Bates, Zachary Collier, Craig J. Fischenich, Candice D. Piercy, Edmond J. Russo, Deborah J. Shafer, and Burton C. Suedel. 2015. Use of Natural and Nature- Based Features (NNBF) for Coastal Resilience. Final Report. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development Center. https://ewn.erdc.dren.mil/wp- content/uploads/2021/03/Pub_4_NNBF_Final_Report_v2.pdf.  Center for Neighborhood Technology (CNT). 2010. The Value of Green Infrastructure: A Guide to Recognizing its Economic, Environmental and Social Benefits. Accessed May 31, 2022. https://cnt.org/sites/default/files/publications/CNT_Value-of-Green-Infrastructure.pdf. The following are examples of conflicts between built and natural environments that can be resolved with open spaces:  Buffers between incompatible land use such as sensitive coastal and riparian water resources  Buffers around native ecosystem areas  Natural corridors that allow movement of species across the landscape  Natural hazard or climate change no build zones and buffers  Site level design to minimize impervious surface areas; incorporate rainfall capture through bioswales or collection for later irrigation use, and similar  Keyline contour swales in flood areas that overlap with greenway corridors to reduce runoff volume and increase infiltration Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 14 The following are examples of ecosystem services that can be connected by a network of open spaces:  Flood control by intercepting, filtering and storing water in natural aquifers (for example, increasing tree canopy cover and infiltration potential)  Reduced erosion and stormwater or pollutant runoff (for example, using bioswales) thus minimizing harm to ocean reefs and human health  Soil formation and retention  Shade, cooling measures, and windbreaks for enhanced livability and energy conservation  Improved air and water quality  Noise reduction  Traffic calming  Improved psychological health  Conversion of carbon dioxide to oxygen and storage of carbon (climate change mitigation)  Beautification, aesthetics, and increased property values The following are examples of ecosystem services provided by green infrastructure and the planting of appropriate native or hardy non-invasive trees and vegetation:  Links remaining fragments of native ecosystems (dry forest and coastal) via corridors to enhance biodiversity, overall health, and long-term sustainability  Mitigate threat of extinction for Hawaiʻi’s endangered native flora and fauna  Provide wildlife habitat and corridors for safe migration  Conserve community character and heritage  Provide support for Hawaiian cultural practices (for example, subsistence or gathering)  Provide public educational opportunities to interact with nature and learn about native species 4. Social and Community Elements of Open Space 4.1 Overview of Social and Community Spaces Society is more than just a group of people that share a common space; it includes their interactions and shared sense of belonging and identification. Society is composed of families and communities, homes and business, a shared love of nature, and the fun of gathering. At a wider policy and planning scale, society also encompasses our institutions, norms, and values. All of these powers come together to share and contribute to social and community activities, as well as political activities, which manifest in the creation or construction of facilities. Open space planning considers the public, semi-public, and private spaces differently. When assessing an open space network, we can focus on public spaces. Table 4 provides examples of these, with additional facilities and locations considered in detail. While these locations are often adjacent to open spaces, their consideration is important to the definition of hubs. Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this space, place, or asset enhance the existing network of social and community spaces? Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 15 Table 4. Examples of Social and Community Spaces Parks, playgrounds, and recreational areas Trails, bike paths, and greenways Community gardens and urban farming initiatives Libraries and community centers Museums and art galleries Public swimming pools and aquatic centers Senior centers and facilities for the elderly Youth centers and after-school programs Sports facilities and athletic complexes Health clinics and medical facilities Hospitals and emergency services Public transportation systems, including bus and subway lines Fire stations and police stations Community schools and educational institutions Daycare centers and childcare facilities Shelters and food banks Civic and cultural centers Theaters and performance venues Multi-use facilities, such as community centers that offer a variety of services Recycling centers and waste management facilities Community radio stations and media centers Community service agencies, such as job training and placement services Neighborhood associations and community-based organizations Public markets and farmers markets Historical and heritage sites Natural areas and wildlife preserves Science centers and planetariums Transit-oriented development, such as mixed-use development around transit hubs Emergency response centers and disaster preparedness facilities 4.2 Open Space Education and Natural Heritage Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this space, place, or asset provide an opportunity to teach or share natural heritage? The KCDP describes nature as the most culturally significant public realm for interaction, stewardship, and learning. The open space network has immense educational value for residents to interact with nature for recreation and subsistence, for teachers to use the network for student activities, for visitor learning opportunities, and for people generally to develop a deeper respect for the community, places, and culture in Kona.  County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. 2019. Kona Community Development Plan. September. Accessed September 22, 2023. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/cdp/kona. The Hawaii State Department of Education (DOE) manages the Kona Campus of the Waipahu Community School for Adults. Hawaii State DOE Department Community Schools are committed to lifelong learning Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 16 and programs designed to accommodate the interests and needs of individuals seeking to expand their knowledge and improve their skills as parents, workers, and citizens.  Hawaii State Department of Education. n.d. Kona Community School. https://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/ParentsAndStudents/EnrollingInSchool/SchoolFinder/Pages/Ko na-Community-School.aspx. Kaʻahahui ʻO Ka Nāhelehele (Nāhelehele) was founded as a nonprofit 501(c)(3) affiliate of the volunteer Dryland Forest Working Group to support the precious few remaining remnant dryland forest habitats. The active working board believes that where there is responsibility and stewardship, there is hope. Nāhelehele provided support to the KCDP Action Committee with formulating the vision and goals of an open space network, consisting of open spaces linked by corridors. The open space network is a key part of the KCDP, and it has great potential for establishing dry forest corridors in the Kona region.  Kaʻahahui ʻO Ka Nāhelehele. 2018. Kona Open Space Network. https://www.drylandforest.org/dry- forest-corridors/kona-open-space. Hawaiʻi County Parks and Recreation has a range of governance documents related to parks and public areas. The Culture and Education Division provides educational and recreational activities for the community year-round to share, preserve, perpetuate and foster Hawaiʻi Isalnd’s rich multi-cultural heritage in the arts, history, and the humanities.  County of Hawai‘i Parks and Recreation. 2023. Parks and Recreation. https://www.parks.hawaiicounty.gov/home-parks. The Nature Conservancy in Hawaii and Palmyra Atoll works towards natural climate solutions and ecological conservation initiatives.  The Nature Conservancy. 2023. Hawaii and Palmyra. https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where- we-work/united-states/hawaii/. Legacy Land Conservation Program Planning Documents provide a clearinghouse of policy and resources related to the state. This resource helps fulfill requirements for a plan that will guide the DLNR in acquiring “land having value as a resource to the State” (also known as “resource value land”). In preparing this plan, DLNR “shall consider any plan relating to the acquisition of such land that has been prepared by any state or county agency.”  Department of Land and Natural Resources. 2023. Legacy Land Conservation Program: Planning. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/ecosystems/llcp/planning/. Center for Conservation Research & Training (CCRT) at the University of Hawaiʻi is the home to numerous units with a diverse but integrated array of interests and activities that support the overall goal of advancing ecology, evolution and conservation biology in Hawaiʻi and the Pacific. The programs include research units such as the Hawaiian Evolutionary Biology Program, educational units such as the Integrative Graduate Education and Research Training, and facilities and technological units such as the Hawaiʻi Biodiversity and Mapping Program. CCRT extends its influence through outreach programs such as the Hawaiʻi Conservation Alliance.  Center for Conservation Research & Training. n.d. Hawaii Biodiveristy and Mapping Program. http://hbmpweb.pbrc.hawaii.edu/ccrt/hbmp. The College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources at the University of Hawai’i “creates and delivers knowledge that supports and strengthens families, agricultural and food systems, and the natural Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 17 environment.” The provides education, research, and extension programs in tropical agriculture and food systems, family and consumer science, and natural resource management.  College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources. n.d. CTAHR Mission and Vision. https://cms.ctahr.hawaii.edu/CTAHRMissionVision. Liliʻuokalani Trust is “a private operating foundation established in 1909 for the benefit of orphan and destitute children, with preference given to Native Hawaiians.” Liliʻuokalani Trust focuses on innovatiove programs for children and youth up to 26 years old, services for trauma-informed social-emotional support, research and evaluation, organizational excellence, and effective resource management. Liluʻokalani serves Hawaii youth through a combination of direct services and collaborations with community partners. For example, one of Liliʻuokalani Trust’s projects in the Keahuolu ahupuaʻa, located within the Kona project area, involved a 1,300 acre master plan for mixed-use development of residential, office, retail, and industrial bulidings; community spaces; and 30% dedicated open space. The master plan protects the shoreline, allows locals and visitors access to cultural site and recreational activities, creates walkable neighborhoods through new street and bicycle infrastructure and transit.  Liliʻuokalani Trust. 2023. About Us. https://onipaa.org/about-us.  Mithun. 2023. Grow Right Grow Tight: Keahuolu Land Planning. https://mithun.com/project/keahuol- land-planning/. 4.3 County, State, and Federal Areas Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this space, place, or asset protect and leverage the benefit of exiting open space or community property? Note: This includes linear property assets like bikepaths and trails, which we describe below but did not assign a criteria to. The Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) is responsible for overseeing approximately 2 million acres of private and public lands that lie within the State Land Use Conservation District, including Kona. In addition to privately and publicly zoned Conservation District lands, OCCL is responsible for overseeing beach and marine lands out to the seaward extent of the state’s jurisdiction.  Department of Land and Natural Resources, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands. 2023. Subzone Maps. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/occl/subzone-maps/ Honolulu Natural Resource and Public Open Space is a white paper prepared by Townscape, Inc. that provides information about conditions and trends related to open space in the Primary Urban Center (PUC)—addressing both natural conservation areas and constructed public parks, plazas, and pathways— to inform the City and County of Honolulu staff and consultants as they prepare a revision to the PUC Development Plan. This study provides insight as to relevant considerations for Kona but should be seen as an adjacent geography insight.  City and County of Honolulu. 2018. Primary Urban Center Development, Natural Resources and Public Open Space. Final White Paper. Prepared by Townscape, Inc. https://www.honolulu.gov/dpp/wp- content/uploads/sites/56/2025/12/PUCDP-Natural-Resource-and-Open-Space.pdf. Kekaha Kai (Kona Coast) State Park is part of The Hawaiʻi State Park System that is composed of 50 parks encompassing approximately 30,000 acres on 5 major islands. These parks offer a variety of outdoor recreation and heritage opportunities. The park environments range from landscaped grounds with Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 18 developed facilities to wildland areas with trails and primitive facilities. This site provides insight on accessibility and amenities, as well as rules and locations of assets.  Department of Land and Natural Resources. 2023. Kona Coast State Park. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/dsp/parks/hawaii/kekaha-kai-kona-coast-state-park/. The National Park Service is a bureau of the U.S. Department of the Interior and is led by a Director who is nominated by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. The Director is supported by senior executives who manage national programs, policy, and budget in the Washington, D.C., headquarters and seven regional directors responsible for national park management and program implementation. Kaloko- Honokōhau National Historic Park is located near the project area, and the National Park Service has a range of educational resources on its site and social media.  National Park Service. 2023. Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park Hawai'i. https://www.nps.gov/kaho/index.htm. The U.S. Geological Survey Northwest-Pacific Islands Region contains seven science centers that conduct a wide array of impartial, multi- and interdisciplinary research and monitoring on natural resource issues in the states of Hawaiʻi, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Western Montana, and in the U.S. Pacific Territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Marianas.  U.S. Geological Survey. n.d. USGS Northwest-Pacific Islands Region Website. https://www.usgs.gov/regions/northwest-pacific-islands. 4.4 Community Gathering Spaces The Trust for Public Land believes work creating and revitalizing parks has the power to transform communities: “Our community-driven process fosters a strong sense of place and connection to nature, and Trust for Public Land supports the development of parks and public spaces every step of the way. We bring communities together to identify sites for new parks and close-to-home natural areas, and activate and renew existing parks. We share stewardship and management techniques to ensure that new and revitalized publicly owned lands are enjoyed.”  Trust for Public Land. 2023. Parks for People Hawai‘i. https://www.tpl.org/our-work/parks-people- hawaii Old Kona Airport State Recreation Area is a 103-acre state park built on the site of an old airport landing strip, which was originally bulit during World War II. The area is a part of the State of Hawaii DLNR Marine Life Conservation District. Community members can enjoy fishing, gathering wana, playing in tidepools, swimming, surfing, snorkeling, SCUBA diving, walking, jogging, picnicking, and sports. The area has a baseball and soccer field, Kailua-Kona Skate Park, tennis courts, Kona Community Aquatic Center, Kekuaokalani Gym, and Makaʻeo Walking Path with trails and gardens. The area also has Makaʻeo County Pavilion, a County-run community center used for various community events and gatherings. Social media can also be a useful resource for finding ‘hidden gems’ in the community.  Explore the Big Island. n.d. Old Kona Airport Beach Park. https://www.explore-the-big-island.com/old- kona-airport.html  Concrete Disciples. n.d. Kailua-Kona Skatepark. https://www.concretedisciples.com/global-skatepark- directory/usa-skateparks-guide/hawaii/kona-skatepark-kona-big-island-hawaii/  Facebook. n.d. Makaeo Pavilion. https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=533252020096150 Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 19 Hale Hālāwai Park has a community pavilion hall that puts on various events for the Kona community. The area also features a rocky beach and grassy areas for recreation.  Trip Advisor. n.d. Hale Halawai Park. https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g60872- d19500946-Reviews-Hale_Halawai_Park-Kailua_Kona_Island_of_Hawaii_Hawaii.html Our team will also focus on vibrant spaces of all types, similar to the work we see in the 2001 Project for Public Spaces handbook.  Project for Public Spaces (PPS). 2001. How to Turn a Place Around: A Handbook for Creating Successful Public Spaces. New York: Project for Public Spaces. https://www.pps.org/product/how-to- turn-a-place-around-2.  Whyte, William H. 1980. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Conservation Foundation. Washington, D.C.  Carr, Stephen, Mark Francis, Leanne G. Rivlin, and Andrew M. Stone. 1992. Public Space. Cambridge University Press, New York.  Low, Setha. 2022. Why Public Space Matters. Oxford University Press. 4.5 Bike Lanes, Paths, and Facilities Kona’s Multimodal Transit Plan gives due consideration to transport and transit, and provides valuable insight into both network and hubs for both current activities and future plans. Hele-On is a service of the County of Hawaiʻi Mass Transit Agency and provides the following services:  Countywide public transit services on 24 fixed and flex routes countywide  A Hele-On Kākoʻo program for Americans with Disabilities Act complementary paratransit service in Hilo, Kailua-Kona, and Puna  A shared ride taxi program with three taxi companies in Hilo  Countywide senior and persons with disabilities transportation service in partnership with HCEOC  A vanpool program in partnership with Commute with Enterprise  10 HIBIKE bikeshare stations in Hilo and Kailua-Kona in partnership with PATH Hele-On transports approximately 588,000 passenger trips a year on a fleet of more than 30 buses and vans, and includes a trolley. Transit services are provided under contract with Roberts Hawaiʻi, taxicab companies, Enterprise Holdings, HCEOC, and PATH.  County of Hawai’i. 2022. Final Transit and Multi-Modal Transportation Master Plan, 2022 Supplement. https://heleonmasterplan.com/final-transit-and-multi-modal-transportation-master-plan/. In 2020, HDOT began refreshing the data, cost estimates, feasibility, and prioritization for all HDOT proposed projects in the 2003 Bike Plan Hawaiʻi. The outcome of this process is to maintain current data for the proposed projects, understand current bicycle facility needs, and identify priority and highly feasible proposed projects for implementation. Priorities are determined according to criteria related to safety, connectivity (for example, gaps in the system), accessibility (such as locations where people need to bike to), equity, feasibility, and stakeholder input. In 2013, HDOT developed project assessment reports to implement high-priority projects on each island.  State of Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation. 2023. Bicycle Planning. https://highways.hidot.hawaii.gov/stories/s/Bicycle-Planning/v4zn-nbn4. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 20 To complement other programs that address pedestrian safety, HDOT prepared a community-based Statewide Pedestrian Master Plan for the state’s highway system. The Master Plan prioritizes pedestrian infrastructure improvements and programs, promotes the Complete Streets vision for the state, and fulfills federal requirements for multimodal planning. Pedestrian Plan Appendix. The Hawaiʻi Pedestrian Toolbox, a companion document to this Master Plan, was developed to identify best practices in designing for pedestrian safety, mobility, and accessibility. Topics include layout of sidewalks, presence and timing of pedestrian crossing signals, access management along roadways, and intersection design. The Hawaiʻi Pedestrian Toolbox will serve as a resource for planners and designers as they consider pedestrians during design.  State of Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation. 2023. Pedestrian Planning. https://highways.hidot.hawaii.gov/stories/s/Pedestrian-Planning/a6mu-vr5z#statewide-pedestrian- master-plan. Running Neighborhoods and other active transit or recreational infrastructure can be highly flexible and difficult to identify. Online resources are often a useful, but not comprehensive resource. Runners, bike commuters, cyclists, and casual bike riders all have different needs. Creating spaces that accommodate a range of modes allows for more comprehensive consolidation or segmentation. Accessibility compliance and best practice is also a co-benefit of planning for everyone. Likewise, cycling communities also have preferred routes worth considering as we connect open and natural spaces. Again, public web resources are less formal but allow us to have a personal perspective when exploring solutions.  Hawai’I Life. 2021. Top Five Running Neighborhoods. https://www.hawaiilife.com/blog/top-5-running- neighborhoods-in-kona/. 4.6 Accessibility, Active Transportation, Micromobility, and Shared Use Mobility The Shared Use Mobility Center created this Shared Use Mobility Roadmap for the Hawaiian Islands, which brings together a cross-sectoral group of stakeholders to establish strategies for building out a County-wide, multimodal transportation system founded on partnerships, technology, and innovation. The Roadmap aligns with a variety of important efforts emerging around the Island, including the County’s Transportation Hui process, implementation of the County Transit and Multimodal plans.  Shared-Use Mobility Center. 2020. Hawai‘i Island Shared Mobility Roadmap. https://sharedusemobilitycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Hawaii-Island-Shared-Mobility- Roadmap-February-2020_LG.pdf. People for Active Transportation Hawaiʻi, is a more than 30-year-old nonprofit organization with a mission to connect people and places with bikeways and walkways on Hawaiʻi Island. We believe safe, equitable transportation options promote healthy people, healthy communities, healthy land, and a healthy planet. They administer three programs: Biking and Pedestrian Safety Classes for Keiki and Adults, HIBIKE Bikeshare, and Vision Zero and Complete Streets Advocacy.  People for Active Transportation (PATH). n.d. Connecting People and Places. https://pathhawaii.org/. HDOT also has a Complete Streets program that will help to inform the design considerations for many linkages or corridors. In Honolulu, this program promotes a range of investments that could be considered for areas adjacent to these active, urban corridors.  Hawaii Department of Transportation and the Complete Streets Task Force. 2010. Complete Streets Legislative Report. November. https://files.hawaii.gov/dotadmin/library/legislature/2011/ACT%2054- Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 21 %20SLH%202009%20REPORT%20-2011-%20- %20COMPLETE%20STREETS%20TASK%20FORCE%20-Part%201%20of%202.pdf. 4.7 Transport Corridors Several governmental agencies and community‐represented advisory committees focus on transportation systems and traffic safety in Hawaiʻi County, including the following:  Hawaiʻi Strategic Highway Safety Plan and Governor’s Traffic Initiatives  County Highway Safety Council  Kona Traffic Safety Committee  Hawaiʻi County Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee  County Transportation Needs Noted in the General Plan and KCDP  KCDP Action Committee Priorities The team will collect a range of recent transportation GIS layers to illustrate the comprehensive findings of transportation planning and programs. 5. Cultural Elements of Open Space Culture is a system of shared beliefs, values, norms, symbols, practices, and artifacts. Culture involves sharing across social groups and society, but also small groups and families. Culture is a complex blend of language custom, tradition, and ritual that connects people to a sense of the whole and purpose. The Kona project area encompasses many Native Hawaiian cultural and historical open spaces, along with a diverse range of multi-ethnic cultural spaces and, also, local residents and visitors from many different cultural backgrounds. In the development of the Kona Open Space Network, we will explore ways to celebrate and incorporate cultural elements of open space, with particular attention given to Native Hawaiian cultural spaces and values. Because Native Hawaiian culture so closely overlaps with environmental and social elements, many of the cultural elements in this section have been described in greater detail in the previous sections. In this section, we introduce new concepts and tie in connections to elements described earlier. 5.1 Overview of Cultural Spaces Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this open space, hub, linkage or asset celebrate the unique culture and heritage of Hawaiʻi Island or Kona specifically? Suggested Criteria for Analysis of Open Space: Does this open space, hub, linkage or asset celebrate the natural spaces specifically designed for local community and residents? KCDP Section 3.2 Guiding Principles envisions a future “sustainable Kona characterized by a deep respect for the culture and the environment and residents that responsively and responsibly accommodate change through an active and collaborative community.” The KCDP’s first guiding principle is to protect Kona’s natural resources and culture. Natural resources include the watershed, coastline, flood plains, agricultural land, open space, and areas mauka of Māmalahoa Highway. The KCDP calls for the preservation and protection of natural resources “to ensure clean air and water, thriving native species, conservation of shorelines and open space, improvements in watershed management and flood control, and reductions in solid wate.” The KCDP also emphasizes the preservation, protection, and restoration of multi-ethnic culture in line with the aloha spirit. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 22 KCDP Section 4.4 Cultural Resources provides significant local cultural context and character, as follows: "In the Hawaiian language and culture, Kona is a traditional Hawaiian moku (district) on the leeward side of the island. To kamaʻāina, however, it is more than just a region or place; it is part of our being. In tradition and custom, Kona’s great beauty and many resources have been entrusted to the people by Akua (our Creator), and inherent in this trust comes kūleana (responsibility/obligation) to mālama (care for) all that gives keola (life), so that it may hoʻomau (be perpetuated). Today, this means to honor what has gone before, be responsible for the present, and plan for the future.” According to cultural historian Kepā Maly, who is quoted in the KCDP as follows, “In any culturally sensitive discussion on land use in Hawaiʻi, 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 ends and nature begins. In a traditional Hawaiian context, nature and culture are one and the same. There is no division between the two.”  County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. 2019. Kona Community Development Plan. September. Accessed September 22, 2023. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/cdp/kona.  Maly, Kepā. 2001. Mālama Pono I Ka ʻĀina – An Overview of the Hawaiian Cultural Landscape. http://www.drylandforest.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/HwnCultrlLandscapeMaly.pdf. Critical to open space planning is the concept of moku, the traditional Hawaiian geographical delineation of each island into moku, or districts. There are six moku on the island of Hawaiʻi: Kona, Kohala, Hāmākua, Hilo, Puna, Kaʻū. These moku form the widest delineation of space for this program. Further nuance is allowed through the understanding and incorporation of the Hawaiian ahupuaʻa system, the traditional Hawaiian land use model for sustainability. Each moku was further divided geographically into slender ahupuaʻa land segments extending mauka to makai. The Hawaiians practiced resource management and sustainable agriculture, as one ahupuaʻa was cultivated in such a way to sustain the entire community residing there.  University of Hawaii. n.d. “Moku.” Hawaiʻi: The Māhele. http://www2.hawaii.edu/~dhonda/moku.htm.  Volcano Heritage Cottages. 2021. Hawaiʻi Island’s Unique Ahupuaʻa and Diverse Districts. https://volcanoheritagecottages.com/2021/12/10/hawaii-islands-unique-ahupuaa-and-diverse- districts/.  Department of Land and Natural Resources. 2015. Ahupuaʻa of Hawaiʻi. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/shpd/files/2015/06/Ahupuaa_Hawaii.pdf. Mālama ʻāina directly translates as “to care for” in the Hawaiian language. Mālama ʻāina encompasses the core Hawaiian way of being: to care for the land as if it is an elder sibling, to protect the land and the sea in a responsible, respectful way. The Hawaiians believed that the land would, in turn, reciprocate all actions and care for the people, the younger sibling, by providing nourishment.  Office of Hawaiian Affairs. 2023. ʻĀina – Land and Sea. https://www.oha.org/aina/. Table 5 provides examples of cultural spaces. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 23 Table 5. Examples of Cultural Spaces ʻAhuʻena Heiau Heiau—Hāpaialiʻi and Keʻekū Kamehameha III Birthplace Kona Hawaiian Quilt Museum and Gallery Kona Cloud Forest Sanctuary Kona Historical Society & H.N. Greenwell Store Museum Kuʻemanu Heiau Kona Point 1871 Trail Historical Helani Congregational Church Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historic Park Honuaʻula Forest Reserve Royal Footsteps Makaʻeo Walking Path Walua Road Walking and Bike Path 5.2 Historic, Ancient, or Natural Area Trails The KCDP Cultural Resources Policy 1-1 recommends that cultural resources, including trails and historic sites should be included in the Open Space Network Program, and the County should be provided with recommendations to purchase appropriate buffers surrounding these sites. KCDP Section 4.4 Cultural Resources also points to the physical environment “Nā Ala Hele” that translates as “the foot trails” or “the pathways” in Hawaiian. Historically, Native Hawaiians established an elaborate system of nā ala hele between the mauka and maikai regions to connect the different areas of the ahupuaʻa together.  County of Hawaiʻi Planning Department. 2019. Kona Community Development Plan. September. Accessed September 22, 2023. https://www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov/general-plan-community- planning/cdp/kona. These connections are critical to understanding the legacy of existing linkages, where linkages are interrupted, and where investment could connect elements of this plan to existing (or potential) examples. Nā Ala Hele Trail & Access Program is the State of Hawaiʻi Trail and Access Program, created to manage public resources related to hiking. The program manages trail access and conducts trail maintenance in order to provide important public services including recreational opportunities, experiences related to cultural history and historic trails, and economic opportunities where possible for commercial trail vendors. Nā Ala Hele trails are also important for access into natural areas for management, research, hunting, and wildfire response. The Makāula-ʻOʻoma trails are located mauka of the project area and support activities such as hiking, biking, hunting, horse-riding, wildlife viewing, and walking dogs.  Department of Land and Natural Resources. 2023. Nā Ala Hele Trail and Access Program. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/recreation/nah/. The National Park’s Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail is a 175-mile corridor encompassing a network of culturally and historically significant trails over 200 ahupuaʻa. It is not yet a single continuous trail, but can be accessed at several broken segments along the coastline of Hawaiʻi Island. The Ala Kahakai Trail stretches along the coastline of the project area.  National Park Service. n.d. Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail. https://www.nps.gov/alka/index.htm. 5.3 Protected and Managed Cultural and Historic Sites The Huliheʻe Palace is located in historic Kailua-Kona, Hawaiʻi, at 75–5718 Ali’i Drive. The former vacation home of Hawaiian royalty, it was converted to a museum run by the Daughters of Hawaiʻi. Today Hulihe’e Palace is a museum showcasing artifacts from the era of King Kalākaua and Queen Kapi’olani, featuring Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 24 beautiful koa wood furniture, portraits, kapa, feather work, Hawaiian quilts and artifacts from Hawaiʻi’s royal past.  Daughters of Hawaiʻi. n.d. Huliheʻe Palace. https://daughtersofhawaii.org/hulihee-palace/. Kaloko-Honokōhau National Park is a kīpuka, a place of cultural and spiritual significance to Hawaiians, providing a look into the culture and lifestyle of the people who thrived along the rugged coast. The park encompasses Kaloko Fishpond (loko kuapā – fishpond style with the wall built on the reef), ʻAimakapā Fishpond (loko puʻuone – fishpond style near shore, typically with a sand ridge wall), and ʻAiʻōpio Fishtrap, which were traditionally managed by Native Hawaiians to sustainably farm fish to feed the community. The park features many historical kiʻi pōhaku (stone petroglyphs), ancient Hawaiian heiau (temples), native plants, native wildlife, anchialine pools (more than 200), tidepools, and coral reefs. It also includes the National Historic Landmarked archaeological site known as the Honokōhau Settlement, which was an early Hawaiian settlement.  National Park Service. n.d. Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historic Park. https://www.nps.gov/kaho/index.htm. Kamakahonu National Historic Landmark was the residence of Kamehameha I, and is located at the north end of Kailua Bay in Kailua-Kona on Hawaiʻi Island. The compound included ʻAhuʻena Heiau, the personal heiau of Kamehameha I. This site was once the capital of the Kingdom of Hawaii.  National Park Service. 2019. Kamakahonu, HI. https://www.nps.gov/places/kamakahonu.htm. 5.4 Historic, Urban, and Natural Trails and Recreational Spaces Landforming provides details on grading for cost-effective, attractive, and environmentally compatible way to construct slopes and other landforms that are stable and that blend in with the natural surroundings. Landform grading design and construction technology have advanced rapidly during the past decade, and this book explains the technique, its uses, its various applications, and its significant advantages.  Schor, Horst and Donald Gray. 2007. Landforming: An Environmental Approach to Hillside Decelopment, Mine Reclamation and Watershed Restoration. Royal Footsteps Along the Kona Coast extends along the entire length of Aliʻi Drive along the Kona Coast Scenic Byway. The Royal Foosteps cover “seven miles of roadway and over seven centuries of Hawaiian Toyalty archaeological, historic and cultural traditions.” The Royal Footsteps corridor includes cultural and historical areas within the project area, such as the Kailua Seawall, Pā o ʻUmi, Huliheʻe Palace, Mokuʻaikaua Church, Hale Hālāwai, and Ōneo Bay.  Images of Old Hawai’i. 2023. Royal Footsteps Along the Kona Coast. https://imagesofoldhawaii.com/royal-footsteps-along-the-kona-coast-scenic-byway/. Walua Road Walking and Bike Path is a 6.5-mile out-and-back trail near Hōlualoa. The trail is a paved neighborhood path that is popular with both area residents and tourists for biking, running, and walking. This route begins as a paved trail that is restricted to non-motorized use, but in other areas this trail shares paved neighborhood streets. The trail travels close by residential homes through a quiet neighborhood.  AllTrails. n.d. Walua Trail. https://www.alltrails.com/trail/hawaii/hawaii/walua-walk?u=i. 5.5 Game Management Areas DLNR manages Hawaiʻi Game Management Areas (GMAs) across the state. The purpose of the GMAs is “to manage, sustain, and enhance habitat and populations of game mammals and/or game birds.” Public Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 25 community members can hunt within designated GMAs. The Puʻu Anahulu GMA is nearest to project area—mauka of the project area.  Department of Land and Natural Resources. n.d. Game Management Areas. https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/recreation/hunting/gma/. 5.6 GIS GIS will be an essential part of this review. It will allow us to better understand which of these elements are inside or adjacent to our study area. The team has reviewed over 500 geospatial layers. We capture numerous layers and assess them in a webmap. As those play a role in our report, we will illustrative context and relevance in documents like this. Where critical for dialogue, we can add content to our shared project StoryMap. 5.6.1 Final GIS Data, KOSN StoryMap The curated data within the KOSN StoryMap plays a huge role in giving tangible and practical definition to the elements discussed here. That curated data has been used to create an interactive map within the Kona Open Space Network Planning StoryMap at https://arcg.is/Ora550 that illustrates the following:  Coastal landmark place names  Historic cultural place names  Public beach access along Alii Drive  Small boat harbors  Terrestrial layers – Nā Al Hele Trails  County major roads  Trails (DLNR)  Urban areas  Historic and cultural boundaries – ahupuaʻa  County parks  State parksStreams  Critical habitats  Existing KOSN sites  Planned/Proposed projects within Kona Urban Area  Open space hubs  Reserves 5.6.2 Initial GIS Resources  County of Hawaii – ArcGIS Portal. https://gis.hawaiicounty.gov/arcgisportal/home/  County of Hawaii – ArcGIS Online. https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/82676202ef66492bb5aec0e8a6e2fcbc.  County of Hawaii – Real Property Tax Office. https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=1048&LayerID=23618&PageTypeID=2&P ageID=9876  State of Hawaii, Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. 2023. Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 26 6. Conclusion This literature review is not exhaustive and will grow as we capture knowledge alongside our outreach and public engagement exercise. The review provides additional definition to complex systems we define. This expands upon the work to date evidenced in the thoughtful scope of work. There are numerous resources from state, local, and community groups. We will work to maintain alignment with the work to date in wide governance documents like the KCDP, and also the small projects and community victories that we see in all types of open spaces. 7. Additional Resources The material in this section may be of interest as we consider the more detailed resources mentioned in the previous ones. The team is less familiar with these materials and wanted to share to foster dialogue. We will keep this list live and active as we acquire more resources, and we look forward to collaborating with individuals who share knowledge across all disciplines and lived experiences. Beckwith, M. 1970. Hawaiian Mythology. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press. Boundary Commission Testimony 1873-1915 Digitized volumes in Collection of Kumu Pono Associated LLC (from Hawaiʻi State Archives). Fornander, A. 1996. Ancient History of the Hawaiian People. Mutual Publishing, Australia. Handy, E.S.C., E.G. Handy, with M.K. Pukui. 1972. “Native Planters in Old Hawaiʻi, Their Life, Lore, and Environment.” B.P. Bishop Museum Bulletin. 233. B.P. Bishop Museum Press. Kamakau, S.M. 1961. Ruling Chiefs of Hawaiʻi. Honolulu: Kamehameha Schools Press. 1968. Ka Po’e Kahiko.: The People of Old. 1991 Tales and Traditions of the People of Old, Nā Moʻolelo a ka Poʻe Kahiko. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 51. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Malo, D. 1951. Hawaiian Antiquities. Maly, Kepā (translator)ms. 1917. “Kaʻao Hoʻoniua Puʻuwai no Ka-Miki (The Heart Stirring Story of Ka-Miki).” Translation of a traditional account of people and places of the island of Hawai’i. Published in the Hawaiian Newspaper Ka Hoku o Hawaiʻi; January 8, 1914 – December 6, 1917. Honolulu, B.P. Bishop Museum. Pukui, M.K. 1983. Olelo Noʻeau Proverbs and Poetical Sayings. https://bishopmuseumpress.org/products/olelo-no-eau-Hawaiian-proverbs-poetical-sayings-1. Agranoff, Robert, and Beryl A. Radin.1991. “The comparative case study approach in public administration.” Research in Public Administration. Volume 1. pp. 203–231. Berens, Gayle. 1997. “Bryant Park, New York City.” Urban Parks and Open Space. Alexander Garvin and Gayle Berens, eds. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute. pp. 44-57. Boyer Ernest L., and Lee D. Mitgang. 1996. Building Community: A New Future for Architecture Education and Practice. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Princeton, New Jersey. Cooper Marcus, Clare and Marni Barnes. 1995. Gardens in Healthcare Facilities. Center for Health Design. Martinez, California. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 27 Cooper Marcus; Clare and Carolyn Francis, eds. 1997. People Places: Design Guidelines for Urban Open Space. 2nd edition. Wiley. New York. Corner, James and Alex S. MacLean. 1996. Taking Measures Across the American Landscape. Yale University Press. New Haven, Connecticut. Cranz, Galen. 1982. The Politics of Park Design. MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Francis, Mark. 1975. “Urban impact assessment and community involvement: The Case of the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Library.” Environment & Behavior. Volume 7, issue 3. pp. 373–404. Francis, Mark. 1998. “Proactive practice: Visionary thought and participatory action in environmental design.” Places. Volume12, issue 2. pp. 60–68. Francis, Mark, Lisa Cashdan, and Lynne Paxson. 1984. Community Open Spaces: Greening Neighborhoods Through Community Action and Land Conservation. Island Press. Washington, D.C. Francis, Mark and Randolph T. Hester Jr., eds. 1990. The Meaning of Gardens: Idea, Place, and Action. MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Garvin, Alexander and Gayle Berens. 1997. Urban Parks and Open Space. Urban Land Institute. Washington, D.C. Girling, Cynthia L. and Kenneth Helphand. 1994. Yard, Street, Park: The Design of Suburban Open Space. Wiley. New York. Hough, Michael. 1984. City Form and Natural Process. Van Nostrand Reinhold. New York. Jacobs, Allan. 1996. Great Streets. MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts. Johnson, Jory. 1991. Modern Landscape Architecture: Redefining the Garden. Abbeville Press. New York. Kaplan, Rachel and Stephen Kaplan. 1989. The Experience of Nature. Cambridge University Press. New York. Kaplan, Rachel, Stephen Kaplan, and Robert Ryan. 1998. With People in Mind: Design and Management of Everyday Nature. Island Press. Washington, D.C. Kobayashi, Haruto, Hajme Koshimizu, and International Federation of Landscape Architects. 1990. Contemporary Landscapes in the World. Process Architecture Publishing Company. Tokyo. Levitt, Rachelle L. 1987. Cities Reborn. Urban Land Institute. Washington, D.C. Longo, Gianni. 1996. A Guide to Great American Public Places: A Journal of Discovery, Learning, and Delight in the Public Realm. Lyndhurst Foundation. Chattanooga, Tennessee. Lyle, John T. 1996. Design for Human Ecosystems: Landscape, Land Use, and Natural Resources. Wiley. New York. 36. Nager, Anita R., and Wally R. Wentworth. 1976. Bryant Park: A Comprehensive Evaluation of its Image and Use with Implications for Urban Open Space Design. CUNY Center for Human Environments. New York. Owen, Lewis. 1993. “Trail Research Reviewed.” The Sea Ranch Surroundings. Spring 1991, 3. Park, S. Post-occupancy Evaluation of Bryant Park. New York: CUNY Graduate Center Environmental Psychology Program. Kona Open Space Network, Literature and Resource Review with Annotated Bibliography 230922203245_C0EB9278 28 Potteiger, Matthew and Jamie Purinton. 1998. Landscape Narratives: Design Practices for Telling Stories. Wiley. New York. Steinitz, Carl. Biodiversity and Landscape Planning: Alternative Futures for the Region of Camp Pendleton, CA. Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program. Thompson, George F. and Frederick R. Steiner. 1997. Ecological Design and Planning. Wiley. New York. Appendix G: Literature Review by Cultural Surveys Hawaii O‘ahu Office P.O. Box 1114 Kailua, Hawai‘i 96734 Ph.: (808) 262-9972 Fax: (808) 262-4950 www.culturalsurveys.com Maui Office 1860 Main St. Wailuku, Hawai‘i 96793 Ph.: (808) 242-9882 Fax: (808) 244-1994 Draft Archaeological Literature Review for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. Prepared for Jacobs on behalf of the County of Hawai‘i Prepared by David W. Shideler, M.A., and Hallett H. Hammatt, Ph.D. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. Kailua, Hawai‘i (Job Code: HAWAII 16) February 2024 Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 1 Management Summary Reference Archaeological Literature Review for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Hawai‘i Island, TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. (Shideler and Hammatt 2024) Date February 2024 Project Number(s) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. (CSH) Job Code: HAWAII 16 Investigation Permit Number CSH presently operates under archaeological fieldwork permit number 24-30, issued by the Hawai‘i State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) per Hawai‘i Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-13-282. No fieldwork was undertaken for this study. Agencies SHPD Land Jurisdiction State of Hawai‘i Project Proponent Hawai‘i County Project Funding Hawai‘i County Project Location The study area, understood as effectively the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve, is in Kalaoa Ahupua‘a, North Kona District on the Island of Hawai‘i, Tax Map Key (TMK) (3) 7-3-043:042 por. The study area is located on the north side of Keāhole Point, immediately south of Ho‘onā Bay and immediately west (makai, seaward) of the Ellison Onizuka Kona International Airport at Keāhole. The project area is depicted on a portion of a 1996 Keahole Point U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle (Figure 1), a tax map plat (Figure 2), and a 2019 satellite photograph (Figure 3). Access to the study area is relatively straightforward from Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway, west on Makako Bay Drive which then turns north, continuing as a paved road along the coast to the Natural Energy Laboratory complex. There is a guard shack at the “NELHA Gateway” just west of Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway but it is believed access is rarely impeded. There is a gate at the entry to the Natural Energy Laboratory but this is only approximately 400 m south of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve and closer vehicular access is possible by entering into the Natural Energy Laboratory or by turning southwest onto gravel-paved Hā‘uke‘uke Way which wraps around the west side of the facility (Figure 4). We note that a pair of views of the coast from 1882 (Figure 5 and Figure 6) show a trail immediately on the coast extending to the south and north from Keāhole Point. Natural and Built The study area is located on the north side of Keāhole Point, immediately south of Ho‘onā Bay at an elevation below 6 m (20 feet [ft]) above mean sea level Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 2 Environment and within 300 m of the coast on an area of old pāhoehoe lava flows. The 1801 eruption of Hualālai Volcano reached the sea just north and east of the area of study (Figure 7). It should be noted that several historic maps (1888 Emerson, 1891 Emerson, 1914 Wall) erroneously show the 1801 flow as extending to the south side of Keāhole Point. The immediate proximity of the 1801 flow may in fact have led to the abandonment of the hamlet. The Ellison Onizuka Kona International Airport at Keāhole (the primary airport on the island) is only 300 m to the east. The Natural Energy Laboratory (University of Hawai‘i) is immediately to the south (and in fact appears to have been built over certain historic properties of this site complex). A U.S. Coast Guard reservation for a lighthouse/aid to navigation at Keāhole Point is just to the southwest. Project Description and Related Disturbance The County of Hawai‘i proposes to develop an Open Space Network Program for the Kona area located in the general vicinity of the Ellison Onizuka Kona International Airport on the north to Keauhou on the south. Open Space Network sites of interest include but are not limited to State of Hawai‘i, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, County of Hawaiʻi, and Private jurisdiction—currently being developed and assessed for feasibility. This study is understood as an early step in facilitating the potential development. Project Acreage The Ho‘onā Historic Preserve is approximately 244 m (800 ft) north/south by approximately 122 m (400 ft) east/west, 7.4 acres (3.0 hectares). Historic Preservation Regulatory Context The “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” is under study for consideration as part of a Hawai‘i County Kona Open Space project. As this study is part of a county project it appears to fall under Hawai‘i Revised Statutes (HRS) §6E-8 and HAR §13-275 requiring SHPD review. Document Purpose This investigation was designed—through detailed historical, cultural, and archaeological background research and a field inspection of the project area— to determine the likelihood that historic properties may be affected by the project and based on findings, consider cultural resource management recommendations. This document is intended to facilitate the project’s planning and support the project’s historic preservation environmental review compliance. This investigation does not fulfill the requirements of an archaeological inventory survey investigation, per HAR §13-276. Summary of Historical Background Research The place name is shared with the bay to the north and is understood as a very active form of the common causative (ho‘o = sense of “to make” or “to do”) of the word “nā” (“calmed, quieted pacified”). We note the specific association with the volcano goddess in the chant: E ho‘i e Pele, i ke kuahiwi, ua nā ko lili, ko inaina Return, o Pele, to the mountain; your jealousy, your rage are pacified. [Pukui and Elbert 1984:75 and 237] Given the geographic relationship of the 1801 eruption of Hualālai Volcano to Ho‘onā Bay and Village (Figure 7) it seems highly probable the name is Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 3 related to the 1801 eruption and the tradition noted above, with a meaning of “To Pacify” or “Pacified” (Bay and Village). The early history of the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” is not well documented. We note the 1888 maps (Figure 8 and Figure 9), the 1891 map (Figure 10), and the 1914 map (Figure 11) show no structures, no ruins, and no trails in this area. It is posited that the immediate proximity of the massive 1801 Hualālai flow (Figure 7) may in fact have led to the abandonment of the fishing hamlet at that early date. A more detailed study of the archaeological research in the vicinity could lead to an understanding of the period of use, but it should be noted that archaeological research often used a volcanic glass hydration analysis system of dating that has since been discredited. Summary of Previous Archaeological Research While a number of archaeological studies have taken place in the immediate vicinity of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve (Table 1), our primary source of data appears to be an archaeological reconnaissance by Stephan Clark (1984) that provides documentation for eight sites in the vicinity of the preserve (State Inventory of Historic Places [SIHP] # 50-10-27-10194 through -00201; see Figure 12 for his site location map). The available data on these sites is presented in Table 2 and the following site descriptions (pages 21 through 30). Only a couple of these sites appear to have been formally mapped (Figure 14 and Figure 15). Two of these sites (SIHP # -010194 a terraced permanent habitation area and SIHP # -010201 a walled house site) appear to have been destroyed following extensive data recovery work (Barrera 1989). Marc Smith (1997) of SHPD provided additional site descriptions and a map of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve (Figure 13). Fieldwork Effort No fieldwork was undertaken for this study. Summary Initial research efforts (including consultation with the SHPD librarian and SHPD Hawai‘i Island lead archaeologist) have not identified an archaeological inventory survey or a preservation plan or a burial treatment plan for the historic properties of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve as might typically be expected for the creation of a historic preserve on state land. We cannot rule out that there are such documents (but it seems unlikely). Our primary sources of data for the historic properties of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve are from an archaeological reconnaissance survey (Clark 1984) and an SHPD memo (Smith 1997). The State Historic Preservation Division entered into a “Curator Program” also referred to as a “Curator Agreement” with a “Curator of the Hoona Historic Preserve” named Alena K.K. Kaiokekoa (also involving the State Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority) signed by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) on 29 December 1995. A 21 June 1997 SHPD memorandum notes what appears to be significant restoration, vegetation clearing, construction, and other work within the Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 4 preserve but notes, “The clearing, repairing and restoration projects that Mr. Kaiokekoa has undertaken was done with our knowledge” (Smith 1997:2). We note in passing and without comment effective minutes of a “NELH Ho‘ona Task Force” meeting dated 20 March 1997 that discusses (among other things) overnight educational activities of 100 people, and living and camping on the site. We note in passing and without comment a complaint for declaratory, injunctive, and other relief filed in Circuit Court in September 1997 by plaintiff Alena Kaiokekoa with defendants including the State Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority and the SHPD. Virtually all documentation of the historic properties of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve identified is supplied in this study (from the Clark 1984) reconnaissance-level survey and brief SHPD memo (Smith 1997). We note again that this documentation is not close to contemporary standards for site identification. It appears significant restoration, vegetation clearing, construction, and other work within the preserve was undertaken under the curatorship of Alena K.K. Kaiokekoa (going back at least to 1997) in “frequent” coordination with SHPD. It appears there is a total of at least five sets of human skeletal remains present, located at two or more locations within the preserve. The present status of a curatorship agreement, the present status of a “NELH Ho‘ona Task Force” or other administrative body, and the present status of formal agreements for the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve are unknown. Next Steps for Consideration The Ho‘onā Historic Preserve has every appearance of being a candidate for incorporation within the Kona Open Space project and appears to continue to offer significant educational and recreational opportunities (Figure 16 through Figure 19). It is relatively accessible (Figure 4). Early consultation with the SHPD is recommended on any incorporation of this preserve within the Kona Open Space project (which may be facilitated with this study). Guidance might be sought on other appropriate entities for consultation. Early consultation with Alena K.K. Kaiokekoa (or his heirs as curators of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve) is recommended. Early consultation with the Kona representative of the Hawai‘i Island Burial Council is recommended given the knowledge of burials within the preserve. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 5 Figure 1. Portion of a 1996 Keahole Point USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle showing the SIHP #s of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 6 Figure 2. TMK: (1) 7-3-043 showing the area of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve (Hawai‘i TMK Service 2019) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 7 Figure 3. 2019 ESRI satellite photograph showing the SIHP #s associated with the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 8 Figure 4. General view of the vehicular access approaching the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve (approximately 400 m to the north at upper right) down Makako Bay Drive approaching the main Natural Energy Laboratory facility at Keāhole Point with Hā‘uke‘uke Way veering off at left (makai) providing closer access (Google Earth 2024) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 9 Figure 5. J.S. Emerson, Field Note Book Map-Book 253-73 (State Survey Division, from Maly and Maly 2003:86) of 8 June 1882 providing a view from Keāhole Point (at bottom right) to the south showing a trail immediately on the coast Figure 6. J.S. Emerson, Field Note Book Map-Book 254-77 (State Survey Division, from Maly and Maly 2003:87) of August 1882 providing a view from Keāhole Point (middle left edge) to the north showing a trail immediately on the coast Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 10 Figure 7. USGS map of the southwest extent of the Hualālai eruption of 1801 showing that the flow reached the sea on the north side of Keāhole Point (“Keyhole Point”) just north and east of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve (USGS 2024) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 11 Figure 8. Portion of the 1888a Emerson map of Honokohau (RM 1446) indicating the area of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 12 Figure 9. Portion of the 1888b Emerson map of Akahipuu (RM 1449) indicating the area of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 13 Figure 10. 1891 Emerson map of Kailua (RM 1280) indicating the area of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve (note the indicated place name “Amanamana” is understood as an alternate for the place name “Hamanamana,” the name of the ahupua‘a [traditional land division] immediately north of Kalaoa) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 14 Figure 11. Portion of the 1914 Wall map of Akahipu‘u (HTS Plat 301) indicating the area of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 15 Table 1. Previous archaeological studies in the vicinity of the project area Reference Type of Study Location Results (SIHP # 50-10-27) Cordy 1975 Ph.D. dissertation Included reporting of work at SIHP # -10194 Test pit excavated in southeast side of SIHP # -10194; site interpreted as Commoner Household and structure as a Sleeping House; basaltic glass dates reported Rosendahl and Kirch 1975 Archaeological reconnaissance survey 314 acres of Keahole Point Natural Energy Laboratory Site Designated “Locality 13 Habitation Complex” (including most of present study area) described as “A large complex of features extending along the coast from N of the Ke-ahole Point Light almost to the edge of the 1801 Lava Flow” (Reinecke No. 86); included several walled enclosure, platforms, small shelters, and cairns; both recent and older features seem to be present; midden concentrations found in various areas Rogers- Jourdane 1978 Archaeological reconnaissance survey NELH proposed facilities areas at Keahole Point (22.5 acres, including three access corridors and two major construction areas) Noted 11 sited areas, including single-feature sites and feature complexes (it appears none within present study area) Rosendahl 1980 Intensive archaeological survey and salvage excavations Natural Energy Laboratory Hawaii (NELH) along access road to southwest Documents 8 sites south of present project area (SIHP # -05601 just south of present project area at NELH-OTEC Test Site consisted of complex of 39 individual features excluding surface artifact concentrations) Clark 1984 Archaeological reconnaissance Natural Energy Laboratory Hawaii (NELH) Property Keāhole Point Primary source of documentation for 8 sites in present study area (SIHP #s -00194 through -00201) Barrera 1989 Archaeological data recovery Addressed approx. 450 acres at Host Park and NELH Kalaoa and Ooma Ahupua‘a, only small portion of which was along coast south of Keāhole Point Barrera (1989:178–193, 195–196) describes in detail excavation work and finds at SIHP # -010194 a terraced permanent habitation area and at SIHP # -010201 a walled house site (1989: 193, 194, 196–212) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 16 Reference Type of Study Location Results (SIHP # 50-10-27) Smith 1997 SHPD site inspection memo Ho‘ona Historic Preserve Provides brief description of historic sites visited and provides map; summarizes developments and notes “[…] clearing, repairing and restoration projects […] done with our [SHPD’s] knowledge” Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 17 Figure 12. Portion of the Clark (1984:2) project area and site locations map showing the location of nine sites on the north side of Keāhole Point labeled “5” (Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum [BPBM] Site # 50-Ha-D16-005) through “12” (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16- 012) understood as approximating the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve Kona Open Space Program study area Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 18 Figure 13. Map of the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve showing the locations of historic properties SIHP # 50-10-27-10194 through 50-10-27-10201 (slightly altered from Smith 1997) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 19 Table 2. Historic properties associated with the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve SIHP # (50-10-27-) BPBM # (50-Ha-) Other Site #s Description References 10194 D16-005 *R 86a, +R&K 13 Solitary structure. Enclosure (low-walled). 9.3 x 4.7m, 0.2- 0.4m. One square excavated. Sleeping house. Konane board in pahoehoe at site. Excavation. Dates Obtained. Believed destroyed following Barrera 1989 data recovery Cordy 1975, Clark 1984, Barrera1989 10195 D16-006 *R 86e & i, +R&K 13 Cluster of structures. D16-6-1. Platform 4.2 x 4.7m, 0.5-0.7m high. ‘ili‘ili paving inside. D16-6-2. High walled enclosure in large enclosure. High walled enclosure with paving: 5.0 x 8.2m, 1.2-1.3m high wall which was vertical with square corners. Historic house. Part of Ho‘onā Historic Preserve documented by Smith 1997 (see Figure 13). Cordy 1975, Clark 1984, Smith 1997 10196 D16-007 *R 86b, +R&K 13 Cluster of structures. Lg. enclosure w/two interior platforms. D16-7-1. Platform 4.8 x 6.5m, 0.5-0.8m high. D16-7-2. Platform (abutted to D16-7-1) 4.0 x 5.0m, 0.4-0.5m high. D16-7-3. Long narrow enclosure (abutted to -2 and -1) 11.5 x 4.0m, and 0.5- 0.8m high. Part of Ho‘onā Historic Preserve documented by Smith 1997 (see Figure 13). Cordy 1975, Clark 1984, Smith 1997 10197 D16-008 *R 86f (part), +R&K 13 Solitary structure. Historic house. Cement foundation, 2.5 x 6.0m. Enclosure 14.1 x 10.0m, 0.6- 0.9m-high walls which were vertical with square corners. Terrace, 7.0 x 3.0m of single-course basalt cobble alignment (.20m high) on N side. Part of Ho‘onā Historic Preserve documented by Smith 1997 (see Figure 13). Cordy 1975, Clark 1984, Smith 1997 10198 -D16-009 *R 86h & j, +R&K 13 Three-sided rectangular enclosure, 9.9 x 4.5m. .50-1.0m high. Two brackish pools c. 15m to NW. D-16-9-2. C-shaped shelter, 3.5 x 4.3m. Abuts D16-9-1. Part of Ho‘onā Historic Preserve documented by Smith 1997 (see Figure 13). Cordy 1975, Clark 1984, Smith 1997 Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 20 SIHP # (50-10-27-) BPBM # (50-Ha-) Other Site #s Description References 10199 -D16-010 *R 86f (part), +R&K 13 Large enclosure, 6.7 x 14.0m. All walls well-built, vertical and have square corners. Probable pen. Part of Ho‘onā Historic Preserve documented by Smith 1997 (see Figure 13). Cordy 1975, Clark 1984, Smith 1997 10200 D16-011 *R 86c, +R&K 13 Large enclosure, 11.0 x 19.0m. Walls 2.0m high, vertical and have square corners. Entrance on E side. Probable pen. Part of Ho‘onā Historic Preserve documented by Smith 1997 (see Figure 13). Cordy 1975, Clark 1984, Smith 1997 10201 D16-012 – Feature complex. D16-12 (1). Terrace wall remnant, 6.0m long and from .80 to 1.25m wide. N side is faced and ranges from .40 to .85m high. Flattened cobble surface adjacent to wall on S. D16-12 (2). Roughly square enclosure 6.0 x 5.75m in size. Walls from .50 to .99 m high. Cupboard feature incorporated into wall on N side. Believed destroyed following Barrera 1989 data recovery. Cordy 1975, Clark 1984, Barrera 1989 Modified pond No SIHP # – Location within the Ho‘onā Historic Preserve area documented by Smith 1997 (see Figure 13). No details, seemingly no SIHP #. Smith 1997 Burials (human 5+) No SIHP #s – Seemingly at least five burials, including burials preserved in place and relocated into the preserve in at least two locations. The few details such as are known are not presented here. Smith 1997 *R Reineke 1930, +R&K Rosendahl and Kirch 1975 Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 21 SIHP # 50-10-27-10194 (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16-005) A test pit was excavated in the southeast side of the site by Cordy in 1975. He interpreted the site as a Commoner Household and the structure as a Sleeping House. Basaltic glass dates of A.D.1723-1789, A.D.1732-1832, A.D.1736-1832 and A.D.1734-1858 were produced [Cordy 1975; 1978:234 as cited in Barrera 1989:178]. Enclosure situated north of the Keahole lighthouse and c. 40 m northwest of the main NELH facilities on the edge of the pahoehoe flow. It presently measures 8.1 by 4.7 min size and is in very poor condition. This structure has lost more than 1 min length on the east end (caused by a passing bulldozer) since Cordy recorded the site in 1975. Walls are tumbled and consist of basalt boulders and cobbles, and range from 0.2 to 0.6 min height. Intact wall sections on the north side prevent erosion of interior cultural deposits. Interior deposits are made up of coral pebbles, gravel, and sand with a basaltic gravel and sand component. A papamū is present adjacent to the exterior southwest corner. Surface midden includes marine shell (Cellana, Cypraea, Drupe, and Nerita) and sea urchin (Heterocentrotus mammalatus and Echinometra matheii). No surface artifacts observed •. Mean ag ranges from A.D. 1756+33 to 1796+62. [HA(a)S95-2, -3, -4; 331(3)-2, -3] [Clark 1984:29-30] Updated Description. This site is a terraced habitation area measuring 5.9 by 8.2 meters situated atop a bare pahoehoe knoll. The living area of 31.1 square meters is, delineated by a dense concentration of waterworn coral pebbles and gravel, two retaining walls and two stone mounds. The westernmost retaining .wall measures 0.55 by, 2.9 meters, covers an area of 1.5 square meters, and stands to a height of 0.15 meter on the uphill [east] side and 0.3 meter on the downhill. The other retaining wall measures one by 2.3 meters, covers an area of 1.8 square meters and stands to a height of 0.2 meter, on the uphill [south] side and 0.45 meter on the downhill. The stone mound on the southeast measures 1.7 by 2.6 meters, covers an area of 3.1 square meters and stands to a height of 0.4 meter; the one on the south side measures 1.1 by 2.7 meters, covers an area of two square meters and stands to a height of 0.5 meter. Two papamu are located at the southeast end of the site. One measures, 0.5 by 0.6 meter and includes eleven rows of holes with twelve holes per row. The other measures 0.35 by 0.35 meter and includes nine rows of holes with nine holes per row. [Barrera 1989:178, 181]. Barrera documents his data recovery work and findings at some length (see Barrera 1989:178–193, 195–196). Believed destroyed following (Barrera 1989) data recovery (see Figure 13). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 22 SIHP # 50-10-27-10195 (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16-006) This site is situated c. 160 m north of Site D16-5 on the east (mauka) side of the jeep road and consists of two features. D16-6-1. Approximately square platform, 4.7 by 4.2 m in size, in good condition. Platform is well constructed with a basalt boulder-and-cobble exterior, from 0.4 to 1.2 m in width and 0.5 to 07 m in height. Interior surface is flat and beautifully paved with ‘ili‘ili (waterworn basalt pebbles) and waterworn coral pebbles. Sparsely scattered marine shell (Cellana and Cypraea) in immediately surrounding area. No artifacts observed. Mean age is A.D. 1716+39. [HA(a)595-ll; 331(3)-10, -11] D16-6-2. Probable historic house site situated about 15 m southwest of D16-6-1, consisting of three connecting enclosures (A, B, and C) (Fig. 7). They measure 9.8 by 5.2 m (A), 8.1 by 5.2 m (B), and 5.3 by 3.9 m (C) in size. The walls are well constructed, have vertical corners, and range from 0.7 to 1.7 min height. Near the southwest interior corner of enclosure A, a small rectangular platform is present. It is built with basalt cobbles, measures c. 1.60 by 0.95 m in size, and from 0.1 to 0.2 m in height. A basalt salt pan is present adjacent to the enclosure B entrance on the south side. The interior surface of enclosure B is paved with ‘ili‘ili, and has interior boulder alignments. A wall, 0.8 to 1.0 min height, abuts the southeast exterior corner of enclosure C and extends south c. 3 m. A large concentration of ‘opihi (Cellana) shells is present inside enclosure C and on the adjacent abutting wall. A circular boulder alignment c. 1.7 min diameter is situated c. 1.6 m west of the abutting wall. Marine shell (Cellana, Nerita, Cypraea, sea urchin and Drupe) and (Echinometra matheii) were observed on the surface. Tin roof panels were observed in enclosure B. [HA(a)595-5 through -9 331(3)-8, -9] [Clark 1984:30–32] Site l0,195 (D 16-6), Historic house site and burial platform. Current work on this site appears to be vegetation clearing. No repair or restoration of the house enclosures has taken place. The burial platform near the house enclosures has been restored in the past. The platform was not visited during this inspection. [Smith 1997:1, see Figure 13] Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 23 Figure 14. Plan view of SIHP # 50-10-27-10195 Feature 2 Historic House (from Clark 1984:31, map from Cordy 1978) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 24 SIHP # 50-10-27-10196 (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16-007) Situated about 70 m south of Site D16-6, Cordy (1975) recorded this site as an enclosure, 11.5 by 5.0 min size, with two interior platforms. Presently, only boulder-and-cobble alignments, two short wall segments, and some scattered boulders and cobbles remain. Scattered marine shell (Cypraea, Nerita, and Cellana) observed on surface. No artifacts present. [HA(a)595-14; 331(3)-13] [Clark 1984:32] Site 10,196 (D16-7), House or "Heiau". This enclosure was restored in the past a close inspection was not made of the site, but it appears to have remained undisturbed since its restoration. [Smith 1997:1, see Figure 13] SIHP # 50-10-27-10197 (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16-008) Historic house site situated c. 150 m northwest of Site D16-6. It is composed of a cement foundation, 6.0 by 2.5 min size, bordered on the south and west by basalt boulder-and-cobble walls, 14.1 m and 10.4 m in length. Walls range from 0.6 to 0.9 min height and are in fair to poor condition. Cement in the foundation may predate 1920s. A low (0.2 m) single course, cobble alignment situated c. 3.4 m north of the foundation forms a terrace c. 7 by 3 min size. Deposits in terrace comprise coral pebbles, gravel, and sand with a basaltic sand and gravel component. Marine shell (Cypraea and Cellana) observed on surface. No artifacts observed. [HA(a)595-7; 331(3)-6] [Clark 1984:32] Site 10,197 (D16-8), Fish house. Some recent vegetation clearing and wall repair has been completed at this site. A restoration plan between our office and the curator has been completed, but to date has not been implemented. [Smith 1997:1, see Figure 13] SIHP # 50-10-27-10198 (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16-009) This site is situated c. 35 m northeast of Site D16-8 and consists of two features. D16-9-1. Three-sided rectangular enclosure, c. 9.9 by 4.5 min size, open to the west. Walls are in fair to good condition, are built with basalt boulders and cobbles, and range from 0.5 to 1.0 min height. A break in the north wall measures c. 1.5 m in width. About 15 m to the northwest of the enclosure are two 'brackish (anchialine) pools, c. 15 by 4 min size. These pools border the basalt boulder beach, which appears to have been modified (faced) adjacent- to the- pools~ Sparse marine shell (Cypraea) present on the surface. [HA(a)595-5, -6; 331(3)-4, -5] D16-9-2. AC-shape wall abutting the south wall of D16-9-1 forming an adjacent enclosed area, c. 4.3 by 3.5 min size. Wall comprises stacked basalt boulders and cobbles and ranges from 0.4 to 0.8 min height. Wall postdates or is contemporaneous with D16-9-1 enclosure. No midden or artifacts present. [Clark 1984:32-33] Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 25 Site 10,198 (D16-9), House and modified brackish pond. This area has been cleared of kiawe trees. It appears that no stabilization or repairing of the-structures has occurred. Currently there are gourds and small shrubs planted around these structures. [Smith 1997:1, see Figure 13] SIHP # 50-10-27-10199 (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16-010) D16-10. Large, high-walled, rectangular enclosure, 14.0 by 6.7 m in size, situated about 30 m south of Site 16-8, on the west (makai) side of the jeep road. Entrance is 1.5 m in width, and near northeast corner. Walls are well constructed, have vertical corners, and range from 0.9 to 1.5 min height. Several large kiawe (Prosopis pallida) trees are growing in the interior. Interior comprises coral sand and gravel with a basaltic sand component. No surface midden or artifacts observed. Possible historic pen. [HA(a)S95-8; 331(3)-7] [Clark 1984:33] Site 10,199 (D 16-10), Canoe shed. This structure was. restored several years ago, with a new thatched roof added. Approximately a year ago high surf and winds damaged the restored structure. The roof poles have been removed from the foundation and stockpiled nearby. The recent damage to the foundation has not been repaired. [Smith 1997:1-2, see Figure 13] SIHP # 50-10-27-10200 (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16-011) Dl6-ll. Large, high-walled, rectangular enclosure, 19 by 11 m in size, situated c. 80 m southwest of Site Dl6-6-2, on the east (mauka) side of the jeep road. Entrance is on the east side. Walls are well constructed, have vertical corners, and range from 1.2 to 2.0 min height. Large kiawe trees are growing in interior. Interior surface made up of coral sand and gravel with a basaltic sand component. No surface midden or artifacts observed. [HA(a)S95-12, -13; 331(3)-12] [Clark 1984:33] Site 10,200 (D 16-11 ), Enclosure. Vegetation was removed from the site, but no repairing or restoration has occurred. The structure has recently been damaged along the makai wall by high surf eroding the base of the wall causing it to collapse. [Smith 1997:1-2, see Figure 13] Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 26 SIHP # 50-10-27-10201 (BPBM Site # 50-Ha-D16-012) D16-12. This site is situated c. 30 m north of/the main NELH facilities, about 30 m east of Site D16-5 and consists of two features (Fig. 8). Dl6-12-l. Terrace wall remnant, c. 6.0 min length and from 0.80 to 1.25 m in width. North side is faced and ranges from 0.40 to 0.85 m in height. A flattened cobble surface is immediately adjacent to the wall on the south, and measures c. 0.65 to 1.25 min width. Marine shell (Cellana, Conus, Nerita, Morula, and Drupe) observed on the surface. Surface volcanic glass flakes present. [HA(a)S93-12, -13; 331(1)- 12, -13] Dl6-12-2. Roughly square enclosure, c. 6.00 by 5.75 min size, situated c. 4 m north of Dl6-12-1. North wall is notched at east end. Here, a cupboard 0.6 by 0~4 by 0.7 m in size·,- is incorporated into the wall. Walls are in fair to poor condition, built with basalt boulders and cobbles, and range from 0.50 to 0.99 min height. Waterworn coral cobbles are present in the walls. Interior surface is composed of loose basalt cobbles and boulders and exposed pahoehoe bedrock. Probable pot hunter's pit present c. 1.1 m east of interior southeast corner. Marine shell (Cellana and Cypraea) observed on surface. No artifacts found. [HA(a)593-10, -11; 331(1)-10, -11] [Clark 1984:33–35] Updated Description Feature A - This is a walled housesite measuring 5.7 by 6.8 meters, with a 0.9 meter wide wall standing to a height of 1.1 meters. The wall itself covers an area of 14.5 square meters and encloses a living area of 16.6 square meters. The entire feature covers an area of 31.7 square meters. Entry to the feature is through an opening in the east wall. A slab-lined firepit measuring 0.55 by 0.6 meter [0.33 square meters] is centrally located. The firebox is 0.2 meter deep and flush with the floor on three sides; the slab on the side nearest the . door protrudes 0.15 meter above the floor level. Feature B - This is a terrace retaining wall measuring 0.4 by 5.1 meters and standing to a height of 0.65 meter. The wall covers. an area of 1.4 square meters and retains a fill of angular basalt cobbles measuring 3.5 square meters in area. Feature C - This is a collapsed rock mound measuring 0.9 by 1. 2 meters [1 square meter] and standing to a height of 0.3 meter.[Barrera 1989:196, 209] Barrera documents his data recovery work at SIHP # -10201 at some length (See Barrera 1989:194, 196–212) Believed destroyed following (Barrera1989) data recovery (see Figure 13). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 27 Figure 15. Plan view of SIHP # -10201, Features 1 (bottom) and 2 (top), enclosure and terrace Wall (Clark 1984:34) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 28 Ho’ona Historic Preserve Figure 16. “Hawaii Beaches Ho‘ona Historic Preserve” website image (accessed January 2024) seemingly showing a general view to the north of the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” area Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 29 Figure 17. “Hawaii Beaches Ho‘ona Historic Preserve” website image (accessed January 2024) seemingly showing a view of an archaeological enclosure at the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” area Figure 18. “Hawaii Beaches Ho‘ona Historic Preserve” website image (accessed January 2024) seemingly showing a view of an archaeological enclosure at the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” area Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 30 Figure 19. “Hawaii Beaches Ho‘ona Historic Preserve” website image (accessed January 2024) seemingly showing a contemporary ki‘i wood sculpture at the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” area Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 31 References Cited Barrera, William M., Jr. 1989 Archaeological Data Recovery at the Host Park and NELH Kalaoa and O‘oma Ahupua‘a, North Kona, Hawaii Island. Chiniago, Inc., Kamuela, Hawai‘i. Ching, F., D. Cluff, and T. Riley 1968-1969 Preliminary Report of Archaeological Surface Survey and Salvage Operations at Keahole, North Kona, Hawaii Island; Section II, Keahole Point Airport, Kailua-Kawaihae Road. Division of State Parks, Department of Land and Natural Resources, State of Hawai‘i, Honolulu. Circuit Court of the Third Circuit 1997 Civil No. 97-169K. Alena Kaiokekoa, plainfiff vs. Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority and the State Historic Preservation Division defendants. 12 September 1997. Clark, Stephan D. 1984 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Natural Energy Laboratory Hawaii (NELH) Property Keahole Point, North Kona, Hawai‘i. Anthropology Department, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Cordy, Ross H. 1975 A Study of Prehistoric Social Change: The Development of Complex Societies in the Hawaiian Islands. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu. Emerson 1888 Map of Honokohau. Registered Map1446. Hawai‘i Land Survey Division, Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. Available online at http://dags.hawaii.gov/survey/search.php 1888 Map of Akahipuu. Registered Map 1449. Hawai‘i Land Survey Division, Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. Available online at http://dags.hawaii.gov/survey/search.php 1891 Map of Kailua. Registered Map 1280. Hawai‘i Land Survey Division, Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. Available online at http://dags.hawaii.gov/survey/search.php ESRI Aerial Imagery 2019 Map Image Layer. Esri, Inc., Redlands, California. Google Earth 2024 Aerial photographs of Hawai‘i. Google Inc., Mountain View, California. Available online at www.google.com/earth.html. Hawaii Beaches website 2024 “Hawaii Beaches Ho‘ona Historic Preserve” website, https://www.hawaiibeaches .com/beach/hoona-historic-preserve (accessed January 2024) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 32 Hawai‘i TMK Service 2019 Tax Map Key (3) 7-3-043. Hawai‘i TMK Service, Honolulu. Maly, Kepā and Onaona Maly 2003 Kohanaiki Ma Kekaha Wai ‘Ole O Nā Kona (Kohanaiki on the Arid Shores of Kona): A Report on Archival and Historical Documentary Research, and Oral History Interviews for the Ahupua‘a of Kohanaiki, District of Kona, Island of Hawai‘i (TMK 7-3-09:3, 14). Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo, Hawai‘i. NELHA Ho‘ona Taskforce 1997 Minutes of the NELHA Ho‘ona Taskforce. 20 March 1997. Pukui, Mary Kawena and Samuel H. Elbert 1984 Hawaiian Dictionary Hawaiian-English, English-Hawaiian. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Reineke, John E. 1930 Survey of Sites on West Hawaii. Ms. in Department of Anthropology, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Rogers-Jourdane, Elaine 1978 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of NELH Proposed Facilities Areas at Keahole Point, North Kona, Hawaii. Ms. in Department of Anthropology, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Rosendahl, Paul 1980 Intensive Archaeological Survey and Salvage Excavations at the Natural Energy Laboratory Hawaii (NELH) Site, Ke-ahole Point, North Kona, Hawaii (TMK 7-3- 43: 4 and 5). Archaeological Research Associates, Pāhoa, Hawai‘i. Rosendahl, Paul and Patrick V. Kirch 1975 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Ke-ahole Point Natural Energy Laboratory Site, North Kona, Hawaii. Ms. in Department of Anthropology, Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Smith, Marc 1997 Site Inspection to Investigate Reported Chapter 6E Violations in the Ho‘ona Historic Preserve, Natural Energy Lab of Hawaii Kalaoa, North Kona, Hawaii Island TMK: 7-3-43:42 (July 21, 1997, Doc No. 9707ms02). State Historic Preservation Division, Honolulu. USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) 1996 Keahole Point USGS 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle. USGS Information Services, Denver, Colorado. 2024 USGS digital image. Avalable online at httpw//www.usgs.gov/ volcanoes/hualālai?lava-flow=on (accessed January 2024) Wall 1914 Map of Akahipu‘u. HTS Plat 301. Hawai‘i Land Survey Division, Department of Accounting and General Services, Honolulu. Available online at http://dags.hawaii.gov/survey/search.php Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 33 Appendix A Appendix A: LCA Documentation LCA 7716:8 to R. Ke‘elikōlani Helu 7716 R. Keelikolani Apana 8 Ua koi mai oia no kona aina o Hamanamana, he Ahupuaa ma Kona, Hawaii, no ka mea, ua loaa iaia keia aina no ke Alii Kamehameha III, mai i ka wa o ka Mahele ana i na aina i ka M.H.1848, a ua noho keakea oleia a hiki i keia manawa. Oia ka makou e hooko nei no R. Keelikolani, he kuleana hoi kona malolo iho o ke Ano Alodio. Ina uku mai oia i ko ke Aupuni hapa; alaila, ua kupono ia ia ka Palapala Sila Alodio. Pono nae ia ia ke uku mai no ka hana ana, a me ka hooholo ana i ka olelo. – Penei: W.L. Lee No ka rumi a me ke pai ana i ka olelo ma ka Nupepa. G.M. Robertson No ke kope ana i ka olelo koina No ka palapala kii J. Kekaulahao No ka hana ana J.H. Smith No ke kope ana i na olelo a na hoike No ka hooholo ana i ka olelo 20 o Iulai 1853. $ 5.00 Ua hooko aku makou i keia kuleana aina mamuli o na olelo o ke Kanawai hou i hooholoia ma ka la 19, o Iune M.H. 1852 i pili i na Konohiki. Koe nae na kuleana Aina o kanaka maloko o keia aina. Summary Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Ho‘onā Old Fishing Village” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK: (3) 7-3-043:042 por. 34 R. Ke‘elikōlani asks for (koi) the land of “Hamanamana” Ahupua‘a in Kona, Hawai‘i because she was given this land by Kamehameha III in the division (māhele) of lands of 1848 and has dwelled there without protest to the present time. No data on land use is offered. This page intentionally left blank O‘ahu Office P.O. Box 1114 Kailua, Hawai‘i 96734 Ph.: (808) 262-9972 Fax: (808) 262-4950 www.culturalsurveys.com Maui Office 1860 Main St. Wailuku, Hawai‘i 96793 Ph.: (808) 242-9882 Fax: (808) 244-1994 In-Progress Draft Archaeological Literature Review for the “Road to the Sea” (Kohanaiki Road) Kona Open Space Program Project, Kaloko and Kohanaiki Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels Prepared for Jacobs on behalf of the County of Hawai‘i Prepared by David W. Shideler, M.A., and Hallett H. Hammatt, Ph.D. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. Kailua, Hawai‘i (Job Code: HAWAII 16) February 2024 Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 1 Management Summary Reference Archaeological Literature Review for the “Road to the Sea” (Kohanaiki Road) Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohanaiki Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Hawai‘i Island, TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels (Shideler and Hammatt 2024) Date February 2024 Project Number(s) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i, Inc. (CSH) Job Code: HAWAII 16 Investigation Permit Number CSH presently operates under archaeological fieldwork permit number 24-30, issued by the Hawai‘i State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) per Hawai‘i Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-13-282. No fieldwork was undertaken for this study. Agencies SHPD Land Jurisdiction Private, and federal (National Park Service) with a crossing of the state Mamalahoa Trail and possibly a corner of the county water tank parcel and Hina-lani Street Right-of-Way (ROW). The specific alignment of any development of the former Kohanaiki Road is to be determined with some uncertainty regarding specific parcels to be crossed; but large parcels traversed by the former trail would appear to include (Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4) from makai (seaward) mauka (toward the uplands: TMK: (3) 7-3-009:002 USA (National Park Service) Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park TMK: (3) 7-3-009:021 USA (National Park Service) Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park TMK: (3) 7-3-017 Kaloko Residential Park LLC TMK: (3) 7-3-025 Kaloko Residential Park LLC TMK: (3) 7-3-026 Kaloko Residential Park LLC TMK: (3) 7-3-032 Hawaii Island Community Development Corporation TMK: (3) 7-3-062 RCFC Kaloko Heights LLC Given that TMK parcels (3) 7-3-009:017, 025, and 026 include the majority of the former Kohanaiki Road, the cooperation of Kaloko Residential Park LLC would seem to be required to approximate public use of the former Kohanaiki Road alignment. Project Proponent Hawai‘i County Project Funding Hawai‘i County Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 2 Project Location This project was provided to CSH with the name “Road to the Sea” (this is understood as popular name related to an abbreviation of “Road to the Sea Coast” that appears to be Emerson’s 1882 name for the alignment; Figure 6). In general terms, we understand this route as extending from just upslope of the Kohanaiki Church (originally called the “Kekaha Church”) in Kohanaiki Village, at approximately 1,300 foot (ft) elevation, down the slope to the coast near the south end of the Kaloko Fishpond following a former pedestrian trail alignment. We understand this “Road to the Sea” route to be co-equal with the “Kohanaiki Road” (also called the “Mauka-Makai Road” and the “Church of God Road”). We are aware that at least one cultural informant (Ms. Elizabeth Malu‘ihi Ako) “preferred to use the label ‘Kohanaiki Road’ to acknowledge its ‘original name’” (Wolforth et al. 2005:30). In light of this expressed preference, and in light of the fact that there are many “roads to the sea” in North Kona District, this study will typically refer to the corridor as the “Kohanaiki Road.” The project is in Kaloko and Kohanaiki Ahupua‘a, North Kona District on the Island of Hawai‘i (TMK plats: [3] 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels). This study concludes that portrayals of the route of the “Kohanaiki Road” differ in various historic maps and that this is in part because some early maps (like Emerson 1891; Figure 9 and Figure 10) are schematic straight-line representations, and in part because the pedestrian trail route was always somewhat “braided” and ill-defined, particularly as it crossed pāhoehoe flows (see Emerson 1888 map, Figure 7 and Figure 8 where the upper and lower sections are not depicted). We suggest the 1924 USGS map (Figure 12) provides a good, objective approximation of the route of the Kohanaiki Road and this 1924 depiction has been used to provide an overview of the route. An approximation of the Kohanaiki Trail (based on an overlay of the 1924 approximation) is depicted on portions of the 1996 Kailua and Keahole Point USGS quadrangles (Figure 1), tax map plats (Figure 2 through Figure 4), and on a 2019 aerial photograph (Figure 5). Natural and Built Environment Kohanaiki Road traverses across approximately 6.0 km of ‘a‘ā lava (where it is typically quite evident) and stretches of pāhoehoe lava (where it is often indiscernible from goat trails) from the vicinity of the former Kohanaiki Church at approximately 400 m (1,300 ft) elevation above sea level down to the vicinity of the south side of Kaloko fishpond in modern day Kaloko- Honokōhau National Historical Park quite close to sea level. Vegetation is believed to vary from thick Christmas-berry (Schinus terebinthifolia) trees at upper elevations, to thick haole koa (Leucaena leucocephala) to fairly open savanna with areas of tall exotic grasses. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 3 Project Description and Related Disturbance The County of Hawai‘i proposes to develop an Open Space Network Program for the Kona area located in the general vicinity of the Ellison Onizuka Kona International Airport on the north to Keauhou on the south. Open Space Network sites of interest include but are not limited to State of Hawai‘i, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, County of Hawaiʻi, and Private jurisdiction—currently being developed and assessed for feasibility. This study is understood as an early step in facilitating feasibility study. Project Acreage Estimating the Kohanaiki Road trail corridor at approximately 6.0 km by an arbitrary width of 5 m yields an estimated area of approximately 30,000 square meters (sq m) or 7.41 acres 3.0 hectares. This is just a “ball-park” estimate. Historic Preservation Regulatory Context The “Road to the Sea” (Kohanaiki Road) is under study for consideration as part of a Hawai‘i County Kona Open Space project. As this study is part of a county project it appears to fall under Hawai‘i Revised Statutes (HRS) §6E-8 and HAR §13-275 requiring SHPD review. The Kohanaiki Road has been addressed as a State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP #) 50-10-28-10714, and also seemingly as SIHP # 50-10-28-02671. Document Purpose This investigation was designed—through detailed historical, cultural, and archaeological background research and a field inspection of the project area— to determine the likelihood that historic properties may be affected by the project and based on findings, consider cultural resource management recommendations. This document is intended to facilitate the project’s planning and support the project’s historic preservation environmental review compliance. This investigation does not fulfill the requirements of an archaeological inventory survey investigation, per HAR §13-276. Summary of Historical Background Research This study is indebted to the work of Maly and May (2003) to which the reader is referred, and from which we borrow extensively. The project corridor is in the ahupua‘a (traditional land division) of Kaloko and Kohanaiki of the Kekaha land section of North Kona District. Kekaha is known as “Kekaha wai ‘ole” (The waterless place) and is proverbial for its aridity (Maly and May 2003:3, 11). While there was certainly habitation along the coast taking advantage of rich fisheries and coastal springs, most of the permanent population is understood to have lived in the uplands around 1,500 to 2,000 ft elevation where rainfall could support agriculture within a belt of habitation and fields. The intermediate zone was probably used in a somewhat ad hoc manner for the gathering of available resources, such as pili grass (Heteropogon contortus) for thatch, and the hunting of wild birds, and for low investment agriculture in the pre-Contact period. For example, children would carry bundles of sweet potato vine segments on excursions to the coast, lift rocks, place a vine segment, lower the rock and move on and repeat. The return of sweet potato tubers and greens might be low but the investment was modest. Relatively early this intermediate zone was used for pasturage for goats, cattle, and donkeys. Each ahupua‘a contained one or more trail by which native tenants traveled between the shore lands and uplands, and along Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 4 these trails have been found heiau (ceremonial sites); residences and shelters; caves; petroglyphs; burials; and a wide range of other features. [Maly and May 2003:3–4] There were many roads to the coast: […] every ahupua‘a also included one or more of these mauka- makai trails. In native terminology, these trails were generally known as-ala pi‘i uka or ala pi‘i mauna (trails which ascend to the uplands or mountain). [Maly and May 2003:93] Habitation in the upland belt is understood to have been rather dispersed in pre- Contact and early post-Contact times but to have become focused on community centers upon the introduction of churches and schools. Maly and May (2003:44 citing Hawai‘i State Archives, Series 262, Box 1, 18481) note that a report from 1848 “identifies ten church-school meeting houses in the Kekaha region [but that] No facility or teacher was identified for the land of Kohanaiki.” While the accounts are not altogether clear, this reference suggests the uplands of Kohanaiki may not have been a relative focus of population until the later 1800s. In the land division (Māhele) of 1848 Kohanaiki belonged to Kamehameha III but was almost immediately conveyed to the Government land inventory (Maly and May 2003:55). The fact that Kohanaiki was government land facilitated the development of the Kohanaiki homesteads and seemingly a new focus of Hawaiian upland habitation. There was certainly pre-Contact Hawaiian habitation in the vicinity of the ca. 1870s Kohanaiki Village, with trails to the coast, but the creation of the homesteads as a center of habitation seems to be related to the rise in popularity of the Kohanaiki Road alignment. It is understood the “Kekaha Church” at Kohanaiki (later known as the “Kohanaiki Church”) at approximately 1,300 ft elevation was built in the early 1870s (Ka Hoku o Hawaii 1926 and The Friend 1929 as cited by Maly and May 2003:45). This church, in the “Kohanaiki Homesteads” appears as a mauka landmark of the Kohanaiki Trail on several maps. Our earliest identified map of trails descending from the Kohanaiki homesteads is a J. Perryman sketch (dated 4 June 1882) (Figure 6) that shows two trails descending from Kohanaiki Village. The southern trail is clearly labeled “Trail to Honokohau” (at right) and a northern trail appears to be labeled “Trail to Sea Coast” and is understood as the Kohanaiki Road. We note in passing that an 1899 map by Reverend Lyons Kakani (Figure 11) shows three routes to the coast from near the Kohanaiki Church (a southern route to Kailua-Kona, a middle route to the Honokōhau Church, and a northern route to the Makalawena Church) but none of the three routes depicted are what would become known as the Kohanaiki Trail. The 1888 Emerson map (Figure 7 and Figure 8) labels a stretch of “Road” between two triangulation points approximating the Kohanaiki/Kaloko Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 5 ahupua‘a boundary and approximating a central portion of the Kohanaiki Road. While it seems odd to see a “Road” in the middle of an undeveloped slope seemingly starting and stopping in the middle of nowhere, this is understood as expressing that portions of the Kohanaiki Road were not evident. In the 1891 Emerson map (Figure 9 and Figure 10) the Kohanaiki Road is depicted as a fairly straight line, whereas we believe it followed vagaries of the slope and was somewhat more nuanced (as the 1924 map depicts). This 1891 map clearly shows how the Kohanaiki Road converges just upslope of the Kohanaiki Church with the southern “Trail to Honokōhau” connecting with the south end of Honokōhau fishpond. The 1924 USGS map (Figure 12) shows Kohanaiki Road connecting the Kohanaiki Homesteads with the Kaloko fishpond, closely paralleling and crossing the ahupua‘a boundary between Kohanaiki and Kaloko. Place names are called out close to the route, but the legibility makes spelling uncertain, perhaps (from makai to mauka): “Halau,” “Kananaka,” “Kamuohe,” “Kawaiahu,” and “Kiaha.” The Kaloko Ahupuaa, District of North Kona, Island of Hawaii, Boundary Commission, Hawaii, Volume A, No. 1, pps. 240–241 (dated August 1873) was consulted but no insight regarding place names on this boundary was gained. The southern “Trail to Honokōhau” from Kohanaiki Village is not depicted. The 1928 USGS map (Figure 13 and Figure 14) provides greater clarity on the route by removing detail (and place names) from the 1924 map. Again, the southern “Trail to Honokōhau” from Kohanaiki Village is not depicted. Until the construction of the Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway in the 1970s, access to the “kula kai (shoreward plains)” (Maly and Maly 2003:101) was limited to local residents. In the first half of the twentieth century, the primary method of travel was “by foot or on horse or donkey, and those who traveled the land, were almost always native residents of Kalaoa, ‘O‘oma, Kohanaiki, Kaloko and Honokōhau” (Maly and Maly 2003:99). With World War II the military graded and widened certain mauka-makai trails and subsequently surplus military vehicles became available and the improved routes of access remained in use. Those who traveled in this new method were almost always native, or old-time residents of the land. And since Kohanaiki and much of the neighboring land was privately owned or held under government lease, those who most frequently accessed the near shore lands were employees of the two primary ranches (Huehue and Honokohau) who controlled the lands. Thus, the nature and extent of access remained much as it had prior to the war. [Maly and Maly 2003:99] “In ca. 1955, Huehue Ranch bulldozed a jeep road to the shore at Kaloko” (Maly and Maly 2003:99). It is believed that this mid-1950s jeep trail, south of Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 6 the Kohanaiki Road is what is depicted on the 1959 USGS map (Figure 15 and Figure 16). While the 1959 map calls out “Jeep Trail,” “Pack Trail,” and “Foot Trail” in the vicinity, the Kohanaiki Road is no longer depicted. Established in 1978, the Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park preserves the coastal sections of Kaloko and Honokōhau ahupua‘a makai of modern Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway. The “Ala Nui Kaloko (unimproved road)” within the park roughly approximates the makai portion of the former Kaloko Road (Figure 17). The National Park Service (NPS) has also developed a coastal “Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail” along an alignment that would have connected with the Kohanaiki Road. The NPS has previously expressed interest in a revitalization of the former Kohanaiki Road. Summary of Previous Archaeological Research An overview of archaeological studies in Kohanaiki and Kaloko ahupua‘a near the Kohanaiki Road is presented in Figure 18 and Table 1. There are four major sources of archaeological documentation of the Kohanaiki Trail mauka of Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway: • Wolforth et al. (2005) (understood as an SHPD-accepted) Archaeological Inventory Survey for mauka TMK: (3) 7-3-009:032 (where the Kohaniki Trail is addressed as SIHP # 50-10-27-10714) • Draft Bell et al. 2008a for 224.43-acre TMK: (3) 7-3-009:017 (where the Kohanaiki Trail is addressed but is not treated as a discrete archaeological site) • Draft Bell et al. 2008b for TMK: (3) 7-3-009:025 (where the Kohanaiki Trail is designated as SIHP # 50-10-27-026371) • Draft Bell et al. 2009 for TMK: (3) 7-3-009:026 (where the Kohanaiki Trail is designated as SIHP # 50-10-28-10714). Unfortunately the later three studies (addressing the majority of the Kohanaiki Road alignment) remain as drafts (15 years later!) so proprietary landowner/ developer concerns limit direct reference (these three studies were carried out for Stanford Carr Development LLC).We also note that in a January 2008 timeframe CSH carried out significant work on the Kohanaiki trail alignment which is not shared here due to possible proprietary concerns. Suffice it to say these three draft studies (Bell et al. 2008a, 2008b, and Bell et al. 2009) have a great deal of data regarding the archaeology of the Kohanaiki Road and adjacent areas. The Wolforth et al. (2005) study (understood as in the public domain) presents an overview of the mauka portion of the Kohanaiki Road (see pages 31 through 36, including Figure 19 through Figure 21). Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 7 Summary of Oral History Interviews Maly and Maly conducted interviews describing […] mauka-makai travel via several trails, depending on their destination across the kula lands between the uplands and shore, across the Kalaoa, Kohanaiki, Kaloko and through Honokohau. From the 1920s through the 1940s, the native families of Kohanaiki and neighboring lands regularly traveled to the shore of Kohanaiki via the old Kohanaiki foot trail, which crossed into Kaloko, and from other mauka-makai or shore line trails, depending on their point of origin. [Maly and Maly 2003:106] The Wolforth et al. (2005) study reports additional informant testimony. A summary of informant interviews is provided here on pages 37 through 39. Fieldwork Effort No fieldwork was undertaken for this study. Summary This study addresses a pedestrian trail alignment popularly known as “The Road to the Sea” (a name understood as relating to an 1882 Emerson [see Figure 6] designation that appears to be “Trail to the Sea Coast”). In deference to expressed cultural informant preference “to use the label ‘Kohanaiki Road’ to acknowledge its ‘original name’” (Wolforth et al. 2005:30), this study refers to the alignment as the “Kohanaiki Road.” The Kohanaiki Road was almost certainly one of many traditional Hawaiian pre-Contact pedestrian trail alignments from an upland habitation and agricultural belt down to the coast. The Kohanaiki trail, however, appears to have become significantly more prominent following the establishment of a more concentrated community in the uplands at around 1,300 ft elevation known as the Kohanaiki Homesteads geographically focused on the “Kohanaiki Church.” The Kohanaiki pedestrian trail is suggested to be closely approximated by a trail indicated on the 1924 USGS map (Figure 12). This pedestrian trail from the Kohanaiki Homesteads down to the south edge of Kaloko fishpond was particularly popular until ca. the mid-1950s when roughly parallel jeep trail improvements (Figure 15 and Figure 16) provided an easier (and drivable) route. By 1959 (Figure 15 and Figure 16) the Kohanaiki Road was no longer shown on maps and is believed to have been rarely used. Several archaeological studies have developed significant data on the Kohanaiki Road. The work of Wolforth et al. (2005) is understood as in the public domain and is cited here at length (pages 36 through 38). Three major studies (Bell et al. 2008a and b and Bell et al. 2009) remain as drafts and may be protected by proprietary concerns. Suffice it to say that archaeological studies have developed a great deal of data on the Kohanaiki Road and vicinity and indicate the alignments indicated on historic maps are only approximations. While some portions of the Kohanaiki Road particularly crossing ‘a‘ā lava flows are very clearly defined, other portions (particularly crossing pāhoehoe lavas) are very poorly defined. There is good reason to Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 8 believe portions (particularly makai portions) of the Kohanaiki Road were always somewhat braided with travelers choosing slightly different alignments of traverse. Next Steps for Consideration The majority of the Kohanaiki Road is understood to be within TMK parcels (3) 7-3-009:017, 025, and 026 owned by Kaloko Residential Park LLC and the development of this alignment within the Kona Open Space project would seem to require the consent of this landowner for public use of the former Kohanaiki Road alignment. It is recommended that Kaloko Residential Park LLC be consulted in this regard. It is understood that consultation by Hawai‘i County with the SHPD under HRS §6E-8 and HAR §13-275 is indicated. A great deal of archaeological data was generated in the course of work on three draft studies (Bell et al. 2008a and b and Bell et al. 2009) but the landowner may have proprietary rights to this data. It is recommended that if consideration of this project area continues under the Kona Open Space project that Kaloko Residential Park LLC be consulted regarding releasing pertinent archaeological data. A significant portion (makai of Queen Ka‘ahumanu Highway) of the Kohanaiki Road is within the (National Park Service) Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park. It is believed that the Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historical Park has developed a great deal of data on the Kohanaiki Road and other trails in the vicinity and might be contacted sooner rather than later if consideration moves forward. It is also recommended that consultation be considered with: 1) the National Park Service Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail Superintendent, 2) the State of Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources Na Ala Hele program, and 3) the Native Hawaiian Organization (NHO) Ala Kahakai Trail Association. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 9 Figure 1. Portions of the 1996 Kailua and Keahole Point USGS 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles showing the indicated location of the Kohanaiki Trail (as indicated on 1924 USGS quadrangles) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 10 Figure 2. TMK: (3) 7-3-007 showing the mauka end of the indicated location of the Kohanaiki Trail (as indicated on 1924 USGS quadrangles) (Hawai‘i TMK Service 2024) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 11 Figure 3. TMK: (3) 7-3-009 showing the indicated location of the Kohanaiki Trail (as indicated on 1924 USGS quadrangles) (Hawai‘i TMK Service 2024) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 12 Figure 4. TMK: (3) 7-3-051 showing the indicated location of a central portion of the Kohanaiki Trail (as indicated on 1924 USGS quadrangles) (Hawai‘i TMK Service 2024) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 13 Figure 5. 2019 ESRI aerial photograph showing the indicated location of the Kohanaiki Trail (as indicated on 1924 USGS quadrangles) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 14 Figure 6. 1882 J.S. Emerson, Field Note Book Map- Book 253:69 J. Perryman sketch (dated 4 June 1882, State Survey Division, adapted from Maly and Maly 2003:485) depicting the view up the slope of Hualālai from Keāhole showing the two trails descending from “Kohanaiki Village,” a southern “Trail to Honokohau” (at right) and a northern “Trail to Sea Coast” understood as the Kohanaiki Road Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 15 Figure 7. Portion of the 1888 Emerson map of Kailua (RM 1449) showing a “Road” segment between two triangulation points, understood as the Kohanaiki Road running from the Kohanaiki Homesteads to Kaloko Fishpond (this suggests the route of the road makai and mauka of the segment was less distinct) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 16 Figure 8. Portion of the 1888 Emerson map of Kailua (RM 1449) showing a “Road” segment between two triangulation points, understood as the Kohanaiki Road running from the Kohanaiki Homesteads to Kaloko Fishpond with an overlay of major contemporary roads for geographic reference Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 17 Figure 9. Portion of the 1891 Emerson map of Kailua (RM 1280) showing the “Kohanaiki Road” Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 18 Figure 10. Portion of the 1891 Emerson map of Kailua (RM 1280) showing the “Kohanaiki Road” with an overlay of major contemporary roads for geographic reference Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 19 Figure 11. 1899 Reverend Lyons Kakani’s diagram of trails traveled between Kohanaiki Church (in the uplands at approximately 1,300 ft elevation) and the churches at Honokōhau and Makalawena. The “Kaloko Trail” is not one of the three trails to the coast depicted (courtesy of the Hawaiian Mission Children's Society Library; L. Kakani, 6 July 1899, from Maly and Maly 2003:49) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 20 Figure 12. Portions of the 1924 Kalaoa and Keahole Point USGS topographic quadrangles showing the “Kohanaiki Road” Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 21 Figure 13. Portion of 1928 Kailua and Keahole Point USGS topographic quadrangles showing the “Kohanaiki Road” Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 22 Figure 14. Portion of 1928 Kailua and 1924 Keahole Point USGS topographic quadrangles showing the “Kohanaiki Road” with an overlay of major contemporary roads for geographic reference Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 23 Figure 15. Portion of the 1959 Kailua and Keahole Point USGS topographic quadrangles with an overlay of the “Kohanaiki road” (which is no longer indicated on the map at all, as indicated on 1924 USGS quadrangles) and showing a new mid-20th century jeep road roughly paralleling the former Kohanaiki Road alignment to the south Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 24 Figure 16. Portion of the 1959 Kailua and Keahole Point USGS topographic quadrangles with an overlay of the “Kohanaiki road” (which is no longer indicated on the map at all, as indicated on 1924 USGS quadrangles) with an overlay of major contemporary roads for geographic reference Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 25 Figure 17. Park Map - Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park (U.S. National Park Service Website) https://www.nps.gov/media/photo/collection-item.htm?pg=7323739&cid=305fb7af-a71b- 469b-941e-a98b439c882f&id=b092ddfa-c881-4cd8-8d3d-c09ce1239591&sid=2e6a21ae-8651-49d Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 26 Figure 18. 1996 Keahole Point USGS 7.5 minute series topographic quadrangle showing previous archaeological studies in Kohanaiki and Kaloko Ahupua‘a in the vicinity of the Kohanaiki Road (as indicated on the 1924 USGS map) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 27 Table 1. Select previous archaeological studies conducted within Kohanaiki and Kaloko Ahupua‘a Source Type of Investigation General Location Findings Reinecke 1930 Cursory survey Coastal Survey Briefly notes numerous sites Emory & Soehren 1971 Cursory survey Coastal Survey Briefly notes numerous sites Kelly 1971 Historical survey and background Kaloko and Kuki‘o ahupua‘a Background study Renger 1971 “Field Notes” of “Mauka excavations” “Mauka excavations” “Field Notes” describe several sites Hammatt (ARCH) 1980 Archaeological Reconnaissance 410 acre parcel Identified 2 sites Soehren 1980a Letter Report Reconnaissance Survey Kaloko lowlands No finds Soehren 1980b Letter Report Reconnaissance Survey Kaloko Access Road Corridor Discusses 3 stepping stone trails, 2 cairn & a lava tube complex Barrerra Jr. 1983 Archaeological Reconnaissance TMK (3) 7-3-9:19 No finds Kennedy 1983 Archaeological Reconnaissance TMK: (3) 7-3-09: 01 Identifies 27 sites Kennedy 1984 Intensive Archaeological Survey TMK: (3) 7-3-09: 01 Results of investigations of 25 sites Barrera Jr. 1985 Archaeological Survey 409 acres 700 to 1080’ elevation 58 sites Donham 1986 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey 470-acres makai of Queen K Hwy 105 sites Rosendahl M. & Haun 1987 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey 3 1-acre parcels for potential water tank sites 1 site Barrera Jr. 1988 Archaeological Excavations YO Project Area 60 sites Barrera Jr. 1991 Archaeological Inventory Survey & Data Recovery Report 800 to 1100’ Identified 61 sites Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 28 Source Type of Investigation General Location Findings Cordy et al 1991 An Ahupua‘a Study: The 1971 Archaeological Work at Kaloko Kaloko-Honokōhau National Park 94 sites identified Kennedy 1991 Surface Reconnaissance Long thin industrial development No significant finds Rosendahl & Walker 1991 Archaeological Field Inspection Industrial crusher site, 2 adjacent 10 acre parcels within present project area Identified a trail with two cairns Barrera Jr. 1993 Archaeological Inventory Survey 5.7 acres; 1450 to 1630’ elevation Identified 40 features of Kona Field System Fager & Graves 1993 Archaeological Inventory Survey Kaloko Industrial Park parcel Identified 17 sites with 60 component features Fager & Rosendahl 1993 Interim Report Archaeological Inventory Survey Kaloko Industrial Park parcel; 15+ acres Identified 17 sites with 60 component features Henry & Graves 1993 Archaeological Inventory Survey Transmission line project Mauka side of Queen K Hwy. Identified 4 sites in present project area O‘Hare & Rosendahl 1993 Report on burials On coast Report on burials Rosendahl 1993 Archaeological Field Inspection Kaloko Mauka Parcel 4 sites discussed Nees & Williams 1995 Archaeological Investigations 110 acres, 2100 to 2900’ elevation Identified enclosure, lava tube, terrace, wall, mounds Walsh & Hammatt 1995 Archaeological Inventory Survey Queen K Hwy Right-of-Way Identified 9 sites adjacent to makai side of Hwy in Kohanaiki & Kaloko Rechtman 1998 Archaeological Field Inspection 2400-2500’ elevation No finds Rechtman & Henry 1999 Archaeological Inventory Survey 1450-1620’ elevation Identified 15 sites Wolforth 1999 Monitoring Report HELCO Keāhole-Kailua Transmission line corridor Describes 1 site 21258 Haun & Henry 2000 Archaeological Inventory Survey Kaloko Industrial Park TMK: 7-3-51:60; 102-acre parcel 45 sites with 81 features Rosendahl 2000 Archaeological Assessment 2435-2730’ elevation No finds Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 29 Source Type of Investigation General Location Findings Clark & Rechtman 2002 Archaeological Inventory Survey 1200’ to 1600’ elevation Identified 5 sites Haun & Henry 2002 Data Recovery Plan Kaloko Industrial Park TMK: 7-3-51:60; 102-acre Data Recovery Plan addresses 8 specific sites Rechtman & Rivera 2002 Archaeological Assessment TMK (3) 7-3-26:4; 3,100’ No finds Cobb Elmore, and Kennedy 2003 Archaeological Assessment TMK: (3) 7-3-09:25, 26 & 28 at Kaloko and Kohanaiki (400 acres) Briefly identifies 154 features Haun 2003 Archaeological Assessment 400-Acre Portion of TMK (3) 7-3-09:28 Kaloko Identifies only 8 sites (63 features) all in ‘a‘ā Haun et al. 2003 Data Recovery Report Kaloko Industrial Park TMK: (3) 7-3-51:60; 102-acre Data Recovery Report addresses 8 specific sites Moore & Kennedy 2003 Archaeological Inventory Survey Roadway Corridor Identified 1 site (23973) 2 mounds Puette & Dye 2003 Archaeological Inventory Survey 22 acres 2100 to 2400’ elevation No finds Shideler, and Hammatt 2005 Archaeological Field Inspection and Literature Review 1,200+ Acres in Kaloko and Kohanaiki Numerous pre-contact sites including: habitations, agricultural features, petroglyphs, boundary walls, and burials observed Wolforth et al. 2005 Archaeological Inventory Survey TMK: (3) 7-3-09: 032 A total of 89 sites were identified, consisting of burials, permanent habitations, temporary habitations, religious sites, trails, boundary walls, and agricultural sites (Draft) Bell et al. 2008a Archaeological Inventory Survey TMK: (3) 7-3-09: 017 (224.43 acres) Identified 59 historic properties (Draft) Bell et al. 2008b Archaeological Inventory Survey TMK: (3) 7-3-09: 025 (360.13 acres) Identified 121 historic properties (Draft) Bell et al. 2009 Archaeological Inventory Survey TMK: (3) 7-3-09: 026 (194.32 acres) Identified 120 historic properties Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 30 Wolforth et al. (2005) Documentation of the Mauka Kohanaiki Road SIHP # 50-10-28-10714 The Wolforth et al. (2005) Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Northern Portion of the Kaloko Heights Project… provides a summary of a 900 m long stretch of the Kohanaki Road (“the Road from Kaloko Pond to the Kohanaiki Homesteads”) within their project area (project area shown in Figure 19. There discussion is divided into four designated segments (keyed into a figure reproduced here in Figure 20) with a following discussion of artifacts and other factors. These accounts are provided below: Figure 19. Wolforth et al,.(2005 project area(USGS Kailua Quadrangle 1996:1) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 31 Figure 20. Condition of SIHP # 50-10-28-10714 as addressed in the Wolforth et al. (2005) project area) Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 32 Figure 21. Wolforth et al. (2005:27) relate that “The entire road within the project area was walked. Information was recorded at 19 locations: width, character of the pathway (paved, soil-filled, etc.), presence of curb and special construction (ramp, causeway, etc.), artifacts present, and condition Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 33 SITE 10714 THE ROAD FROM KALOKO POND TO KOHANAIKI HOMESTEADS Site 107 14, the Road from Kaloko Pond to the Kohanaiki Homesteads, extends 900 meters (roughly 2,950 feet, or 0.6 miles) within the project area. Vegetation at and around the road varies depending upon elevation, and proximity to the Kohanaiki Homesteads. The characteristics and the condition of the road also vary. Those variations can be grouped into four segments (Figure 105). SEGMENT 1: THE INTERSECTION TO KIAHA HOMESTEAD Segment 1 (Spot 1) is the portion of the road that is adjacent to and beyond the project area. A portion of this area has been bulldozed for the construction of modern house lots. The road may have been bulldozed away here, and at the very least has been notably altered by modern vehicle transportation creating a typical two-track appearance in a pathway leading to a modern house. The intersection of the road with a north-south trending trail is still a transportation route, but one that has been partially paved, and evolved into a two-track. Consequently, this portion of the road retains none of the character that it had during the historic or prehistoric era. Based solely on visual evidence, no one would recognize it as the location of a historic or prehistoric trail. SEGMENT 2: THE KOHANAIKI HOMESTEADS Segment 2 (Spots 2 through 4) is the 150 meter-long portion of the road that passes within the Kohanaiki Homesteads. The road is difficult to identify in this segment due to the highest density and large size of trees along the road-to a degree not seen elsewhere along the road. The roots of large christmasberry trees have altered the ground surface. In addition, present pig foraging and cultivation by pakalolo growers in the past has disturbed the ground surface to the extent that no intact road is evident in this segment. Determining the road location in this segment is confounded by the fact that the distance between the walls of the homesteads ranges from 4.0 to 8.0 meters. The road could have been anywhere within that width. SEGMENT 3: ALONGSIDE THE WALLED KONA FIELD SYSTEM Segment 3 (Spots 5 through 8) is the 150.0 meter-long portion that parallels the walled-in Kona Field System area that is west of the Kohanaiki Homesteads. The road is identifiable along this portion, but only in discontinuous pieces. curbs6 are present in short lengths (mostly less than 15.0 m long). The width of the pathway ranges from 3.0 to 3.2 m. The road is most noticeable as cleared ground in comparison to the natural and rugged lava on either side of the pathway. The surface of the road is most often bare lava. Paving is present (small stones 2 to 15 cm in diameter) in the pathway, but not frequently or for long distances. Soil and introduced paving covers the pathway in less than 20% of this segment. There are trees within the pathway, but there are fewer than those present in Segment 2. There is a short wall on the north side of the road near Spot 8 that terminates in alignment Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 34 with the northwest comer of the walled Kona Field System area. The function of that little wall is unknown, but it appears to be directly associated with the road, by creating a 6.0 meter-wide route for the road. SEGMENT 4: THE MIDDLE AND LOWER ELEVATIONS Segment 4 (Spots 9 through 19) is the 600 m portion of the road that is makai of the walled Kona Field System. The road is clearly identifiable with curbs delineating the pathway throughout much of this segment (Figure 106). The pathway width ranges from 1.5 to 2.3 meters. Trees and scattered stones attest to some disturbance to the pathway, paving, and curbing. There is more disturbance to the road in the eastern portions of Segment 4. The road is in good condition throughout the western majority of Segment 4. Curbs and paving are present and intact over long portions of the road. Trees and scattered stones attest to some disturbance to the pathway, but that is limited in scope. In the lowest elevations six-foot tall grass is directly associated with the road, that is, growing on top of the road, but is not growing alongside it. While it makes it more difficult to view the road, the grass does not seem to have created any disturbance to the road. Artifacts and Other Factors Several historic artifacts were observed along the road, and these are probably directly related to road use. Three rubber motor vehicle tires were within several meters of the road. All three were 67 cm in outer diameter, with a 40 cm interior diameter. Close inspection of one tire lacking treads showed trademarks and specifications: "Firestone Gum Dipper, 4 Ply 6.00-1 6, #0425835BB1'. Another tire was partially covered in soil, suggesting its longer period of time at that location. Two clear glass gallon jugs, one clear glass bottle, one clear glass half gallon bottle, and two broken bottle bottoms were observed within several meters of the road, and in one instance, within the road pathway. The smaller bottles and half gallon one are typical alcohol bottle shapes, and the two intact gallon jugs have "Fuji Sake Brewing Co. Ltd., Honolulu, Hawaii" imprinted on their bases. In addition, one complete opihi shell, and one complete cowry shell were located within a meter of the road (at different locations). Similar evidence of discarded food sources along the road may also be represented by the occasional adult mango trees alongside. Although there are mango trees in groups scattered around the project area, their presence alongside the road may be related to discarded mango pits during travel in historic times. In one instance, a sake jug and tire occur at the road with approximately a dozen mango trees. There is one papamū directly associated with the pathway. The konane board is on 60 by 60 centimeter portable stone that is situated on the pathway between the low, rough kerbing at UTM 1 86378E, 2 1 8 1 15 IN. It is next to the northern kerb. The konane grid is 6 by 8, but the grid is truncated by the roughly triangular shape of the playing area (Figure 107). The papamū is a pre-Contact artifact and was Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 35 originally located nearby, but it was moved to its current resting place on top of stones placed there during WWII. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 36 Summary of Oral History Interviews The following summary of informant interviews pertaining to the Kohanaiki Road are drawn from the work of Maly and Maly 2002 Several people interviewed remembered traveling up and down the Kohanaiki Road. Agnes Puakalehua Nihi-Harp and Violet Leimomi Nihi-Quiddaoen recall walking up that route from the ocean before 1940. Their older sisters took that path up the slope to school in Kalaoa (Maly and Maly 2002: 27-29). Malaea Agnes Keanaaina-Tolentino recalls that back in the 1930s when her grandfather leased Kaloko Pond, they would "go down the old trail from Kohanaiki to Kaloko, to work on the pond" (Maly and Maly 2002: 139). Peter Keka, who was born in 1940, remembers traveling that route, also, and picking yams and mangoes along the way (Maly and Maly 2002: 207). When asked if there were resting places along the route, Mr. Keka replied, "well, not really" (Maly and Maly 2002:208). George Kinoulu Kahananui, Sr. discussed how trails were modified during the 20th century "(b)ecause the war came up and the army opened up all the trails. Even that old Kohanaiki-Kaloko trail coming down, they made road for the jeep, coming down" (Maly and Maly 2003: A-166). The interviewer followed that with, "So they improved them because they were ala hele wāwae before" [foot trails], and Mr. Kahananui responded, "Yes". Maly and Maly (2003) provide the following summary of informant testimony of the trail: When asked about knowledge of sites or storied places on the lower kula lands of Kohanaiki- the area from the present-day Ka‘ahumanu Highway to the back of the shore lands-the interviewees knew of very few. The primary features described on the kula, were the mauka-makai trails and the Alanui Aupuni or Kamehameha Trail; boundary ahu (cairns); and walls. Nearer the shore, old kahua hale (house sites); hale pāpa‘i (shelter sites); a possible church lot (kahua hale pule); the loko kai and ponawai (anchialine and potable water ponds); ki‘i (petroglyphs); ko‘a (fishing shrines and markers); poho (salt and/or bait bowls); noted sites for particular fish and marine resources; and other types of features are known to elder kama‘āina. One of the most interesting features on the kula lands behind the ponds, are the ahu (cairns), some seventeen of which cross Kohanaiki, roughly north to south. None of the elder interviewees recalled ever hearing anything about them, or even seeing them while they were in the field working cattle or traveling mauka-makai. The native tradition of KaMiki, [cited earlier in this study], may provide us with an explanation of them, as boundaries marking the area set aside for the ali‘i of the legendary period. Traditional names of features on the cultural landscape, documented in the early 1900s, by native resident-writers of Kekaha-such as ‘Apo‘ula (a point, surf, and kū'ula of Kohanaiki); and Wailoa, the anchialine ponds, were not remembered by the interviewees. It has been recorded by the kūpuna, that in earlier times, at some locations near the mauka-makai trails, a distance back from the shore, families would store "beach goods" for their return visits. These caches were usually small caves that could be concealed. None of the kūpuna recalled ever seeing any old sites or items in the Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 37 caves on the kula lands, though none doubted that sites unknown to them, exist. They also recorded that as youth, they were always warned away from being "maha‘oi” or nosy and poking around such sites that were previously known, or found by them. The kūpuna also recorded that their primary interest while traveling makai, was to get to the fishing grounds, and in reverse, to get back home. In the area from the lower Kohanaiki Homestead lots and extending mauka, interviewees have all described the occurrence of caves, walls and various features, including burials. Occasionally, when working the range, rounding up cattle in the 1940s-1950s, huaka‘i po or night marchers have been heard or seen. The explanation being that the spirits of the people of old, who once lived on the land were traveling in one direction or the other to attend to some ceremony or on fishing journeys, or to attend to some other activity. [Maly and Maly 2003:105-106] From Wolforth et al. (2005) Three people talked about traveling on the Mauka-Makai road. In addition, four people that were interviewed for another project talked about that pathway. … Mr. Arthur Mahi, Ms. Elizabeth Malu‘ihi Ako, and Mr. George Kinoulu Punihaole, Jr had traveled on the Mauka-Makai road over 40 years ago [prior to 1965]. Mr. Mahi mentioned that he had used the Mauka-Makai road to travel from Kohanaiki Homesteads to the ocean, and he called it the Kohanaiki Road. He initiated the field inspection by driving us makai along that route from the upper Belt Road. The intersection of the Kohanaiki Road with the upper road is near the Kona Church, and the pathway is paved at the intersection area (well above [their] project area). Above the project area the Kohanaiki Road is a one lane, semi-paved road for a short distance, until it terminates at uncleared vegetation that prohibits passage. Mr. Mahi drove down that road fully expecting to arrive at the Kohanaiki Homesteads, but that was not possible due to the vegetation. Eventually we made it to the project area via another route, and we walked the pathway. While on the pathway, Mr. Mahi mentioned that the old Kohanaiki Road was along the border between Kaloko and Kohanaiki [which fits the mauka portion near Kohanaiki homesteads]. Mr. Kahanui mentioned that he had traveled the Mauka-Makai pathway, but all of his travels along that route were via motorized vehicles. Ms. Ako lived in the next ahupua‘a to the north of the project area, ‘O‘oma, as early as the late 1930s. As kids they used to use the "Kohanaiki Road" (the Mauka-Makai road) to go down to the ocean. At that time, that road was also referred to as "Church of God Road", but Ms. Ako emphasized that she preferred to use the label "Kohanaiki Road" to acknowledge its "original name". They would take a trail from ‘O‘oma over to the homesteads, then go down to the ocean from there. She recalled with some delight how donkeys and horses (they rode donkey and horses, which she considered the Cadillacs of the day) would "take their sweet time" going downhill, but moved rapidly uphill on their way home. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 38 They would carry fresh water and food down to the ocean, and would fish and drink brackish water down there when the fresh water ran out. The trail prior to World War I1 was marked by ahu (cairns); there was no stone paving or stone kerbing along the pathway at that time. The pathway was worn slightly into the exposed surface rock. Also, the land had much fewer trees on it then. She recalls that there were some guava and large mango trees, but no Christmas berry or other trees then. The few trees that were there, were small (except for the mango). The vegetation was so sparse that they could use the trail at night. In fact, traveling in the evening and at night was preferred, because it was much cooler traveling at that time. They started their journeys at dusk. During travels along the Kohanaiki Road, Ms. Lee did not investigate stone features alongside the route. She does not know about specific stone features along the route, or know the functions of activities associated with them. That is because the trail was used to get from home to ocean to home; there were no other destinations along the pathway, and because the things associated with the past were meant to be left alone. Their time of use and activity had passed, and it was no business of the travelers. This was Ms. Lee's expression of abiding by the Hawaiian "tapu". She remembered that the Kohanaiki Road was also used by ranch cowboys. In addition, during WWII soldiers were stationed at the church yard within the Kohanaiki Homesteads. The soldiers decided to build up the pathway, and started to do so at the camp and working their way downhill from there. But they stopped building it "about 1/4 mile down", because it was too much effort for the little return that they got from it. Ms. Lee characterized the pathway to the ocean as "old trails", because of the ahu and slightly worn shine on the ground surface. She felt that they should be protected, because of her fond memories of traveling to and from the ocean as a youth, and because of its association with old Hawaiian ways. [Wolforth et al. [2005:29-30] Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 39 References Cited Barrera, Jr., William M. 1983 Archaeological Reconnaissance Kaloko, North Kona, Hawaii, Chiniago Inc., Honolulu HI. 1985 Kaloko and Kohanaiki, North Kona, Hawaii: Archaeological Survey (TMK 7-3- 09:19), Chiniago Inc., Honolulu. 1988 Kohanaiki North Kona Hawai‘i Island Archaeological Excavations Interim Report Chiniago Inc., Honolulu. 1991 Final Draft: Kohanaiki North Kona Hawai‘i Island Archaeological Inventory Survey & Data Recovery. Chiniago Inc., Honolulu. 1993 Kaloko, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK 7- 3-08:17), Chiniago Inc., Honolulu HI. Bell, Matthew, Randy Groza, Mindy Simonson,David Shideler, and Hallett H. Hammatt 2008a DRAFT Archaeological Inventory Survey of a 224.43-Acre Parcel within Portions of Kaloko and Kohanaiki Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Hawai‘i Island TMK: [3] 7-3-009:017. Cultural Surveys Hawaii, Kailua, Hawai‘i. 2008b DRAFT Archaeological Inventory Survey of a 360.131-Acre Parcel within Portions of Kohanaiki Ahupua‘a and Kaloko Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Hawai‘i Island TMK: [3] 7-3-009:025. Cultural Surveys Hawaii, Kailua, Hawai‘i. Bell, Matthew, Mindy Simonson, Kelley Esh, Randy Groza, David Shideler, and Hallett H. Hammatt 2009 DRAFT Archaeological Inventory Survey of a 194.324-Acre Parcel within Portions of Kohanaiki Ahupua‘a and Kaloko Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Hawai‘i Island TMK: [3] 7-3-009:026. Cultural Surveys Hawaii, Kailua, Hawai‘i. Boundary Commission 1873 The Kaloko Ahupua‘a, District of North Kona, Island of Hawai‘i, Boundary Commission, Hawaii, Volume A, No. 1, pps. 240-241 (dated August 1873) Clark Matthew R. and Robert B. Rechtman 2002 Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK 3-7-3-7:27 & 50 Kohanaiki Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Island of Hawai‘i. Rechtman Consulting, Keaau Hawai‘i. Cobb Allan, Michelle Elmore, and Joseph Kennedy 2003 An Archaeological Assessment of TMK: 7-3-09:25, 26 and 28 at Kaloko and Kohanaiki Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii Archaeological Consultants of the Pacific, Hale‘iwa Hawaii Cordy, Ross and Joseph Tainter and Robert Renger and Robert Hitchcock 1991 An Ahupua‘a Study: The 1971 Archaeological Work at Kaloko Ahupua‘a North Kona, Hawai`i: Archaeology at Kaloko-Honokohau National Park, Western Archaeological and Conservation Center Publications in Anthropology No. 58. Tucson: National Park Service, 1991. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 40 Donham, Theresa K. 1986 Full Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Kohana-Iki Development Project Area, Land of Kohana-Iki, North Kona, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-3-09:3,14), PHRI Report 216-040286, Hilo, Hawai‘i Emory, Kenneth P. and Lloyd J. Soehren 1971 Archaeological and Historical Survey, Honokohau Area, North Kona, Hawaii, Bishop Museum, Dept. Anthro. Revised Edition, Report 61-1, Honolulu. Fager, Mikele W. and Donna K. Graves 1993 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Kaloko Industrial Park Parcel, Land of Kaloko, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:7-3-51:Por.1). PHRI: Hilo, Hawai‘i. Fager, Mikele W. and Paul H. Rosendahl 1993 Interim Report: Archaeological Inventory Survey, Kaloko Industrial Park Parcel, Land of Kaloko, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:7-3-51:Por.1). PHRI: Hilo, Hawai‘i. Hammatt, Hallett H. 1980 Archaeological Reconnaissance of a 410-Acre Parcel TMK: 7-3-09 Portions of Parcels 1 and 17 [and 19] Kaloko, Kohanaiki, North Kona Hawai‘i Island ARCH. Lāwa‘i Hawai‘i. Haun, Alan E. 2003 Archaeological Assessment 400-Acre Portion of TMK 7-3-09:28 Land of Kaloko, North Kona District, Island of Hawai‘i Haun & Associates Keaau, Hawai‘i Haun, Alan E. and Jack D. Henry 2000 Archaeological Inventory Survey Kaloko Industrial Park Phases III and IV TMK: 7-3-51:60, Kaloko, North Kona Island of Hawai‘i Haun & Associates. Keaau, Hawai‘i 2002 Data Recovery Plan Sites 21999, 22010, 22014, 22016, 22017, 22018, 22023 and 22032 Land of Kaloko, North Kona District Island of Hawai‘i TMK: 7-3-51:60. Haun & Associates. Keaau, Hawai‘i Hawai‘i TMK Service 2024 Tax Map Key (3) 7-3-007, 7-3-009, 7-3-0051. Hawai‘i TMK Service, Honolulu. Henry, Jack D. and Donna K. Graves 1993 Phased Archaeological Inventory Survey Phase I – Site Identification Keahole- Kailua 69 kV Transmission Line Project North Kona District Island of Hawai‘i PHRI, Hilo, Hawai‘i. Kelly, Marion 1971 Kekaha: ‘Aina Malo‘o, Historical Survey and Background of Kaloko and Kuki‘o Ahupua'a, North Kona, Hawaii, Department of Anthropology Report 71-2, Bishop Museum, Honolulu HI. Kennedy, Joseph 1983 An Archaeological Walk-Through Reconnaissance at Kaloko Golf Course (TMK 7-3-09:01), Kaloko, North Kona, Hawaii, Archaeological Consultants of Hawaii, Inc., Honolulu. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 41 1984 An Intensive Archaeological Survey for the Proposed Kaloko Golf Course, Kaloko, North Kona, TMK 7-3-09: por. 17, Archaeological Consultants of Hawaii, Inc., Honolulu. 1991 Surface Reconnaissance of the Proposed Industrial Development at Kohanaiki, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 7-3-09:15 (Revised 8-12-91). Archaeological Consultants of Hawaii: Haleiwa, Hawai‘i. Maly, Kepā and Onaona Maly 2002 He Wahi Mo‘olelo ‘Ohana no Kaloko Me Honokōhau Ma Kekaha O Nā Kona -A Collection of Family Traditions Describing Customs, Practices and Beliefs of the Families and Lands of Kaloko and Honokōhau, North Kona, Island of Hawai‘i. Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo, Hawai‘i. 2003 Kohanaiki Ma Kekaha Wai ‘Ole O Nā Kona (Kohanaiki on the Arid Shores of Kona): A Report on Archival and Historical Documentary Research, and Oral History Interviews for the Ahupua‘a of Kohanaiki, District of Kona, Island of Hawai‘i (TMK 7-3-09:3, 14). Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo, Hawai‘i. Moore, James R. and Joseph Kennedy 2003 An Archaeological Inventory Survey Report of a Proposed Roadway Corridor Located at TMK 7-3-09:28 (por) in Kaloko Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Island of Hawai‘i Archaeological Consultants of the Pacific: Haleiwa, Hawai‘i. Nees, Richard and Scott Williams 1995 Archaeological Investigations in Five Parcels of the Kaloko Mauka Subdivision, Kaloko Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. Ogden Environmental and Energy Services, Inc., Honolulu. O'Hare, Constance R. and Paul H. Rosendahl 1992 Report on Burials at Kohana-Iki, Kohana-Iki Resort Phased Archaeological Mitigation Program, Phase II - Data Recovery, Land of Kohana-Iki, North Kona District, Island of Hawai‘i (TMK: 3-7-3-09:3). PHRI, Hilo, Hawai‘i. Puette, Seamus T. and Thomas S. Dye 2003 Archaeological Inventory Survey for Kaloko Mauka Parcel, Hawai‘i Island T.S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists, Inc., Honolulu. Rechtman, Robert B. 1998 Archaeological Field Inspection Koloa Mauka Parcel (TMK: 3-7-3-25:15) Kaloko Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Island of Hawai‘i. PHRI, Hilo, Hawaii. Rechtman, Robert B. and Jack D. Henry 1999 Archaeological Inventory Survey Morrison Property Kaloko Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Island of Hawai‘i. PHRI, Hilo, Hawai‘i. Reinecke, John E. 1930 Survey of Hawaiian Sites from Kailua, Kona to Kalahuipua‘a, Kohala, Bishop Museum Manuscript, Honolulu. Renger, Robert 1971 Kaloko Field Notes (hand-written manuscript) Unknown publisher Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 42 Rosendahl, Margaret L.K., and Alan E. Haun 1987 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Kaloko Water Tank Sites, Land of Kaloko, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 370-101487. Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc.: Hilo. Rosendahl, Paul H. 1993 Archaeological Field Inspection Kaloko Mauka Parcel PHRI Hilo, Hawai‘i. 2000 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Kaloko Mauka Parcel, Land of Kaloko, North Kona District, Island o Hawaii TMK: 3-7-3-25: 13. PHRI: Hilo, Hawai‘i. Rosendahl, Paul H. and Alan Walker 1991 Archaeological Field Inspection, Proposed Kaloko Industrial Crusher Sites, Land of Kaloko, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK: 3-7-3-09:17). PHRI: Hilo, Hawai‘i. Shideler, David and Hallett H. Hammatt 2005 Archaeological Field Inspection and Literature Review For 1,200+ Acres in Kaloko and Kohanaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i TMK: (3) 7-3-009:017, 025, 026 & 028, Cultural Surveys Hawaii Kailua, Hawaii Soehren, Lloyd J. 1980a Archaeological Reconnaissance Letter Report (Kaloko TMK 7-3-09:1 Phase 1 1980b Archaeological Reconnaissance Letter Report (Kaloko TMK 7-3-09:1 Phase 2 1983 Letter to Mr. Kazuo Omiya concerning an archaeological Reconnaissance at Kaloko, Island of Hawaii. USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) 1996 Kailua and Keahole Point USGS 7.5-minute series topographic quadrangle. USGS Information Services, Denver, Colorado. National Park Service 2024 Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park (National Park Service Website) https://www.nps.gov/media/photo/collection-item.htm?pg=7323739&cid=305fb7af-a71b- 469b-941e-a98b439c882f&id=b092ddfa-c881-4cd8-8d3d-c09ce1239591&sid=2e6a21ae-8651- 49d Walsh, Patrick, and Hallett H. Hammatt 1995 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of the New Queen Kaahumanu Highway Right-Of-Way Between Palani Road and Keāhole Airport; Within the Ahupua‘a of Keahuolu, Kealakehe, Honokōhau, Kaloko, Kohanaiki, O‘oma 2, Kalaoa-O‘oma, and Kalaoa 1-4; Kekaha, North Kona District, Hawai‘i Island. Cultural Surveys Hawaii: Kailua. Wolforth, Thomas R. 1999 Monitoring of the HELCO Keāhole-Kailua 69 kV Transmission Line: A Detailed Description of Mamalahoa Trail (50-10-27-2). Paul H Rosendahl, Inc., Hilo, Hawai‘i. Cultural Surveys Hawai‘i Job Code: HAWAII 16 LR for the “Road to the Sea” Kona Open Space Program Project, Kohonaiki, North Kona, Hawai‘i Island TMK plats: (3) 7-3-007 various parcels, 7-3-009 various parcels, and 7-3-051 various parcels 43 Wolforth, Thomas R., Chris Monahan, Kirk Johnson, Tyler Paikuli-Campbell and Robert L. Spear 2005 Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Northern Portion of the Kaloko Heights Project in Kohanaiki and Kaloko Ahupua‘a, North Kona District, Hawai‘i, Island, Hawai‘i: Settlement Pattern Investigations in the Southern Kekaha Middle Elevations [TMK 3-7-3-09:32). Scientific Consultants Inc., Honolulu. Appendix H: Public Engagement Plan Public Engagement Plan Document No.: 230928084941_05f6b505 Version: Final County of Hawaiʻi Department of Planning Kona Open Space Network November 10, 2023 Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 i Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................................... ii 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Planning Department’s Mission Statement .....................................................................................................2 1.2 Public Engagement Approach ................................................................................................................................2 2. Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Project Planning Committee ..................................................................................................................................3 2.2 Interested Stakeholders ..........................................................................................................................................3 2.3 Public ..............................................................................................................................................................................2 3. Proposed Decision Process .................................................................................................................................. 2 3.1 Plan and Policy Review, National Best Practices, and Emerging Trends ..............................................3 3.2 Goals and Objectives, Parcel Identification, and Scoring Criteria Development ...............................3 3.3 Project Website and Geographic Information System Development ....................................................3 3.4 KOSN Program Definition and Conceptual Plans ..........................................................................................3 3.5 Implementation Strategies.....................................................................................................................................3 4. Public Engagement Process and Tools............................................................................................................. 4 4.1 Social Justice and Environmental Justice Planning Strategies ................................................................4 4.2 Public Outreach Tools and Methods ..................................................................................................................5 4.2.1 Stakeholder Meetings .................................................................................................................................5 4.2.2 Project Website, Online Questionnaires, and Email Updates .......................................................5 4.2.3 Community Engagement Meetings .......................................................................................................5 4.3 Community Engagement Schedule ....................................................................................................................6 Figures Figure 1. Kona Open Space Network Plan Decision-making Structure ...........................................................................2 Figure 2. Tentative Kona Open Space Network Plan Development and Public Engagement Schedule ............7 Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 ii Acronyms and Abbreviations CDP Community Development Plan DLNR Department of Land and Natural Resources GIS geographic information system KOSN Kona Open Space Network LEP limited English proficient Planning Department County of Hawaiʻi Department of Planning PEP Public Engagement Plan Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 1 1. Introduction The County of Hawaiʻi Department of Planning (Planning Department) is in the process of developing a Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Plan to establish a framework to be used in the planning of the County’s open space development and preservation. The KOSN Plan will provide policy level guidance to the County and steering committees for the evaluation, prioritization, funding, and implementation of the County’s open space network goals. The KOSN represents a community-driven objective of the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP), aiming to establish connections between public open spaces, parks, neighborhoods, and historic sites. The KOSN Plan seeks to maintain green drainage and flood control areas while preserving trees for shade and carbon absorption. Additionally, it intends to develop a network of pedestrian and bicycle trails on and off-road to encourage healthy and active lifestyles. To be successful, the KOSN Plan will need to be technically sound, while achieving the buy-in of key government, industry, and community stakeholders. The KOSN’s Public Engagement Plan (PEP) strives to achieve consistency in outreach efforts while allowing for flexibility to meet the wide-ranging stakeholder group needs. The guiding principles and intentions that underscore the PEP’s engagement activities include the following:  Build broad and clear understanding of real problems, options, tradeoffs, issues, and values.  Engage stakeholders in a meaningful way that provides them with confidence that their issues have been considered in the process.  Use the right communication tools for the right audience.  Speak with and listen to underserved and diverse communities in a fair and engaging way.  Foster a public conversation that allows various stakeholder voices to see their perspectives in the context of others.  Conduct step-by-step, defensible, forward-moving decision making that fosters consensus among key stakeholders and decision makers at each milestone.  Balance face‐to‐face interaction with people who live, work, and travel in diverse communities—including specific techniques to reach out to traditionally underserved communities—with creative and compelling online engagement tools that will cost-effectively reach people throughout the Kona urban area.  Create outreach materials that are easily read, highly visual, and compellingly communicate key messages.  Place a special emphasis and mindfulness on issues of hazard mitigation, social justice, and environmental justice when conducting public outreach that will ultimately be reflected in the final KOSN Program. This PEP describes stakeholder roles and responsibilities, decision-making structure and process, and the public involvement process and tools. The public involvement and stakeholder coordination strategy must be flexible and adaptable to be both effective and appropriate for guiding information sharing with the range of diverse communities throughout the study area. Over the course of the KOSN project, the team will host several opportunities for stakeholder engagement, including three stakeholder workshops and a broader community engagement meeting. The project team will develop a public-facing website, potentially using the Konveio platform, that includes a geographic Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 2 information system (GIS) storymap and a public comment interface. Additional public outreach will occur through County and subcommittee notification of stakeholders and interested parties. Findings from early stakeholder engagement meetings and website comments will be used to shape the way the project team interacts with the public and will help to refine the specific public involvement processes and tools used throughout the project. 1.1 Planning Department’s Mission Statement The Planning Department’s mission is to foster an improved quality of life for the Island of Hawaiʻi’s communities through responsible and progressive planning. To support this mission, the project team will engage the Island of Hawaiʻi’s multifaceted communities to learn what aspects of an open space network are important to them, with the goal of improving the quality of life for all communities in the project area. 1.2 Public Engagement Approach The KOSN project team is committed to a public engagement approach that:  Increases public awareness and understanding of the open space and land use planning process in Hawaiʻi.  Provides an open and transparent decision-making process conducted through equitable and constructive two-way communication between the project team and the public.  Provides early and ongoing opportunities for stakeholders to raise issues and concerns that can be considered by the project team.  Meets applicable state and federal laws, regulations, policies, and procedures.  Proactively informs and encourages the participation of stakeholders—including citizens who have traditionally been underserved and underrepresented— without regard to race, color, national origin, disability, religion, sex, age, economic status, or primary language with benefits, rights, and meaningful access preserved for limited English proficient (LEP) persons, in full compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Hawaiʻi anti-discrimination laws.  Stimulates a broad-based interest in the Planning Department’s planning activities and builds widespread community understanding of findings and decisions.  Fosters greater opportunities for the public to participate in the land use planning decision-making process by maximizing opportunities for the public to collaborate with the Planning Department and other land use-related agencies in the County. Key elements of public engagement include a structured decision process, clear decision milestones, and well- defined roles and responsibilities. Thorough and thoughtful consideration of issues at each decision point by all the interested project stakeholder groups helps to ensure quality decisions that will not have to be revisited because a significant element was missed. Additionally, the clear identification of decision points creates an expectation in stakeholder groups for staying on task and schedule. Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 3 2. Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities The following section outlines the various KOSN stakeholder roles and responsibilities within the PEP. 2.1 Project Planning Committee The Planning Department is managing this KOSN project. The Project Planning Committee comprises members of the Planning Department actively involved in project management, their consultants (Jacobs and subconsultants Cultural Surveys Hawaiʻi, Geometrician Associates, and Hawaiʻi Alliance for Community-Based Economic Development), and members from the KOSN CDP subcommittee. The KOSN CDP subcommittee guided the progress of this project over the years. Since 2015, they have delineated the KOSN Plan's visions and goals and contributed to shaping the project's scope. Inclusion of the KOSN CDP subcommittee members in this Project Planning Committee ensures continuity with past planning efforts. The Project Planning Committee will:  Guide the public engagement process and KOSN Plan development.  Set the framework for the project.  Communicate project progress to County management, governmental agencies, or jurisdictional colleagues as needed.  Provide guidance and suggestions for stakeholders to inquire or collaborate with.  Review project and background materials and make recommendations at key decision points. 2.2 Interested Stakeholders Several civic and community groups help to shape and improve the quality of life in Kona. Examples of these potentially interested stakeholders include: Government Stakeholders: • Kona CDP Action Committee • County Council • Leeward Planning Commission • Office of the Mayor • Hawaiʻi County Civil Defense Agency • Hawaiʻi Fire Department • Nā Ala Hele, • Hawaiʻi County Parks and Recreation • Hawaiʻi County Department of Public Works • University of Hawaiʻi - HCC Pālamanui • Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands • DLNR Division of State Parks • National Park Service Other External Stakeholders: • People for Active Transportation Hawaiʻi • Kona Hawaiian Civic Club • Kona-Kohala Chamber of Commerce • Hawaiʻi Cycling Club • Kona Hiking Club • Daughters of Hawaiʻi • Kai 'Opua Canoe Club • Affected landowners Additional interested stakeholders may be identified during development of the KOSN Plan, through early outreach and community meetings. Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 2 2.3 Public In addition to input from identified interested stakeholders, the Project Planning Committee will disseminate project information to and seek input from the public at large. A variety of public involvement processes and tools will be used (further described in Section 4) to obtain input from the public. Public information and input are intended to be ongoing throughout the development of the KOSN Plan. The project website is intended to be interactive and will include a space for the public to leave comments on the goals and progress of KOSN planning. Focused public outreach will occur before project decision points to provide the public with meaningful opportunities to affect the project outcomes. 3. Proposed Decision Process The proposed decision-making structure for the KOSN Plan is shown on Figure 1. Figure 1. Kona Open Space Network Plan Decision-making Structure The KOSN Project Manager will keep the Planning Director apprised of the project’s progress. The project team and interested stakeholders understand and acknowledge that the Planning Director retains all final decision-making authority for this project. The Planning Department will conduct the following:  Review recommendations from the Project Planning Committee and interested stakeholders and make the final recommendations to the Planning Director.  With the Project Planning Committee, review recommendations from the interested stakeholders and the public.  Strive for consensus when developing their recommendations.  For dispute or conflict resolution, the following guidelines will be used by the Planning Department members: - Examine interests that are behind the disagreement. - Explain why they have taken a specific position. - Seek compromise solutions. - Decide whether to return issues to the Project Planning Committee for further information development. Project Planning Committee Planning Department Recommendations Planning Director Approval In t e r e s t e d S t a k e h o l d e r s Pu b l i c I n p u t Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 3 3.1 Plan and Policy Review, National Best Practices, and Emerging Trends The first decision step of the project is holding partnering meetings with the Project Planning Committee to establish project purpose and context and to outline roles and responsibilities. After the project kickoff, the consultants will conduct a plan and policy review, review national best practices, and identify any emerging trends that may affect open space network development. The first decision point is for the Project Planning Committee to validate and provide input on the plan and policy review, national best practices, and emerging trends. 3.2 Goals and Objectives, Parcel Identification, and Scoring Criteria Development The second decision step includes refinement of the KOSN Plan goals and objectives, building on existing work by the KOSN subcommittee and other interested stakeholders. The consultants will present the types and characteristics of the KOSN hub and link elements, identify parcels that could potentially serve as hubs or links, and develop scoring and prioritization metrics for the KOSN. More detail about how data, insight and evidence are collected during this process is included in the Parcel Selection Methodology technical memorandum. The consultants will obtain feedback from the Project Planning Committee. With this feedback, the KOSN Plan goals and objectives will be refined. The goals and objectives will be shared with interested stakeholders for feedback. 3.3 Project Website and Geographic Information System Development The third decision step is the review of the project website and GIS analysis of project elements. The project website is an important component of the public outreach for this project, providing project visualization through interactive GIS data (maps), announcements and updates, and online engagement opportunities via the comment form. The Project Planning Committee will have an opportunity to review and comment on the GIS analysis. The project website will be maintained and updated throughout the life of the project and can be modified as necessary to improve data presentation, public interaction, and comment gathering. 3.4 KOSN Program Definition and Conceptual Plans The fourth decision step involves the creation of conceptual plans that integrate the previous analyses and program elements, including goal definition, site investigation, site selection criteria, and public engagement. The Project Planning Committee will create up to three conceptual plans (three alternatives) for development, maintenance, and preservation of open space in the project area. The conceptual plans will consider phased implementation of the KOSN goals. Interested stakeholders and the public will have an opportunity to weigh in. 3.5 Implementation Strategies The fifth decision step applies to the implementation plan for the KOSN. The Project Planning Committee will work with interested stakeholders to develop an implementation plan that identifies the policies, investment strategies, and actions that will guide the Planning Department in attaining the KOSN Plan’s goals and objectives. The implementation plan will focus on open space network development in the Kona Urban Core Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 4 during the initial phase of project development and will also examine implementation strategies for later phases of the KOSN Plan. 4. Public Engagement Process and Tools Interested stakeholder and public outreach at key decision points will be used to provide the public with meaningful opportunities to affect project outcomes. The Project Planning Committee will tailor the public engagement process and tools to reach a broad constituency of known stakeholders, affected landowners, interested citizens, and residents in the project area. The Project Planning Committee will identify a comprehensive range of stakeholders. These findings will shape the way the Project Planning Committee interacts with the interested stakeholders and public for the remainder of the project, as well as the specific public engagement process and tools used for the project. Effective documentation of public input will make it easy for community members to see the connection between their input and the decisions made. Documentation of the public involvement process will be maintained on the project website. Public input will be actively considered by the Project Planning Committee and the Planning Department in making recommendations at each decision point. The following sections identify the public engagement process’s guiding principles with an emphasis on disadvantaged or underrepresented communities. Planning strategies, outreach tools, and activities are also described herein. In addition, the Project Planning Committee will review recent public participation for the Kona CDP and incorporate successful strategies and lessons learned. 4.1 Social Justice and Environmental Justice Planning Strategies As part of the data gathering effort, the consultants will conduct a review of demographics data available from the State of Hawaiʻi, the U.S. Census (and its annual updates), the American Community Survey, and the Location Affordability Index1 to understand the general concentrations of minority, native Hawaiian, and low-income populations. The consultants may conduct more detailed demographic analyses as specific areas of concern and future scenarios are identified. In addition, the Project Planning Committee will reach out to interested stakeholders to learn more about the traditionally underserved populations on the island. The project team will identify common obstacles to achieving meaningful participation from these underserved communities and will determine how to structure effective outreach strategies. The analysis of demographics and feedback from the interested stakeholders will help to inform the refinement of the PEP, but, regardless of population data, members of all groups will be invited to participate in the planning process. To engage these communities, the Project Planning Committee will employ the following strategies:  Demographic data analysis: Analyze the effects of the KOSN’s planning efforts in relation to the County’s varied minority populations as appropriate.  Community engagement activities: Include groups that advocate for or serve as networking places for these traditionally underserved communities in the community engagement activities.  News releases: Include news releases in formats or forums that would be most likely to reach underserved communities. 1 Once published, the 2020 Census, the American Community Survey, and the Location Affordability Index will replace older data whenever practicable. Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 5 Translation services and other special accommodations for LEP persons will be provided at all public workshops upon request. 4.2 Public Outreach Tools and Methods The PEP will use a variety of methods and tools to reach interested stakeholders and the public throughout the duration of the project. The outreach will include a variety of in-person and virtual meetings to include stakeholders across the project area. 4.2.1 Stakeholder Meetings The Project Planning Committee will host a series of stakeholder meetings at key milestones throughout the project. These meetings will be designed to be interactive—interested stakeholders will have the opportunity to learn about the project and provide input on the milestone at hand. In-person meetings will be held at one or more locations in Kona. These meetings may include the ability to join virtually. The project kickoff meeting was open to the public and was held on August 29, 2023, at the Makaʻeo County Pavilion located at the Old Kona Airport. 4.2.2 Project Website, Online Questionnaires, and Email Updates A project website will be developed to give the public a convenient way to stay informed about the project’s progress and meeting schedule. The website will be hosted and maintained by the County, with assistance from their consultant, and will include text, links to PDF graphics and reports, and project visualization tools (GIS-based maps). The website may include the following information:  Project overview and purpose  Project schedule and upcoming milestones  Planning Department meeting agendas, summaries, and materials  KOSN subcommittee meeting schedule, agendas, summaries, and materials  Materials from open houses, including displays and summaries  Project announcements  Project email address, where the public can submit comments The enhanced website will provide a single source for project information and will allow for active engagement, promoting two-way project communication. The Project Planning Committee may post online questionnaires following stakeholder meetings for interested stakeholders and the public to provide input outside of the meetings. Email updates may be used to reach interested parties on the mailing list to direct them to the project website, announce upcoming events, or share important project milestones. The public also can submit unsolicited comments through the project email address, which will be linked on the project website. 4.2.3 Community Engagement Meetings To talk with many community members about the project, the Project Planning Committee will host two community engagement meetings. These community engagement meetings will be like the stakeholder meetings but will be advertised to a larger audience and will occur after initial development of the KOSN analysis and selection methodology. The KOSN conceptual plans will be presented at the community engagement meetings with the goal of collecting public opinion and input on the alternatives. Visual aids or PowerPoint presentations will be used to help the community orient themselves in relation to proposed hubs and links and to visualize the effects of the KOSN on their specific community. Community feedback Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 6 received during the community engagement meetings will be shared on the project website, where the public will have further opportunity to comment on the conceptual plans and the feedback received. 4.3 Community Engagement Schedule Community engagement will be a continuous process throughout project development, using the project website and project email address to distribute project updates, solicit feedback, and receive public comments. In addition to ongoing two-way communication through the project website, the Project Planning Committee will host two community engagement meetings to share conceptual plans for the KOSN, listen to public feedback, and collect public comments, suggestions, and opinions for use in refining the conceptual plans. The following figure shows a tentative schedule for KOSN Plan development and opportunities for public involvement. Public Engagement Plan 230928084941_05f6b505 7 Figure 2. Tentative Kona Open Space Network Plan Development and Public Engagement Schedule Tasks JUN JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG Notice to Proceed  Project Kickoff  Stakeholder Meeting (Workshop 1): Open House  Stakeholder Meeting 2 (Workshop 2a): Site Selection Stakeholder Meeting 2 (Workshop 2b): Prioritization Stakeholder Meeting 3: KOSN Program Development  Community Engagement Meeting 1  Stakeholder Meeting 4: Application (Plan Making) Community Engagement Meeting 2  Stakeholder Meeting 5: Implementation Plan Development  Project Report  2023 2024 tbd: during 11/28/23-1/12/24 6/22 7/11 8/29 12/19 1/31 2/26 4/9 5/2 to be adjusted after Workshop 2a date is determined Appendix I: Parcel Selection Methodology Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology Document No.: 230929115238_b04a997b Version: 0 Kona Open Space Network Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b i Executive Summary The following Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Parcel Selection Methodology (Parcel Selection Methodology) describes the approach to identifying current and future spaces, places, and other open space assets for potential inclusion in the KOSN. The Selection Methodology aligns with the Literature and Resource Review, the Public Engagement Plan (PEP), and the forthcoming Scoring and Prioritization Methodology for the KOSN Project. By describing a specific parcel selection methodology in advance of parcel scoring and concept plan development, interested stakeholders and the public can feel heard and included during the KOSN planning process and are more likely to support the KOSN Plan. The selection of parcels considers all available land within the defined study area and then narrows the list of identified parcels based on KOSN goals, previous analyses and planning efforts described in the Literature and Resource Review, and input from the Project Planning Committee during the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a). The goal of the parcel selection exercise is to develop a spatially referenced database of parcels that represent the existing open space network and opportunities to improve or expand the existing network. The steps to achieve this goal, described in this Selection Methodology, include the following:  Data gathering  Data assembly and preliminary network analysis  Parcel selection refinement  Parcel data attribution  Parcel categorization After completing these steps, the Project Planning Committee will have a set of parcels, categorized by open space network element (hub or link), that can be scored against criteria to prioritize investment towards improving or expanding the existing open space network. Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b ii Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ i Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................... iii 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 2. Data Gathering ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Desktop Review ...........................................................................................................................................................3 2.2 Project Planning Committee Input ......................................................................................................................4 3. Data Assembly and Preliminary Network Analysis ........................................................................................ 4 3.1 Geospatial Assessment ............................................................................................................................................4 3.2 Geospatial Data Sources .........................................................................................................................................5 3.3 Creation of New Geospatial Data .........................................................................................................................5 4. Parcel Selection Refinement ............................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) ......................................................................................................6 4.2 Refined Selected Parcel Dataset ..........................................................................................................................6 5. Parcel Data Attribution ........................................................................................................................................ 7 5.1 Prioritization and Concept Plans ..........................................................................................................................8 6. Parcel Categorization ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Tables Table 1. Example of Initial Assessment .......................................................................................................................................7 Table 2. Example of Data Review ...................................................................................................................................................7 Table 3. Example of Initial Review .................................................................................................................................................8 Table 4. Examples of Hubs ...............................................................................................................................................................9 Table 5. Examples of Linkages ..................................................................................................................................................... 10 Table 6. Examples of Natural Spaces ........................................................................................................................................ 10 Table 7. Examples of Social and Community Spaces ......................................................................................................... 11 Table 8. Examples of Cultural Spaces ....................................................................................................................................... 12 Figure Figure 1. KOSN Study Area ...............................................................................................................................................................2 Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b iii Acronyms and Abbreviations DLNR Department of Land and Natural Resources GIS geographic information systems ID identification KOSN Kona Open Space Network NAR Natural Area Reserves NELHA National Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority PEP Public Engagement Plan TMK tax map key Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 1 1. Introduction This Parcel Selection Methodology describes how the study area will be analyzed to select various parcels or easements for inclusion in the Kona Open Space Network (KOSN). As shown on Figure 1, the study area is equivalent to the Kona urban core and contains the area under consideration for development of the first phase of the KOSN. Later efforts may expand the KOSN beyond the current study area, potentially using the same selection methodology that was employed in this planning process. The parcels selected for potential inclusion in the KOSN fall into two broad categories:  Existing open space network components (baseline or existing conditions) that can be further protected, improved, modified, or have interpretive signs to inform the community.  Private or public parcels that are not currently serving an open space network function but could be acquired or modified to enhance the open space network, prevent encroachment of urban development, or provide an ecological benefit. The hub and link concept forms the core of the KOSN planning effort and applies both to the baseline conditions and to parcels not currently providing an open space function, but which are in a location that would benefit the open space network if improved or preserved. Initial baseline conditions will be characterized by identifying and cataloging hubs and links discovered through the Literature and Resource Review. These existing open space network components will be assembled into geographic information system (GIS) layers to allow for easy visualization and analysis of the network. The creation of custom KOSN GIS data also will allow for easy identification of network gaps and parcel acquisition targets. Parcels that do not currently function as part of the existing KOSN may be selected for further analysis either because they fill an identified gap in the network, or because they would function well as a new hub or link based on their location and land use status. Various attributes contribute to the selection of a parcel for inclusion in the KOSN, including topography, land cover, the presence of biological or cultural resources, the ability to provide ecological benefits, proximity to community users, and current development pressure. Some parcels may not have an obvious connection to the KOSN in the near term but are important to protect as open space based on development pressure and undesirable urban growth patterns. Previous studies and input from the Project Planning Committee during a Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) will inform the selection of parcels to consider adding to the existing open space network. Some locations may be functioning already as hubs or links but lack appropriate protection, improvements, or signage. These locations may not close an obvious gap in the existing KOSN but could enhance or expand the existing network by improving or protecting a parcel or parcels the community already considers as a hub or link. The following sections detail how the data of existing and potential hubs and links will be gathered and assembled, what format the data will be presented in, how the Project Planning Committee will review and augment the selection of parcels, what attributes will be added to the selected parcel data, and how the selected parcels will be categorized. Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 2 Figure 1. KOSN Study Area Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 3 2. Data Gathering 2.1 Desktop Review A desktop review will be conducted to assess and research opportunities, locations, and sites identified previously in the Literature and Resource Review. These opportunities (parcels and/or easements) will be assessed for the potential to preserve, improve, and incorporate into the KOSN. Desktop review will focus on identifying known existing KOSN elements (hubs and links) and known locations that do not currently serve a function in the existing KOSN but where preservation or improvement would enhance or expand the existing KOSN. By identifying the known existing set of places and community assets, a better understanding Kona’s existing network of hubs and linkages can be achieved. By starting with an initial assessment of existing open spaces, a baseline of functions can be established, gaps can be identified, and a plan can be created for future needs. Initial sites that may be identified as existing KOSN elements (hubs or links) include, but are not limited to:  Old Kona Airport State Recreation Park (Makaʻeo Pavilion)  Kaloko-Honokōhau Park  Oʻoma Beach  Kohanaiki Beach  Kikaua Point Park  Wawaloli Beach Park  Kahaluʻu Beach Park  Banyans Surfing Area  Keolonāhihi State Historical Park  Hale Hālāwai Park  Pualani Park  Huliheʻe Palace  Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail  Na Ala Hele Trails  Walua Road Walking and Bike Path  Aliʻi Drive  National Energy Laboratory of Hawaii Authority (NELHA)  Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resource (DLNR) Forest Reserves (Puʻuwaʻawaʻa, Honuaʻula, and Waiʻaha Springs Forest Reserves are in proximity, mauka [mountain] to project area)  DLNR Natural Area Reserves (NAR) System (Waiea NAR and Kipāhoehoe NAR are located south of project area) Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 4 Beyond the specific places identified from the scope of work, known existing KOSN elements using the resources from the literature review will be collected and defined, including the following:  The Kona Community Development Plan  Hele-on Mass Transit Agency Kona Hub  Local, State and Federal Parks and Reserves  Natural Resource Agencies and Groups, such as the Soil and Water Conservation District  Critical Habitat and Water Resources  Schools, Trusts, and Public Lands  Public Access Open Space and Natural Resource Locations1  Other GIS Layers included Literature and Resource Review, section 5.6: GIS. In addition to the known existing KOSN elements (hubs and links) identified in the Literature and Resource Review, the project team will identify suggested opportunities to enhance or expand the KOSN, based on research and professional expertise. Opportunities for enhancement or expansion of the KOSN will be identified based on apparent gaps in the existing network and known threats to open space such as undesired urban development patterns or sea level rise. The identified opportunities will be a subset of the overall selected parcel dataset that can be sorted, filtered, and analyzed both separately and in conjunction with the set of known existing KOSN elements. Examples of opportunities include preservation of coastal land, designation of pedestrian or bicycle paths between existing hubs, and enhancement or acquisition of parcels that currently serve as community gathering spaces (hubs) but are either not currently preserved as open space or that lack appropriate amenities to serve as vibrant KOSN hubs. 2.2 Project Planning Committee Input Following initial desktop review of known KOSN elements and potential opportunities for enhancement or acquisition, the project team will seek input from the Project Planning Committee to refine the dataset of existing and potential KOSN hubs and links. This input will be provided primarily during the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a), which is described below in Section 4. Input from the Project Planning Committee is a key component of the parcel selection methodology because many of the committee members, including County staff and the KOSN CDP sub-committee, have institutional knowledge about the existing KOSN and the goals for KOSN enhancement and expansion. 3. Data Assembly and Preliminary Network Analysis 3.1 Geospatial Assessment As locations (parcels or easements) are added to the dataset of selected parcels, each existing KOSN element or opportunity for enhancement or expansion will be coded as a hub or link, and converted to a geospatial data format. Geospatial datasets, or layers, for existing KOSN elements will be assembled for opportunities to enhance or expand the KOSN. The project team will extract relevant data from existing datasets, where possible, and tailor it to the needs of open space analysis. Some of the data collected will be part of existing geospatial datasets. If existing geospatial datasets do not contain known KOSN elements or identified opportunities for KOSN enhancement or expansion, the project team will create new geospatial data (shapes) to add to the layers of existing KOSN elements or identified opportunities. 1 Hawaiʻi County, Public Records. 2023. https://records.hawaiicounty.gov/weblink/Browse.aspx?dbid=1&startid=13770&cr=1 Accessed on 09/29/2023. Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 5 The geospatial, or mapping, aspect of the data assembly process provides a view of the whole existing network rather than isolated hubs or links. By assembling collected data into a layer of known existing KOSN elements, a visualization of the existing network will provide a quick reference as to where new hubs and links would fit in an expanded network or where potential barriers to enhancing or expanding the KOSN (such as privately owned property, topographic barriers, or already-developed parcels) exist. The KOSN StoryMap website will be the primary portal for viewing data that has been collected or created, reviewed and shared: https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/7eec443c097c452eaa58c337c8d6b274 These network connectivity insights are not as readily available when data are stored in a spreadsheet or other database without a geospatial (mapping) component. However, the use of a geospatial database does not preclude spreadsheet-style analysis because the geospatial data can be exported as tables for review, sorting, or analysis outside the mapping interface. Each feature (parcel or easement) in the dataset is stored as a row of data with multiple attributes (columns). These columns can contain the same information that typically would be found in a spreadsheet-style dataset. Section 5, Parcel Data Attribution, provides more detail on what types of information would be stored in the columns. 3.2 Geospatial Data Sources As previously noted and in the Literature and Resource Review, the project team will collect geospatial (mapped) data from a range of publicly available sources, including, but not limited to the following:  County of Hawaiʻi ArcGIS Portal https://gis.hawaiicounty.gov/arcgisportal/home/  County of Hawaiʻi ArcGIS Online https://hawaiicountygis.maps.arcgis.com/home/index.html  County of Hawaiʻi Real Property Tax Office https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx? AppID=1048&LayerID=23618&PageTypeID=2&PageID=9876  Hawaiʻi Statewide GIS Program (2023) https://gis.hawaiicounty.gov/arcgisportal/apps/webappviewer/ index.html?id=6d4a0ca08b9744c9a34e0a6ff65b882e  Hawaiʻi Statewide GIS Program (2023), Geospatial Data Portal (2023) https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/  Hawaiʻi Statewide GIS Program (2023) Geospatial Webmap https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/ Additional publicly available data sources may be identified during the parcel selection process and will be incorporated in the KOSN dataset as appropriate. Data sources will be logged in a data dictionary, so that source and explanation of datasets are available. 3.3 Creation of New Geospatial Data The project team will use the ESRI suite to maintain data consistency with the StoryMap website. Much of the data that will be included in the KOSN layers and will be generated from desktop analysis of publicly available data sources. Some features (parcels or easements) will need to be added to the KOSN layers by manually creating a geospatial representation (shape). These newly created features will be identified either through the initial desktop analysis of the existing KOSN network and apparent gaps or other opportunities for enhancement or expansion, or through input received from the Project Planning Committee during the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a [further detailed in Section 4]). Newly created data will conform to accepted geospatial (mapping) standards and will be reviewed by the project team before incorporation in the KOSN dataset. Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 6 4. Parcel Selection Refinement 4.1 Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) The Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) is a working meeting of the Project Planning Committee to review the dataset of existing KOSN elements and opportunities for enhancement or expansion of the KOSN, and to edit or augment the dataset based on local, institutional knowledge of past KOSN development and current KOSN goals. During this workshop, the project team will learn about on-the- ground realities for expanding and improving access to open spaces in Kona. The project team will share the assembled database of parcels with the Project Planning Committee and confirm that we have captured a representative and inclusive list of existing KOSN elements and opportunities for enhancement or expansion of the KOSN. The initial data-gathering and network analysis efforts previously described are not anticipated to produce a comprehensive KOSN dataset, and the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) is a key component of data development that will help to capture less obvious hubs and links and refine the list of selected parcels. For example, if the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) indicates a priority for trails and greenways, the project team can focus their effort on refining the dataset of existing trails and identifying any existing trail connectivity issues. Or, for example, if the Project Planning Committee shows an interest in increasing access to schools or recreational areas, the project team can expand and highlight those features in the dataset. Tools to aid discussion and analysis at the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) will include, but will not be limited to:  Large format printed maps  A projector and screen for displaying digital GIS maps  Printed lists or spreadsheets of selected parcels with space for notes;  Computer workstation with access to the interactive ESRI mapping software Using these tools, the Project Planning Committee will be able to view the preliminary selection of KOSN elements and opportunities and edit or augment that selection. The goal of the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) is to easily and quickly identify data that were missed or that were included but should not have been added, and then to edit that data in real time. The data editing process may be manual (drawing on paper maps or adding notes to printed lists or spreadsheets) or digital (dropping pins on interactive GIS maps or editing attributes of GIS features). Important characteristics of the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) venue include tables, open walls to hang a projector screen, functioning electrical connections, and functioning internet connectivity. 4.2 Refined Selected Parcel Dataset At the end of the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a), a refined selection of parcels will be determined that can be further attributed (detailed in Section 5) and then scored against a set of criteria and prioritized (further described in the Scoring and Prioritization, provided under separate cover). The project team will consolidate the initial desktop review and preliminary network analysis with the edits and additional data received during the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a), to produce a refined list of parcels or easements for County review. The refined list (dataset) of selected parcels will include a robust collection of attributes (described in Section 5) to evaluate during the next project work phase, Scoring and Prioritization Workshop. Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 7 5. Parcel Data Attribution To support parcel evaluation during the upcoming Scoring and Prioritization Workshop (Workshop 2b), the project team will develop uniform attributes for each parcel or easement. Table 1 through Table 3 illustrate an example of data attributes (columns of information) for a hypothetical opportunity to enhance an existing park. This data attribution would occur before the scoring of parcels and primarily serves to populate the minimum necessary information (attributes) for each selected parcel to allow for uniform evaluation against chosen criteria. It also would serve as an initial feasibility screening to help focus further investigation. Attributes that will be populated for each selected parcel include, but are not limited to:  Physical location of each parcel (for example, address, tax map key (TMK) number, or longitude/latitude)  Brief description of the parcel or location  Classification of the parcel as a hub or linkage  KOSN element type (for example, natural habitat, community space, cultural site)  Brief description of existing KOSN element or future opportunity  Benefits of enhancement or inclusion in KOSN  Barriers to enhancement or inclusion in KOSN  Data source  Internal comments  Project timing (for enhancement or expansion opportunities)  Project phasing (single project or part of a larger program) Some parcels may satisfy more than one value for each attribute. For example, a parcel may serve as both natural habitat and a community space. Existing KOSN hubs or linkages may also qualify as future opportunities for enhancement (the parcel may currently serve as a hub or linkage but would benefit from investment in enhanced amenities or signage). The selected parcel database will capture instances where a parcel has more than one value for each attribute. Table 1. Example of Initial Assessment ID Address TMK Number Location as defined by community Hub or Linkage Short Name KOSN Element Type Benefits Initial Barriers Sample 1 1 Main Street Sample A park next to our elementary school Hub Kahakai Elementary School North Park Expansion Community Space for children and local neighborhood Property Availability ID = identification Table 2. Example of Data Review Geographic Unit Source Description Internal Comments Project Phasing Neighborhood, Census Tract, Other StoryMap Drop a Pin Area available, close to Aliʻi Drive Revisit with School Single Project Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 8 Table 3. Example of Initial Review Project Timing Map ID Immediate 19.614573004083137, −155.97843776363084 5.1 Prioritization and Concept Plans Later steps in the KOSN development process, which are described in the Scoring and Prioritization Methodology technical memorandum (provided under separate cover) and shown in the concept plans, will result a refined list of opportunities, clarified and scored in an understandable way. The Project Planning Committee will describe how the list of opportunities is prioritized as a whole, how prioritization can be adjusted to fit future needs, and how to focus on the opportunities that perform well against our listed criteria. Because a network of hubs and links within the Kona community are being assessed, opportunities as a part of a whole working together, rather than individual opportunities in isolation, is needed. The concept plans, which will be developed as a later step in the KOSN development process, will tie individual opportunities for enhancement or expansion of the KOSN into systematic alternatives that maximize the benefits of the KOSN. 6. Parcel Categorization As appropriate, the following groupings will be used to categorize and organize parcels by type. These lists will grow and shift over time. Table 4 through Table 8 repeat examples provided in the Literature and Resource Review and Scope of Work.  General Elements of Open Space - Hubs - Linkages  Natural Elements of Open Space - Coastal Corridor Natural Areas - Shorelines - Greenway Corridors - Drainage, Floodways, and Flood zones - Watershed Management and Recharge Priority Areas - Forest Reserves, Critical Habitat, and NARs  Social and Community Elements of Open Space - Open Space Education and Natural Heritage Programs - County, State, and Federal Areas - Community Gathering Spaces - Bike Lanes, Paths, and Facilities - Accessibility, Active Transportation, Micro mobility, and Shared Use Mobility - Transport Corridors  Cultural Elements of Open Space - Historic, Ancient, or Natural Area Trails - Protected and Managed Cultural and Historic Sites - Historic, Urban, and Natural Trails and Recreational Spaces - Game Management Areas Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 9 This organization of open space parcels into hubs and linkages, and natural, community, and cultural types allows us to categorize and identify a wide range of parcels that could be considered as part of the existing and future KOSN. This general categorization can be divided into more specific categories with associated examples, as shown in Table 4 through Table 8. This list may grow and change as parcel data are collected and as more information about the existing KOSN and opportunities for enhancement or expansion are gathered. Table 4. Examples of Hubs Hub Types Examples Educational Spaces  Schools  Libraries  Community centers Recreational Spaces  Parks  Playgrounds  Sport fields  Ballparks  Skateparks  Surf spots  Bodysurfing spots  Private recreation (golf, tourism, pools, etc.) Coastal Corridor Natural Areas  Kaloko-Honokōhau National Park  NELHA  Oʻoma Beach  Beaches  Shoreline access areas  Specific snorkeling, diving, and surfing areas Community Gathering Spaces  Hale Hālāwai  Makaʻeo Pavilion  Civic centers  Plazas  Community gardens Protected and Managed Public Cultural and Historic Sites  Heiau  Huliheʻe Palace  Burial grounds  Historic sites  Sacred landscapes Natural or Climate Change Hazard Areas  Riparian buffers  Green infrastructure  Ecosystem services (zones or corridors) Scenic View Areas and Visual Character Spaces  Areas of scenic beauty and expansive views Culturally Significant Natural Areas and Sensitive Natural Resource Areas  Community-favored natural spaces  Identified protected spaces Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 10 Table 5. Examples of Linkages Linkage Types Examples Shorelines  Kona Community Development Plan vision of 17-mile-long stretch of protected open coastline from Makaʻeo north to Kīkaua Point  Shoreline setbacks  Shoreline linear parks  Beaches Historic, Ancient, or Natural Area Trails  Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail  Nā Ala Hele trails Formal Transportation Assets  Walua Road walking and bike path  Old West Hawaiʻi Railroad bed  Ane Keohokālole Highway walking and bike path  Kona Village Grand Aliʻi Esplanade  Scenic heritage corridors (Aliʻi Drive)  Connections to multimodal transportation hubs and key destinations Linear Natural Spaces  Mauka-makai connector paths and greenways  Urban trail network  Greenbelt  Greenway  Flood mitigation areas  Native ecosystem corridors  Learning landscapes  Regional contour corridors  Flood corridors and flood contour swales mauka = mountain, makai = ocean Table 6. Examples of Natural Spaces Natural Space Types Examples Nearshore Marine Ecosystems  Coral reefs  Wetlands  Anchialine ponds Native Plant Ecosystems  Native dryland forests  Native plant coastal regions Subsistence and Gathering Landscapes  Coastal zones  Coconut groves  Loko iʻa (Native Hawaiian fish ponds)  Cordage gardens  Laʻau lapaʻau (Native Hawaiian traditional medicine practice with plants)  Kalo loʻi (Native Hawaiian taro farm)  Productive agricultural landscapes Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 11 Natural Space Types Examples Mauka Forest Watershed Recharge Areas  Mauka forest areas and other watershed recharge in the study area Stream and Flood Channel Riparian Areas and Buffers  As identified by state geospatial resources Hazard Areas Benefiting from Open Space Integration  Wildfire risk  Lava risk  Severe storm or hurricane  Flooding from intense rainfalls  Erosion and runoff of soils, pollutants, and biological hazards  Tsunami  Sea level rise leading to coastal erosion or subsidence  Rising temperatures, humidity, and heat index  Strong wind Table 7. Examples of Social and Community Spaces Parks, playgrounds, and recreational areas Trails, bike paths, and greenways Community gardens and urban farming initiatives Libraries and community centers Museums and art galleries Public swimming pools and aquatic centers Senior centers and facilities for the elderly Youth centers and after-school programs Sports facilities and athletic complexes Health clinics and medical facilities Hospitals and emergency services Public transportation systems, including bus and subway lines Fire stations and police stations Community schools and educational institutions Daycare centers and childcare facilities Shelters and food banks Civic and cultural centers Theaters and performance venues Multi-use facilities, such as community centers that offer a variety of services Recycling centers and waste management facilities Community radio stations and media centers Community service agencies, such as job training and placement services Neighborhood associations and community-based organizations Public markets and farmers markets Historical and heritage sites Natural areas and wildlife preserves Science centers and planetariums Transit-oriented development, such as mixed-use development around transit hubs Emergency response centers and disaster preparedness facilities Kona Open Space Network, Parcel Selection Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 12 Table 8. Examples of Cultural Spaces ʻAhuʻena Heiau Heiau—Hāpaialiʻi and Keʻekū Kamehameha III Birthplace Kona Hawaiian Quilt Museum and Gallery Kona Cloud Forest Sanctuary Kona Historical Society & H.N. Greenwell Store Museum Kuʻemanu Heiau Kona Point 1871 Trail Historical Helani Congregational Church Kaloko-Honokōhau National Historic Park Honuaʻula Forest Reserve Royal Footsteps Makaʻeo Walking Path Walua Road Walking and Bike Path Appendix J: Scoring and Priorities Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology Document No.: 230929115238_b04a997b Version: 0 Kona Open Space Network Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b i Executive Summary The Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) Scoring and Prioritization Methodology describes the process for scoring each parcel based on the criteria identified at the Parcel Selection Workshop by the Project Planning Committee. The KOSN Scoring and Prioritization Methodology is a systematic approach to assess and rank parcels of land based on specific criteria related to natural, community, and cultural benefits. By following a structured approach and using predetermined criteria, the project team aims to reduce the likelihood of bias in parcel selection and prioritization. It is designed to ensure fairness, transparency, and alignment with other components of the KOSN planning process, ultimately leading to informed decision- making regarding the selection and prioritization of parcels for the project. The collaborative approach ensures that various perspectives and expertise are considered. The Scoring and Prioritization Methodology aligns with the Literature Review, the Public Engagement Plan, and the Parcel Selection Methodology, thereby ensuring consistency and coherence in the decision-making process. Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b ii Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ i Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................... iii 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 2. Confirm Selected Parcels from Parcel Selection Workshop ........................................................................ 1 2.1 Confirm List of Parcels .............................................................................................................................................1 2.2 Revise and Update Parcel Visualization (Mapping) ......................................................................................1 2.3 Adjust Parcel Grouping ............................................................................................................................................2 3. Define Scoring Criteria, Scoring Scale, and Weighting Scale ...................................................................... 2 3.1 Scoring Criteria ............................................................................................................................................................2 3.2 Scoring Scale................................................................................................................................................................2 3.3 Weighting Scale ..........................................................................................................................................................2 4. Preliminary Scoring ............................................................................................................................................... 4 5. Score and Prioritize Parcels Against Criteria ................................................................................................... 4 5.1 Scoring and Prioritization Workshop (Workshop 2b) ..................................................................................4 5.1.1 Discuss and Finalize the Proposed Scoring Criteria ........................................................................4 5.1.2 Prioritize Scoring Criteria ...........................................................................................................................5 5.1.3 Score Each Parcel Grouping or Individual Parcel Against the Scoring Criteria .....................5 6. Post-Workshop Edits ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Tables Table 1. Proposed Scoring Criteria ................................................................................................................................................3 Table 2. Proposed Scoring Scale for Scoring Criteria ............................................................................................................4 Table 3. Proposed Weighting Scale for Scoring Criteria .......................................................................................................4 Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b iii Acronyms and Abbreviations GIS geographic information systems KOSN Kona Open Space Network PEP Public Engagement Plan TMK tax map key Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 1 1. Introduction This Scoring and Prioritization Methodology describes how parcels identified through the Parcel Selection Workshop (Workshop 2a) will be scored based on a set of identified criteria for natural, community, and cultural open space benefits. The project team will prepare proposed criteria statements, proposed scoring scales and weighted values, preliminary scoring, and materials, such as spreadsheets and geographic information systems (GIS) mapping visualizations of parcels, for the Scoring and Prioritization Workshop (Workshop 2b). At this workshop, the Project Planning Committee will review and finalize the scoring criteria, prioritize scoring criteria with assigned weighted values and, score and prioritize parcels against the criteria. The Scoring and Prioritization Methodology falls into the following main steps: 1. Confirm list of selected parcels from Workshop 2a. 2. Define scoring criteria, scoring scale, and weighting scale. 3. Determine preliminary scoring. 4. Score and prioritize parcels against criteria. 5. Provide post-workshop edits. The Scoring and Prioritization Workshop (Workshop 2b) with the Project Planning Committee is a pivotal step within the Kona Open Space Network (KOSN) planning process. It involves the collective assessment, scoring, and prioritization of parcels against established criteria, with the active participation of the Project Planning Committee. The workshop helps ensure that the scoring and prioritization of parcels aligns with the projectʻs objectives and takes into account the diverse perspectives and expertise of the Project Planning Committee. 2. Confirm Selected Parcels from Parcel Selection Workshop 2.1 Confirm List of Parcels The Parcel Selection Methodology describes how the Kona urban project area will be analyzed to select various parcels or easements for inclusion in the KOSN. The final list of parcels that will be identified through the parcel selection work process will be scored and prioritized, as described further in this technical memorandum. Before scoring and prioritization, the Project Planning Committee will confirm that the list of selected parcels is inclusive and captures a complete set of potential parcels for inclusion in the KOSN. 2.2 Revise and Update Parcel Visualization (Mapping) The project team will revise and update ArcGIS layers that were used to visualize the list of parcels during the parcel selection work process. The ArcGIS layers (mapping) will be revised to incorporate revisions to the confirmed list of parcels, enabling the Project Planning Committee to see and assess the potential areas for enhancement or expansion of the KOSN at the Scoring and Prioritization Workshop (Workshop 2b). ArcGIS visualization will help people to conceptualize the open spaces, and the ability to hide and view different layers with clear labels and colors will help to streamline the scoring process. Using the GIS enhances the decision-making process by providing spatial context, facilitating real-time collaboration, and improving the clarity of information. Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 2 2.3 Adjust Parcel Grouping The project team will adjust the grouping of parcels by location and general category focus (for example, parks, beaches, trails, recreational spaces, cultural spaces) based on feedback received from the Project Planning Committee following Workshop 2a. Parcels grouping will be revised as necessary to streamline the evaluation and scoring process in Workshop 2b. For example, shoreline access areas and beaches along the Kona coast could be grouped together and then scored together, since they can function as a connected network of protected coastal areas. While initial parcel groups will have been developed during Workshop 2a, these groups may need to be refined before Workshop 2b, to maximize efficiency during the Parcel Scoring and Prioritization Workshop. Not all parcels may fit into a group; parcels that do not fall into a group can be stand-alone and be scored individually. 3. Define Scoring Criteria, Scoring Scale, and Weighting Scale 3.1 Scoring Criteria The project team proposes this set of criteria (Table 1) to score the list of parcels considered for inclusion in the KOSN. The Project Planning Committee is not limited to this proposed set of criteria, and the committee will have the opportunity to add or remove criteria during the Scoring and Prioritization Workshop (Workshop 2b). In Table 1, criteria are segmented into five main categories: Hubs, Links, Natural Spaces, Community Spaces, and Cultural Spaces. These five categories cover the main goals and aspirations of the KOSN, which includes increasing accessibility to Kona’s open spaces to support the health and wellbeing of the community and preserve Kona’s sensitive natural and cultural resources. Scoring criteria are proposed for each of these five categories to ensure that the main goals of the KOSN are covered in the scoring process. 3.2 Scoring Scale Criteria are written in the form of a statement rather than a question, for criteria to be scored on a numeric scale measuring one’s qualitative agreement with the statement, where the following applies (Table 2):  -3 = strongly disagree  -1.5 = disagree  0 = neutral  1.5 = agree  3 = strongly agree Each scoring criteria will be scored on this -3, -1.5, 0, 1.5, 3 scale to maintain consistency across all scoring criteria. 3.3 Weighting Scale The information provided in Table 3 outlines a weighting system for the criteria used to assess parcels. This scoring system uses a scale of 1 to 3 for assigning weight values to each scoring criteria statement. The weight values are as follows:  Weight of 1: This weight implies that the criterion has the lowest priority in the evaluation process. When a criterion is assigned a weight of 1, the score for that criterion statement is multiplied by 1, which means it does not affect the overall score significantly. Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 3  Weight of 2: A weight of 2 indicates that the criterion is given a higher level of priority. When a criterion is assigned a weight of 2, the score for that criterion statement is multiplied by 2, which gives it greater influence on the overall score.  Weight of 3: A weight of 3 signifies that the criterion statement is of the highest priority in the evaluation process. When a criterion is assigned a weight of 3, the score for that criterion statement is multiplied by 3, giving it the greatest impact on the overall score. Each scoring criteria statement will be given a weighted value by the Project Planning Committee. The Project Planning Committee will discuss, agree upon, and finalize the scoring criteria, scoring scale, and weighting scale at the Scoring and Prioritization Workshop (Workshop 2b). Table 1. Proposed Scoring Criteria Scoring Criteria Category Scoring Criteria Statement Hubs This parcel (that is, space, place, or asset) brings people together. Links This parcel (that is, link or corridor) connects one or more community hubs to other community hubs or connects directly to community transportation corridors. Natural Spaces This parcel preserves a natural resource or natural space. Natural Spaces (Coastal Corridors) This parcel protects and/or increases access to the shoreline or ocean. Natural Spaces (Fresh Water) This parcel positively impacts the quality and quantity of the community’s fresh water supply or aquifer. Natural Spaces (Habitat) This parcel protects natural habitats and natural corridors. Natural Spaces (Co- benefit) This parcel benefits the current ecosystem services or addresses conflicts between the built and natural environments. Community Spaces This parcel enhances the existing network of social and community spaces. Community Space (Heritage and Education) This parcel provides an opportunity to educate, learn, and/or share heritage. Community Space (Public Property) This parcel protects and leverages the benefit of an existing open space public property. *This includes linear property assets like bike paths and trails. Cultural Spaces This parcel celebrates the unique culture, heritage, and/or history of Kona, the Island of Hawaiʻi, and/or the State of Hawaiʻi. Cultural Spaces (Local Focus) This parcel preserves or enhances natural spaces that directly benefit the local Kona community and residents. Cultural Spaces (Native Hawaiian Focus) This parcel preserves or enhances spaces with Native Hawaiian cultural significance. Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 4 Table 2. Proposed Scoring Scale for Scoring Criteria Score Value Qualitative Assessment for the Scoring Criteria -3 Strongly Disagree -1.5 Disagree 0 Neutral 1.5 Agree 3 Strongly Agree Table 3. Proposed Weighting Scale for Scoring Criteria Weight Value Mathematical Result Qualitative Assessment 1 Multiply the score value by 1 No Priority 2 Multiply the score value by 2 High Priority 3 Multiply the score value by 3 Highest Priority 4. Preliminary Scoring The project team will preliminarily score each of the parcel groupings and any individual parcels using the -3 to 3 scoring scale, referencing the Literature and Resource Review, web resources, and GIS visualizations as a knowledge reference for scoring the parcels. This initial scoring provides a baseline assessment of the parcels’ attributes, considering factors like ecological significance, community benefits, and cultural importance. The scoring scale ranging from -3 to 3 provides a wide spectrum of potential scores, allowing for a nuanced evaluation of parcels, as scores can represent negative impacts, neutral factors, or positive attributes of each parcel. Preliminary scoring will help accelerate the workshop process and will allow the Project Planning Committee to focus on refining and reaching consensus on the scores. 5. Score and Prioritize Parcels Against Criteria 5.1 Scoring and Prioritization Workshop (Workshop 2b) At the Scoring and Prioritization Workshop, the Project Planning Committee will:  Discuss and finalize the proposed scoring criteria.  Prioritize (weight) scoring criteria.  Score each parcel grouping or individual parcel against the scoring criteria. 5.1.1 Discuss and Finalize the Proposed Scoring Criteria The Scoring and Prioritization Workshop will commence with a discussion of the preliminary scoring conducted in preparation of the workshop. The Project Planning Community members will have the opportunity to review and provide input on the criteria statements to ensure they accurately reflect the project’s goals and objectives. Any necessary adjustments or clarifications can be made during this discussion. If committee members propose a change, the larger group will vote on the change. The change will be implemented if there is majority vote. Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 5 5.1.2 Prioritize Scoring Criteria The committee will then prioritize (weight) the scoring criteria statements themselves on a 1, 2, 3 scale, where 1 is no priority, 2 is high priority, and 3 is highest priority. For example, committee members may think that the natural coastal scoring criteria is a higher priority than a cultural scoring criterion. This prioritization (weighting) exercise will be carried out through an interactive voting exercise. Each committee member assigns a 1, 2, or 3 priority weighted value to each of the scoring criteria statements, and the majority weighted value will “win” and be assigned to that criterion. For example, committee members could be given post-it notes—with the numbers 1, 2, and 3 written on them—to place under each of the criteria on a large poster paper. After the majority votes for weighted values are identified, the committee will discuss the results. During this discussion, committee members will have the opportunity to suggest adjusting any of the weighted value assignments and provide reasoning for the adjustment. The group can then vote on whether the adjustment should be implemented. 5.1.3 Score Each Parcel Grouping or Individual Parcel Against the Scoring Criteria After weighted values are assigned to the scoring criteria, the committee will review the preliminary scores provided by the project team. The committee will run through each parcel grouping or individual parcel against the scoring criteria and propose any edits to the preliminary scores. Since the total parcel list will likely be long, the project team recommends assessing the parcels in the groupings by category, which were made during Workshop 2a and refined ahead of Workshop 2b. Committee members will engage in open discussions about the parcels, and members will be free to suggest changes or edits to any of the preliminary scores. If a majority of the committee group collectively agrees to the scoring change, then the new score will be assigned. After scoring for all parcel groupings or individual parcels has been discussed, the project team will verify the scoring scales and the weighted values. Data verification allows a review of the results and helps determine if the data created reflect the understanding of the Project Planning Committee. For example, if natural open spaces were scoring lower than community open spaces, but this was not reflective of the discussion during Workshop 2b, the individual scores will be examined to ensure that scales and weighted values are accurate and representative of the committee’s thoughts and vision for the KOSN. Scoring scale numeric values could be shifted further apart, for example, using a scale of -5, -2.5, 0, 2.5, and 5. Weighted values could also be adjusted so that the multiplying factor accurately prioritizes some criteria over others, in line with the thoughts expressed by committee members. 5.1.3.1 Recording Scoring Input at the Workshop The project team will record changes to scores on an Excel spreadsheet, which will be projected on a large screen for in-person attendees. For online attendees, the spreadsheet will be shared on-screen on the Zoom meeting platform. The spreadsheet will have rows for each parcel grouping or individual parcel and columns for each scoring criteria. During the meeting, the consultant will type in scores into the cells as the group provides scores for each of the scoring criteria. The committee will then be able to see up-to- date scoring and input during the meeting to avoid any confusion between members. Kona Open Space Network, Scoring and Prioritization Methodology 230929115238_b04a997b 6 5.1.3.2 Utilizing ArcGIS Visualizations During the workshop, the Project Planning Committee will look at ArcGIS visualizations of the parcels prepared previously by the project team. With the ArcGIS visualizations, the committee will be able to see where parcels are located within the KOSN project area and how parcels may be connected to other spaces, such as community, coastal, natural, and culturally significant areas. The project team will share access to the ArcGIS visualizations digitally with the committee, so members will be able to view the parcels on their personal computers, tablets, or mobile devices. The project team will also print out large copies of maps with the project area boundary and parcel areas clearly marked. 5.1.3.3 Prioritizing Parcels Excel spreadsheet formulas will be used to automate calculations for the total scores, using multiplication by the weighted values. The parcels will be ordered from highest total score to lowest total score. The highest scoring parcels will be prioritized for inclusion in the KOSN and prioritized for further investigation during development of the concept plans. 6. Post-Workshop Edits After the workshop, the Project Planning Committee will have the opportunity to provide post-workshop suggestions. The committee will be given the up-to-date version of the parcels and their scores, as well as edits made during the workshop. Members can review the scores and weighted values independently, in their own time, and provide feedback that the project team can use to finalize the prioritization. Members can provide comments or edits to the project team, who will compile comments from members into a single document. The project team will then send the full list of comments out to the Project Planning Committee for agreement with the suggested changes.