Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026 10 21 Exhibits A-1 to A-52_v1.pdfEXHIBIT A-1 EXHIBIT A-2 u a n - t` SAY / illir ' /fl i / I R ,ors r '9. � S •,� 'tom. � „ _ J' 3 Pa t 1 d f^ t r " � �— ` � 'yr ,�,. :•ky�����y � R a,l r r 1',,a �` � vt% °4'< F �y*"�,� �. z s F e � a � �w f� r, I* li9v ;�� � „!fib k ar f' a.r"• `;! �' � �.:,�` �. \ �y a . �•�`�"�� .. / �" �.. II1 ^ f rY �+n � ,yw f lap, M sro IA ^N c 4 EXHIBIT A-3 EXHIBIT A-4 Hawai Puna H -00821 'zN REPORT 72-3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE of PROPOSED KAPOHO-KALAPANA HIGHWAY, DISTRICT of PUNA, ISLAND of HAWAII by ROBERT F. BEVACQUA T140MAS S. DYE Prepared for: Sam U. Hirota, Inc, and Department of Public Works County of Hawaii June 1972 Department of Anthropology Bcrnicc P Bishop Museum Honolulu, Hawaii EXHIBIT "A-4" Report 1972-3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNAISSANCE OF P R O P O S E D K A P 0 H 0- K A L A P A N A H I G H W A Y, DISTRICT OF PUN A, ISLAND OF H A W A I I by ROBERT F. BEVACQUA and THOMAS S. DYE for SAM 0. HIROTA, INC. and DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS County of Hawaii June 1972 Department of Anthropology BERNICE P. BISHOP MUSEUM Honolulu, Hawaii Copyright © by Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, 1972 ABSTRACT The archaeological reconnaissance reported here was conducted by Bernice P. Bishop Museum for Sam 0. Hirota, Inc. and the Depart- ment of Public Works, County of Hawaii, from February 21 through June 10, 1972. The purpose was to locate, describe, and evaluate the archaeological sites within the corridor of the proposed Kapoho- Kalapana highway. Forty-eight sites --including two heiau, eight clusters of Petro- - glyphs, four platforms, six enclosures, five cemeteries, three trails, 14 site complexes, two ponds, a mound, a lava tube, a coffee mill, and a village --are discussed in this report. Based on a synthesis of field and literary data, the sites are evaluated according to their historical and archaeological importance, their interest to the general public, and the desirability of further study. A . The results of this survey will enable the highway planners to design the highway so as to avoid unnecessary destruction of the sites and at the same time make the sites accessible to Hawaii's public. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The final publication of this report represents the concerted labors of numerous individuals, to whom we are deeply indebted. Thanks go to the staff of Sam 0. Hirota, Inc., who foresaw the need for this archaeological survey and who graciously co- operated with us during every phase of the project. Appreciation is extended to the staff members of the Bishop Museum who unsparingly contributed to the completion of this project: Yosihiko Sinoto for his able administration of the project; Peter Gilpin, Maile Moore, and Mary Rosendahl for their preparation of the graphic materials;Janet Gordon for her tech- nical editing; Dorothy Barrere and Marion Kelly for consulting with us on historical matters; and Alverna Yuen and Freddie Harby for typing the manuscript. The authors are particularly indebted to their field crew-- ' Neal Oshima, Tony Maiava, Cathy Azar, Nancy Newhall, and Arie Korwa--for their interest and enthusiasm in the project. Special thanks go to Paul Rosendahl and Rob Hommon, Bishop Museum Archaeologists,for their thorough review of the report manuscript. iv CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 PHYSICAL SETTING . . . . . . . . . . 3 CULTURAL BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 = PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH . . . . . 5 FIELD PROCEDURES . . . 6 SITE DESCRIPTIONS AND EVALUATIONS . . . 7 SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Appendix A. Detailed Maps Showing Locations of Sites in Categories I, II, and IV . . . . . . . . 26 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 TABLE Table 1 Inventory of sites and their evaluation categories . 25 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure — I Composite location map showing Kapoho-Kalapana Project Area . . . . 2 2 Plan view of Kukii Heiau, Site 2500 . . . . . . . . . 9 3 Dressed stone at Kukii Heiau, Site 2500 . 10 4 Kapoho petroglyphs, Site 2501 . . . . . . 12 5 Plan view of Mahinaakaka Heiau and Keahialaka Ponds, Sites 2517 and 2518 . . . . . . . 16 _ 6 Probable burial platform, Site 2523 . . . . . 18 7 Plan view of petroglyphs, Site 2529 . . . 19 8 Kehena Beach Trail, Site 2540 . . . . . . . . . . . 22 W 9 Project area, showing distribution of archaeological sites 45 -- v Figure Page 10 Site 2500, Kukii Heiau, Category I . . . . . 27 _ 11 Site 2501, scattered petroglyphs on the exterior of Kapoho Crater, Category I . 28 12 Site 2502, Pualaa Village, Category I . . . 29 13 Site 2504, platform, Category II; Site 2505, - Complex, Category II . 30 14 Site 2510, Pohoiki Warm Spring; Site 2511, old coffee mill, Category I; Site 2514, platform, Category IV 31 — 15 Site 2516, complex, Category II; Site 2517, Mahinaakaka Heiau, Category I; Site 2518, Keahialaka Pond, Category I; — Site 2519, Hale Family Cemetery, Category IV . . 32 16 Site 2523, platform, Category I; Site 2525, petroglyphs, — Category II; Site 2527, petroglyphs, Category II; Site 2528, petroglyphs, Category II 33 17 Site 2529, petroglyphs, Category I; Site 2530, King's Highway, Categories I and III . 34 18 Site 2532, platform, Category II . 35 — 19 Site 2533, complex, Category II . . . . 36 20 Site 2534, Pua'akanu Cemetery, Category IV 37 21 Site 2535, trail, Category II . 38 22 Site 2536, complex, Category II; Site 2538, cemetery, Category IV . 39 23 Site 2539, cemetery, Category IV; Site 25400 Kehena Beach Trail, Categories I and III 40 24 Site 2544, petroglyphs, Category II; Site 2545, petroglyphs, Category II 41 25 Site 2547, Kaipuuelelu Cemetery, Category IV 42 — vi INTRODUCTION The proposal to build a highway along the Puna coastline connecting Kapoho and Kalapana (Fig. 1) raised the problem of how the highway could be aligned to avoid the unnecessary de- struction of Hawaii's archaeological sites. To resolve this problem, Sam 0. Hirota, Inc., and the Department of Public Works, County of Hawaii, planners of the highway, contracted with Bernice P. Bishop Museum to conduct a study of the archae- ological resources of the highway corridor. The goal of the study was to locate, describe, and evaluate the more signifi- cant sites within the affected area, a corridor 15 miles long by 2000 ft wide. The results of this study, presented in this report, will enable the planners to design the highway so that _ the important sites can be preserved and incorporated into the overall appeal of the scenic highway. The archaeological study was structured in two distinct parts, field and laboratory. The six weeks of field work broadly focused on compiling information, in the form of maps and a descriptive catalogue of sites, about the archaeological resources of the cor- ridor area. The laboratory work consisted of analyzing the field data and reviewing the literature relevant to the study --such as Hawaiian traditions, missionary journals, historical accounts, and manuscripts of previous archaeological research. The field data were then synthesized with the literary data to formulate an eval- uation for each site. The evaluation is primarily based on the site's historical and archaeological importance, its condition, its interest to the general public, and the desirability of further study. - It was originally intended to structure the study so as to be able to cope with all the archaeological sites within the project area, but because of the limiting factors of finances and time the T scope of the program was narrowed to deal only with the more sig- nificant sites. The study is thus limited to reconnaissance; however, this narrowed scope does not detract from the goal of the study, since during the field work extensive knowledge of all the archaeological features in the corridor was gained. Equipped with this knowledge it was possible to compile an inventory of sites that included both the more important sites and a representative sample of sites. Thus, though not containing a complete list of sites, this report does realistically represent the archaeological resources of the project area. -1- 14. 1ss- NIIHAUn KAUAI PACIFIC OCEAN OAHUQ�� MOLOKAI LANAI QD MAUI KAHOOLAWE THE HAWAII ISLANDS HAWAII 0 100 200 kilometers H ILO KAILUA CAPIE KUMUKAHI PROJECT AREA ALAPANA approx. / 0 s0 100 SOUTH POINT kilometers Fig. 1. COMPOSITE LOCATION MAP SHOWING KAPOHO-KALAPANA PROJECT AREA. -2- PHYSICAL SETTING The District of Puna lies between the Districts of Hilo to the N and Ka'u to the S, and extends from the great promontory of Cape Kumukahi on the E to the forested slopes of Mauna Loa on the W. Geologically, Puna is dominated by the E rift zone of Kilauea Volcano, which begins at Kilauea and extends 52 km to Cape Kumukahi. The length of the rift zone is marked by more than 60 cinder and spatter cones (Macdonald, 1941:1), by earthquake faults, and by numerous lava and steam vents. The land formation is composed of overlapping basaltic lava flows that originated from vents in the rift zone. Topography is relatively smooth, with some undulations corresponding to the form of the underlying lava flows. Puna's extremely rugged coast was formed by the erosion of the numerous lava flows by wave action. This erosive process created a coastline of low, sheer cliffs, interspersed with occasional beaches of black sand or boulders. Because of its favorable position in the path of the prevailing NE tradewinds, Puna is well endowed with orographic rainfall. The moisture - laden tradewinds, forced upward by the Puna land mass, cool and condense into clouds and rain, resulting in relatively high annual rainfall--50 to 150 in. --for the project area (Newman, 1970:21). Drainage is eastward, following the sloping terrain toward the sea. Drainage systems are poorly — defined, with no perennial streams and only a few intermittent ones. There are two general types of flora in the project area--'ohi'a forest, and stands of diverse native vegetation. The forest areas are dominated by the 'Ohi'a-Zehua tree, a species endemic to Hawaii and a hardy pioneer tree that is usually the first to establish itself on new lava flows. 'Ohi'a forests cover much of inland Puna and also portions of the coastline, accounting for the majority of the _ vegetation present on the lava flows. Usually present in the 'ahi'a forests are a variety of ferns, mosses, and lichens. The secondary vegetation is characterized by its diversity and its indigenous character. This vegetation is usually found in coastal areas undisturbed by recent lava flows and includes such native plants as naupaka- kahakai (Scaevola colZina subsp. polymorpha), hau (Hibiscus titiaceous), milo (Thespesia populnea), kou (Cordia subcordata), kamani (CalophylZum inophy Nwn), ncni (Morinda eitrifoZia), ki, or ti (Cordyline terminaZis), 'uZu (Artocarpus connunis), haZa (Pandanus odoratissimus), niu, or coconut palm (Cocos nucifera), moa (Psilotum nudwn), and pohuehue (Ipomea pes-caprae). In addition to these native plants, several recently introduced species are present, such as guava (Psidiwn guajava) and (Psidiwn eattleianum), lantana (Lantana cwnara), mango (Mangifera indica), and koa haole (Leucaena glauca) (Latin names from Neal, 1965). - 3- CULTURAL BACKGROUND The District of Puna, originally one of the six chiefdoms or moku of the Island of Hawaii, never played a dominant role in shaping the course of history of the Island of Hawaii. Unlike the other.districts, no great chiefs or families rose to a powerful position in the centuries of see- sawing power struggles that have marked Hawaii's history. Puna's fertile _ lands were desirable and were eagerly sought] however, their control did not depend on the conquering of Puna itself, but rather on control of the adjacent districts of Ka'u and Hilo. An attempt to follow in detail the course of Puna's history is therefore difficult, since, traditionally, her history is bound up with the fortunes of the ruling families on either side of her (Emory, Barrere, et al., n. d.:15) . One of the most interesting aspects of early Puna is that Hawaiians believe, and their traditions imply, that it was once Hawaii's richest agricultural region and that it is only in relatively recent time that volcanic eruptions have destroyed much of the finest garden lands (Handy, 1972:542). Excepting those areas devasted by lava, Puna's soil is quite fertile and has supported a variety of crops including taro, sweet potatoes, breadfruit, coconuts, and sugarcane (Handy, 1972:539-42; Cordy, n.d.:21). On the basis of information compiled by Handy (1972:541), distinct crop patterns can be delineated for certain areas within the present project area. Upland Kalapana and upland Kaimu formerly supported fields of taro, while Makena and lower Kaimu supported sweet potatoes, but not taro. Kikala and Keakea, being mostly barren pahoehoe lava, supported neither crop. Keauohana, Kehena, Ke'eke'e, Kamaili, Kaueleau, and Opihikao used to be planted to dry taro more or less throughout their inland areas. The interior of Kapoho Crater was, "...almost entirely laid out in plantations —in a high state of cultivation, planted with taro, bananas, and sugar cane" (Ellis, 1969:297-298) . The first foreigners to walk along the coast of Puna were undoubtedly William Ellis and his fellow missionaries Asa Thurston and Artemas Bishop, who toured the Island of Hawaii in 1823. Ellis left a vivid description of the flourishing native life the missionaries witnessed during their journey through Puna (1969). While traveling from Kalapana to Kapoho, the missionaries preached to the inhabitants of seven villages--Kaimu, Keauohana, Kehena, Kamaili, Opihikao, Kauaea, Keahialaka, and Pualaa--with a combined population of approximately 2100 (Crozier and Barr -ere, 1971:9-10). Ellis described the villages as pleasant, populous, and prosperous, with their residents employed in fishing and tending their extensive agricultural plantations. r In 1835 the Reverend Titus Coan assumed control of the Hilo Mission - station, where, during his nearly 50-year career, he became a major influence in the lives of the people in the Districts of Hilo and Puna. Coan is best remembered for zealous mission.work and a thorough indoctri- nation of the people. This Christian indoctrination has had lasting effects, for few traditions and legends survive of Puna's pre -missionary past (Crozier and Barrere, 1971:11). -4- In late 1848 and early 1849 a succession of epidemics swept through the Island of Hawaii, carrying off 1000 people in Reverend Coan's two districts of Hilo and Puna. From this time on, the population of Puna steadily declined from natural attrition among the weakened people (Barrera and Barrere, 1971:7). The gradual abandonment of the native agricultural systems which began in 1840 (Cordy, n.d.:21) was followed, in the late 1800s, by the gradual emergence of new land uses, such as ranching, and coffee and sugarcane cultivation. Now, in the mid-20th century, only sugar cultivation remains an important concern in Puna; ranching and coffee pursuits have drastically declined. Also important at present is the cultivation of papayas, anthuriums, and orchids. PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH The earliest contribution to the archaeology of Puna was made by John F. G. Stokes. While engaged in, research on Hawaiian religious structures in 1906, Stokes described and mapped both Kukii and Mahinaakaka Heiau (n.d.) . In 1907, Thomas G. Thrum wrote an interesting account of Kukii Heiau and its unique dressed -stone construction (1907a:38-47). In 1930-32, Alfred Hudson conducted a reconnaissance survey of the E coast of the Island of Hawaii. His manuscript (n.d.) provides valuable general information on the archaeology of Puna,though a good many of the — sites he recorded have been destroyed by subsequent land development or lava flows. In 1959, the staff of the Bishop Museum, under the direction of Dr. Kenneth P. Emory, prepared a volume on the natural and cultural history of the Kalapana Extension of Hawaii National Park (n.d.). Though their report does not include the area encompassed by the present survey, — it does offer invaluable information about the history, traditions, and environmental setting of the District of Puna. — In 1970, Virginia H. Loo and William J. Bonk compiled an inventory of sites in the northern portion of the Island of Hawaii for the Planning Department, County of Hawaii. Their report (n.d.) includes a description — and evaluation of the more significant sites in the Districts of Kohala, Hamakua, Hilo, and Puna. J. Halley Cox and Edward Stasack discuss the petroglyphs in Puna, including those found at Kaukulau (1971). BIN Bishop Museum staff members Neal S. Crozier and Dorothy B. Barrere researched and reported on the ahupua'a of Pualaa (1971). This ahupua'a (Hawaiian land division), owned by the Bishop Estate, contains the nearly intact ruins of the Hawaiian village of Pualaa. Violet Hansen, Commissioner of Historic Sites for the Island of Hawaii, has photographed and recorded numerous sites throughout the Dis- trict of Puna. Her records, on file at Bishop Museum, proved to be a vital asset in the compilation of information for this report. Relative to other areas in the Hawaiian Islands, Puna thus has a rather extensive history of archaeological research, which was initially confined to the study of heiau but was later expanded to include general site surveys (Newman, 1968). Despite the number of surveys that have been conducted in Puna, however, no excavation programs have been attempted and no archaeological interpretations of Puna's prehistory have been offered. FIELD PROCEDURES The field crew consisted of a director, two supervisors, and four field assistants. The field work was carried out over a six -week period - beginning February 21 and ending April 3, 1972. The archaeological sites were located by walking coordinated sweeps _ through 'the project area. Sweep patterns were determined by the physio- graphic configuration of the area, vegetation cover, and the size of the survey team. During the survey, special attention was focused on thor- oughly searching the most likely alignment of the proposed highway. When an archaeological site was discovered, any obscuring vegetation was cleared to insure proper identification of the site and to facilitate mapping and recording. The metric system was employed in the recording of site information (1 meter equals 39.37 in.). A photograph was taken of each site and each important feature within a site. The sites were located on a master map by means of a transit using datum information provided by Sam 0. Hirota, Inc. The more notable sites were mapped in detail with a telescopic alidade and plane table. Sites were designated according to their formal or structural characteristics --for example, a designation of mound or platform --rather than according to inferred function (Hommon, 1970:74). Only in the instances where the literary data suggested a function was a function label used, such as Mahinaakaka Heiau or Pualaa Village. Many of the sites have been designated as complexes. A complex is simply a conve- nient designation for a composite site that includes several archaeolog- ical features. A feature is defined as an irreducible, non -portable, archaeological unit (Hommon 1970:74) and usually corresponds to a stone structure such as mound, wall, or enclosure. For example, site 2505 has been M - designated a complex; it consists of an aggregate of features including four enclosures, several walls, a mound, and a platform. Each site was assigned a site record number based on the State of Hawaii system fornumbering historic sites. Red and white flagging tapes, bearing the site number, were conspicuously tagged to each site. All site information --written descriptions, measurements, scale diagrams, compass bearings, and other pertinent observations --were recorded in the field on permanent site record forms, and will be kept on permanent file at the Department of Anthropology, Bishop Museum. RESULTS The results of the Kapoho-Kalapana survey are presented on the following pages. Each site is described and its historical and archae- ological significance is evaluated. Evaluations are based on a thorough visual examination of each site and consideration of its relation to proximate sites. On the basis of the evaluation, sites are placed in _ one of four categories. Criteria for the placement of sites in each category and specific recommendations concerning the future of the sites placed in each category are discussed below. Y Category I includes sites that are of interest to both the archae- ologist and the layman. They interest the archaeologist because they are unique, in good condition, exemplify a particular site type, exhibit the distinguishing characteristics of a particular site type, and, in some cases, possess sufficient cultural deposits to warrant further investigation. They interest the layman because they possess intangible qualities that enhance their appeal as vestiges of Hawaii's past. It is recommended that the sites in this category be protected until they can be thoroughly investigated by qualified archaeologists. Upon completion of the archaeological investigation, each site that can be restored should be stabilized and reconstructed by a trained and qualified crew, so that it resembles as nearly as possible the original site. The sites should then be made accessible to the public, either by incorporating them into existing parks or by designating the location of the site as a park. Category II includes sites that are of interest primarily to the archaeologist. These sites either possess an apparently rich cultural deposit or are of a type that offers potential insights into certain aspects of pre -contact Hawaiian culture. It is recommended that the sites in this category be protected until they can be thoroughly inves- tigated by a qualified archaeological team. At the conclusion of this thorough investigation each site in category II would be re-evaluated -7- and placed in categories I, III, or IV. The recommendations for the particular category would then apply to the re-evaluated site. Category III is composed of sites that are of little interest to even the archaeologist. Sites in this category include those with no cultural deposit, those of apparently recent origin, and those that have been thoroughly investigated and have been found to be of little or no interest to the layman. All of the information that can be extracted from these sites has been collected. They are not recommended for protection and no further archaeological investigation need be conducted. Category IV consists solely of burial sites. It is recommended that these sites be protected, but no further archaeological work is desirable. It should be noted that if any burial site described here, or any burial within an existing cemetery,is in danger of being disturbed, the appro- priate official in the Department of Health in Hilo must be contacted and appropriate plans must be made to relocate the burial to a place where there is no danger of its being disturbed. SITE 2500 - KUKII HEIAU Category I Kukii Heiau, situated on the summit of Kukii Hill, is renowned for its unique dressed -stone masonry. According to tradition, the heiau was built by Umi, a devoutly religious ruler of the Island of Hawaii (Fornander, 1969:101-102). Umi, after his acsension to power, toured the island erecting several heiau, each of which is distinguished by its dressed- or hewn -stone construction (Fornander, 1969:101), a technique that was extremely rare in pre -European Hawaii. Kukii Heiau consists of a walled platform, 37 by 21 meters (Fig. 2), built level with the top of Kukii Hill. It is presently in poor condition, having been seriously disturbed by erosion and vegetation. Only in the southern portion of the site are the walls still intact. No pavement stones or other interior features are presently discernible, although Stokes reported that in 1906 the heiau was paved. Scattered about the perimeter of the heiau are several dressed flagstones --large pahoehoe slabs with artificially straightened edges (Fig. 3). The surfaces of the stones are largely unmodified. Several times in the late 1800s dressed stones were taken from the heiau. In 1879 King Kalakaua used them in the construction of the founda- tion of Iolani Palace; later, other stones were used in the building of Queen Kapiolani's residence in Honolulu (Thrum, 1907a:55). Though in poor condition, Kukii of Hawaii's past. It is emphatically for further study. Heiau represents a unique vestige urged that this heiau be protected I:M 0 d P O —o �0 p o � o Q O a 0 � 0 0o a p � o 0 a � 0 00 _ oo0 0 o ° O O — 0 � 0 0 Oeg$ o 0 AD p 0 0 0 — 0 �� o 0 n � O MN N Fig. 2. PLAN VIEW OF KUKII HEIAU, SITE 2500. — -9- c7l� CN LLJ LLJ LLI Z� CD. LU V) V) w —10— SITE 2501 - KAPOHO PETROGLYPHS Category I A number of petroglyphs (rock carvings) are located on the large, vertical basalt slabs that form the southern exterior of Kapoho Crater (Fig. 4). The petroglyphs are arranged in several clusters and include a variety of forms and figures. Several excellent depictions of men with upraised arms grasping canoe paddles or war clubs are among the triangular -bodied figures. Erosion has rendered the majority of the figures indistinguishable. Because of their sheltered position beneath ledges or vegetation, however, at least 12 of these petroglyphs are in excellent condition. SITE 2502 - PUALAA VILLAGE Category I The ruins of Pualaa Village represent what was once a thriving Hawaiian coastal community. Encompassing an area of 40 acres, the ruins include about 20 house sites with enclosing galls, nuumerous garden pits, interconnecting paths, and a heiau (Crozier and Barrere, 1971). In 1823 the Protestant missionaries Ellis, Thurston, and Bishop, while circling the Island of Hawaii on an exploratory tour, spent a night at Pualaa and preached to the natives. Reverend Ellis wrote a vivid description of native life along this portion of the Puna coast before European disruption, speaking of "...tranquil occupation of the inhabi- tants, some weaving mats, others walking cheerfully up and down winding paths among the steep rocks,...and the smiling gaiety of the whole" (Ellis, 1969:298). " Crozier and Barrere (1971) reported an historical survey of the literature pertaining to Pualaa and provided detailed description of the village ruins. y The Pualaa village ruins are one of the few remains of a Hawaiian village that have been spared destruction by land development. The Bishop Museum has presented to the owner, the Bishop Estate, a series of recommendations that call for the clearing, stabilization, and eventual restoration of the village. Insofar as those recommendations apply to the area of this survey, the authors urge that these recommendations be followed. SITE 2503 - COMPLEX Category III This site consists of a complex of ruins measuring 150 by 150 meters and includes several free-standing, bifaced walls, two enclosures, and numerous depressions and mounds. The depressions appear to be natural, -- but their proximity to the mounds suggests that these features probably represent remnants of garden plots. --- SITE 2504 - PLATFORM Category II This site is a rectangular platform, 7 by 10 meters, built against a natural slope. The platform ranges in height from 1.5 meters on the N end to 0.4 meter on the S end. On the platform are two adjoining -11- LL enclosures --one is circular, 0.5 meter high and 4 meters in diameter; the other is roughly square, measuring 2.5 meters on a side and 0.2 meter in height. The site is in good condition and has reasonably good potential for excavation. The platform's impressive size and unique design, and the possi- bility that it was used as a religious structure, make it one of the more archaeologically interesting sites found in the corridor. SITE 2505 - COMPLEX Category II This complex of ruins includes four enclosures, several walls, a mound, and a platform. Except for the platform and one of the enclosures, the site is in very poor condition. The platform is rectangular, measuring 4.5 by 3.2 meters and 0.95 meter high. The well-preserved enclosure is a 5.5-meter square; its walls are 1.7 meters high, 0.7 meter wide, and are bifaced with a core fill. SITE 2506 - ENCLOSURE Category III _ This open-ended enclosure encompasses a natural cavity in a pahoehoe dome. Each of the three walls is 3 meters long, 0.8 meter wide, and 1.5 meters high. The cavity, in the middle of the enclosure, measures 0.75 meter E-W by 0.4 meter N-S. Possibly a small lava tube, the cavity extends below ground level for an indeterminate distance. Two large stones, possibly used for capping the cavity, lie on the S edge of the opening. No cultural material was observed in the cavity, and the function of this site is not known. Several walls and crude platforms were also noted in the vicinity of this site. SITE 2507 - COMPLEX Category III This complex of ruins probably represents several adjoining house enclosures with surrounding agricultural features. Walls range from 80 to 110 cm in height and are generally deteriorated. Construction is pre- dominantly pahoehoe chunks, with numerous waterworn stones interspersed. The site appears to be of somewhat recent origin. SITE 2508 - ENCLOSURE Category III Each wall of this square enclosure measures 11 meters long, 1 meter wide and 1 meter high. The site, in poor condition, has poor excavation potential. SITE 2509 - ENCLOSURE Category III This irregularly shaped enclosure located near Isaac Hale Park probably was used as an animal pen. It is in poor condition and has no excavation potential. -13- SITE 2510 - POHOIKI WARM SPRING This small spring of lukewarm water is located behind the pebble beach at Pohoiki Bay. This spring is situated in the bottom of a lava sink, where it forms a 6-by-8-meter pool. The Pohoiki Warm Spring is not a conventional archaeological or historical site, but the spring and pool do possess sufficient aesthetic qualities to warrant their preservation as an area of natural beauty. SITE 2511 - OLD COFFEE MILL Category I The old coffee mill, located near Pohoiki junction, is a large, two-story structure with concrete walls 0.6 meter thick, built between 1880 and 1885 by R. Rycroft (Dorothy Barrere, personal communication). The mill is in excellent condition and is a unique architectural struc- ture. William Bonk of the University of Hawaii, Hilo Campus, has suggested (Loo and Bonk, n.d.:60) that the coffee mill be converted into a "living museum." His suggested program would provide an opportunity for university students to participate in the reconstruction and operation of a coffee mill and museum that would offer a tangible illustration of a portion of Hawaii's history. On the basis of its unique historical and architectural value, and also its potential as a museum, it is recommended that Bonk's plans for restoration of this site be followed. SITE 2512 - ENCLOSURE Category III This small, lightly constructed enclosure with rough paving and a crude entrance, is probably of recent origin and utilization. SITE 2513 - ENCLOSURE Category III This site,a large, unusually shaped enclosure,encompasses approxi- mately 5,500 sq meters. The walls of the enclosure range from 1 to 1.35 meters in height and are constructed mainly of small paahoehoe slabs. The structure appears to be of recent origin. SITE 2514 - PLATFORM Category IV This site consists of a low, small, nearly circular platform built against an outcropping of rough, broken pahoehoe; the platform is crudely constructed of this rough lava. The lack of any signs of human occupation, = the absence of related sites, and the small size of the platform itself, tend to preclude a habitation function and help to identify the site as a burial platform. .. -14- SITE 2515 - COMPLEX Category III This complex measures 50 by 25 meters and consists of a rectangular _ enclosure, a stone -lined well, a wall, and a platform. All of the fea- tures are well -constructed, in good condition, and appear to be of recent origin and utilization. SITE 2516 - COMPLEX Category II This massive complex of walls, small enclosures, and mounds covers an area 100 by 50 meters. The walls are very substantial, averaging 1.5 meters wide and 1 meter high. At the NW end of the site are numerous small enclosures, 2 by 3 meters, possibly used as small garden plots. SITE 2517 - MAHINAAKAKA HEIAU Category I Mahinaakaka Heiau is the best preserved and most easily accessible heiau in the survey area. Its setting --a coconut -palm grove behind a boulder beach in the ahupua'a (Hawaiian land division) of Keahialaka-- elicits a sensation of being in pre -European Hawaii. The heiau is a large, rectangular, stepped platform (Fig. 5) built almost entirely of large, waterworn boulders ('ald). It measures 24 meters N-S by 40 meters E-W, and is up to 2.S meters high. The surface of the heiau was originally paved with waterworn stones, but as early as 1932, it was reported to have been disturbed (Hudson, n.d.:369). The surface is presently covered by a dense growth of hala and young coconut palms. Mahinaakaka Heiau is exceptionally well preserved and attractively situated in an area of striking beauty. SITE 2518 - KEAHIALAKA PONDS Category I These brackish -water ponds are located immediately mauka of Mahinaakaka Heiau (Fig. 5). Originally a single pond, the construction of the Hilo -Puna Trail in the 1800s divided the pond; the larger part lies mauka of the trail. Together, the ponds cover approximately 1,150 sq meters. A low retaining wall lines portions of the perimeter of the larger pond. SITE 2519 - HALE FAMILY CEMETERY Category IV This cemetery contains six graves, all capped with concrete. Four — of the graves have headstones. Inscriptions on the headstones indicate that this cemetery originated in the late 1800s. -� SITE 2520 - COMPLEX Category III This site is a complex of two very large enclosures immediately mauka of Highway 137. Together, the enclosures delimit approximately 720 sq meters of steeply sloping, rocky terrain, devoid of soil in places. The walls of the enclosures are crudely constructed and in poor condition. -1s- 0 0 0 ° OQio°a o oo 000 oo p°oa4vo ao 'o W 0 O RR 0o Q Q"�oo 0 o p o� o apo v �o �O � 00 � G O�Oo 000 n 6a0 0 �OOoo aQ mv�o °gyp opo o000 Op�0° ° '0� �o o0 QO °o ao 0o�oOOC�D00oo0 00 0 O ,0 0 0000 noo 0 ° -°oG W 9°o0 o° °° o o = 0 0 p 0 0� pOO ` �op .o O °° 0 0 o°O O° � -O ° 00 ° o 00 �a0 < a p° o0 o a Qo i a 'o 0 °° o°oo°o 0 0°o i qoo° 0 0 oQ o 0 o 0 0°0 6v° 0 p 0 00 0 Oro 0 0 0 00°o 0 ° 0 �o� 9 00 aQ o O Do°m ° 0 opOOo°po0 p O 0 0 14%od O _ c oa oopn ¢' ODpOp° D V l�pnn G O �Q� mdporo�0 0 �"qO �u qp0 oy QUO° o�J O o �o(� �n0,p00(�Cn b�p�oD aoq vOQ.0p 0 o voO p D Q % �9K]o 0 0%-7 o 00a 0 00 00 r1 ryn4f o E O n o Ln C Z O Q� Y a J 2 Q W Y G Z a 0 0° O o bo�po p 6 Q o _ 00 O LL! o 0 0 D° o a g a a z °0 Qa0° � O Ln o � CV —c �z z b a Ln �o c14 . N L11 LLI H �o o C1 Ln LL -16- SITE 2521 - ENCLOSURE Category III This nearly square, well-built enclosure, 2 meters makai of Highway 137, has walls 1 meter high and approximately 10 meters long per side. The feature appears to be of recent origin and was probably used as an animal pen. SITE 2522 - COMPLEX Category III This large complex of enclosures and walls covers approximately 18,500 sq meters. The massive walls are crudely constructed and average 1 meter high and 0.60 meter wide. The average enclosure is 750 sq meters. This site appears to be of recent construction and utilization. SITE 2523 - PLATFORM Category I Site 2523 consists of a large rectangular platform and two peri- pheral platforms on rough pahoehoe lava. The main platform is massive, measuring 7 by 11 meters and ranging from 0.60 to 1.5 meters in height (Fig. 6), with relatively straight walls and a well -paved surface. — The peripheral platforms are both low and small --the one to the SW is paved and abutted against the main platform; the other, to the NE, is unpaved and separate. In the center of the main platform is a depression, 2 by 3 meters, that reaches a depth of 0.5 meter. Depressions similar to this are common in the platform burialsin known cemeteries within the survey area; they usually indicate a collapsed crypt, and the nearly central location of this depression supports this function. However, the massive size of the main platform suggests that this site may well have y functioned first as a religious structure, and then was converted to a place of interment for one or more burial. Irrespective of function, the impressive size, good condition, and the fine quality of construction make this one of the more outstanding sites in the survey area. SITE 2524 - COMPLEX Category III Site 2524 consists of two crudely constructed, L-shaped structures, several walls, and numerous mounds. All features within the complex are crudely constructed of pahoehoe chunks. The complex lacks any unique features and is apparently devoid of any midden or kitchen debris. SITE 2525 - PETROGLYPHS Category II These faint petroglyphs are a cluster of about 35 dots, circles, lines, and probable letters on the smooth pahoehoe lava along the N side of a cavity that was formed by a partially collapsed pahoehoe dome. There is no evidence to indicate that any additional figures ever existed on top of the now collapsed dome. SITE 2526 - LAVA TUBE Category III This large lava tube has partially collapsed, exposing two entrances to two chambers separated by a natural rock fall and by a wall that extends -17- 1211 0 oo Q 00 D ll C) d Do..................... ri CD y a. Plan view and cross section '--M 6 5f —t V 0 b. Photograph looking 5 across platform Fig. 6. PROBABLE BURIAL PLATFORM, SITE 2523. from the edge of the rock fall to the opposite wall of the lava tube. The entrance to the N chamber is partially blocked by a wall that limits the size of the opening and effectively hides it. This site may have been prepared as a refuge cave during a time of war; the paucity of midden suggests that, if the cave were ever inhabited, it was for only a very short period. SITE 2527 - PETROGLYPHS Category II J Site 2527 is a group of about 12 petroglyphs on smooth pahoehoe lava near a cliff that falls 10 meters to the sea. The petroglyphs include figures, concentric circles, lines, and dots, and are faint as a result of erosion from wave action. SITE 2528 - PETROGLYPHS Category II Located 5 meters makai of Coast Highway 137 is a cluster of about 16 letters on smooth pahoehoe lava. Eight of the letters appear in four groups of two each and are probably initials. The remaining letters are more elab- orately fashioned and appear older. SITE 2529 - PETROGLYPHS Category I This site is a field of about 90 figures, letters, reversed letters, circles, lines, and dots (Fig. 7) on smooth pahoehoe lava next to a prec- ipice which falls 10 meters to the sea. Most of the petroglyphs are in good condition and several words and place names are legible. Z Z o ft Fig. 7. PLAN VIEW OF PETROGLYPHS, SITE 2529. -19- SITE 2530 - KING'S HIGHWAY Categories I, III — The King's Highway runs roughly parallel to the ocean and is visible along portions of the Puna coastline. The highway is a curbed trail for two horses that was probably built in the late 1860s by prison labor. There is some uncertainty as to the correct name of this trail. Recently it has been called "King's Highway" and "King's Trail" by surveyors (Apple, 1965:55). One section of the King's Highway is maintained by the staff of MacKenzie State Park, and an explanatory sign has been posted by the trail. It is recommended that this section of site 2530 be placed in category I; the rest of the trail can be placed in category III. SITE 2531 - MOUND Category III This crudely constructed mound, 10 by 3 meters, is built against a natural rise in the pahoehoe lava. It is constructed mainly of frag- mented pahoehoe with several waterworn stones of various sizes distrib- uted throughout. SITE 2532 - PLATFORM Category II This platform is constructed of rough pahoehoe chunks and paved with large waterworn stones. The structure is nearly square, measuring approxi- mately 8 meters to a side, and ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 meters in height. The sides are now crumbled, but the pavement seems fairly intact. Platforms such as this were often used as foundations for thatched houses. Because of erosion and disruption from the dense- vegetation in the area, the excavation potential of this site is only fair. SITE 2533 - COMPLEX Category II This complex of walls, platforms, and enclosures covers an area of about 50 by 25 meters, just mauka of Highway 137. Construction of most features within the complex is substantial and utilizes waterworn stones. Walls are bi-faced with a rubble fill, very straight, and run either parallel or perpendicular to other walls within the complex. This site possibly represents the remnants of the old Hawaiian village of Opihikao. SITE 2534 - PUA'AKANU CEMETERY Category IV Pua'akanu Cemetery is on an as lava flow overlooking the ocean at Lolia. Owned by the State of Hawaii, this cemetery covers 10 acres and contains 400 burial units, of which approximately 100 have been utilized. There are no caretakers or superintendents and the State does not keep records of individual interments, though the cemetery is still used. The -_ above information was extracted from the records of the Department of Health, State of Hawaii. -20- The majority of the burials at Pua'akanu Cemetery are platforms built of as chunks, with occasional waterworn stones and coral. It is difficult to determine the age of these features. Several of the plat- forms are large enough to have accommodated more than one interment. The remaining graves have concrete caps and headstones, and appear designed to accommodate an individual burial. SITE 2535 - TRAIL Category II Built of large, waterworn stepping stones, this trail runs mauka- makai (E-W) for approximately 115 meters and probably intersected the Kehena Beach Trail at one time. SITE 2536 - COMPLEX Category II This complex extends 50 meters N-S and 25 meters E-W (mauka-makai) — along a 15-meter-high cliff next to the ocean. The complex consists of a platform abutting a wall, an L-shaped structure, and an open-ended rectangular enclosure. All of these features are constructed of a mix- ture of fragmented pahoehoe and various sizes of waterworn stones. The largest concentration of waterworn stones occurs in the platform. Because of the disrupted condition of the top of the platform, it is impossible to discern if the waterworn stones once served as a paving. SITE 2537 - COMPLEX Category III This site is a complex of enclosures located just mauka of Highway 137. The larger enclosures appear to have been designed as cattle pens, and one is still used for this purpose. The functioning pen consists of — heavily constructed walls, approximately 1 meter high and-1 meter wide, enclosing a flat area of approximately 1,600 sq meters. This site appears to be of recent origin. SITE 2538 - Cemetery Category IV — Consisting of approximately 25 platform burials, this cemetery is located 170 meters mauka of Highway 137. The rectangular platforms are constructed entirely of as lava. Some of the larger platforms may _ contain more than one burial. This cemetery may have originated before European contact and probably has a history of occasional use up to and including the 20th century. It does not appear to have been used recently. SITE 2539 - CEMETERY Category IV This cemetery, containing approximately 23 burial platforms, is located 100 meters mauka of the Kehena Beach Trail sign. The platforms are rectangular and constructed entirely of as lava, and several are large enough for the interment of more than one individual. As with the other cemeteries of this type within the survey area, it is -difficult to determine an age for the individual features. -21- SITE 2540 - KEHENA BEACH TRAIL Categories 1, III The Kehena Beach Trail is a portion of a steppingstone trail that once encircled the Island of Hawaii. Parts of the trail are still visible along the Puna coastline (Fig. 8), though in several places it has been obliterated by recent lava. flows. The section of this trail at Kehena has been preserved and is maintained by the Hawaii County government; an explanatory sign has been posted. The portion of the trail maintained by the government is placed in category I; the rest of the trail in the survey area is placed in category 111. SITE 2541 - C-SHAPED STRUCTURES Category III This site is a cluster of three C-shaped structures, 10 meters from a cliff that overlooks the ocean. Paper, glass, and plastic litter the site. All three C shapes appear to be of recent origin and utilization. SITE 2542 - COMPLEX Category III Site 2542 is a group of three shelter sates on barren pahoehoe lava 2 meters from a cliff which overlooks the ocean. All features are con- structed of as lava chunks that apparently were gathered from a large as lava flow on the N border of the site. Paper, glass, and plastic litter the site and add to the impression that this site is of recent origin and utilization. r.ir`FH[ V1i PFAirr R['%H_, Ji C 2544 — SITE 2543 - COMPLEX Category III Located 1.23 km S of Waipuku Point, this complex of features is on a bluff overlooking the ocean. There are eight C-shaped structures and a single, partially collapsed lava tube with four entrances. The C shapes range in size from 1 to 2 meters across the opening. Some midden was found scattered thinly on the barren pahoehoe lava, but the search for evidence of occupation in the four chambers of the lava tube proved fruitless. These features may be prehistoric in origin and probably are still used occasionally by fishermen as shelters from the wind and rain. SITE 2544 - PETROGLYPHS Category II Located 10 meters makki of Highway 137 are an indeterminate number of petroglyphs on smooth pahoehoe lava. Twelve letters are discernible, though faint. Other petroglyphs,so faint that they are indistinguishable, are scattered about the periphery of the clusters of letters. SITE 2545 - PETROGLYPHS Category II This site consists of an enclosure and about five letters on smooth pahoehoe lava, 2 meters from a precipice that drops 12 meters to the — ocean. The enclosure, 5 meters NE of the petroglyph cluster, appears to be of recent origin and utilization, and is of minimal importance. The petroglyphs are in good condition. SITE 2546 - PETROGLYPHS Category III Situated 2 meters mauka of Highway 137 are two letters, ZM, on smooth pahoehoe lava. SITE 2547 - KAIPUUELELU CEMETERY Category IV Kaipuuelelu Cemetery, owned by the State of Hawaii, is located 1.1 km NE of Kaimu Beach, on the mauka side of Highway 137. Though reportedly — used as a cemetery prior to 1933, it was not until May 22, 1933, that the area was designated as a recognized cemetery under Executive Ordinance 578 (Suefuj i, 1970) . The cemetery, covering an area of 70,000 sq meters, contains 8,000 burial units, of which only 200 have been utilized. There are no care- takers or superintendents and the state does not keep records of indi- vidual interments, though the cemetery is still officially open. The above information was extracted from the records of the Department.of Health, State of Hawaii. The vast majority of the graves are platforms constructed entirely of as lava chunks. Numerous platforms are large enough to have accom- modated more than one burial; these platforms are probably of early- ZUth-century origin. The remaining graves have concrete caps and head- stones and appear designed to accommodate just one individual. -23- SUMMARY Forty-eight sites were recorded during the Kapoho-Kalapana survey, as shown in Table I and Fig. 9 (foldout at end). Of these, 16 had been previously recorded. Following the survey and the data evaluation, eight sites have been placed in category I, 13 in category II, 19 in category III, and seven in category IV. Pohoiki Warm Spring (Site 2510) is • not an archaeological feature and accordingly is not placed in any category; and two sites (2530 and 2540) are in dual categories as shown in the table. The recent geological history of Puna has been dominated by successive volcanic eruptions, which have buried extensive portions of the countryside with fresh lava. These frequent lava flows were the prime factor in determining settlement patterns for prehistoric and early historic Puna. Recent lava flows were generally left uninhabited, while the areas left undisturbed by volcanic action were exploited for both agriculture and habitation. William Ellis, during his journey through Puna, wrote of seven villages between Kapoho and Kalapana; of the seven, only one, Pualaa — Village, -is still largely intact. Perhaps portions of Opihikao and Keahialaka remain, but the ruins in these areas are so sparse that it is difficult to determine if they once composed a portion of a village, _ or if they are just isolated features. The other four villages have been completely destroyed, either by volcanic action, vegetation, or recent land development. The most outstanding example of prehistoric Puna is Mahinaakaka Heiau. It is urged that immediate action be taken to insure that this heiau and Keahialaka Pond which borders it are protected. The complex should be investigated as soon as possible by a qualified archaeological team, and eventually restored. This complex would be an invaluable addition to the small body of restored sites which so eloquently repre- sent Hawaii's past. Finally,it is sincerely hoped that the planners of the proposed highway, Sam 0. Hirota, Inc., and the Department of Public Works, County of Hawaii, and any future developers of the Puna area heed the recom- mendations outlined in this report. Only in this way can Hawaii's heritage be preserved for future generations to study and appreciate. Y -24- — Table 1. Inventory of Sites and Their Evaluation Categories Site Type of Site Distribution within Categories No. I II III IV None 2500 Kukii Heiau x 2501 Kapoho Petroglyphs x 2S02 Pualaa Village x — 2503 Complex x 2504 Platform x 2505 Complex x — 2506 Enclosure x 2507 Complex x 2508 Enclosure x ' 2509 Enclosure x 2S10 Pohoiki Warm Spring x 2511 Old Coffee Mill x 2512 Enclosure x — 2513 Enclosure x 2514 Platform x 251S Complex x 2516 Complex x — 2517 Mahinaakaka Heiau x 2518 Keahialaka Spring and Ponds x - 2519 Hale Family Cemetery x 2520 Complex x — 2521 Enclosure x 2522 Complex x 2523 Platform x ` 2524 Complex x 2525 Petroglyphs x 2526 Lava Tube x 2527 Petroglyphs x — 2528 Petroglyphs x 2529 Petroglyphs x 2S30 King's Highway x* x* — 2531 Mound x 2S32 Platform x 2533 Complex x 2534 Pua'akanu Cemetery x — 2535 Trail x 2536 Complex x 2537 Complex x — 2538 Cemetery x 2539 Cemetery x 2540 Kehena Beach Trail x* X* — 2541 C-Shaped Structures x 2542 Complex x 2543 Complex x 2544 Petroglyphs x 2545 Petroglyphs x 2546 Petroglyphs x 2S47 Kaipuuelelu Cemetery x for 2530,see p. 19; for 2540, see p. 21. -2S- APPENDIX A. DETAILED MAPS SHOWING LOCATION OF SITES IN CATEGORIES I, II, AND IV The N arrow in each of the maps in this appendix indicates True N. The scale for all maps is 1 in. = 2000 ft. -26- :: 9 LL -2%- i C ui x W ui z O CL O CL uj cr-. LL, _ U O o� N W W H H N w U LL- -28- AW11A AMMEMEM 2 50 2 -29- 2504 -- / ,p 2505 1 Fig. 13. SITE 2504, PLATFORM, CATEGORY 11. SITE 2505, COMPLEX, CATEGORY II. -30- Fig. 14. SITE 2510, POHOIKI WARM SPRING. SITE 2511, OLD COFFEE MILL, CATEGORY I. SITE 2514, PLATFORMY CATEGORY IV. -31- Fig. 15. SITE 2516, COMPLEX, CATEGORY II. SITE 2517, MAHINAAKAKA HEIAU, CATEGORY I. SITE 2518, KEAHIALAKA POND, CATEGORY I. SITE 2519, HALE FAMILY CEMETERY, CATEGORY IV. -32- � / I / ) 2523 -2525 28 Fig. 16. SITE 2523, PLATFORM, CATEGORY I. -1 SITE 2525, PETROGLYPHS, CATEGORY II. SITE 2527, PETROGLYPH5, CATEGORY II. SITE 2528, PETROGLYPHS, CATEGORY II. -33- 0 ofW �Q W U Q V =CD r= J C7 N W� d Y C; N M Lr% Lr% N N U- - 34- r� m m iz - 35- M M L11 N LLJ F- M: I iz -36- U- -37- ME • - 38- } wo O c2 CD LLI LLI F- Q V v X � W UJ d LLI Ef O LU %D OD M M L IN U % N N LLJ LLI F-- F- V7 fN 1V N C1 LL —39_ } J OC UI cc W F- 4 x U U Q . W m LJ Q F- = W LLJ 2: = W W U ]C Ln Lr% N N W W (nV) M N -40- wcc: wW QQ U U L; s_zr LnU'\ N N Ww t- r cnV1 -41- Fig. 25. SITE 2547, KAIPUUELELU CEMETERY, CATEGORY IV. t -42- REFERENCES Apple, Russell A. 1965 Traits: From Steppingstones to Kerbstones, B. P. Bishop Mus. Spec. Pub. 53. Honolulu. Barrera, William M., and Dorothy B. Barrere 1971 Archaeological and Historical Survey: Ahupua'a of Kupahua, District of Puna, Island of Hawaii. Rept. 71-6. Dept. Anthropology, B. P. Bishop Museum. Honolulu. Barrere, Dorothy B. n.d. Personal notes on Puna. In author's possession. Cordy, Ross n.d. Pre -European Agricultural Systems --their End Point (1970). . Ms. at B. P. Bishop Museum. Honolulu. Cox, J. Halley, with Edward Stasack 1970 Hawaiian Petroglyphs, B. P. Bishop Mus. Spec. Pub. 60. Honolulu. Crozier, S. Neal, and Dorothy B. Barrere 1971 Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Ahupua'a of PuaZaa, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. Rept. 71-1. Dept. Anthropology, B. P. Bishop Museum. Honolulu. Ellis, William 1969 Polynesian Researches: Hawaii (New Edition). Charles E. Tuttle Co., Inc. Tokyo. Emory, Kenneth P., Dorothy B. Barrere, et at. n.d. Natural and Cultural History Report on the Kalapana Extension of the Hawaii National Park (1959). Ms. In Dept. Anthropology. B. P. Bishop Museum. Honolulu. Fornander, Abraham — 1969 An Account of the Polynesian Race: Its Origins and Migrations (New Edition). Charles E. Tuttle Co., Inc. Tokyo. Handy, E. S. Craighill, and Elizabeth Green Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. B. P. Bishop Mus. Bull. 233. Honolulu, Hansen, Violet n.d. Unpublished Notes (1968). In Dept. Anthropology, B. P. Bishop Museum. Honolulu. Hommon, Robert J. n.d. "Notes on 'A Formal Classification of Hawaiian Archaeological Features'." (1970) The Hawaii Register of Historic Places. -43- Hudson, Alfred E. n.d. The Archaeology of East Hawaii (1932). Ms. In Dept. Anthropology, B. P. Bishop Museum. Honolulu. - Loo, Virginia H., and William J. Bonk n.d. A Historical Site Study and Evaluation of North Hawaii (1970). • Ms. Prepared by Anthropological Research International for the Dept. of Planning, County of Hawaii. MacDonald, Gordon A. 1941 "Lava Flows in Eastern Puna". The Volcano Letter. No. 474. University of Hawaii. Honolulu. Neal, Marie C. 1965 In Gardens of Hawaii. B. P. Bishop Mus. Spec. Pub. 50. Honolulu. Newman, T. Stell 1968 "Hawaiian Archaeology: An Historical Review." New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter. 11, 4: 131-135. �- Newman, T. Stell 1970 Hawaiian Fishing and Farming on the Island of Hawaii in A.D. _ 1778. Dept. of Land and Natural Resources, Honolulu. Stokes, John F. G. _ n.d. Survey of heiaus of Hawaii (field work done in 1906). Type- script in Dept. Anthropology, B. P. Bishop Museum. Suefuji, Raymond 1970 Land Use Report for 1969. Planning Dept., County of Hawaii. Hilo. Thrum, Thomas G. 1907a "Heiaus and Heiau Sites Throughout the Hawaiian Islands." Hawaiian Annual for 1906. Pp. 38-47. 1907b "Tales from the Temples." Hawaiian Annual for 1908. Pp. 48-78. -44- / 1 u `PEpppO �EVOp Y, /VAP`P. ' uy� + l Department of Anthropology Report series (continued) 72-1 Salvage ArohaeoZogy at Vailau-1Finote, Xa'u, Island of &aaaii. March By William M. Barrera, Jr., and Robert Hommon. $2.75 72-2 Endangered Raiaaiian ArshaeotogioaZ Sit" within Alaui County. March By Kenneth P. Emory and Robert Hommon $2.75 72-3 Archaeological Reoonnaiaaance of Proposed &apoho-KaZapana Highway, June Distriot of Puna, Island of &waii By Robert F. Bevacqua and Thomas S. Dye $2.00 BERNICE P. BISHOP MUSEUM DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY REPORT SERIES 61-1 Archaeological and Historical Survey, Honokohau Area, North Kon, Haaaiz. By Kenneth P. Emory and Lloyd J. Soehren (Reprinted, 1971) $3.00 69-5 An Archaeological Survey of the Seaward Portion of Honokohau #2 and N2, North Kona, Hawaii Island. By Deborah F. Cluff (Reprinted, 1971) $2.00 70-8 Archaeological Survey and Excavations, Kaman-Nui Valley, NoanaZus Ahupua'a, September South Haiaaa Valley, Halawa Ahupua'a. By William S. Ayres (Reprinted, 1971) $3.00 70-9 Piilanihale Heiau Project, Phase I. Site Report. October By Ross Cordy $2.00 70-10 Archaeological Reconmaissanee of Coastal XaZoko and Xukio I, North Kona, Hawaii. November By Robert C. Renger (Reprinted, 1971) $2.00 70-11 Archaeological and Historical Survey of Rakini-Nui and Pakini.-Ai Coastal Sites, November Waiahukini, Kailikii, and &awes, Ka'u, Hawaii. By Yosihiko H. Sinoto and Marion Kelly (Out of print) 70-12 Inventory of Archaeological and Historical Sites in the Districts of Kona and December Ka'u and in Anaehoomalu, South XohaZa, Island of Hawaii. By Kenneth P. Emory (Out of print) 71-1 Archaeological and Historical Survey of the Ahupua'a of Pualan, Puna District, January Island of Hawaii. By S. Neal Crozier and Dorothy B. Barrtre $1.50 71-2 Kekaha: 'Aina Malo'o. Historical Survey and Background of XaZoko and Kuki'o March Ahupua'a, North Kona, Hawaii. By Marion Kelly (Revised edition, October 1971) $2.00 71-3 Archaeological Survey of Kahan Valley, Xaolauloa District, Island of Oahu. April By Robert J. No.— n and William M. Barrera $2.00 71-4 Archaeological Survey: Kahaluu and Xeauhou, North Kona, Hawaii. May By Kenneth P. Emory, Patrick C. McCoy, and Dorothy B. Barrtre $2.00 71-5 Archaeological Survey of Kamehameha III Road, North Xona, Island of Hawaii. July By S. Neal Crozier $2.00 71-6 Archaeological and Historical Survey: Ahupua'a of Xupahua, District of Puna, July Island of Hawaii. By William M. Barrera, Jr., and Dorothy B. BarrA-re $2.00 71-7 Humzn Skeletal Remains at Anaehoomalu. October By Michael Pietrusewsky (U. Hawaii) $2.50 71-8 Human Skeletal Remains in the B. P. Bishop Museum. November By Michael Pietrusewsky (U. Hawaii) $2.00 71-9 Investioations it South Halawa Valley, Oahu: Phase II. October By David 0. Denison and Arthur Forman $3.00 71-10 Archaeological Excavations and Survey at Keauhou, North Kona, Hawaii. October By William M. Barrera, Jr. $2.00 71-11 Archaeological Excavations at Kamehameha III Road, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. October Phase II. By S. Neal Crozier $2.00 (Continued on inside back cover) EXHIBIT A-5 EXHIBIT A-6 EXHIBIT A-7 EXHIBIT A-8 From: Chervl Maraan To: W PCtesti manv; Cc: Chervl Maraan Subject: Kaimu Cove LLC tmk 1-2-018-001 Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 2:11:22 PM Aloha, Regarding the proposed SMA permit application. TMK 1-2-0018-001 I, Cheryl Morgan am the immediate landowner and neighbor sharing a common border with this proposed subdivision. I have lived on and cared for this property since 1986 and resided on Hawaii Island since 1975, I have never witnessed this type of disrespect for the land. With total disregard to the protected and pristine Milo forest as well as other indigenous plants and trees and before any permits were granted, the owner recklessly plowed heavy machinery down our common border. Not only were these threatened species eliminated but coconut trees on state property were cut down. Since our common boundary was not clearly tagged by the owner, the excavator seemingly may have pushed over an old Milo tree (which I want to save) onto my property, near the ocean. Until our shared border is clearly established no further cutting of border trees or branches should be permitted. Another concern is the owner's habi t of burning brush and possibly trash, 'opala in an open fire pit. We are down wind and being Kupuna we cannot tolerate the smoke. I am also concerned about the impact of 5 new homes on this fragile ecosystem with each possibility having an o'hana structure. Respectfully, Cheryl Morgan EXHIBIT "A-8" Mark Lindsey Franklin Dear Planning Department, It has been brought to my attention that a Notice of Hearing regarding Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA- 2024-000063 regarding the subject property identified as TMK (3) 11-2- 018:001, will be open for public input beginning at 11:00am on Thursday, October 3, 2024. I will be submitting this letter describing in bullet points the many reasons why this application should be denied completely. There will be a list of important issues that I will describe to the Planning Department in detail, and I would like each subject reviewed. Here I will list the subject topics of each important detail that I find relevant to this review. I will be happy to assist in fact finding any subject of this report. Archaeology Findings Kalaeahiamoe The Cape of the Red Rooster Court Case: Gaddis& Lui Kwan vs Amfac- Kau. Kawa beach access. This precedent case determines legal access from Mauka to Makai at historical sites on ancient footpaths. Hawaiian Canoe Landing This is a known location for Hawaiian Canoe landing.@ see Tommy Holmes; The Hawaiian Canoe. Helped launch and land 3-man fiberglass canoe at pebble beach with owner/ builder South African Mark and Gerry Kuahiwinui Grant. 1989. Witnessed 2 Tahitian stand up paddlers paddled from Kehena Beach and exit 1 hour later at Kalaeahiamoe pebble landing. Summer 2024.Used ala hele path to hwy 137. Kalaeahiamoe Surfing site Witnessed 2 surfers and then 1 surfer June/July 2024. Access through said property, ancient footpath (ala hele) from hwy 137 down to pebble beach. Divers exit the ocean at this location. Kalaeahiamoe Heiau Located 1/8 mile west of said property. Found on Ahia Rd. Locate by using google map. Remnants of temple and beach stone footpath (ala hele) lead directly east to cemetery and said property. Kalaeahiamoe kuula stone I believe this stone fishing shrine was bulldozed by its new owner. Its whereabouts is unknown Kaipoelelu Cemetery This ancient burial site is a state regulated cemetery. Used by Native Hawaiian families to this day. Directly across hwy 137 from said property. I believe that it makes sense that the heiau, ala hele pohaku, cemetery, and milo grove leading to canoe landing are part of a set of a collective Hawaiian archaeological complex. Ala Hele Pohaku Running westerly and mauka. Remnants of the footpath are found throughout coastal Puna. Parts exist near heiau to cemetery. Puna Coastal Trail This portion of the beach stone footpath that encircles the island coastline. Machinery recently damaged the top Eastern corner of the footpath. Milo trees were cut in a manner that blocked the footpath leading to canoe landing. Trail used daily by fisherman and gatherers. Geology This land parcel is divided by two distinct lava flows. The eastern elevated portion is part of the 1898 Makena AA flow. The lower southern portion is the remnants. of an older lava crater approximately 1.5 -2 acres circular in shape. Distinct features include Ancestral Milo grove (Thespia populnea) approximately 1.5-2 acres. Former black sand beach now a pebble stone beaches still used today as a Hawaiian cultural canoe landing. Remnants of burial sites before the construction and opening of Kaipoelelu Cemetery. Botanical The rare, endangered and federally protected endemic grass (Ishemon baronii) is found along the top eastern portion of said property. The plateau and Pali coastal native plant system is approximately 4 k long, running from Kaimu village to Kehena Beach. Important endemic species are Akia, Uulei, kookoolau, ilima, Pukiawe, ohia, amau, etc. A portion of the eastern part of said property that includes this coastal plant zone was bulldozed and protected plants were destroyed. The highlight of this property by far in my native Hawaiian eyes, was its ancestral fully intact Milo Forest (Thespia populnea). Diameters of 16-30 inches were not uncommon at this site. Tom Piko, native master carver estimates this groves age to be over200 years old. This entire grove was unceremoniously chain sawed to the ground and pushed by machinery into 4- 8 massive piles of crushed logs, limbs roots and canopy. Good Stewardship of special sites (Wahl Pana) are essential when ownership is to take place. The entire destruction of this forest site within the State Coastal zone Management area points fault at the Real Estate broker, equipment operator, arborist, as well as the new owners. This destruction is a blow to the entire Island community as the largest intact natural Milo Forest in East Hawaii Island was destroyed maliciously. The civil Beat is aware of this folly and are planning on a future article bringing this damage of a rare natural site to the attention of the entire state and nation. Poor stewardship by the owners tells me that despite the $250,000.00 state fine, they have nothing to stop them (now that the forest no longer exists) from doing a money grab, while 3-5 generations will have to wait for the regrowth of this forest. State Laws Land developers will continue to violate DLNR laws and regulations when profits can pay for state fines and more. An example must be made to discourage these type actions. The donation and legal release of the entire said property by new owners is not unreasonable for their willful destruction of sacred space. A nonprofit such as Malama o Puna could lead stewardship. At the very least set more fines for damaging the ancient Puna Coastal trail and destruction of the endemic plant species. One single home on upper Eastern property area is the most to be allowed is fair. The idea of a forced 50-year stewardship demand of the new owners to regrow and the recovery of historical, cultural, and botanical losses is innovative. A State -run agency or a nonprofit agency should design and oversee the restoration work. Coastal Zone Management The rules are set to protect sites, but speculators pay the fine and it's like a slap on the wrist. Community Impact Hawaii is small. Sites like this are unique. So, it's been damaged for how many generations? 150-300 years. Hawaiian Gathering Rights Legal and open ala hele are mandatory at sites like this to ensure rights of citizens. Hawaiian Burial Council I was told by a now deceased member of the Waipa family where the burial site is located around 1993. Most of this area was run over by machinery. The sons are still living on Hawaii Island. Ethics and Good Stewardship The new owner told at least 5 neighbors face to face that he was conscious of the protected forest. He lied to the community. We can't trust someone willing to destroy a Wahi Pana for profit. Now, I will give you a brief introduction of who I am regarding this land application and why it is of importance Mark Lindsey Franklin, of Native Hawaiian and mostly Scottish/English and German ancestry. Recently retired from the County of Hawaii Fire Department Ocean safety department totaling 3 decades of full and part time work. I have a B. S. in Horticulture from Charter Oak College, Connecticut. I specialize in Hawaiian Botanical, and archaeological research. I have been a resident of Kaimu Village for twentyyears before I lived in the Kikala Keokea mauka area of Kalapana beginning in 1982. I'm a Hilo High School graduate in 1978 and grew up in Volcano Village on my family's 10-acre dairy farm and my grandmother's home in the Keaukaha area.. I was born in Honolulu. The Lindsey family is tied to the Pe'a, Waipa, and Ahia families of Kalapana, and at least 4 properties belong to relatives within 1/a mile of this property. From: Hannah Rozendo To: W PCtesti many Subject: Written Testimony regarding Kaimu Cove, LLC> Date: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 3:54:50 PM Attachments: HRozendo Testimony KaimuCoveLLC.pdf Aloha, Attached is my written testimony in opposition of the proposed development by Kaimu Cove, LLC. Mahalo for the consideration, Hannah Rozendo 2 October 2024 Aloha k5kou, My name is Hannah, and I live in Puna, Hawaii. This testimony is regarding the proposed Special Management Area permit (PL-SMA-2024-000063), development of a parcel in Kaimu into 5 subdivisions. While my professional expertise is in coastal management and I have worked in Puna kahakai, I write this independently of any organizational associations. The past few years have introduced me to cherished relationships with the land and people of lower Puna, and Kaimu is no exception. Based on my experiences, research, and understanding of this area, the proposed development is in opposition to the community values. Based on my understanding of the proposed project, existing environmental and cultural impact assessments of the project inadequately describe consequences of this action. By developing this site into five relatively large residential plots, the surrounding area will be stunting the natural succession of the land (return of flora and fauna) following the 1986-1992 lava flow. This includes the adjacent site of one of the last remaining intertidal zones in the Kalapana/Kaimu region, a host to irreplaceable native plants, limu, and fisheries. This development will further hinder the access of Hawaiian people to their sources of nourishment and cultural practices at the ocean, and reduce the gathering resources of people who depend on them. As we have all witnessed in Hawaii, human development on the coastline only leads to more challenges and safety concerns (i.e. toxins leaking to the ocean, destruction of habitats, erosion damage to development, etc.), that can be prevented by wiser development decisions. I urge those with power and influence to reconsider this proposal for the benefit of the communities of people, nature, and the land itself in Kaimu. Mahalo nui, s Hannah Rozendo From: Chloe Martins- Keliihoomalu To: WPCtestimonv Subject: Kaimu LLC Testimony Date: Thursday, October 3, 2024 11:41:04 AM Attachments: Kaimu LLC Testimonv.pdf Aloha, My name is Chloe Martins-Keliihoomalu. I hope my testimony will be accepted and put into the records. Unfortunately, I won't be able to attend, but I am watching via YouTube Iivestream. Please see the attached document. For various reasons, I am against this development project. Mahalo, Chloe Testimony of Chloe Martins-Keli`iho`omalu Re: KAIMU COVE LLC Special Management Area Use Permit Application Hearing Date: October 3, 2024 Aloha, I am submitting this testimony in strong opposition to the proposed development by KAIMU COVE LLC for a 5-lot subdivision on a 3.677-acre shoreline parcel within the Special Management Area (SMA) of Kaimu, Puna. As a native Hawaiian and lineal descendant of this area, I stand as a caretaker and gatherer of the resources of this coastline and land. The development of this land is not in alignment with the cultural heritage and stewardship that we, the people of this land, have practiced for generations. 1. Risk to Coastal Resources: The proposed development poses significant risks to the coastal resources that are vital to our ecosystem and cultural practices. This area is subject to ongoing shoreline erosion, a natural process that, when compounded by development, will result in the loss of both biological and historical/ecological resources. Coastal trails, traditionally aligned to move inland with the retreating shoreline, are at risk of disappearing due to contemporary legal frameworks that fail to protect these pathways. Coastal vegetation, which also migrates inland with shoreline erosion, could be lost if it is artificially constrained by development. 2. Inadequate SMA Rules and Environmental Protections: The current Special Management Area rules and review processes are insufficient to safeguard the unique and fragile environment of this coastline. The developers argue that the subdivision will not adversely affect the environment, but the erosion and sedimentation impacts of grubbing, grading, and construction in such a sensitive area are inevitable. The existing regulatory framework does not adequately address the dynamic changes in coastal ecosystems, putting vital natural resources at risk of degradation or permanent loss. 3. Cultural and Historical Significance: This land is not merely a site for development but a place deeply connected to our ancestors and our cultural practices. The coastline and its trails are integral to our identity as native Hawaiians. As a descendant of this area, I understand the cultural responsibility we have to care for and protect this land. Development that disrupts these sacred connections not only threatens the environment but erodes our cultural heritage. This proposal overlooks the deep cultural ties that exist between the people and the land, violating the principles of stewardship that have been honored for generations. 4. Previous Violations and Development Concerns: The history of violations on this property, including unauthorized clearing and grading, is deeply concerning. While the applicant claims compliance with SMA regulations going forward, the prior disregard for these rules suggests a lack of genuine commitment to environmental protection. Further development without stringent oversight could result in further harm to the coastal landscape and the resources we rely on for subsistence and cultural practices. 5. Inconsistent with the Rural Character: The proposed subdivision is inconsistent with the rural and cultural character of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. Introducing five residential lots and associated infrastructure, such as driveways, septic systems, and utility installations, will degrade the natural and rural landscape that defines this area. The land has long been a place of quiet, subsistence living, and this development threatens to disrupt the harmony between the people and the land. In conclusion, as a lineal descendant, caretaker, and gatherer of this land, I oppose this development. It is not in line with the cultural heritage and stewardship of the people of Kaimu. I urge the court to reject the Special Management Area Use Permit and prioritize the protection of the coastline, its resources, and the cultural legacy of this land for future generations. Thank you for your consideration. Mahalo nui, Chloe Martins-Keli`iho`omalu From: Makani Gregg To: WPCtestimanv Subject: Testimony: Chapters 91-92 section 6-7.5(a) Date: Thursday, October 3, 2024 10:31:43 AM Aloha. This is a testimony against today`s (October 3rd) agenda item at 11am within Chapters 91-92 sections 6-7.5(a) for applicant KAIMU COVE, LLC (PL-S MA-2024-000063) . I do not support KAIMU COVE, LLC`s application for a Special Management Area Use Permit to create a 5-lot subdivision for future residential development and related improvements all within a 3.677 acre parcel in the Special Management Area (TMK 3-1-2-018:001). I do not support and I am extremely against this subdivision residential development which has a gate and blocks beach access to where my `ohana would access for subsistence fishing and gathering. This business did have signs up in a timely manner and I was not aware of this proposal till yesterday. I drive past this property at least 3 times a week and have not seen a sign up. And this kind of gated subdivision on the oceanfront in Kalapana is not the way my family and community want to see happen. I tried of seeing gated subdivisions and homes being built and sold at extremely high prices which drives the cost of living for everyone but especially for Native Hawaiian families born and raised of this area. Theres needs to be more time for families and residents to know about this development because there are more families that will impacted than who was consulted. They graves across the street has more families that have not be contacted and need their voices heard. I highly recommend that this development application does not pass today because there are people that still have concerns and do no want this. Mahalo. Makani Gregg EXHIBIT A-9 WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI`I MINUTES OCTOBER 3, 2024 A video recording is made part of these minutes, which can be viewed on the YouTube County of Hawai `i Planning Department channel at https://www.youtube.com/live/awcv__oZayI?si=nziXiZJ2yys2RQ a Timestamps are provided for reference in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 92, Hawai `i Revised Statutes. In the event the video recording becomes unavailable at the abovementioned URL address, the public can contact the Planning Department for assistance. At 9:03 a.m. Chairman Dennis Lin called the meeting, followed by a recess to wait for the arrival of a late commissioner in approximately twenty minutes. The Windward Planning Commission reconvened in regular session on Thursday, October 3, 2024, at 9:26 a.m., in the County of Hawaii, Council Chambers, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii, with Chairman Dennis Lin presiding. This meeting was streamed live on YouTube. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Louis Daniele III (Vice Chairman), Wayne De Luz, Lauren Balog (from 9:25 a.m.), and Dennis Lin (Chairman). COMMISSIONER ABSENT AND EXCUSED: Chantel Perrin. ALSO PRESENT: Suzanna Tiapula, Esq. (Counsel to the Commission), Jean Campbell, Esq. (Counsel to the Planning Department), Zendo Kern (Planning Director), and Planning Department staff. Two members of the public were in the audience. A quorum was present. Chairman Dennis Lin called the meeting to order and introduced the Commissioners. Staff introductions were made. It was announced that the Commission will hold two meetings today: the regular meeting at 9:00 a.m., and a continued meeting at 1:00 p.m. to discuss the Planning Director Initiated Bill on telecommunication facilities. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 21.43] Chairman Dennis Lin at 9:27 a.m. allowed the Commissioners to review additional materials provided at the start of the meeting. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 23: 071 Chairman Dennis Lin asked each Commissioner to confirm they had reviewed all materials, including written public testimony related to the applications being reviewed today. Each Commissioner verbally confirmed they had done so. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 25: 32] Page 1 of 6 Windward Planning Commission October 3, 2024, Minutes EXHIBIT "A-9" APPROVAL OF MINUTES At 9:30 a.m. the Commission addressed the minutes of the September 5, 2024, Windward Planning Commission meeting. The approval of the minutes was postponed to the November 1, 2024, meeting. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 26: 01] STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS At 9:31 a.m. the Commission took up this item with two public members present in the Council Chambers. Chairman Dennis Lin explained the procedure for testifying and referenced Planning Commission Rule 1-5 regarding decorum. Testifiers were given the option to speak at this time or later when the specific agenda item was called to order. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 26:11] There were no in -person or Zoom testifiers on this agenda item. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2 7:2 71 Coastal Zone Management (CZM) and Special Management Area (SMA) training by the State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) and Planning Department staff. The Commission took up this item at 9:32 a.m. with no public members in the audience. State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) staff Debra Mendes, Acting Program Manager [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 28:401and Shichao Li, Senior Planner [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 41: 29] gave a presentation. The floor was then opened to allow the Commission to ask questions of the OPSD staff. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 1:22:13] [SEE EXHIBIT I — PowerPoint Presentation, EXHIBIT 2 — Cumulative Effects/Impacts Assessment Guidance in Special Management Area Permitting April 2022] Planning Department staff Alex Roy gave a presentation on Cumulative Impacts. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 1: 26:251 [SEE EXHIBIT 3 — Cumulative Impacts and the Special Management Area Planning Commission Rules 8, 9, and 11 (2024) Notes from the Planning Department] The floor was then opened to allow the Commission to ask questions of the Planning Department staff. This hearing item ended at 10:53 a.m. Chairman Dennis Lin called a recess at 10:53 a.m. and the meeting was reconvened at 11:05 a.m. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 1: 49: 001 NEW BUSINESS APPLICANT: KAIMU COVE, LLC (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Application for a Special Management Area Use Permit to create a 5-lot subdivision for future residential development and related improvements all within a 3.677-acre parcel in Page 2 of 6 Windward Planning Commission October 3, 2024, Minutes the Special Management Area. The subject property is located on the makai side of Kalapana-Kapoho Road, approximately 2,450 feet from its intersection with Pahoa- Kalapana Road, Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001. The Commission took up this item at 11:05 a.m., with approximately twenty-two public members in the audience. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2: 00: 56] Alex Roy gave the staff presentation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2: 02: 05] The floor was then opened to allow the Commission to ask questions of the Planning Department staff. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2: 09: 451 Applicant Representative Daryn Arai, Land Use Planning Consultant along with applicant Mark Wyatt of Kaimu Cove, LLC, gave a presentation and addressed concerns raised in testimonies received. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2:11: 58] Seven individuals provided testimony in -person: 1. Leslie Rosehill [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2:23:48] 2. Mark Lindsey Franklin [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2:25:441 3. Emily Naeole [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2:30:29] 4. R.J. Hampton [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2:33:39] 5. Sativa Sultan [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2:37:45] 6. Gina McGuire [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2. 40. 40] 7. Richard Valdez [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2: 45:18] Four individuals provided testimony on Zoom: 1. Keala Keliihoomalu [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2: 51:13J 2. Leila Kealoha [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2: 55: 03] 3. Leialoha Ilae-Kaleimamahu [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 2:59:19] 4. Makani Gregg [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3: 02. 41] Daryn Arai, the applicant's representative and applicant provided comments in response to the testimony given by the testifier. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3: 05:26] Daryn Arai offered to continue this meeting, providing an opportunity to meet with some of the testifiers in the hope of finding common ground or areas where there can be greater understanding and reasonableness. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3: 08:22] Director Zendo Kern provided comments with an emotional tone, stating that in almost four years of sitting in this position, despite facing numerous controversies and challenges, he had never been moved to tears. He expressed that his heart hurts at this moment and offered an apology to one of the Zoom testifiers, Leala Kealoha, acknowledging that the Planning Department had failed to contact her as they should have, and he took full responsibility for that oversight. Director Zendo Kern shared his feelings and urged the applicant to engage with the community, consider their concerns, and work towards a compromise that may be acceptable to both sides. He also mentioned that, for the first time, despite the existing recommendation, he is inclined to change his stance, emphasizing that he had never felt this way before. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3: 08: 53J Page 3 of 6 Windward Planning Commission October 3, 2024, Minutes Action: Chairman Dennis Lin motioned to continue and asked the applicant's representative and the applicant for a proposed time frame for the continuance. Daryn Arai responded, asking if it would be possible for the request to be made at the call of the Chair, allowing flexibility to meet with as many community members as possible without feeling rushed to structure something with potential conditions to address concerns. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:12: 21] Chairman Dennis Lin restated the motion: to continue the hearing at the applicant's request, with the continuance based on the call of the Chair. The applicant will communicate with the Planning Department with updates, and once the Planning Department is ready to present its recommendation, the matter will be placed on an agenda. Commission Wayne De Luz seconded the motion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:14:11] The floor was opened for discussion among the Commission. Vice Chairman Louis Daniele suggested that an Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) be conducted, given the testimonies received. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:14: 50] In response, Director Zendo Kern proposed considering a Cultural Impact Analysis (CIA) and Vice Chairman Louis Daniele agreed. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:15: 07] Vice Chairman Louis Daniele made a motion to amend Chairman Dennis Lin's motion on the floor, adding that an AIS and/or CIA be completed for the parcel before proceeding and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Lauren Balog. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:15:26] A roll call vote was taken on the amended motion to include either an AIS or a CIA, and the motion carried with five ayes (Daniele, Balog, De Luz, and Lin), no noes, and one excused (Perrin) [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:16:33] Chairman Dennis Lin restated the action taken as a motion to continue the hearing until updates are provided to the Planning Department and requesting either an AIS or CIA be completed. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:16:59] A roll call vote was taken on the original motion to continue as amended, and the motion carried with five ayes (Lin, De Luz, Balog, and Daniele), no noes, and one excused (Perrin) [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:17.-48] This hearing item ended at 12:22 p.m. Chairman Dennis Lin called a lunch recess at 12:22 p.m. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3:18: 44] and the meeting was reconvened at 12:58 p.m. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3: 54:201 2. APPLICANTS: MAUI VARIETIES INVESTMENT, INC. (FORMERLY JERRY SOUZA) (PL-REZ-2024-000059/AMEND REZ-13-000171) Application for a 10-year time extension to Condition C (establishment of a commercial use) and an amendment to condition H (road improvements) to require completion prior to occupancy rather than within 5 years from the effective date of Change of Zone Ordinance No. 14 54, which rezoned approximately 1.0 acre of land from Agricultural-1 acre (A -la) to Village Commercial-20,000 square feet (CV-20). The subject property is located at 15-1447 Kahakai Boulevard, at its intersection with Kea`au-Pahoa Road, Keonepoko Homestead Lots, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 1-5-007:061. The Commission took up this item at 12:58 p.m., with approximately thirteen public members in the audience. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3: 54: 30] Page 4 of 6 Windward Planning Commission October 3, 2024, Minutes Jessica Andrews gave the staff presentation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 3: 56: 47] Applicant Representative Sidney Fuke, Planning Consultant with Applicant Wayne Kamitaki gave a presentation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4: 03: 30] There were no in -person or Zoom testifiers for this agenda item. Action: It was moved by Vice Chairman Louis Daniele and seconded by Commissioner Wayne De Luz that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council on Change of Zone Application No. PL-REZ-2024-000059 amending REZ 13-000171 based on the Planning Director's recommendation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4: 07:291 A roll call vote was taken, and the motion carried with five ayes (Daniele, De Luz, Balog, and Lin), no noes and one excused (Perrin). [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4: 08:19] This hearing item ended at 1:12 p.m. 3. APPLICANT: ANDREW MATSUURA (PL-REZ-2024-000063) Application for a Change of Zone from an Agricultural-3 acre (A-3a) zoning district to a Single Family Residential-15,000 square feet (RS-15) zoning district for 3.25 acres of land. The subject property is located at 1078 Abe Street, approximately 100 feet east of its intersection with Lei Lehua Street, Waiakea Homesteads, Waidkea, South Hilo, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 2-4-080:017. The Commission took up this item at 1:13 p.m. with approximately thirteen public members in the audience. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4: 08: 45] Alukahe Kala gave the staff presentation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4: 09: 53] Applicant Representative Sidney Fuke, Planning Consultant along with Applicant Andrew Matsuura gave a presentation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4:16:09] Chairman Dennis Lin opened the floor for the Commission to ask questions of the applicant's representative and the applicants. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4:27:53] There were no in -person or Zoom testifiers for this agenda item. Action: Vice Chairman Louis Daniele moved that a favorable recommendation be forwarded to the County Council for Change of Zone Application No. PL-REZ-2024-000063, based on the Planning Director's recommendation, with amendments proposed by the applicant to Condition M and the addition of a new Condition C which relates to limiting the number of accessory dwelling units allowed on the lots. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4: 33:59] Commissioner Wayne De Luz had seconded the motion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4:36: 48] A roll call vote was taken, and the motion carried with five ayes (Daniele, De Luz, Balog, and Lin), no noes and one excused (Perrin). [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4: 37:11] This hearing item ended at 1:41 p.m. Page 5 of 6 Windward Planning Commission October 3, 2024, Minutes PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4:37:53] Report on Special Management Area (SMA) determinations, minor permits action issued by the Planning Director. At 1:42 p.m. Chairman Dennis Lin introduced this item and stated the Special Management Area (SMA) determination and minor permits issued by the Planning Director for the September 2024 report were emailed to the Commissioners. There were no questions about the report from Commissioners. ANNOUNCEMENTS [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4: 38: 38] Planning Program Manager Maija Jackson announced that two meetings are scheduled for November 1, 2024. The first will be a Special Meeting for the General Plan Review, starting at 9:00 a.m., followed by the regular meeting at 11:00 a.m., which is tentatively set to include eight agenda items. Planning Program Manager Maija Jackson also mentioned that the Planning Department is in the process of finalizing the General Plan Review agenda, which will outline the anticipated meeting dates from November through March. She noted that not all scheduled dates may be necessary, but they are set in advance to keep the Commission and the public informed about potential meeting times. Chairman Dennis Lin announced that the Windward Planning Commission's next regular monthly meeting is scheduled for Friday, November 1, 2024. ADJOURNMENT [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 4:40:20] There being no further business, it was moved by Vice Chairman Louis Daniele and seconded by Commissioner Lauren Balog that the meeting be adjourned. A voice vote was taken, and the motion carried unanimously. Chairman Dennis Lin adjourned the meeting at 1:45 p.m. ATTEST: November 03, 2024 07:11 PM Dennis Lin, Chairman Windward Planning Commission Respectfully submitted, Melissa Daca�aiiali— lgCyaioY Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador Nov 2,202413:45 HST) Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador Secretary Page 6 of 6 Windward Planning Commission October 3, 2024, Minutes C Z Q H Z W W Q Z Q O�3 W Z O N H Z W W Q Z a 1�3 J a V W a LU Foi V O ce a z W W c� a Z a w W z J i 00. =o Z Lu (A (A w W Q z Q .E3 W � z 0 z W d a 0 �z W U �s, z 0 V z z z J a W ce 0LL W ClCOz I -I N LL 0 z V �z z i E z U v NQ Fuco CO 0 N N W m 0 U O 9 N U 0 M n� H o U U cG Ste" w Fa v v U m o U W OC)Q w U ., �o C9 0 3 +1 oc 0 S— JJ � d Q ?l�-.+-i� � QI cz in a� o � N N Z /��� V Z O ONE S n .d O . r. �`n0 +; o Qg� LU No z w 0 r' cc; U E ° ° E d v `c 8 0 a-J fa c v N o .22 L K _o o c 0 0 a U O L oU 4-J E _ c � 4-1 o fa !� z a� 4-J r6 c s 4 — U) a� � �fu W Y z v�i Z . r6 V _ Z aJ L AIL ) Q L. ( vl r� 1 t -� • c O c 0 U Ln 0- e n (q d U Q N 'n a •y. C C 4+ ++ o v 7 I 0 w 4A w N 0 e{S Y Q c `0 ice+ w v L v m w ry v o o u4 tn C 4LU o c G c a m v � 0 � t � Nv ~ '0 %n W O 0 � O 2 C G 0 a O y C L Q• Y W Cl ._ L. a v c 2 u u z a U a Ln M o N � J L QJ � ap+ �C V1 CL .a m _= V � N � 0 ca � U c� y �s Eo .� > y V E a O vQj m 0 > -= m L 'Q 2 �° _ 'oa c o m i J U 0 00 N H a °4 V U V O Vl i C E Q p1 O _ �N E m M O C _ = p � +�+ O m _u m O N� fA L M M V L ._ = O. (n �0LL > m m m m IL m a m a .r'r I`1 L r.l O C V LM a� LL sail!1!gisuodsall A.ioleinBall v N O V ua e.i 6o.i d E CD -z i E z O Q 0 cB a i CIC N O IV C O Ci O w N a F o s o_ �'J W � � L O L a O V L 4-J w [6 L. O N c L � � Q o L 0 .� Ov ra m .� i E Q 0-0 cnO al w V fu � a N u ra L a-J Ln f o U = v .� L:= roru .— = O V — V � Ln fo .� u E c- L = N L (� V) a) C: O O ry 0 o V — — — L- L- L- V Lin 4 LN -0 N -0 N -0 fo � LL LL L L� N cn ,� V N p ' O � LL ' � N M LL V Q E CD -z i E z O Q 0 cB a i CCE N O IV C O Ci O w N a �s �'J E m cn O a x N V m m a� as.+ O CL CL Y/ 4w ._ E L Q 0 e 0 0 0 0 E CD -z i E z O Q 0 cB a i C� N O c :5; LL IV O Ow N a �'J *fj _ O m 0 = V cp O .C' O V V O N 47 f0 i _ _ C a m o a a� - s m = > m c O m O O= M u m in x A A A A A _ a i _ o D w G7 _ �0 .V Z0 i i — &a E ,V = L = .V O � �. O L. O O O = V 0 _ U d7 m O U U OC OC = OC V) V) V W W A A A A A ees leiiolIJJe j Sees Pei!un Iiwil eliW leoilneN £ 8Uilaioqs R I o fv Ci joeq)98 aupaJ04 el �I `��, I I yl E 71 cn y U �U C � Gt CD c_ .n c� 0 U w� C)cn W C uj W _ c � N _ 2 R 5 V Q � .g � � 0 � 7 / .- -0 e g -0 -J / ro Ln E S CU\ rj m E 2 E cu u e a .e V) o e O w 2 § § �25 k ®]k))\ }k2� {' � §k2�\ - � $ )) k)&} / §|!°■■ g ` ^ j | [ a\\ Uw 0 H Z W x a O J W W G W J m a z N a •• H G � a � O ,dS " V N Z a J a LL O W V 1-1 LL LL O a p" to E � L C pl 00 E L.=a O L W w IA _ au _ m a fA U C w Im a 10 m w J f0 L cn O L a i N V �a 2 1 a O IO01m iEw )W.M` �c= v mcm cao o00� 0 „gym Uia th �� �� N fn E N c6 N N N O d) C_ E N m N f6 fa C O > fn U � f6 j (6 U N O f6 E N M 4 "6 -0 " E N C O 4- O C f6 fu LZ Q E 0)— NO "C M L C O -r- a-J QJ fn +' C N O L f6 a--i N 0) N — 4-1 > > f6 _0 C_ 4-J U N a-1 a-J O C � U N pl O � C �� a- E N N N O E N C fu O C 0)4-J -C N 4-J f C U 0� L O U f6 _ fu 4-J C C IM fB E O .. Q E:O O, O V)_ O `~ C fn N -O N C 4-1C M O U p LO O NEc, NNU- � U C fO — •— C L C N O O U a-J (/l Ln .- f6 a-j .� E N N a..+ N L .- E U U fu fu O f6 E cn ro -O Q fo O 'p N L N 0 U m C U ra Q) U V ate--+ .N _ L U " N a--+ 4 � O N U 3 f0 O C .� V C N U C �' fa U C ra O �- a-J � a� — C E _� � V N � .M Uj >. > U C_ . f0 = dJ '� C _Ln w fv fa fa N O O O E / V C a-1 70 L 0) 4-1 (n 0) C Q) a--' C_ O— N Q U)C_ Q) C a)-ara ��Uf1 G7 of L C fo L C_ C °�`0 C a� "" >` V) a m C O fB u C O cn C 0 N .a U Cl N O UO -O I--0, U ate-d — a� teJ 'f3 C cc 4-1f) N N N � a70 � � • . E N cn ro a--i E p N � L f6 L �' fv w V) u �, � u+ o >,N,C M ;a O . +J a� C OL OL OL O OL 0-0 O O-r O Ln fY D a- C_ a� C_ U C_ C_ Q� u u U C N 9 o. V bo C V 4 N 4 �:l _0 L Ez > � C m a -0 L ci L O N Ln Q O O 4-, 3 �- a -+ c a O_ M U O E O ate-+ _ > O 01 m OV _0C C N r c °U '� vi C:E�'r oVC� Q4- 0) 00 Q) O (a N = cn -O _0 c6 al C C L M C C — - r6 0 ra ra 0 - M � Ln LA o N � cn M � N cv "O N -fo — LA a V) -p 3: ui O >. � �, � 4-1 N L _0ca (� L Q Q '> (n 4+ �c-0 FA U��c w� a oy o a N y N y N m E L= Q2 IS _ y m� v� V E o p O. o `m i ` m 0 H C nm m m N o C y N y � Eo N vy 3 rL, N 7)y v N 9 mo Oa9 5 °P� mcL a c E � "c m o Q d 7 L p U Q y a,m O L> E E U .° ai Y E m c m E m E 3 a m m - Y y< �o'y y m V -.m E [ # o o ¢� m m co w N m U a QQ a O y m S i n� Im a� Q d Q m ° m c c c w -`w d r w o Q L m o d v a s r w 5 2 o o m E 'S .� N d t a H a w co `o y N f ro E c E ? o U° E o o m 4 O w d o �� > o E > O O L �s c�d au �O U H O� pub o o c 5 o mc G > O a� r m C7 N m O O O -'� 5 C N d N N Q O N m o C ap m m a d c m c '� j N N o m Q O N C m a r a C t 7 o W J V O m O$ (li W FL- F- cu o m 01 F- o F- 0 w ees leiiolIJJe j Sees Pei!un Iiwil eliW leoilneN £ 8Uilaioqs R I o fv Ci joeq)98 aupaJ04 el �I `��, I I yl E 71 cn y U �U C � Gt CD c_ .n c� 0 U w� C)cn W C uj W _ c \j z r� M L c O O ea N Z i C z /LL� CD 0)a ■y C C i cco u O cu ` LL _ = (A e� 0 ° •— M 3 �� IM L 3 C O C O •— �- -+ W C O O M � m U) = O m O — Q E '^ O 3 0 0 z ca J 1 m m m m N w N O N w M w m P% C1 s � 3 Ym o _ *fj (A = s 0 = 0 m _ 0 V - = 3 01 = 0 V 13 ._ s c .ra i a �. 'Oa = 0 0 V = ca L �_ _ L 0 �P% i V i 00= V V� aQ >s �,�,L.., MIL 000 =0 �*'p �cnm0 L. 47 V_ E m 0 m 0 C ._ 0 0. E cA � cA — � y � c QV = V L 0.ich 000> _ L. W > o ;HOC 0�+�0 0 0 V 10! V� > = O 0 M L 0 O L s s = a. L z IN IN IN IN *fj 41 1 Ln C �, _ U — V� O a� = O• _ c Q� a 3 p ' ( If un _4W 4)o 41 0 Ma fG V cQ Oa s •i•— =a.+ ._ _ cn a �*=� s Ls L •- 4w L._ of Q CL ._ L _ -W y E O m 3 O E�� M I�'� a� °o n�= 00�0 �Eo 00=oCLQ. =9 9 O OCL 0� -- 3 _ 'OasQ M W Oi O L O L O O� O*+ 0�01 i0 m U Z to Z O 'G m N / Cn \ \ & \ �\ (ƒ\ /\ \\ƒ / g/ ~ -05 =<a ]®( ef« �\ \ ƒ _ ( \ \35 \ \/\ / /\ \ fa2 \a /\\ { % )) 7 /, �§ ƒ a= \¢ /\>§)10 uur� » / ¢�/ \ ( _ \/\ \ \g = *fj *fj Q V .�. = N_ cii = m I �o a, U v 47 m -0 O � L a ai 0-o _ E - v NN m aco O s 0 O u In ,o v O c T a o O L j.. L (Q u C Q Q .0 CC� C Ln m O C..�3vo U(i L 0 p R L C a E Gl Ln o H � � v a Q (n a n � L Q Q) � •— aJ � � T a (n Q M T U) L a�a-0 M G a fu C.0 -E o 0 (n C 4-1 O 0 C -0 C U O -O a--' Q 0 (n � cy (n'i O 7 r6 O (n O 70 (n O (n 7 t6 N (O -0 -O O � M _' 0 -- 'i C En O N V N U C C O ro i L. 7 •L O L r O L 7 V L L cc U O L U N - a1 O� 7 c 7 0 O N c En u u(a r !n r6 .0 .- U U U L L 2 U cl (n (n 0 U O W 0 U a) 0 m rg � ru _O CD E U) (n - Cj1 LL [6 — Cr N M IT N i0 CO m 4- 0 V M .0 A � o CL o m L = eke a Z c o cn _ o N p O o 'C Y/ m L v 7 �� 2 'ee w (c }+ �E0m&2 w CL i �nm=cao V O 3 =0_ I _< Mcs L w smwo th a -usa�� m cam-W30.L.4-m ou �k �0 N Q Ln O N za E CD -z i E z N Q 0 cB a i CIC N O � O O111111 6 _ m Vi m O O V V M V = m s n =low V i O s o V s — � V to � - s .— - O O — ��' o s a .� cm low o _ m 'Q ° _ V ■— i O — ■— V ■- �+ V 0 0 M = O O � _ — — s m °7 ' = m ■; i L. MINIMS E a m o m O m _ �O (A M M. 4- O (A ,0 _ V ,� _ ow _ M i O OMINIMS O i ,O V cn MINIMS i 0 0 0 0 0 .— }+ O O a a a m° a L. o 3 a o A A A A A A W o v =� Tr�MM `v W O J f2 o J � L 00 : N (n a U L O Q O p1 fl- J Ln o C N ro -r- 4-, U C ate-+ V � .C: Q = � L ate) O (n >. 4-1 70 C: io Q) O C L U 0 O L � L (n C: o S= fu r0 a--+ E U u 3: Ln O L U L fo Q O -0 r� U ro � � 2 o F- LI) J *fj 3: ra J N U 0 3 ru J v c ra J 5 = L ■ CL '- i ° � 7 C' r L M L Vf ■> _ LM CL V ■ coo L � _ O W Ls CL N M � L Vi�V t0 w rl }a V = a m � � L L = a m 0 V . • '— cn O ra � s a'd O L. ,O i 4- = a-+ Q � *, O mca O s pro C cL. L. _ L y M 7 M 4-A L O CL = o = ._ a L. V U 4- rQ U w \ O \ V i _ ra CL `1 .w G 4- O V = + _ O 4-1 O 41 o ra (n U = CL 3 �+ ■v O O CL t ■V CL a O .00.W H A A A ry r. > 0 E 4-JCCL ro 4- (1) u 4-J .- aim -Q) L. 0 U u c .0 U-) (a 4- 0 M ru u 4- _0 E E 4-j 7' p1 C: 7 @ ce 0 4w C: > c= O 0 E L. V) Lf) o .0 L. 4-J Ln ru C: x 4-J ro L- w o 0 0- E v) c: X u 0 C: C (1) (1) U •T No = (/) U .— -0 C: . 0 C: 3: 0- ro L- 4-J C: W m 4- — W 4- U ro 4- ro 15 e-s fu u _0 Q) 4- W0m = L W m O N Z al mLL oM =a ��L) N 11 O o °' ,_ N M 0 _W m U x O O ■V W O- v a0 ac°cI� 11 N E 0 a 0 a u m A u I 0 N N Q E O E ro U N E t31 U C r6 M -0 N = O fo al raj 0 E O U O C rl z a� p1 J N 4-, r fo O � N O -0O 4-J N N ra O O- (a M ro _0 N p1 C O C O U O C O M L O Q L O p1 D O V) L 0- 0 J O N U a� a� L 0) C 4-J rn C 4-J M N O N N Q O U N 1-4 O a)N V ro � M N -O N a--+ a C O E U N CD C ra O m ry N � C C O 0-0 C ra U O W ro C 0) C O vi •U ro a--) ro O c O ra CL ra N J ro N i U) 70 N N N 4- C O E a� a E o6 N >- O �+ N U � Q .0 V V O � O Q 00 E 'p p ra O U V O _O U m (n O W N fa .a 0)O N = O� c _M Q U - Z•C 'C �O O o= O -0 O C) CL 3 O N tom 4_+ O L (n N O N U •L L m C 0-1 O L O Q (D Q L LA N V J U J O LL . . 0 0 O � Q E ul 0•O ' O � L O W 0) E _' .� > m •r6 E � O Ln m W 0) O C E- L f6 a •`o (3) V = p O L . . V1 N r� N L W N u ` -C u u N G Y N .LI u L. O O \ y •y p t •� N W ro N;Q a iy� W ro N 41 N 07 ? W W ro O LC ro c G ' O " 3 a N L i i > ++ 'A.0 y N 4J t W& y T ;� y O� CL u — yro� C= 4 \, L y _ t v t i C N •N C` iNe :� _O O o O V L c i+ L s v. ru0 Q N N ro _ .G b E '�° _ A° ro L Q`o or O p _ro ° u .� C y N 0- � •V O ro C O O O .� i � '� L O a L y ° C E CL +� A w O+ o *CVo ,c N 0 CL O {� O u t •ro 4 ro N 01 b N C L ° T= N W 4, CL C M y ° \ p W ° L ro 1 C ° N ` 41 t c ro .G i In _ c y y CL N i ►°' = N O O E O 01 n w �- W ° 'A4. N V1 c • = N of ro N IA •L C" C C —►, .�. o ro -M ro L= O 'L V V.— N i• O ro •N .° v1 N t7.' N -M i. L ro O d O. L L 'AO d ro p �+ i s > u O N -� aNi ro of A Y O '9 N r h ill m N A "C INO m i b E E Yi 4, u Z ro '!' gy�m•• b u c ro i A i oEi =' T •h. b 'O -M C• FYI O G E O. L ►+ i+ ro 'O .y `►. ro .�-� c W a d N N � O W O N L 'F' m ILO N IM E `O c O EKO , sC> CL E p ro b ° b . 4, N C1 m a 0 a� U O 3 m 4- 0 Q 4w m o% Ln M N 0 m 0 a O 0o a� 0 0 le 00 N co Ln .. 0 0o CUMULATIVE EFFECTS/IMPACTS ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE IN SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA PERMITTING Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program State of Hawaii Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (808) 587-2846 April 2022 EXHIBIT 2 Cumulative Effects/Impacts Assessment Guidance in Special Management Area Permitting 1. Purpose/Background Special Management Area (SMA) permit is a discretionary permit, which requires a decision -making body to exercise judgment prior to its approval. Considering potential cumulative effects in SMA permitting is required by the Hawaii Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Law, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 205A. Pursuant to HRS §205A-22, the determination of whether an action may have a substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect and therefore require a SMA Use Permit, must take into account potential cumulative effects as one of the key elements. Further, whenever the county authority finds that any excluded use, activity, or operation may have a cumulative impact, or a significant environmental or ecological effect on a SMA, that use, activity, or operation shall be defined as a "development" for the purpose of SMA permitting. For example, as the result of cumulative effects/impacts, repeated improvements to an existing single-family residence on a shoreline parcel could be defined as a "development" and trigger a SMA permit. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Office for Coastal Management (OCM) periodically conducts Section 312 evaluations on the performance of federally approved coastal zone management programs of the states and territories. According to the NOAA OCM Evaluation Findings — Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program August 2008 to August 2018, both stakeholders and county partners in the State of Hawaii expressed that "[I]t has been extremely hard to determine cumulative impacts in the special management area permitting process, and community members are frustrated, and that refined guidance would be helpful in making decisions." In response to OCM's evaluation findings and recommendations, the State of Hawaii Office of Planning and Sustainable Development' (OPSD), the lead agency for the Hawaii CZM Program, has worked with the County Planning Departments to study cumulative impact assessments for better decisions in SMA permitting. The OPSD has applied the following approaches and procedures to conduct this study: o Review the requirements of cumulative impact assessments and available guidance from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Hawaii Environmental Policy Act (HEPA) o Request for guidance references for cumulative impact assessments from other coastal management programs via the Coastal States Organization ' The name of the Office of Planning was changed to the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, enacted by Act 153, Session Laws of Hawaii (SLH) 2021. o Research the Final Environmental Assessments (EAs) and Final Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) under the HEPA to review cumulative impact assessments in environmental documents o Discuss cumulative impact assessments in SMA permitting with the county planning departments for their input o Recommend the parameters and criteria of cumulative impact assessments for SMA permitting Based on the subject study, the OPSD is issuing this cumulative effects/impacts assessment guidance for use by the County Planning Departments, which includes: o Cumulative effects/impacts2 o Principles of cumulative effects/impacts assessment and analysis o Spatial and temporal parameters of cumulative effects/impacts assessment in SMA permitting o SMA criteria in cumulative effects/impacts assessment (emphasis added) o Determining significance of cumulative effects/impacts, and the checklist The purpose of this guidance is to provide policy and implementation support to assist the counties to better assess and determine cumulative effects/impacts in their SMA permitting. Following this guidance is not mandatory, and this guidance does not have the force and effect of law and shall not supersede state or county laws and rules relating to the CZM. The counties are responsible for defending their consideration of cumulative effects/impacts in SMA permitting. 2. Cumulative effects/impacts The Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) regulations for implementing the NEPA defined cumulative impact as "the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency or person undertakes such other actions." (40 CFR § 1508.7). On July 16, 2020, CEQ issued its new rule updating the regulations for federal agencies to implement the NEPA in the first comprehensive update since 1978. "Cumulative impact" defined in 40 CFR § 1508.7 was repealed, and an agency's analysis of effects shall be consistent with CFR § 1508.1 paragraph (g) as follows: (g) Effects or impacts means changes to the human environment from the proposed action or alternatives that are reasonably foreseeable and have a reasonably close causal relationship to the proposed action or alternatives, including those effects that occur at the same time and place as the proposed action or alternatives and may '- "Effects" or "impacts" used in this guidance are synonymous, as stated in Hawaii Administrative Rules Chapter 11-200.1. s Cumulative effects analysis is no longer required as part of a NEPA review under CEQ's final rule, issued July 16, 2020. However, as posted by Federal Register on October 7, 2021, CEQ proposes to revise § 1508. l(g)(3) by restoring, with minor modifications, the definition of "cumulative impacts" from the 1978 NEPA Regulations and striking the current provision that repealed that definition. 2 include effects that are later in time or farther removed in distance from the proposed action or alternatives. (40 CFR §1508.1) Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) Chapter 11-200.1 under the HEPA, HRS Chapter 343, continues the requirement of cumulative effects/impacts assessment, and defines Cumulative impact as "the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency or person undertakes other actions. " All EAs/EISs are supposed to provide cumulative impact assessments for their proposed actions. According to the CEQ handbook on Considering Cumulative Effects under the National Environmental Policy Act (CEQ, 1997), the primary purpose of cumulative effects/impacts analysis is to determine the magnitude and significance of the environmental consequences of a proposed action in the context of cumulative effects of other past, present, and future actions. Significance of cumulative effects/impacts depends on how they compare with the environmental baseline and relevant resource threshold such as regulatory standards. Cumulative effects are usually categorized into eight scenarios for assessment as follows (CEQ, 1997): 1) time crowding — effects of frequent and repetitive actions on the environment; 2) time lags — delayed effects of a proposed action; 3) space crowding — effects of spatial density on the environment; 4) cross -boundary — effects occurring away from the source; 5) fragmentation — effects or changes in landscape pattern; 6) compounding effects — effects arising from multiple pathways; 7) indirect effects — secondary effects; and 8) triggers or thresholds — effects defined by agency laws, policies or regulations. 3. Principles of cumulative effects/impacts assessment Analyzing cumulative effects/impacts is challenging, primarily because of the difficulty of defining the geographic (spatial) and time (temporal) boundaries. No single formula is available for determining an appropriate scope and extent of a cumulative impact analysis. However, Guidance for Preparers of Cumulative Impact Analysis — Approach and Guidance (Caltrans, 2005) states that the following principles have gained a general acceptance: 1) Cumulative effects are caused by the aggregate of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. 2) Cumulative effects are the total effect, including both direct and indirect effects, on a given resource, ecosystem, and human community of all actions taken, no matter who has taken the actions. 3) Cumulative effects need to be analyzed in terms of the specific resource, ecosystem, and human community being affected. 4) It is not practical to analyze the cumulative effects of an action on the universe, and the list of environmental effects must focus on those that are truly meaningful. 3 5) Cumulative effects analysis on natural systems must use natural ecological boundaries and analysis of human communities must use the actual sociocultural boundaries to ensure including all effects. 6) Cumulative effects may result from the accumulation of similar effects or the synergistic interaction of different effects. 7) Cumulative effects may last for many years beyond the life of the action that caused the effects. 8) Each affected resource, ecosystem, and human community must be analyzed in terms of its capacity to accommodate additional effects, based on its own time and space parameters. As required by HAR § 11-200.1-10, a group of actions proposed by an agency or an applicant shall be treated as a single action when: 1) The component actions are phases or increments of a larger total program; 2) An individual action is a necessary precedent to a larger action; 3) An individual action represents a commitment to a larger action; or 4) The actions in question are essentially identical and a single EA or EIS will adequately address the impacts of each individual action and those of the group of actions as a whole. The Hawaii Environmental Policy Act Citizen's Guide (2014) recommends that when considering the significance of potential environmental effects, the proposing or approving agency should consider the sum of the effects on the quality of the environment. A proposed action must be described in its entirety, and shall not be broken up into component parts, which if each is taken separately, may have minimal impact on the environment. An action shall be determined to have a significant effect on the environment if it may be individually limited but cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions. For example, pools or septic tanks or other ancillary or accessory structures/uses to a residence structure should be included in a larger development as a single action. According to Stormwater Impact Assessments: connecting primary, secondary and cumulative impacts to Hawaii's Environmental Review process, May 2013, the methodology of cumulative impact assessments should address the following issues: 1) Cumulative effects need to be analyzed in terms of the specific resource, ecosystem, or human community being affected. 2) Cumulative effects on natural systems must use natural ecological boundaries. 3) Cumulative effects are caused by the aggregate of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. 4) Each affected resource, ecosystem, and human community must be analyzed in terms of its capacity to accommodate additional effects, based on its own time and space parameters. 11 4. Spatial and temporal parameters to scope past, present and future actions in SMA permitting In accordance with the definition of "cumulative impact" previously defined in CEQ's rule or in HAR Chapter 11-200.1, and the research on the Final EAs/EISs available from Office of Environmental Quality Contro14 (OEQC) online library, spatial and temporal boundaries are two critical parameters to scope past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions that need to be taken into account in cumulative impact assessments. Principally, spatial and temporal scopes for assessments depend on the scale of a proposed action, and on target resources and/or environment. Each affected resource, ecosystem, and human community should be analyzed in terms of its capacity to accommodate additional effects, based on its own time and space parameters. Ideally, spatial and temporal scopes for cumulative effect/impact assessments should be expanded to the point at which a specific coastal resource is no longer significantly affected, or the impacts are no longer of interest to affected parties. However, categorizing and determining the geographic and temporal scope of cumulative effects/impacts in the SMA permitting process can significantly divert the county planning departments from focusing their time and resources on the most significant effects. Given that existing cumulative effects/impacts analysis guidance from CEQ and HEPA is not provided in the context of the SMA, there remains ambiguity in its application and implementation. This SMA-oriented guidance seeks to narrow down the spatial and temporal scopes of the cumulative effect/impact assessments. With respect to spatial scope, setting the consideration at an existing defined boundary such as the SMA boundary within the county jurisdiction would reduce uncertainty in assessing an appropriate scope. The SMAs designated by the counties generally begin at the shoreline and extend to the nearest highway or several miles inland. Other factors, such as salinity and tidal influences on bodies of surface water, also affect a SMA boundary. Pursuant to HRS §205A-23, as amended, the SMA in each county shall be as shown on such maps filed with the county authority as of June 8, 1977. To narrow down the scoping to a meaningful assessment and include what counts for cumulative effect/impact assessments in SMA permitting, it would be appropriate and feasible to apply the SMA boundary as a spatial parameter if no critical issues on coastal resources or environment are raised beyond the SMA. The OPSD recommends a geographic radius up to the SMA inland boundary from the shoreline as the minimum spatial scope to assess the incremental impacts of a proposed action on the SMA when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Besides geographic scope, temporal scale is another crucial parameter to scope past and future actions to assess cumulative effects/impacts resulting from a proposed action. "Reasonably foreseeable" actions are those that are likely to occur, rather than those that are merely possible or subject to speculation. Reasonably foreseeable future actions are those that have the potential to overlap spatially or temporally with a proposed project. It is recognized that a SMA Use Permit is usually granted to complete a proposed a The Office of Environmental Quality Control has been renamed as "Environmental Review Program" within the OPSD, enacted by Act 152, SLH 2021. 5 development within 5 years from the issued date with potential time extension. In addition to including the effects/impacts that occur at the same time and place as the proposed action, the OPSD suggests that a minimum of 5 years or more as practicable before the application of a proposed action serve as a basic temporal parameter to scope past actions within a SMA for the purpose of cumulative effects/impacts assessment in SMA permitting. The timeframe of a long-range plan such as the county general plan and/or community plan, or the expected lifespan of a proposed project, whichever is longer, could be utilized as a maximum temporal scale to scope foreseeable future actions. To assess cumulative effects/impacts in a feasible way, the OPSD recommends a range as the temporal scale to scope foreseeable future actions in the SMA permitting process. The range would be from 5 years or more as practicable from the application of a proposed project as the minimum, and up to the lifespan of a structure or the operational life of a proposed project as the maximum. 5. SMA criteria in cumulative effects/impacts assessment With spatial and temporal scopes, cumulative effect/impact assessments in the SMA permitting process must be conducted under the provisions of the Hawaii CZM Law. The objectives and policies in the CZM law provide overarching guidance to the counties in their administration of the SMA permit system. These CZM objectives and policies cover: — Recreational resources — Historic resources Scenic and open space resources — Coastal ecosystems Economic uses — Coastal hazards — Managing development — Public participation — Beach and coastal dune protection — Marine and Coastal resources' Under the CZM objectives and policies, the SMA guidelines, articulated in HRS §205A- 26, apply specifically to the SMA permitting process. The SMA guidelines must all be factored into the assessment of any development proposed within the SMA. Compliance with the SMA guidelines must be achieved before an SMA permit can be approved. Therefore, the OPSD recommends that the counties apply temporal and spatial parameters with SMA criteria, as presented in Table 16, to account for cumulative effects/impacts of a proposed action on a SMA as follows: o Minimum 5 years or more as practicable before the application to scope past actions Coastal resource means any coastal wetland, beach, dune, (shoreline), barrier island, reef, estuary, or fish and wildlife habitat, pursuant to the National CZM Act of 1972, as amended. ' Each county may further develop its own cumulative effects/impacts assessment template. G o Minimum 5 years or more as practicable from the application, and up to the lifespan of a proposed project to scope foreseeable future actions o Extension to SMA inland boundary as a geographic radius to scope other actions o Extension beyond the SMA boundary for a specific coastal resource, if necessary o Effects on coastal resources/SMA under the CZM objectives and SMA guidelines Using the minimum spatial and temporal scales recommended by this document as guidance, the counties may identify and/or apply their own temporal and spatial scales for a specific project, based on available geographic information system (GIS) data layers, site visits, and a history of site. Please keep in mind that a cumulative impact, or a significant environmental or ecological effect on a special management area (emphasis added) is required for a SMA assessment pursuant to HRS §205A-22. This cumulative effect/impact assessment guidance is limited to SMA permitting within the county jurisdiction under the CZM provisions and SMA guidelines. Effects/impacts should not be considered if they are remote in time, geographically remote, or the product of a lengthy causal chain. 7 Table 1. Criteria of Cumulative Effects/Impacts Assessment in SMA Permitting Temporal Scope2 Spatial Past actions Future actions Scope Effects/ - minimum - minimum 5 - minimum 5 years Impacts CZM Criteria' radius to years past or Present or more as from the SMA more as actions practicable from the Proposed inland practicable application, and up Action boundary from the to the lifespan of application the project Coastal 1 recreational resources Historic 2 resources Scenic and 3 open sace Coastal 4 ecosystems Economic 5 uses Exposure to 6 coastal hazards Beach/dune 7 protection Marine 8 resources Bay, estuary, salt marsh, 9 river mouth, slough or lagoon Fishing ground, Wildlife 10 habitats, or agricultural uses of land 'Criteria from the CZM objectives HRS Chapter §205A-2 and SMA guidelines HRS §205A-26, as amended. 2a) Identify past, present, or foreseeable future actions in the vicinity of a proposed project from the EAs/EISs OEQC's online library by searching for the keyword "island" and "year"; b) Search for available information for past, present and planned actions within the SMA in the vicinity of a proposed project from the respective county planning department, with available GIS data layers; and c) Scope foreseeable future actions from community plans, capital improvement projects, and land use designations as applicable. 6. Determining "Significant effect" and "Cumulative impact" Although not defined under HRS Chapter 205A, "Significant effect" and "Cumulative impact" are defined under the Hawaii Environmental Impact Statement law, HRS Chapter 343, and HAR Chapter 11-200.1, Environmental Impact Statement Rules, as follows: "Significant effect" means the sum of effects on the quality of the environment, including actions that irrevocably commit a natural resource, curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment, are contrary to the State's environmental policies or long-term environmental goals as established by law, or adversely affect the economic welfare, social welfare, or cultural practices of the community and State (HRS §343-2). "Cumulative impact" means the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency or person undertakes other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (HAR § 11-200.1-2). Furthermore, HAR §11-200.1-13 has established significance criteria, including qualitative and quantitative thresholds, for determining whether an action may have a significant effect on the environment. The significance criteria include: — Irrevocably commit a natural, cultural, or historic resource; — Curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment; — Conflict with the state's environmental policies or long-term environmental goals; — Have a substantial adverse effect on the economic welfare, social welfare, or cultural practices of the community and state; — Have a substantial adverse effect on public health; — Involve adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities; — Involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality; — Be individually limited but cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions; — Have a substantial adverse effect on a rare, threatened, or endangered species, or its habitat; — Have a substantial adverse effect on air or water quality or ambient noise levels; — Have a substantial adverse effect on or be likely to suffer damage by being located in an environmentally sensitive area such as a flood plain, tsunami zone, sea level rise exposure area, beach, erosion -prone area, geologically hazardous land, estuary, fresh water, or coastal waters; — Have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas and viewplanes, during day or night, identified in county or state plans or studies; or — Require substantial energy consumption or emit substantial greenhouse gases. The definitions and criteria for determining "significant effect" and "cumulative impact" set forth above are applicable in SMA permitting. The county authorities and county I planning departments may apply these definitions and criteria to assess potential effects/impacts resulting from any uses, activities, or operations within a SMA in making determinations relative to SMA use permits, minor permits, and SMA permit exemptions. However, for the purpose of SMA permit decision -making, application of the significance criteria should be constrained to the CZM objectives and policies and SMA guidelines. Eligible actions for SMA exemption, or developments that are eligible for the SMA minor permit, based on a valuation of less than $500,000, should be subject to some form of assessment to show that the proposed action has no substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect, taking into account potential cumulative effects on a SMA. County - specific review and assessment protocols are encouraged to support a standardized assessment and reporting process. If significant cumulative effects/impacts on a SMA resulting from a proposed development are reasonably foreseeable, site -specific mitigation measures in the planning phase, design phase, construction phase, and/or operational phase should be proposed and implemented to mitigate potential incremental impacts added by the proposed development in response to the CZM criteria illustrated in Table 1. For example, site -specific mitigation measures in SMA permitting to achieve consistency with the CZM objectives and policies and SMA guidelines may include: — Provision and maintenance of public shoreline access — Preservation/protection of archaeological sites, wetlands, and other sensitive areas — Protection of life and property from coastal hazards as defined in HRS Chapter 205A — Protection of beach and coastal dunes — Boundary setbacks and building height restrictions to preserve coastal views — Drainage improvements to control siltation in coastal waters — Prohibition of artificial lighting from directly illuminating the shoreline and ocean waters — Restriction, including frequency and intensity, on the improvements to an existing structure such as a single-family residence, on a shoreline parcel. Cumulative effects/impacts assessment has been required by the NEPA and HEPA for several decades. In accordance with CEQ's new rule issued in 2020 and OPSD's research on EAs/EISs, however, it is noted that both NEPA and HEPA have faced difficulty in providing guidance as to how to conduct cumulative effect/impact assessments to meet the requirement. The lack of feasible spatial and temporal parameters has made assessing cumulative effects/impacts extremely challenging not only in SMA permitting, but also in evaluating EAs and EISs. In response to OCM's evaluation, the OPSD has conducted research on all Final EAs/EISs (1,103 total) from August 2008 to April 2020 via the online EAs/EISs library at https://planning.hawaii.gov/erg/. In very few cases, these Final EAs and EISs specifically discussed or applied spatial and temporal parameters to scope the past, present and foreseeable future actions in cumulative effect/impact assessments. Approximately 96% of Final EAs and EISs simply referred to the definition of cumulative 10 impact, and then made a statement of no adverse cumulative effects/impacts for their proposed projects. EA/EIS review crosses jurisdictional bounds, and studies all environmental effects/impacts associated with the action. If an EA or EIS serves as a supporting document for a SMA use permit application, the OPSD suggests that the subject EA or EIS specifically include cumulative effects/impacts assessment on the coastal resources/environment under HRS Chapter 205A, and discuss site -specific mitigation measures in design, construction, and operation to mitigate any adverse cumulative effects/impacts from a proposed development. 7. Recommendation This guidance is for the counties to consider potential cumulative effects/impacts from a proposed action which may or may not be "development" as defined in HRS §205A-22. To ensure and/or defend a consideration of cumulative effects/impacts in SMA permitting, the OPSD recommends that a SMA use assessment provide: A checklist about the incremental impacts on coastal resources/environment resulting from a proposed action under the SMA criteria as illustrated in Table 1 provided by this guidance. Counties are encouraged to develop their own implementation policies and tools to further standardize cumulative effects/impacts assessment in SMA permitting. 2. A location map of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions that have been identified under appropriate and feasible spatial and temporal parameters for the purpose of cumulative effects/impacts assessment. Within a spatial and temporal scopes, the location map should also include all repeated repairs and component actions that are phases or increments of a larger action. References Update to the Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. Council on Environmental Quality. Final rule. Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 137 / Thursday, July 16, 2020 / Rules and Regulations, available at https://www.2ovinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-07-16/pdf/2020-15179.pdf Considering Cumulative Effects under the National Environmental Policy Act, Council on Environmental Quality, January 1997 Guidance for Preparers of Cumulative Impact Analysis — Approach and Guidance, Environmental Management Office, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), June 30, 2005 Stormivater Impact Assessments: connecting primary, secondary and cumulative impacts to Hawaii's Environmental Review process, Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program, May 2013 Hawaii Environmental Policy Act Citizen's Guide, State of Hawaii Office of Environmental Quality Control, October 2014 11 Cumulative Impacts and the Special Management Area County of Hawaii Planning Department (2024) PC Rulp 9- 9-4(e)(4): Whenever the Director finds that any excluded use, activity, or operation may have a cumulative impact, or a significant adverse environmental or ecological effect of the Special Management Area, that use, activity, or operation shall be defined as "development" for the purpose of this rule. 9-4(q): Special Management Area Minor Permit means an action by the Director authorizing development, the valuation of which is not in excess of $500,000 and which has no cumulative impact, or a substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect on the Special Management Area. 9-4(r): Special Management Area Use Permit means an action by the Commission authorizing development, the valuation of which exceeds $500,000 or which may have a cumulative impact, or a substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect on the Special Management Area. 9-10(a): The Department shall assess all uses, activities or operations proposed in the Special Management Area except in cases in which the applicant determines that the proposed use, activity or operation will: a) exceed $500,000 in valuation; or b) have a cumulative impact, or a significant adverse environmental or ecological effect on the Special Management Area. In this case, the assessment procedures may be waived, and the applicant shall petition the Commission for a Special Management Area Use Permit pursuant to Section 9-11. 9-10(e): Where it is found that the proposed use, activity or operation is not in excess of $500,000 in valuation; and will not have a cumulative impact, or a substantial adverse effect on the Special Management Area, and after review by the Public Works Director for compliance with Chapter 27, Flood Control — the Director shall issue a SMA Minor Permit. 9-10(f): The Director shall declare that a Special Management Area Use Permit is required if it is found that the proposed use, activity or operation has a valuation in excess of $500,000 or may have a substantial adverse effect on the Special Management Area. 9-10(g): The Director shall declare the proposed use, activity or operation exempt from the definition of development if it is found that the proposal falls in any category under Section 9-4(e)(2), and does not have a cumulative impact, or a substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect on the Special Management Area. The Director may impose certain conditions with the exemption determination to EXHIBIT 3 assure that the proposed use, activity, or operation does not have a substantial adverse effect on the Special Management Area. 9-10h: Criteria of Substantial Adverse Effect In considering the significance of potential environmental effects, the Director shall consider the sum of those effects that adversely affect the quality of the environment and shall evaluate the overall and cumulative effects of the action. A 'substantial adverse effect' is determined by the specific circumstances of the proposed use, activity or operation. In determining whether a proposal may have a substantial adverse effect on the environment, the Director shall consider every phase of a proposed action and expected consequences, either primary or secondary, or the cumulative as well as the short or long-term effect of the proposal. The Director should bear in mind that in most instances, the following factors of a proposal, although not limited to same, may constitute a substantial adverse effect on the environment when the proposed use, activity or operation: (1) involves an irrevocable commitment to loss or destruction of any natural or cultural resource, including but not limited to, historic sites and view planes outlined in the General Plan or other adopted plans; (2) curtails the range of beneficial uses of the environment; (3) conflicts with the long-term environmental policies or goals of the General Plan or the State Plan; (4) substantially affects the economic or social welfare and activities of the community, County or State; (5) involves substantial secondary impacts, such as population changes and effects on public facilities; (6) in itself has no substantial adverse effect but cumulatively has considerable adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions, (7) substantially affects a rare, threatened, or endangered species of animal or plant, or its habitat; (8) detrimentally affects air or water quality or ambient noise levels; (9) affects an environmentally sensitive area, such as flood plain, tsunami zone, erosion -prone area, geologically hazardous land, estuary, fresh water or coastal water; or (10) is contrary to the objectives and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program and the Special Management Area Guidelines of Chapter 205A, HRS. PC RULE 8 8-3(d) "Shoreline" means the upper reaches of the wash of the waves, other than storm and seismic waves, at high tide during the season of the year in which the highest wash of the waves occurs, usually evidenced by the edge of vegetation growth, or the upper limit of debris left by the wash of the waves, which has been certified by the Board of Land and Natural Resources in accordance with its rules. * *[OCCL, 13-5, ".... or as otherwise defined in section 205A-1, HRS"] 8-11(c) "No variance shall be granted unless appropriate conditions are imposed as applicable:" (3) To minimize risk of adverse impacts on beach processes; (5) To minimize adverse impacts on public views to, from, and along the shoreline. Evaluate potential cumulative impacts of variance on environment? Amend variance based on observed substantial adverse impacts? PD RULE 11 11-3(i) "Shoreline" means the upper reaches of the wash of the waves, other than storm and seismic waves, at high tide during the season of the year in which the highest wash of the waves occurs, usually evidenced by the edge of vegetation growth, or the upper limit of debris left by the vegetation growth, or the upper limit of debris left by the wash of the waves, which has been certified by the Board of Land and Natural Resources in accordance with its rules. 11-4(c) The Planning Department may waive the certification requirement in cases where there may be special or unusual physical circumstances or conditions of the land or where a structure or activity is proposed at a considerable distance inland. Setback lines shall be conservatively, but reasonably established. The Planning Department may require a survey map of the subject area depicting physical and geographical conditions to assist in making a determination. 11-6(a) The mining or taking of sand, dead coral or coral rubble, rocks, soil or other beach or marine deposits from the shoreline setback area, in excess of one gallon per person per day; 11-8(a) A minor structure or activity proposed in the shoreline setback area shall not need a shoreline setback variance if the Planning Department determines that it would not affect beach processes or artificially fix the shoreline and would not interfere with public access or public views to and along the shoreline. [and will not cause cumulative impacts or have a substantial adverse impact on shoreline resources] Cumulative Impact Definitions: US EPA: (1) whether the resource is especially vulnerable to incremental effects; (2) whether the proposed action is one of several similar actions in the some geographic area; (3) whether other activities in the area have similar effects on the resource; (4) whether these effects have been historically significant for this resource; and (5) whether other analyses in the area have identified a cumulative effects concern. § 1508.7 Cumulative impact Cumulative impact is the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non -Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. Tyree of Ili f Oct I lid i re�ct C LI "I U 1"I t ivc EffeLt Effect 410vi-a -- 10.1 C•C;a:3 CaUse� Of Fffpo Timing of •ffPo P toi c'et C'�orisLrudjon And IrrI-7.or-.iw-H H I ion ° i•:J irPr:1 F f r �:l x rir id I' i•: I v:::' AL Scini- � FU1 j r6- ' 'i!hin Rc .. i' i•: 9:: r F-x r-1 Pi° All TiEi.rti °tiaa �°a'r a'°a�1 01- IN th(- 'A4hin Rrmr•idi wi _ -ti W { Itr'7x ty k17'�, D:CJj-,� . Can the County institute a requirement for coastal development to include a "Cumulative Impact Analysis" if the County can define and/or set parameters on how to determine if "Cumulative Impacts" will effect the environment? Past Imp act Actions Proposed Project Impact Cumulative Impact on Individual Resource =mpct Future Actions " Reasonably foreseeable, Imp act i ncl udes i ndi rest acti ons Other Present Actions 1. Proposed Project Impacts — Describe 2. Previous Impacts to resource, or within geographic area — Describe 3. Other current impacts to resources, or within geographic area 4. Potential future actions and their impacts to the resource or within geographic area. Define: Geographic area Cumulative Impact Analysis EXHIBIT A-10 From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehil Date: Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 3:53PM Subject: Re: Request for Information To: Dacayanan, Melissa <Melissa.Dacayanan@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Steen, Raimee<Raimee.Steen @hawaiicounty.gov>, Roy, Alex <Alex.RoyCChawaiicounty.gov> Mahalo for your quick response. Your kokua is much appreciated. Aloha, Leslie On Friday, January 24, 2025, Dacayanan, Melissa <Melissa.Dacayanan@ hawaiicounty.gov> wrote: Good morning Leslie Enriquez Rosehill, Thank you for your email. Following up on Raimee Steen's email from Friday, October 18, 2024, please find attached a copy of the Windward Planning Commission minutes. The application is currently on hold pending the completion of an AIS or CIA. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Planner Alex Roy at (808) 961-8140. Thank you. Melissa Dacayanan-Salvador Windward Planning Commission County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 EXHIBIT "A-10" 1of4 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Direct: (808) 961-8156 Main: (808)961-8288 Email: melissa.dacayanan@hawaiicountyAov From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Sent: Friday, January 24, 2025 To: Steen, Raimee <Raimee.Steen@hawaiicounty_gov> Cc: Dacayanan, Melissa <Melissa.Dacayanan9hawaiicountygov> Subject: Re: Request for Information Aloha and mahalo for the information. I have received them. I am wondering the status on this application? Leslie Rosehill On Friday, October 18, 2024, Steen, Raimee<Raimee.Steen@hawaiicounty_.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, Leslie Rosehill, In response to your request for information dated October 9, 2024 (PL-INT-2024-008941) regarding TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001, you will receive a separate email with a OneDrive link to view the following folder: TMK (3) 1-2-018-001 The Planning Commission meeting minutes in respect to this TMK are currently unavailable. It will be provided to you as soon as it becomes available. Please check your spam folder/junk folder if you do not receive the OneDrive link email. Please confirm you are able to view the files sent. 2of4 Thank you. Raimee Steen From: Steen, Raimee Sent: Wednesday, October 1 To: 'Leslie Enriquez Rosehill' Subject: RE: Request for InfowiiMm Aloha Leslie, This email is to confirm that your request has been received (PL-INT-2024-008941) . We are working to gather the files associated with your request and will send them to you once complete. Mahalo, Raimee Steen Clerk II I Planning Division County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 1 Hilo, HI 96720 Main: (808)-961-8288 raimee .steen @ hawaiicounty_.gov From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill 3 of 4 Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2024 8:33 AM To: Planning Inter gov> Cc: Leila Kealoha Subject: Request0*40900 To whom this may concern, Aloha no, I was advised by someone in the planning department office yesterday to make my request to this email. Mahalo nui for your review and attention. This is a request for all plans, permits and history associated with TMK 120180010000. Address: 12-7789 Kalapana Kapoho Beach Rd, Pahoa HI 96778 Also in request are meeting minutes brought before the commission in respect to this property and landholders, Kaimu Cove LLC. I appreciate your due diligence and will be waiting for a response. Mahalo, Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Hilo, HI 96720 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A-11 From: Steen, Raimee <no-reps@sharepointonline.com> Date: Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 12:47PM Su lder "TMK (3) 1-2-018-001" with you To*:ee*OWmeeeen Cc,hawaiicounty_.gov> L!�' Steen, Raimee shared a folder with you This is the One Drive link to view the files for your request for TMK (3) 1-2-018- 001. TMK (3) 1-2-018-001 D, This link only works for the direct recipients of this message. 1of2 EXHIBIT "A-11" This email is generated through County of Hawaii's use of Microsoft 365 and may contain content that is controlled by County of Hawaii. 2of2 EXHIBIT A-12 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8AB7-41CO-AO87-D524E75FE5EA Aug-23-03 U 41ps frm-CLARK REALTY OW- HILO 6099616271 T-073 P E1t12A819 P-886 P"MAWT -1 k DS DS 51312022 EXHIBIT ••A-12 " DocuSign. Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA Aur-23-05 04:41pe Fran-CLARK REALTY CORP. HIL0 T-O73 R.009/010 F-989 At the request of. sr. B"ca Itab3.-nikau, as Arc)b&a,vj9+gjc4t ,Inyentory Survey wAs tpoaductmd by ScL-txtti:f,�c Cons u,. t&At Services APM 4 .paccv4 .03f land. 1pr-a.ted, .am L:.3w1- 5�. et mu � ■. Puna vlstrLct, i,416Dd of, hawai'i t.FIgure Iy;. Tha p�po&* 40f »is SurV ey WILry t,o dat4=1,ne tte:.irr;&awnc * or absence of 19 i(jnificaut cu lt-uxel ramatims to tha, pprajoct aescea . Me fl:c1dwork was casrr' ked out on Drtobor Z:3 a -ad 24, la-w by. Robert 3►... �pF�� 3���w �;VF1z4 pal Trive&ti:ga-rori_ nnd Li" udoxevn jr4jead. )U;:S0tant) 'ne, i wjvict. a ea et�co®pae�rd 3.8 e.o�-arc- bordered an =the aarth !s ► am A.D. 175J2 a a+ 3 w, an 't.ha ! aL8t � yhr, .ace -an, on z Rai ut 1r} by &M *ecnpied, hp"-e lot, "d Ib*- wc*r �• �[aingona-�ai�oX:o 1441ch A06d , VWRO, .e -t ;)n ir. zb e- project arena. 1AC111d d., drat was nor. l.f zcd ro. qu.am Tif ate, f*Zza, Vinci, ZOLA', &ftiAj iwa ey p6d, "d ,e Corr 5imnod .cava.r. Small-, groan 'c�, t i �PP+cr i_n t4_e draa of aiut 5.Q-lfl�$3L 8,.*1 � The i�eacal aa13 clo"if-ioatio n. of the pxv-Jett Area xss lCsva Ptrt3at3 i kr.aaaesl r rocky ixes-t (90il SurVMY 1�"-'I•s.-44-, 41-) A. raeYi:*w, -of, t" Land 'Cojo',iss ion Awzrd: -t.j;CA4 booka f4nkzad- ao - 'LCA.tie witbin or nitar uto jpn9j tct Remit I . er ,�rec i� c�r3 Shear in i a3se i „A iacIada 3 k la �Fe le u t k s ' fit. � ]Cei'pi i ►191t 6x5y ,(80 V aA P a DS OS 7 DocuSigri Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA Aug-23-05 64;42pe Frog-CLARK REALTY CARP- HKO 8Q895162TE T-DT3 P OW 919 F-638 a/' a -M.Kuw.,z•x I OS pS I - ��, � 5/3/202-2 i DocuSign. Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA Au;-23-05 04.42pa Fror-CLARK RULTY MRP. 41LO 0089616278 T-0'f3 R.005/019 F-918 and Dtc 1972) , a batrit-am;i n ... . �x Ltd: a ppx� stQ.ttt trail (ChLn g gM A11a- twcx wai 1s and. 11Q,r$rrar• 3.977 ), aAU, terraced areas, and a series of. zrAil3 CRordaer. 9ardnes hat s-ugVM- ted. that the KnIpti-l&I-apafla area ,caw general use throe-ghout the regton, wIrIk &m&j j, areas pi ' I)jgXXy izrtens i ve P-IentiAq areas mixed- mitt,; hab:itatiam uni-j�.s x *vrdaer i977:5=.. Bordner's ser_t.l,*=ntAt pZtz} for .1G�.3�d�a�tiQCa3apgtra ar" ;LIB. mf lrrted in Mctldu�wrney's uVLttlameat M0,4A ;- which �r os five xunas of Mawft-ilm n aerr_siement and 14Ad.. u". ;cm,* , �pw_ ttey' g mcadV.I, r fists coastml az3C +fit strip irh#c# i 1 ad, str.�cture�z�'�tit��.g. ��Li� .peg->;aau�exrt a�}err �:razap,Qrar•y *i8e.�akorrg tha eAt•i" C*as.t t.lCE140wney 19�g;1�:),. S�tties4etrte cas�id. ac��r si•rtgu,laz.k5r� ca 'srrs ct in .smaii wide; 7V spaced•. I aps, or men DrO-t d a -ound- s pemjttjv 1_Oc&tj-_4n-V mch ms. Ej,10, Say. �;�3�p►rn�,:Y 979 , E 3 Get`dan ptot•s mad ether a,RicuIj-t1Ii. a t:ujCes �rere � x 3 ► rua� is td wj to h �Lhv, habit't�c,3i teav=wa 4FieF3dowaay T� , 3 �6. } . >!�c•F�,�towney sa�ges�a 'z ea�5►a:.�mrnar:1; #.'eater►- such • aS cbe cccurremce of as)j. r>eals, �or bets-wr 4a.!4xIw,&e4- *fire gail,s' ...• . impot;te;V-1 f4ar mrops, Pnr.,dbj_4L X"" or S.;:Av_ t, ce4t�t31t>Es fbs C i. s 41menAhl* to -2*4 P*nda or Itrea.m$ for aqu=ajta '.e• ,Amdj�or tn�aalaxLd, Tarim cp���tiap. a�eeiar to abe ma.}nr °acc pXs itsov�� d. wi r rep } a D3� rest vtis xh4 qt r1 #uine¢a agrIculture- It: wotod. by }ta��' aad. �a�Y ����$s�•�4:�• ��o �a�: Wit. �F?�i7C .Kerb �ar��t��+ supportad Lora -and IVw.,kr. tal.m "gp+rte4 saAt. pOLatuea-.- ElAis d+ scr ad x � a:s' ►a j r 4 :# Usut., -And �Cm3a Spit- Vbe {as �� 5/3/2022.. DocuSign. Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA AWZ3-05 04!4.3ps FrmrCLARK REALTY CORP. HILO BODISIS271 I -an P.0OVDID F-688 area rxa$ ext�n>&�:v�ly t-tir�:3vart�xd: ,a�trd�..�s�ndad. p�aatat#..a�ial�� gr!I�a$ Pf cccon:,kt.., and cl—amiss of Ere* l.. -,use* -motet, that haimo had a ;one sandy b»+ : J klis, U.2j=.a-604 �z fs the bea�Tx area, ��3.�d�a�c� Rax�[Ia]can3.,a A���rs mac} the as tsci tec! #rabitatitt7 cwap.ig-x- and trail, that vas*Ce of the t highjmr donsity use arias suggested by 'Pordmw and- XcEldowaay. The pre►s,"t proje,:,,t area IiDcatad north&aat from: the. peach by tb• 00*21 mad+ ,have JDmn A w fntanr ime,1Z vLijtx� area p0s*1,b3-y. djae tc thin. saj'.-s and the ].;arck- of a pezmaue-nr. matzx, snnroe. • ThIs beiaq the n -, expocteg %,iwt" mi-ght 4nelude tmp=ari►_ jh rr Ceme-rat im to i ei : ac ss the r-., ad rem pros ct'xea g#INAa rts-e..ta: the- pPss;ft� i.ity of hAman bnriajia 'b". pr"e nt in t" Tbe-;PUrPQW ct this Invarttary auxy. was.,"...Me presence or ,abseas-e. Pf sk .nut remalms �.,hr: wi h and zubsuzlare t,evtjM%. The gurjace. ZVCQ=atS& mr.* eras• &Inducted ty mt�4*4ng.- ttc :prp-jps* ax,*a, In rs �e s►ar!`. + sr the th�z- � r�r�ray_ Mre VhAn It 3a. �parfi.. SF R •xUr* '14ftiltt,,y we& �E arStr . to -good' xthi - pacing bqt ray aim s.e�v+eyalre •Wba 46,��-e0quate Smr �,te. ,digc sver An �- cif, pal uzal xv�;xa >war,er fl4wad and, parked VIth..IL 't''60p=AVY site =xt�ax.; 'rs aorfiaiICe i x rc a : a -tsut- lbqr:b gy.cinp a�ai l DocuSign. Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA Au='23-05 04;43pe FrwCLARK REALTY CORP- HILO BQE BIRTS T-M P.W/019 E-199 a]tr-atigt&Phi=c rrenc sws Oh;%th. w*r-a wSed to, examilm sv,U' 4'"S its and earplore- f-or ,buriAd 'cultu�ra].. nat•t.,arials,.. The soil fret the. -excavations was noa. scr,"rrcd. aacordi were icspf tbrough -the vie raf fier1fincn-ems, pa67xyri6w draxipgs- of se-lected rrrchi-tectaral f`eat-grog, and• the use of a bl•a mk and wh i:t-e phetn record. All soi i ro3ore were based au the Muns•ell colmr charts. MaEppi- g was- done. by. tape grad cov&m*-. All project m6tar!�&ls a -re -!�,tn.ed at the offs-ce p�fSc erretific Cs>asuLt- s. eat Servicrs,, F.&n6Qhe, Niwai'.j. t .. F-our Axch*eoUgita:1 sites war:e iocasc*d d>ar.;Lsg tis-e fieldwmrrk, t.k$s�*- war-* site 54-1F�6;3:-��. $� to 1J3, 516 #Fj glix'e 2'Y . cacti Of � th�� syt i� de.scr.�;r't�rd b+ek�s�►rr Sir 18,E v s$ ] WAS a C--shape lac -aced near the base of tam k . D , i754D rev a• f-low and, at the et1f Qjf- thjj. b6UldC;Ze Pmba r,s3a41' ; F i'x re 3 sad-4 . The op+rn jaq of the �s�ap�a gy red to the wtzt-. The: c-jpum width, Q.f tbv #,trucxut t 'ws$. 5.JQ ..ilp Wr4 the deptt al ttm �C - Shop& f-rom its i n er is t a i. to tba'�t p - of ,.the C.--a3dpe was I -Ab m_ The max.irmm waI1 th-ficxa*xA 'W&A 14 "a =&XLTnijm Lm $too r •" 11[ he..Wbt. wag .o .. n:.M. The fr.atvrim wAs 4tvzlt of shacked -•sub-.&ng L*r tD- saLb-"uAdtd bacelt cosbb-lea- *nd: 4rRaU. bo.vl�der...a . The, 4.xvi4'ar 1 &1.1 lot the srruc>turie hAO be,r-n xUs"; bed: -by, .,sevAr_A;l : at t- Tun ts. ' Ifte *outharn. Milt of the ffatytre: w,Ks ovse 'ds�tur4ed: Uan- t#t-6rthera halt. PS DS �{ [� 5j3%2022. DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8AB7-41CO-AO87-D524E75FE5EA Aug-t3-05 U 4300 Frow-CLARK REALTY ODRP. HILO 8089618IT8 7-013 P.00AIill F-888 Da as r rd r U 5 - r6 1•- 7 DocuSigri Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA Aur-23-05 D4:44ps Fro--CLARK REALTY CARP HILO 8060616278 t 1, D JpS OS 5/3/2D22 T-0I3 P M/019 F-888 l 1 y ey.iiq }H 'i dtiJ �.\ Y ���{ �.` 'S t' ''�'�y �3� I��+' � b• _cr r t F I �y '" ✓ .y, r�' .mot �+R` 1 �'�i� i.. - Cam+ 1 .� i/FyL` 'rr •yW..' .•����� r� \ :.r r.. � I. ± • r•"' <f A• rj'V "tia6.. M l T ti ^r i '�O r i �^ r s" 1 DocuSign. Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D524E75FE5EA AUK-I3-M 04:-Owr Frw-CLARK REAL Y CORP. HILO 828951EZTI F-D73 P.0111DA F-036 A. 16-rge pica- Of' IZ3..h oP1 wor. he gtoUad'sur- gace• on tie, irmi-da of orb& C-Slrape. A- sieg a-.aUa i-grepbiC Cr-,_ncb (5 ,� tree- exca�ra'ced just ou�- aide: the opening of, tbo C-ahacpe to taa•r foz� buried .cul-t-uml depamI it A.. Tb is uAbt xaaaeur.ed 1.00 by 6.. ,51D- a aid was dug ta: ,a. depth of 40 cam. b.el:ow a►wface. buly oar. natur&l layer was encounter", This lay*r vat .a black (10 YR- 211, d} silt with abatad&nt grwwl sl,.ged• pieces of bamalt . 4900.t of the. e."t"M half of r Un.kt VA& TPOk 04ifmv- ly bel-ow them- .suTaAce.. The westom hsat ok 'Oft UUkt. b"toac�d >ike 091 mc*s, -between n An;1 4b: gm. beX,*w surface.. JRa calms r4l �aa i- Als of any kinO, wage rrcomerod. Sits 3 9 .. wa:5 co> i";L cif tka surtav& tv,.wma CF1gUxeu 5u 46, And 9) _ F-mo-t-irry l ir" a t -stAp0 err,4tb it.a. Pp"Ls- Dr. -erpt qd ro the• sQu�Dh., The maxim widrb of the *stx.mc r re w" 3.70 w and tim dep t4l u f the C�-ebapc f atom J L 6 _jzt aricx, • ar02.1. cc! Cie C�-s3ape Was 1 .2-a m. -T3ra• mea-x:ifi,m wai3 ChUlwcAA^ was 1-.09 j and 'the maxinum. irmer or way l height. ,w" D,,-17-57 p.- Tbi$ fea'>f . _s�� �r,s�-cb�asxruc�ted �. su�a-en�u3�r .ra ewb.-r».mpded basalt cobb&** r..ud: zMAJI ;bQUt4pTA . TO pamtg# bfi ed of_ jrtor 8rxuct,ure >Kax cvUt utd and- im bac.. comd tic r, The A!l;Ur _ r-bAV S of t-he:.4tx 1cr-* wee Wel l stack*& drat f jrt,ek,. A 'aenz. grfw- at she ._GrWxe�•,qff the inter or *bill. � Featur—e 2. weas situcad: all-gh:tly mQr& than t m meters to the South of FeatuTe i . Ttat.VM 2 .Vac a r9vk. me.und: •Whic'h measured 1. es m nor r sarh by 1.. ast,/► "t,. v��� a ara�num he�> s�# Utst r* -war of sa3- l� 'to sub- 6S OS 5/3/2022 DocuSigri Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA Aug-23-05 84r45pm Frort-CLARK REALTY CORP. HILO 1029616276 T-DT3 P-012/812 F-^888 PW _ ....r uz y.' w r•-.,lit � � � lz.R r ,.. f ' 4 +rr j�`' r � d�S-y �M✓r£� ��r..A'sa � ' � ` a vial �z {., + f A y IV~. '-�.. t �� �`: x-.ram._ ,'.- _ r� , .."r:r _ a .:. `•a:!'� !: � r..s�`'r. - �`- - '-^.'5..-- �' ":? K'• _ N -'�'' •+Say V � r, ; r .: j t ar Y -+.•4 r�s„S rorr r y F 5 z J iz, 40 J W. • E , „ a iT.�sre 6.7 ,Ni -" r,C .•+ �t6+•. .. i`h; ��+# '"4g� �yc'"�"�w.s• iv `�` ; 4i RAW, "'r DocuSigri Envelope ID En445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA S huh-23-05 04:47PR Frm-CLARK REALTY CORP_ HILO 10996162T8 T-V73 P.014/019 F-M 9l 11trat -d r x`+Si 1p '±t7r<e [3 cih'r 1116,asu7C4-Rg d . ,5Q by. 4D . 5d cxc wAr edt betio"n :F-ea;tax;esr X. and- 2 _ aunit -was dug- to a maximum. depth. of 1A CM taw ac4t-. Q.nly a7tr nAtUXitl 1AW r WAS -6DCOuntered. TbA9 lacer ca �atasf 0t -a- dares reddimb, br.owp YR. 2.�54JZ, d j, Salt -Witt abundant :grCv#i zkzois ri-eca of. �a�alt. The 4att bot.-t-4mmad gut -on ,a 'bedrock cam basalt_ ETC ciXitura l xateri&J:ar -of ,auy ki-nd .wem z rarad. �x .5 t at 3 ,ram �. •��i :that *XtmAjod. a)ang: Tha base of x-t & ti:LLI for the u - ado so Seat d +`3gar� ;P) Theakl exfiCnda bec to:thc b��d W&S C4�V&red: by tic. VJMW L�tjt am *tn xr�4� ems. ThFe. i� ngtt� a� the Mall WA tip n ,prn;�Ccr.. area. w" ;2&. ara, thw wzj j .ba 4brt. w . �r ��i >!t,•. �x� �;td �i�th reps: �.. 51� �.. - *4 1 wm--s"Z'aac�eci; Of wall At&Mr� qQA f)wad large. cobble x4a amall boulder. &i-za',a bales�3s. i� IA �pzq JAW. MAW tpwiA on tQp of- t ht *all S°i a 148V SM, 70-4tu•rd 1 +gas as l > ZWA_ jb"bm ;e 1LFj&jmx,e 9,1. The- �aeas�xkrsnt xis cx � eatta >a >t>._.l sa Rgr0/avatt. bar . #: a cbw�/wcxt, vUb A .depth of 0- ,k;... The bptulag. vas claaxoff .crf- rmiQ. whLch wai ttiaed Ai4. bujad. $p"L�fl��cF�� 1W t {�e37C �ca.ta , :t # a.. mo 4ulUuml A&te9t4a IKA& ,St►unt in 5/3/2022 2 r - - - - - - - - .... 4 OICA� 4V A, DocuSign. Envelope ID En445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA 04;48po Fro*-CC1 RK RPAL'rY CORP. HILO BOH86162TO T-M P.416/019 "88 The. presence of t:he, �L.6arby ceze"ry v" .1a zper;i:f&:e: c+ancer'n Oaring thXs prpj.ect, spec;lal rrtt,entiop Vaer~ d to themtukapax- tion o-f 'tihe pro_je•ct axe& to determine kf eirt>Ecrs�re:a eieailar to those ide ati:1i*d in the ceAetary weerAA &18-0 prase:v-t in the project axa.a. V0 st,i-,h fure--,- -vase i-de nr-i7f i ed, nor wer6 Any other fee- tures id*nt if Led that were inrar-prerted ac bartals . Im ed4ition th1W soil buil-d-u-F- JA .the pr.aj*ct ar*e was. IrQ XMI-10w ae to px,eci-ude thm far,ese ac a rah "bsuctac& buriaLa s four ar-cXaea1,oq-caa. &itcs. were Id*Atifteri wjrhi.a, chcpra.je+~t a r,-ea . 1T- er i ;'i g. q G-shaped #.ru ct r e, f atria $s = a tera so r aewrp si-ngle� s V r;at'iAgraPhfs tr-ench wax �plwcsd. Tmar c --s h4p a . bur nc+ buxi,ed cuttur.a.i mar-aria+il a were Sounv*. xpjLd jqa 41ut$ date for the #►ea.tuie crmj�d be abt-ft1l't,6d. However.., th& typm at ate;h:i�te►e,- s, ur-ait. t>ea-tu r.e koun4 a�c a1z a ls, :5"75- is a. cypp -Cc a.,r a G t and early past-.C-ontact f�aat,nret . Tbv,$ { IS e"JMMed :to be Th9k COXSI found ia ee sexc L on vx h wee- - pv: At side 10,525 is -p �BCs�t:. i2�es+eraue saa3�az �-eces 'Of col' �Ve preen can the nearby- teach yee;t QUIP- oaa1W phis WAS prat ^e-T, t1ttt; is o tt es tt .UgC4 as8 B. r.a'.1.19ittuA Vf x1B ring. tIM ' 419 - t i o`;o w ch.:r he .C-:1J►ape is. pat �aj sac . ned .a5 a, It*mppor,ary s#m,1 ,ter . Feature .2 { saa�.i rna-u d,. p abab. p. u �iF ,eef S an aqr-1 c.U1- ureel feeaLur-e�. Aet wat3r 1&ire s 9:x5 S, rteT j%bwolutw datee.& pr Cmitura1 ma"rinks mere: obxas-tefd Exam this mi:to.. S Le lis'ps'ZO is to to. -e early rpost-coA' "t in Rap., as DS 5/312022 1•4 l DocuSign. Envelope ID E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA Aur23-05 04:48pm FrcrCLARK REALTY CORP. HILO 6081616M 7-073 P W/012 F-888 pre -fates: the- FAUP44ra-Savokb Beach %- MW odAti-N rQiAgr, rht north e`t -end Of ttt--WZ1.1; wws covered by the -raad fill. The wall may have served. A a. -bouxtdery w4ti1. Site 11&, 528 is a swa►l-1, modified boll*- in. a 1-ava bubble. No cultural materiel orr date$ were obctainad from- this fea;tilre . The feature function i.zwnclear but it caold nave eyed as a ,a.:arage aX.ae or a Sma11 placrtfAQ ssea, I; tl L-W Sit% .is:.aSJWeiated With sites. �8,525 and 1.8.,526 then tho stte m-ould, 4aze- uo p,ra-C-outa" to ear;1y, .post.-C c-t twa - a t3yexe1l ter : of foul's s �s �a drat 'ZI.bLee r area was * ed fDx i-eukpora�ry stwLter a -ad jimxi ed agricaul•tWr,&-' ectivit,i e.s. ift -th+e pre-C-ont-act " Adr' ley boat tazt p.+ AC4, TtLLZ } firs v i t h rfi e model r pas d: #ar1 S J-n Shi a "irari amc 20zb eeatucy impAct. -i-e sndiceted by. the preaonce fjrc wAI.t at sites All four e;t the .s es- are a i qn,a!-c& t undo r Crit�gr oa- *- w • µ ,bocetss" of, Oe "i4z=ar inn they "nta€n,: Avwver, teC*use- :f.j:- • cf�e�. Bata• 3tee� b��-� �oo,t>� f.taro ,�er�h e3�:t�z =tyhtlf`",aau. h� ��+tt - �d as no.:Loagax r-Xg j.f -� A hor�gh �aae► a, aea� tad, it bw"a lrur- L 14 are .0cWsM-0r,0d as 'tbo pr pe�c r i:.a.croa1aped., work ,i:n r-be aamaadi$te -ardrp -jarX' tAw. burial - oust' Joe= bAlVed- .end Lha Motes 3. 1 Iiisa��hri� �rese�ua���z �+r�ri;t� npt'if�eci:. gamed i0a -the rrso•l�me: of :*Di-g prti j,oct. ft #e roxammended that too furl a hae�s'i-Qg.%r-0. -)�Oax4 ,be re uix.ed-at, TA541-3--2--1.8-tj, +It. . 1 os ❑s 15 1 () DocuS!gri Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41CO-AD87-D624E75FE5EA I U .49 Pm Frm--CLAFK MALTY CM. HILO 9II88698tT8 T-OT3 P.018411 "BE Award Book's n..d. mwi Z�dps- at - eazk LCA- file zwj4j - Hawad Be-vatqua, Rohart ayid %amimaL box,dn-e-r, RICAArd 1977 ,r0qQ_,_,eCj Ac Clm-htt-riyke- Skaader., AMA Smrpben .197+ 3i",010 gy -of, keog'arvL�' mac B.Z5. !=E61 -AEC a !Z-R= Uasng Amru I ao*ton.- crocyla Aad 8"%� L47A. 1"Aaaj 23 -Of Su ry 705 0 51312022 ____ 17 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8AB7-41CO-AO87-D524E75FE5EA Aur23-05 04:48ve Fraw-CLARK REALTY CORP. HILO 80896162'r8 T-0T3 P.0z8/0?!1 I -888 T stokes, proms g FLo-a a ass ita, :Edt lid bbp '1m joy*. i k i 2. rDOCUSigned by: f �'51748BA681166452 DocuSigned by: J9Sa 164A283A1373406_. ' 5/4/2022 5/3/2022 - T ii 4 EXHIBIT A-13 Stephen K. Yamashiro Mayor June 9, 1993 J�ZYfOR ~,W art oF•Nr,.�► (9VU fV of chnWC4" PLANNING DEPARTMENT 25 Aupuni Street, Room 109 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 (808) 961-8288 • Fax (808) 961.9615 Mr. Nicholas Schwaebe Dear Mr. Schwaebe: Virginia Goldstein Director Norman Olesen Deputy Director Special Management Area (SMA) Minor Permit No. 93-12 Proposed Single Family Dwelling And Accessories Shoreline, Historic, And Native Vegetation Resources TMK• 1-2-18. 1• Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Keekee, Puna We have received and reviewed a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit Assessment Application for the proposed construction of a dwelling and accessories on a vacant shoreline parcel which lies between the Kalapana-Kapoho Road and the ocean. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The application indicates plans to construct a single family dwelling, water tank, septic system, and driveway in the makai central portion of the 3.8 acre lot (area before erosion). Land clearing is proposed only for the driveway (previously cleared) and house pad, retaining as much of the existing vegetation as possible. SHORELINE. A recent survey of the subject property has revealed that the coastal strip of State land which had fronted parcels in this area has mostly eroded away and/or subsided, leaving remnants next to the northeast and south corners of the subject parcel. The arcuate -shaped shoreline area consists of sand or cobble beach, old 'a'a lava chunks or recently emplaced (1990) pahoehoe lava flow, all of which extend makai of a distinct vegetation line. The vegetation line curves into the platted parcel boundaries along about 330 feet of the 550 feet of makai boundary line. Ample room is available for public access along the shoreline makai of the vegetation line. LAND USE. The subject property bears a State Land Use District classification of "Urban" and County zoning of Rural Agriculture-0.5 acre (RA-.5). The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map designates the area for Low Density Urban uses in the central and mauka portions of the parcel and Open Area uses in the makai portion of the parcel. H I SIT`K---1 3 a — — Mr. Nicolas Schwaebe Page 2 July 9, 1993 HAZARDS. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), designates the mauka portion of the subject parcel to be in Zone "X", outside the 500-year floodplain, and the makai 60-100 feet of the parcel to be in the "VE" Flood Zone (Coastal High Hazard or Tsunami Area). The Lava Flow Hazard Map for Kilauea volcano identifies the area of the subject parcel to be in Lava Hazard Zone 2, the second most hazardous zone. A pahoehoe lava flow from the current eruption of Kilauea was emplaced in 1990 immediately makai and west of the parcel. The area has also subsided some following the 7.2 magnitude 1975 earthquake and presumably also in the 7.5 magnitude 1868 earthquake. This coastline was washed by locally generated tsunami in both instances. These eruptive and tectonic events are periodic along this unstable south flank of Kilauea. VEGETATION. There are three kinds of vegetation on the subject parcel. An approximately 250 year old 'a'a flow supports a sparse cover of ohia trees with native shrubs (akia and pukiawe). An older (400-750 years old) pahoehoe flow is densely covered with an exotic -dominated admixture of plants including christmasberry, milo, monkeypod, guava, hala, swordfern and coconut. The coconut, milo and hala also contribute to a strip of coastal strand vegetation, along with naupaka and the sedge Fimbristvlis cvmosa. No rare plants are contained within these vegetation types at the site. HISTORIC STATUS. The subject parcel is situated in proximity to a cemetery site and a wider spread of prehistoric burials which occur on a number of adjacent properties. The possibility of occurrence of burials plus the likelihood of historic sites on the subject parcel, necessitated an archaeological inventory survey being performed for the lot. A report of the survey was completed by Dr. Robert L. Spear in November 1992, and submitted to the Historic Preservation Division (HPD) of the Department of Land and Natural Resources for review. Four historic sites were discovered and adequately documented, and it was determined that none of these features was a burial. FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION Upon review of the request against the guidelines for granting a Special Management Area Permit, the Planning Director hereby approves a Special Management Area Minor Permit. The proposed action is consistent with the Objectives, Policies and SMA ^ Guidelines which were established to provide guidance for the preservation, protection, and development of coastal resources of the State and County. They identify several areas of management concern including historic, recreation, scenic resources, coastal ecosystems, economic use, and coastal hazards. Mr. Nicolas Schwaebe Page 3 July 9, 1993 The proposed dwelling construction is not expected to have any detrimental effects on the Special Management Area, as determined from the following findings and conditions. The total valuation of the project will not exceed $125,000; and the proposal will not result in a significant adverse effect on the Special Management Area. Based on the information provided in the shoreline photos and recent survey map of May 3, 1993, and the applicant's statements to place the improvements at least 140 feet from the makai vegetation line, the Department waives the requirement for a certified shoreline survey. In lieu of the certified shoreline to identify the shoreline position, the Director determines an 80-foot wide shoreline setback area to be taken from the makai boundary line of the parcel. This determination is consistent with the Open Area General Plan designation for the makai portions of the lot and reflects caution due to the nearshore wave and flood hazard as well as the ambiguity of the legal shoreline position. No construction or site disturbance is proposed for this shoreline setback area, and none is allowed without approval under Shoreline Setback Area and SMA Rules (Planning Commission Rules, Numbers 8 and 9). The application states that the genuine threat of lava inundation is understood by the applicant. The application and site plan indicate that the location of the dwelling will be in the makai center of the parcel, and that very little of the existing vegetation will be disturbed. According to the descriptions and map in the archaeological report, it can be inferred that the native dominated vegetation on the 'a'a flow will not be disrupted. The mapped locations of the archaeological sites and statements in the application indicate that the impact of the proposed project will be minimal as far as the sites are concerned. The HPD review of the archaeological report concluded that enough information had been collected from each site to allow for a "no longer significant" determination, and that the proposed project would now have "no effect" on the historic sites. Based on the above findings, the limited nature of the project, and �^ given the proposed conditions, it is determined that the granting of this request will not impact the identified resources. Therefore, the granting of this request will not be contrary to the purpose and intent of Chapter 205-A, HRS, relating to Coastal Zone Management; Rule 9 of the Planning Commission relating to the Special Management Area; or the General Plan. Mr. Nicolas Schwaebe Page 4 July 9, 1993 A Special Management Area Minor Use Permit is further approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant, its successors or assigns shall be responsible for complying with all conditions of approval. 2. The applicant shall comply with all other applicable laws, rules, regulations and requirements. 3. The life of authorization of this permit is two years. Construction of the proposed improvements shall be completed within two years. 4. An 80-foot wide shoreline setback area is determined for the subject parcel to be taken from the makai boundary line of the parcel. No construction of site disturbance is allowed within this shoreline setback area without prior �- approval under Shoreline Setback Area and Special Management Area Rules (Planning Commission Rules, Numbers 8 and 9). 5. Any deviations from the proposed project as explained in the application materials and in the body of this permit will require advance approval from the Planning Department, particularly with regard to the imposed 80-foot shoreline setback. Should you have any questions about this permit please contact Rick Warshauer or Rodney Nakano at this office. Sincerely, VIRdJNIA GOL EIN Planning Director — Z4�aZJ ?3 Cff-Def Engineer baee ^ FRW : mj h xc: SMA Section PC Records EXHIBIT A-14 Mitchell D. Roth Mayor Lee E. Lord Managing Director 74- na+.�ne liaol of alola HN, County of Hawaii kailua-)w,na. Hauai`i 96740 Pholie (N(JR) 323-I 770 Fax(SON)327-3563 PLANNING DEPARTMENT MAIL RESTRICTED DELIVERY SIGNATURE CONFIRMATION RESTRICTED DELIVERY 7019 2280 0002 0137 1720 October 10, 2022 Kaimu Cove LLC Mr. Nl ark Wyatt 12-55 Likoliko Loop 4866 Pahoa,HI 96778 Dear Mr. Wyatt: Zendo Kern Director Jeffrey W. Darrow Deputy Director East Hawaii Office 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Plione (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 SUBJECT: NOTICE OF`' VIOLATION AND OItI)ER Complaint: Unpermitted Development within the Special Management Area (SMA) Landowner(s): Mark Wyatt; Kaimu Cove LLC File No.: PL-PCV-2022-00015 TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001, Kalanana-Kanoho Load, Pahoa, Hawaii Our records indicate that your SMA Use Permit Application (PL-SAA-2022-000080) was returned by letter dated July 25, 2022, due to inaction. According to the letter it informs you that you are not permitted to conduct any work or activities, until a SMA review is completed, and the appropriate approvals or permits have been issued. FINDINGS Our initial investigation based on a complaint, has revealed the following: The property is located at TMK (3) 1-2-018:001, with no assigned address, and is hereinafter referred to as the "property". The property is owned by Kaimu Cove LLC and consisting of approximately 3.8 acres is located within the State Land Use (U) Urban and within the County of Hawaii, Zoning District Agricultural (RA-.5a). On October 4, 2022, our Planning Inspector conducted a site inspection of the subject property and observed that grubbing/grading has occurred to create an access road with a junction. The southern portion of the junction led to a parking area and the northern portion of the junction led to a clearing, which seems to be for a future dwelling. (See Exhibits A - C) laming.hawaiicounty.gov Hawaii Count} is an Equal Oppor•tumn :Provider and E'mploywr nlaiming0lhawaiicounty_go� EXHIBIT "A-14" Mark Wyatt PL-PC V-2022-00015 NOV & ORDER October 10, 2022 Page 2 RULE 9. SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA 9-4 Definitions: a) "Assessment" means an evaluation by the Department of a proposed use, activity, or operation to determine whether a Special Management Area Use permit is required. e) "Development" means any of the following uses, activities, or operations on land or in or under water within the Special Management Area: (1) "Development'' includes the following: (A) Placement or erection of any solid material or any gaseous, liquid, solid, or thermal waste. (B) Grading, removing, dredging, mining, or extraction of any materials. (3) Any proposed use, activity, or operation listed in Section 9-4(e) (2) shall be deemed to be "Development" until the Director has determined it to be exempted from the definition of "development." (4) Whenever the Director finds that any excluded use, activity, or operation may have a cumulative impact, or a significant adverse environmental or ecological effect on the Special Management Area, that use, activity, or operation shall be defined as "development" for the purpose of this rule. 9-8 Permits required for development: a) No development shall be allowed within the Special Management Area without obtaining a permit in accordance with this rule. b) No State or County Agency authorized to issue permits within the Special Management Area shall authorize any development unless approval is first received in accordance with this rule. Mark Wyatt PL-PC V-2022-00015 NOV & ORDER October 10, 2022 Page 3 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Based on the fore2oina, you are in violation as follows: 9-8 (a) No development shall be allowed within the Special Management Area without obtaining a permit in accordance with this rule. Therefore, the Department is issuing you a Notice of Violation and Order, with an administrative fine in the sum of ten thousand ($10,000) for the development of property (grubbing/grading a road and land clearing) without a. Special Management Area Assessment (SMAA) permit. The violation must be corrected as stated in the Order below on or before the stated deadline date to avoid the accrual of daily fines. ORDER. You are hereby ordered to take the following corrective action(s) at your own expense: Immediately cease and desist any further unpermitted development, including cutting of trees/foliage on the subject property. 2. Apply for and secure an after -the -fact Special Management Area Use Permit Assessment for the unpermitted development (grubbing/grading) on your property. (Application must be submitted electronically) 3. Correct all violations at your own expense on or before the date specified below. 4. Pay all fines due this office and complete corrective actions by the deadline date of January 6, 2022. Payment may be made by cash, cashier's check, or money order. Personal checks are not accepted. Make cashier's check or money order payable to the County Director of Finance. 5. Immediately contact the Inspector listed below upon completion of your SMA application. Upon satisfactory compliance with all conditions of the above order, we may close the complaint with no further action. GENERAL INFORMATION 9-17 Penalties (a) Any person who violates any provision or this rule shall be liable for (1) a civil fine not to exceed $100,000; or (2) for the cost of returning the affected environment or ecology within the Special Management Ai-ca to the condition existing before the violation. Mark Wyatt PL-PC V-2022-00015 NOV & ORDER October 10, 2022 Page 4 (b) In addition to any other penalties, any person who is violating any provision of this rule shall be liable for a civil fine not to exceed $10,000 a day for each day in which such violation persists. (c) Any civil fine or other penalty provided under this rule may be imposed by the circuit court or by the Planning Department after an opportunity for a hearing under Chapter 91, HRS. 9-19 Administrative Fines The Department is authorized to impose administrative fines in accordance with established rules. What happens if you do not correct the violation? A violation that is not corrected by the deadline date may be assessed daily fines. Can you appeal this Notice of Violation? Yes. In accordance with Section 6-9.2 (a) of the Hawaii County Charter, the Board of Appeals is authorized to hear and determine any appeal from the final decisions of the Planning Director. I. An appeal shall be electronically submitted in the format prescribed by the Board of Appeals and shall specify the person's interest in the subject matter of the appeal and the grounds of the appeal. Unless otherwise specifically provided by the Board of Appeals rules, an electronic copy of each document shall be filed. A filing fee of $250 shall accompany any such appeal. (Application must be submitted electronically) 2. The appellant, landowner(s) if not the appellant, and the director shall be parties to an appeal. Other persons may be admitted as parties to an appeal, as permitted by the Board of Appeals. For your convenience, we have provided the website address for Hawaii County's new EPIC System. (Electronic Processing and Information Center) for applications. WEBSITE: httns:/ihawaiicountvhi-enerzoynrrb.tylerliost.net/Ai)i)s/Se[fSey•►ice4/hoiiie Due Date for Appeal: The appeal must be received within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt of this Notice of Violation and Order. An appeal to the Board of Appeals shall not stay the provisions of the Director's "Order" pending the final decision of the Board of Appeals. The appeal must be made in accordance with the Board of Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedures, or it may result in the dismissal of the appeal. What happens if I lose nay appeal? The assessment and accumulation of fines does not stop when you file for an appeal. If the Board of Appeals denies your appeal, then you will be required to pay your fines from the day the fines began to the date the violation(s) has been corrected, which must be verified by the Planning Department. You can also take corrective action as described in this letter and stop the daily fines while Mark Wyatt PL-PC V-2022-00015 NOV & ORDER October 10, 2022 Page 5 appealing. If you do not take corrective action, daily fines will continue to accrue incrementally. Should you acquire the services of an attorney/counsel representation, then you are required to also submit a letter of consent with your response letter authorizing the County to correspond and respond to the attorney/counsel representation. Can I get a time extension to have more time to correct the violation? If you know you cannot complete the corrective action by the deadline date, you may want to submit a "request for a time extension" before the deadline date. Include all the following- information with ;your request: Describe what you have accomplished prior to requesting this time extension. 2. The amount of additional time necessary to complete the corrective action. 3. The name and telephone number of the person assisting you in this effort. 4. The date in which you expect the violation to be fully corrected. The submission of a time extension request does not guarantee the approval of the request, nor does it extend your right to appeal. If your time extension is denied, daily fines will continue to accrue from the date as described above and until the violation is corrected. If approved, the daily fines will be delayed until the new deadline date. Should you have any questions on this matter, please contact Planning Inspector Mark Iwamoto at (808) 961-8151. Sincerely, Zell", "S7) ZEN DO KERN Planning Director MI.to COH01"planning. pblie F.n4orce+nent%TMK Files%ZQNE 1 Sec. ]-Ito 14' 1-2-018-0011NOVsinawyattpcv22-00015.doc cc: (via email) Tracie Lee Camero Mark Wyatt PL-PC V-2022-00015 NOV & ORDER October 10, 2022 Page b ar ^4P' AiR � a ME b -. Exhibit A: Photo depict the unpermitted development of the property. Mark Wyatt PL-PC V-2022-00015 NOV & ORDER October 10, 2022 Page 7 Exhibit ES: Photo depict the area of the unpermitted development near the junction and the excavator used for the clearing. Mark Wyatt PL-PC V-2022-00015 NOV & ORDER October 10, 2022 Page S Exhibit C: Photo depict the area of unpermitted development near the Kalapana-Kapoho road. EXHIBIT A-15 �i Asm, affiliates Archaeology • History • Ethnography • Architectural History January 20, 2024 Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC 12-55 Likoliko Lp 44866, Pahoa, HI, 96778 Email: wyattinhawaii(agmail.com Subject: Results of an archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation conducted in support of an SMA use permit application for the proposed subdivision of TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. Dear Mark: As requested, ASM Affiliates (ASM) conducted an archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation in support of an application for an SMA use permit, concerning the proposed subdivision of TMK: (3) 1- 2-018:001, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The field inspection was conducted to help address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proposed 6-lot subdivision of the 3.551-acre subject parcel by confirming and updating the findings of an earlier archaeological inventory survey (AIS) prepared for the property by Spear (1992). Furthermore, consultation was undertaken seeking information from knowledgeable individuals regarding the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the subject property. Project Area Description The project area is the entirety of TMK (3) 1-2-018:001 located within Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. The 3.551-acresubject parcel is bounded on the mauka side by the Kalapana-Kapoho Road (see Figure 3), on the makki side by a 40 foot exclusion zone along the coast (Figure 4), to the northeast by an undeveloped State-owned parcel consisting of `a `d lava, and to the southwest by a developed residential property. The project area situated at an elevation of 10 to 25 feet (3.05 to 7.62 meters) above mean sea level and is 40 feet inland from the coast. An Historic cemetery is located to the northeast of the project area on the opposite side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road; Figure 5) Geologically, the project area is located on the lower flanks of Kilauea Volcano and is comprised of multiple lava flows (Sherrod et al. 2021), with a Puna basalt flow that erupted between 400 and 750 years before present (BP) forming much of the central and southern part of the parcel; a younger Puna basalt flow of `a `d lava dating to 200-400 years BP creating the northeastern edge; and a more recent pahoehoe flow that occurred between 1986 and 1992 present at the coast (Figure 6). Soil classifications within the project area (Figure 7) mimic the geologic substrates and are comprised primarily of dry Hakuma highly organic loam on 2 to 10 percent slopes, with dry Malama-Lava flows complex on 2 to 40 percent slopes on the 'ad flow along the northeastern edge, and pahoehoe lava flows on 2 to 20 percent slopes present at the coast (Soil Survey Staff 2022). There has been some prior ground disturbance along the northeast, southwest, and mauka edges of the project area. On the `a `d flow in the northeastern portion of the parcel, a grubbed and graded driveway (Figure 8) meanders along the property line and accesses a graded house pad near the coast on a promontory that overlooks the rest of the parcel (this area was mostly recently cleared in 2022). There is a second roadway which diverts from the upper road and is routed down through the middle of the project area to the coast (Figure 9). This road may have been already present when previously surveyed in 1992, as 820 Mililani Street, Suite 700, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 (808) 439-8089 Fax: (808) 439-8087 507A East Lanikaula Street, Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (808) 969-6066 Fax: (808) 443-0065 EXHIBIT C 23 www.asmaffiliates.com EXHIBIT "A-15" January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 2 of 19 something resembling it is mentioned by Spear (1992). Bulldozer push piles were also observed along the boundary with the adjacent residential property to the southwest near the middle of the project area. These push piles appear to be related to the clearing of that neighboring parcel. A number of brush piles, seemingly from hand clearing activities, were also noted in the northeastern portion of the project area at the base of the `a `d flow. Vegetation cover within the project area is influenced by the extent of prior ground disturbance. In the undisturbed portions of the project area (Figure 10), the overstory consists predominately of monkeypod trees (Samanea saman), hala (Pandanus tectorius), hau (Hibiscus tiliacenus), milo (Thespesia copulnea), with coconut palm (Cocos nucifera), and naupaka (Scaevola sp.) along the makai section, `ohi `a lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha) along the northern boundary, a scattering of noni (Morinda citrifolia) throughout the property, and a single eucalyptus tree (Eucalyptus globulus). The ground cover consists of morning glory Qpomoea indica), particularly in the makai portion of the project area, with Boston fern (Nephrolepis exaltata), and various species of grasses. In the previously disturbed portions, the vegetation is comprised of a mix of grasses, purslane (Portulaca sp.), gunpowder trees (Trema orientalis), Melochia (Melochia umbellata), guava (Psidium guajava), and other non-native weeds (Figure 11). A Brief Culture -Historical Background for the Subject Parcel The project area lies on the southern shores of the Puna District of the Island ofHawai`i within the ahupua `a of Kaimu. Kaimu is bordered to the southwest by the ahupua `a of Kalapana and Kupahua, to the north by the ahupua `a of Waiakahiula and Ka`ohe, and to the west by the ahupua'a of Kikala 1-2 and Keokea. Traditionally, the primary village for this ahupua 'a was (and still is) known as Kaimu, a name that has been translated to mean "gathering [at the] sea [to watch surfing]" (Pukui et al. 1974:69). The shoreline of this ahupua `a, according to Pukui et al. (1974:69), is "noted for its surf and its black sand beach" and was originally called H6`eu and Ka-poho. Pukui et al. (1974) note that this beach was likely formed after a 1750 lava flow, during which time steam explosions formed the characteristic black sand of the area (the beach at Kaimu was covered by lava flows that occurred during the 1980s and is no longer present). The English missionary William Ellis embarked on a circumnavigation of Hawaii Island in the 1820s in the hopes of identifying population centers that would be receptive of Christian missionary teachings. During his travels, he collected observations of the environments and people he encountered. After leaving the district of Ka`u, Ellis entered southern Puna along its coastline and described the string of villages he traveled through, including Kaimu, which he described as being: ...pleasantly situated near the sea shore, on the south-east side of the island, standing on a bed of lava considerably decomposed, and covered over with a light and fertile soil. It is adorned with plantations, groves of cocoa -nuts, and clumps of kou trees. It has a fine sandy beach, where canoes may land with safety; and, according to the houses numbered to -day, contains about 725 inhabitants. Including the villages in its immediate vicinity along the coast, the population would probably amount to 2,000.... The extent of cultivation in the neighbourhood, together with the decent and orderly appearance of the people, induce us to think they are more sober and industrious, than those of many villages through which we have passed (Ellis 1825:160). Indeed, the habitation and agricultural patterns of southern Puna were often dependent on the path of the lava flows from Kilauea Volcano. As Handy and Handy (1972:751) note, the lands of Makena and lower Kaimu were suitable for growing sweet potatoes but not taro, and the neighboring ahupua `a of "Keakea [Keokea] supported neither, being mostly pahoehoe lava." Additionally, Hawaiian traditions imply that Puna "was once Hawaii's richest agricultural region and that it is only in relatively recent time that volcanic eruption has destroyed much of its best land" (Handy and Handy 1972:752). By the mid-19`h century, the traditional Hawaiian land tenure system was radically altered through a process of land division known as the Mhele Aina. This change in land tenure was promoted by the missionaries and the growing foreign population and business interests in the island kingdom who were generally 24 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 3 of 19 hesitant to enter business deals on leasehold lands. The Mahele (division) defined the land interest of Kamehameha III (the King), the high-ranking chiefs and konohiki (headman of an ahupua `a). As a result of the Mahele, all lands in the Kingdom of Hawaii were placed into one of three categories: (1) Crown Lands (lands personally claimed by Kamehameha III); (2) Konohiki Lands (lands claimed by lesser ah `i and konohiki) and; (3) Government Lands (lands surrendered by the King or the konohiki in lieu of commutation) with the caveat that the rights of the hoa `aina (tenants) were to be reserved (Chinen 1958:vii; 1961:13). In the case of the lands of Kaimu, the ahupua `a was originally claimed by Mataio Kekuanaa'a, who managed the estate of his daughter the ah `i Victoria Kamamalu. However, in January of 1848, Kekuana6`a surrendered this land to the King, and Kaimu was placed into the inventory of Crown Lands (Buke Mahele 1848). As the King and his ah `i and konohiki made claims to large tracts of land via the Mahele, questions arose regarding the protection of rights for the hoa `aina. To resolve this matter, on August 6`h, 1850, the Kuleana Act (also known as the Enabling Act) was passed, clarifying the process by which native tenants could claim fee simple title to any portion of lands that they physically occupied, actively cultivated, or had improved (Garovoy 2005). Within Kaimu, no kuleana lands were awarded and within the entirety of the Puna District only two kuleana were awarded (Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018). A map of lands in the vicinity of Kalapana, Puna (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1614) prepared by E. D. Baldwin in 1892 shows the lands in the vicinity of the subject parcel and indicates the locations of nearby cultural features located to the southwest of the current project area, including a heiau, several houses and other named places located within Kaimu Village, and a trail extending inland from the village (Figure 12). The `a `d point located in the eastern corner of the subject parcel is labeled "Keoneana" on that map. A later tracing of the 1892 map showing the Crown Land Homesteads of Kaimu (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1812) shows that the subject parcel was subdivided and sold to C.H. Will (Grant No. 8004) as Lot 28-C of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads by late December 1921. Records from 1932 list the subject parcel as being owned by a Mrs. Chieko, who acted as a trustee for the minors Hanayo Will, Yoshio Will, and Isami Will, each of whom held a 1/3 interest in the lot. By the 1960's, ownership of the parcel had split between the previously mentioned members of the Will family, who would own the parcel until the late 1980s. Summary of Prior Archaeological Study within the Subject Parcel The current project area (TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001) was the subject of an intensive archaeological inventory survey prepared by Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. in 1992 (Spear 1992). As a result of that study, four archaeological sites were identified within the property (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18525, 50-10-63-18526, 50- 10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; Figure 13) that were interpreted as having been used for Precontact to early Historic Period for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. All four sites were described and mapped by Spear (1992), and two of the sites (Sites 18525 and 18526) were excavated to help refine their functional interpretations and test for the presence of buried cultural deposits. Spear (1992) assessed all four sites as significant under Criterion d for the information they had contributed to understanding past lifeways within the project area. He noted that sufficient data had been collected from the sites as a result of the AIS to warrant a treatment recommendation of no further work." The State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) agreed with the significance assessments and treatment recommendations for the sites, and accepted the Spear (1992) AIS, in a letter dated March 3, 1993 (LOG NO: 7604, DOC NO: 9302ks25). The descriptions of the sites recorded by Spear (1992) are summarized below. Site 18525 was recorded by Spear (1992) as a C-shape located near the base of the `a `d lava flow, at the end of a bulldozer push road, in the eastern corner of the parcel. According to Spear (1992), the opening to the C-shape was oriented to the west and measured 5.1 meters wide and 1.45 meters deep. The walls were 2.1 meters thick, and the maximum height was 0.36 meters. The feature was disturbed at the southern end, and hau growth affected the exterior wall (Spear 1992). One large piece of coral was found on the ground surface on the inside of the C-shape. A single stratigraphic trench was excavated outside of the opening of the C-shape to test for buried cultural deposits. Measuring 1.0 meter by 0.5 meter, the trench was dug to a 25 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 4 of 19 depth of 0.4 meters below the surface, but no cultural materials of any kind were encountered. Based on its formal attributes, this site was interpreted as a Precontact/Historic temporary habitation shelter. Site 18526 was recorded by Spear (1992) as consisting of two surface features (Features 1 and 2). Feature 1 was described as a C-shape with its opening oriented to the south, with a width of 3.7 meters and a depth of 1.2 meters. The maximum wall thickness and height were 1.09 meters and 0.75 meters respectively. The eastern third of the structure was collapsed and in poor condition. Feature 2 was situated slightly more than two meters to the south of Feature 1, and consisted of a rock mound which measured 1.85 meters N/S and 1.5 meters E/W. The maximum height of the mound was 0.6 meters, and a single stratigraphic trench measuring 0.5 by 0.5 meters was excavated between Features 1 and 2. Excavation extended to a maximum depth of 0.36 meters and no cultural materials were encountered. Spear (1992) interpreted Feature 1 as a temporary habitation shelter and Feature 2 as a small agricultural mound. Site 18527 was documented by Spear (1992) as a wall that extended along the base of the fill for the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. At the time of the 1992 study, the wall extended beyond the project area to the southwest and was covered with road fill at its northeast end. The length of the wall within the project area was recorded as 28 meters, with a maximum height and width 1.1 meters and 0.5 meters respectively. No excavation was undertaken at Site 18527 by Spear (1992), who interpreted the site as a boundary wall that predates the construction of the adjacent roadway. Site 18528 was documented by Spear (1992) as a modified lava bubble, with interior measurements of 0.82 meters (north/south) by 0.8 meters (east/west) and a depth of 0.92 meters. The opening was cleared of rock which had been used to build up the southwest portion of the feature. No cultural material was found in association with the feature and according to Spear (1992), who interpreted the site as a possible storage feature or small planting pit, there was no potential for excavation. The presence of the nearby cemetery (located to the northeast of the project area on the mauka edge of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road; see Figure 5) was a specific concern of the earlier study, and Spear (1992) noted that special attention was paid to the mauka portion of the project area to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present in the project area. No such features were identified in that area, or anywhere else within the project area. Additionally, as noted by Spear (1992), the soil buildup in the project area was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface features or burials. Results of the Current Field Inspection On October 27, 2023, David King, M.A., Colsen Balai, B.A., and Jonas Leon, B.A., and Matthew R. Clark, M.A. (ASM Principal Investigator), conducted a thorough surface survey of the subject parcel, as well as a general inspection of the `a `d flow bordering the northeastern side of the project area. The survey included a surface inspection of the entire parcel utilizing north/south pedestrian transacts with fieldworkers spaced at 10-meter intervals. As was previously done by Spear (1992), special care was taken in the mauka portion of the project area, especially on the surface of the adjacent `a `d flow, to look for burial features similar to those contained within the Historic cemetery across the street. As a result of the pedestrian survey, three of the four sites previously documented by Spear (1992) within the subject parcel were found (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; Figure 14). The locations of these sites were documented using a GPS, and the current condition of each of these sites is briefly described below. Site 50-10-63-18525 (a C-shape) could not be relocated, and it is thought that this site, which was formerly located in the eastern portion of the subject parcel at the base of the `a `d flow (Figure 15), was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbing activities after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) AIS. The location and distribution of sites and features identified within the subject parcel, as well as the relative location of the cemetery to the project area, is depicted in Figure 14. Site 18526 Features 1 (a C-shape) and 2 (a mound) were both in similar condition to what was described by Spear (1992), but the features are currently obscured by heavy overgrowth and two large trees that have fallen across them (Figures 16 and 17). Site 18527 (a historic wall) is in the same condition as described by Spear and no changes to that site were noted (Figure 18). Site 18528 (a modified lava blister) has been 26 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 5 of 19 disturbed by land clearing activities since it was first documented in 1992. Small boulders from that push have fallen into blister and the site is currently obscured by thick brush covering its edges (Figure 19). No additional archaeological sites were identified within the project area as a result of the fieldwork conducted by ASM, but several recent rock constructions and modern landscape modifications were noted (see Figure 14). These more recent features, which include rock stacks, stone -lined paths (Figure 20), and rock cleared areas on the ground surface, are largely concentrated in the coastal -central portion of the subject parcel, in areas that appear to be used recurrently and recently for camping and fishing activities. The lack of mention of these features in the Spear (1992) AIS report, as well as the modern vegetation disturbance and debris associated with them, suggests that all of the additional rock constructions identified within project area were built during the last 30 years. None of these more recently constructed features appear to be burial monuments. Consultation To address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proximity of the cemetery to the project area and to determine the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the project area, ASM's Senior Ethnographer, Lokelam Brandt, M.A. conducted consultation with several long-time residents of the area including descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families. Consultation occurred during a period between October 31, 2023, and December 13, 2023, when ASM staff contacted Ms. Ke`ala Keli`iho`omalu, Mrs. Leialoha Ilae-Kale imdmahu, and Mrs. Ku`ulei Kealoha-Cooper by phone. Following the initial phone calls, each of the three consulted parties were provided with a consultation letter and maps specifying ASM's search for persons who may have knowledge of any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. Each of the consulted parties contacted additional family members to seek such information. Ms. Keli`iho`omalu spoke with elder relatives Prince Keli`iho`omalu, Sam Keli`iho`omalu, Noenoe Dunn, Tiana Dunn, Jerry Dunn, Princess Keli`iho`omalu, Jr. Keli`iho`omalu, and Tiara Keli`iho`omalu. Ms. Keli`iho`omalu indicated that her uncle Sam also attempted to reach out to Aku Hauani`o and Kamu Quihano and that her father attempted to reach out to Annie Ka`aukai and Leslie Enriques. Mrs. Ilae-Kalaimdmahu also contacted members of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and recommended that ASM staff contact Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper since she had heard that the cemetery belonged to the Kealoha family. Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper was contacted by ASM and she spoke with several of her relatives, including her mother. None of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. Subsequent email correspondence with Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper clarified that the cemetery did not belong to the Kealoha `Ohana, however, her mother related that in the 1930s and 1940s, the Kalapana Church was located near the cemetery and that her tutu (Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper's great-grandmother) Emma Nai`a was a pillar of that church. She added that there is a Kealoha cemetery in `Opthikao but was not aware of any such family cemetery in Kaimu. Conclusion and Recommendations The results of the current study support the findings of the Spear (1992) AIS. Three of the four sites previously documented by Spear (1992) within the subject parcel were identified during the field inspection (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; see Figure 14). These sites are all in similar condition to what was previously described, and indicate that the parcel was used during the Precontact to early Historic Period for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. All three of these sites were observed to be in similar condition to what was previously described by Spear (1992). The fourth site (Site 50-10-63-18525, a C-shape) could not be found, and is thought to have been destroyed by land clearing activities that have occurred within the subject parcel since the Spear (1992) AIS was accepted by SHPD. No potential burial features were identified within the subject parcel as a result of the current fieldwork, nor were any possible burial locations identified as a result of the consultation conducted by ASM The only features identified within the property that were not reported on by Spear (1992) appear to be less than 50 years old and related to on -going camping and fishing activities that still occur within the project area. The findings of the current study, combined with the 27 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 6 of 19 SHPD's prior review of the Spear (1992) AIS (LOG NO: 7604, DOC NO: 9302ks25), support an HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" pursuant to HAR §13-275-7(a)(1) for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject parcel. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Matthew R. Clark, M.A. Senior Archaeologist — ASM Hilo Director References Cited Buke Mahele 1848 Buke Kakau Paa no ka mahele aina i Hooholoia iwaena o Kamehameha III a me Na Lii a me Na Konohiki ana, Hale Alii, Honolulu. Chinen, J. J. 1958 The GreatMahele: Hawaii's Land Division of1848. University ofHawaii Press, Honolulu. 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawaii. Privately published. Ellis, W. 1825 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of Tour ofHawaii, or Owhyee; with remarks on the History, Traditions, Manners, Customs and Language of the Inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands. Cocker and Brewster, Boston. Garovoy, J. 2005 "Ua koe ke kuleana o na kanaka" (Reserving the rights of Native Tenants): Integrating Kuleana Rights And Land Trust Priorities in Hawaii. Harvard Environmental Law 29:523- 571. Handy, E. S. C. and E. G. Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018 Kipuka Database. Electronic document, htlp://kipukadatabase.com/kipuka. Pukui, M. K., S. H. Elbert, and E. Mo`okim 1974 Place Names ofHawaii. Revised and Expanded ed. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Sherrod, D. R., J. M. Simon, S. E. Watkins, and K. M. Brunt 2021 Geologic Map of the State of Hawai `i. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. USGS Numbered Series. Scientific Investigations Map 3143. 1:100,000 and 1:250,000 scale. Electronic document, https://dol.org/10.3133/sim3l43, accessed February 18, 2022. Soil Survey Staff (United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service) 2022 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov. Spear, R. 1992 An Inventory Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawaii, TMK 1- 2-18:1. Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. Prepared for Bruce Robinson. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 7 of 19 Figures �r r . ✓ RM f N,:,_ Area of Detai y 0 200 Km 9� �� T , framer Tank\� /✓ `� IV • r� 3 Q 50 r KEOK EA s INN� K 9 ` KAa0.U-WOM afAtt�ivAS LAVA.' LC�': i �1 yD NN [ � . t RM 31 9 KAIMtJ•MAKEN Kairno park I/ i '� - Portion of USGS 7.5' Quadrangle Kealakekua, 1996 0 190 380 OMcters [- I'rirjectarea Figure 1. USGS map showing location of project area. 29 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TNtK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 8 of 19 c t O 51 41 '10 C15 I 0 ti mk '0 30 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 9 of 19 Figure 3. Google EarthTM showing project area. 31 1 1y � I f r� ronting the current project area, view to the southwest. ``:�_, xY'`x„�.R� hr""✓1� .g'�-'="' - W-3711, January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page I of 19 �Qfia. \ Qp2 / a i (Itr N 0 Qp2 1,500-3,000 yr Puna Basalt Qp5 A.D. 1986-1992 Puna Basalt Qp4o 400-750 yr Puna Basalt 0 Project area Qp4y 200-400 yr Puna Basalt Sherrod. IJR. L111ton..1 NI,, Witkm,c S.li.. and Hntnt. R.M.. _007. Map of the Staic of Hmai is l".S. Geological Sun-eyOpen-File - Rcpor'007-lOtiy. g3 1,_9 plm -xzk,t HIUSIOO and 1'2i0.0110-vndi GlS i'%'N—_a —d !03t '023 Figure 6. Geology underlying the project area and surrounding vicinity. Figure 7. Soil composition in the project area and surrounding vicinity. 33 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 12 of 19 Figure 8. Graded area along northeastern boundary ofproject area, view to the west. Figure 9. Road extending to the coast of the project area, view to the northwest. 34 40 As 7, TV 11 ak VA �Nv "IN 'Vow tot k January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 14 of 19 h C �' (•� jam, ` ? N �_ � � � r ��'� .,'K- i - �.. _ t_ i �v'ia%`� �rNC� Q/ U s `J''. J Y �nyf y..�' 7 ` �1' a. .. 1 �'�%\"`� I,S p �•�l -a. —7'%- G n�._1. >` rl.o .�j`1"_I�•`' �.V� 1� „R. � _ar . S zo�,r,,,--' ,) f,�c�,� IT' IL - _.__ � �n `ru �. \ ,"J �`�,� ;r�� `-�j.•,: � fit- —' �\ IF z � 1 1. K E O-N E A N A.1 �Ke oh 'A AZ / - Malao'a- �.; P,e,uIKe - ' •-K ea h"c K AI.. -A E,Fi 1'M OE HeLc0. .. WA IA PE LE U H�U.EW L L, K.A1 m lJ Figure 12. Portion of Hawaii Registered Map No. 1614 (prepared by E.D. Baldwin in 1892) showing the location of the current project area. 36 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 15 of 19 _ '.,. •'�[�M +� .ram n M I Figure 13. Spear (1992:6) site location map. 37 Historic Cemetery. It a.r '.L 'Aft . , r a� c 18527 g ti "r- �,a w Graded Area Si(e 18526 Site 18528 » �, 2 Site 18525 rv- Modern camping features ' r r r 4 " a 4); r r• I Parcel :a .4 Arch Site (not found) limits of Lraded area 10 Arch Site (found) �_ 0 k"R ;511 Nk RP 17 'Yq ;511 Nk RP 17 'Yq 7 r.� , w �i,• r' l ./ t r�,' ifr Y r tip o !, 1- ArC Ai 104, d° a � ��„�' f ,"{* �"'�y � �N11� c1 i` I i �.t; - � yy,�4 s♦ �}�' '' a c��o �, ,�Y ' . �Y*e,V4 fir` s y y�_ ...�.1 �,Y"� 1��- Ce1�'+ �- 1 T i _ .".�:.:—♦� l �1 l.� . "`'y.', 410 w 1' ss 0`� l atbr- F PIP lk EXHIBIT A-16 Roy, Alex From: Daryn Arai Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 9:11 AM To: Roy, Alex Subject: Re: PL-SMA-2024-000063 - Wyatt Appreciate it, Alex! The surveyor is working on a revised map as we speak. Take care. Sent from Daryn's iPhone On Jul 24, 2024, at 8:52 AM, Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov> wrote: Just an FYI , this will be on the Oct 3 WPC agenda. The acceptance letter should be coming soon. Thanks, Alex From: Daryn Arai Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 9:18:10 AM To: Roy, Alex Subject: Re: PL-SMA-2024-000063 - Wyatt Much appreciated, Alex! Will get working on the revised plan. Daryn Daryn Arai Mobile: ■ i EXHIBIT "A-16" From: Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:38 AM To: Daryn Arai Subject: Re: PL-SMA-2024-000063 - Wyatt spoke to the director about the project and he is in agreement, we do not want to set up conflicts in the future. Having a separate 5-ft. easement will alleviate any future issues. Can you get me an updated plan that shows the easement separate from the parcels? will accept the application, but please work on getting the updated plan before PC. LMK if you have any questions. Thanks, Alex From: Daryn Arai Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2024 12:42:24 PM To: Roy, Alex Subject: Re: PL-SMA-2024-000063 - Wyatt Aloha Alex, Spoke to Mr. Wyatt and no problem reducing the easement to 5 feet. I forgot to do that when the number of lots was reduced. Regardless, this subdivision plan is just a concept so Mr. Wyatt is willing to adjust the layout to fit your recommendations, including relocating the property lines to ensure that no driveway coincides with the public access easement and provide for clear separation. If a condition of approval will provide you with such comfort, Mr. Wyatt will agree to it. Let me know if this is acceptable to you. Daryn Daryn Arai Mobile: From: Roy, Alex <AIex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2024 9:27 AM To: Daryn Arai Subject: PL-SMA-2024-000063 - Wyatt Daryn, It looks like I am taking on this case as Tracie has other projects to deal with. I have reviewed the application, and I have one issue which I want to clarify before accepting. When we first met with Mr. Wyatt he agreed to a 5-foot wide pedestrian access trail that would run along the northern property boundary. I see that it is 10-feet wide, but is within the driveway of one of the proposed lots. This is not a good plan; there should be a clear separation between the access easement and the driveway— having the public traverse an active driveway to reach the shoreline is not safe. Also, when a 10-foot wide access is provided, it can sometimes accommodate vehicular access — which we do not want. 5-foot wide pedestrian access is acceptable and what was agreed upon a while ago. Let me know, thanks. Alex EXHIBIT A-17 Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant July 5, 2024 Mr. Zendo Kern, Director County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Director Kern: Subject: SMA Use Permit Application (3`d resubmittal) Applicant: Kaimu Cove LLC Request: To allow proposed 5-lot subdivision of minimum 1/2-acre sized lots and its related improvements including eventual construction of 5 single-family dwellings TMK: 1-2-018: 001. Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna Accompanying this letter, we present for your consideration and processing before the Windward Planning Commission the revised request by Kaimu Cove LLC for a Special Management Area Use Permit to allow for a proposed 5-lot subdivision consisting of parcels at least 1/2-acre in size and the eventual construction of a single-family dwelling on each of the proposed lots. The subject property is located along the coastal section of Kaimu-Makena Homesteads in the Puna District. Pursuant to your application requirements to be filed via the EPIC system, please find accompanying this letter the following: a. Original of the completed SMA Use Permit application form and accompanying environmental report that includes a location map and site plan; b. Completed application form with landowners' authorizations c. List of the surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. Should you have questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. copy via email: Mark Wyatt, Kaimu Cove LLC P.O. BOX 4501 HILO HAWAII 96720 PHONE: EMAIL. Sincerely, Daryn Arai EXHIBIT "A-17" SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION Applicant: KAIMU COVE LLC Request: Proposed 5-lot subdivision and related subdivision improvements including eventual construction of 5 single-family dwellings Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018:001 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna District Hawaii Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant July 2024 I'A,. 1111"MIT XVIPIACATION (Type j ove LLC T i L July 5, 2024 I i k PAhQ& I lawai I ols I ko i1i'llift 'A%Iktw� - (808) 965-5404 inhawanftmad.com P,, i lo, f 5 - r -:::i 4-,-n fial and njncultural subdivi-swirl con quiting of lute mininlual 112-aC r: si; , -d Wbdiv1.%j.4jU!'YW1"VC the comtniction of-rrIaLL.- ---mcntg and the ly cfwcItm ,tNN, - -)NJ N(i _xp KEy: (3) 1 1 tZ L Of MOPERTY 'AREA OF REQUESTED USE: 3.677 acres 3.677 acres Mark Wynn i Lisa Ann Benham/ Ehwm-d Utyro FEE SD"LF I ANDOWNIER(S) WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION 141et WO tSOIAM 19AWMI.-Ift UW"JI 17,,k i,jsA AM 11.Ak1'1.JM &- ',Ayro, sm attaLhod auduniza60" letteim I DAM k CTI XrT —i Daiyn Arai POBOX4501 Hilo. Hawaii 96720 i I l 11 - " ; L. , 1 -1 op; 'o vy") (Email a adenoeand oopies shoWd be sent, COMES: Gill, I VAL, App AgerA I�f� � �a � � 1 • Il� ..r .o _ _ w , r 1. 1-41%%ura r%,l,iI r.e-1tw!in ru Lim II CL-r LLr. -I IL 111 aw1w+e Kfnrrti Al; an 1-1 adr 1LA L1- -ly Ibr 4nd 'Illllilr,p ,lj .',TP lrllIW pr h" 11111ynn-1 FllhilliNklAirl n Ilk SW.E Fit P iu'.tiuii FJ.-d ti.lwllMY mi I'iwuA fyWnL I11 Ills SNIA n1k I maiL"; A I Ml I.IIr 'ill +1 .,Ckw UMMOMMF Al i Ii41JfM In :"=S Ir'PMU IIF "III IiWi CI'i bCh.311 re is n _hor hllllk l q,.ouliillu 4r _. w 1� y -, I �."�� ■ , � B. � IprYL I ir -AllI i I I I "• r ' l � YI I ��� wl ! h� j � � r rr r� •1� � I . � � • i � June 20.2022 I, Lign Ann Benham 811OW hark Ya## tO aet aS PrOxy end sign on my U-wh Eirf_ Mark Wvatt is my authorized representative to sign do amen is fGr Building )ard PPannkng l parrmnt documents - Lisa Ann Benham LIST OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS TAX MAP KEY OwnerName OwnerAddress2 OwnerCityStZip 120040010000 STATE OF HAWAII 75 AUPUNI STREET, ROOM 204 HILO HI 96720 120060330000 STATE OF HAWAII 75 AUPUNI STREET, ROOM 204 HILO HI 96720 120060340000 STATE OF HAWAII 175 AUPUNI STREET, ROOM 204 HILO HI 96720 120060360000 STATE OF HAWAII 75 AUPUNI STREET, ROOM 204 HILO HI 96720 120180160000 NEVO,VALERIE TR HI 96778 8040 120180190000 NEVO,VALERIE TR PAHOA HI 96778 8040 120180330000 MORGAN,CHERYLANN 17PAHOA PAHOAHI96778 120180020000 MORGAN,DAVID & CHERYLANN PAHOA HI 96778 120180030000 O'SHAUGHNESSY,MICHAEL & SUSAN JPAHOA HI 96778 0728 BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION Applicant: KAIMU COVE LLC Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018:001 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna District Hawaii Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant July 2024 Table of Contents A. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USE / DEVELOPMENT..............................................................................1 1. Applicant's Request..............................................................................................................................1 2. Location of Property.............................................................................................................................1 3. Statement of Objectives and reasons for the request......................................................................... 3 4. Proposed Project Details...................................................................................................................... 3 S. Timeframe and cost..............................................................................................................................6 B. HISTORICAL PROPERTY INFORMATION........................................................................................7 6. October 10, 2022: Notice of Violation(PL-PCV-2022-00015).............................................................. 7 7. December 15, 2022: Time Extension to Comply with Order...............................................................8 8. August 4, 2023: Commencement of Daily Fines................................................................................10 9. August 9, 2023: Applicant's Response to Daily Fines Letter..............................................................10 C. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS............................................................10 10. State Land Use Designation...............................................................................................................10 11. Current County Zoning: ...................................................................................................................... 10 12. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: ....................................................... 12 13. Puna Community Development Plan..................................................................................................13 14. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A................................................................................16 15. Special Management Area (SMA).......................................................................................................16 16. Certified Shoreline Survey..................................................................................................................16 D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA............................................................17 17. Subject Property.................................................................................................................................17 18. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses...........................................................................................................17 19. ALISH................................................................................................................................................... 20 20. Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification System..................................................................20 21. US Soil Survey.....................................................................................................................................20 22. FIRM....................................................................................................................................................20 23. Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report(2017)...............................................................21 24. Flora/Fauna Resources....................................................................................................................... 21 25. Archaeological Resources...................................................................................................................22 26. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights....................................................................................................25 27. Public Access.......................................................................................................................................26 E. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES................................................................................................26 28. Access: ................................................................................................................................................ 26 29. Water..................................................................................................................................................26 30. Wastewater........................................................................................................................................ 26 32. Essential Utilities and Services............................................................................................................26 F. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SMA USE PERMIT REQUEST...........................................................27 33. Anticipated effects upon the Special Management Area...................................................................30 G. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF CHAPTER 205A AND SMA GUIDELINES.........................................32 H. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................................... 36 COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERM ITAPPLICATION FOR MARK WYATT Affecting Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018: 001; Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna A. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USE / DEVELOPMENT 1. Applicant's Request Mark Wyatt, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant", is requesting a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit to allow for the development of a 5-lot subdivision consisting of parcels at least one-half (1/2) acre in size, on the subject property consisting of approximately 3.677 acres of land situated along the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road within the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, District of Puna. The proposed development also includes the construction of a proposed single-family dwelling and related improvements on each of the proposed lots as determined by the individual lot owners. 2. Location of Property The subject property is located at along the makai side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road (State Route 137), approximately 2,450 feet to the northeast from its intersection with the Pahoa-Kalapana Road (State Highway 130), and identified as TMK: 1-2-018: 001 (refer to Figure 1- Location Map and Figure 2 - Tax Map below). Rn I I P a g e Figure 1 - Location Map +r ra 1 I� h e + � I t i Figure 2 - Tax Map 2 1 P a g e 3. Statement of Objectives and reasons for the request The Applicant wishes to subdivide the subject property into five (5) individual parcels, each consisting of a land area of least one-half (1/2) acre. The Applicant will retain two (2) of the proposed lots to construct single-family dwellings, one on each parcel. The remaining three (3) lots will be sold to individuals, with each lot accommodating a proposed single-family dwelling and related facilities, such as driveway and wastewater systems, utilities, and possibly accessory structures such as storage sheds, carports, and other improvements typical of a single-family residential homesite. In total, the proposed 5-lot subdivision will result in the construction of five (5) single-family dwellings and related improvements within the 3.677-acre property. The reason for the request is to provide housing opportunities within an area designated for residential -agricultural uses (RA zoning) since the late 1960s with the adoption of the Zone District Maps as part of the Zoning Code. The subject property is part of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, that maintains a similar RA zoning as the subject property, with lots ranging in size from as small as 5,300 square feet to 3 acres. 4. Proposed Protect Details (see Figure 3 — Proposed Subdivision Plan) a. Proposed Subdivision: Subdivision of 3.677-acre property into five (5) lots, each of which will maintain a minimum lot size of at least one-half (1/2) acre. The four (4) shoreline fronting properties will accommodate the required 40-foot shoreline setback. b. Access: Each lot within the proposed subdivision will have direct frontage with a proposed private cul-de-sac roadway, which then connects with the Kalapana- Kapoho Beach Road. c. Public Access: a 10-foot wide, cinder -surfaced public pedestrian access easement will be provided along the entire northern boundary of the subject property, adjacent to the existing adjoining State lands. d. Water: County water is available to support the proposed 5-lot subdivision. The subject property is currently serviced by one (1) existing water meter. The water main along the mauka side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road will need to be tapped by lateral services and extended to the subject property. 3 1 P a g e i 1 1a_ r ti � r 1 FA Figure 3 - Proposed Subdivision Plan 41 e. Wastewater: Each proposed single-family dwelling will be serviced by an individual septic system designed to meet State Department of Health standards. f. Site Improvements: The Applicant and subsequent owners of the individual lots will be grubbing and grading each subdivided lot to accommodate a proposed single- family dwelling. Each proposed single-family dwelling will be constructed in accordance with applicable minimum yard setbacks of 25 feet for the front and rear yards and 15 feet for the side yards. Each single-family dwelling will not exceed 35 feet in building height. Along with the construction of each single-family dwelling will be the installation of associated utility improvements, such as access driveways (paved, grassed or gravel), water meter and waterline installations, electrical utility poles, and septic systems. No use, land alteration or vertical construction will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback area as established by a shoreline survey of the subject property certified by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on March 29, 2023. g. Remedial Actions: As further discussed in Section B of this report, past un-permitted actions by the previous landowner and the Applicant resulted in the clearing and laying of surface fill material within the northeastern section of the subject property that intruded within a portion of the 40-foot shoreline setback area as well as upon a portion of the adjoining State-owned lands as shown on Figure 4-Past Grading/ Grubbing Activities. The intrusion within the adjoining State-owned lands consisted primarily pushed vegetation that has since partially deteriorated with most of the vegetation reestablishing itself. The Applicant will remove all pushed vegetation that has not deteriorated for proper disposal at a greenwaste facility. Black cinder was placed within the 40-foot shoreline setback area to create a safer walking path along the shoreline trail. The Applicant will remove the black cinder from within the shoreline setback area and restore it to its previous condition to the extent practical. In both instances, the Applicant will coordinate both site restoration activities with the Planning Department, and if deemed necessary, the State Department of Land and Natural Resources. These restoration efforts will be completed, to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision 5 1 P a g e Approval. As these remedial actions are to remove any unpermitted physical material from within the shoreline setback area or upon state-owned lands and restore it to its previous, natural -like condition, that Applicant is thereby removing any intended "use" of these areas as either a stockpile for grubbed material on State-owned lands or as an improved walking path within the 40-foot shoreline area. Therefore, pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statute Section 343-5(8), no "use" is proposed and no environmental assessment is required in order to proceed with the processing of this application. S. Timeframe and cost Upon issuance of an SMA Use Permit, the Applicant will promptly file a subdivision application with approval anticipated within five (5) years from the effective date of the permit. Associated known costs and estimates associated with the proposed subdivision action is anticipated to be as follows: • Surveyor contract for subdivision and certified shoreline survey - $25,000 • Rock wall and gate at entrance - $15,000 • Construction of private cul-de-sac roadway - $50,000 • Water meters (4 additional) - $25,000 • Land clearing operator fees estimated at 300hrs - $15,000 • Approximately 10 loads of cinder to fill voids between rock - $7,000 • Removal of unwanted trees - $10,000 Each owner of individual lots within the proposed subdivision will determine the type of home to be constructed, along with its supporting facilities. Timing of the construction of each home will also be determined by the individual lot owners. Therefore, unknown costs at this time, as it would be premature to request quotes or develop subdivision construction drawings at this early stage in the overall review process, would include the following items: • Cost of wastewater (septic) improvements for each proposed home, sizing dependent on type of home constructed and site conditions. • Drainage report not prepared as it will be associated with subdivision construction drawings prepared as part of the subdivision process. • Cost of utilities, aside from water, will be determined during the subdivision process when utility engineering plans are developed. • Legal fees for deeds and recordation are undetermined at this time, as it will occur after issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. 6 1 P a g e B. HISTORICAL PROPERTY INFORMATION 6. 1992: Prior landowner activities Based on information provided by previous landowner, Applicant understands that prior landowner intended to construct their home on the subject property, and commenced with the clearing and grading of the property to the extent as shown on Figure 4-Past Grading/ Grubbing Activities. Over the intervening decades, the previously grubbed and graded areas were allowed to overgrow, with the exception of one clearing effort sometime around 2017. Aside from this one known clearing event, the cleared areas were allowed overgrow once again until the purchase of the property by the Applicant. 7. May 28, 2022: Transfer of ownership Applicant purchases subject property. 8. June 1, 2022: SMA Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2022-000080) Applicant files SMA Use Permit Assessment application to grub entire subject property to allow for the construction of seven (7) dwellings. Application subsequently returned by Planning on July 31, 2022 for additional information. 9. June 2. 2022: Application for eradine permit (PW.ENG2022-00139) Application file grading permit application with Department of Public Works (DPW) for clearing and grading of northern -most access driveway to proposed housepad location as shown on Figure 4-Past Grading/Grubbing Activities. Permit application subsequently rejected by DPW as not required due to total affected area less than one (1) acre of land. 10. Late July 2022 till mid -August (approximately 2 weeks) Applicant commences with grubbing of existing vegetation only within the northern- most driveway access and proposed housepad location as extensive vegetation had regrown. The Applicant mistakenly understood in discussions with both Planning and DPW that grubbing activities could commence. The grubbing activities inadvertently extended into the adjoining State-owned lands by about 20 feet at the most. The Applicant also laid down 3 truck loads (approximately 36 cubic yards) of black cinder within the eastern most portion of the subject property in proximity to the proposed housepad to fill the voids on the ground and to not significantly alter the existing grade 7 1 P a g e as it existed prior to the purchase of the property by the Applicant. Unfortunately, the black cinder was laid down in a portion of the 40-foot shoreline setback area, as shown on Figure 4-Past Grading/Grubbing Activities to create a more walkable path along the shoreline area where people have previously navigated. 11. September 1, 2022: Subdivision Application (PL-SUB-2022-000094) Applicant files application for proposed 7-lot subdivision of subject property. Application subsequently returned for more information, including securing a certified shoreline survey of property and SMA Use Permit for the proposed development. 12. September 29, 2022: Cessation of grubbing and grading work Applicant is verbally informed by Planning Department to cease and desist from any grading and grubbing activities within the subject property until such time proper SMA- related approval is issued by the Planning Department. Applicant promptly stops all activities upon the subject property. 13. October 7. 2022: SMA Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2022-000119) Applicant files SMA Use Permit Assessment application to allow for grubbing of subject property so that a topographical assessment can be made for the proposed subdivision of the property. Application subsequently returned by Planning on October 26, 2022 for additional information. 14. October 10, 2022: Notice of Violation (PL-PCV-2022-00015) Planning Department formally notifies Applicant to cease and desist from all grubbing and grading activities within the subject property until an SMA Use Permit is issued. 15. October 19, 2022: SMA Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2022-000126) Applicant files SMA Use Permit Assessment application to for after -the -fact grading and grubbing that had previously occurred on the subject property and subject to Notice of Violation dated October 10, 2022. Application subsequently returned by Planning on October 26, 2022 for additional information. 16. December 15, 2022: Time Extension to Comply with Order At the request of the Applicant, the Planning Department issues a 6-month time extension with a new deadline of June 15, 2023 by which to comply with corrective actions described in the Department's October 10, 2022 NOV and Order. 8 1 P a g e 5 z d L 72 Figure 4-Past Grading/Grubbing Activities 9 1 P a g e aa 2 17. August 4, 2023: Commencement of Daily Fines Planning Department informs Applicant that due to failure to comply with corrective actions by the June 15, 2023 deadline, daily fines commenced as of October 11, 2022. 18. August 9, 2023: Applicant's Response to Daily Fines Letter The Applicant, through its consultant, responds to the Daily Fines Letter with a demonstration of its on -going efforts to comply with all corrective actions as specified within the Department's October 10, 2022 Order 19. December 26, 2023: Applicant secures additional time Applicant secures additional time until June 26, 2024 by which to comply with corrective actions. C. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 20. State Land Use Designation: Urban. The subject property is situated within an area designated for Urban uses by the State Land Use Commission, as shown on Figure 5 — State Land Use 21. Current County Zoning: Residential and Agricultural-0.5 acre minimum lot size (RA-.5a) The Residential and Agricultural (RA) zoning district provides for activities or uses characterized by low density residential lots in rural areas where "city -like" concentrations of people, structures, streets, and urban level of services are absent, and where small farms are intermixed with low density residential lots. The RA district is intended to be only within areas designated as being in the State land use rural or urban districts. (see Figure 6 - Current Area Zoning) 101 Page 1 111 Page A rj Figure 5 —State Land Use Figure 6 — Current Area Zoning 22. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: The County of Hawaii General Plan is the policy document for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawaii. The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map classifies the subject property and area directly inland (mauka) for Extensive Agricultural uses, which are lands not classified as Important Agricultural Land. Such lands are not capable of producing sustained, high agricultural yields without the intensive application of modern farming methods and technologies due to certain physical constraints such as soil composition, slope, machine tillability and climate. Other less intensive agricultural uses such as grazing and pasture may be included in the Extensive Agriculture category. Portion of the subject property along the shoreline prior to the certified shoreline is designated Open (see Figure 7- General Plan LUPAG Map) Figure 7 — General Plan LUPAG Map 121 Page 23. Puna Community Development Plan: The Puna CDP (PCDP) was developed and adopted by the Hawaii County Council on August 27, 2008. It became effective on September 10, 2008 as Ordinance No. 08 116. The PCDP does not define any specific land use pattern for the area in proximity to the subject property. However, the PCDP established three (3) major themes that guided the development of the plan: • Malama I Ka Aina which "establishes how the contextual natural, historic and cultural features of Puna should be preserved." (emphasis added) • Growth Management which "addresses how the future pattern of human settlement and land use should be shaped to respect that context and support the desired quality of life for Puna's residents." (emphasis added) • Transportation which "focuses on sustainable approaches to transportation to support the goals of the two above themes." Relative to the Malama / KaAina theme, four (4) major elements were identified and assigned goals, objectives, and actions. These elements and their relationship to the proposed action follow: 1. Historic. Cultural. and Scenic Resources An archaeological inventory survey of the subject property did identify four (4) sites as significant for the information they contain, but because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. Nonetheless, should there be inadvertent discoveries during the construction of this project, work will stop and contacts with the County Planning Department and State Historic Preservation Division will be made. Furthermore, the project site is not known as hosting any cultural or scenic resources. 2. Native Forests and Geological Features An assessment of floral and faunal resources and its geology indicates that the goals and objectives of this element would not be applicable to the 131 Page proposed project. The subject property is not part of any established native forest area, neither does it have any significant or unique geological features. 3. Aquifers, Coastal Waters and Stormwaters The subject property is not proximate to potable wells in this area. Notwithstanding that factor, the proposed subdivision will utilize septic systems meeting with the approval of the State Department of Health. The subject property is also not subject to storm waters or coastal flooding nor the effects of sea level rise. Given the above, the goals and objectives of this element would be fulfilled. 4. Shoreline Area The Applicant has secured a certified shoreline survey of the subject property, and has conformed its proposed subdivision to the location of the certified shoreline, as well as providing a public pedestrian shoreline access to allow public access to coastal resources. The other theme is Managing Growth. For this, six (6) elements were identified. These elements and their relationship to the project follow. 1. Land Use Pattern Evaluating this request against the articulated goals and objectives of the Managing Growth theme, the request would be consistent with the following Goals of the PCDP: • Puna retains a rural character while it protects its native natural and cultural resources. • Reduces the exposure to high risk from natural hazard situations. 2. Agriculture and Economic Development The PCDP identifies the following: Goals • Increase opportunities for diversified agriculture • Preserve lands for agricultural use • Increase local market share of Puna agricultural products 141 Page Objectives • Discourage urban growth and further subdivision on lands that have been identified as having agricultural value. While the General Plan does identify the subject property for extensive agricultural activities, its small size and location between a public road and the ocean precludes its use for extensive agricultural activities. As such, the proposed subdivision should not have an adverse impact on the agriculture industry since the location, size and soil conditions do not present the subject property as having any significant agricultural value. 3. Social Services and Housing As this is not a social service or more affordable housing project, this section is not applicable. 4. Public Safety and Sanitation Services Public safety services are available Pahoa. All solid waste generated by the project will be disposed of at either the transfer station in Pahoa or at the Hilo Transfer Station. No sewer system exists in the subject area, and the Applicant will comply with Department of Health requirements regarding proper wastewater disposal methods. 5. Parks and Recreation This section is not applicable, as the project would have no direct impacts on parks. Nonetheless, the Applicant will provide a public pedestrian shoreline access to ensure public access to coastal recreational resources. 6. Energy Sustainability While the proposed subdivision has access to the electrical grid, it will be up to the individual homeowners whether they wish to live off -grid or rely upon the utility for its electrical needs. The third theme is Transportation. As a small 5-lot residential and agricultural subdivision, the goals and polices of this theme is not applicable to this project. However, the proposed subdivision will occur within the established Kaimu-Makena Homestead community within a residential area having lot sizes ranging from 5,300 151 Page square feet to over 3 acres. The effectiveness of enhancing transportation facilities and options is dependent upon the density and distribution of users. In this particular instance, creating a 5-lot subdivision within an existing homestead community will be less detrimental to any planning efforts to enhance transportation services and facilities. In summary, the proposed 5-lot residential and agricultural subdivision will maintain the rural character of this area of Puna while remaining consistent with the themes outlined by the PCDP. 24. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A The entire State of Hawai'i lies within the Coastal Zone Management area. The intent of the Coastal Zone Management Program is to guide and regulate public and private uses in the coastal zone management area with respect to recreational resources, historic resources, public access to the shoreline, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems, marine resources, economic uses, coastal hazards, managing development, public participation, and beach protection. 25. Special Management Area (SMA) The Special Management Area (SMA) is a part of the Coastal Zone Management Program that is regulated by the County, established to promote the State's policy to preserve, protect, and where possible, to restore the natural resources of the coastal zone of Hawai'i. Therefore, special controls on development within the area along the shoreline are necessary to avoid permanent loss of valuable resources and the foreclosure of management options, and to ensure that adequate public access is provided to public -owned or used beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves, by dedication or other means. The subject property is situated within the SMA due to its immediate proximity to the shoreline. An SMA Use Permit is required from the Windward Planning Commission in order to support the development of the proposed 5-lot subdivision and associated single-family residential dwellings. 26. Certified Shoreline Survey A certified shoreline survey of the subject property was secured on March 29, 2023 from the Board of Land and Natural Resources. The certified shoreline migrated inland from the makai boundaries of the 3.800-acre subject property as defined by tax maps, 161 Page reducing the overall land area of the subject property to 3.677 acres, as shown on Figure 8 — Certified Shoreline Survey. D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 27. Subject Property The property is trapezoid in shape and 3.677-acres in size and is situated between the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and the shoreline (see Figure 9 - Aerial Site Map). The Aerial Site Plan is based on March 7, 2023 imagery obtained via Google Earth. The subject property is currently vacant of any use or structure, aside from some limited clearing by the previous landowner for a proposed driveway and house pad circa 1992. However, the proposed home was never constructed and the previously cleared driveway and house pad is now overgrown with vegetation. More recently, the Applicant cleared and graded a portion of the subject property along its northern boundary, beginning at the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extending all the way down to the shoreline. Upon issuance of a Notice of Violation by the Planning Department, all work has ceased and the Aerial Site Map shows that vegetation has begun to reestablish itself. 28. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses The subject property is located within a portion of the I<aimu-Makena Homesteads, a collection of lots and subdivisions that span an area along the eastern side of the junction of Pahoa-Kalapana (Hwy 130) and Kalapana-Kapoho (Hwy 137) roads, and is predominately zoned for Residential and Agricultural (RA) uses with a minimum lot size of 1/2-acre. Adjacent to the east and makai of the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road are State lands zoned for Open (0) uses with agricultural -zoned lands (A-3a) along the mauka side of this road. The subject property basically defines the eastern -most extent of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. 171 Page r Jr' y KL w i •4 Ir L=1 4 1" F ;�' a l~ � �tiJ •' � •' ' • • it .� �Y •+ _ I � 1 s� •7r ■ av, " I i ■ e•, n r;r r _ a Y•• r.• 1 I r i w. .. -J• Figure 8 — Certified Shoreline Survey 181 Page 29. ALISH: Other Important Agricultural Lands The subject property is not classified as by the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii. 30. Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification System Soils within the subject property are classified as having very poor agricultural productivity rating (Class E soils). 31. US Soil Survey: Hakuma highly organic hydrous loam (666) These soils series consist of shallow, moderately well drained soils formed in basic volcanic ash over pahoehoe lava. Hakuma soils are on the low elevation, windward slopes of Mauna Loa and Kilauea volcanoes. Slopes range from 2 to 10 percent. Mean annual rainfall is about 154 inches. Hakuma soils are generally found in open canopied forest. A few areas are used for pasture. Natural vegetation is ohia lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha), treefern (Cibotium chamissoi or C. glauca), uluhe (Dicranopteris linearis) and guava (Psidium guajava). 32. FIRM Zone "X" - determined to be outside the 500-year flood plain (see Figure 10 — Flood Hazard Map. There are no known existing drainageways that traverse through the subject property. Figure 10 — Flood Hazard Map 201 Page 33. Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report (2017) The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report ("report") provides the first state-wide assessment of Hawaii's vulnerability to sea level rise and offered recommendations to reduce the exposure and sensitivity to sea level rise and increase the State's capacity to adapt. The report assessed the best available science on climate change and sea level rise and provides recommendations based on emerging good practices. One such practice is that the magnitude and rate of sea level rise warrants planning for 3.2 feet of sea level rise by 2100. Towards that end, the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA) shows that the subject property and its proposed 5-lot subdivision and future homesites will not be vulnerable to 3.2 feet of sea level rise, as depicted in Figure 11- SLR Viewer. on Loisaivaa W,anray• i4411 a,Pr-,9&II ■'.701 ILLI'" FL9%J i i i IIT,9 I! %'MltEt11 a 1• a �f -e d � • a• a��i w�„ �, 4 34. Flora/Fauna Resources Figure 11— SLR Viewer Mill. MI No professional flora or faunal surveys were conducted of the subject property. However, the Applicant has identified any endangered species of plants or animals within the subject property. The on -site vegetation includes guava, lauae, ti, noni, hau, 211 Page hala, milo, ohia, monkeypod, christmas berry, melochia, gunpowder trees, cane grass, java plum and verbina. Near the west property line there are some common mangos, avocado and banana from the neighbors. Naupaka occurs along the shoreline areas. While no endangered species of fauna was observed on the subject property, its location and shoreline proximity could see threatened or endangered species such as the Hawaiian Hoary Bat, Hawaiian (koloa) Duck, Hawaiian (Nene) Goose, Hawaiian Petrel, Hawaiian Coot, Band-rumped Storm -petrel, Hawaiian Stilt, Newell's Townsend's Shearwater and the Short -tailed Albatross. The Blackburn's Sphinx Moth is the only endangered species of insect that could inhabit the affected area. 35. Archaeological Resources 1992 Archaeological Inventory Survey The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 (Exhibit A). The report, titled "An Inventory Level Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawai `i (TMK: 1-2-18:1) November 1992", identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include: • Site 18,525 — C-shaped structure built of stacked sub -angular to sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small boulders. No buried cultural features were found in this structure, which functioned as a temporary structure. • Site 18,526 — two surface features consisting of a C-shape and a rock mound, both consisting of sub -angular and sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small bounders. No cultural material was found in the C-shaped structure, which functioned as a temporary shelter. The small mound probably functioned as an agricultural feature. • Site 18,527 — a post -contact wall structure that extended along the base of the fill for the I<alapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extended beyond the subject property to the southwest until it was eventually covered by fill associated with the road construction. Most likely served as a boundary wall. • Site 18528 — small modified hole in a lava bubble. No cultural material was found in association with this feature and there proved to be no potential for 221 Page excavation inside the opening. The feature function is unclear, but could have served as a storage area or small planting area. The presence of a nearby cemetery (locally known as Makena Cemetery) was a specific concern during the survey, so special attention was paid to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present within the subject property. No such features were identified., nor were there other features identified that were interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build- up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. January 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation (Exhibit B) The Applicant contracted with ASM Affiliates who conducted an archaeological field inspection of the subject property to confirm and update findings from the earlier archaeological inventory survey and a cultural consultation to confirm the presence or absence of burial sites. According to the report, "There has been some prior ground disturbance along the northeast, southwest, and mauka edges of the project area. On the `a `d flow in the northeastern portion of the parcel, a grubbed and graded driveway (Figure 8) meanders along the property line and accesses a graded house pad near the coast on a promontory that overlooks the rest of the parcel (this area was mostly recently cleared in 2022). There is a second roadway which diverts from the upper road and is routed down through the middle of the project area to the coast (Figure 9). This road may have been already present when previously surveyed in 1992, as something resembling it is mentioned by Spear (1992). Bulldozer push piles were also observed along the boundary with the adjacent residential property to the southwest near the middle of the project area. These push piles appear to be related to the clearing of that neighboring parcel. A 231 Page number of brush piles, seemingly from hand clearing activities, were also noted in the northeastern portion of the project area at the base of the 'ad flow. The pedestrian survey conducted located three of the four sites previously documented by Spear in 1992. The forth site, a C-shaped feature [Site 15,525] located within the eastern portion of the project site at the base of an `a`a flow, could not be located as it was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbance after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) survey. The result of the current survey supports the findings of the Spear (1992) survey, with the three relocated sites in similar condition to what was previously described and indicate that the subject property was used during the Precontact to early Historic periods for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. No potential burial features were identified within the subject property nor were any possible burial locations identified as a result of consultation by the archaeologist. A consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted, that included descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families, namely Ms. Ke`ala Keli`iho`omalu, Mrs. Leialoha Ilae-Kaleimamahu, and Mrs. Ku`ulei Kealoha- Cooper by phone. According to the report, "Following the initial phone calls, each of the three consulted parties were provided with a consultation letter and maps specifying ASM's search for persons who may have knowledge of any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. Each of the consulted parties contacted additional family members to seek such information. Ms. Keli `iho `omalu spoke with elder relatives Prince Keli `iho `omalu, Sam Keli `iho `omalu, Noenoe Dunn, Tiana Dunn, Jerry Dunn, Princess Keli `iho `omalu, Jr. Keli `iho `omalu, and Tiara Keli `iho `omalu. Ms. Keli'iho'omalu indicated that her uncle Sam also attempted to reach out to Aku Hauani `o and Kamu Quihano and that her father attempted to reach out to Annie Ka'aukai and Leslie Enriques. Mrs. Ilae-Kalaimdmahu also contacted members of the `ohana Keli `iho'omalu and recommended that ASM staff contact Mrs. Kealoho-Cooper since she had heard that the cemetery belonged to the Kealoha family. Mrs. Kealoha- 241 Page Cooper was contacted by ASM and she spoke with several of her relatives, including her mother." According to the report, none of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. Subsequent email correspondence with Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper clarified that the cemetery did not belong to the Kealoha `Ghana, however, her mother related that in the 1930s and 1940s, the Kalapana Church was located near the cemetery and that her tutu (Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper's great-grandmother) Emma Nai`a was a pillar of that church. She added that there is a Kealoha cemetery in `Opihikao but was not aware of any such family cemetery in Kaimu. Based on these findings, the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. 36. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights According to the Applicant, there are no known customary or Native Hawaiian cultural rights exercised within the subject property. Upon clearing of a gravel driveway along the northern property line of the subject property in 2022, the public has been using the driveway to access the shoreline area and adjoining State lands. As previously mentioned, the Applicant will be providing a 10-foot wide shoreline public pedestrian access along its entire northern boundary adjacent to the adjoining State-owned lands. The presence of Makena Cemetery nearby along the mauka side of the Kaimu-Kapoho Beach Road was of special concern by the archaeologist (Spear 1992) who paid special attention to look for features within the subject property that could be interpreted as burials, and none was found. As mentioned previously, recent consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted during the current study, that included descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families, none of whom knew of any burial sites within the project area. If a burial is encountered during land disturbance activities, the Applicant will immediately cease all work and notify the Planning Department and the State Historic Preservation Division to await proper direction and clearance before any land alteration work can resume. 251 Page 37. Public Access The nearest formal access to the shoreline is situated along Kalapana Beach Haven Road, situated approximately 640 feet to the southwest of the subject property along the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. As mentioned, upon clearing of a gravel driveway along the northern property line of the subject property in 2022, the public has been using the driveway to access the shoreline area and adjoining State lands. As previously mentioned, the Applicant will be providing a 10-foot wide shoreline public pedestrian access along its entire northern boundary adjacent to the adjoining State-owned lands. E. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 38. Access: Access to the subject property is from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, a State - maintained roadway with a roughly 10-foot wide pavement and unimproved shoulders within an approximately 80-foot wide right-of-way. 39. Water County water is currently available to support the proposed 6-lot single-family residential subdivision. Should this SMA Use Permit be approved and tentative approval granted to the proposed subdivision, the Applicant will install lateral connections from the water main within the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road to individual proposed lots. 40. Wastewater There is no municipal sewer system servicing the subject area. Each proposed single- family dwelling will be serviced by individual septic systems meeting with the approval of the State Department of Health. 41. Solid Waste Solid waste will be handled through commercial haulers or disposal by the landowner into authorized landfill sites or transfer stations. All waste generated by construction - related activities will have to be transported to the West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill in Pu`uanahulu, North Kona. 42. Essential Utilities and Services Other utilities, such as electrical, cable and telephone services, will be made available to the subject property. 261 Page F. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SMA USE PERMIT REQUEST The approval of the Applicant's request to develop a proposed 5-lot single-family residential subdivision is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The subject property is not subject to any coastal hazard nor anticipated to have any adverse impact upon coastal resources. The Applicant will be providing shoreline public access through the proposed subdivision as required by Chapter 34 of the Hawaii County Code regarding Public Access. The proposed subdivision and homesites will not have any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area or upon any endangered species of plants or animals. In view of the Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa`akai O Ka`Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. It is unlikely that there are any valued cultural, historic and natural resources to be found within the property. Two archaeological studies conducted on the subject property concludes that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. Consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted and none of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. For these reasons, the Applicant could find no evidence of any possible adverse effects or impairments that will occur to any valued resources should the proposed 5-lot subdivision and its associated construction of single-family dwellings be allowed. Should the Applicant inadvertently encounter any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials, the Applicant agree to cease any work in the immediate area and contact the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD), resuming activities only upon securing archaeological clearance from DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. 271 Page Approval of the request to create a 5-lot single-family residential subdivision, if approved, will not be contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawai'i Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management nor the guidelines for approval of an SMA Use Permit as prescribed by Planning Commission Rule No. 9 regarding the Special Management Area. The subject property is situated within the Special Management Area with direct frontage along the shoreline. However, the subject property is not subject to any coastal hazard nor the effects of sea -level rise. Therefore, the development of the subject property as a single-family residential subdivision is not anticipated to have any adverse impact upon coastal resources such as coastal recreational and marine resources, coastal ecosystems or the public use and recreational use of any beach. Based on a March 29, 2023 certified shoreline survey, a 40-foot wide shoreline setback is established that will manage all structures and land use activities within this shoreline setback area to ensure that coastal processes and resources are protected. The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 which identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include two C-shaped structures probably used as a temporary structure and an agricultural feature, a post -contact boundary wall, and a modified hole in a lava bubble probably used for storage or a small planting area. There were no features identified that could be interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build-up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. A January 2024 archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation confirmed these previous findings and found that the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. 281 Page Therefore, it is not anticipated that the proposed request will have any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area. The subject property, zoned RA-.5a, is similarly designated as the rest of the area referred to as the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. The subject property itself represents the eastern extent of this homestead area, with lands beyond retained by the State. While the General Plan suggests that the subject property be utilized for extensive agricultural purposes, it designates it as the only lot on the makai side of the Kalapana- Kapoho Beach Road, squeezed between Low Density Urban uses for the rest of the homestead area, and Open uses for the State lands immediately to the east. Extensive agricultural pursuits simply cannot happen on this 3.677-acre shoreline parcel, which is clearly best suited for residential uses as is the rest of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. For these reasons, the Applicant feels that allowing this proposed 5-lot residential subdivision in this particular location is supportive of the County's efforts towards managing development through the General Plan that also encourages the County to: • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County. With a policy that: • Vacant lands in urban areas and urban expansion areas should be made available for residential uses before additional agricultural lands are converted into residential uses. Finally, in terms of the public participation objective, this is generally a public agency function. This is achieved through the Marine and Coastal Zone Management Advisory Group (MACZMAG) and the public hearing process required pursuant to the Planning Commission's Rules and County Council's meetings on this application. Notices of this application will become available through the posting of a sign on the property, as well as sending two (2) notices to surrounding property owners, one at the time the application is filed and again, prior to the public hearing. 291 Page 33. Anticipated effects upon the Special Management Area a. Relationship of Dr000sed action to land use Dlans. Dolicies and control The subject property represents the eastern extent of that area designated Urban by the State Land Use Commission and recognized as a part of the Kaimu- Makena Homesteads. The Puna Community Development Plan does not offer any land use policies specific to the Kaimu area, but as stated above, the General Plan does focus more urban types of uses in existing Urban areas, which is the case presented by the Applicant. b. Description of how proiect will affect area and surrounding lands The subject property lies within a long-established homestead area that has a number of single-family residences. This proposed single-family residential homestead will be no different. Lands beyond the subject property to the east and north (mauka) being owned by the State. All necessary utilities and services to support the proposed subdivision and its single-family residential use is or will be made available. Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road is a two-lane County -maintained roadway that can easily accommodate the traffic generated by this small subdivision. c. Description of impacts that cannot be avoided and applied mitigation measures The development of the subject property into a subdivision consisting of five (5) single-family residential dwellings will forever change the landscape in this particular section of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. But as a part of this homestead area, the proposed development will not be contrary to the existing residential character within this section of Kaimu. Lands to the east beyond the subject property is owned by the State, providing adequate coastal open space opportunities along this scenic roadway. During construction of the subdivision and its associated single-family dwellings, best management practices will be implemented to insure that excessive dust or runoff is controlled. If required by the Department of Public Works, a grubbing and grading permit will be secured prior to land alteration activities. No such land alteration activities will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback 301 Page area, which will be clearly delineated with flags or temporary construction fencing, as deemed appropriate by the Planning Department. Wastewater generated by these homesites will be managed by septic systems approved by the Department of Health. To mitigate the impacts of the proposed development on these vacant lands, the Applicant will provide a 10-foot wide public shoreline pedestrian access easement along its northern boundary to preserve access to coastal resources. d. Alternatives to the proposed project The only reasonable alternative is to maintain the subject property in its current vacant and vegetated state. Attempts could be made to cultivate the land or place it into pasture, but at only 3.677 acres, the subject property provides little agricultural opportunity, especially given the poor soil conditions immediately adjacent to the ocean. While the proposed project can be reduced to one single-family dwelling on the entire 3.677-acre property, the fact is that it still represents the introduction of residential uses on this property. Whether one dwelling or six, if adequate support facilities are provided and impacts properly mitigated and managed, the actual number of dwellings is irrelevant. The purpose of the SMA is to ensure that development will not have a substantial adverse effect upon coastal resources, and the Applicant believes that he has accomplished this goal with the information provided within this application. e. Irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources Given the limited scope of the proposed 5-lot subdivision and associated single- family dwellings and related improvements, the Applicant is not able to identify any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of cultural, historical, recreational or ecological resources as a result of the proposed subdivision development. In fact, a benefit in the form of a formal shoreline public pedestrian easement where none currently exists is a commitment towards enhancing access to a public resource, the shoreline. 311 Page G. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF CHAPTER 205A AND SMA GUIDELINES a. Recreational resources While the subject property itself is not known to accommodate any coastal recreational opportunities, its shoreline proximity does provide access opportunities. Therefore, to mitigate the effects of the proposed 5-lot subdivision upon access to coastal resources, the Applicant will establish a 10-foot wide, cinder - surfaced public pedestrian shoreline access along its northern property boundary. The proposed subdivision has modified its makai shoreline boundary to reflect the location of the recent certified shoreline, thereby providing additional opportunities for lateral access along the shoreline. The subject property has lost approximately 10,846 square feet of land area due to the encroachment of the shoreline. b. Historic resources The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 (Exhibit A). The report, titled "An Inventory Level Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawai `i (TMK. 1-2-18:1) November 1992", identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include: • Site 18,525 — C-shaped structure built of stacked sub -angular to sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small boulders. No buried cultural features were found in this structure, which functioned as a temporary structure. • Site 18,526 — two surface features consisting of a C-shape and a rock mound, both consisting of sub -angular and sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small bounders. No cultural material was found in the C-shaped structure, which functioned as a temporary shelter. The small mound probably functioned as an agricultural feature. • Site 18,527 — a post -contact wall structure that extended along the base of the fill for the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extended beyond the subject property to the southwest until it was eventually covered by fill associated with the road construction. Most likely served as a boundary wall. 321 Page • Site 18528 — small modified hole in a lava bubble. No cultural material was found in association with this feature and there proved to be no potential for excavation inside the opening. The feature function is unclear, but could have served as a storage area or small planting area. The presence of a nearby cemetery was a specific concern during the survey, so special attention was paid to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present within the subject property. No such features were identified, nor were there other features identified that were interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build-up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. The State Historic Preservation Division will be notified and all work shall immediately cease should inadvertent discovery of any archaeological feature be encountered during development of the proposed subdivision. A January 2024 archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation conducted by ASM affiliates in January 2024 confirmed these previous findings and found that the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. c. Scenic and Open Space resources The subject property is not identified as an area of natural beauty by the General Plan. The subject property remains largely vegetated with restricted coastal viewplanes from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. Immediately to the north are State-owned lands situated upon a 1750 A`a lava flow that affords greater coastal viewplane opportunities than does the subject property. The requested small 6-lot subdivision with 1/2-acre sized lots will offer low density building sites that should not have a significant impact upon any viewplane. It could be argued that 331 Page permitting the proposed subdivision to proceed forward will allow for clearing of the existing vegetation, allowing for greater coastal viewplane opportunities. For these reasons, the Applicant finds that the proposed 5-lot subdivision will not have significant adverse impacts upon any scenic or open space resources within the project area. d. Coastal ecosystems The subject property has direct shoreline frontage, along with a 40-foot shoreline setback that will be imposed and enforced by the County, ameliorating the effects of any development activities upon coastal resources. The small scale and low density of the proposed subdivision at only 5 lots will further manage the scale of improvements and uses upon these lands and its effects upon coastal ecosystems. The Applicant will comply with all applicable government regulations to mitigate the effects of the project upon coastal resources, such as regulation related wastewater treatment and disposal, erosion and sedimentation control, grubbing and grading activities. e. Economic uses The intent of the proposed subdivision is to subdivide lands that have been designated for the past 50-plus years for residential and agricultural uses, providing such opportunities within an area long established as a homestead community. From an economic standpoint, jobs will be created as part of the subdivision process as well as the construction of homes on each property. The County will gain in real property tax revenues and fees associated with the construction and occupancy of the proposed single family residential dwellings within this subdivision. f. Coastal hazards The subject property is not subject to coastal flooding nor the effects of sea level rise, as discussed in Sections D(21) and D(22). In view of the Hawai'i State Supreme Court's " PASH" and "Ka Pa`akai 0 Ka`Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the 341 Page associated traditional and customary practices of the site. The Applicant nor past studies have identified the subject property as being host to any valued cultural, historical, and natural resources. The proximity of the subject property immediately adjacent to State-owned lands and the requirements of Chapter 34 of the Hawaii County Code has prompted the Applicant to provide a 10-foot wide public pedestrian shoreline access along the northern boundary of the proposed subdivision. This will ensure coastal access between the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and the coastline. With this mitigating action, the Applicant could find no evidence of any possible significant adverse effects or impairments that will occur to any valued resources should this SMA Use Permit be approved. A cultural consultation with long-time residents of the area found that none of those consulted were aware of any burials within the subject property. However, should the Applicant inadvertently encounter any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials, the Applicant agree to cease work in the immediate area and contact the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR- HPD), resuming activities only upon securing archaeological clearance from DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. The Applicant has not encountered any evidence of traditional or customary Native Hawaiian rights being practiced on the subject property, nor existence of any known valued cultural, historical or native resources in the area. Thus, it is believed that the project would have no adverse impact relative to the cultural and historical resources of the area. To the extent to which traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights. Based on the above findings, the Applicant maintains that allowing the development of the proposed 5-lot subdivision and single-family dwelling units and related improvements will not have any substantial adverse impacts on the surrounding area, nor will its approval be contrary to the objectives and policies of Chapter 205A, HRS, relating to Coastal Zone Management and Rule No.9 of the Planning Commission relating to the Special Management Area. 351 Page H. CONCLUSION Based on the discussion above, the Applicant finds that approval of an SMA Use Permit to allow for the development of a 5-lot residential -agricultural subdivision and the construction of a single-family dwelling and related improvements on each of the proposed lots will conform to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan; adheres to the general policies and objectives of the Puna Community Development Plan; will not have a significant adverse impact upon coastal resources; and would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. 361 Page DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA '4mr:-i4l V.&L—f rll`i. CU A. r EjUhl; Am7 Z7 ti DS -1)S 5/3/2022 EXHIBIT A DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA fC Iti :°• ,I J + 11 LL Fr k� — 14 11 : f L1 L O 1 Gd{. .. .� _ � e � _Z L . L" :' � r...��A ,7 1��1 ,� •.� reC rl � i" I I J r ei' �ti � i . • � : e � 116 -rt r,- ., C u 1�u L•m 1 f v rt y, a... �� �1._r. {Y:� ti 'r. L,,% _� •� J �i" Z'1 4'"h 1 �,., �, ' , a C; a �. 1 tiff •� 1 1�' I �'., :1 3 v . 1 . 1 -5 - L 19 J`I a 1 ��u11Y'_ w i � r � J � �i 1 r „�-4r •��rr� n � �, i �A1 b ti` L'.J• �I h..,, 1� %'.L.� +.L �. .SLit1y r� L: 7 rll,eL.IyU� err �X Id�Y ■ � I�W� c:c r% ti. y A;� L !' ejL: WL�1.4 1 ikmI WA49 a vw 'L." AIL t I 1,"1� 17. 11' _� 1+i�'} t rJ u�:v. �• ��'.,il �':. �1 �Ae�Sr„� �, r' 11- r.0.re'(L fl J.J- � �: C..S 1 ��L.h: .1'3� i tin: b�,M6 % uJ: t.gg S,,... r 'i..".""! rF :� �'.W'Y_. t�jl �'. !�Llu Z-1"r LI' 11 = d^&T.:.-':newt : LqM i1, =47e` p- 14 = �r�'r-.h = 6i}JW�L�I,�y "1 +�~dS 1 _ {. ,L 11F.a °_ :L1. E. a . '= L••. a� 1 �r 1 A•J 11 r •. 1 ! i'. 1 L ny e•1 f..l 1 71 �.1 •..�' i. T�� C.LLL. r. r,-L--..L4z- :n .�E1511� _ J �IW:' �.yy'. ,SJ•'�s1 .'L }I'd .� 1.,ti 1 _ ,�1, t f � 1� w f ! _..1 1 .{ r' � r.7,R L• �, I'�.�' �'� � 1 � � 1 � � �. Y�. �' �'�t W � d ,T' tiw.e�rJ� rrt -I. _ iN -i-'I 1Lf, L.+ i.e."7.`S :Rf °LC. 1 1 �u �y q� 1 aA 1'N ,LJ Y. Y :. ells j.L:" ' 19•�`r :•,f i+ w��:c ��1 �' :1. �,®. k',i• iUK; 1 fa:UZI 1 ^L FL ark2j8-�ff •i'l f_'i. K 1„ `1'r%,-u � �''ti f Id :5:� �eYY1_ ��41•ti r ti. �1 yy p.ti n b; '�'I� J' 11 d ,�°:1''{'_-JYCi .. II id,_ �. f5lL'1•= F ., uL^��1u1 r.l 1"rl� C•.N ti� �'.11 1� 1 1 n1 1', . f.M,.'s ti ���! Y �. 1� i 3 �a. ICJ . J . 7�. I �: S� �1 ,�•� '�I �' 'y ti s I J � ,yam qp �' � �, �' �}J 2_��1L✓L�L� �r .�111.� � d.R: �„ �, C111�.�Y�i��.F-�_�m ����uA', 1' a - ile j' 1 . �.� �ktrLl''Sr: ■+TM,YIti C'f FA DS �J 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA 9,pT •r�' �1' �1. • elf ILr1 �• '-11 1° "S s I.Ye war t I" °e1AV 1 4.mIr 1"4 1 d j1 r J al ..m., a yL1 hA" 0loL—L :...�.. y L•�JII gA:ii� p,"'�P" 1). N%. °. m i.o.. l W. ,I 4 'r". Z? w �.• Y _ I� � - 4 e • i � _ � ' . L . •tip a J�� �. ••f1",� "YL '{ IN JII 1" ®rf•�f A y1 •1 I< _ ~ e • .. r • v> V = .: la ti _� ,a .. • el , �, !s lal ti " d� a.A J: 1• ten : -"I _ r IL r en9rr li1�k6r r a "Y • •" ... 'r �i�e''� . �Y.V, - �w 1,.! �•" 1•'L '•f,•�• 1 .e 191 p +' tir •M1'�"+Y�. a •'G{ -e:L X•11'helY d� IL a • w ,W°r�. l0 . fA' •4CN •�fF' .. • 1 ,.�•" e W �''• .AL .: ¢1L•i� E'G' " }+w.Ee1• ti .-J-,L J '; 8C .- W' �. A. _ a � �y� •6 J• r •°1 !rl°T,R.11L� '� - 1 � Y ,Y ti'e �I1 • e'°-{fir°—.a + +.. •: "It �• ea % ;��� .. Ir I 1 w} �f �' -e •1 ME f M7 F :V-i,-_� i� ��.{ =°��L -.tl�"? I I r'� � � "e i- 71 aM iC fl, "- T Cf N �DS---G'S ,� / 5/3/2022 " DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA A ���: �,f."� � i "9�Mm y.S�:" '-��:.' ti �' i ��7• ..�r� ^u L"4u� ���IF "�R^.G j°e �g �'1� r e �.�d"y'�,• I�u %��� �I LIti A,:..L..r" C.D iu, 1 1%i' 1,;� i2 1 '7t.jk 1.. i ° 'l. mar °&911 ,1' $ i oT•1 rr.�. a a r. �'' .tip rim P. � •, 1� i"S IkA "a rm 'w � a'.: m:`r Fm m r. � T. � m9C : a e'" 1 L �.r • i i k' � :. rC •'. { rati titi}'ti m . SF' � l 1 .`ti;, L: qt� bt ^ lal Puy, ML—: I .k-'':1 1:.. i "Ih I.c% ti %ca m �..L.�Ira.) w7 IR ti.. 1"� „sr"�" � r 1� r• r-'�Jti'Ilb ��".i�, t f" :� v.•�• . .v,+4�L{'J4®il:��. �^�,ti' i,i 0"„}+"�.�ti�m �J�jC� �'�f: }�"'�..� }. �3 :. 1 i' �r�j: �"'.'1:F6Y:mm �• i .r"iwL Cr �•�� 1r '�� .. } � . ..� R � C ... t,17 1..:" 1"h.'� m• :: 5 =f '�"�.� �...�h��"1-� e � �:• o �r�Y� ��Q.".. � ''"my �'� ..�'�, �... �IL•ti ��.. a}',�1'i ,p S. �' i" � 1.. �.i,. J• 7" : r : =": i: � .: � I �L Fi .1 m f " hl- r Pt x r'vC �' tw r A• ®:• �'^ • T'- r::.: 7 rl L :."-� m• '� r:.r1 2%! L.��� � .Im� Mz-k 4.,r z. 9k i c Nc., :i ± ' "4 .ti: !�" r -'Ir JC �. r "�„�k J a�JR 9L. ',,7m m" .•°� a 1 _ 'Cry . :: m d,. acn f. y . ra cr,,t r• d z Z. L%.. r r �a�}'.ti1_"r .:°: �r"f 9.' 11;�:I q��a ;=C•=,:r �.� � %7.'M- jji iaL ti � � I:,F� "J�"� Ili .:' Ifl �"�•r°' � SC r:•L%.,r,, vd V� .ti Z. •L. ���:. K ��'_,> "iF .m`r. ��.w .'i: a 4L.. in "a;p,:: " rf'L �� �i:�,7 {'ri - I - �" " I! r � �.'� � �r " ^gym � �'t.^�� fl �a ■ v cai"..�Fk' .7.ui :":�. yy.'� �°' ".l= j.'°L��.iv���.l'r,� .I:r__.1 r��r,?s= .y��m ��iti���� ..1 m�Jyu.j "��. Y Y � �{:: j' i. 5i' SF" i �; 4."'e'G 1'• ... �. &.4� 3 . L 4 j' L 1:"1® 2 V, -1 Ja t,r "i - X 4r "! L-, 10 d"Y'� �4Iri �g5 7!`r !-G"-.== T� ^��r� "tw i''�" 1iii 1'�® "^�°e.j° ' :•'r 81 m r elP;.ryc' li' �:ir-h 'R , rrr7r L"Cti i• I'.CA'i': P� .ru.�ki _ 6 F L: 1-%b-k g r L0',LI. 03 .17 L �2 I� --DS 1' 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA I r 1 11.- , re".Ir ..fJ, peRT 3i = Z 1.0 �� �� C rr� 1P��,'!I �¢ �rra .�:Ljl=�Jr.4! +; Lx1b15Cd�• �ALet G•Lkpu MJ4dn r. I r _i�,:i= '�!�k.h ry11� C i Lari 1 � i�� Po' a � � � T •� 5` r� � � � �1= 51 LA JW r!e^"�'.I � � = � { r. r i �? If ram' Y� ..k�i.,�• � o �,r ! 7 m � 1 L �� � r! 9�i :� IF ��� •r •� I� : �,•.�1; y��, -I }5�•; �ff�T�°TAaM.L�'`r. f" q' r -��I riI6�,� �� 11 -, i- ,� a�r� 1�E �,��4 ����. c ml T ! �� L �.1� 11�� .-r •P •��19 � �� JJ a:.� �1f: ��• ��� L J . r1 • 1 '% A ti r dL 1 c r. �,. •• r. - ra •u. _ 1 � � ... � . _ 1 .e"i �• � Fes^ ' � r .; • .j6 -{� �I�r•, � u-;, . } �y ti .�,%a ..�,�• , o; ®a l+ ,m� w.� a �.' f"qL% L" 1A' Ivy %p � .!x�W't�k' sY P:..16 _ �a .i °: ��1.1� F r h � ,'�' I:i .I �'4• •I r r: . �� ��� ��e�uti w•u a �� '06 DaW 91■ A DI :: -Iti I ` : 5 e. i:�'��6-•. 1 ": I. up rL !m :i Lr-r•ii}z • 13 �. ^ti �•� �, 1�� 3u= P V,w D �4— III I:q r M 4! -i c- c nL:tLhb;•. 6� w ''m"n-A. 4, r-r I ,_ r 1�� a���'�".ti � :. �.w��' - �ti'4'1 <: •�, e4 - �� } Ii �' �S-�J[er a IJY � �7�' � 6 � ti �— _ +] W, W r r• +l "Ci{ :� i a :f'. '� jjL,, �L r j'.I r� � � Ltw' V L ! L: l Lit ! : !1: j dh:I�u ^ ,kw :+ a JP s �LI J Wo. 1:aii--1 �'.h •h 1'`ark}Y L. :rrj;jrq:t71' . ,,,�.,. �ti1.r:•w�.�..Lr.= � � i�'�f'ly �sr� '��,. � °d, rah aa.;�,n• oliF` _ � �'�� :�f'�1 �1 �'�, � "—LDS ' 5/3/2022 •• y' DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA 3 1 n F. L a I w D P4 i. r" i' Iy'J r. r-N, u tom' f ., : �,ti L{ dL'::x r LI: : 4' rr 1'.11 •� L : .� fit : •, w• .. _ '1 11 "�w a 1' rd — •:ate r � �� l���o �, .�� � 1�_. �.� .'f. iL' 1: r. _�M. Pw .NCr'. 11e. % i ti •: � : m r A.;.� r ^aP 1 1 ,a 7 .. 'r.�M^'"ry Lys T�f l i ! � � r I I L,6 ,r P _ re i "q i l n 41 A . �M1 . I�. f=;z• � 10 w. :�. �• °.. wr�.r• L " i_ a.°4"iL_ til•1."�•`�a ��L'.ti'� �w.1 _T i�w W - L'0R Sw ti Ar l:t15*1; 1 L W* r 111 ry a :. 1 1 -n L E.' . r •+ ra L - YJ r•, j,.k %b },r� as as i ri D n t, a J• L A .a r l lav �wr?S ' �:".w A L 4!' J.L .�� o ,,, mm --j +' ti {•'. •_ a L �Ir i• �'1'}: •ti•�- 1. — ;m. • u • w — ur i•1 � _ ..._ {e i , �... ,�'.� i" W. r: N 1 ..Lai � - AL i 111 rr , " !,I. } •y •e e'7 r - L:- „ U-J.L.M,, F b �e jr -�=.L* — I Et-10— ] E L, r.C. a _ {I'1 .LC 1%i" + '1 %.-.L rl 7- F} d: ,,. •:•' �"' •tti'� . c 1 P& �a _ J. u 1.1 .: •i o of uo u % : : y >� ��.�� r'1 � .' c� i� •��°�.�a'J .��r � r• 1 S :i� a r A � � a•• �iw` kL:��Gti �_�: saxib c i 0';LUA 'fir= r 4r.f7 -3 y , a' h+ 0L.41-2 CI N ILW,, 'r "-LLr:-J 1 •: "= = I}5®y _� "� � �� �� ":��0'' r 4f L '.� 1 IrT�.u3 e. __ L t&r. .1; ti IT-] Z h.�- •� ,,, rl „`. iC.� � $`I� a7��.�•�YI1u h.L o � tA-: •.r�� ��"�' � �If 2. L: W'Ia e, :��i11° erI-,1k 1 � r'. I.h^� — �. i•_ Q, { ,� �•IB°rl �7:� 1.rm liz1 a� ! 1. ti :1 :ire} .. ca jr >1 r. 4.1 ZwZ 1 _ - •L. aFw. u 1 L �„ �: Z�11. •:r L�� �a �rf S ®. •� s, L� 1. _16 •= G..ot, —, . A 1e d �i 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA A I L 3 •` : 1 •.:J • r Y d� y �I ea I. f .R•m � Y' rrr 4 1 _ r 1 • -p 1 P fYl AP ir r 1 3 r ■ I. V6 1 e b L '•Y rJ ®f NIL 3J DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA � �-Y'•- • ,. '� g . �_,er _i. �.Nw• 1 "'A' �'' � -d �' � ., 1 �j� ti••VP• :� A •_ F.4��"' 1 fr fir^.'-L�L ° 5/3/2022 0 2 •F bl DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA DS / DS 5/3/2022 I L L DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA �- r I Ce", ;,k N I � I L f L P: r r):" L �1::: I- r -I L I r- C- tsm L, 99 Lb RC4 tY I F r "I LJ L 1:! 11 J 0 U 7 r, r , ' - : I P Z I A z -M =.- eU 'am m IM Ok,: - -,I t Y§- !A C") -L JLt kJ;L JL: T. I r -d &zx Q I: i! J. 7^ "p, -%bi 41444 .AF r 4,mx)T nf s. &TZ yr ;,Lm L r u zjm + m -C: 10,11dMIL trf- CiNL L6 •d L-t e C 17-� J M J •4 1 U L 7.1' %J e L ;j %: L e'l IyJ Lr- LL i:�V • 1- 13 -:J')'i VI II -:e-A L Z'r'i L.i 4;- T 1 .: r f lk.:. -�, a' J x1f m co o ir q U, I •-e- y ig rr:.a Mj-� 1 :1 4-j p 7:111.- 0I.;-r- % .;MMk -k. I 'I"' w4, L'I 11 bp S Fa ;j L i,%:. r i- . o,1. dr Q'.F -zL I TtU el !T L)Lk o 3r VSI- DS DS 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA 1 a,: � �AAW.ilri"dP �i4f�1 ��I �ti � ��" � w1 � ��•'i!n'•X •-�R', �' t•. a1..�.�} gr %• _ M C r _1— 'v' 1 1 •5 � 1 � Ip111 L.iA 6 A r",- r f e� DS GCS AA W 5/3/2022 1 1 . T f ii � rr. u L � 1 1 1 ®®®ppp L.. DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA ••ti p �i'. 1'iF i r—ak'1' �_ i., •-• iT� I i I N e I M AIDS (—nS .4 5/3/2022 . m® DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA !d "r'• �� LP.aati ��� „raw °" a !I;-' HILO IIN 0 . i 'dli� R �^la :����i �.��^:�r. L"rv•:�,�L =rti�',�il l 3��_i; r �.Sc r'�, Y�'f " •,"� � y ^'rr 1� � e R '� �° �' �. R ���.�a I :, b.1,. �..5 � . � � �:�. a i � � � � i0'��JL r V � � .� �" � . ti � - �:: l,� �. •r � .:: Ixl :W •M-PM 1---W=aAit4n F 4,4 11t! j l rrAr, .1LJ1_.t '; : r:'sv' _ r., r: ..Z Y L jvu� �Jfw@L Ibg 7A cm Iti }•e -i 1oJLi' r..':,a, fJl: =_ MTV..- i.A oar1 A� : ,r •t„� r w ^iL'1e',R'AlA.. yti r 7 rr:-di Yh° -i—.md ' �• �r: ° r�c �"�Ii�.i' LL'Uy TE, • '..i ej::`{ :��'� '$ } .°i c ..��°7,6 }:.Lr-1.s r:W r-s, w e "''7m i- L L-n n iJt"r�S'?C.�S �.�. 17 9 L .. kr L. 'f 1 „r•,^r. 4 'Y 7 u �'^� �r�' "�ti•� �dA�. 4 �,� � �P� !" r�! ti^�,— � ti",L::�: _ Sr� .��' �� . � 'IP Y"Jv:.�S� � �15n 1 ' X %°JJ"1:::,, r. s^ e^ 4VINk l'elm s 'eLt r, 1:JI C ^�':., °r'hr -M. �r• A iL a;" u7 L! Ai:,; I, .M-L drAf�r sL:!'- , L 1� � ,� � a� �� c�j•�� 5 �� i .ia"� v�r. � _ ,1+•1 �t,,. �i�o ti?� � •t..h� :�:`:.i� �t'� ��'�"„, •,'�';� 'c ,g - �' 1. .� .-.m� N. r L r.A.), it Ix W 7 �• •T,�.� v ;:1 r _y �� �- a Y. 5��� I} A 1 =: 1: t rL 1"l r; = h 17i° I 71k Z- iI':11 4L r 19a:k W, .y* -ILh rl, 1...: . rj�;r v°1,•.� �q � p r 1 }� R• '�} • it t� •� 4 � �} i�i �r t 1 � l . 1: '�nir1 :L r "4� lla. %^ S-;I, R: °� d L.•{,�J.'� J n �. _ 1,' }' h L:j LI, a �sai'� �: to lti _ �u fir. �}'�J •, � 1 � DS DS _a. 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA SJ.�..� .r +�. Y... ay.� • ,.�. �C.;l� ° . �:' I +� L S'9i e,i.�� -�li i i • �'•��' a �• iu.,� � w • MIL 0 .a. ;,r mI R P�A,?� - 6 ' �• r i v r� T �' �� p�, 't a. 1.�. .� K'I/. S�•" f� �� 11'�i• �.Vf'IIE• L. ��L"• .. �{DS -- DS 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA I A 0-1 p:,i1''a .v%- LI � i.'�L �'1' 1�[�i�� ,�• r����{-�M}5 "a.'i1L' �'��Iw;7;�r °.�i L�.71��� L91, t z y c! a'fi'�, ��.,a Irk :`1 Y .��1k' y •JI1•��.r: .�o . �_,i L N t rA rUIL�T k. •-- ,( _ ..1 ,l � ���� YLS � LI .•r er. _ 1 .. » • � •r�a - "vA • � R" J r : C- A 11 : , i eti 1ST _, Lf r. � 31 � : i �: r}w. r �W=l WYI ;' ■b ��, L: `� 1.' 1 � . i""L: all: 1.1 arnrlr jL-4•Lr! r ���. 1 _ c 1 .� ' - � L' � �. _ � A �. �- I 4, � °..1-_ .. , ■'1 : J� uti u� ' �' '.��.. r' 1 1 •r 1yo IA [I :1 r11 L^'� 'r 4� �_'!'.�'.�:r Jr'- �.r a�� �'° :. �+' r SAC". I II 1 •� . t f 0 - 1 'Wi • J��� � 1® L" 1y J . � L _ �P �li G :Z t I 1�,-i P. f.' • L X. . � 1 i i = 1 {"i I, a,. cju : y . s . ti ' Ll = I�i.� � ti 4 JL-� L 1' ' Sw .�,. �: { 1 '+ .� .��'' ■�� ...1� _ . a"v ��. .� 1 ,�„ ti••--WI ;'"..��i�ri'ri ."cd f �°nti �" �_�'_•�Y�. %ice Hai r '*r� dx yr ��+ �..r. : tl i�} +� .1■=-ii�° El r + -"C t leti¢. I—w Jr r L' ti S �' ■_ 1 L r-, °'�:: T"?'1�„ih ' •` 1-,.. .1 t,� % 1•/i iA�4ti-eai,a4 �jula 'f 1%, •1 j. -nju: l r .�n � fi .96 L' wz,�A m6r--i l a•. �:! .. r ■�. • r�T 'r.•�, _ -SA L ' f t i q�� ,72% 1 Cj3A u�, 0 0ra - r '�7 -cj "- i L -; 1 Y %�:� 1A,1 ^I'1 ea �. _ .. '�4} .% 5° ° y t. nm-6m6;L ro ba 1. zp ° '� a 1 ILL 1 ::,w,. -L' ���,-.'f' . A' f.'2'% a v 1:! � {`,�1 C�- � � �'"I�F ti�F"�^ ��I ��,"M �: •� r I.r�•.n 1:"". Mgr ,�•xl ��rJ ��ti • r y � _ u ■ ®��� J p ��� �,. spa ,1 �y �J.'� �■ 'y.0. ,••�L � :� � 1 "� • 3 •''9 1�.. '.� �. rr 1'W 115Fr' Ib •� L.i ._ ��, I�h 1.. "w r➢"u I,IJI b.LLJ1V ME ■'�'rV1�.,r �f!■iL ��' .y W141'L"r. I 11 • _ ' r � Y".9�'- �.,�ar!1 Y �'_ �" � ,L•„�.� 4'11�+�* ti='� �, .■;�r� 4 �+�r`• s'�= =.'i• 1 1 tiL +1 Ai . I'd'.m,_4%j_--L°I; ti ,4••� J4LQ Y -F:r.1�1 1• r 1. L L J.r.1 a ILfo n 9"'15 i 'i 1 mti 1 ?, ' �'Y,' Y 1 • v- L •aJ 11 Q�. ;70 Jilt1 ti 1. 4'R r 1 i Ail C. LI r-1 1 0 Ir4-I•a _ r,,:° _- .._T T°'o�•M' - kL.„ ,�. �11�tuA 4%A d5 - �_ •1 {'.ti :.'.x 1.. L y D:XMI•� I°t.1 L � A I ='.5 �'® i1 � 1 �. �1L' : Sri 1 r'. 1'r' uf-'rl I "°:;o. L:%I 1'G ��� �� "r'aCL, r. �r•li: r �'': �I .1 1 try .r r• b= ."°i L �� L � fi" z • r � 1 � �J Yh��` � �� ■r+"^_' -0.4lm9 �ii..l 4Q be px-i! -CIF-Xmft ik'z ya! DS DS �J °�� 5/3/2022 �'L DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Pi ..r'• : Et 9� 'LU" 6 a}l " Wa I H18 6 a d' ",ti W � '�'� r� 1��`q � P`�" �-�� s�!r'�o�. �� ���.�' � -^ ��'f • • �F'" � �-: C :.Y' � �7 �; is"�° ,� �. . �' r° � .:.� �� Yn •� ". =� f�51 F�°� Emw° ����=��P: _� �W: r�� is■]■� 3�•r� •1T.��:� �3��r tI� L r j1++rcm c1 9L'.°•ti "�'• - �''kr aviF", 5 a....titi� �1.h�k -1 �,��• �r h�v f.,. ail* MCI Y:1 .'I..{'• ie P- m -%cc-3 ; !L d dry' : LvAr �"••e w..�jJLi I�LiC* W !Q ® -:--i .Pi I"` bP, ��.0 i.,e.km :j- •.0 ic-, . = PT- ftLf•® o 11mi? %;31 `•w,e : Jl .m. I- ti :'A 7,11y p: ��� R r'le Y a.ii ."� {�� ��i.��i. .i�.. ti� Y�i �,8����. -J' '�h - 1I;6 1 0 " P7. � i 0 � ®tip 1 s . � "� � I r � v rn.�� � �-z � � 3� i e ° � ^� •u' � c. P'y ',. � � ° '� ,;, i= �� C �, Y: P: .0 m � � �•�ti�i u 1 �;!� Z� �P� w•.u• � 1 L . '� a� � ® �.�' @. ,m .. � � �'..'.i •�'"�� �'., � :'F v^� � �- w�i t'� �•S iui i .� I� �`-s: 45 ra'�J21'�': IlP ���ro ._A I -: I I r;'4� J ::I.: m : i• �-� r.r� � a� aP�-�� '. "��� ,�1+�0 �r� �ti � .L "AAA 0hI#S. •At-�'•L" � % 9i gL---,Lr � AC"�IC61t �e:o n.1 V I ti'dI i- •L'f �^7 .: 'Cr%tier m iI � r�:j 1 C.�: �. J � �, � � 'P � 5 ,; I • x e mad F ,„a r ift ' : W; s n L t% ti -.P6�_-, z : Cm- "-tiOt I. P J• LI --i C- L' .c %x fiLM yl: AEI T hj-bT CD 13 �! qh-: e. e!{L. -'�'ti. ^n« 1ir�F: -:•iC� t'..•1•,4' S�, �� � J =�% A �_L, 1•�s �®•=�' f� ZJIY _' �u : I %: i •� -" Sy 11 i�.- u o '9 x.. �ti : is e- ®� y� Z gar U '. 14.f P 4.L%L6 . -a 0. • s , L- �ti rr I': - i- 'a a rJr I L�- $'11 Y: L: i � s �t O. Fx s f e � �'ti i P �' k' �4 _ �'� ., •'h {i l:.{ - -! ��* _"-®: •,i�� L,�� 'kcr�GT "a,rx ��C �`',�'� tf. fc . iF� �d°•�-a"''L' Y s�:� I. �}'� �� I{ a, d• '.- - !{�° •r �" i' { 9° ti. grtW1,:FL J W, IAI t .,i 7 c-t S L;� � 6P ��•r :.t- L, �.-N Lae 1.1:r pr i A.P.-C. s •@ �.� .•. 'i+�',.�"L..�.�� i' '9d�'i. P F r rT'm .a} 3 C':. 'rLkD ZA t,-A13'u ' tL �A, .A 'i ,1• •� " ' . s ,—oS h L^I 1/ 5/3/2022 1 -A DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA 4.1•: 71 I I �i = s • , : a „i1 -�r 1 s ' I ;.X-i:,ICl1 I i.—_ % 11 .��� [��• e� yr� �-1riP. y�.' � � 4.• o �1'! L'�1 � � ��� � d; ^�{ it r�:,� �i �i y ti ;: i�� r •..� 4i rar I`��=�'�'9'� GJj,•� 'I F,��"r YaC .0.ui% ■ M1 ' .. _ ®'a.7C �JY' M� k r�l '• J�': ur' Y P'9 ° I d"°La r.+.{ rcy r rt'i : I Lt r.'� :1, 3 � � • ..E .. "' • '. •��1'ti � � l'. ��• r . C • �Wffl re r•°"'I° •� .i{r u•ir };�PIJI'Z.�'� `L ,�{ 1}�9; aL'II u ram••, Z'r .A M •' I W'' L• 1.11^ir`;� i �`M` 11r¢', ti�f i ���.:'. f•� 1 r.A� 3 e :1= ^,Yo., m� ti +•-� . ii 'iu'.. r .� Co• i1. ti 1 147• Ir F .4 }- m, . riF• ,r ° a S a R. ! � +fir iti.� i ': TI A k-1 7 4,U':`V IL rYtii�fr._ •7 � ia."J•., J, '. d Li A 1 " rr L u IL ri�'f1•tilQi ,yamALL_ • yr 'r =. a 'u'i .... �.'t.„ �I®I: A_.:": r �r 'i' � _i},{• : ^L u"5'°t�"�timyi •^ � iaFi �� ti ��i'i �:m � •, �+, i��-,. r i l � •.ram.; �'� :�`„�' "y Csu = tiA 1 "i ti ®.n` f �, jP'+. C•1 .�iCL'�'� _ ' i . pS I —LDS L` _/ 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA J• ••�,.r i i 4:ivs e: eE. N 'J m'• '!,!` Ili • J 19 A. •� 'r r 71�ea'i� �� ®IIfTi.n ' + I ' 7 y F,P; �•03�,ti� .1°m ?� . �,�i �o IL3i. P'�'rrJ'r _ I l I 1 I DOCUSigned by: L,lj 5/4/2022 5748BA581163452_ D3CuSrtgned by: .4%561 Beznwal1'�'l 5/3/2022 164A283A'b73406._ fi AS r.h-o,.) oq - a - id rq - 1=Irroq.-L-p W - e,rch h:.cLnI HIGMIt, January 20, 2024 Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC 12-55 Likoliko Lp #4866, Pahoa, Hl, 96778 Email: wyattinhawaii@gmail.com Subject: Results of an archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation conducted in support of an SMA use permit application for the proposed subdivision of TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. Dear Mark: As requested, ASM Affiliates (ASM) conducted an archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation in support of an application for an SMA use permit, concerning the proposed subdivision of TMK: (3) 1- 2-018:001, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The field inspection was conducted to help address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proposed 6-lot subdivision of the 3.551-acre subject parcel by confirming and updating the findings of an earlier archaeological inventory survey (AIS) prepared for the property by Spear (1992). Furthermore, consultation was undertaken seeking information from knowledgeable individuals regarding the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the subject property. Project Area Description The project area is the entirety of TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 located within Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. The 3.551-acresubject parcel is bounded on the mauka side by the Kalapana-Kapoho Road (see Figure 3), on the makai side by a 40 foot exclusion zone along the coast (Figure 4), to the northeast by an undeveloped State-owned parcel consisting of `a `d lava, and to the southwest by a developed residential property. The project area situated at an elevation of 10 to 25 feet (3.05 to 7.62 meters) above mean sea level and is 40 feet inland from the coast. An Historic cemetery is located to the northeast of the project area on the opposite side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road; Figure 5) Geologically, the project area is located on the lower flanks of Kilauea Volcano and is comprised of multiple lava flows (Sherrod et al. 2021), with a Puna basalt flow that erupted between 400 and 750 years before present (BP) forming much of the central and southern part of the parcel; a younger Puna basalt flow of `a `d lava dating to 200-400 years BP creating the northeastern edge; and a more recent pahoehoe flow that occurred between 1986 and 1992 present at the coast (Figure 6). Soil classifications within the project area (Figure 7) mimic the geologic substrates and are comprised primarily of dry Hakuma highly organic loam on 2 to 10 percent slopes, with dry Malama-Lava flows complex on 2 to 40 percent slopes on the `a `d flow along the northeastern edge, and pahoehoe lava flows on 2 to 20 percent slopes present at the coast (Soil Survey Staff 2022). There has been some prior ground disturbance along the northeast, southwest, and mauka edges of the project area. On the `a `d flow in the northeastern portion of the parcel, a grubbed and graded driveway (Figure 8) meanders along the property line and accesses a graded house pad near the coast on a promontory that overlooks the rest of the parcel (this area was mostly recently cleared in 2022). There is a second roadway which diverts from the upper road and is routed down through the middle of the project area to the coast (Figure 9). This road may have been already present when previously surveyed in 1992, as 1!fo ?All1;:i ti� Trr, SI 11r: �'!:i: I-rnwA1.i 1 z A:'.i A -i'!LL.r 4.!: !I.'.ItJ I :ix: i:I^Il14:o-'J 4k7°e EXHIBIT B L;� iy;L:.;.3:311_t-k li%- I;fr;:i 't-�° 9 }' X R i:..IWEI 'i 13-COR :o:.n'; -' ii4i: � r -r . January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 2 of 19 something resembling it is mentioned by Spear (1992). Bulldozer push piles were also observed along the boundary with the adjacent residential property to the southwest near the middle of the project area. These push piles appear to be related to the clearing of that neighboring parcel. A number of brush piles, seemingly from hand clearing activities, were also noted in the northeastern portion of the project area at the base of the `a `d flow. Vegetation cover within the project area is influenced by the extent of prior ground disturbance. In the undisturbed portions of the project area (Figure 10), the overstory consists predominately of monkeypod trees (Samanea saman), hala (Pandanus tectorius), hau (Hibiscus tiliacenus), indo (Thespesia copulnea), with coconut palm (Cocos nucifera), and naupaka (Scaevola sp.) along the makai section, `ohi `a lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha) along the northern boundary, a scattering of noni (Morinda citrifolia) throughout the property, and a single eucalyptus tree (Eucalyptus globidus). The ground cover consists of morning glory (Ipomoea indica), particularly in the makai portion of the project area, with Boston fern (Nephrolepis exaltata), and various species of grasses. In the previously disturbed portions, the vegetation is comprised of a mix of grasses, purslane (Portulaca sp.), gunpowder trees (Trema orientalis), Melochia (Melochia umbellata), guava (Psidium guajava), and other non-native weeds (Figure 11). A Brief Culture -Historical Background for the Subject Parcel The project area lies on the southern shores of the Puna District of the Island of Hawaii within the ahupua `a of Kaimu. Kaimu is bordered to the southwest by the ahupua `a of Kalapana and Kupahua, to the north by the ahupua `a of Waiakahiula and Ka`ohe, and to the west by the ahupua `a of K7kala 1-2 and Keokea. Traditionally, the primary village for this ahupua `a was (and still is) known as Kaimu, a name that has been translated to mean "gathering [at the] sea [to watch surfing]" (Pukui et al. 1974:69). The shoreline of this ahupua `a, according to Pukui et al. (1974:69), is "noted for its surf and its black sand beach" and was originally called H6`eu and Ka-poho. Pukui et al. (1974) note that this beach was likely formed after a 1750 lava flow, during which time steam explosions formed the characteristic black sand of the area (the beach at Kaimu was covered by lava flows that occurred during the 1980s and is no longer present). The English missionary William Ellis embarked on a circumnavigation of Hawaii Island in the 1820s in the hopes of identifying population centers that would be receptive of Christian missionary teachings. During his travels, he collected observations of the environments and people he encountered. After leaving the district of Ka`u, Ellis entered southern Puna along its coastline and described the string of villages he traveled through, including Kaimu, which he described as being: ...pleasantly situated near the sea shore, on the south-east side of the island, standing on a bed of lava considerably decomposed, and covered over with a light and fertile soil. It is adorned with plantations, groves of cocoa -nuts, and clumps of kou trees. It has a fine sandy beach, where canoes may land with safety; and, according to the houses numbered to -day, contains about 725 inhabitants. Including the villages in its immediate vicinity along the coast, the population would probably amount to 2,000.... The extent of cultivation in the neighbourhood, together with the decent and orderly appearance of the people, induce us to think they are more sober and industrious, than those of many villages through which we have passed (Ellis 1825:160). Indeed, the habitation and agricultural patterns of southern Puna were often dependent on the path of the lava flows from Kilauea Volcano. As Handy and Handy (1972:751) note, the lands of Makena and lower Kaimu were suitable for growing sweet potatoes but not taro, and the neighboring ahupua `a of "Keokea [Keokea] supported neither, being mostly pahoehoe lava." Additionally, Hawaiian traditions imply that Puna "was once Hawaii's richest agricultural region and that it is only in relatively recent time that volcanic eruption has destroyed much of its best land" (Handy and Handy 1972:752). By the mid-19t'' century, the traditional Hawaiian land tenure system was radically altered through a process of land division known as the Mdhele Aina. This change in land tenure was promoted by the missionaries and the growing foreign population and business interests in the island kingdom who were generally January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 3 of 19 hesitant to enter business deals on leasehold lands. The Mahele (division) defined the land interest of Kamehameha III (the King), the high-ranking chiefs and konohiki (headman of an ahupua `a). As a result of the Mahele, all lands in the Kingdom of Hawaii were placed into one of three categories: (1) Crown Lands (lands personally claimed by Kamehameha III); (2) Konohiki Lands (lands claimed by lesser ali `i and konohiki) and; (3) Government Lands (lands surrendered by the King or the konohiki in lieu of commutation) with the caveat that the rights of the hoa `dina (tenants) were to be reserved (Chinen 1958:vii; 1961:13). In the case of the lands of Kaimu, the ahupua `a was originally claimed by Mataio Kekuanao`a, who managed the estate of his daughter the ah `i Victoria Kamamalu. However, in January of 1848, Kekuanaa'a surrendered this land to the King, and Kaimu was placed into the inventory of Crown Lands (Buke Mahele 1848). As the King and his ah `i and konohiki made claims to large tracts of land via the Mahele, questions arose regarding the protection of rights for the hoa `aina. To resolve this matter, on August 6t11, 1850, the Kuleana Act (also known as the Enabling Act) was passed, clarifying the process by which native tenants could claim fee simple title to any portion of lands that they physically occupied, actively cultivated, or had improved (Garovoy 2005). Within Kaimu, no kuleana lands were awarded and within the entirety of the Puna District only two kuleana were awarded (Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018). A map of lands in the vicinity of Kalapana, Puna (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1614) prepared by E. D. Baldwin in 1892 shows the lands in the vicinity of the subject parcel and indicates the locations of nearby cultural features located to the southwest of the current project area, including a heiau, several houses and other named places located within Kaimu Village, and a trail extending inland from the village (Figure 12). The `a `a point located in the eastern corner of the subject parcel is labeled "Keoneana" on that map. A later tracing of the 1892 map showing the Crown Land Homesteads of Kaimu (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1812) shows that the subject parcel was subdivided and sold to C.H. Will (Grant No. 8004) as Lot 28-C of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads by late December 1921. Records from 1932 list the subject parcel as being owned by a Mrs. Chieko, who acted as a trustee for the minors Hanayo Will, Yoshio Will, and Isami Will, each of whom held a 1/3 interest in the lot. By the 1960's, ownership of the parcel had split between the previously mentioned members of the Will family, who would own the parcel until the late 1980s. Summary of Prior Archaeological Study within the Subject Parcel The current project area (TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001) was the subject of an intensive archaeological inventory survey prepared by Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. in 1992 (Spear 1992). As a result of that study, four archaeological sites were identified within the property (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18525, 50-10-63-18526, 50- 10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; Figure 13) that were interpreted as having been used for Precontact to early Historic Period for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. All four sites were described and mapped by Spear (1992), and two of the sites (Sites 18525 and 18526) were excavated to help refine their functional interpretations and test for the presence of buried cultural deposits. Spear (1992) assessed all four sites as significant under Criterion d for the information they had contributed to understanding past lifeways within the project area. He noted that sufficient data had been collected from the sites as a result of the AIS to warrant a treatment recommendation of ' no further work." The State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) agreed with the significance assessments and treatment recommendations for the sites, and accepted the Spear (1992) AIS, in a letter dated March 3, 1993 (LOG NO: 7604, DOC NO: 9302ks25). The descriptions of the sites recorded by Spear (1992) are summarized below. Site 18525 was recorded by Spear (1992) as a C-shape located near the base of the `a `d lava flow, at the end of a bulldozer push road, in the eastern corner of the parcel. According to Spear (1992), the opening to the C-shape was oriented to the west and measured 5.1 meters wide and 1.45 meters deep. The walls were 2.1 meters thick, and the maximum height was 0.36 meters. The feature was disturbed at the southern end, and hau growth affected the exterior wall (Spear 1992). One large piece of coral was found on the ground surface on the inside of the C-shape. A single stratigraphic trench was excavated outside of the opening of the C-shape to test for buried cultural deposits. Measuring 1.0 meter by 0.5 meter, the trench was dug to a January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 4 of 19 depth of 0.4 meters below the surface, but no cultural materials of any kind were encountered. Based on its formal attributes, this site was interpreted as a Precontact/Historic temporary habitation shelter. Site 18526 was recorded by Spear (1992) as consisting of two surface features (Features 1 and 2). Feature 1 was described as a C-shape with its opening oriented to the south, with a width of 3.7 meters and a depth of 1.2 meters. The maximum wall thickness and height were 1.09 meters and 0.75 meters respectively. The eastern third of the structure was collapsed and in poor condition. Feature 2 was situated slightly more than two meters to the south of Feature 1, and consisted of a rock mound which measured 1.85 meters N/S and 1.5 meters E/W. The maximum height of the mound was 0.6 meters, and a single stratigraphic trench measuring 0.5 by 0.5 meters was excavated between Features 1 and 2. Excavation extended to a maximum depth of 0.36 meters and no cultural materials were encountered. Spear (1992) interpreted Feature 1 as a temporary habitation shelter and Feature 2 as a small agricultural mound. Site 18527 was documented by Spear (1992) as a wall that extended along the base of the fill for the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. At the time of the 1992 study, the wall extended beyond the project area to the southwest and was covered with road fill at its northeast end. The length of the wall within the project area was recorded as 28 meters, with a maximum height and width 1.1 meters and 0.5 meters respectively. No excavation was undertaken at Site 18527 by Spear (1992), who interpreted the site as a boundary wall that predates the construction of the adjacent roadway. Site 18528 was documented by Spear (1992) as a modified lava bubble, with interior measurements of 0.82 meters (north/south) by 0.8 meters (east/west) and a depth of 0.92 meters. The opening was cleared of rock which had been used to build up the southwest portion of the feature. No cultural material was found in association with the feature and according to Spear (1992), who interpreted the site as a possible storage feature or small planting pit, there was no potential for excavation. The presence of the nearby cemetery (located to the northeast of the project area on the mauka edge of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road; see Figure 5) was a specific concern of the earlier study, and Spear (1992) noted that special attention was paid to the mauka portion of the project area to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present in the project area. No such features were identified in that area, or anywhere else within the project area. Additionally, as noted by Spear (1992), the soil buildup in the project area was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface features or burials. Results of the Current Field Inspection On October 27, 2023, David King, M.A., Colsen Balai, B.A., and Jonas Leon, B.A., and Matthew R. Clark, M.A. (ASM Principal Investigator), conducted a thorough surface survey of the subject parcel, as well as a general inspection of the `a `d flow bordering the northeastern side of the project area. The survey included a surface inspection of the entire parcel utilizing north/south pedestrian transects with fieldworkers spaced at 10-meter intervals. As was previously done by Spear (1992), special care was taken in the mauka portion of the project area, especially on the surface of the adjacent 'a `d flow, to look for burial features similar to those contained within the Historic cemetery across the street. As a result of the pedestrian survey, three of the four sites previously documented by Spear (1992) within the subject parcel were found (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; Figure 14). The locations of these sites were documented using a GPS, and the current condition of each of these sites is briefly described below. Site 50-10-63-18525 (a C-shape) could not be relocated, and it is thought that this site, which was formerly located in the eastern portion of the subject parcel at the base of the `a `d flow (Figure 15), was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbing activities after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) AIS. The location and distribution of sites and features identified within the subject parcel, as well as the relative location of the cemetery to the project area, is depicted in Figure 14. Site 18526 Features 1 (a C-shape) and 2 (a mound) were both in similar condition to what was described by Spear (1992), but the features are currently obscured by heavy overgrowth and two large trees that have fallen across them (Figures 16 and 17). Site 18527 (a historic wall) is in the same condition as described by Spear and no changes to that site were noted (Figure 18). Site 18528 (a modified lava blister) has been January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 5 of 19 disturbed by land clearing activities since it was first documented in 1992. Small boulders from that push have fallen into blister and the site is currently obscured by thick brush covering its edges (Figure 19). No additional archaeological sites were identified within the project area as a result of the fieldwork conducted by ASM, but several recent rock constructions and modern landscape modifications were noted (see Figure 14). These more recent features, which include rock stacks, stone -lined paths (Figure 20), and rock cleared areas on the ground surface, are largely concentrated in the coastal -central portion of the subject parcel, in areas that appear to be used recurrently and recently for camping and fishing activities. The lack of mention of these features in the Spear (1992) AIS report, as well as the modern vegetation disturbance and debris associated with them, suggests that all of the additional rock constructions identified within project area were built during the last 30 years. None of these more recently constructed features appear to be burial monuments. Consultation To address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proximity of the cemetery to the project area and to determine the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the project area, ASM's Senior Ethnographer, Lokelani Brandt, M.A. conducted consultation with several long-time residents of the area including descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families. Consultation occurred during a period between October 31, 2023, and December 13, 2023, when ASM staff contacted Ms. Ke`ala Keli`iho`omalu, Mrs. Leialoha Ilae-Kaleimdmahu, and Mrs. Ku`ulei Kealoha-Cooper by phone. Following the initial phone calls, each of the three consulted parties were provided with a consultation letter and maps specifying ASM's search for persons who may have knowledge of any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. Each of the consulted parties contacted additional family members to seek such information. Ms. Keli`iho`omalu spoke with elder relatives Prince Keli`iho`omalu, Sam Keli`iho`omalu, Noenoe Dunn, Tiana Dunn, Jerry Dunn, Princess Keli`iho`omalu, Jr. Keli`iho`omalu, and Tiara Keli`iho`omalu. Ms. Keli`iho`omalu indicated that her uncle Sam also attempted to reach out to Aku Hauani`o and Kamu Quihano and that her father attempted to reach out to Annie Ka`aukai and Leslie Enriques. Mrs. Ilae-Kalaimamahu also contacted members of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and recommended that ASM staff contact Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper since she had heard that the cemetery belonged to the Kealoha family. Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper was contacted by ASM and she spoke with several of her relatives, including her mother. None of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. Subsequent email correspondence with Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper clarified that the cemetery did not belong to the Kealoha `Ohana, however, her mother related that in the 1930s and 1940s, the Kalapana Church was located near the cemetery and that her tutu (Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper's great-grandmother) Emma Nai`a was a pillar of that church. She added that there is a Kealoha cemetery in `Opihikao but was not aware of any such family cemetery in Kaimu. Conclusion and Recommendations The results of the current study support the findings of the Spear (1992) AIS. Three of the four sites previously documented by Spear (1992) within the subject parcel were identified during the field inspection (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; see Figure 14). These sites are all in similar condition to what was previously described, and indicate that the parcel was used during the Precontact to early Historic Period for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. All three of these sites were observed to be in similar condition to what was previously described by Spear (1992). The fourth site (Site 50-10-63-18525, a C-shape) could not be found, and is thought to have been destroyed by land clearing activities that have occurred within the subject parcel since the Spear (1992) AIS was accepted by SHPD. No potential burial features were identified within the subject parcel as a result of the current fieldwork, nor were any possible burial locations identified as a result of the consultation conducted by ASM. The only features identified within the property that were not reported on by Spear (1992) appear to be less than 50 years old and related to on -going camping and fishing activities that still occur within the project area. The findings of the current study, combined with the January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 6 of 19 SHPD's prior review of the Spear (1992) AIS (LOG NO: 7604, DOC NO: 9302ks25), support an HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" pursuant to HAR § 13-275-7(a)(1) for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject parcel. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Matthew R. Clark, M.A. Senior Archaeologist — ASM Hilo Director References Cited Buke Mahele 1848 Buke Kakau Paa no ka mahele aina i Hooholoia iwaena o Kamehameha III a me Na Lii a me Na Konohiki ana, Hale Alii, Honolulu. Chinen, J. J. 1958 The Great Mahele: Hawaii's Land Division of 1848. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawaii. Privately published. Ellis, W. 1825 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of a Tour of Hawaii, or Owhyee; with remarks on the History, Traditions, Manners, Customs and Language of the Inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands. Cocker and Brewster, Boston. Garovoy, J. 2005 "Ua koe ke kuleana o na kanaka" (Reserving the rights of Native Tenants): Integrating Kuleana Rights And Land Trust Priorities in Hawaii. Harvard Environmental Law 29:523- 571. Handy, E. S. C. and E. G. Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018 Kipuka Database. Electronic document, http://lcipukadatabase.com/kpuka. Pukui, M. K., S. H. Elbert, and E. Mo`okini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii. Revised and Expanded ed. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Sherrod, D. R., J. M. Sinton, S. E. Watkins, and K. M. Brunt 2021 Geologic Map of'the State of Hawai `i. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. USGS Numbered Series. Scientific Investigations Map 3143. 1:100,000 and 1:250,000 scale. Electronic document, https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3l43, accessed February 18, 2022. Soil Survey Staff (United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service) 2022 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, htip://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.�-to . Spear, R. 1992 An Inventory Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawaii, TMK 1- 2-18:1. Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. Prepared for Bruce Robinson. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 7 of 19 Figures 0 .PF el 1'• d." ac • 1^, n r' — uuy 44 i h'.7 h� .r�"1,� a •� , J m . . W W R r L u n 1. • L. d t s ' -A ti • •. � �e N^ 1 " F� • I� �Y h • � � e �� w» o. ., mmm�'� � � • � .�� ��� � yT_ a ��� _ r®' o4 1 1TwI • -• �•. 1• F}^L IA.i� M�e•Fw� ti� IL % 1' _®» ; �� �, �� IC•S^1 �fl 41Lm d ..WAIL — 1 1 1 t " n •um „ 6-- v _ -V all a 0� � a n y -' 1% y .. .�,. • ,e Ili e I • m.,� �. a w4, -6 1 N°�� 1 µ" ism, ,_ =�• � 1 � _�.11_71 L�� �Xo-� -.�' '•�'I.�.�Allir.��{1..r1 °tk'.. 6 ;��rl e g� INS --MEMO '=rrrR � �� �� I ' ,r 1 Figure 1. USGS map showing location of project area. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 8 of 19 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 9 of 19 Figure 3. Google EarthTM showing project area. �r7{:Po 1 ��• chi l� lu' "' '' r•, •ter" .. •,• �. Lj ' • � r!' I, 1 r .ail . rl k,. �t •'r' •" — j '� "1' 1�, � 1 l y �JIL I y' 1 L I • � AT pp • 1 IT - r _ rP"- �Jy�1 •�' _�' "�•a • �r, �� . 1 i "t.. Y"• � � u 'r I� �� r r14• LC� — I { re % J 1 J�IF ti _ x�•�r�,%•,� •� - d ,� ��,,r� 1 � r7 �''� ' _ r' J-.y.la w�171�. • - .. L • 3 I .w1 �,.�•ti �'. r _, it +. • k , �A. �'� _ - . IT r �1L - a.. — � T ., 1 �E r •I•d J 1� ,I— d — k•.• _"k•L }may,. • 1 '• W . '7 , J ail , � m v •,�F.1 Ile p_1F i�e�Yr 17�na' u. °' r J„� ��I:..:ia — •",�J�r'�— •'.�A•.:,. •• °,.::,� p.. •� ■u .e 6� 1 .w I �'J 4�, � �� 1:���'r i:,:" MA � ���,I,�"M1,��� — ,. �'11" 1'I �.•� 1� "A V IJC January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 11 of 19 Figure 6. Geology underlying the project area and surrounding vicinity. Figure 7. Soil composition in the project area and surrounding vicinity. m . • 4R .v Lf L I i v`vy4 i -•I v r �•• I 1" _ •r .. •. r . 1 { • �' .. " . I• a �� 1 v.Y Y I9 1 1 1 I Y 1 Ire 1: R •-r r1 • •.:�;.' �' „,, :y,' d°•I 11 ::.e, m %Llu,,��• I ie 1ysys .. 1 '� "�, , i`r —..- ,_ .a. - pia n _ �•— FV -aP•h . i i •-Y} I i R .,I e q�' �� r 1 ` i, r r ,. 4a■ �r 1—��""�ri �� I r 1r 1 1' 1 r• ". -,1 �� �"v. "i+a. tip• �.: f W 1 f''Iy L L a. • r� '. • ti. ' I , 1 A ' • '� i i�" • I • � r � Ii � 1i I L. ":e - ■ , � 6 � • „ 1 r• � r� �n a W, a I r• � a' i IW §r —', ' I I f �� I � ry : • -Je � A" ., �� I Y ��rr.a r � a L a � .p — 'n ti.• •••Y _ by r'—{.. a'. �'�:y .� r? L }TYr•�4�.P •�I �, 1�. n ti 1 111 �:�.`Fr' 1 yam;• r • , ti •1. 1 — �.. 1 - 1 • 1r . • r,'r�1�r. � •• A'r'hL' � � I;'I �:��-1� m 11 R ^�::.:� ��'• .... awti •°• � ~ 9•::: ti 11�} ti r �. •.y•b��• ra d � �� . - . r ."L '• u. I •- � ti• fL r fy, r �y � •RS }�I � I �ti A •r�V �y I T 'y1��"'__� j�°•yy I. Slrvr":,:r w ° a ti °• ••� ti Sr:,�� �r�� .�'4.� 'r ai'r r f • h '1 .� 1'•Iti � i `i •' .. 11 �r � •Yj - I I :{r a ' • I .;•4 _ r15.::. � _ _ '71r`�r• �r•11S~.. . a a r rno LW Y q pr PA i ® 1 r wL•'� �' � � ti �', � a l . 1 1 � . ^ � ° '.,e ® k4�� a "A, , 1.. •a •�e y , it Y " • r � er • : 1 r 1 ^ L �,. y4 ., : 4 'mot .r A . ' ew' tr, 1� h� 1 • a ` ti r4 A a •° r " a ' -" e. yr• • -� .. , �lalr r .•,r. r,. ,�y._ ®a,� ;-Ir_ .. 4 • I :Y ,?w� • r^�. � e. . y Y 1 ' r° �, • �{ AWV Ir :1 4. 1 ��� • ti . . r .Y rt,• - 1 . v x a gym• y� jj. �� YA ray L,� I .° 4:". 11 :•:yf° Y p� 7 . r W� A ,.• p' 1 1 yy • IM ZY L," FA r'r.' ye 1 .x 14 eF.. e Y �» Ir 1:'iy��" A w �^w �sY � „ 1 A. ti . • h 1 . A'°, � a � . � . �. Y • • • .H �. I S ^ r� r .. r • � r • � • • 1' » •. i r. i ' 4. �. �, 4 :1 1•,. ,�Y � ,ram -.. �•'•� �`' r«•� —Y Y ryyl • yl L•4 1 .:.•• L4v" u•'L�,�- 1 �O'1y .}'1° y� • �' Y'' i y 1.6 r"�1e'r •Aa m � .: { r »- ': n rer �. ° i ,r p"1 y'��r. �•!l��°•A•�'•r, y»y ,�r�•ti W »ai �k:.•.r 1'' �• r . • . •" ,. " °:o ;°'e: ,"yY ell ,•.� oe W'� "i �� y°. j 1 �• � 1 JJ 1, °, " ti.,"Ly• •A .r„�rl• n »1 « IJe �.. ��,,1' ° u r 1: F p-�-a{ • ' rs 1 • - r, 1 '" �Y 1. 1 ' !�'a .. ��„ : � � � 1 �,, i � - i�rrr .' .ip�• � p: °� � Ly YI r J { 1'1W 1 t � r .• � 1. L� ]yyj�W ti Z` ' ry4 W h �u�.a AAL$�y'S' 5."`' •4 4 J1' -: P P r .'L 1 -•'� �y •S � ��ewe � J• �r err ,: � -',• P r �•+ �E.' 1 �}yyl • �'�°,�° - }e"° 1 a4 • 1 • . . r LFs '• L I Y e y h �� C 1 r •„ {�}� f- L�.•�:: m.°�.��� r� � y �' r " y a �� .•:� J. r.,�A9FrFd m'.. �e �}}4e. �L 1 ^I` �. 1•�-• . { A e•-4 � ". 1`r tii 1 r. .tip', •• ILC:'• 1�y� yyyyFy.�} y' �Y a� " .s•1 °y .•1•y r 1 :. f,�4 r1 1y�;{=• j-�4e3.•='�,•1"11�L}Y ar �•1.��� •�'.J y.l..- �. a i' ® •:. • ""��" SG'r "rl� 1}.•sYL�I��,yL ^•"1'• ••y. �.y i •1 1�4L 4. .•• ° • • {® 1� ®4 r T •i Y 1 � Ir. 1 • 1 •� y '�� 1,�IrT I� , r 1.1 � � w� F � • • 1. • �M y �! A � u • + • 1�� • •1 • • • - 1 1 r .. '", ��::: ti�-M1r � r� - _ . � � 1 � � �4 4.1 yam.• �' :: � • • 4� � » r k °i7. 1• Y-�r y� 7- � • �'LL .� �. V ti ti ''''Y.n.'1�• 1 yA�� y �_�•-` °� L^•°• Yl A r� r`e ___ y•7° �a° 11 •.t 4 y dYYYY January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 14 of 19 � r Y.• I -"'"r ti� . .. ti ¢ a • � ii ii � a �'L ti ° .Jk r t ' r ,�. arN •• .Y" 3 • •� • •.k • r''•r ' 1 .:� f•Z I : L. 1a.: • ti••L •; •f I r . ti 11 ', "' k', . � Ya �� 1 'V . •• � . � rr r . = • , r � a r},K.Y .r• .�;Y 'a-' a 'r�_a .tip r • "I L •r •. l� ,14.' ti• •I• 1. 1 tir• I r : •re . •r I t • '� .•ti • � • I .J ti , ^fir. a •r. � I '� , f1 "^ {• 1,. •, 7-r 4 •.1 _ 1 •."r ,.,i �'i�11 • � 'ice :. vw k } ••.�,' �° � •L:tiv' •��l I''_. r "r a . � r• � r' �a r " J'1, i"I r I"•• �'Y '1,' a •- h .a.,. I I _:- f,. •' " '� .. �. era• .•{• g; " ,•1• ,a� r " �.' ti.ti• �" Pr1.- r �' m{~ r . 1 _ r ' ° a , ` • 1 �r r • ti a' f � _ a . • a. {- ^' I' " � -�u� 4: �. � � ti " a • I r , �.J ...: • .1 ; '. a ".. I • h,•• • �a �{ • kj�' - J.. • • a ,.• � ._ •'}I I' .�. �.. a' ��•ti• 'i rti'.• L": r .r,_ y�. 1•.� r�•'rr~I • •�'� �•�ti. 1� .r1 r_ `. � .. Jii -i .r'._.r • • TI"= ,• r: . r.a' - "•y-"a'�•1�1• Ta ti'r {. •I• ?}r Y a '• i :.r • _ .•.L'L ,� _ „ ti • �a '}I •ti 1 "�J , Y r ' I' - ti 1 —{•I J .•f aa.1u ".ry "� .:I ••:,"�r'•�••'• a• I•�1 • �•ti_ •� ti ti:}.' rs_}'^,•". i a7titi Y'� ��'I1.4y•a •r• f v.'_ti•�"1� :1 .r "•:ti -� .a :�•r = nti. a •". ° ry"u]: {,a.1.ti� =.; � �.r.�-r}• ,• r•r„r 11 {,' •'aA .. ..,.:.:: I,r ti r"ryrl` ' ti — • a 7Y _ rIa i • Y , • �_1 •-1.. � 1 •� • }r �n d ti � a ti T 11 • ti 1 " a,• L,1 I"-1i r�_ �• }_ a- I I' 'r a.ti 'ti i .t i I „ '-__I •r_ 1 , r'. I•rl�aS • �ti:r r• ..f�:.r — � — L •�" J•ti • �i'r r •• . .•Y. hI'e"I fi•a 'I..J,. : � �yf} ti • r ~ 1 Imo' „{. arA}� "a.� d rti •ri •e v — Y IIr r - I Fr%I•. ... Ar .' �ii "'.r p� _i'P 1 1 •SDI I� 1�} • J' � ii r �.tihrV I I I a ■ % —,+t !•� II�L r.}Jr f.•ya r arlsn r I F A I I a� I - 4. Ir I yI�TI ^�•n ��r�'• — ILAyaIII �- J,La. ;•K r. ,_ ti �Y"I a:, • C t" I- V CAr,t I 1 7 : K A U. Figure 12. Portion of Hawaii Registered Map No. 1614 (prepared by E.D. Baldwin in 1892) showing the location of the current project area. &mom zQ 2024 Archaeological FieldInspection and Cultural Consultation for I2y (3)1- mEm! Page Rww « � � Figure !% Spear /99:gsite location map. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 16 of 19 Figure 14. Location of sites and features identified during the current study. let N a .,P w,<�u, y... : Y•m. 1 ". l•'m ,I •a'�w-'!1-', P'}C. �. .� ^Se ., �ey.. ,. ,. ��ilR � �� � r• � rr . 19 ..wl•ti � P+'••AI i . z1r1 . I Yi ■ 1 ° `.•—� ICY 7 W • "� ,1 ti ..ti w_ .•fir • wy � � . . }' '•fir � ��I_•� : �y •.,. •{I r T }. J, •Y r • 1 . �' I " �.�.. {•!. '" 1°: � " 'i •• r •e. I ti �^,•S I not', p[� m . r •}. � � I•ti5i e � hw •r Yl lr l ; r •• } Lnl•°I; � �m�r •°'ti 1, r l.. n�'' y� 1 I 'm : � r - r � .. 1 r 1• • � i X I • ° 1 • �`1 1 R6 r •r.; 1}z I •. • w I,y J• i• � .X� r• }y'1' w r u � y _• arm' L n'a ' ® W. • �9 -r � - 1` ` r� • n _ 1� �, ti ti r' _ I,L�!�5�w � v' _ti., ti.}r. �1' •,_'%� _ • •�:,• 1• ', •u L_ '�} •dW • ' • ' • •' }yf fi +'� � • ' Di� '� nM�� °�' 1 A� � 1 X r � I. � W r .I � f1.'' � ' 1 '�..L _ IL 1�.• 1 • r L� ' 1 . . . 1 �• 1. r 1 ^� m fi+0.r' w u�1 .. L • " 1r .���ti �rt •^'. •.n4 0' fy ,. ..�Ar. .. �.� • w "� •�A. n w r 1"1 .} U . L •' I ^ 1 r P• • It • I' ww 7 S' w r: ■. sl r. a. r t� ti ��� � rr • {� �,� � �� �Id .. • Y. w. ,. .r 1 � _ 0 y N `FF J• F • r � � �ivr � — � � tin^��f� 1 � w�1 � •� r� � r • i•a r1 �' nr r Y y•}� ".w. rL tit__ 1 n r. _. 1. v ��r •,x",�J �tir•. W _ ,, �fi• w I I r .J1 I. • 1 r w."�al='r'' 1 Y �3. k •e} , � ��y�� ° � �.! � 1F�' � , '�"' 1 r.'r' N 1 3n 9 me y�' ti rry` R 4 Yrr � r�5�i 1 r � " ■ r. li �i ,y� • ti m—. i � a —^Rr i r ".w w �, 4r � �u _ r ti • ,��� m� ��� fC I I' • 1 �..� n Jd— • 1 1 °r J - iii A 1. L� ,. ! • YJ r W , L 1 ■ y■ - 1 _ r' • Y .... Po I IRS • 0 r �, �,• LAF .T rAJ ryl � •rF�. �° �� p^� �•. I r � b L f�� I of r i 0 1. ti •1F�.1 M1yzr• r �• � I L... �rk � J I If nti u r 1 °� i 1 "•, I IR • I ° wn w • y n � r I w r _ Ir 6 _ 1• 1 i P 0.- ,y� L J •M, ° J _ •' ° I . •• � fill _ � � _ � ` � � • � • ,.,r •. _ I ' � � r J 1 1' J I •S •�• .ii. �.. e J 'I� �. ��' c w Sp I ' L —"� _ fir_ •.>. �il� 1 ra^N �� � a� m ,. `.,P .: • }�• ^• � u�y4iA� N � � • :: a - .. LEI I y} � rk },.. "•. 4 Ji�l ti■ tYi�l,.e "R• I • Y P R • i • 1 0 6�• ° .• r W "..?Y'5 + — ,.:-.° 9�11, ,"r 11 �I ,P I • .1� P' • °ry' ' 1 rY r • "" L r +�., ', � • p ". • i fie' 1 ��� 5i 's .�:g •f: fir. ,I" F" L ��,4 'i' �pr .4 . '"� � �•.� 'y • _ t • ALL" I"� ,, ' � d ■J� �J.,�; ,�. : 4 7 Srr � "..•P, n •.I ••' " �` w� 'n■ 111 r •f �'77�f }� I.°�r1 � ��F�R• r A ° •s ' • r • I I� .:: ti Y'. I lie ..° � r m�� R ,• '•� ". R• , r "��L��e » L ° �L .;! rt��tl a �n � ' y� r yI � .� w m• r k .5,m ti. .y ji�M n m•,. I�n4�. �n �,7m m 1�°y �•,ti•• nYm y' ,»"�7�• " "R ®,. •, • .J ,.. c� � � �a ° `. r• � 1 � I •P I r TT�9� r ��• � r L�� � ����5� �R,y •ti. m m i • ,�„ . ,�, 'v • • ti ra'M , • r •� m • • r�' 1 v4 I u �`1 , �m „ r • d 7 � .�n P �.. • °r� ,q • k• 1 r� .tip. d •LPL y ry�r.�y "r , yy6 `'�• °I 11°1I•r .., � N YAy {4 �P ■ . I}' m • .} 4 � u� • y� F I ,r n .r. � •��� � ���»»4111��� v IL° 1 � • " • r. •��• rl L • • • �,u�j err 1, �' • � } � witr`-yPM� �M �''»:, •y.a p� 1��.:: I T 1 • n —.i•' n �..r a •..' " _ • •n ' 1 .� r' �• I ny *tiV.e1 L _ r ° %1 r Iti - . m . ■ r AI r R. ' r, r� 4 2 •r"• " • 1}. 1'• I�1 •� •, ��,a Or 111.'� e 11 •'r•� Lrl � •y � �r��, ����m i ix m4 •� 1 I:il.'- , r r 1 ®1,� v Y' :� e- 1"•• a r� ,'• I ,� 1 e,.� a ., • • _. r 1 -. - • ��� a t ".'�•y„„w ,r A r.. a %s. ".r !» , I a r " ,I °°�• u . wr . r,, Ali a• • ��� � �. •i u � � • a51 r.� � la:, m• �r�r�� e 1 a � EXHIBIT A-18 Oda, Michelle From: Nakamura, Darlene K <darlene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gov> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 2:45 PM To: Planning Internet Mail Subject: Request for Comments - Kaimu Cove LLC - SMA Use Permit (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Attachments: Kaimu Cove LLC.signed.pdf, Kaimu Cove LLC.signed.pdf, Kaimu Cove LLC.ENGR Comments.pdf, Kaimu Cove LLC.000L Comments.pdf, Kaimu Cove LLC.HDLO Comments.pdf Aloha Alex Roy, Attached are comments from the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources ("DLNR") to the above - entitled subject project. Mahalo, Darlene EXHIBIT "A-18" JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR I KE KIA`AI NA SYLVIALUKE °.•.i LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA,AINA F P O o STATE OF HAWAI9 KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAI9 DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES s�ae o/Hawra KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA LAND DIVISION P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 August 26, 2024 County of Hawaii Planning Department Attn: Mr. Alex Roy 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Mr. Roy: DAWN N. S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT via email: Planning(a)hawaiicounty.gov SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Request to Develop a Five (5) Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings and Related Improvements located at Kaimu, Puna, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 on behalf of Kaimu Cove LLC Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter. The Land Division of the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) distributed or made available a copy of your request pertaining to the subject matter to DLNR's Divisions for their review and comments. At this time, enclosed are comments from the (a) Engineering Division, (b) Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands, and (c) Land Division -Hawaii District on the subject matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Darlene Nakamura at (808) 587-0417 or email: darlene.k.nakamura(a)hawaii.aov. Thank you. Sincerely, for Russell Y. Tsuji Land Administrator Enclosures cc: Central Files te.°.F hq P JOSH GREEN, M.D. �', +95s v, DAWN N. S. CHANG GOVERNOR I KE KIA'AINA 0.. CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES SYLVIA LU KE _• 1i COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA �: �- P r, MANAGEMENT k and STATE OF HAWAII I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES Stdteo(Hoa� KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA LAND DIVISION P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 July 29, 2024 MEMORANDUM FROM: � DLNR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources (kendall.l.tucker(a-)hawaii.gov) _Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation (rich ard.t.howarda-hawaii.aov) X Engineering Division (DLNR.ENGRa-hawaii.gov) X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife(rubyrosa.t.terrago(a-)hawaii.gov) _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management (DLNR.CWRMa-hawaii.gov) X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands (sharleen.k.kubaahawaii.aov) X Land Division — Hawaii District (gordon.c.heit(Dhawaii.gov) XLand Division — Ian C. Hirokawa (ian.c.hirokawa(a-hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Rebecca L. Anderson(rebecca.l.andersone-hawaii.gov) X Aha Moku Advisory Committee (leimana.k.damate(a-)hawaii.aov) TO: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator Ra"7"syy� SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) — Request to Develop a Five (5) Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings and Related Improvements LOCATION: Kaimu, Puna, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 APPLICANT: County of Maui on behalf of Kaimu Cove LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 23, 2024. If no response is received by the above date, we will assume your agency has no comments. Should you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at darlene.k.nakamura(a)hawaii.gov. Thank you. BRIEF COMMENTS: ( ) We have no objections. ( ) We have no comments. ( ) We have no additional comments. ( V Comments are included/attached. Signed: C A — Print Name: Carty S. Chang, Chief Engineer Division: Engineering Division Date: Aug 6, 2024 Attachment DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING DIVISION LD/Russell Y. Tsuji Ref: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) — Request to Develop a Five (5) Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings and Related Improvements LOCATION: Kaimu, Puna, Island of Hawaii TMK(s): (3)1-2-018:001 Applicant: County of Maui on behalf of Kaimu Cove LLC COMMENTS The rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44CFR), are in effect when development falls within a Special Flood Hazard Area (high -risk areas). Be advised that 44CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter B, Part 60 reflects the minimum standards as set forth by the NFIP. Local community flood ordinances may stipulate higher standards that can be more restrictive and would take precedence over the minimum NFIP standards. The owner of the project property and/or their representative is responsible for researching the Flood Hazard Zone designation for the project. Flood zones subject to NFIP requirements are identified on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). The official FIRMS can be accessed through FEMA's Map Service Center (msc.fema.gov). Our Flood Hazard Assessment Tool (FHAT) (fhat.hawaii.gov) could also be used to research flood hazard information. If there are questions regarding the local flood ordinances, please contact the applicable County NFIP coordinating agency below: o Oahu: City and County of Honolulu, Department of Planning and Permitting (808) 768-8098. o Hawaii Island: County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works (808) 961-8327. o Maui/Molokai/Lanai County of Maui, Department of Planning (808) 270-7139. o Kauai: County of Kauai, Department of Public Works (808) 241-4849. Signed: CARTY S. CHANG, CHIEF ENGINEER Date: Aug 6, 2024 �L'�1VtD oP D1V1S3DN <e....hq JOSH GREEN, KO, �� . �� sa , �� DAWN N. S. CHANG GOVERNOR KE KIAAINA L_ �p g!r �.� CHAIRPERSON BO fSF q�Ie�Npd�INp RAL RESOURCES SYLVIA LUKE ! UFF I C RESOURCE UEVfENAM GOVERNOR KA MOPE KIA AINA 2 ` o @ T 10,4 �od 4 2 � AUG 21 Aid 10: 2 � +� AND COASTAL LANDS n P �F WAIT I KA MOKU'AINA 'O HAWAN IM JUL 30 A 4 20 )\T U R A RIAT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES sp' 1E�T� KA'OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI'AINA DEFT. OF LAND $ LAND DIVISION NATURAL RESOURCES STATE OF HAWAII P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 July 29, 2024 �i MEMORANDUM DLNR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources (kendall.l.tucker(aD-hawaii.gov) _Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation(richard.t.howard(a)-hawaii.gov) X Engineering Division (DLNR.ENGR(aD_hawaii.pov) X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife (rubyrosa.t.terraao0hawaii.aov) _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management (DLNR.CWRMa-hawaii.aov) X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands (sharleen.k.kuba(&hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Hawaii District (Qordon.c.heitAhawaii.gov) X Land Division — Ian C. Hirokawa (ian.c.hirokawaa-hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Rebecca L. Anderson(rebecca.l.anderson(a)hawaii.gov) X Aha Moku Advisory Committee (leimana.k.damateCcDhawaii.aov) tvnn: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator Rt, r ru✓�; SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) — Request to Develop a Five (5) Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings and Related Improvements LOCATION: Kaimu, Puna, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 APPLICANT: County of Maui on behalf of Kaimu Cove LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 23, 2024. If no response is received by the above date, we will assume your agency has no comments. Should you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at darlene.k.nakamura(a)-hawaii.gov. Thank you. BRIEF COMMENTS: ( ) We have no objections. ( ) We have no comments. ( ) We have no additional comments. (}� Comme nd/attche �c d Signed: . Print Name: I Division: OU'Ll Date: -Z�2 1;- I Attachment CO -A JOSH GREEN, NLD. GOVERNOR I KE KIA AINA SYLVIA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR KA HOPE KIA AAJNA STATE OF HAWAI9 I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAI9 DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA 'OIHANA KUMUWAIWAVAINA OFFICE OF CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU. HAWAII 96809 REF:OCCL:CM Zendo Kern Planning Director County of Hawaii — Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 DAWN N.S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT RYAN K.P. KANAKA40LE FIRST DEPUTY DEAN D. UYENO ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR -WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS - Correspondence: HA 25-18 Aug 20, 2024 SUBJECT: Request for Comments for Special Management Area (SMA) Major Permit No. PL-SMA-2024-000063 to Develop a 5-Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings Construction Project Located Within the Kaimu-Makena Homestead; Puna, Hawaii; Tax Map Key: (3) 1- 2-018:001 Dear Mr. Kern, The Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) has reviewed your correspondence regarding request for comments for the proposed development of a 5- lot subdivision at the subject location. The proposed development will include the construction of 5 new single-family dwelling with related improvements on each lot as determined by the individual lot owners. The related improvements may include driveways, carports, wastewater systems, utilities, and possibly storage sheds. Additionally, a proposed private cul-de-sac roadway will be constructed for ingress and egress to Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. You are requesting comments on the proposed construction project. It appears the project is located within the State of Hawaii Urban Land Use District. The OCCL regulates land uses in the State Land Use Conservation District, as such, the project appears to be located outside of our jurisdiction. As a ocean -front subdivision, I encourage you to review the State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer (https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/) to assess the potential impacts of sea level rise on the parcels. The structural design should consider post on pier rather than slab on grade as the properties may be affected by coastal hazards such as flooding and erosion. Additionally, please note that Act 16, which amended Hawaii Revised Statutes 205A, prohibits the construction of private shoreline hardening structures in front of private properties where there is a sandy beach. Zendo Kern Correspondence HA 25-18 SMA for a 5-lot subdivision development It should be noted that prior grubbing activities by the previous owner (around 1992) on the lots resulted in inadvertent vegetation pushing that extended northward into the adjacent State-owned lands by approximately 20 feet. The grubbing activity ceased upon recognition that the activity had gone beyond the property boundary. Most of the vegetation has re-established itself. The applicant stated that any remaining deteriorated vegetation remaining on State lands will be removed and disposed at a green -waste facility. Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence, contact Cal Miyahara of the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands at (808) 798-6147 or calen.miyahara(a-hawaii.gov. Sincerely, a 04. Michael Cain, Administrator Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands C: HDLO 1 G, �•:�,. H9 JOSH GREEN, M.D. �P'•. �eaa , DAWN N. S. CHANG GOVERNOR KE KIA'AINA 0f CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES SYLVIA LUKE i t} i COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE S1 LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR KA HOPE KIA'AINA �e MANAGEMENT � fd STATE OF HAWAH I KA MOKu,AINA `O HAWAH DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES sort orrhw2° KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA LAND DIVISION P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 July 29, 2024 MEMORANDUM TO: DLNR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources (kendall.l.tucker(abhawaii.gov) _Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation (richard.t.howard(a).hawaii.gov) X Engineering Division (DLNR.ENGR(a--)hawaii.gov) X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife(rubyrosa.t.terrago(a)_hawaii.gov) _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management (DLNR.CWRM(a)-hawaii.gov) X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands (sharleen.k.kuba(a)-hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Hawaii District (gordon.c.heit(a-)-hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Ian C. Hirokawa (ian.c.hirokawa(a-)_hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Rebecca L. Anderson(rebecca.I.anderson(a).hawaii.gov) X Aha Moku Advisory Committee (leimana.k.damate(a)hawaii.gov) FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator Rcc�seCG 7"sujG SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) — Request to Develop a Five (5) Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings and Related Improvements LOCATION: Kaimu, Puna, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 APPLICANT: County of Maui on behalf of Kaimu Cove LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 23, 2024. If no response is received by the above date, we will assume your agency has no comments. Should you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at darlene.k.nakamura(c-�hawaii.gov. Thank you. BRIEF COMMENTS: ( ) We have no objections. X) We have no comments. ( ) We have no additional comments. ( ) Comments are included/attached. Signed: ��� YyUZ Print Name: Gordon Heit Division: Land Division Date: August 19, 2024 Attachment EXHIBIT A-19 Oda, Michelle From: Lebo, Susan A <susan.a.lebo@hawaii.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 4:43 PM To: Planning Internet Mail; Roy, Alex Cc: Gastilo, Joshua T; wyattinhawaii@gmail.com; Matt Clark Subject: HICRIS 2024PR00930, PL-SMA-2024-000063 Attachments: 3-1-2-018-001_2024PR00930_2409JG07_ARCHY_6E42_PRMT_FI_N H PA.pdf Hello, Attached is a pdf copy of our division's review of the following: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review County of Hawaii Special Management Area Use Permit: PL-SMA-2024-000063 Field Inspection Letter Report Applicant: Kaimu Cove LLC (Landowner's representative) Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Sincerely, Susan Susan A. Lebo, PhD SHPD Archaeology Branch Chief (808) 321-9000 cell EXHIBIT "A-19" JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR I KE KIA'AINA SYLVIA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA V2pd and �tOai S O � State of Ha ill STATE OF HAWAII I KA MOKL�`AINA `O HAWAI`I DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD, STE 555 KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 September 6, 2024 Zendo Kern, Director County of Hawaii, Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 planning(i0awaiicoun ov Dear Zendo Kern: DAWN N.S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT RYAN K.P. KANAKA'OLE FIRST DEPUTY DEAN D. UYENO ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR -WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS IN REPLY REFER TO: Project No. 2024PR00930 Doc. No. 2409JG07 Archaeology SUBJECT: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review County of Hawaii Special Management Area Use Permit: PL-SMA-2024-000063 Field Inspection Letter Report Applicant: Kaimu Cove LLC (Landowner's representative) Kaimn Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) review of the subject County of Hawaii Special Management Area (SMA) Assessment permit application received by our office on July 26, 2024. The submittal included an SMA Use Permit Assessment Application, site plans, copies of a previous archaeological survey report (Spear 1992), an archaeological field inspection letter report (Clark 2024), and photos of the project area. The proposed project area comprises the entire 3.677-acre parcel. The project proponent proposes the development of a 5-lot subdivision consisting of parcels of at least 0.5 acres each for residential purposes. The following is also proposed as part of the subject project: • A 10-foot wide, cinder -surfaced public pedestrian access easement will be provided along the entire northern boundary of the subject property, adjacent to the existing adjoining State lands. • The water main along the mauka side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road will need to be tapped by lateral services and extended to the subject property. • The applicant and subsequent owners of the individual lots will be grubbing and grading each subdivided lot to accommodate a proposed single-family dwelling. • The intrusion within the adjoining State-owned lands consisted primarily of pushed vegetation that has since partially deteriorated with most of the vegetation reestablishing itself. The Applicant will remove all pushed vegetation that has not deteriorated for proper disposal at a greenwaste facility. Black cinder was placed within the 40-foot shoreline setback area to create a safer walking path along the shoreline trail. The Applicant will remove the black cinder from within the shoreline setback area and restore it to its previous condition to the extent practical. In both instances, the Applicant will coordinate both site restoration activities with the Planning Department, and if deemed necessary, the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources. These restoration efforts will be completed, to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, prior to the issuance of final subdivision approval. Zendo Kern September 6, 2024 Page 2 The submittal materials indicate that an archaeological survey conducted in the early 1990s (Spear 1992; Doc. No. 9302ks25) included the current project area. The survey identified four historic properties within the project parcel: Site 50-10-63-18525 [c-shape], Site 50-10-63-18526 [complex], Site 50-10-63-18527 [wall], and Site 50-10-63-18528 [lava tube]). Each was assessed as significant under criterion d and as adequately documented and, thus, were recommended for no further archaeological work. The Clark (2024) Field Inspection (FI) report describes the project area, summarizes the previous archaeological studies and the results of the field inspection, and provides a project effect recommendation of "No historic properties affected" for the current project. Clark (2024) indicates that ASM Affiliates archaeologists conducted a 100% surface pedestrian survey of project area on October 27, 2023. The FI relocated three of the previously identified historic properties (Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-19527, and 50-10-63-18528). Site 50-10-63-18525 was not relocated and was assumed to have been destroyed as the area exhibited evidence of ground -disturbing activities. Site 50-10-63- 18526 and Site 50-10-63-18527 were observed to be in a similar condition as originally recorded by Spear (1992); Site # 50-10-63-18528 was observed as having been impacted by land -clearing (push) activities. No historic properties were newly identified. However, Clark (2024) indicates that additional rock constructions were observed and suggests that they were constructed sometime after the Spear (1992) archaeological survey. Due to the proximity of the subject project area to a nearby cemetery, consultation was conducted between October 31 and December 13, 2023. None of the consulted parties knew of any burials being located within the current project area. Based on the information provided, SHPD's project effect determination is "No historic properties affected" pursuant to HAR § 13-284-7(a)(1) for the current project. Additionally, pursuant to HAR §13-284-7(e), when SHPD comments that the proposed project shall not affect significant historic properties, the HRS 6E historic preservation review process ends. The permit issuance process may continue. Although the field inspection does not fulfill the requirements of an archaeological inventory survey as specified in HAR § 13-276-5, it serves to facilitate project planning and supports the historic preservation review process. Please submit one hard copy of the report, clearly labeled Library Copy INAL, along with a text -searchable PDF copy of the report and a copy of this letter to the SHPD Kapolei office, Attn. Library and one hard copy to the SHPD Hilo office, Attn. Joshua Gastilo. Also submit a text -searchable PDF copy of the report to HICRIS Project No. 2024PR00930 using the Project Supplement option, and a PDF copy of the report to lehua.k.soares(��hawaii.�,yo\-. Attach to permit: If historic properties such as lava tube openings, concentrations of artifacts, structural remains or human skeletal remains are found during construction activities please cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find, protect the find from additional disturbance, and contact the State Historic Preservation Division at (808) 933- 7653. Please contact Joshua Gastilo at Joshua. Gastilo(�uhawaii.gov for any questions regarding archaeological resources or concerns regarding this letter. Aloha, Jessica L. Puff Architecture Branch Chief Acting Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division cc: Alex Roy, alex.roy(&hawaiicoun ov Daryn Arai, Kaimu Cove LLC, wyattinhawaii(c gmail.com Matthew Clark, mclark(a�asmaffiliates.com EXHIBIT A-20 Sm Archaeology • H15tor `�, ,c �: r,; • n-. , 1aCturat Hrskory September 10. 2024 Marl: Wyatt C aimu O c LLC 12-55 Likoliko Lp ,18C6, Pahoa . HI, 96778 Email, wyattinlaaka'.aiifri �rnail_caan Subject: LIBRARY COPY. Results of an arc harro logical field inspection and cultural consultation c0ntlrl1;1Qd ill wrll)la(rt Of 111 SM k use permit application for the proposed subdivision of TNIK 1 5) I-'-I11101111. I�ain1C1 -\hupua`a, Puna District, Island ofHiwai`i. Dear Mark; Asrcquestcd.ASNI 1tlili,ncsl �NSNI)� .:4}ndtictccl an ainh,acclA&M ildd inwl}cct on and c'uhum I consulnabil in support of an application t`or an SM LKV perniti_ concerning the proposed ,u1--4I1% r ion cif- NJK: (3) 1- 2-018:001, Kalntik Ahuptta'a, Puna Ut�,t rk: i. Wand of 11, n ai 0 jums 1 _ :. am4i } f. The f cid inspc•cticita vats concitlmd io iudp addrwss the cont�cl ll� car' lh, (. oiillll� of I I;1,tai-1 Plalwin , 1)ew,trnlak:rit mg ir'cling the prc'1"two NO MU inio k of the 55I•au nlil�tw panel by 0011ttnllnlY� tl]iil'UPda11r11z� ilic findings of an Cal hk1 F :11111%,'liror� 11f' i \ 1.'\ 1�) p1q),ired for the property by Spear ( l992), FurthcrinorQ. ccln.wttlr. A11 "On rindcr{aken owl0 ; 111is}rnmakil ti-on1 knowledgeable indivi€uals regarding the presence {or a11kso w i of1'tuAl sites "Ahki the suh0iproperty. Project Area Desrriplion The project area is Ills e11ti1ti1k Lr1'1-\[ : (_+) 1-2-01; ,001 locata:cl L,,ithin KainlCr Ahoptaa`a, Puna District. Ishind of Hawaii. The 3.55 1-acresulbject parcel is bounded on flit* weneAca side h� the Kalapa€t:t-ICa1mho Ro;W (see Figure 3, on i11w med-Lei We h% a M, Amn exclusion mw along ilia coast (I`igurc Q to floe nslrlheast by an undcxsloped 9111.0-OVen0d parcel Consisting, o 'ca•c,' lava, and to the soutlixvcst by a dev ehIacd residential prt.kpCr� . 1110 pralcc't area dumd at a n cle alien of 10 to 25 foct (3.05 io 7.62 mcurs) abo%ti ni, atl sezi level and is 4o ltiei inland from 111,e coast. An Htswric cein tery is located to the northeast of tllc prgimarealon the opposes sltic Of 00 Ii,ll'Llpan i.-Kallc)I1�1 F'iL'4u- ��. Geologically_ the prc.ject area is lcn:atod = the Iknicr il,lnk. or mIuco Volcano and iscontprised of'multiplc lava flows (Sherrod 0 rl ")21). with a Nun hwWt Rou iNa y'11°.Isnd beo,-vol .11M knd 750 yc'u." b':ion: prount (BP) Ib n ing much of the coaroll cl M southem pan of flaw par -cal, a yowyei— 1•' ma haWl. klon of `iI k"n dathig to Ilrl-To %emq FiF'trt:mhr ,. Lh12 noli11kastern edge- and al nitre 1,L:c4111 perhoc;iruc Elti,.,. tlaat occurred hctxk'ti:ti?1 I9) ,#- .1nd 1902 02 pr, so nz a1 10 COWSL 9 1' Iu""11rC 6) SOH CIa55t11Cat1c111�, %i It11111 dh: prt�Iti:ct m-La TgUrV ?) 111111114 IN PO{115!<_rli; NtLbu]'veN:lnd ;ire1:4111511r'i*S ISrll11:11111 511'N �1�Li.tJrlr;r li➢_'d, {YY�1ui, It>,Ilrl. on 2 to I {I Ise`' � r1t ,lslllw Mill dvy Malnnla-Lava llo%1 0AII1)IIA 011 -210 4{1 17et'i.'121111 the 'O .d flow ,Mang the° nail. enstrr1l ;dge. and 10+1dalm I;n a Oon s on 2 to 017crrc'nt doliss present at the coast 1 sAl Th ri: Ila, �klrllc tIrlor °'r1'}l Ill disturbance -110ii till northt~ i;l. -,,u;11','-. el-:. :i",1 17 cnok a edges of tlae prrc�jcrl a1'c,1. (..)n th..e A thin in Qno tilcan"n 10011 (UV11,11V:;_ ',rnt-7 ttbbcd :ld l-adc:d~drivL:way lid ik�".�3r� ��1 r11i`;i,It�l�1�;llS,li:t11�17risI.Y�:t4 Ii11L' :1114� ;i1.:ti*�k`�:i :- �I.t' �i}'�,�t' I`,1l' �1�..iirth4 Ll}5"L!�,t �?ii 1 �]t"Oi11UT]tt�1'V Kai o%vilooks des im of t114 parcel (this .11vp . ,., unni`, wc,'1 S cicaNd in ?11221. 'Flicre is n second roadu;i; whoh Ivan, hum th<; tr1f1yr iowl ,anal s 15'ii wd do-,1I1 tJhltxtl��Il ti>c Iniclt114 tit tI1C pr4�leCt are�� t0 the coast Asurc ti.kt. ]Iris road nips hark been rLli-,:adprc.,erit when pmviously surveyed in IU 2, as 82D r' hon1 Met Suitt n , I . Wr ;;i 06813 MDS) 4MI1089 Fax: (6�439-M7 S. Q EaU _arri Ula Q.,n n r h a1 96725 M08) 9095066 Fax: WDS) 441CO65 is „, , loq 3;ra_GAm EXHIBIT "A-20'' Sq,lL"1r11Wi q1021. Archax>,lp0cui I i,:H Id ; y, 1:...-'1 3�+rTMK(3) I-?-tlltt:QU1 Page ? of 10 somcdIng reselllbling it N mentioned b) Sr,:,ic i 1 L)c} 2 I. Bul ]dozer push piles were allo observed along the bound am {}'ktll the adlacem resi.laiAa! pt'o1a= to 111k ,oui,,I1west near the iniddle of the pI' geet aria. These push piles appear to be related to the c Iti ai y of tflat 13a; Wring parcel. A nu sober of brush piles, seerrringIy from hand clearing actin- ks„ wcrr also nc1wd in to Wwwici-n portion of the p3Djcct arca at the base of the 'We-i now. Vegawtion co%cr k#'i[hin die project area is int'luc mod M to C\ton oC prior t',round dk[LYrbince. In the tin disturllcd poll Ions of' thc p3-t,lccI Li-N:,l I.I igiirr I(II- [Ilr 0%ktiE,SIclrk L°L511wiwt, 1lrcdoininIlLclx- c,t'mtlle;;:ypod t1'e4'S 4.�CflYrtllk"i! h'tJr7lir?f7„ 1?ir�;r ti „' �.�:'r'� [{'C'�fl�'ri2.+J. ]kill (1{d121.1C'irY f;�r.r{'l'rilr'� I, ml%fi V,ilh ,:0C0I1tIL pallll (( rrt.dix and J?(mpaka (SC4ae> )IV Sp.} 611011v' die 17721kay sc:iioil. 111w t7(l:"l'L'I;I hL°undary, a scat t'im; Of M41i t 11a+?"; hAt L"if?'iARO) III rt,LI'[IS111" IIIL° pI-opCI-[ ilIIL! :! wI11rIti ":IIC:11'.1`III�, r1-tip' lhtrC'ifOpa% &MA vy 11w 'grolin l timti't.consists of 1110111i1111 .101% I1pejOloc a ,r;:lrc'cr1. [1,L11iL'111::11's ii1 'h1 : rrr.rAm poi iion of the prvit:Qi a%a. Y1 f"L:1-11 tA'L'jV1'0Jit'lW c'.1Y7W U i L and t:1nons s1,}eaah a: '_I.Is, an. Ill t11c 1.irC"0LlSly disItirh, d poriit�iI - iII, '.L: L!Ill. Ion i s a o m p n w d 11fa tl'111 o f 1w—Cw.1.711Aank 11'[,7 wp 1-'L'Lnrlk,' J,:Il-c C1t"M211ff., 0If,.. rkl- kll_xllla Wfrk.'rirtr..;L'iii.1,illt"'I101L-11,okk'kk'4`£'C1:k{II1!Lli`111 A Brief Culture -Historical .L1Rackground for the SubjL.Ct Parcel The 1,''3-ehjcci an a Hes can the soudern shores of the Punt District of thy: Island of Hawaii within the c7hill.nia'cr of K.11lllll. Wr11illl is bo dend to the wt>11Lh" nt by tl1C cahtpke it of Kalapan;t and Ktlpnhtia- to the north by Ilti1= crillgWU a i,f ANA,.lk;a.l3HE and kavhc- and to the west b� Lhc crhupiv a of Klikala 1 .and K; 6kea. Traaditionally. the p6man % ill ou Or Win ohipkhy unun (and s ill i- I I..,,na n as W"lifi. 0 Hain t11;1t 11,.1w been t1';In ltlt4� to rllk;lll--t.;,{ divri11�� I;lt I.I1' 1 bk:1 1141 %�i1i,01 .IIIt-II1t, `.- fP1 kui Li ,11. 1L)-4 w)1.. ] Iic ;I1cs diuc ofzl:i* iri?�rf,;rar [r. .h:c0I'tIMW 1.0 l}ttlkln A A ( 1974:(+yj- is -iioi�:d for Its surf and its hlt,-J ti,X,§;l h^,-adl .Ilkkl 0H-U110 H% callal Wi -vLL;lnd K a-poho. Puk;u.i L r -il I N •+1 no(k il7;lt this bearli xk.l* I'iI L:k I'Lr11llQd .11t4',.. A 1 7�0 h%l [ 110kk . di.11-nc a hich We swatu exlYl dons ID1111rL1 Lhti w]l.Ir.Lcio—istic hLick zLind L,I' ihet iron 1.1Itc hec l h at KiY1m& "as l;(>}tira`d A ]aka f o"s Mai occurred d1LLtI1lv.! dw I L)` W and A no Ii:5 Iga 1)IiSC1 - 11w 1.115',Il 9h lnissiollar% William Ellis i,„.111Lrii-k.cd oil,i cir,:th11111;nI+!,It0n cal I l;lt ai-i Island in the IX-11k rhh '110 11L1k1ti L1t IL€CtILlf�[n'- population CC'ntors IIl.3t W01.11U hL l'a`wC�)Ll�i cat { III- Llan Lllltii0,1i4rk LC.chlt1'_'*;. D1.111HU Ili, iral elc he WAwdobscinstOnsof the ani lro111? nits and poL pIc l c ciic ltirltcl-": G 1' a r Ica% im to distrlcl of I a,cii. 1:10 enti.nd w uallenl Fauna along ik coasdine mid dcwrnh"I to Amr1'= of v Won, he Lr,l'StiI Li Llli�ow,2ll. im:!Lidiiii l�aiariu-which lit drsCrib�`c1.Lslicitle: v I It`tsw:nitlk "itllatcd near di.,- sea shore, On Lhc s01.11.11-cast side of ilic island- stardim! on ,1 h,ai cat' lava co3ts3dcrallly decomposed. and cot creel of or "Atli a light and Unk soil. It Is ,ido:- Cd v, I t11 plan Lawn, ov, L:s of cocui)-n tw and c° I Lmlps of kou trccs- It has a Eric sandy Wok nho w C,Innos Iow 1 nul %kill[ ti;1t % .md, i%cording to the houses ntlttiNn° d io-da`v. C0311.aiih, ;;Il01.Ii -25 1311mbit:1111�- 111CILIi inc the village, A A lnlmedlateW]nnY along the anst. Mw I,,}t}ul;3tion ,vculd pIc}1,;11f1y ,Imount to',{ 00. ° .. The extentof,�ulii% atlon In the t1.1'_hhoii:Nod. together in it the Mom and orderly allksearanee of the poople. induce us [n I!mi!, l lei ,erg: more sober and industrious. than those: of many villages through which tkw ha}c (Ellis 1825:160). Indeed. the habitation and asnrld`tilttlral panerns of sou hero Puna were often dependent on the Imell of flit' I,l-%a f7,nv., 1't-t}Lll 1 ilatica Vo[Ca010..1w Haiidv ,ind H mils' f 1c1?` :751) 1101C- Llacfr,��lands Of Nl:tk rla Wid ]�st�'L:r Kai111t1 1,a!I'L; stlit:Yl�1c for grol%111i� til�L:.,?[ pcq"Ilok4s NI[ not taro. and lht4 aeighboring l7ltldlma'u of--Kk iACa IhRlt RI suppuncd1 nAW bcing nla.sw[Ik 1Jt470(-,'Y,r. laV-,j.° A(Wi6011allt-'. I-ILUX.Liiarl tradi6orls iinpl� that poii,1 ..)1°asonce Hawaii 4I' 6ic t ;;lvj-k;IIll,L11;11 Ik:!?iolI ;IIl'! Ilm: iL i*ill Tkj11iV I1' LLRlL tl]',1l VOIC;1.36' CELL [)IiNl liasdestroyed 371t[Cll of as be St land tI'IL,,ndt and Ikin Llk' 11}-2-7521- Bv the ill id- I Q` ccliturd . lh4 Iraditiow-A Hau oii.ul land t41 ire n so u as r,1Wh ,slt4rL:d through,a process 0f bnd dk IAli kIIok%rl 1* thL 110hele '.lima 'I'll 1, L 11,1[1 'k' ill 14311c1 rL L1t11'k: ,k';�w 1lI°(")I11t?led by the [17iw�ionall�S and Lhc' "rL,"dip' brags Ilr�I�Asion and 1'°11simsw nicorois in flit island Ungdom who wcrc generally 49 Selrtainixr Ill, 2024 Archacoiagacal Fit!td Inspection and Cullural Consulialion Ibr TN— M: (3 ) 1-2-018-001 Page 3 of 10 hesitant to Onto., basinrs5 deals on Icaselioid Iakldw. l he °Vtdlxeie (division) defined the land Interest of l amehakueh,l III He King). the hig4winkm; c117w°k and bFr7r,hk Ihe:k nan of an ahrpmz'a). As a :4*lilt of the Ui)ieie, all ON irk the KnWdolu of }.I:>!k aci tk ON I11aced Into one of thrcc cawyones- 1 I I C ro%%n Lands (lands personally claiinti:d by K 1m"•ltanl�:lu1 1111: 121 du"W hvi I-wWs {lands �:Iaiilwd b7 lesser Lj.4'Y and kt i?ohiki) ,1nd. (3) (..itnL•lrlrklent 41;111tlti sttl7e1ldevvd k) div Kin,,, or tlrw° krv?ohi4i in hetl Of COMInU1160'C)"1111 the C L%c,lI 1ll,lt the right'. of t]:L`/unf"dint'ioclinrllo %%ci-e to bc. TCSerCd (ChilWO ii: 1961:13), In th, usis of the Ini-I ll: or knimG1, Me A+f)tiWo mas orls;in; Hy i:ltkknN by Nhiaio Ki:1`: aaao-.i. ►kllo tlianaptid 111i2 c;t:lte of` his daughter ilic ali'i Victoria kanianlalu. 1-1oixvver, in January of 1848, K,L: xi 'a Sj11TclldVZ'. d this land to the Kill;, 7tnl KLIl 11lu ti,;is, J)L)1:Cd i1110 the irIVOILOry of Crown Lands (Bl:I'c Whele 1,S4S). r A; llli I� in _ and Ilkal; .f an . r,rt�„rr, r Illade c aun w to largo tracts of I -Lind via the ; 107c' e. questkorls arose k'L'°':llflill llx I,s1}r4C11011 I'm thw hejee'rn)ia 'Is, Ntiri = this ltt,imn on A4tp q l3"'- Iki& thy` Kukana .Act (Aso kI1o"n as the Sa1 N., AclM ivu; pnsl ,cd. in - thc procoss b� which tiative tenants could ti.1.11111 i'�:c "I111pIL' I i t I io ,C]'.'. port1L1n oFI ,.IIk:-• Ii,.j: ;I1 '. 1;11 *1k,I':I'. IN: CUpiCd- LCIiktl L:I�' Cltieatell- Or had i1!!] 1)l %k'll ((.l.l:IM1101 - SrNi�I �\ VIi ';i: K.1iIIItl. 114! .171L'L?�h,i jlld* 14L'I'13id kViihin Ilkc Clktll�Cl\ t)fthe Punu III >trio s.+nh t" o I.v„Sani %vcre a4w-ani d {005ee of Hax%,IiI.I°,. I'fairs 4) l ,\ III,111 ol" 1,111kk lI1 Ilic t'Ik:IIIIi% ;' Kalapana, 1`LIIK {11,'1%},il'1 R1: ,'ICI'Cd N41 \0. 10 14 1 prL`parcd b1 E- D, [3;111F'sk]II III 1. ` } *11iS1k* Ille I,il!,IL, 111 6C w+okk v of tliw *III}!t4.'i p'l-cLI'Ind IIikllttiCk:ti 111v Ioc:)llolls Of 1&ed`rby C11ttff.11 ';C;ltures local d to the ;,w1WCSl C1170 tiIILT 11ll }}C'�ti'.','t I :I I': 'I :llll:ludlllg, a +Wie :i. wl5 �J it ho1.,�cs and ot�1L:'r II,Lf od p5ccn 144e;1 od "Akin €�itl.nD �'i€l,'XS.o:md at6;`n c%sti'=nhn; Wand fl qn 9114' tilll;.y, Ti4.illlk 12). I11C i+ ci J)Oillt I;)Cant[ 111 1111 ti:C tti 171 C0I_nC.1' (}f ill;: wLd)10 t pr44 ` I> :dh1 14-i1 ­ Kc011-, 11n:3 k}iL III l't 11111l}. A Iatcr tra0112 Of tlic INN rn111.1 wlrOWK2 1110 t10"11 IAHd I l0lllescadw of h.aImb (l la%{,li-i R, ' Is}l�t�retl %lap No. I ' 1 sllci�e s tli.l thewulllcct 1lalrcl x a; ii 1itl I b icic�l :tiul said tea { .I 1�, l i t I Gran t (t. 115 q t .lti 1..t�t '.,�_C of the. Kallnu4vla{ :na HnIYtL`mati_IS S We R c1. ih T I Ll2I. Rv nd, I Iovil 103_ Ilsi ilia �Wi iw,:t p-Lirtik-l a, K illg tmnell hr+aMrs Chiwkll° 3aho41Ct+:'i1'Is o Lrustce roz 0 W 117l111i1, Ikll;n0 %� ill, Will,,uld I*;1111] Will, each saWhorn held a 13 interest in thy Iclt. BN be i;1t,IY ,1k, nurship of the pired hod split I; mccn ihc. t11:ti 10USl� uieationed mcmbas of Tv Will Iamily. who %%ould i)%i n the p4ircO until tlic late 11MOs. Samman, of Prior Arrhaeologikal Study within the Subjecl Parcel the current lonject aria t llik. 1 ) 1-2-01,90)1) "nis the sul'lfeel nf:nn in tOnsive archicological inventory sui%q prepared by SciclliAt t. f+m111t,11iI tiCrviecs- ]ne- in 1—C I�%p.,:1I- I00.'l. AS R`Ni of Tv 5dtov Sir 0I100ct71Q01 ShISS WIV I,IL°IIt;AM 0:A A the prc,p rq 1S1111.1 SiicS>5.i-111-t•.w-I����. +o-lo-(�3-185 h, 51k- 10-63-1 ,'5271 and 1paw 131 that WON tmerpvted as hnv inn hccn Hsed kn-Preeontaci to e{`k]# 1°ltsto'dc Mod Or I,'llil'o:v3 ll.117iwInion I?I]!`1)�},.ty., With ;]S�,OLAL14:d ;hill Illllltw[1 appriculturi] alw occurring. All Rmw dal +Lrl &N : died mid innpj)- d 11� Spc,ar ( I IW2I- and Lip o offlic pit 4 1 1 ,�w 25 and IN526) UVTC 0100%,r& ki help 10110 thOr f1nWI1011:tl inicl-prctLwons and tell thC presence of IUrled cultural dkrposkt,�. S11r,I1 1 ;N'�l!"CiI A! ii1Uk' under k riltl ioik d for 111k° irli"m lll4iiio l they had contributed to ul:,lcl-;x:khnl .! p,I4-. iteway�, V% itlltn i11e pl-gicrt are;i. I14 noted than s111f1cicnt�cia,ta had been collected fl'cllu dio 41IL* n> a:4.'N'.:i'. o0he AIN to N 471'1'mu. a tt'4; nl%:ilC Ivi.;oi 11i] ,ndalion or -no fUrther work." TI i, 'Mate Htrt<yl,k PIC'L".:who IV Won (SHPD) age ed %wnh the ;knllielly e assenme€1ty and tk°e;M'1AV -t.".'tip!?`.;1o1'd:0nuI, RW IV ,IIL', .II Id accepted lhk SpL::l.I t 14k'l'} AIS Ili;l leMarch arch 3, 1993 (1_06 \0 -r,l i_l. DU N0: k?_ k2k, 25 l-hc descriptions of tllc sites recorded by Sixar ( 1992) are sLtl1rl1141rizccl bcio%N-- tl 118525 wi,, rc4orded 11k Spc;�r r I kl4)2 I is li ("-s]il1pL° locatk d near chu base of the lr vo Ian a Mom ° at 1ht end of a bulldoac r !Nish road, kn Q waste rll earner €1f the pared, Accord i ng to Spear 1 1992 I- the opcning to the (-s11.11x "v l` 4,..:1 rated to the kk t st and rnvasurcd �.1 ntetcrs Neill,: ,grid 1.4,; inem—s deep. The wills xvvre 2-1 Metal-'- f ll 1. i, e Aild Chti til::'t.I 111 l "1 heigh %us U36 meters. The featLCrc 11 L):, dkILIT-be `1 ni the southenl kxd, and hun Iqon;1 ,If1wed I& 4x1.•ror Wall (Npwar 1992 On6 Impe pi�•ce c1fcor,li v%,ls t{)tnid kill dw g7round sm Emu mi Te l!'1*n0 or H a { - oqw A sinyIv 3ttaadgr phic trench 1' nx 4`\4m nod 11uvi is or C11L: o ning of thti l.-,lialli to t SC r-­r boric, :uIuIr,!I {ivpoi lta- Measuring 1-0 niclor h\ ii.w n1L-Cci'_ Me trench i4a,� c1q, to a 50 ScptainIx.r 10, 2024 Archacolagjcal Fit!ld Inspection and Cullural Consulialion 1br T_MK: (3) 1-2-018-001 11age 4 of 11) bW 110 wlllwl-,ll lilattirlifl� kil"Ill killd ')cl,'C elIe0lll`lLsl_;:d. 1:1'L.",4d (11' IN,' t61111:d lk%t(CS, this L,::,- v, illicl-Pn�EL:J ;L., ;l Prvsolll-I�, I li,,toriic liall11,11i0li S n I ( I Q 9 �l S s{ I] I , I}.iII I L 5 11 1 'IN 0 S tJ H,1 L: L; 1� ; L i i i i i i i i n: 1 and 2). Feature kk 1t11 w, orl':Iited to the south, %k ilh it %% idili i)l' imiors and a depth of K ::wk" R,- %kall iild, Iles; hi .,. k:,v 1 .00 owl': I , ;lilt! I 6 -� lwLLl ti respectively, Thk. easl-,-1 11 1!11 -J of ill%: %4 J� l and LEI I)= condition. Fomum 2 "as wasod AM v mom tKin tIl" llleak'I'S 114: 4;11.01 Of Fcatiir,- I . miki eoils15t4Ld Ofii RTL:k 111011511d %% IliCII 1 .93 illel,:1-S Vs alid 1 5 1 'A I hL' ::;AXI 1�: :k` cil'Al incusurblip H 1 V - 4 -=torw os on A xW W" son Fodtunny I and 1 Won Won exlollood to a LunWimn; durh of A ";:I W 0 K M d H 0 C U h 0 1 11 11. J 0 11a I S WCM v w m q W N d Spi:a r ( I Q1; 2Irllw:ll5itt4'L1F�`,J I L I I'L: I as a w ill Porn I..,. 11, 1 );,, I ' I k, i I whcIter ai i d Ftaw rc _2 :i g! 11 i-.! -L.,-. i : L• t i I t iiml in o tin d, Site 1 N:271 V-'as d0CUni,:mk:d by i I i _i, ,,, ,ill that cmundcd ilonu the ba,;': of the fill for the KAMnim"KAMM Bawh Road, Ai M MW A 111C I ,I."--,wdy. thv ��,ill �v--vllded 1)4N oiid ihL: project aiva to the SOW11M eSl iind " ns a" W iih ;,. :l ..,i it, nk"Weno end. Ills of ilik: -%N Al kk ahin the project arC.L IN 0S rcccll ci cl as 14 mo P K. : 0 n llnm K n! ill P o v In m J "Iddi I . I ill,: i� rs and 11. ~, lll�[,: I-S No oxca% ndcmi wm under alien "I NK, 4 52 - K; Npay i 1 `!`a2 k " ho We quotod the sue ah a Mundan wall that piNates the consnTction of 0 a wh ny i oWn dN, . She I xx ON" as d(7omna wd by Kpaii Nw n n, � P h 0 aid 1 n o bublflk_ I-.. i il i inicrior ineasurcnicnis IIICL,lI k::,ilk: _�, �' "! "' I I ') ' ", �:J, I_ I IlL: 'x .,LS C I Q LIIC Ll 0 tL .0l'.:l '6"Lli I I : i', " L: k �:, I I 0]1011111,� rock 1011,'I7 had ki":J 1:, `.Ikll�:d lip [Ile otlfll%kCst PkIllioll i.11 111k: Ik--L"[[ll-_ No '2111tilral 111a(4:ri"ll fulwl ill "'. !,.Il illc i,-:!ikllc .1cLviding to SIIL:I!l ill!L'1111'ekL([ OIL: 'JtL ZIs 'I featLLl_-,' ;)I -,111AI I%I.W'.111._.: pli. illc-,- lin 1),otellilid TI:L,- t:i; :k !o [Ilk, 110 "d S1 ()I% I Ilk, '-.l .k:t 'IrCa )I, I ll,: p.. jjj, 41 C,I I, v:,: 11"CL!''L' CMICCM k1l IIW , s111k1 %"..,1:Lir � N.' LIUL?.'Mhlll lli.'ld to 111L !'ow,.!l proiect -.o d,-i,-lllllllL: lI:_%1lUC-:;:,L-, ldclitifil'A ill llkQ C4'llk21Qr1 :11 `.Ill. \0 %-%'%[, 0L-llllI___.1-;I that area" tw- an \ xv ON M " ahm f;:.t w nowd h% 'p%:%ie- t l01)21. ihL? ,oil hm ill 111C pr(}ilxl Ma Ms 90 MCI% wN to preclude the pn-,,-::cof subsurfacc or burials. l4sulls of the Current Field Inspection On OirLt)l�t:r 27, MI. David Kiny, KA. Wsen Balai. B.A.. and Jonas Leon, B.A.. and R Ulii k. M. -V (ASM IInncipal Ill; asayworK condumd a Annigh MoC SlJn,�ey Of th e $11.7] C C I IM !'C L'I - :1 k4 : I I 1y i'! VQ13L' 01 1111PWIC111 01`1110 �{W Otn% 10011hring Q Wieastem side of the project area, The sun o inaludo(. 0151,Lr1;IRC 11SPULRO 4to onmv paW Wzhy north south pedestrian trailsects., %N ith fiAdIv0?ClT QUAIL 11 I.LL \ i k) I I � I : - Ll oll C 11 t Spear x 11992 L S pc c d -a I C= v.-ZIS Laken in the num4w pol-1 io i,. ()f 111L' )l1;1L.L-: orl ill,: 'kilfacQ 1,11' Ills ;1d jacclu 'a -iflow, to look for burial features similar w i I I I I I I Iii C I i L S to Vic cL: nic te ry ac ro S5 the strut" 4 ,ti11 of the' 17cclestrian stir cy- thrcc of the four sites previously documented by Spear ( 1992) within AM t 4111 P She* 50- HU-i- 1,026, 50- 1,0-63-18527, and 50-10-0248528, Fig 14 1 Ilk: ';ok jiwll- it,:' " J,k101:111,11C111CLI USillg a GPS. and the cunvm condition of each of these I-. I. -I iz:1--- AM Kim SK 54 1003A 8525 (a 0KIng i eottid not bt: ivlocawd. and it is thought 11, > i . s:. v4 I I i,: ,% ; :.-. :,'.: i -rii crl _-, I ocated In the L: a w i c ril 1�o rti oti <) f the -, L i h.i e ct p.irce I at the base of the 'a '6 [Io%% I I !, -%r-k: 3). IN 1, J "': I" >\ -%I hN. nil.' anical Eround Isturbi n v Wi AW , aher ilic acceptance of the Spear i I`!`i' I \ I<. I he local. :,l I :i:..,l d I StFil!'11-1.11013 of sh, and henumos uk MW williki 1lic subJect parcel, z well -Lis 11w 1-slatl k C location 01, Lll, L nacta I to the proicci area, is dcpicwd in Figurc 14� She 1 M516 Rawnes I (a C-shapel and 2 (a mound) werc bath in sinidar coild i iioii w what, ;%as described h� Spahr ( 1 1){)2 , Q be bamms one cunvnd - Y obscumd by h"% V M CTI'�TOWIII and I %4 0 Z I'CC�, LIIL`l I ha% L: W Hen ,moss them(FiyLu-c,, I F) orld 1 77 1- Sitc N�27 (,,1 historic wall) is in tho sarile co i i J i i i on vis d es c i -i l�: d b , N, -.111d itt, (o 0,;ii. �%viv noted (Figure 18). Site IN52s' (A 11`0LIlI1QkI 1-)Nzi bhstcr� lm, llem Septainlxr Ill, 2024 Arcilacolagical Fit! Id Inspec Lion an,I 1 uItiural Consullalemi T-MK: (3) 1-2-019-0)1 Page 5 of 11) ilisLwhed by And clearing wh hies sirll;v a lint documemed in 1992. Small boulders from that push €Y 1%.L ,J,`,1.,11len Into blimc:E ;':Ii,' IIi, silk t is curet it' i+1)s1k Cured b% 1hIA Hsh 0[7%06lly It'k rit.l;!cs (Flure 19). No addict« n;il 1` 11;?4'tl:t7.';; -L1 si;,:, wm idencified %V 1111111 the 11?lfect area as a result of the fieldwork conducted by ASK h'n ,c%ti:t :vain€ rock constl`L1C hoc, and modern landscapl nlodlficauojiw were noted (see Figure 14). Tllti',. 11107C sfeatures, which inchikk: i'(wk ,i-,tiU,S. 1.101],: Lned paths i1 lquo 20), and rock cleared a ms on the yr(�:m 1 surface" arc' largo" tic>neo rn wd in to cc is-11-centril€ € orison of the suN ct parcel, in areas that 1.:71xar to be tiscd ivcunvndv ,arid rcc>:l ILIJ Nor vamping and tishillg a tonics, The lack of nwritign of di,:..t' :czil rrcs ill: 111C S11C,11 t €462i A I S !upon, as is01 ns ihu 1Ystqkin kyetn on diStlitrballce and dcbri „w,t74' ,.°.k'.I 1%iih there. titl" goats that ,111 oftile addir_ional rocl, c:onrioll" iciclrtiAS i4`itliin project area mwi: W Ki Juii1Y':! rho lost :I1 \l`;lrs. None of'these Mere ro4' 'iYll\ �:01111ILICtULI jcatums appear to Lie burial Innnlillla`°: C'nnsul alien 'R addru— tho als:k'a, o illy Courth or Ilu" ll l I}1;1Lllling Lk ' nmmk7i mix 11,11!: ih I}11 1i11 ay of de cemetel\ io the !.s1y'jba°. ,1.' ,:i and to deteilitiiw Ili: presence Jor olSol U, 1 of In : MI -K , w dd 1 the. Project area, 1'5 .Soiior L-11,C1,11Ii :1rr.11 A. C011CILICLw,_ Z" lwu1.1all }I'i ..:;il ,.' te'.!l long-time residents of t11.: area illclutlinp dnwo:'.;Ianw w 1,' Whir 0 I'.°eli"1110 01"alU ,110 I a;,1t711:1 ramiltes. Consultation OCCAmd i€LLrlll g a °p 1l1'.11 hone" { lv'.o7-., r 31.. ` 0 3, and Deceinbc— contacwd 11*. hc'ala till Il-ni'tim,ilu. �1:'< I L:, }i-olia 11,!.k WakLm:lmahll" and NK Ku u k'1 h,.nkslyi- [1opQr b� phone. I-011oi1Ing the M'.I;t1 I _ Ilti e.?1 ,. :,IL:II Iq LIW TMC C0I1101.0 t P"Ina, "OY P_'0%1JUd V.A 1 W11SUkt:lti0rl Ititttir dl111 I,)Ji— 1 , -earth Rw Pelson, "It, may have kIla" 40. is o F .1n I'",rr1:11s addilio l:'1; I;.';Illl'. I?'�°Ill::7:. .i., ':e lltiil Ill '.}'9's':.t:s'il \1w. € ,211 111O omalLi spoL2 %� IIIl Jt'-vl" CCkltI%US € H11CC KOcilY[}'om-,ilii .S:-mi 1 _:I. 1 '_:5':}III;I= OL:111},: D1111=: 1 I;rill;l Dillon. Jvi i\ Daiii1. Pn;lLC4!,;S 1\t'li'riw'oi11;1III .I: k,t'll"111t'1'0111,11LI" Llild I :t::t Ira I'""Ill'.,',}Il1:lILl. %Is. hell lili) 17111 llti 111dicated 11im her I mdi. S�lm ,1kr, ,4lSempi,'d 1i7 I';•;;vll oilt to I ;., ;lllkl 1',t111111 Otifliato and that Iltir flt}1L:r attellipl%tid 'i7 iv LLJ1 our IL1 Alillic and l.11''It'r1 a1S0 (,'Q1lt'.lC'LLd Il:l°tll -,,: rs of the 'tlhana 1 :1: iht7 ollwltl Ih,1; ISM v1,tltit7lnxi. NO. Kealoll l-("Clop:r til'.k she had heard that s:k:;:1t'It;1L I clsnL eel '., IIYk' Wkc}11.::;1nS 'k11, €%1";Ri0h.l-( t' 0pQr waits colil,it": d K kW and She Spoke a nh w oral of her rel, ui e,, including her Jllot€l r° nv '11 11,`L conslldwd rvinics }km:,x of any buili.11 -;irC5 Within dio pri7ji:ci arrc'a. Subsequent Cell,.Iil i�(j]"I ::•.!�i.�lY1:,tlYk: wills Mrs. K-,i1ob.i4lopler chrll' ni '.�:°. i Meeclllete!', did riot belong to the I�C:�llt}il.t 'Ohall;l i'.a k'.:' cr, her mother related char its tilt 1930s .111d .°;.11 , tllc K,1'„Inalla Church \vas Iclvr.la.l 1'li:lf thecanil kq, and that lieretlfld ,�trs KL',:='ti h.l-t 17;11'j4'I'`slyfr'411t v}r:lt':z1111°. ilYt'!:11.1111Y1.1 �:11";:'°°°;.�:1',:11:11 ailil:tiil. 1. ..1:1I,'d that tiler{ i5 i.Itit.,,41Y.1 t11111-h?ry to `C)1111ii}..' ;','I .•,;. ;1/!, .1s :l:t ;�' ;11_. ,. t.. ..li.";Ik K,1.Illlfl" Opki(hk,�ifm mid Recommendations :.,L111N of the curl°i nl swdy s sport the findings of tllr Shear (1992) AIS. Three of the four sites dOClL1llented 10 %'pear ( 1992) "Kin the sublect poscel were identified during tie field inspection 1ti1� Ii' .I: ;r1-llI +' I 'r'," {I-I!I-l„-I 7 algid St1-1fa- ?-I ?�i: see Fi4alre i 4�, Tllrs: itv are'ail i11 !k' 11..1! `°kar; prexlous€� described. and indicate thll the parcel was l sad Wine Me 1yl'a'tii lY„ltil t ' i.il1 s 1,wtl lE Period for ictlipolary habitation purposcs. 'aI'tl> ;1Sti(}Cl:lt4d 5torn---: :1.11d ilnllt,,'d ,-1 ici11:uwI ,1:7 i i1112. A11 three of Ihose Ates swere ohsei,'cd io ilti iii .,iinilai` Condition to %% 11,11 11;1s I1',.:,i's o1 k .hollby 11.eariig9_1€1L4`Courthshe (Shc40-H-Q- l(. ,1Yt1€atilcould nolb' lclllrlci" alYs: 1'- Ihkl-,: hi to h;1%" 114ti]L dL:',1.I'0%Cd 1)\ IL11ld C'IQ.Ir11L5! :1ti 111 ILios 11i:a IlaL L'tx iul l ed '°,° iLIIill the sllh.iL,til pzni" J sillcti' illy �'r,v:Ll t Is)')2t -11ti k`,as.lvcvlllet.l h`€[IPD. No pol,°lui;11 h1LrLa€ %%CI ' ldlti 11 Li fl L!d %%ir€lin the subject parck-; :!- ;' ivAnit of the cur.'ellt 114•Idk'.W. 110r WON MI) POSSibIC bll.'itll 1c,v;stll711w I4Ii11fICLti{l as a rewAtof de con niliatlon condl-sew i b], ALMA e I Ile dill.' feattlr,�s identified within Lllk pj-o€,:nL dim wcrc riot reported orl'b °' 1pvar( 1.992)appearto be lvtiw ti1,Yn -;(I �own cold and rrlawd to cm-golLl�CuLlipi``llu, and fishing, acttklies 1ll,�r 0.1€ occur within the proi,'vt :Ii't;:3 "I 1e hlidiMY! , lrl" 111ti current study, coilYt,rtned '.'. ilh the 52 S,q)tambcr 10, 2024 Archaeological F it! Id Inspec tion and Cu trural Consulim ion hir TNIK: (3) 1-2-0 19-001 Page 6 of 11) 51 111 D' P3101- I.L:., I,:%-, M, 111C i 'i i r,) I ) ,\ [S i 1.( )(; �(): 701 W. EN)(' N () 12Ls25 )_ SLIpport 111 H W) chop w, A : v do wnwx on or -No h And c I I.A R I 3-27-5-7cli I) It) i, 111,' PrOPOWd SLLL)L.'I% L" 1011 MId dli VC101)MLAI I 0t the Al hJeCl 1%%l 1-�L; shok! I'l % oLl ha111% 1 Off 01. COMMS. PIOW QV 1 &C 0 1 0011 i W 1 nL J HV , 1 i I t 1 Ioslip_ Senor A rch.-Loologist A I `I! I References Cited Bukc Whele 1848 M& L A 1 40t 1 V"1 10 M WC IWU? i WdsKU 10 OCM' f) e I)l I' Mt. VL f Lji a Vi I ]:I lo Mil. I 1i IlLokilti. C1:lftilt. J. J. jq5n ( 1h jW4nI V !ZOO I I It Q khVI fd"hQW U rH 1 0 Ki h 0 C I 10"A& P: Oil, I IML01 0 1 Ll. 1961 h 1,1; Uh 1i 1-6 fO A 11) fie.� 10 1 1-k e + I c W. PYL % -LIIC I �' 1) LL M I Sh cd. Elk, W. 1825 Journal c if 'J'r !Varrafive f �fa Tour q/'Haii -ah_ or (}Li -/? ' ree: %01h renwrks on dic I., i.k,:. j Fio., i, ri i, Gansvon I 2005 "U"k WL: L. iwllliLmi o na k;m-ik,,i'_ r % i ng i h,- i iyhis oF zil n c I ,-imncsIncQ-7.ra irk Ku leana R I L i 1 i i J L, i � id I �,u %� i I 'r :.}I i i i,: ill i ja �4 a i I. fi. 0 1 i V.,; "'? i 0 i lyk Ii. 'i I 1972 Mt:kv i... 0i 1:t ;,'-L-- Lore- MR!: 1. k I! t 13ti,illl.' \11.I,C�111 I QQHl M I W"qi ',111•.q1l1 P1 0,,, 11 OH01 h Offl CC Qf li'Ll I I LI ! I . ' fl:!! 1'> 201H Rip"Li DmAnn, i ki1)UkLIdiLakasL!.com kilinka. Pu ku i - M I:.. S. H. 1 1974 Ph IL i VL -':k ii;. lit:'', 1 1:! 11 k ". c i -, or�i I c, I ii i i I 'iv,, -,, Hollo k1lu, Shc nod. D. K J. M. S i n w r. 4 E. AN A A v n n M Kai 2021 Wo"A whqP 111 10 AAHC w 1ho"a 1 n. 111wimay a: kv InNom U.S. Geological Sul In LAW NMOONd Sol W, SWOMHAW ko m.0Hk4> %It A 141 1: kHMHA) and j-2-;(1_0(1l) I- - 11:11%­ 11oi.,q...- :1, z 1.4 %,. acccss,2d Fc14rLtI1-, S&I On= SWT(Ulli[ti:d 1)1%111 111 �:,Ll I I !�C%k",' 0,%',S,`FN [I I i0l) SC I 2022 WC!"., �,o; '-l. I I � -., . I.. I domnew. L-.itt; %1 obsoilLi,­% jircs.tvid -I. L� (IN. SpearL R. 1992 An hm sawn slju n t r An UK= Pnjmrq� Puna EMa Island oF TMK I- 11 4 - 1 4 a i w 1k H 11 C ( � H " 0 XY No i -, ; c L!,-,. Inc. I %% i i-e d foj- Bruce Rohi n son 53 Selrtainb r Ill, 2024 Archarnlagical Fit!td Inspection and Cultural Consullalion Ior T-MK: (3) 1-2-018-001 Page 7 of 11) Figures 1 AtVM ill llVl.ii I : f r alefr T �- .._. J_. _. yy,,a�'' ae FF,,� ... r' . l r , At� 71 i - rl.'(f�lr MCL�IIST�JSk� ` 'S�� ""_ ` ,� • � ti.S.V,1 ,rvy- T.' KAIMt),MMEIY � r �.:5if5 Fla -._ �-- -�..__9•'� PAyk 1J Hu 3,M, Prrmjcci Irss Figure k. USGS map showing location ofpMiect area" 54 Scptain1w 10, 2024 Archacola,P,jcai Fit!1d Inspection and Cutrural Consulialion 1br TN-M: (3) 1-2-018-001 Page 9 of I,) � . ................ .................... ... . ............. 3,; s - r� d I ..over { 4 p�yr, ea �o-+ ;�r} ' Fl erw krp. it L k 55 Selrtain1w Ill, 2024 Anilacoiagacal Fit!Id Inspection and Cullural Consultation for TN— M: (3) 1-2-018-001 Page 9 of l,) T ;.'..ta 111 56 ti!'14`rGtl�cr 111, 2024 f rtli,e.<•I 1,;1' I hl.-4wltinnand CultmalConsuliationIbrTMK=(3) 1-2-018-001 Rum 4. C oasilinc fronting the cum:lit project arti a_ view to the SomhWest. Figure �. Historic cenicten- located to the northcast of tlic current project area, manka of the Kalapalia-Kapoho Road_ N-icv%, to the northwast_ 57 Selrtaint r Ill, 2024 Archacoiagacal Fit!Id Inspection and Cutrural Consultation 1br TN- M: (3) 1-2-018-001 Page I I of 11) (�139 1.�(1R i-+, 1)1111 I'v 1111 It, I L:111 0115 AD. I`J.`•rl.111' 11ILIJi1 E;slk. 11 Qrs4el um---*1) v4 1'„::.I 1 iw4j k Q Elmi"l;Ire,( Q)r4)' _Nw-jiw N^r I'MILI 11;;Ni11 •1,. i>!. i�: ri,4. ...I .nl �.. wi 1 x�.- - = t;.q',. I°.^xaix i:'am.vi 1 N t,rrl,.r,rAiw.Irr.,"11V& Howe 6, Colou ajttderlyjitjbr 11% pr% jcel ar,«a and surroundin icil�ily. Figure 7, Soil composhion in the prqjcct area acid suiTounding �-jejnity 58 Selrtainb r Ill, 2024 Arritacological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation l'or T M: (3) 1-2-018-001 Page 13 of 11) Fiimurc 4. Cir,idcd wva alonv-r nonlwastcm boundary of prajcci ztrra_ view to the N%�sr_ Figure 9. load extending. to the coast of the prgjcct area, %,iew to the northwest_ 59 . 1iy �y a10 � a ♦ a i 1� a' y vl ` - .M .. I t r - }�� `� �� �• - � `� �` a � �_ .+ � .t ' sue' Scptain1w 10, 2024 ArellacolcqOcal Fit!ld Inspection mid Cutrural Consultation lbr T-MK: (3) 1-2-018.001 Page 14 of 11) I l L. ! 4 %- A - , A , L ^ k-r rn ca e: ui hi I A U IE W ^4 K ^ I M U �w F I -, ii tv 12 Po ri i o 11 o I' I t -L: % ��,m R�-;!!I<1�:[-�:kl \IL".' ""o 11,1-S h.k 11). 1�,M I o Cal L o 11 o I 11C C U M,: 11 L p C0.1 c Ct -LI,L? il. a DO, 2(02q A2lilo,14121CLJI FivId Inspection and Culturil Cmmikarroil ilir-TNIK: (3) 1-2-019-001 hq;c e of N 62 FIiqirri4- ('rctErirry, x I r IY s iic Il 52? a 4 _ 0.1 _$ V'+.M• gym. J" �. Nile IS524, x 46 a r P �MiHfTY �.Ml pin; �1 $ a A l —w 4 a .;. t sa m Is NeT�' , ,r , r� EXHIBIT A-21 AJR_2024 COUNTY OF HAWAI`I PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT KAIMU COVE LLC SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION (PL-SMA-2024-000063) KAIMU COVE LLC Application for a Special Management Area Use Permit to create a 5-lot subdivision for future residential development and related improvements all within a 3.677-acre parcel in the Special Management Area. The subject property is located on the makai side of Kalapana-Kapoho Road, approximately 2,450 feet from its intersection with Pahoa-Kalapana Road, Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1. Request: The proposed development is for a 5-lot subdivision on a 3.677-acre shoreline parcel within the Special Management Area (SMA). Each lot is intended for the construction of a single-family dwelling, along with related facilities such as driveways, wastewater systems, and utility installations. The development aims to provide housing opportunities in an area zoned for residential -agricultural use. • Lot size: The proposed development involves subdividing a 3.677-acre property into five lots, with each lot having a minimum size of half an acre (each lot will cover at least 21,780 square feet), with four of the lots fronting the shoreline and accommodating the required 40-foot shoreline setback. • Building height: Each dwelling will not exceed 35 feet in height and will adhere to yard setback requirements (25 feet front and rear, 15 feet side). • Utilities: Water will be supplied via lateral connections from the existing water main. Wastewater will be handled by individual septic systems approved by the State Department of Health. Other utilities, including electrical, cable, and telephone services, will be available to each lot. • Additional improvements: The project includes grubbing, grading, access driveways, pedestrian shoreline access pathway, water meter installations, and electrical poles. -1- EXHIBIT "A-21" The subdivision will not adversely affect the environment or surrounding lands, and it will comply with Hawaii regulations related to wastewater treatment, erosion control, and sedimentation to minimize impacts to the shoreline. Additionally, public pedestrian shoreline access will be provided, ensuring community access to coastal resources. The overall intent is to maintain the rural character of the area while adhering to land use policies (Planning Department Exhibit 1 — SMA Use Permit Application dated July 5, 2024). 2. Project Objectives: The primary objective of the proposed project is to subdivide a 3.677-acre property into five residential lots. This will provide housing opportunities within an area designated for residential -agricultural use, consistent with zoning established in the 1960s. The project aims to create a low -density subdivision, maintaining the rural character of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads while offering individual home sites. Each lot will support the construction of a single-family dwelling and related improvements. 3. Cost/Time of Project: The total estimated cost for the proposed project is $147,000. 4. Landowner: Mark Wyatt BACKGROUND INFORMATION 5. Special Management Area (SMA): A Notice of Violation and Order (ZCV-2022-015) was issued to the landowner in 2022 for the unauthorized clearing of land, removal of trees, grubbing and grading. However, the vegetation has regrown, and the applicant is pursuing the SMA as a part of the resolutions to this enforcement. 6. Chapter 343, HRS: The proposed project was evaluated with respect to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Ch. 343-5, and staff notes that no triggers were identified. The Applicant has stated that no work will occur within the shoreline setback area and has stated that no heavy machinery will be permitted within the 40-ft. setback area. STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 7. State Land Use Designation: Urban 8. General Plan LUPAG MAP: Extensive Agriculture (ea) 9. County Zoning: Residential — Agriculture 0.5-acres, (RA-.5a) -2- 10. Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP): The original Puna Community Development Plan was adopted by the Hawaii County Council on September 10, 2008, through Ordinance No. 08-116. The amended Puna Community Development Plan was adopted by the Hawaii County Council by Ordinance No. 10-104 on November 4, 2010. 11. Special Management Area (SMA): The project is located within the Special Management Area and therefore, the proposed development is subject to SMA review. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 12. Subject Property: The project area is bordered to the makai side by the shoreline and to the mauka side by Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. The elevation ranges from 10 to 25 feet above mean sea level, with a 40-foot shoreline setback established to protect coastal resources. This area is characterized by its recent volcanic activity from the lower flanks of Kilauea Volcano, leading to a landscape comprised of multiple lava flows, including `a`a and pahoehoe formations. The landscape of the site currently exhibits some signs of previous ground disturbance, primarily due to previous clearing and grubbing activities. 13. Surrounding Land Zoning/Uses: The parcels surrounding the proposed project are primarily zoned for Residential and Agricultural (RA) uses, with a minimum lot size of half an acre. Specifically: To the east and makai (towards the ocean) of Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, the land is State-owned and zoned for Open (0) uses. Mauka (towards the mountains) along Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, the lands are zoned Agricultural (A- 3a). These zoning designations support low -density residential and agricultural use in this rural area. The Kaimu Cove project parcel is situated in a region predominantly zoned as Residential and Agricultural (RA-.5a) with a minimum lot size of 1/2 acre. The area has been designated for residential and agricultural uses since the late 1960s. Surrounding lands include: • State Lands: To the east and makai of the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, which are zoned for Open (0) uses. • Agricultural Land: Lands further mauka (inland) along Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road are designated for agricultural uses, consistent with the historical agriculture that characterized this coastal community. • Residential Areas: The project site lies at the eastern edge of the Kaimu- -3- Makena Homesteads, which consists of various residential lots with sizes ranging from 5,300 square feet to over 3 acres. 14. Soil Type: The soil on the project parcel is classified as Hamalcua highly organic hydrous loam. These soils are shallow, moderately well -drained, and formed in basic volcanic ash over pahoehoe lava. They are typically found on low elevation, windward slopes of Mauna Loa and Kilauea volcanoes, with slopes ranging from 2 to 10 percent. This soil is characterized by its poor agricultural productivity rating (Class E). 15. Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification System: The project site is listed as "Unclassified". 16. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM): Most of the subject property is within Flood Zone X, outside the 500-year flood plain, with coastal areas makai of the shoreline within flood zone VE. Staff notes the property is not located within the wave inundation zone according to the State Sea level rise viewer (SLR-Xa). 17. Flora/Fauna Resources: The project area has been assessed for its ecological characteristics, revealing a presence of various floral species such as Monkeypod trees (Samanea saman), Hala (Pandanus tectorius), Milo (Thespesia copulnea), Coconut palms (Cocos nucifera), Naupaka (Scaevola sp.), `ohi`a lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha). Ground cover includes various grasses, morning glory (Ipomoea indica), Boston fern (Nephrolepis exaltata), and non-native species like gunpowder trees (Trema orientalis) and guava (Psidium guajava). No specific endangered fauna are found within the parcel itself. However, due to the proximity to coastal environments, there is potential for transient or endangered species to inhabit or visit the area, including: The Hawaiian Hoary Bat, Hawaiian (koloa) Duck, Hawaiian (Nene) Goose, and other bird species such as the Hawaiian Petrel and Hawaiian Stilt. 18. Archaeological Resources: There are four archaeological sites identified on the project property from a 1992 survey, including two C-shaped structures, an agricultural feature, a post -contact boundary wall, and a modified lava bubble used for storage or planting. However, these sites are considered "no longer significant" as sufficient data has been collected. Further archaeological work is not required, but if any discoveries are made during construction, work will halt, and authorities will be notified. Additionally, no 0 significant cultural or historical resources have been identified, and local consultations did not reveal any burial sites or traditional practices. (SHPD response) 19. Cultural/Historic Resources: The proposed project is not expected to have any significant adverse impacts on Native Hawaiian rights or cultural practices. There is no evidence of traditional or customary Native Hawaiian rights being exercised on the subject property, however, the shoreline area makai of the project site is heavily utilized for fishing and gathering. The applicant will be constructing a permanent shoreline access pathway from the road to the shoreline to allow for continued use. Furthermore, archaeological surveys and consultations with residents did not identify any burial sites or other valued cultural resources. The project complies with the State Supreme Court's PASH and Ka Pa`akai O Ka `Ama rulings, and no adverse impacts on gathering or fishing rights are anticipated. 20. Scenic and Open Space Resources: The project site is not identified as an area of natural beauty by the General Plan, and there are no notable scenic resources specifically mentioned for the subject property. However, the property is largely vegetated with restricted coastal viewplanes from Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. State-owned lands to the north, located on a 1750 a`a lava flow, provide greater coastal viewplane opportunities than the project site itself. Staff notes that the applicant conducted land management activities without prior approval, which included impacts to the neighboring State Conservation District parcel to the north. According to the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands the grubbing has ceased and most of the vegetation has re-established itself, and they note that the applicant will remove all remaining deteriorated vegetation and dispose of the green waste in an appropriate manner. 21. Public Access: The proposed development includes a 5-foot-wide public pedestrian access easement to the shoreline. This pathway will be cinder -surfaced and run along the northern boundary of the property, adjacent to state-owned lands. The access is designed to ensure continued public access between Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and the shoreline, providing safe and convenient entry to coastal resources. -5- PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 22. Access: The property is accessed via a private driveway entrance from Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road (State Route 137), a State owned and maintained roadway. 23. Water: According to the Department of Water supply (DWS) there is one (1) existing 5/8-inch meter serving the subject parcel. Water can be made available to each of the new lots from an existing 8-inch waterline along Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road with an appropriate water commitment deposit and the construction of necessary water system improvements, and facilities charge. 24. Wastewater: Each single-family dwelling to be located within the new development will include a DOH approved individual wastewater treatment system. 25. Other Essential Utilities and Services: All other utilities, including electrical, telephone, and cable services are available to the site. AGENCIES' COMMENTS 26. State Department of Health: (Planning Department Exhibit 2 — July 30, 2024, Memo). 27. Department of Public Works (DPW) - Engineering: (Planning Department Exhibit 3 — September 9, 2024, Memo). 28. Department of Land and Natural Resources —SHPD: (Planning Department Exhibit 4 — September 6, 2024, Letter). 29. Department of Land and Natural Resources — OCCL: (Planning Department Exhibit 5- August 20, 2024, Letter). 30. Department of Water Supply (DWS): (Planning Department Exhibit 6 — August 28, 2024, Memo). 31. Department of Land and Natural Resources — Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM): (Planning Department Exhibit 7 — August 5, 2024, Memo). AGENCIES - NO COMMENT 32. County of Hawaii Police Department; Department of Land and Natural Resources, Land Division, Engineering Division. M AGENCIES - NO RESPONSE 33. Hawaii Fire Department; DPW -Building; Department of Environmental Management (DEM); Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD). PUBLIC COMMENTS 34. The Department has not received any comments or objections from the public or adjacent landowners on the subject application. APPLICANTS RESPONSE 35. The Applicant provided the following response to agencies comments (Planning Department Exhibit 8 — September 16, 2024, Letter). -7- Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Comuttant J Li j v 5, 2024 G I I'l I, I I TI 111" 11 1-.rl w III I I I "o. HI 96720 I ):,Ii I ii I cctor Kern: Sill-il"k-I: SN 1.: I A pli I I k -;!t , %'11 11 it(ah AF`J)i!WLllj, K;mnu Cove 1.1.(' T L acrc i szcd lots 0,11101A 0I rnjjj'jj)Lj1j] 112- arld its I-Cl -LI1 cd -; 1, 11 Irk 1% L: I ncn�,, I I iC- I ti d I I l,- evL'FRLELLI COONIFUCtion Of T% I K I ICI I . K i I I I I I L 1 1 11; 1 11 Or .11 4I t';: k I Acco ni I),, L I i y i n!2 I h -,, I c r I o r, 'XL' J�T-e.� 0 n I fOF VO 0 1- C on.,,' i Cie r.. I I ,II ; 111 I'Oc(l S � i n cc, hc fore I h e d Pim,117.1.---, (­IIIMHI-- iorl 111�: 1tiL:J 3L'{Ili I h,, III (m .. 1-1,(' 1,01 a A14--L1 I"L: P:111i11 lo ;,,Utm lol-,l �-Io1. IIl1i,bI.,,1oII C, '[,-[I --I L I I' I lVL+-, at 1/2 Il P1.II',%LI;IIII Io ITtILMVI1I5"1i1 It' 11C 1110d ', l,L 1.1"t- [PJCSys!10111. P]0,1�C Fill,] ,I. ( HL._I;1,-d 01, Ilk' ',% 'fill -�e PC[ I!,IK X.)11ILL:J'Wil 1'411 1: 1 ;-,fId L'l I 'k I I't ` I L 11%: 111 , L I IL:151171 I[ILL a loculion III,!11 UAl ',IIC rdLLII: C. I I %I 111 It, '1kirroll m 1, 11 s- prk IA IIL'C� 'A I 111'. 11 1 "N 0r 1hk Salbject property. Should you have questions on this inatter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Daryn Ai-ai copy via email: Mark Wyatt, Kaimu Cove LLC RO, RM 4-'O1l H] 1.0 HAWAII 11-IONF: FMAII.- r Pla n n i nig Dept. .Exhibit 1 — SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION Applicant: KAIMU COVE LLC Request: Proposed 5-lot subdivision and related subdivision improvements including eventual construction of 5 single-family dwellings Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018:001 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna District Hawaii Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant July 2024 SPECIAL NMNAGFMFN1'.--kREA UcsC P11-ANill"APPLICATION ( * 'OUNTY OF I 1AWA N PLA N N I N C'. CONI N1 I-Y-,] ON . VI P , - C 0 1' 1 -- I , .. r I I I I I � I.-j I I t 1, 11 ., C +.: L ( L I : : .: t 4 , k I III 1,,-1 111"!! Lkl!', ti.aFt'i Ct, .�1i�;'T-� ,,lt i�lr�i 1 t ft�� . 1-�� ..��,.M� - -onp. llw� 4X,66 I it I to U. I I zoval 1 907 7�;- 0"), 10 I , IST kPPL I C A N7'S INTERE ST (if n , l-, - -. -,v I k,-.r)- D:,11, I' I' - JL1[Y 5- 2024 PHONE: (Bus.) V-, vrujPo,.L7d 5-10 ic,,'ciciltialmid a 11 1m 11-A -bd'vi-Joll ()I- jklj., 111ITlil kw; A1111- w . I.th (hc i-oll"'truction (11, j nip ro vt--mA-nv, ;1nd 61c TAN N I A P K I R A-.5a i- k I - ij k I LU L, 6 L. (177 acres M a rk W v,,i a i i k i A i i n 1; enbrim I Edward Uryro H`i, 'WOPL.1% I.AND(AVNLRts)wR11 I'ENAL III' 111i/ `-H;. ,_, :- : ., . : the L-laIC1114:11, Ir'JU&J.) Isar 1.js;) Ann Benharn & 1 llgr, 0, alltaChCd k GIEN"T, Daryn Ann A6ENT x H, 10, Hawal 9(-)-'' (Email) J"Je,jKe. jRdWatC tL I %A 1111 1 q "t L � In da no an d c op ift A ou Id 6c sent. ()RIGE MAL Apphc;-ilit COPIES- Agent 3.677 acres DATE: I . .r 1 I, i=dwan:l S lltyru. a s sharcholdcr is Kaimu C'c7 c LLC, agrec to have Mark Wyatt serve as Proxy I'Or aTId .ILIIh }rireti rcpreI;VTITti%'C i0r ds cumcnt sinhnnisdons to the State of Hawaii and CounIN L11-I lawal-i relate.Ll to the 4AIA aipphcatiunrs fi5r I MK (3) 1-2-0181001 and the subdivision thereof irIEO 7 parcels. hi this ruprd he c= sign on IxhalI of mt as a shareholder in Kaimu C oN. . L I .C. �x�r�d / a 5 i y�51 N;d� June 20,2022 1, Lisa Aran Benham albw Mark Wyatt to act as proxy and sign on my behalf. Mark Wyatt is mar authorised representative to s;gn documents for Building and Planning Depaiiment C OCUmen'. , r � Lisa Ann Benham UST OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS TAX MAP KEY OwnerN.imp Ow n e. rAd d re ss 2 OWII�Ccitvstzip 2 a iw. 11 U, 11: S . A Oi Hi'..'-,VNI h it ip -oil s 140 n mum 204 Hilo n T'S 12U6033C'000 I L Oi HAV."All i�i J :JNI S f I ? --- I- i, 1i 00 M 204 HL") HI 96120 1)060340000 nWf OF HAWAH i5 ALVNI STRFT. ROOM 704 IH V n 10 96770 J000360003 SIAH OF HAWAII 75 jWPONI STR; rj Rom )a4 1 W 0 HI 96720 yyyyyyy j N; vayv 7RT TR P;V 10A H I Q6778 &VA) 0 9 f) pc1.'i V..'... 1? I P I)A I no ? ?s 12OIKU333000: MC RGANN. k KYL AN N M002 AN VnY U & 0 HE =L ANP., PAP OA wd 9U 1 M � _f) 6_-i , m n 0 10 4 n A 0 0 P n I , VI I C I 111.1 . , �- `) t., .AN PAI &A ) I yb 114 11??11 BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION Applicant: KAIMU COVE LLC Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018:001 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna District Hawaii Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant July 2024 Table of Contents A. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USE / DEVELOPMENT..............................................................................1 1. Applicant's Request..............................................................................................................................1 2. Location of Property.............................................................................................................................1 3. Statement of Objectives and reasons for the request......................................................................... 3 4. Proposed Project Details...................................................................................................................... 3 S. Timeframe and cost..............................................................................................................................6 B. HISTORICAL PROPERTY INFORMATION........................................................................................7 6. October 10, 2022: Notice of Violation(PL-PCV-2022-00015).............................................................. 7 7. December 15, 2022: Time Extension to Comply with Order...............................................................8 8. August 4, 2023: Commencement of Daily Fines................................................................................10 9. August 9, 2023: Applicant's Response to Daily Fines Letter..............................................................10 C. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS............................................................10 10. State Land Use Designation...............................................................................................................10 11. Current County Zoning: ...................................................................................................................... 10 12. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: ....................................................... 12 13. Puna Community Development Plan..................................................................................................13 14. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A................................................................................16 15. Special Management Area (SMA).......................................................................................................16 16. Certified Shoreline Survey..................................................................................................................16 D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA............................................................17 17. Subject Property.................................................................................................................................17 18. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses...........................................................................................................17 19. ALISH................................................................................................................................................... 20 20. Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification System..................................................................20 21. US Soil Survey.....................................................................................................................................20 22. FIRM....................................................................................................................................................20 23. Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report(2017)...............................................................21 24. Flora/Fauna Resources....................................................................................................................... 21 25. Archaeological Resources...................................................................................................................22 26. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights....................................................................................................25 27. Public Access.......................................................................................................................................26 E. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES................................................................................................26 28. Access: ................................................................................................................................................ 26 29. Water..................................................................................................................................................26 30. Wastewater........................................................................................................................................ 26 32. Essential Utilities and Services............................................................................................................26 F. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SMA USE PERMIT REQUEST...........................................................27 33. Anticipated effects upon the Special Management Area...................................................................30 G. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF CHAPTER 205A AND SMA GUIDELINES.........................................32 H. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................................... 36 COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERM ITAPPLICATION FOR MARK WYATT Affecting Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018: 001; Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna A. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USE / DEVELOPMENT 1. Applicant's Request Mark Wyatt, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant", is requesting a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit to allow for the development of a 5-lot subdivision consisting of parcels at least one-half (1/2) acre in size, on the subject property consisting of approximately 3.677 acres of land situated along the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road within the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, District of Puna. The proposed development also includes the construction of a proposed single-family dwelling and related improvements on each of the proposed lots as determined by the individual lot owners. 2. Location of Property The subject property is located at along the makai side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road (State Route 137), approximately 2,450 feet to the northeast from its intersection with the Pahoa-Kalapana Road (State Highway 130), and identified as TMK: 1-2-018: 001 (refer to Figure 1- Location Map and Figure 2 - Tax Map below). �pSpOPO 4 Cp.P I I P a g e Figure 1 - Location Map SUBJECT PROPERTY Figure 2-Tax Map 2|Pa0e 3. Statement of Objectives and reasons for the request The Applicant wishes to subdivide the subject property into five (5) individual parcels, each consisting of a land area of least one-half (1/2) acre. The Applicant will retain two (2) of the proposed lots to construct single-family dwellings, one on each parcel. The remaining three (3) lots will be sold to individuals, with each lot accommodating a proposed single-family dwelling and related facilities, such as driveway and wastewater systems, utilities, and possibly accessory structures such as storage sheds, carports, and other improvements typical of a single-family residential homesite. In total, the proposed 5-lot subdivision will result in the construction of five (5) single-family dwellings and related improvements within the 3.677-acre property. The reason for the request is to provide housing opportunities within an area designated for residential -agricultural uses (RA zoning) since the late 1960s with the adoption of the Zone District Maps as part of the Zoning Code. The subject property is part of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, that maintains a similar RA zoning as the subject property, with lots ranging in size from as small as 5,300 square feet to 3 acres. 4. Proposed Protect Details (see Figure 3 — Proposed Subdivision Plan) a. Proposed Subdivision: Subdivision of 3.677-acre property into five (5) lots, each of which will maintain a minimum lot size of at least one-half (1/2) acre. The four (4) shoreline fronting properties will accommodate the required 40-foot shoreline setback. b. Access: Each lot within the proposed subdivision will have direct frontage with a proposed private cul-de-sac roadway, which then connects with the Kalapana- Kapoho Beach Road. c. Public Access: a 10-foot wide, cinder -surfaced public pedestrian access easement will be provided along the entire northern boundary of the subject property, adjacent to the existing adjoining State lands. d. Water: County water is available to support the proposed 5-lot subdivision. The subject property is currently serviced by one (1) existing water meter. The water main along the mauka side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road will need to be tapped by lateral services and extended to the subject property. 3 1 P a g e Figure 3 - Proposed Subdivision Plan 4 1 P a g e e. Wastewater: Each proposed single-family dwelling will be serviced by an individual septic system designed to meet State Department of Health standards. f. Site Improvements: The Applicant and subsequent owners of the individual lots will be grubbing and grading each subdivided lot to accommodate a proposed single- family dwelling. Each proposed single-family dwelling will be constructed in accordance with applicable minimum yard setbacks of 25 feet for the front and rear yards and 15 feet for the side yards. Each single-family dwelling will not exceed 35 feet in building height. Along with the construction of each single-family dwelling will be the installation of associated utility improvements, such as access driveways (paved, grassed or gravel), water meter and waterline installations, electrical utility poles, and septic systems. No use, land alteration or vertical construction will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback area as established by a shoreline survey of the subject property certified by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on March 29, 2023. g. Remedial Actions: As further discussed in Section B of this report, past un-permitted actions by the previous landowner and the Applicant resulted in the clearing and laying of surface fill material within the northeastern section of the subject property that intruded within a portion of the 40-foot shoreline setback area as well as upon a portion of the adjoining State-owned lands as shown on Figure 4-Past Grading/ Grubbing Activities. The intrusion within the adjoining State-owned lands consisted primarily pushed vegetation that has since partially deteriorated with most of the vegetation reestablishing itself. The Applicant will remove all pushed vegetation that has not deteriorated for proper disposal at a greenwaste facility. Black cinder was placed within the 40-foot shoreline setback area to create a safer walking path along the shoreline trail. The Applicant will remove the black cinder from within the shoreline setback area and restore it to its previous condition to the extent practical. In both instances, the Applicant will coordinate both site restoration activities with the Planning Department, and if deemed necessary, the State Department of Land and Natural Resources. These restoration efforts will be completed, to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision 5 1 P a g e Approval. As these remedial actions are to remove any unpermitted physical material from within the shoreline setback area or upon state-owned lands and restore it to its previous, natural -like condition, that Applicant is thereby removing any intended "use" of these areas as either a stockpile for grubbed material on State-owned lands or as an improved walking path within the 40-foot shoreline area. Therefore, pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statute Section 343-5(8), no "use" is proposed and no environmental assessment is required in order to proceed with the processing of this application. S. Timeframe and cost Upon issuance of an SMA Use Permit, the Applicant will promptly file a subdivision application with approval anticipated within five (5) years from the effective date of the permit. Associated known costs and estimates associated with the proposed subdivision action is anticipated to be as follows: • Surveyor contract for subdivision and certified shoreline survey - $25,000 • Rock wall and gate at entrance - $15,000 • Construction of private cul-de-sac roadway - $50,000 • Water meters (4 additional) - $25,000 • Land clearing operator fees estimated at 300hrs - $15,000 • Approximately 10 loads of cinder to fill voids between rock - $7,000 • Removal of unwanted trees - $10,000 Each owner of individual lots within the proposed subdivision will determine the type of home to be constructed, along with its supporting facilities. Timing of the construction of each home will also be determined by the individual lot owners. Therefore, unknown costs at this time, as it would be premature to request quotes or develop subdivision construction drawings at this early stage in the overall review process, would include the following items: • Cost of wastewater (septic) improvements for each proposed home, sizing dependent on type of home constructed and site conditions. • Drainage report not prepared as it will be associated with subdivision construction drawings prepared as part of the subdivision process. • Cost of utilities, aside from water, will be determined during the subdivision process when utility engineering plans are developed. • Legal fees for deeds and recordation are undetermined at this time, as it will occur after issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. 6 1 P a g e B. HISTORICAL PROPERTY INFORMATION 6. 1992: Prior landowner activities Based on information provided by previous landowner, Applicant understands that prior landowner intended to construct their home on the subject property, and commenced with the clearing and grading of the property to the extent as shown on Figure 4-Past Grading/ Grubbing Activities. Over the intervening decades, the previously grubbed and graded areas were allowed to overgrow, with the exception of one clearing effort sometime around 2017. Aside from this one known clearing event, the cleared areas were allowed overgrow once again until the purchase of the property by the Applicant. 7. May 28, 2022: Transfer of ownership Applicant purchases subject property. 8. June 1, 2022: SMA Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2022-000080) Applicant files SMA Use Permit Assessment application to grub entire subject property to allow for the construction of seven (7) dwellings. Application subsequently returned by Planning on July 31, 2022 for additional information. 9. June 2. 2022: Application for eradine permit (PW.ENG2022-00139) Application file grading permit application with Department of Public Works (DPW) for clearing and grading of northern -most access driveway to proposed housepad location as shown on Figure 4-Past Grading/Grubbing Activities. Permit application subsequently rejected by DPW as not required due to total affected area less than one (1) acre of land. 10. Late July 2022 till mid -August (approximately 2 weeks) Applicant commences with grubbing of existing vegetation only within the northern- most driveway access and proposed housepad location as extensive vegetation had regrown. The Applicant mistakenly understood in discussions with both Planning and DPW that grubbing activities could commence. The grubbing activities inadvertently extended into the adjoining State-owned lands by about 20 feet at the most. The Applicant also laid down 3 truck loads (approximately 36 cubic yards) of black cinder within the eastern most portion of the subject property in proximity to the proposed housepad to fill the voids on the ground and to not significantly alter the existing grade 7 1 P a g e as it existed prior to the purchase of the property by the Applicant. Unfortunately, the black cinder was laid down in a portion of the 40-foot shoreline setback area, as shown on Figure 4-Past Grading/Grubbing Activities to create a more walkable path along the shoreline area where people have previously navigated. 11. September 1, 2022: Subdivision Application (PL-SUB-2022-000094) Applicant files application for proposed 7-lot subdivision of subject property. Application subsequently returned for more information, including securing a certified shoreline survey of property and SMA Use Permit for the proposed development. 12. September 29, 2022: Cessation of grubbing and grading work Applicant is verbally informed by Planning Department to cease and desist from any grading and grubbing activities within the subject property until such time proper SMA- related approval is issued by the Planning Department. Applicant promptly stops all activities upon the subject property. 13. October 7. 2022: SMA Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2022-000119) Applicant files SMA Use Permit Assessment application to allow for grubbing of subject property so that a topographical assessment can be made for the proposed subdivision of the property. Application subsequently returned by Planning on October 26, 2022 for additional information. 14. October 10, 2022: Notice of Violation (PL-PCV-2022-00015) Planning Department formally notifies Applicant to cease and desist from all grubbing and grading activities within the subject property until an SMA Use Permit is issued. 15. October 19, 2022: SMA Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2022-000126) Applicant files SMA Use Permit Assessment application to for after -the -fact grading and grubbing that had previously occurred on the subject property and subject to Notice of Violation dated October 10, 2022. Application subsequently returned by Planning on October 26, 2022 for additional information. 16. December 15, 2022: Time Extension to Comply with Order At the request of the Applicant, the Planning Department issues a 6-month time extension with a new deadline of June 15, 2023 by which to comply with corrective actions described in the Department's October 10, 2022 NOV and Order. 8 1 P a g e LJ OC w 'M J 77rLr, Ll LL PE L w EL L-4 1.4 E� C) I 17 L3 t rS Cl p C4 13 Figure 4-Past Grading/Grubbing Activities 9 1 P a g e 17. August 4, 2023: Commencement of Daily Fines Planning Department informs Applicant that due to failure to comply with corrective actions by the June 15, 2023 deadline, daily fines commenced as of October 11, 2022. 18. August 9, 2023: Applicant's Response to Daily Fines Letter The Applicant, through its consultant, responds to the Daily Fines Letter with a demonstration of its on -going efforts to comply with all corrective actions as specified within the Department's October 10, 2022 Order 19. December 26, 2023: Applicant secures additional time Applicant secures additional time until June 26, 2024 by which to comply with corrective actions. C. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 20. State Land Use Designation: Urban. The subject property is situated within an area designated for Urban uses by the State Land Use Commission, as shown on Figure 5 — State Land Use 21. Current County Zoning: Residential and Agricultural-0.5 acre minimum lot size (RA-.5a) The Residential and Agricultural (RA) zoning district provides for activities or uses characterized by low density residential lots in rural areas where "city -like" concentrations of people, structures, streets, and urban level of services are absent, and where small farms are intermixed with low density residential lots. The RA district is intended to be only within areas designated as being in the State land use rural or urban districts. (see Figure 6 - Current Area Zoning) 101 Page dKAWM AGRICULUTURAL CONSERVATION URBAN SUBJECT PROPERTY Figure 5 —State Land Use A-3a A-3a RA-.5a RA-.Sa SUBJECT PROPERTY � ' Figure 6 — Current Area Zoning 111 Page 22. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: The County of Hawaii General Plan is the policy document for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawaii. The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map classifies the subject property and area directly inland (mauka) for Extensive Agricultural uses, which are lands not classified as Important Agricultural Land. Such lands are not capable of producing sustained, high agricultural yields without the intensive application of modern farming methods and technologies due to certain physical constraints such as soil composition, slope, machine tillability and climate. Other less intensive agricultural uses such as grazing and pasture may be included in the Extensive Agriculture category. Portion of the subject property along the shoreline prior to the certified shoreline is designated Open (see Figure 7- General Plan LUPAG Map) INTENSIVE EXTENSIVE AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTURAL LOW DENSITY URBAN SUBJECT PROPERTY Figure 7 — General Plan LUPAG Map 121 Page 23. Puna Community Development Plan: The Puna CDP (PCDP) was developed and adopted by the Hawaii County Council on August 27, 2008. It became effective on September 10, 2008 as Ordinance No. 08 116. The PCDP does not define any specific land use pattern for the area in proximity to the subject property. However, the PCDP established three (3) major themes that guided the development of the plan: • Malama I Ka Aina which "establishes how the contextual natural, historic and cultural features of Puna should be preserved." (emphasis added) • Growth Management which "addresses how the future pattern of human settlement and land use should be shaped to respect that context and support the desired quality of life for Puna's residents." (emphasis added) • Transportation which "focuses on sustainable approaches to transportation to support the goals of the two above themes." Relative to the Malama / KaAina theme, four (4) major elements were identified and assigned goals, objectives, and actions. These elements and their relationship to the proposed action follow: 1. Historic. Cultural. and Scenic Resources An archaeological inventory survey of the subject property did identify four (4) sites as significant for the information they contain, but because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. Nonetheless, should there be inadvertent discoveries during the construction of this project, work will stop and contacts with the County Planning Department and State Historic Preservation Division will be made. Furthermore, the project site is not known as hosting any cultural or scenic resources. 2. Native Forests and Geological Features An assessment of floral and faunal resources and its geology indicates that the goals and objectives of this element would not be applicable to the 131 Page proposed project. The subject property is not part of any established native forest area, neither does it have any significant or unique geological features. 3. Aquifers, Coastal Waters and Stormwaters The subject property is not proximate to potable wells in this area. Notwithstanding that factor, the proposed subdivision will utilize septic systems meeting with the approval of the State Department of Health. The subject property is also not subject to storm waters or coastal flooding nor the effects of sea level rise. Given the above, the goals and objectives of this element would be fulfilled. 4. Shoreline Area The Applicant has secured a certified shoreline survey of the subject property, and has conformed its proposed subdivision to the location of the certified shoreline, as well as providing a public pedestrian shoreline access to allow public access to coastal resources. The other theme is Managing Growth. For this, six (6) elements were identified. These elements and their relationship to the project follow. 1. Land Use Pattern Evaluating this request against the articulated goals and objectives of the Managing Growth theme, the request would be consistent with the following Goals of the PCDP: • Puna retains a rural character while it protects its native natural and cultural resources. • Reduces the exposure to high risk from natural hazard situations. 2. Agriculture and Economic Development The PCDP identifies the following: Goals • Increase opportunities for diversified agriculture • Preserve lands for agricultural use • Increase local market share of Puna agricultural products 141 Page Objectives • Discourage urban growth and further subdivision on lands that have been identified as having agricultural value. While the General Plan does identify the subject property for extensive agricultural activities, its small size and location between a public road and the ocean precludes its use for extensive agricultural activities. As such, the proposed subdivision should not have an adverse impact on the agriculture industry since the location, size and soil conditions do not present the subject property as having any significant agricultural value. 3. Social Services and Housing As this is not a social service or more affordable housing project, this section is not applicable. 4. Public Safety and Sanitation Services Public safety services are available Pahoa. All solid waste generated by the project will be disposed of at either the transfer station in Pahoa or at the Hilo Transfer Station. No sewer system exists in the subject area, and the Applicant will comply with Department of Health requirements regarding proper wastewater disposal methods. 5. Parks and Recreation This section is not applicable, as the project would have no direct impacts on parks. Nonetheless, the Applicant will provide a public pedestrian shoreline access to ensure public access to coastal recreational resources. 6. Energy Sustainability While the proposed subdivision has access to the electrical grid, it will be up to the individual homeowners whether they wish to live off -grid or rely upon the utility for its electrical needs. The third theme is Transportation. As a small 5-lot residential and agricultural subdivision, the goals and polices of this theme is not applicable to this project. However, the proposed subdivision will occur within the established Kaimu-Makena Homestead community within a residential area having lot sizes ranging from 5,300 151 Page square feet to over 3 acres. The effectiveness of enhancing transportation facilities and options is dependent upon the density and distribution of users. In this particular instance, creating a 5-lot subdivision within an existing homestead community will be less detrimental to any planning efforts to enhance transportation services and facilities. In summary, the proposed 5-lot residential and agricultural subdivision will maintain the rural character of this area of Puna while remaining consistent with the themes outlined by the PCDP. 24. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A The entire State of Hawai'i lies within the Coastal Zone Management area. The intent of the Coastal Zone Management Program is to guide and regulate public and private uses in the coastal zone management area with respect to recreational resources, historic resources, public access to the shoreline, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems, marine resources, economic uses, coastal hazards, managing development, public participation, and beach protection. 25. Special Management Area (SMA) The Special Management Area (SMA) is a part of the Coastal Zone Management Program that is regulated by the County, established to promote the State's policy to preserve, protect, and where possible, to restore the natural resources of the coastal zone of Hawai'i. Therefore, special controls on development within the area along the shoreline are necessary to avoid permanent loss of valuable resources and the foreclosure of management options, and to ensure that adequate public access is provided to public -owned or used beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves, by dedication or other means. The subject property is situated within the SMA due to its immediate proximity to the shoreline. An SMA Use Permit is required from the Windward Planning Commission in order to support the development of the proposed 5-lot subdivision and associated single-family residential dwellings. 26. Certified Shoreline Survey A certified shoreline survey of the subject property was secured on March 29, 2023 from the Board of Land and Natural Resources. The certified shoreline migrated inland from the makai boundaries of the 3.800-acre subject property as defined by tax maps, 161 Page reducing the overall land area of the subject property to 3.677 acres, as shown on Figure 8 — Certified Shoreline Survey. D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 27. Subject Property The property is trapezoid in shape and 3.677-acres in size and is situated between the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and the shoreline (see Figure 9 - Aerial Site Map). The Aerial Site Plan is based on March 7, 2023 imagery obtained via Google Earth. The subject property is currently vacant of any use or structure, aside from some limited clearing by the previous landowner for a proposed driveway and house pad circa 1992. However, the proposed home was never constructed and the previously cleared driveway and house pad is now overgrown with vegetation. More recently, the Applicant cleared and graded a portion of the subject property along its northern boundary, beginning at the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extending all the way down to the shoreline. Upon issuance of a Notice of Violation by the Planning Department, all work has ceased and the Aerial Site Map shows that vegetation has begun to reestablish itself. 28. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses The subject property is located within a portion of the I<aimu-Makena Homesteads, a collection of lots and subdivisions that span an area along the eastern side of the junction of Pahoa-Kalapana (Hwy 130) and Kalapana-Kapoho (Hwy 137) roads, and is predominately zoned for Residential and Agricultural (RA) uses with a minimum lot size of 1/2-acre. Adjacent to the east and makai of the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road are State lands zoned for Open (0) uses with agricultural -zoned lands (A-3a) along the mauka side of this road. The subject property basically defines the eastern -most extent of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. 171 Page 'lj 00! _ 'NI ! 37VJS p our W ON jnw m ` am N`� yg Q �Npg.$ �s ro w [ 1.S oroN ov � 'p° E«.xM o a HE c t c0 u E m m o oO1 ��N a oow o N h O qZ imp pJ �O �m Emr o J GSOG�M1 7 �u �ea� CL mo i a � �� t�i z° •11� °aE � ��o rKELI 00 N M 2' wJ eC - F"o 1. p J �(n4 �Ly EY— - J.• ZC)a vQ \ \ m i N ,may o; Aw N ! AMP �­aQw "� \ 1 N d O I �r !1 J OL �l �/ 00 1gti� ry�cA 0 F. vi N�so UJm cb 0 o ciaovi�nvmallo�N i��h rn E; o Off® V `�2 0 mmr NM �MMfW v ��'Nam'��ri.mN ��O N r 3��vnvu�mn wrn�� N M C ui '3 Y o ❑or Figure 8 — Certified Shoreline Survey 181 Page Figure 9 —Aerial Site Map 191 Page 29. ALISH: Other Important Agricultural Lands The subject property is not classified as by the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii. 30. Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification System Soils within the subject property are classified as having very poor agricultural productivity rating (Class E soils). 31. US Soil Survey: Hakuma highly organic hydrous loam (666) These soils series consist of shallow, moderately well drained soils formed in basic volcanic ash over pahoehoe lava. Hakuma soils are on the low elevation, windward slopes of Mauna Loa and Kilauea volcanoes. Slopes range from 2 to 10 percent. Mean annual rainfall is about 154 inches. Hakuma soils are generally found in open canopied forest. A few areas are used for pasture. Natural vegetation is ohia lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha), treefern (Cibotium chamissoi or C. glauca), uluhe (Dicranopteris linearis) and guava (Psidium guajava). 32. FIRM Zone "X" - determined to be outside the 500-year flood plain (see Figure 10 — Flood Hazard Map. There are no known existing drainageways that traverse through the subject property. aao„ Flood Iiazard Map M,pgeneratee Notes: May L yg" oncra,�mrnr x.�«,e rxoon,r,rnr lean bxor,.ra an.w,�,torNw.::�mrrn. remmrr;ddNan:r�rofrnm rM,.,..arc,..ar. ramn><ren.n, anerxn.unr,:.ymy�Mmmmnnrmrmr.re., ui, .rnnn wn,.r+Wur.an•�vmrobrfo.�++fr+w rnn a-r..xrolmn;nla�r�now.y..Kro.,ee�+Jr rnnowa.e:WPr,+,. onermNmc., hmn m�re.eieh wn;m.�r a.;u pm.�.e .m elm eam m.n/w�anon Figure 10 — Flood Hazard Map 201 Page 33. Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report (2017) The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report ("report") provides the first state-wide assessment of Hawaii's vulnerability to sea level rise and offered recommendations to reduce the exposure and sensitivity to sea level rise and increase the State's capacity to adapt. The report assessed the best available science on climate change and sea level rise and provides recommendations based on emerging good practices. One such practice is that the magnitude and rate of sea level rise warrants planning for 3.2 feet of sea level rise by 2100. Towards that end, the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA) shows that the subject property and its proposed 5-lot subdivision and future homesites will not be vulnerable to 3.2 feet of sea level rise, as depicted in Figure 11- SLR Viewer. Sea Level Rise : State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer An Interactive Mapping Tool in Support of the State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Re:,o, + ee rvx10.0 ' Z­. ,-. v I BASEM @ t�l .. — r i •7uu .1ra� to ...un • Gra state Satellue i� Di01Wl levation Model(DEIL) El(MRE G Sea Le':el Rize Expo jre Area —MOO 2.0 Ft .; Ft Figure 11— SLR Viewer 34. Flora/Fauna Resources 0.5 k J 1.1 k [ 2.0ft expand ^QPJS-�­Ohl�SCl No professional flora or faunal surveys were conducted of the subject property. However, the Applicant has identified any endangered species of plants or animals within the subject property. The on -site vegetation includes guava, lauae, ti, noni, hau, 211 Page hala, milo, ohia, monkeypod, christmas berry, melochia, gunpowder trees, cane grass, java plum and verbina. Near the west property line there are some common mangos, avocado and banana from the neighbors. Naupaka occurs along the shoreline areas. While no endangered species of fauna was observed on the subject property, its location and shoreline proximity could see threatened or endangered species such as the Hawaiian Hoary Bat, Hawaiian (koloa) Duck, Hawaiian (Nene) Goose, Hawaiian Petrel, Hawaiian Coot, Band-rumped Storm -petrel, Hawaiian Stilt, Newell's Townsend's Shearwater and the Short -tailed Albatross. The Blackburn's Sphinx Moth is the only endangered species of insect that could inhabit the affected area. 35. Archaeological Resources 1992 Archaeological Inventory Survey The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 (Exhibit A). The report, titled "An Inventory Level Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawai `i (TMK: 1-2-18:1) November 1992", identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include: • Site 18,525 — C-shaped structure built of stacked sub -angular to sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small boulders. No buried cultural features were found in this structure, which functioned as a temporary structure. • Site 18,526 — two surface features consisting of a C-shape and a rock mound, both consisting of sub -angular and sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small bounders. No cultural material was found in the C-shaped structure, which functioned as a temporary shelter. The small mound probably functioned as an agricultural feature. • Site 18,527 — a post -contact wall structure that extended along the base of the fill for the I<alapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extended beyond the subject property to the southwest until it was eventually covered by fill associated with the road construction. Most likely served as a boundary wall. • Site 18528 — small modified hole in a lava bubble. No cultural material was found in association with this feature and there proved to be no potential for 221 Page excavation inside the opening. The feature function is unclear, but could have served as a storage area or small planting area. The presence of a nearby cemetery (locally known as Makena Cemetery) was a specific concern during the survey, so special attention was paid to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present within the subject property. No such features were identified., nor were there other features identified that were interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build- up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. January 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation (Exhibit B) The Applicant contracted with ASM Affiliates who conducted an archaeological field inspection of the subject property to confirm and update findings from the earlier archaeological inventory survey and a cultural consultation to confirm the presence or absence of burial sites. According to the report, "There has been some prior ground disturbance along the northeast, southwest, and mauka edges of the project area. On the `a `d flow in the northeastern portion of the parcel, a grubbed and graded driveway (Figure 8) meanders along the property line and accesses a graded house pad near the coast on a promontory that overlooks the rest of the parcel (this area was mostly recently cleared in 2022). There is a second roadway which diverts from the upper road and is routed down through the middle of the project area to the coast (Figure 9). This road may have been already present when previously surveyed in 1992, as something resembling it is mentioned by Spear (1992). Bulldozer push piles were also observed along the boundary with the adjacent residential property to the southwest near the middle of the project area. These push piles appear to be related to the clearing of that neighboring parcel. A 231 Page number of brush piles, seemingly from hand clearing activities, were also noted in the northeastern portion of the project area at the base of the 'ad flow. The pedestrian survey conducted located three of the four sites previously documented by Spear in 1992. The forth site, a C-shaped feature [Site 15,525] located within the eastern portion of the project site at the base of an `a`a flow, could not be located as it was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbance after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) survey. The result of the current survey supports the findings of the Spear (1992) survey, with the three relocated sites in similar condition to what was previously described and indicate that the subject property was used during the Precontact to early Historic periods for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. No potential burial features were identified within the subject property nor were any possible burial locations identified as a result of consultation by the archaeologist. A consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted, that included descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families, namely Ms. Ke`ala Keli`iho`omalu, Mrs. Leialoha Ilae-Kaleimamahu, and Mrs. Ku`ulei Kealoha- Cooper by phone. According to the report, "Following the initial phone calls, each of the three consulted parties were provided with a consultation letter and maps specifying ASM's search for persons who may have knowledge of any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. Each of the consulted parties contacted additional family members to seek such information. Ms. Keli `iho `omalu spoke with elder relatives Prince Keli `iho `omalu, Sam Keli `iho `omalu, Noenoe Dunn, Tiana Dunn, Jerry Dunn, Princess Keli `iho `omalu, Jr. Keli `iho `omalu, and Tiara Keli `iho `omalu. Ms. Keli'iho'omalu indicated that her uncle Sam also attempted to reach out to Aku Hauani `o and Kamu Quihano and that her father attempted to reach out to Annie Ka'aukai and Leslie Enriques. Mrs. Ilae-Kalaimdmahu also contacted members of the `ohana Keli `iho'omalu and recommended that ASM staff contact Mrs. Kealoho-Cooper since she had heard that the cemetery belonged to the Kealoha family. Mrs. Kealoha- 241 Page Cooper was contacted by ASM and she spoke with several of her relatives, including her mother." According to the report, none of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. Subsequent email correspondence with Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper clarified that the cemetery did not belong to the Kealoha `Ghana, however, her mother related that in the 1930s and 1940s, the Kalapana Church was located near the cemetery and that her tutu (Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper's great-grandmother) Emma Nai`a was a pillar of that church. She added that there is a Kealoha cemetery in `Opihikao but was not aware of any such family cemetery in Kaimu. Based on these findings, the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. 36. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights According to the Applicant, there are no known customary or Native Hawaiian cultural rights exercised within the subject property. Upon clearing of a gravel driveway along the northern property line of the subject property in 2022, the public has been using the driveway to access the shoreline area and adjoining State lands. As previously mentioned, the Applicant will be providing a 10-foot wide shoreline public pedestrian access along its entire northern boundary adjacent to the adjoining State-owned lands. The presence of Makena Cemetery nearby along the mauka side of the Kaimu-Kapoho Beach Road was of special concern by the archaeologist (Spear 1992) who paid special attention to look for features within the subject property that could be interpreted as burials, and none was found. As mentioned previously, recent consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted during the current study, that included descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families, none of whom knew of any burial sites within the project area. If a burial is encountered during land disturbance activities, the Applicant will immediately cease all work and notify the Planning Department and the State Historic Preservation Division to await proper direction and clearance before any land alteration work can resume. 251 Page 37. Public Access The nearest formal access to the shoreline is situated along Kalapana Beach Haven Road, situated approximately 640 feet to the southwest of the subject property along the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. As mentioned, upon clearing of a gravel driveway along the northern property line of the subject property in 2022, the public has been using the driveway to access the shoreline area and adjoining State lands. As previously mentioned, the Applicant will be providing a 10-foot wide shoreline public pedestrian access along its entire northern boundary adjacent to the adjoining State-owned lands. E. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 38. Access: Access to the subject property is from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, a State - maintained roadway with a roughly 10-foot wide pavement and unimproved shoulders within an approximately 80-foot wide right-of-way. 39. Water County water is currently available to support the proposed 6-lot single-family residential subdivision. Should this SMA Use Permit be approved and tentative approval granted to the proposed subdivision, the Applicant will install lateral connections from the water main within the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road to individual proposed lots. 40. Wastewater There is no municipal sewer system servicing the subject area. Each proposed single- family dwelling will be serviced by individual septic systems meeting with the approval of the State Department of Health. 41. Solid Waste Solid waste will be handled through commercial haulers or disposal by the landowner into authorized landfill sites or transfer stations. All waste generated by construction - related activities will have to be transported to the West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill in Pu`uanahulu, North Kona. 42. Essential Utilities and Services Other utilities, such as electrical, cable and telephone services, will be made available to the subject property. 261 Page F. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SMA USE PERMIT REQUEST The approval of the Applicant's request to develop a proposed 5-lot single-family residential subdivision is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The subject property is not subject to any coastal hazard nor anticipated to have any adverse impact upon coastal resources. The Applicant will be providing shoreline public access through the proposed subdivision as required by Chapter 34 of the Hawaii County Code regarding Public Access. The proposed subdivision and homesites will not have any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area or upon any endangered species of plants or animals. In view of the Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa`akai O Ka`Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. It is unlikely that there are any valued cultural, historic and natural resources to be found within the property. Two archaeological studies conducted on the subject property concludes that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. Consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted and none of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. For these reasons, the Applicant could find no evidence of any possible adverse effects or impairments that will occur to any valued resources should the proposed 5-lot subdivision and its associated construction of single-family dwellings be allowed. Should the Applicant inadvertently encounter any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials, the Applicant agree to cease any work in the immediate area and contact the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD), resuming activities only upon securing archaeological clearance from DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. 271 Page Approval of the request to create a 5-lot single-family residential subdivision, if approved, will not be contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawai'i Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management nor the guidelines for approval of an SMA Use Permit as prescribed by Planning Commission Rule No. 9 regarding the Special Management Area. The subject property is situated within the Special Management Area with direct frontage along the shoreline. However, the subject property is not subject to any coastal hazard nor the effects of sea -level rise. Therefore, the development of the subject property as a single-family residential subdivision is not anticipated to have any adverse impact upon coastal resources such as coastal recreational and marine resources, coastal ecosystems or the public use and recreational use of any beach. Based on a March 29, 2023 certified shoreline survey, a 40-foot wide shoreline setback is established that will manage all structures and land use activities within this shoreline setback area to ensure that coastal processes and resources are protected. The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 which identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include two C-shaped structures probably used as a temporary structure and an agricultural feature, a post -contact boundary wall, and a modified hole in a lava bubble probably used for storage or a small planting area. There were no features identified that could be interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build-up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. A January 2024 archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation confirmed these previous findings and found that the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. 281 Page Therefore, it is not anticipated that the proposed request will have any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area. The subject property, zoned RA-.5a, is similarly designated as the rest of the area referred to as the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. The subject property itself represents the eastern extent of this homestead area, with lands beyond retained by the State. While the General Plan suggests that the subject property be utilized for extensive agricultural purposes, it designates it as the only lot on the makai side of the Kalapana- Kapoho Beach Road, squeezed between Low Density Urban uses for the rest of the homestead area, and Open uses for the State lands immediately to the east. Extensive agricultural pursuits simply cannot happen on this 3.677-acre shoreline parcel, which is clearly best suited for residential uses as is the rest of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. For these reasons, the Applicant feels that allowing this proposed 5-lot residential subdivision in this particular location is supportive of the County's efforts towards managing development through the General Plan that also encourages the County to: • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County. With a policy that: • Vacant lands in urban areas and urban expansion areas should be made available for residential uses before additional agricultural lands are converted into residential uses. Finally, in terms of the public participation objective, this is generally a public agency function. This is achieved through the Marine and Coastal Zone Management Advisory Group (MACZMAG) and the public hearing process required pursuant to the Planning Commission's Rules and County Council's meetings on this application. Notices of this application will become available through the posting of a sign on the property, as well as sending two (2) notices to surrounding property owners, one at the time the application is filed and again, prior to the public hearing. 291 Page 33. Anticipated effects upon the Special Management Area a. Relationship of Dr000sed action to land use Dlans. Dolicies and control The subject property represents the eastern extent of that area designated Urban by the State Land Use Commission and recognized as a part of the Kaimu- Makena Homesteads. The Puna Community Development Plan does not offer any land use policies specific to the Kaimu area, but as stated above, the General Plan does focus more urban types of uses in existing Urban areas, which is the case presented by the Applicant. b. Description of how proiect will affect area and surrounding lands The subject property lies within a long-established homestead area that has a number of single-family residences. This proposed single-family residential homestead will be no different. Lands beyond the subject property to the east and north (mauka) being owned by the State. All necessary utilities and services to support the proposed subdivision and its single-family residential use is or will be made available. Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road is a two-lane County -maintained roadway that can easily accommodate the traffic generated by this small subdivision. c. Description of impacts that cannot be avoided and applied mitigation measures The development of the subject property into a subdivision consisting of five (5) single-family residential dwellings will forever change the landscape in this particular section of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. But as a part of this homestead area, the proposed development will not be contrary to the existing residential character within this section of Kaimu. Lands to the east beyond the subject property is owned by the State, providing adequate coastal open space opportunities along this scenic roadway. During construction of the subdivision and its associated single-family dwellings, best management practices will be implemented to insure that excessive dust or runoff is controlled. If required by the Department of Public Works, a grubbing and grading permit will be secured prior to land alteration activities. No such land alteration activities will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback 301 Page area, which will be clearly delineated with flags or temporary construction fencing, as deemed appropriate by the Planning Department. Wastewater generated by these homesites will be managed by septic systems approved by the Department of Health. To mitigate the impacts of the proposed development on these vacant lands, the Applicant will provide a 10-foot wide public shoreline pedestrian access easement along its northern boundary to preserve access to coastal resources. d. Alternatives to the proposed project The only reasonable alternative is to maintain the subject property in its current vacant and vegetated state. Attempts could be made to cultivate the land or place it into pasture, but at only 3.677 acres, the subject property provides little agricultural opportunity, especially given the poor soil conditions immediately adjacent to the ocean. While the proposed project can be reduced to one single-family dwelling on the entire 3.677-acre property, the fact is that it still represents the introduction of residential uses on this property. Whether one dwelling or six, if adequate support facilities are provided and impacts properly mitigated and managed, the actual number of dwellings is irrelevant. The purpose of the SMA is to ensure that development will not have a substantial adverse effect upon coastal resources, and the Applicant believes that he has accomplished this goal with the information provided within this application. e. Irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources Given the limited scope of the proposed 5-lot subdivision and associated single- family dwellings and related improvements, the Applicant is not able to identify any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of cultural, historical, recreational or ecological resources as a result of the proposed subdivision development. In fact, a benefit in the form of a formal shoreline public pedestrian easement where none currently exists is a commitment towards enhancing access to a public resource, the shoreline. 311 Page G. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF CHAPTER 205A AND SMA GUIDELINES a. Recreational resources While the subject property itself is not known to accommodate any coastal recreational opportunities, its shoreline proximity does provide access opportunities. Therefore, to mitigate the effects of the proposed 5-lot subdivision upon access to coastal resources, the Applicant will establish a 10-foot wide, cinder - surfaced public pedestrian shoreline access along its northern property boundary. The proposed subdivision has modified its makai shoreline boundary to reflect the location of the recent certified shoreline, thereby providing additional opportunities for lateral access along the shoreline. The subject property has lost approximately 10,846 square feet of land area due to the encroachment of the shoreline. b. Historic resources The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 (Exhibit A). The report, titled "An Inventory Level Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawai `i (TMK. 1-2-18:1) November 1992", identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include: • Site 18,525 — C-shaped structure built of stacked sub -angular to sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small boulders. No buried cultural features were found in this structure, which functioned as a temporary structure. • Site 18,526 — two surface features consisting of a C-shape and a rock mound, both consisting of sub -angular and sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small bounders. No cultural material was found in the C-shaped structure, which functioned as a temporary shelter. The small mound probably functioned as an agricultural feature. • Site 18,527 — a post -contact wall structure that extended along the base of the fill for the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extended beyond the subject property to the southwest until it was eventually covered by fill associated with the road construction. Most likely served as a boundary wall. 321 Page • Site 18528 — small modified hole in a lava bubble. No cultural material was found in association with this feature and there proved to be no potential for excavation inside the opening. The feature function is unclear, but could have served as a storage area or small planting area. The presence of a nearby cemetery was a specific concern during the survey, so special attention was paid to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present within the subject property. No such features were identified, nor were there other features identified that were interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build-up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. The State Historic Preservation Division will be notified and all work shall immediately cease should inadvertent discovery of any archaeological feature be encountered during development of the proposed subdivision. A January 2024 archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation conducted by ASM affiliates in January 2024 confirmed these previous findings and found that the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. c. Scenic and Open Space resources The subject property is not identified as an area of natural beauty by the General Plan. The subject property remains largely vegetated with restricted coastal viewplanes from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. Immediately to the north are State-owned lands situated upon a 1750 A`a lava flow that affords greater coastal viewplane opportunities than does the subject property. The requested small 6-lot subdivision with 1/2-acre sized lots will offer low density building sites that should not have a significant impact upon any viewplane. It could be argued that 331 Page permitting the proposed subdivision to proceed forward will allow for clearing of the existing vegetation, allowing for greater coastal viewplane opportunities. For these reasons, the Applicant finds that the proposed 5-lot subdivision will not have significant adverse impacts upon any scenic or open space resources within the project area. d. Coastal ecosystems The subject property has direct shoreline frontage, along with a 40-foot shoreline setback that will be imposed and enforced by the County, ameliorating the effects of any development activities upon coastal resources. The small scale and low density of the proposed subdivision at only 5 lots will further manage the scale of improvements and uses upon these lands and its effects upon coastal ecosystems. The Applicant will comply with all applicable government regulations to mitigate the effects of the project upon coastal resources, such as regulation related wastewater treatment and disposal, erosion and sedimentation control, grubbing and grading activities. e. Economic uses The intent of the proposed subdivision is to subdivide lands that have been designated for the past 50-plus years for residential and agricultural uses, providing such opportunities within an area long established as a homestead community. From an economic standpoint, jobs will be created as part of the subdivision process as well as the construction of homes on each property. The County will gain in real property tax revenues and fees associated with the construction and occupancy of the proposed single family residential dwellings within this subdivision. f. Coastal hazards The subject property is not subject to coastal flooding nor the effects of sea level rise, as discussed in Sections D(21) and D(22). In view of the Hawai'i State Supreme Court's " PASH" and "Ka Pa`akai 0 Ka`Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the 341 Page associated traditional and customary practices of the site. The Applicant nor past studies have identified the subject property as being host to any valued cultural, historical, and natural resources. The proximity of the subject property immediately adjacent to State-owned lands and the requirements of Chapter 34 of the Hawaii County Code has prompted the Applicant to provide a 10-foot wide public pedestrian shoreline access along the northern boundary of the proposed subdivision. This will ensure coastal access between the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and the coastline. With this mitigating action, the Applicant could find no evidence of any possible significant adverse effects or impairments that will occur to any valued resources should this SMA Use Permit be approved. A cultural consultation with long-time residents of the area found that none of those consulted were aware of any burials within the subject property. However, should the Applicant inadvertently encounter any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials, the Applicant agree to cease work in the immediate area and contact the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR- HPD), resuming activities only upon securing archaeological clearance from DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. The Applicant has not encountered any evidence of traditional or customary Native Hawaiian rights being practiced on the subject property, nor existence of any known valued cultural, historical or native resources in the area. Thus, it is believed that the project would have no adverse impact relative to the cultural and historical resources of the area. To the extent to which traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights. Based on the above findings, the Applicant maintains that allowing the development of the proposed 5-lot subdivision and single-family dwelling units and related improvements will not have any substantial adverse impacts on the surrounding area, nor will its approval be contrary to the objectives and policies of Chapter 205A, HRS, relating to Coastal Zone Management and Rule No.9 of the Planning Commission relating to the Special Management Area. 351 Page H. CONCLUSION Based on the discussion above, the Applicant finds that approval of an SMA Use Permit to allow for the development of a 5-lot residential -agricultural subdivision and the construction of a single-family dwelling and related improvements on each of the proposed lots will conform to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan; adheres to the general policies and objectives of the Puna Community Development Plan; will not have a significant adverse impact upon coastal resources; and would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. 361 Page DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA P-'x:,TY CDMI H1LO E3' gsic2n 7-173 F CQ2nlu F-89$ TISLAND OF RAW 5/3/2022 .. .'� EXHIBIT A DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Q RE AL' T-v CCRP, K 1 0 T - 0 P 009MI F-101 TIP Xt t he rEqM'Cmt zJf JK'r- truce an �riqjtr5n The dutu=ine the PreaiN.flDg. or ra y Of cult-ar1 rpmUnTi J-u the p�r�njL_Ct Ar*A. T dwork Va JIM& Out UD &.-d. 24, 13Re by Rther.t T'. spa?,rl. -The ppojv­ct arcgj north by ftxl A, D. t75 0 fj.-pw.0 CM tkL .0a.SL O'n t-hui up JPd h �i V.!j 13, 1,0.t 4 And ob -t b*, w4n:,44r, -Ica IcLP"4 -ftPOho is the. pr.njrct Arr-a 1);LrItide4, tat vas tics 9mr. 12d c O.-V e �14E dre'a of SI-ce Tk 1& 1 s D I'Ac."% t Lc n of the praj 0 at �r jQ: �°d a' -1 CLV& f r,01c%Y P'fat (Soil 7- DS F DS 5/3/2022 U_TIJ_qI9___Ir�O DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA RULN CDRF Hi LU P ZU/6' 0 F416 TCT, - p n! ze� F—TT I % rm vp iN U, -Aw Owdm t a- r—DS DS 5/3'/202.2 ,PRDXM' AREA Na� DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA A'4-23-115 04:410m Frc,,.---LAPK H-Ai7i MRP. w-LO BNW6278 7-LQ F US/Dig F-180 and We 10-72 -1, a Ub-ftin-on owapliftit 9,:� AD,. tw& np'r-dacr tr011%, (-RO-rd-aer 1-977). VG7,thro,Iqbout rho., jc:BgtPE, ulrh Play"1119 MIX*d ":�'�th habita'LiOn un-ict%i UL)xcirter'-s xettlem6A, t pIT-n to-r zhc 9rhi-CIV pj�(>-Pv-sud five ne-Y'A MCd-e-J. 1 1 4-4 a. Coft$tal At-c;Lp WhIch-II-kj:d7LI4 Z Df4 C the e 1 W? 9 1. 5 C�0111-6- aC-CLIr j-A . Waal I't w 16 -Y -np s� P "r, (i Z.- I-u-u II - r- r a -,-ed. apound sj�� r il i--c I-0 c a t I-0 flo V u Cb eLs. -th-e. U 7.9 s t L. MC-E dowu*y aS LAe of L-PP s i s, 9rbotII: 4-r ; zt !nl�aafns for app-ea-r zo -?,)e r,,Ojo.r Thc egr,,,aeral 6f Tor d Kenriy zi-rkd. -who *&4 Z;tut.,VP*Lr YCiArL�.- fnme-l�-Iy ivpporte4 4pw c e�.t put �jt a 2m, C-69,6r.4 VIO e DS F DS AA 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA AurV-A 04,4�P-- Fri*-' RFE.MY MW H I LO f 056A-F-He area was m--xt-cWmt--'Iy -t Ljj-i-r3_-vff ��d z.-,nd. t1ded. az,cam Df voccoik.t, atd. clz5LqE� Q-� k�pjt txO*j.. p aj-jjc�- Tzotes thst K&jff,.q had a Seady 6v�ach C.-SHis 1025--160). copplex. AbIza tr&il, -VItat- as are, of the tilghex diftimait-F US-c- nraa�7 S-aggcLj;:tUd by N.(;�Eldovnay. The _pr-t. proje!�.� area I� ou. T.hb��tc:h up tho coast n,&y hz.qc kL 1*.P-F uz�-IA.Zed L-T:R'.a Po"Ibiy 4%iv tc aad. tN-, �:aof a POZZAMC'M -%zatuz 50-write. ti-o,ns a,rL54. icam. t 6s.&r The. -JaZ E�r 01 9 _gr �rjj g04�PA4,11�11& Cemet_e 'tb4E- C'k>.ad f-_VO--j Y2 PT-:Qj*r MW WAz. :dez and -SILb-�-Uj-taze Ing, tlhjm priot ST-04 J�-n -eySTtK gwtir. "A,f"P"3 -vath tom Loz-; no vore thj�&-n 3,'D Iv. h'i Z. Op c nd ILarked lw�rh- - jej rz-nal,' 3 2 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA CA OP7 r U AIT C� H I LD T-0 5 P 10710 i F-Rag �trm. "ed �;P. ezzmkag soil -.dopcnitt3 ana � piore for bLifi P, e, - c ul.tkj7,Etj Tulle 4Qi, fro, d t h� Aar-OVU-Ware kept throuch *he uma a.f p4un-eimw dt-dwi-nqE of ntl�Cted &rjCh!tLc-tux4j featT.Xeg, and USC j, tz a bla�-.k and white phnr�n retard. A]j Stil �010r�c W'M bAsod an the Mkmsel3 cc-1,Dr- c#nrt--R., MaFppjnatr s 5 doje by T;4.Fe *-ad colqpag. All tint Si:rviCel, Kar06-ohe, haopaj,j. c ILE L sites W-era lcuat'd dur �,Iyla LIC-14,W.Drk Iftr I 0-&JL-, 11, 2A to IB, S-2B cFig ur,7., Z) desi;jJhrrd bellmwll I WAO a G—Xhapfz„ I-0cf-LQ4 naAr the bazrz� 61 the AD. 17LJP flaw a-nd at tier. QRd pj road (FL-guren 3 a4d A.), The jf�Lpi&-,j �rq q al the :t.� them wist. The. maximum w1dlth ;,,t the the dq.yth of Lti-e C-jFhapp-- C-rom J%.0 jn)terjor W&-Il tg C.-Uhape was n. The ma,xi-ln.um Walk Vhicxm�:a -was .2.10 �A 4n-d tllc The to Alb -)fowl d OrA -8,MAJI: bo.ua-done T;)o b'Y I Thet hzrrl Z-J-A. 't.iK: - 66I -ha - If. -Liha= DS DS 5/3/2 0 22 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA k11L 2N� 04!0. HAL'Y CJI�P HU 7-GT2 P 808AA FAIR p- DSf E-B /� 1 ^. i 4M t Ys, e - [ 4�+ . f�l DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA 0 �, DS ' ^ DS 5/3/2022 T-171 P [0a/V9 F-15I; t DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA km—,,-7 C`:A-1p. rL.:-•:"LA.PX H€ LT COP:. diI O @18B-'62T6 T-L75 n @:aAjik 8B6 DS r� ,. m DS 5/3/2022 -. . `li" r , �µ 4'f ' yam• DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Aug z3-05 04.,45po Fq-, -CLAR 1., t MRP. 108 9 31 S 2 Til P ziVU0 ;-806 Pf" cdral 4�-z by. -L.S. -found. V'A the F;ide the. Opeflim? of t,hp, C-Zh-P-.pfl t4. tnEit fO.F ruit-ural cicpou-it-k, Th - 5 zi J'r it !01 a L Su r ecL Aar by 0 5 a d 11 g t I>, a d4ipth of 40 cz� bi2l-ow -9 ux f tic, i-- . Onl"Y. Go* U2kr-V-r*) layeZ VaL5 '��Z-ounte-red, This 1-11yer was a (i.0 'YR 2,ti, id cij It nbunda-Qt X14Led. pieCaS Crf of the e&BL.�Ln htllf Qf UIOK� X J)r fjestern 0.4-- -,this UlAt Out No cu.'Wmrj�l �ilz of any ki5a;j wot* Vdas comp-ri�"C!a Of L-vQ 5urf-Y1r,4-N feratjlrftiq triguzaf: And 7). of m an6 the &,prt vt the C-&h-Eapt; FTow Its vp "CO Ci--Nb4Pe was 1.2:0 m. -T&,i,za-K-Xmum wal-I rjictn-cn:r, wa,t I. qjp 1p "d -W4,11 h4Llqlxt w6u 0,75 ,fk CO)�3trUCtZ!d aL ��Ub-ZlngUI-4zr r�o RAh-r4ui1-aOjA ba(j- irA5 Of the *rxo"m M.'a we-,�: Wk. I I M a ch , rnnkd f i t ted. A pa�'An:t. grew At zhe cfmme-r O'Z t-ho lnteri:n�r south a .-reaturo, 2.wrap a -vp.pk, gmniid vhleh minamrad 1 .:95 M avxt-h/l�ct,uh b1t � - SO M. -u�jth 0 V-"ey�um h9gi-57hi �:. 0 n. Th4G tq[�Luf-q vas pmrz.cmxlLcr�Ot sung;klar to sulb- DS DS 5/3/20.22 E4; DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA A��-23-Cif �1 ;45am rc-w;,N.l h REWT DAP. di3O OH9€IUN I-M F MA19 �I$ 4 J DS , DS L. III CL fi tikp"a. � F i , m 5/3/2022 r �"' �r�w.,�,•'. ,.bey �At ."�5y� �,� lw '°'„ �wY� ��'.'.+�a.'°YiM1.W'Mw�i ..`, k X� dl •i�� a...'�at�. .. . � ',A XPI k DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Zrm-CLAN MRP HILO T-Un P 014/919 MOO kr a ct-., C.'sio M, W&S, Ond 2, T"s anit a dug. to a FLaXhQLm CIRPek. Of U an be-.-Iow &u-rfani�. 4D n,%tATA-1 L�:Ycx -C:�b cin u nt-, f- zj: CL - ZkAi 9 lay.AVI dl�lk- Z��ddisb brulkyP 5 YR 2. d t-b ab-atf,4--a n t -or* V40 5 ipi!s- pirwc ik 0 lot 'a %;e 1 tmla unit but-irQfted, ctut -an A Ue-arcack Pt NO CUItUrei3. Qi Auy Und "na Sze tFeffiture I t-rall thm bace. Ojt "-e -Ull tnZ t€'ru '3�hr- lgall � ,<v --the va's C*V.0r&d- -tl'he read &t its 'ThE,- the ;w a 1. - I -rhe Pica .r-CL �--r4a vao �&Da im, Lhr- -.,cajj .Amight w�,G I. C:!9!;IbIO TO Mail 'Qj'4ffe:( t�-'A bjaigisl:t, K Lear" *f" tpuna on top ofthe v-all. .pr-- Cd nurvb)'u.;�u,th by ,0,8,n 92- A" The �Jputlnq :P�Q-r, cloozea. -Cf Z'.0-ek. whkqh wa;r, U-'�,,ed go, t4YA,;�d z T be, 2w, ejyzidl it -or oxed%mti" 14w�lc. Vim ap"". DS DS 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA 01;J�P- -rcrC,ARK FE-Q-f WRP. it-0 OHS 162% P 016/wl rc fi vs asi!mc-e of 4 during tU.S. Projc-ct� !�Far--s Pald i�o rbe Ajakh& pox- t-i-on of 'the project 4xem. to dezer-ming If tiMilar Lo �-bcse idemtifi" in the 0-amat*ry were &,sQ juthe vz-Q--,cc7x, lots w u c h f 0,1 t 'A r a lAouxUl i a d, mor were 0kny 1D t h e z, LL&L ware inzar-protect z-� build lituna; ar&s was; a.n t-c> vhm �Vz�-, Tb Ij .15 tk� Ds 5/3/2022 -a,.Pxc-.CQA:4ct- or 'GaTLY P-r.*1-=t et tbf". Lrt--, -UC4�druzig t -a -8* r-,l 43 - tic* *i—" �d ti:z FtaiLure a -as fin t-uraj. fear-11-re-, wltft no -d,1tQ5 In a T- V..T ialn from 13 r�Jti--. 12 —DS /AI ,Lntd "Our atEi d s-' ng-1--2kj a Z. t-g,r4LRP h i -f t 4-L�n c 11 'Wh S., t -thm, type, 6f typic5j-1 early post-contzct f-e,8 ba DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA H u I. AUE-N—J5 vA :461,7 F I Ul-Z. � �F. K Tf A L -Y U,RP !?IWC OMLCIo 162, a 7-073 P 017/411 His L -4L T" VAU r-he R"d Omw ca&IRti-ri-P isi-SWe r-" noy.r-ha-aE-t end nT --t e- V;a�13 qcucrod by t-bL�. roz%d fill- The wall rray h;,-vc. .3efved ino F, 2�3tu�dzzy 'ii �: 71 , 5a flan 1, modified 1401-t- ia. a lava bij�bje, No -cultural mai i�Vaal or dzit-�--s v-cr� Ohtaiaed Ir.OM this f�ucturs. T..Ka icature fuDctiun iz uukclear bu-t it could he-ve soxy.ed &a a s.upr�eqe ar.r--gs or # small wjth sites 18..,WS and 18,5.26 thaT) tt� 5it-e to tw ov.ere-!a t-hz.t-,e of the foux judi'laft" that rb--- pr-!;I�Sz var, m�: d fo.r tvrkra-r,y ah-tLjr-uj, :oejej: jjms*pd tz '0 1 -W-h r- &'I r I -pr rjp-O-Sd. r I i th'! a- Y*PPi�' . cme 20T--b cmn.tury. lmpaiM 14, lndicotc-d by thC-, PrT.'�k--2�6C-E-- raj ttj'G- P. t J 101 f-QL;:u of the siftoza. *r-e Crf ThC- ].� f-,r_na r I C,,n they _C 0 R T J19w*vlei " CiE-DL h&A bPP--,. JPOM ':�LCh Wito- Vh zLonv UrW Ix z 14 I's u in� vj� cl-r--a ned as. -t-P. " 4 &-V 0;1 O"d., we r h lr t-t-; . D sde nr n be burlal =)aw-C' �c- h'A:Awmd #nd r-bm 41itot-v .i3aSeL4L Ca. the !rr4F, t,. 0 kt *4 T"A . �-z S DS 5131202i. DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA i i Award gochs P-SALTY CaRR. HU M95IMt T-973 P 1118/03 &;9-c'q jv'aps O file. af-Wacqua, aoberr Tk. $fjnlaa 1).Ya Avz rT Ff- a W g -,4 Port scrice -21-UP, ifiLliam 1hp r Y1 art i9-kV?PO-- h'��P i` 9 7!; and tff IrItI," 7Q. rCt apt - 72-metLil�ILCY tOPOV.;Rq-i4 :Sur. ftt!�m, sac. A -DS 5/3/2022. DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA A0.G-23-04 UAP�I PD—iY HI.., I 5 21 5 T-0?3 P by 1z Dy EDOCUSigned by: Vv 57486A681166452... EDocuSigned by: j ?5a,Dewwa" �164A283A1373406 5/4/2022 5/3/2022 17 1 ASM affiliates Archaeology • History • Ethnography • Architectural History January 20, 2024 Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC 12-55 Likoliko Lp #4866, Pahoa, Hl, 96778 Email: wyattinhawaii@gmail.com Subject: Results of an archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation conducted in support of an SMA use permit application for the proposed subdivision of TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. Dear Mark: As requested, ASM Affiliates (ASM) conducted an archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation in support of an application for an SMA use permit, concerning the proposed subdivision of TMK: (3) 1- 2-018:001, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The field inspection was conducted to help address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proposed 6-lot subdivision of the 3.551-acre subject parcel by confirming and updating the findings of an earlier archaeological inventory survey (AIS) prepared for the property by Spear (1992). Furthermore, consultation was undertaken seeking information from knowledgeable individuals regarding the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the subject property. Project Area Description The project area is the entirety of TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 located within Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. The 3.551-acresubject parcel is bounded on the mauka side by the Kalapana-Kapoho Road (see Figure 3), on the makai side by a 40 foot exclusion zone along the coast (Figure 4), to the northeast by an undeveloped State-owned parcel consisting of `a `d lava, and to the southwest by a developed residential property. The project area situated at an elevation of 10 to 25 feet (3.05 to 7.62 meters) above mean sea level and is 40 feet inland from the coast. An Historic cemetery is located to the northeast of the project area on the opposite side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road; Figure 5) Geologically, the project area is located on the lower flanks of Kilauea Volcano and is comprised of multiple lava flows (Sherrod et al. 2021), with a Puna basalt flow that erupted between 400 and 750 years before present (BP) forming much of the central and southern part of the parcel; a younger Puna basalt flow of `a `d lava dating to 200-400 years BP creating the northeastern edge; and a more recent pahoehoe flow that occurred between 1986 and 1992 present at the coast (Figure 6). Soil classifications within the project area (Figure 7) mimic the geologic substrates and are comprised primarily of dry Hakuma highly organic loam on 2 to 10 percent slopes, with dry Malama-Lava flows complex on 2 to 40 percent slopes on the `a `d flow along the northeastern edge, and pahoehoe lava flows on 2 to 20 percent slopes present at the coast (Soil Survey Staff 2022). There has been some prior ground disturbance along the northeast, southwest, and mauka edges of the project area. On the `a `d flow in the northeastern portion of the parcel, a grubbed and graded driveway (Figure 8) meanders along the property line and accesses a graded house pad near the coast on a promontory that overlooks the rest of the parcel (this area was mostly recently cleared in 2022). There is a second roadway which diverts from the upper road and is routed down through the middle of the project area to the coast (Figure 9). This road may have been already present when previously surveyed in 1992, as 820 Mililani Street, Suite 700, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 (808) 439-8089 Fax: (808) 439-8087 EXHIBIT B 507A East Lanikaula Street, Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (808) 969-6066 Fax: (808) 443-0065 www.asmaffiliates.com January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 2 of 19 something resembling it is mentioned by Spear (1992). Bulldozer push piles were also observed along the boundary with the adjacent residential property to the southwest near the middle of the project area. These push piles appear to be related to the clearing of that neighboring parcel. A number of brush piles, seemingly from hand clearing activities, were also noted in the northeastern portion of the project area at the base of the `a `d flow. Vegetation cover within the project area is influenced by the extent of prior ground disturbance. In the undisturbed portions of the project area (Figure 10), the overstory consists predominately of monkeypod trees (Samanea saman), hala (Pandanus tectorius), hau (Hibiscus tiliacenus), indo (Thespesia copulnea), with coconut palm (Cocos nucifera), and naupaka (Scaevola sp.) along the makai section, `ohi `a lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha) along the northern boundary, a scattering of noni (Morinda citrifolia) throughout the property, and a single eucalyptus tree (Eucalyptus globidus). The ground cover consists of morning glory (Ipomoea indica), particularly in the makai portion of the project area, with Boston fern (Nephrolepis exaltata), and various species of grasses. In the previously disturbed portions, the vegetation is comprised of a mix of grasses, purslane (Portulaca sp.), gunpowder trees (Trema orientalis), Melochia (Melochia umbellata), guava (Psidium guajava), and other non-native weeds (Figure 11). A Brief Culture -Historical Background for the Subject Parcel The project area lies on the southern shores of the Puna District of the Island of Hawaii within the ahupua `a of Kaimu. Kaimu is bordered to the southwest by the ahupua `a of Kalapana and Kupahua, to the north by the ahupua `a of Waiakahiula and Ka`ohe, and to the west by the ahupua `a of K7kala 1-2 and Keokea. Traditionally, the primary village for this ahupua `a was (and still is) known as Kaimu, a name that has been translated to mean "gathering [at the] sea [to watch surfing]" (Pukui et al. 1974:69). The shoreline of this ahupua `a, according to Pukui et al. (1974:69), is "noted for its surf and its black sand beach" and was originally called H6`eu and Ka-poho. Pukui et al. (1974) note that this beach was likely formed after a 1750 lava flow, during which time steam explosions formed the characteristic black sand of the area (the beach at Kaimu was covered by lava flows that occurred during the 1980s and is no longer present). The English missionary William Ellis embarked on a circumnavigation of Hawaii Island in the 1820s in the hopes of identifying population centers that would be receptive of Christian missionary teachings. During his travels, he collected observations of the environments and people he encountered. After leaving the district of Ka`u, Ellis entered southern Puna along its coastline and described the string of villages he traveled through, including Kaimu, which he described as being: ...pleasantly situated near the sea shore, on the south-east side of the island, standing on a bed of lava considerably decomposed, and covered over with a light and fertile soil. It is adorned with plantations, groves of cocoa -nuts, and clumps of kou trees. It has a fine sandy beach, where canoes may land with safety; and, according to the houses numbered to -day, contains about 725 inhabitants. Including the villages in its immediate vicinity along the coast, the population would probably amount to 2,000.... The extent of cultivation in the neighbourhood, together with the decent and orderly appearance of the people, induce us to think they are more sober and industrious, than those of many villages through which we have passed (Ellis 1825:160). Indeed, the habitation and agricultural patterns of southern Puna were often dependent on the path of the lava flows from Kilauea Volcano. As Handy and Handy (1972:751) note, the lands of Makena and lower Kaimu were suitable for growing sweet potatoes but not taro, and the neighboring ahupua `a of "Keokea [Keokea] supported neither, being mostly pahoehoe lava." Additionally, Hawaiian traditions imply that Puna "was once Hawaii's richest agricultural region and that it is only in relatively recent time that volcanic eruption has destroyed much of its best land" (Handy and Handy 1972:752). By the mid-19t'' century, the traditional Hawaiian land tenure system was radically altered through a process of land division known as the Mdhele Aina. This change in land tenure was promoted by the missionaries and the growing foreign population and business interests in the island kingdom who were generally January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 3 of 19 hesitant to enter business deals on leasehold lands. The Mahele (division) defined the land interest of Kamehameha III (the King), the high-ranking chiefs and konohiki (headman of an ahupua `a). As a result of the Mahele, all lands in the Kingdom of Hawaii were placed into one of three categories: (1) Crown Lands (lands personally claimed by Kamehameha III); (2) Konohiki Lands (lands claimed by lesser ali `i and konohiki) and; (3) Government Lands (lands surrendered by the King or the konohiki in lieu of commutation) with the caveat that the rights of the hoa `dina (tenants) were to be reserved (Chinen 1958:vii; 1961:13). In the case of the lands of Kaimu, the ahupua `a was originally claimed by Mataio Kekuanao`a, who managed the estate of his daughter the ah `i Victoria Kamamalu. However, in January of 1848, Kekuanaa'a surrendered this land to the King, and Kaimu was placed into the inventory of Crown Lands (Buke Mahele 1848). As the King and his ah `i and konohiki made claims to large tracts of land via the Mahele, questions arose regarding the protection of rights for the hoa `aina. To resolve this matter, on August 6t11, 1850, the Kuleana Act (also known as the Enabling Act) was passed, clarifying the process by which native tenants could claim fee simple title to any portion of lands that they physically occupied, actively cultivated, or had improved (Garovoy 2005). Within Kaimu, no kuleana lands were awarded and within the entirety of the Puna District only two kuleana were awarded (Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018). A map of lands in the vicinity of Kalapana, Puna (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1614) prepared by E. D. Baldwin in 1892 shows the lands in the vicinity of the subject parcel and indicates the locations of nearby cultural features located to the southwest of the current project area, including a heiau, several houses and other named places located within Kaimu Village, and a trail extending inland from the village (Figure 12). The `a `a point located in the eastern corner of the subject parcel is labeled "Keoneana" on that map. A later tracing of the 1892 map showing the Crown Land Homesteads of Kaimu (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1812) shows that the subject parcel was subdivided and sold to C.H. Will (Grant No. 8004) as Lot 28-C of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads by late December 1921. Records from 1932 list the subject parcel as being owned by a Mrs. Chieko, who acted as a trustee for the minors Hanayo Will, Yoshio Will, and Isami Will, each of whom held a 1/3 interest in the lot. By the 1960's, ownership of the parcel had split between the previously mentioned members of the Will family, who would own the parcel until the late 1980s. Summary of Prior Archaeological Study within the Subject Parcel The current project area (TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001) was the subject of an intensive archaeological inventory survey prepared by Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. in 1992 (Spear 1992). As a result of that study, four archaeological sites were identified within the property (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18525, 50-10-63-18526, 50- 10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; Figure 13) that were interpreted as having been used for Precontact to early Historic Period for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. All four sites were described and mapped by Spear (1992), and two of the sites (Sites 18525 and 18526) were excavated to help refine their functional interpretations and test for the presence of buried cultural deposits. Spear (1992) assessed all four sites as significant under Criterion d for the information they had contributed to understanding past lifeways within the project area. He noted that sufficient data had been collected from the sites as a result of the AIS to warrant a treatment recommendation of ' no further work." The State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) agreed with the significance assessments and treatment recommendations for the sites, and accepted the Spear (1992) AIS, in a letter dated March 3, 1993 (LOG NO: 7604, DOC NO: 9302ks25). The descriptions of the sites recorded by Spear (1992) are summarized below. Site 18525 was recorded by Spear (1992) as a C-shape located near the base of the `a `d lava flow, at the end of a bulldozer push road, in the eastern corner of the parcel. According to Spear (1992), the opening to the C-shape was oriented to the west and measured 5.1 meters wide and 1.45 meters deep. The walls were 2.1 meters thick, and the maximum height was 0.36 meters. The feature was disturbed at the southern end, and hau growth affected the exterior wall (Spear 1992). One large piece of coral was found on the ground surface on the inside of the C-shape. A single stratigraphic trench was excavated outside of the opening of the C-shape to test for buried cultural deposits. Measuring 1.0 meter by 0.5 meter, the trench was dug to a January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 4 of 19 depth of 0.4 meters below the surface, but no cultural materials of any kind were encountered. Based on its formal attributes, this site was interpreted as a Precontact/Historic temporary habitation shelter. Site 18526 was recorded by Spear (1992) as consisting of two surface features (Features 1 and 2). Feature 1 was described as a C-shape with its opening oriented to the south, with a width of 3.7 meters and a depth of 1.2 meters. The maximum wall thickness and height were 1.09 meters and 0.75 meters respectively. The eastern third of the structure was collapsed and in poor condition. Feature 2 was situated slightly more than two meters to the south of Feature 1, and consisted of a rock mound which measured 1.85 meters N/S and 1.5 meters E/W. The maximum height of the mound was 0.6 meters, and a single stratigraphic trench measuring 0.5 by 0.5 meters was excavated between Features 1 and 2. Excavation extended to a maximum depth of 0.36 meters and no cultural materials were encountered. Spear (1992) interpreted Feature 1 as a temporary habitation shelter and Feature 2 as a small agricultural mound. Site 18527 was documented by Spear (1992) as a wall that extended along the base of the fill for the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. At the time of the 1992 study, the wall extended beyond the project area to the southwest and was covered with road fill at its northeast end. The length of the wall within the project area was recorded as 28 meters, with a maximum height and width 1.1 meters and 0.5 meters respectively. No excavation was undertaken at Site 18527 by Spear (1992), who interpreted the site as a boundary wall that predates the construction of the adjacent roadway. Site 18528 was documented by Spear (1992) as a modified lava bubble, with interior measurements of 0.82 meters (north/south) by 0.8 meters (east/west) and a depth of 0.92 meters. The opening was cleared of rock which had been used to build up the southwest portion of the feature. No cultural material was found in association with the feature and according to Spear (1992), who interpreted the site as a possible storage feature or small planting pit, there was no potential for excavation. The presence of the nearby cemetery (located to the northeast of the project area on the mauka edge of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road; see Figure 5) was a specific concern of the earlier study, and Spear (1992) noted that special attention was paid to the mauka portion of the project area to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present in the project area. No such features were identified in that area, or anywhere else within the project area. Additionally, as noted by Spear (1992), the soil buildup in the project area was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface features or burials. Results of the Current Field Inspection On October 27, 2023, David King, M.A., Colsen Balai, B.A., and Jonas Leon, B.A., and Matthew R. Clark, M.A. (ASM Principal Investigator), conducted a thorough surface survey of the subject parcel, as well as a general inspection of the `a `d flow bordering the northeastern side of the project area. The survey included a surface inspection of the entire parcel utilizing north/south pedestrian transects with fieldworkers spaced at 10-meter intervals. As was previously done by Spear (1992), special care was taken in the mauka portion of the project area, especially on the surface of the adjacent 'a `d flow, to look for burial features similar to those contained within the Historic cemetery across the street. As a result of the pedestrian survey, three of the four sites previously documented by Spear (1992) within the subject parcel were found (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; Figure 14). The locations of these sites were documented using a GPS, and the current condition of each of these sites is briefly described below. Site 50-10-63-18525 (a C-shape) could not be relocated, and it is thought that this site, which was formerly located in the eastern portion of the subject parcel at the base of the `a `d flow (Figure 15), was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbing activities after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) AIS. The location and distribution of sites and features identified within the subject parcel, as well as the relative location of the cemetery to the project area, is depicted in Figure 14. Site 18526 Features 1 (a C-shape) and 2 (a mound) were both in similar condition to what was described by Spear (1992), but the features are currently obscured by heavy overgrowth and two large trees that have fallen across them (Figures 16 and 17). Site 18527 (a historic wall) is in the same condition as described by Spear and no changes to that site were noted (Figure 18). Site 18528 (a modified lava blister) has been January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 5 of 19 disturbed by land clearing activities since it was first documented in 1992. Small boulders from that push have fallen into blister and the site is currently obscured by thick brush covering its edges (Figure 19). No additional archaeological sites were identified within the project area as a result of the fieldwork conducted by ASM, but several recent rock constructions and modern landscape modifications were noted (see Figure 14). These more recent features, which include rock stacks, stone -lined paths (Figure 20), and rock cleared areas on the ground surface, are largely concentrated in the coastal -central portion of the subject parcel, in areas that appear to be used recurrently and recently for camping and fishing activities. The lack of mention of these features in the Spear (1992) AIS report, as well as the modern vegetation disturbance and debris associated with them, suggests that all of the additional rock constructions identified within project area were built during the last 30 years. None of these more recently constructed features appear to be burial monuments. Consultation To address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proximity of the cemetery to the project area and to determine the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the project area, ASM's Senior Ethnographer, Lokelani Brandt, M.A. conducted consultation with several long-time residents of the area including descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families. Consultation occurred during a period between October 31, 2023, and December 13, 2023, when ASM staff contacted Ms. Ke`ala Keli`iho`omalu, Mrs. Leialoha Ilae-Kaleimdmahu, and Mrs. Ku`ulei Kealoha-Cooper by phone. Following the initial phone calls, each of the three consulted parties were provided with a consultation letter and maps specifying ASM's search for persons who may have knowledge of any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. Each of the consulted parties contacted additional family members to seek such information. Ms. Keli`iho`omalu spoke with elder relatives Prince Keli`iho`omalu, Sam Keli`iho`omalu, Noenoe Dunn, Tiana Dunn, Jerry Dunn, Princess Keli`iho`omalu, Jr. Keli`iho`omalu, and Tiara Keli`iho`omalu. Ms. Keli`iho`omalu indicated that her uncle Sam also attempted to reach out to Aku Hauani`o and Kamu Quihano and that her father attempted to reach out to Annie Ka`aukai and Leslie Enriques. Mrs. Ilae-Kalaimamahu also contacted members of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and recommended that ASM staff contact Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper since she had heard that the cemetery belonged to the Kealoha family. Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper was contacted by ASM and she spoke with several of her relatives, including her mother. None of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. Subsequent email correspondence with Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper clarified that the cemetery did not belong to the Kealoha `Ohana, however, her mother related that in the 1930s and 1940s, the Kalapana Church was located near the cemetery and that her tutu (Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper's great-grandmother) Emma Nai`a was a pillar of that church. She added that there is a Kealoha cemetery in `Opihikao but was not aware of any such family cemetery in Kaimu. Conclusion and Recommendations The results of the current study support the findings of the Spear (1992) AIS. Three of the four sites previously documented by Spear (1992) within the subject parcel were identified during the field inspection (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; see Figure 14). These sites are all in similar condition to what was previously described, and indicate that the parcel was used during the Precontact to early Historic Period for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. All three of these sites were observed to be in similar condition to what was previously described by Spear (1992). The fourth site (Site 50-10-63-18525, a C-shape) could not be found, and is thought to have been destroyed by land clearing activities that have occurred within the subject parcel since the Spear (1992) AIS was accepted by SHPD. No potential burial features were identified within the subject parcel as a result of the current fieldwork, nor were any possible burial locations identified as a result of the consultation conducted by ASM. The only features identified within the property that were not reported on by Spear (1992) appear to be less than 50 years old and related to on -going camping and fishing activities that still occur within the project area. The findings of the current study, combined with the January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 6 of 19 SHPD's prior review of the Spear (1992) AIS (LOG NO: 7604, DOC NO: 9302ks25), support an HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" pursuant to HAR § 13-275-7(a)(1) for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject parcel. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Matthew R. Clark, M.A. Senior Archaeologist — ASM Hilo Director References Cited Buke Mahele 1848 Buke Kakau Paa no ka mahele aina i Hooholoia iwaena o Kamehameha III a me Na Lii a me Na Konohiki ana, Hale Alii, Honolulu. Chinen, J. J. 1958 The Great Mahele: Hawaii's Land Division of 1848. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawaii. Privately published. Ellis, W. 1825 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of a Tour of Hawaii, or Owhyee; with remarks on the History, Traditions, Manners, Customs and Language of the Inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands. Cocker and Brewster, Boston. Garovoy, J. 2005 "Ua koe ke kuleana o na kanaka" (Reserving the rights of Native Tenants): Integrating Kuleana Rights And Land Trust Priorities in Hawaii. Harvard Environmental Law 29:523- 571. Handy, E. S. C. and E. G. Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018 Kipuka Database. Electronic document, http://lcipukadatabase.com/kpuka. Pukui, M. K., S. H. Elbert, and E. Mo`okini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii. Revised and Expanded ed. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Sherrod, D. R., J. M. Sinton, S. E. Watkins, and K. M. Brunt 2021 Geologic Map of'the State of Hawai `i. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. USGS Numbered Series. Scientific Investigations Map 3143. 1:100,000 and 1:250,000 scale. Electronic document, https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3l43, accessed February 18, 2022. Soil Survey Staff (United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service) 2022 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, htip://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.�-to . Spear, R. 1992 An Inventory Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawaii, TMK 1- 2-18:1. Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. Prepared for Bruce Robinson. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 7 of 19 Figures N d �'l � IV Ara of Delai it '00 iCin I I I I I N I ✓ HOMFST KEOKEA 'nu.,� KIKA - �rw.� �Y✓ LAT i 43 ti, Kainlu y- Porlik+n of l 5('iti K alakekAaa, 141)(1 it 190 380 a I 2•tuw� �.aum 'a axu� Figure 1. USGS map showing location of project area. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 8 of 19 ♦ &mom zQ 2024 Archaeological FieldInspection macs mcaA+mf I2y (3)1- mEm! Page 9w 19 FPS $ Qogc£ah®showing project area. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 10 of 19 Figure 4. Coastline fronting the current project area, view to the southwest. Figure 5. Historic cemetery located to the northeast of the current project area, mauka of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road, view to the northeast. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 11 of 19 Figure 6. Geology underlying the project area and surrounding vicinity. Figure 7. Soil composition in the project area and surrounding vicinity. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 12 of 19 Figure 8. Graded area along northeastern boundary of project area, view to the west. Figure 9. Road extending to the coast of the project area, view to the northwest. a tr:e ° If i � �� �,, 4 t �,�� ^'d' r 1�1' -l►.�y�rf..t�j�.� �.. � yt� �, s �, � ���-�"�„ •.7 ,tom `,, w,��„'� _ I N, 4-7 dd yr. r 41 ytpyp���y o"o; lie' 1' d 1 a Y . Att, � e �•� 1 ✓t \ 4 '� I c, rya' � •'` ' ��' '4ya rZ. � . .j 47 Ma e.+ .a mY' S f VIA � � • � L� .. s+ AE 7 ,zr � .t�x'k r.��°���i;wWt,J January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 14 of 19 Figure 12. Portion of Hawaii Registered Map No. 1614 (prepared by E.D. Baldwin in 1892) showing the location of the current project area. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 15 of 19 Figure 13. Spear (1992:6) site location map. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 16 of 19 N Area of Douil 9D ri 'rnf w„ J 01Meters 0 !0 20 y Figure 14. Location of sites and features identified during the current study. jwlt �1. , Y ` ` �•\ 11 i Y � •a (+ T U71 ;.'`a tip. i�,1 .� •i� 1 ryr� �, a ��, �. :-� a T { �� v��.� �\: 1. t'If/¢1 4. ` /� j� ( ..'.•SDI �� ��(.�1��' rr'_Y ,1... I ;�1. P._ 9-. \ySy'� ♦ Y �• , ^ � t,l �. � .fir R. r, J i"'� r R4. ti� !�a 1� '-„� i• fir,. iV 7igure 19. Locationof 1 1 • blister,• �<- �Ir;;"'B{Ill► '�� ,�' r� 'A t. ` A .4•i i:, .�_+ �� • � � .fit Se _ _ � F'� � _. � w• d '3^y��".�twp�' ..:- _. • .' �, w �� y+, f � ..fit s���p��'' � � rat Y, E rM JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR OF HAWAII KE KIA'AINA O KA MOKU'AINA O HAWAI'I STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH P.O. BOX 916 HILO, HAWAII 96721-0916 MEMORANDUM DATE: July 30, 2024 TO: Mr. Zendo Kern Planning Director, County of Hawaii FROM: Eric Honda District Environmental Health Program Chief KENNETH S. FINK, M.D, MGA, MPH DIRECTOR OF HEALTH KA LUNA HO'OKELE SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Applicant: Kaimu Cove, LLC. Request: To Develop a Five (5) Lot Subdivision Including the Construction Of Single -Family Dwellings and Related Improvements TMK: 1-2-018:001, Kaimu, Puna —Hawaii In most cases, the District Health Office will no longer provide individual comments to agencies or project owners to expedite the land use review and process. Agencies, project owners, and their agents should apply Department of Health "Standard Comments" regarding land use to their standard project comments in their submittal. Standard comments can be found on the Land Use Planning Review section of the Department of Health website: https://health.hawaii.goN,/epo/landuse/. Contact information for each Branch/Office is available on that website. Note: Agencies and project owners are responsible for adhering to all applicable standard comments and obtaining proper and necessary permits before the commencement of any work. General summary comments have been included for your convenience. However, these comments are not all-inclusive and do not substitute for review of and compliance with all applicable standard comments for the various DOH individual programs. Clean Air Branch 1. All project activities shall comply with the Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Chapters 11-59 and 11-60.1. Planning Depi. Exhibit__ 2 Zendo Kern .1r3Iy 30. 2024 Page 2 of 4 2. Control of Fugitive lust: You Iiuist reasonably control the general ion of all airborne, visible ILi itive dust abed c(Allllly With the ftacyifiVte tiuNt ]3rovjSiOM of HAR § 1 1-60.1-33. Note that as:tivitie,, that occur near existing residences, businesses, I)LIblic areas, and major thoroughfares exacerbate potential dust concerns. It is recommended (hai a du.gt L:ontyol mani gernent plan be developed which identifies and mitigates all that may generate airborne and visible to hive dus4 and that butfr] zoo ws be established w henevcr possible. 3. Standard cotniments tog• the Clean Air Branch are at: 1)t17�: -hea1111 h'ivzL)i g, ,v-- ,�' �: ii i t` Clean NA'ater Branch 1. All project activities, shall comply with the HAR. Chapters 11-53, 1 1-54, and 1 1-55- 1. The following Geatl Water Branch website contain.,; intormaation for agencies and/or project ownerswho are seclwing. colrlmcnts re-arding environmental compliance !or th.C11- pr loos with HA1 , Chaplcrs l 1-53, 1 1-54. and 1 1-55-1 I1ups-./;heal ih.hawaii.go%'civb cicasct- titer-branch-ltomc- :fR'-'Q-LkVLi_ SUtttclard-c+<]ming is'. Hazard Evaluation & Emergency response Office 1. A Ph"u I Environmontal Sitc Asscssiiacnt {ESA} and Phase Il Site Invesligation should be conducted ror projects wherc:ver current or Fortner activities on site may have rcmdied in releases of hazat-dOLIN substances, including ail or chemicals. Arcas o conccrn include; tX11CM and fomier Industrial aroas. harbora, airports, 2I11d lorMCI-l} alld CUIT .I]tly zoned agricultural lands used for growing sugar, pineapple or other agricultural products. 2. S(andard comments for the IIazard E vaI cation & Emcrgc]1cy Kc:sporlsc 0 Jice are at: epo 1.11 dusL* Indoor and Radiological Health Branch 1. Project activities shall comply with HAR Chapters 1.1-3 , 11-45, 11-46, 11-501, 11- 50, 11-503, and I 1-504. 2. loi-,E may Lie crc1lc1-a'.:d 1.]`4 I-M'{' tiPclllt:s`I;]{`fl ti AJ Or Cot75tr-LiCtion. The applicable maxim, im otind le%k,k as stated in Tittle 11, 14AR, Chapter 11-46, , ('0Il1mimity Noise CoutTol.'' not he exceeded unless a /liaise permit is ohi.uncd From the Dep irin--:ia ofHealth- 3. Construction!'De ino I i I i on Invol vind3 A%)ti tos; It the proposed project inc Udes renovation/demolition activities that may involw"e asbestos, the appIIcant should contact the Asbestos and Lead Section of the Branch at Safe Drinking Water Branch Zendo Kerr Jelly 30.1 2024 Page 3 of 4 L Agencies awdl o} ;,ro-iL:L�i vVN 17,01--: ;tre responsible for ensuring environmental complia117':w• k"". I11,:jr. p ojec°{ in the areas of 1) Public Water Systems 2) Underer,:ur.d Ii,io,:Ijon Cowi-ol: and 3) Groundwater and Source Water Protection in aCC0j'L ;II!L'V %,-ith l JATt Uh;r;}iers 11-19, 11-20. 11-21, 1 1-23.. 1.1-23A, and I J- 25, They riEm °',,C re,,poiisihle i<n- fulfilling additional requirements related to the Safe britrkil147 tatcr prog;ranl. igpa : 1W,1191r.11,1W Iiih LOv ,Limb , 2. Standard comments for the Safe Drinking Water Branch can be found at: ii,lxav,cpn °lalldu'� Solid & Hazardous Waste Branch 1. Hazarduus Waste Program - Tlie state regulatiOIIS for hazardous waste and used oil are in HEAR Chapters 11-260.1 to 11-2.79.1. These rules apply to the identification, handling, transporuttion, storage, and disposal of regulated hazardous waste and used oil. 2. Solid Was Le Programs - The laws and regulations are contained in. I IRS c'11; 339D, 342G. 3421 H, and 3421, and HAR Chap[ rs 11-58.1 and l 1-2 2, Generators and handlcrs of -solid wa sic shall ensurc proper recycling or di�I)u�,L1 at D(A 1-purniirted solid waste ruallagellicnt Iarcilifles. I I' 1)L""�ibl . prevcrlli()rl, reuse. and recycling are preferred options over dispwc zit, The Office of Solid Wage ManagetilCnt alsct the CleC11-0111C LICV 5CC lVCVChng. and recok ry Iat , the glass a d v anted dIsgios I f�;e progr:rni- air d t1142 cl�lic��it K�vQl:I C containi:v ptvgr-liin. 3. Underground Storage Tank Program — I -lie state regulations for underground storage tanks are in 1-1 A R Chapter I 1-280.1, These rrife.s atlip Iv to the design, operation, closure, and release response requirerrrerrts for undergrorrrtd storage tank systems, including unknown underground t-anks identified during constRiction. 4. Standard coniniciit,� for the Solid& Hanirdotrs Waste Branch c:au be fecund art: Irtat3;:;; heailr.Iy.I�akatrii.�:`�ypc: Iarrrcu�;e;'. Wastewater Branch For conulients, please email the Wastewater Branch at doh.wkvb'ii dph.hawaii.Qov. Sanitation J Local DOH Comments: 1, Accord iiisr to RAR § 1.1-26•-35,1No person, firm. or corporation shalt denloIItih or cleat' any structure without first ascertaining. the pre�cncc ear ab,,ence ofrodents that 111ay L ndantxer public health by drspLn'S lI from s4rCII JVLAlrisew, Should any such inspection repeal the presence of rod e_nt�, the n.odeltts �JialI be eradicated before demu1ishinQF Or Cleldng the structure- A clLfmolinoil lierrnit Is required prior to demolition. Zendo Kenn July 30, 2024 Page 4 of 4 Other 1. CDC - Healtky Places - Healthy Cgimn unity Design Checklist Toolkit recommends that,,state and county plannin{t department,,, developers, platmers, engineers, and other interested patties arr*% these principles when planning or reviewing new i v,� lopments or redev lGj)MCilt prOJf`.CtS. . 1f new informal ion is hound or changes are madc to your submittal, DOH reserves Ilse right to implemcnt appropriate cnvironmental health restrictions as required. Should there be any chic olons on this natter, plcs Q contact. the Department of Health, Hawaii District Health Office, al 4}_t_;-()9j 7, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COUNTY OF HAWAII HILO, HAWAII Ir7_119:1 Xzwewadaw TO: Zendo Kern, Planning Director September 9, 2024 FROM: Department of Public Works, Engineering Division r SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Applicant: Kaimu Cove, LLC Request: To Develop a Five (5) Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings and Related Improvements TMK: 1-2-018:001 Sorry for the delay. We have reviewed the subject request and provide the following comments: The subject parcel is in an area designated as Flood Zone X and VE on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Flood Zone VE is the Special Flood Hazard Area inundated by the 100-year coastal flood (1 % chance of occurring in any given year) with velocity hazard (wave action). All construction within Flood Zone VE shall comply with the requirements of Hawaii County Code, Chapter 27, Floodplain Management. 2. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, of the Hawaii County Code (HCC). 3. Construction within the County right-of-way shall comply with HCC, Chapter 22, County Streets. Questions may be referred to Robyn Matsumoto at 961-8924. Planning acp:_ Fxhr lt.__ 3__. County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Proviler and Employer JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR I KE KIXAINA SYLVIA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA I IOPE KIA'AINA O `ynd and ryat`ai O State of Hai STATE OF HAWAII I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAI`I DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES IiA `OIHANA KUNIUWAIWAI `MNA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION KAKUHIHEW A BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD, STE 555 KAPOLEL HAWAII 96707 September 6, 2024 Zendo Kern, Director County of Hawaii, Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 planning(o-r),hawaiicounty. gov Dear Zendo Kern: DAWN N.S. CHANG CI IAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT RYAN K.P. KANAKA`OLE FIRST DEPUTY DEAN D. UYENO ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR -WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS IN REPLY REFER TO: Project No. 2024PR00930 Doc. No. 2409JG07 Archaeology SUBJECT: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review County of Hawaii Special Management Area Use Permit: PL-SMA-2024-000063 Field Inspection Letter Report Applicant: Kaimu Cove LLC (Landowner's representative) Kaimn Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) review of the subject County of Hawaii Special Management Area (SMA) Assessment permit application received by our office on July 26, 2024. The submittal included an SMA Use Permit Assessment Application, site plans, copies of a previous archaeological survey report (Spear 1992), an archaeological field inspection letter report (Clark 2024), and photos of the project area. The proposed project area comprises the entire 3.677-acre parcel. The project proponent proposes the development of a 5-lot subdivision consisting of parcels of at least 0.5 acres each for residential purposes. The following is also proposed as part of the subject project: • A 10-foot wide, cinder -surfaced public pedestrian access easement will be provided along the entire northern boundary of the subject property, adjacent to the existing adjoining State lands. • The water main along the mauka side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road will need to be tapped by lateral services and extended to the subject property. • The applicant and subsequent owners of the individual lots will be grubbing and grading each subdivided lot to accommodate a proposed single-family dwelling. • The intrusion within the adjoining State-owned lands consisted primarily of pushed vegetation that has since partially deteriorated with most of the vegetation reestablishing itself. The Applicant will remove all pushed vegetation that has not deteriorated for proper disposal at a greemvaste facility. Black cinder was placed within the 40-foot shoreline setback area to create a safer walking path along the shoreline trail. The Applicant will remove the black cinder from within the shoreline setback area and restore it to its previous condition to the extent practical. In both instances, the Applicant will coordinate both site restoration activities with the Planning Department, and if deemed necessary, the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources. These restoration efforts will be completed, to the satisfaction of the Planning Department, prior to the issuance of final subdivision approval. Planning Dept. Exhibit 4 Zcnde Kcim September k 290 Pogo 2 Thv MUM nmovilialls %hirov Ihm an awh.le0l0'_1kJ1 -,LIT% L-� C011(11.10ed ill the e.grly 1900, 1 Spe:ir 19()2-. Doc. No. 9 U 1 1.2 > i w h j I"I -he 010'rul'il pndvo a rw. I ho A , a) h Wanod hair WI. wi, ;,"pun ie, w A hut I hv Imlval 1}3reel: sill: '.; %:�25 [ti.Qwwuj SAC W I fl.61.1 V.'!� lc.."1111 L'.� . �A'! 50- 1 1 :Intl w;:1,2 50. 1 1 N_'X [1,1% ;1 '. k I I - LW 11 Ilds . L., ",'4 I ') - w i " I : i I _'.i: ; I n -. kil', is 1�1 I 1�:riLILI LI .,1:1, il ;Ikl;:,l 4Ik1L!kffllC:J1CLj ;Jjjd, LIILJS. %L u rL' lrC 4t,fl 1; 1 W! I L I Ll k'klt' t I U W ird w r w-A: hak:(' 1 ks'_ i l.l I '' I. I I k. Fhw Mi CC& Rchl Inspcnion W rorw. dw�nh,:-- ., 1--rolL'Cl ::irczi. :41.11111114:11YO- dl'. 111V�iWl, --N,, kkl�lni: I lilt i :i n, I L 1,, 1 111,: 1: 1 ir I P. JH, 1 0 PhqCL I WN: i0A k4 "� ' , 1j, n0kwl- On h: n a a o pqWn ( W Oil! I i iii.lins a, Q% A A SN I NnAh", MmoklisN onAwwd a Pun—whwc trl::l ( '1 1-[ lvlo'IL'd llll,c,: ill' Ilk: �)'R:-1 Il ldl4ll Al%:hlii_,'J pri I pOrl ic� I C 1:,,, -71 "ICA h A -I K520. An 1-01 IV:- d111 0011-0-10M SILO WW14,­1025 Wl MO Whq OW And n.:, u %my nd lo aw u hmw dW:Ok VA % 1AL WWA Q VAN I I d V"W" 14 qYM111WQWl115' 2101A 111". qn up P eA_ 170 011 "Y A: (whIL , > 2 arc WA o I w ka III o ind-_-1 14,11 ,1' I_" ll.,SI!,::ir I 1 1:". M IS okwp �c a la % I � lWil i 1 1 ;;11 :1'1 i 11 - 'I 1:11�11 L :LJFAi-� i acl i % iklu� Vci hki,' irir-n ili,-i i i,-, b I" I I,.; I It I %4 C % L!. il. L i %; J I, !'..:i 1 11°, 1 „'k.., k k "Is 11-L 14:SS 11 I Is ',4 eTu ol.%�,-rk u,, ;im I tk -'.'ic cl ih,: .1 k. ;1 c : i ;i I 12 J L II L k' I ! L'I L r". -I I �t I It :11 i{ I I I ',V,1 I L' I I I Lk I: LC I l, I I ti% :,:I I f ) L: t 41111 mn! 1 GLAnher I illk 11I.Jih,' ILW.1ilAl '�% il".lill lllti C1.11-11:1:11 PB�jCCI i L I'L-; 1. Bx!!.Iftl 011, 111l iril,11 Inx. ii ill })Jjj%' _.5 I :j 1. `~: I I I ' I ) ' < : , I . I I -,: _. --'I ICL .'j- I I I i'l. I I , ii , i \4P lflwt, rii• priaperfies affected" pwanni k' If XR 01 3-50-his I i I"ll. ik': :.I :,:I-: pajew!. :'. pi';-<l ..!.[ ,.! I I AR 1 ' _­­ -lo' wIlcil Sl 11,11 L0111111CM, LIU1. lilt 1"71l; %11,3:1 Ill 'i .111,:,: L si'Lln"i'al il I I i, '.. r 1, j­- 111 1 - I I a%;iLoric Pr':'crv'aiol� revie%; 1t1111.IL Ahmigh to neld in1vaian Was n 4 5 k n H to "qWanna n .4 an -, i':,fl il- -, r.. %I ;-% L-." -i % �peLJ:_-'L!d fil I _' 1 I" -` ! -­2 -fl-. II "n n 10 howain Pn do 1 vmnir P Ln 1 n PIN 0, Mv N -1, -HL pl't!'c." JILf'W: I L'S W'-% :'''l , I'le;1se 'kl 111ti it 011C 11,;:-d 1:11I)V Ivpoll' I I: Irm I 41Lill -.L:.! 1:: 1 ' 1 1: 1' Ilk: ;i::,i i of 6 is 1 anur w the M 11'I1 K dy 0 11 �'r-wc- I I I; I i fl Ll I 1 1 LL>TL I t:i pV 11) 1.! L' I sl i lij. I N1 I I lb I I j 1: ;i 1. I'l -N 1 1 111 L RI P 1, 1 rili II 11 IR" I 1" 1! 11 1 111 1s', �?111IY. 11 Id I" I ) 1 .,II1', 11 C. 1-1: P I FL I r i' !.Ch. i 1 1 i I 1i1: icll m 1)%-I14'i° pr'}131:1-11L_3 �-All Al I.%J 11.11IL: 'JI'MALival rm­i,,.ir,- ­: 11 11111; Lil k,: 1 1. LL i .11 N 0 L I I I Li . I '. 1:-1 11,_' 11 *-. I L I C. IIIII L%: I I 'L i, i 1: 1 IC C CJe work II'. I %. I f ! I I I I,: Ll ill L': '! i L: i 11 i i. . ''..I -. I I uld. I,%. i 11 1 I'l ."ll ji X]d .O'.na 1 he SMW 1 hnah! PW"o an W ! 4 door j I Q I V 7 oil . P L; L: oftmel JoLA I 1 I L! ( ii I sl I 1 1 1 111 1 1 "T It 1"�' Ll t I a �1 I k' I I, I r� I I i-c I i L-� i i 1.c42 i i i s regard i i:,-- I I -, i : I c' '� L::- AR:'f1lL,:L"Allc 111111'01 Aamg Adir K WWh SUM IOU fi� PWWn MkM I}Ix': D)ll Cc.: Atox Roy, Daryn Kalmu Ci r, LL I I nh,':iw _ify ^li ii1.cam CGH PLAN NINO DEPT AUG 27 2024 PH4:48 JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR KE KIAANNA SYLVIA LUKE UEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA REF:OCCL:CM O F H STATE OF HAWAH I KA MOKU'AINA 'O HAWAH DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA'OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI'AINA OFFICE OF CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS P O BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 Zendo Kern Planning Director County of Hawaii — Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 DAWN N.S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT RYAN K.P. KANAKA'OLE FIRST DEPUTY DEAN 0. UYENO ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR - WATER ADUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION ANDCOASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOOLAWEISLANO RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS- Correspondence: HA 25-18 Aug 20, 2024 SUBJECT: Request for Comments for Special Management Area (SMA) Major Permit No. PL-SMA-2024-000063 to Develop a 5-Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings Construction Project Located Within the Kaimu-Makena Homestead; Puna, Hawaii; Tax Map Key: (3) 1- 2-018:001 Dear Mr. Kern, The Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) has reviewed your correspondence regarding request for comments for the proposed development of a 5- lot subdivision at the subject location. The proposed development will include the construction of 5 new single-family dwelling with related improvements on each lot as determined by the individual lot owners. The related improvements may include driveways, carports, wastewater systems, utilities, and possibly storage sheds. Additionally, a proposed private cul-de-sac roadway will be constructed for ingress and egress to Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. You are requesting comments on the proposed construction project. It appears the project is located within the State of Hawaii Urban Land Use District. The OCCL regulates land uses in the State Land Use Conservation District, as such, the project appears to be located outside of our jurisdiction. As a ocean -front subdivision, I encourage you to review the State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer (https //www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/slr-hawaii ) to assess the potential impacts of sea level rise on the parcels. The structural design should consider post on pier rather than slab on grade as the properties may be affected by coastal hazards such as flooding and erosion. Additionally, please note that Act 16, which amended Hawaii Revised Statutes 205A, prohibits the construction of private shoreline hardening structures in front of private properties where there is a sandy beach. Planning. Ceps. Exhibit 5 rid -:) Ke!r, C:-)rresp-)ndence H', 'U IMA !`i tsar i -Ick subdmsi o-:- It sho�,rid be r',Oied ihat prs()r grubbing a(,tivrties by the prevrc+us owner taround 1992)- on the I0s esulkr}ri ir) li'ladvor'tc-rit vego-taiio:) pushing that extended northward into ti c adiace!3t Statn-c��M-neci ia!}cis byr approximately O ` c,' The grubbing activity ceased uperi r (,ognrt, m el'; the activity had gone beyond the property boundary Most of the vegetation 1,as re-established itself. The applicant statr.d that ary rc':maining �it�tr'rr°7rakec;i vegetatim-i on State lands will be removed and disposed at a green waste facility houid you have any questions regatding thir; c„Orret,;) 0rider7s'.e. Miyahara ca. the Office of Conservation and Coastal ;-ands at MB) 7 98-.614 or calm rniy�- ara rahawall nov. Michael Cam Administrator C-)ffiCC 0f (I n TC rvah;r, ariri a�;aP I. ariCi CA ra h Ln J c z 0 � (11 W W U J Lu Lu 4z F-- dx gc ar a wLL w 5� W DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY COUNTY OF HAWAI`I 345 KEKUANAO`A STREET, SUITE 20 HILO, HAWAI'I 96720 TELEPHONE (808) 961-8050 • FAX (808) 961-8657 August 28, 2024 GDH PLANNING GcPT AUG 29 2024 ►M�:22 REG'D HAND DELIVERED "f0: Mr. Zendo Kern, Director Planning Department FROM: Keith K. Okamoto, Manager -Chief Engineer SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Applicant - Kaimu Cove, LLC Request - To Develop a Five (5) Lot Subdivision Including the Construction of Single -Family Dwellings and Related Improvements Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018:001 We have reviewed the subject application and have the following comments. Please be informed that there is an existing 5/8-inch meter serving the subject parcel, which is limited to an average daily usage of 400 gallons and suitable for only one (1) single-family dwelling. Water can be made available from an existing 8-inch waterline along Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road fronting the subject parcel in accordance with the Department's existing water availability conditions, which are subject to change without notice. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 5 of the Department's Rules and Regulations, a copy of which is being forwarded to the applicant, a water commitment may be issued. Based on the four (4) additional units requested in the proposed 5-lot development, the required water commitment deposit is $600.00. Remittance by the applicant of the deposit is requested as soon as possible so that a water commitment may be formally issued. The commitment will be in writing with specific conditions and effective dates stated. Please keep in mind that this letter shall not be construed as a water commitment. In other words, unless a water commitment is officially effected, water availability is subject to change without notice, depending on the water situation. For the applicant's information, final subdivision approval will be subject to compliance with the following requirements: Construct necessary water system improvements, which shall include, but not be limited to: Planning Dept. ... ater, Our Most Precious Resource, .. Ka 'Wai,4 `Kane ... Exhibit 6 The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer. Mr. Zendo Kerry, Director pagc 2 A1.11:1111A 28.2024 a_ walol- fllalw� C: I rallk, I If tic . 11, 01-1111" W',I'.-,- I' I; ;I'l peak - ! 1 l' 15 11 , .11;kitls; till d..II:IC1k-I ofw'11-1' 6 1',1w1.'::' t'11111'd b. service laterals that %kil I accouirliodate 5/8-inch it, cacti lot. C. e%dslin.0 ,ervicc lateral must be cut and plugged at the main and relocated to die I I " 'pacd Ito I I lk 01-C 111'al 1 61. It h fcct 'Ipan il nd 14It11111 K.-,: I k 1 .1 111 .1 r'l % L'%% :1.%' or, 1 4 111 dcad-Clld SITLCIS. I IlC 1.)SI I I I-C 11' dt",L111 SIVI I I IN,' I0k:,t[VJ 41t 4 In',, hlI I i 1 1 P, " l'I I I I IC ;;i,.- kou.ti4.-, or ' unit, Cowi 1 t t �w_� dw r.-ork'I t>r li, [ilk: 411, C. St 11) 0.. 1 1 1 1 !V(I k I I rc I, I I 1.-, '.0 L""I !:'I II'IPT'l rk-d r I -o !'k r I I I t I 1 7 ' 7 1 7 11 L: j I] I k L: ] I I ),.",%LrtmerLt'% ajfkcwd llcccssarv. G ILII k I I ' U I I I : I I L: , L 1 L. u'd I I I I I ). L I C I I i CII [ 1 CC F. registered i n th c i k2 t iv, iI i'L'', I L", I III I k! Rci-,ii' !I,,- :,, -%;I'! ling 10�-i FAC I L ['111 S f I L� R ( i I VC) I 4 S14. Of �/j I i... ,11 ot;1 I I. Th I PT I 1 17 1 10 I'L 11 LL I S U I I I I i Q'I 111111 1 L:II I IIIL'( ti I I-L!'.1 tile' tIIMl IiLc 1ti I C� I :V; 1": 1 1 1 1 1 Ld "!.10 T I i I PLlki Ll V \% 1 1 IV (I I I I L: CX I C I I 11 S 111': tagMal watt r Cf,111111111"11clit dcjlo;Il� ('xk:�'vd dw 1;i41k[1'Cs Chaq�c, [it) Mr. Zendo Kem Director Page 3 August 28.,2024 3, 1-1,11 i`lk:1."' PIV 1)1,1:1! k' do"'I I 11'.k' i' I...' 1'k I po-1 1"41 Ij i ' it: %w ater system !i I' i 11! 1 "„ a -LOr to A h!id JiA7 cerilk dw L I escrIlp'Llcr. v, Cw; I I ic conNO d I'-:,: I 1''IL I L 1 1)1 1 k 1: Cir �A:11 ','I I I III 1 1 -'.1C %V1, '11111er1l k I ; I I I I I - I 111,: Ck 111 k I ; 1" 111 11clits 'ccp1cd bi' the Walcr Lau itr.id iiail be L Ic Should there be any questions, please contac I N-it - N, n i.Ji: i i t w I k!:: i "k\ ater Resources and Planning Branch at (808) 961-8070, extension 25t,, slrlccrcjk \oolrs. ()ktiimwo, RE. 'Vianager-Chicl Lngineer R Q: d fg copy — Kaiinu Cove, LLC Mr. Daryn Arai JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNORS KE KIAAINA TO FROM: SUBJECT FILE NO.: TMK NO.: DAWN N. S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON KENNETH S. FINK, M.D., MGA, MPH AURORA KAGAWA-VIVIANI, PH.D. WAYNE K. KATAYAMA PAUL J. MEYER LAWRENCE H. MIIKE, M.D., J.D. STATE OF HAWAH I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAI`I DEAN D. UYENO ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES i KA'OIHANA KUMUWAIWAPAINA COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT I KE KAHUWAI PONO P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 Aug 05, 2024 Zendo Kern, Planning Director County of Hawai'i, Planning Department I Dean D. Uyeno, Acting Deputy Director Commission on Water Resource Management Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) RFD.6302.8 (3) 1-2-018:001 REF: RFD.6302.8 Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject document. The Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM) is the agency responsible for administering the State Water Code (Code). Under the Code, all waters of the State are held in trust for the benefit of the citizens of the State, therefore all water use is subject to legally protected water rights. CWRM strongly promotes the efficient use of Hawaii's water resources through conservation measures and appropriate resource management. For more information, please refer to the State Water Code, Chapter 174C, Hawaii Revised Statutes, and Hawaii Administrative Rules, Chapters 13-167 to 13-171. These documents are available via the Internet at htti)://dinr.hawaii.gov/cwrm. Our comments related to water resources are checked off below. ❑ 1. We recommend coordination with the county to incorporate this project into the county's Water Use and Development Plan. Please contact the respective Planning Department and/or Department of Water Supply for further information. ❑ 2. We recommend coordination with the Engineering Division of the State Department of Land and Natural Resources to incorporate this project into the State Water Projects Plan. ❑ 3. We recommend coordination with the Hawaii Department of Agriculture (HDOA) to incorporate the reclassification of agricultural zoned land and the redistribution of agricultural resources into the State's Agricultural Water Use and Development Plan (AWUDP). Please contact the HDOA for more information. RI 4. We recommend that water efficient fixtures be installed and water efficient practices implemented throughout the development to reduce the increased demand on the area's freshwater resources. Reducing the water usage of a home or building may earn credit towards Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification. More information on LEED certification is available at http://www.usgbc.org/leed. A listing of fixtures certified by the EAP as having high water efficiency can be found at http://www.epa.gov/watersense. l5. We recommend the use of best management practices (BMP) for stormwater management to minimize the impact of the project to the existing area's hydrology while maintaining on -site infiltration and preventing polluted runoff from storm events. Stormwater management BMPs may earn credit toward LEED certification. More information on stormwater BMPs can be found at http://planning. hawaii.gov/czm/initiatives/low-impact-development/ ❑ 6. We recommend the use of alternative water sources, wherever practicable. ❑ 7. We recommend participating in the Hawaii Green Business Program, that assists and recognizes businesses that strive to operate in an environmentally and socially responsible manner. The program description can be found online at http://energy.hawaii.gov/green-business-program. ❑ 8. We recommend adopting landscape irrigation conservation best management practices endorsed by the Landscape Industry Council of Hawaii. These practices can be found online at http://www. hawaiiscape.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/LICH_Irrigation_Conservation_BMPs.pdf. Planning Dee . Exhibit Page 2 August 30, 2024 El9. 'There may be the pate-mial for ground or surface water degradal onfcontarnination and recomr^end chat approvals for mi,5 protecl be conditioned upon a reviow by the State Department of Heallh and the developer',; tae,,eptr nfx,, ;,f any+ resuitfng requirements mlated t(r:ater quality. ❑ 10. The propose;i water supply s-ource For the prfjij:Ct is luuatvid in a di::siyriated ,:titer Inanagemifrit area. and a Water Use Permit rs required 'imor to use of water. The VVJiter Use Permit may be c:Griditicried cm the requir(-, raient to use dual line 'seater supply systems for new indusmal and commercial develop•n.enis ❑ 11. The Hawaii Water Pia it is d:recteC toward the ac!iievei;tent of the utilization of rectaime:;water for uses olher ilian dronkiny and or potable water needs in urie hundred per cent of Stale and County f�cdities by Dece;; i per Y . 2045 ( 174C-31(f'1' 1, Ha*aii Re�Jsed Statutes), We strongly recommend that thisproject consider using reclaimed water for ii-, non -potable water needs, such as irrigation. Reclaimed water may include. but is r:ol limited to. recyderl t•:asie cater. gray- water. and captured rainwaterlstomiwater_ Please COHILIU1. tfie Hawaii Department of Hea th, Wastev.wer Brandt. for more information can their reuse guidelines rind the av,adabit ity of reclaima4 water in the pmjo.(.i arlwq. 12. A WelI Construction Permit(s) is (are) are required befeare iIie cornii?r,,ncerrtvrit of any well construction work. 13. A Bump Installation Permit(s) is (are) required before grwunci .-.- _-air is developed as a source of supply for the project. 114, There is (are) well(s) located on or adjacent to this projecE. I I t ill : ,7re not planned to be used and will be affected by army .:},: (,xi! biriction, they wust be properly at ar;ra , :r..! and sealed, A permit for well abandonmcn:-n;i:;t i-cw rr;r::pined_ 15. GraUnd-wale!, ,,.. ,.),,-',a i ais from this project may affect streamllows, which may require an instream flow standard 2rrtLi; i,t,c 1. M A Stream ChanncI AN, F ^rmit(s� is tare) rogtiircd before any alteration clan bie made to tho bed anftr banks c ;, st .,.,i r. •r•e1. 17. A Stream Diversicr. 'Norks Permit(s) is (are) required before any stream diversion works is constructed or altered, ❑ 18. A Petition to Amend the Interim Instrearn Flaw Stslidard is required for any new or expanded diversion(s) of surface water. El19. The p;arred ,nurrve of water for this pro$ecl has not been identified in this report, 'Therefore, we cannot delerm;m, ,':l7at'D rrriits ar petitions are roquirc.-d from our offior, or whother thcra are potential impacts to 7] OTHER" If you t-�-IVC anV G'UCStions. please contact Ryan linata of [he R-agulation Branch at (808) 587-0225 or Katie Roth of ttie. Plar,riina) Branch ti806) 587-0216 Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultori t SL' Ill,- 1 1'�hk.- I. I (1- 2024 N I I-. /Lt ii, I I, K�.-II. PI -,I n i'.i r' : L Coull:\ of I lav, ,:I`L PI,11,1111111� I K:par'.11IL:i11 101 Suitt! D�:,u Dl,�xttv Kerru .S I,J,' C:t: "o SMA Use Permit Application PL-SM. -2024-1)(10063 Applicant: Kaimu Covc. LI-C 'I'MIK: 1-2-018:001..KiiiiL-i..-funs. Hawaii Think you for provid: I i,-, the Applicant wil h cornmmts receivek I I n -I III -I I it- \; I rI t I,. I,. iv,, I k,M I :1!., I 1`1ti, ,-ubjeet applicatioll. to,' hidi %k C III.(IN idc 11w fol'o.-A m­ oI :wd N;,,mr.i' I lk.%' 0' CO!'I\ti'i'%;1""%M AI!AI I I,%._,1L,,1. 'I hC I i'll'O I M �0 F� %111 11 :I Ild tM. I ; I I I K "I ii-PIN '.Ilk' 111IL'L' I j'N I 't � 110 !' I -'I II'_' OLLLNIdc O'llic CL 511 C I I I I I � 7. 1 '1 L I ! L I k: IV I't ) I L: LI I N 'I LI C 0 t' I I 11C 'L F jUI'I tlarU11- I I I >4% L ' I, ', - 1-, 0( i111.1 1. k'k I I k' N I IIIC k I k % I"; I I'_. t I I 'L " I I ',i:SOS 111 L ' P k '1 -1 i -. : L I i I I I PZkC I ', SIB � C: L --I,%,- :IIIJ othel. .IA/Lkll H11011 1.114' Nubdk %vhw]i Hic AI%I1hL',I.i.I1 ;IkL:V1-%,'kI III _1� SNIA by k.(ILIIII.111116� 1""IC x1111kll%i'.Ioll .1%, M11. h\ FLNIA 1,:%tI L 5 1 111 k ) I I I I 1 1 % I I I L: S 1,11 Ut i )C I I 7-k: L1' k 5 1 k L' I I S kkt.I I ',: L I I I L I I it i,. T k I _'L - I I t I k ) IV 111 1 % ',V I I 'I � I 'I 1I C I L' I- Ii ):'< I. % c I " L k for di sp :II L I I I I I 1 1-1 (1 ;'el11 Wa�, I e J'4'kc j I i (y 111 RCI.OUrces-Historic prCSCI-valloll I )I� I lilt-T11k, dalc'�. Scjli.�21i_-J,cr 0. 2H24 I 110 A -'I)' I j_II L':l �C� VI1.11 1 Ofl'o I I'l I IVOI 1:1 I-C i I I W 1% 1 1 11% I)OC I I 1 111 IVIlt 11.1 it. r I h I k4.m. ,'-V I ir, I I lo I:Ikl I )I .111R..-Sl H 11) 111 1 1 !10 11'ZINA4' k III IV VIOW 1-1 It %' h\ 111 11 V C 111 % 1 k � 1 ' 1 IVk)I 10 1 111'e� 1% W'%! L' I I I I I I I M 1 C i I 1' 1 L' I I I C (T. L I I I i L I I,\ Rohk.'I[ I1I,._D. ill II)`),_ , I71L - - ltldcd �0- I () i)3 1 0 1 Ck In I I k: I, - RO, ROX 4-'0) 1 111 1-1 AW.A Dcp PHONF: Exhib�f Mr. Zendo Kern, Planning Director Page 2 of 4 September 16, 2024 and Site 50-10-63-18527 (wall), and Site 50-10-63-18528 (lava tube). A fourth site, (Site 50-10-63-18525 [c-shape feature]) was not relocated and was assumed to have been destroyed as the area exhibited evidence of ground -disturbing activities. The report did not identify any new historic properties, although it did indicate that additional rock constructions were observed and suggests that they were constructed sometime after the Spear (1992) archaeological survey. Due to the proximity of the subject project area to a nearby cemetery, consultation was conducted between October 31 and December 13, 2023 and found that none of the consulted parties knew of any burials being located within the current project area. Based on the information provided above, SHPD's project effect determination is "No historic properties affected" pursuant to HAR § 13-284-7(a)(1) for the current project. Additionally, pursuant to HAR § 13-284-7(e), when SHPD comments that the proposed project shall not affect significant historic properties, the HRS 6E historic preservation review process ends and the SMA permit issuance process may continue. 3. Department of Land and Natural Resources -Commission on Water Resource Mann_ e (memo dated August 5, 2024) The Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM) promotes the efficient use of Hawai`i's water resources through conservation measures and appropriate resource management. As recommended by CWRM, the Applicant will encourage lot owners to install efficient water fixtures and implement water efficient practices within the proposed dwellings and throughout the proposed subdivision. As a proposed subdivision with individual lot owners and individual needs and capabilities, the Applicant cannot assure that the design of these homes will achieve LEED standards, but the water conservation information provided by CWRM can be shared with potential lot owners. The Applicant will explore the use of best management practices for stormwater management to minimize the impact of the proposes subdivision upon the existing area's hydrology. One such effort is to reduce the amount of pavement within the subdivision access roadway, which directly translates to the amount of runoff generated due to impervious surfaces. The Applicant also agrees to comply with applicable requirements of the State Department of Health to minimize the potential for ground or surface water degradation or contamination to protect groundwater quality. Mr. Zendo Kern, Planning Director Page 3 of 4 September 16, 2024 4. Department of Land and Natural Resources -Engineering Division (memo dated Jul, 29, 2024 The Engineering Division reminded the County and Applicant of the need to research the Flood Hazard Zone designation for the subject property, and the need to comply with local flood ordinances, which may stipulate higher minimum flood standards that an be more restrictive than the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). 5. Department of Water Supply (letter dated August 28, 2024) The Department of Water Supply (DWS) confirmed water availability to support the proposed 5-lot subdivision from an existing 8-inch waterline located along the Kalapana- Kapoho Beach Road that fronts the subject property. The Applicant will submit the required water commitment payment to secure these 4 additional water commitments promptly after approval of the requested change of zone request. Should this rezoning request be approved, the Applicant will construct all necessary water system improvements required by DWS prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval, which shall include: Construct necessary water system improvements, which shall include, but not be limited to: o water mains capable of delivering water at adequate pressure and volume under peak -flow and fire -flow conditions; minimum diameter of mains shall be 6 inches from Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road extending approximately into the cul-de-sac, o service laterals that will accommodate 5/ 8-inch sized meters to each lot, o existing service lateral must be cut and plugged at the main and relocated to the appropriate lot, o fire hydrant(s) spaced no more than 600 feet apart and within 300 feet of the driveway or access for each lot. On dead-end streets, the last fire hydrant shall be located at one half the distance from the last house, or unit, fronting the property line, or to the driveway or access for the property. o subject to other agencies' requirements to construct improvements within the road right-of-way fronting the property affected by the proposed development, the Applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and adjustment of the Department's affected water system facilities, should they be necessary. Submit construction plans and design calculations prepared by a professional engineer, registered in the State of Hawaii, for review and approval. Mr. Zendo Kern, Planning Director Page 4 of 4 September 16, 2024 6. Department of Public Works (memo dated September 9, 2024) The Applicant acknowledges that the subject property is situated in an area designated as Flood Zone X and VE on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Applicant also understands that the Flood Zone VE is the Special Flood Hazard Area inundated by the 100 -year coastal flood (1% chance of occurring in any given year) with velocity hazard (wave action) that will prompt all construction within Flood Zone VE to comply with the requirements of Hawaii County Code, Chapter 27, Floodplain Management. For clarification, the Applicant referenced the entire subject property, situated as that portion being situated mauka of the certified shoreline, as being situated within Flood Zone X, and lands makai of the certified shoreline being situated within the Flood Zone VE. We understood this as lands makai of the certified shoreline is owned by the State of Hawaii. Therefore, our preliminary assessment is that the subject property and the proposed 5-lot subdivision will be situated entirely in Flood Zone X. The Applicant will comply with all earthwork and grading requirements as specified within Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, of the Hawaii County Code. Finally, the Applicant will ensure that construction within the County right-of-way complies with Chapter 22, County Streets of the Hawaii County Code. We hope that we have adequately responded to comments offered by the respective agencies. Please feel free to contact me should there be any questions or need for additional information. Sincerely, DARYN ARAI Land Use Planning Consultant copy via email: Mr. Mark Wyatt EXHIBIT A-22 AJR-2024 ("01"N'11 OF HAWAI`I PLANNING DEPARTMENT RFC_'ONIMENDATION REPORT KAIMU COVE LLC" SPECIAL N1.kNAGF %1rNT :1RFA l'SE PERMIT :APPLICATION (PI.-SM A-2024-Ofl0063 ) Upon careful review of the applicant's request against the guidelines for granting of a Special Management Area Use Permit, the Planning Director recommends that this request to create a 5-lot subdivision for future residential development and related improvements all within a 3.677-acre shoreline parcel in the Special Management Area (SMA) be approved by the Planning Commission. Since this recommendation is made without the benefit of public testimony, the Director reserves the right to modify and/or alter this recommendation based upon additional information presented at the public hearing_ This approval recommendation is based on the following: The proposed development outlined in the application is for a 5-lot subdivision on a 3.677-acre shoreline parcel within the Special Management Area (SMA). Each lot is intended for the construction of a single-family dwelling, along with related facilities SLIch as driveways, wastewater systems, and utility installations. The development aims to provide Dousing opportunities in an area zoned for residential -agricultural use. - Lot size: The proposed development involves subdividing a 3.677-acre property into five lots, with each lot having a minimum size of half an acre (each lot will cover at least 21,780 square feet), with four of the lots fronting the shoreline and accommodating the required 44-foot shoreline setback. • Building height: Each dwelling will not exceed 35 feet in height and will adhere to yard setback requirements (25 feet front and rear, 15 feet side). • Utilities: Water will be supplied via lateral connections from the existing water main. Wastewater will be handled by individual septic systems approved by the State Department of Health. Other utilities, including electrical, cable, and telephone services, will be available to each lot. EXHIBIT "A-22" • Additional improvements: The project includes grubbing, grading, access driveways, pedestrian shoreline access pathway, water meter installations, and electrical poles. The grounds for approving development within the Special Management Area are based on HRS, Chapter 205A-26(2) (Special Management Area guidelines) and Rule 9- 1 l(e) of the Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure. Planning Commission Rule 9-1 l(e) states that the Authority (Planning Commission) may permit the proposed development only upon finding that: 1. The development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect except as such adverse effect is minimized to the extent practicable and is clearly outweighed by public health, safety or compelling public interest; 2. The development is consistent with the objectives and policies and the Special Management Area guidelines as provided by Chapter 205A, HRS; 3. The development is consistent with the General Plan, Community Plan, Zoning Code and other applicable ordinances; 4. The development will, to the extent feasible, reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist, including specific factual findings regarding: a.The identity and scope of valued cultural historical or natural resources in the petition area, including the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the petition area; b. The extent to which those resources including traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights, will be affected or impaired by the proposed action; and c.The feasible action, if any, to be taken by the Authority to reasonably protect any valued cultural, historical or natural resources including any existing traditional and customary native Hawaii rights. In review of the SMA guidelines as listed under HRS 205A-26(2)(A), the proposed development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect, except as such adverse effect is minimized to the extent practicable and clearly outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling public interest. The proposed Kaimu Cove project includes adherence to necessary environmental assessments and regulations to ensure minimal ecological disruption, The project will comply with the guidelines set by the Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Program and will obtain the required Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit, ensuring that coastal and environmental resources are protected throughout the development process. The project design incorporates multiple mitigation strategies to minimize potential adverse effects. A 40-foot shoreline setback will be established, prohibiting any construction or land alteration within this area, which aims to protect coastal ecosystems and maintain natural processes. Additionally, a 5-foot-wide public pedestrian access easement along the northern boundary will enhance public access to coastal resources while helping to protect the sensitive shoreline environment. Each single-family dwelling will utilize individual septic systems designed to meet State Department of Health. standards, thereby mitigating pollution risks to nearby water bodies and ecosystems. The project includes commitments to restore any areas of previous unpermitted disturbance, which involves removing unpermitted grading materials and restoring affected areas to their natural state. Review by local agencies will ensure that restoration efforts meet environmental standards, helping to rehabilitate the land and restore habitats impacted by past activities, During construction, best management practices will be implemented to control dust, erosion, and runoff, including the utilization of sediment barriers and other techniques to prevent soil erosion during and after construction, as well as spraying water on active construction areas to minimize dust emissions. These practices are aimed at InnitingY any temporary disturbances related to construction activities. The project site has been assessed for its ecological characteristics, revealing that while the area includes various flora, no endangered or threatened species have been documented directly on the site. The ecological impact is further mitigated by the absence of significant habitats or species that would be adversely affected by the proposed development. Furthermore, past archaeological surveys have confirmed that the site does not contain significant histo 'cat or cultural resources that would require additional -3- protective measures. The benefits of the proposed project, including the provision of housing opportunities within an established community, align clearly with public interests. The development will assist in fulfilling housing demand in the area and contribute to local economic growth, which outweighs any minimal ecological impacts that may occur. In summary, the Kaimu Cove project has been designed and assessed to ensure that any potential adverse environmental effects are minimized to the extent practicable. The measures in place to protect ecological resources, combined with the project's alignment with public health and safety interests, demonstrate that the benefits of the project clearly outweigh any minor impacts, supporting community well-being and sustainable development in the area. In reviewing the proposed development against the factors that may constitute a substantial adverse effect as listed under Planning Commission Rule 9-10 (H) (1-10), it has been determined that the proposed project to subdivide the subject parcel to create five (5) home sites will not have a significant adverse environmental or ecological effect upon the Special Management Area. This determination is based on the following_ In review of the SMA guidelines as listed under HRS 205A-26, the proposed development is consistent with the objectives and policies as provided by Chapter 205A-26, RRS, and Special Management Area guidelines contained in Rule No. 9 of the Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure, The purpose of Chapter 2.05A-26, Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) and Rule 9 of the Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure, is to preserve, protect, and where passible, to restore the natural resources of the coastal zone areas. Therefore, special controls on development within an area along the shoreline are necessary to avoid permanent loss of valuable resources and the foreclosure of management options. The objectives and policies of Chapter 205A-26, HRS and Rule 9-10(h)include, but are not limited to, the protection of coastal recreational resources, historic resources, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems, marine resources, beaches, and controlling development in coastal hazard areas. The proposed Kaimu Cove project is consistent with the objectives and policies -4- outlined in Chapter 20SA-26 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, as well as the Special Management Area (SMA) guidelines contained in Rule No, 9 of the County of Hawaii Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure. Specifically, the project prioritizes the protection and management of coastal resources and ecosystems, aligning with the underlying purpose of maintaining the integrity of Hawaii's unique coastal zones. By establishing a 40-foot shoreline setback, the project effectively safeguards against coastal hazards and preserves natural coastal processes, which is a key requirement under the SMA guidelines. The development also adheres to the principle of sustainable growth by providing much -needed housing options within an established community, thereby respecting the area's character while accommodating population growth_ Furthenuore, the project includes provisions for public access along the shoreline, enhancing recreational opportunities while ensuring that access does not compromise the sensitive ecological environment. Through these measures, the Kaimu Cove project embodies the intent of the relevant statutes and rules, balancing development needs with environmental stewardship and community well-being. View planes towards the shoreline will not be adversely impacted as the proposed home sites are not visible from the nearest State highway or other mauka vantage points, and access to the shoreline will be provided through the subject parcel. Staff notes the coastal berm located along the maki side of the subject parcel will also minimize viewplane impacts along the shoreline, and views mauka. The property contains mostly non-native and several common native plants, Standard clearing, and lighting mitigation will be employed to ensure no adverse impacts to any potential threatened or endangered animals that may traverse the property. The property is not situated over any natural drainage system or water feature that would flow into the nearby coastal ecosystem and no floodplains are present in the affected area. In terms of beach protection, construction is set back from the shoreline and would not affect any beaches nor adversely affect public use and recreation of the shoreline in this area. With implementation of Best Management Practices associated with grading permits, there should be no impacts on marine resources. No historic sites would be adversely affected and no effects to cultural resources and practices will occur since the existing cultural use of the shoreline area for -5- fishing and gathering uses will be maintained and a permanent shoreline access party will be established. The proposed development is consistent with the County General Plan, Puna C'omniunity Development Plan (PCDP), Zoning Code and other applicable ordinances. The proposed Kaimu Cove project demonstrates consistency with the Hawaii County General Plan, the Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP), the Hawai.`i County Zoning Code Chapter 25, and other relevant ordinances for both the County and State of Hawaii. Specifically, the project aligns with the Hawaii County General Plan"s emphasis on sustainable development and the provision of adequate housing, as it proposes a 5-lot residential subdivision that addresses local housing needs while ensuring compatibility with the surrounding residential and agricultural context. The PCDP further supports this initiative, as it encourages low -density residential development that respects the rural character of Puna, which the project embodies by offering lots of at least 112 acre in size. Additionally, under Hawaii County Zoning Code Chapter 25, the project is categorized within the Residential and Agricultural (RA-.5a) zoning designation, allowing for the proposed uses and ensuring adherence to local land use policies. Furthermore, the project includes proactive measures such as a 44-foot shoreline setback and public access easements, promoting environmental protection and community engagement while also satisfying applicable state and county regulations concerning coastal development. The project aligns with key themes of the PCDP: Protecih► Nalural and C'uhural 12e.wier'ceas: The project has planned measures such as a 5-foot-wide pedestrian public shoreline access easement and adherence to environmental best management practices, ensuring that existing resources are preserved. Growth Management: The subdivision aims to provide low -density residential lots that fit within the context of established residential uses in the surrounding area, proinoting the rural character of Puna. Public Safety and Sanitation: The project includes provisions for wastewater management using individual septic systems, complying with health and safety regulations. -6- The County General Plan aims to maintain a balance of land uses and supports urban development in already designated urban areas. The Kaimu Cove project is situated in an area recognized for residential and agricultural use since the late 1960s. While the General Plan suggests extensive agricultural uses, it also emphasizes the utilization of urban areas for residential purposes where appropriate. Consequently, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the objectives of the County General Plan, facilitating housing opportunities within an established community. Oxerall, the Kaimu Cove project fits the zoning of the area, adheres to the County General Flan, and aligns with the objectives and themes outlined in the Puna Community Development flan. This integration supports sustainable community grov,,th in a manner that is consistent with existing regulations and community values. Through these specific strategies, the Kaimu Cove project successfully integrates the objectives and policies of the relevant plans and codes, fostering a balanced approach to development that preserves the integrity of the natural environment and enhances community livability. The development will to the extent feasible, reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist. In view of the Hawaii State Supreme Court's "DASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka"Mina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian rights, such as gathering and fishing rights, must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site_ Investigation of %alUed resources: An archaeological inventory survey was conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D., in 1992, which identified four archaeological sites within the property, indicative of previous habitation and agricultural activities during the Precontact to early Historic periods_ In addition to the 1992 survey, a more recent archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation were performed by ASM Affiliates in January 2024. This study aimed to confirm previous findings and ensure that no significant cultural resources were overlooked. The investigations reaffinned the presence of three of the four sites identified in the earlier survey while noting,4that one site had likely been destroyed due to land -7- disturbance, The current assessment concluded that there were no burial features or significant archaeological concerns within the project area. This survey informed subsequent assessments and was accepted by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). According to SHPD via letter dated September b, 2424, the project effect deterinination is "No historic praper-rieS afj� cted', and the permit process may proceed. The valuable cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the area: The area of the proposed Kaimu Cove project contains several valuable cultural, historical, and natural resources, although assessments indicate no significant archaeological sites or resources have been overlooked. Culturally, the region is situated within the ahupua`a of Kaitnu, which has historical significance for native Hawaiians as a gathering place and is known for its connection to traditional practices, including fishing and gathering. The vicinity also Hosts a historic cemetery to the northeast, which underscores the area's cultural heritage. Historically, previous archaeological surveys identified four sites indicating past habitation and usage, suggesting the area was utilized for agricultural and residential purposes during the Precontact to early Historic periods. The presence of features such as C-shaped structures and walls reveal the area's potential importance for understanding prehistoric Hawaiian lifeways. In terns of natural resources, the project site is characterized by a diverse range of flora, including native and non-native species. The coastal environment supports various ecosystems, and the region is adjacent to shoreline and marine habitats that are critical for local blodlversity. While these resources possess inherent value, assessments have shown that no significant cultural or endangered resources are found directly on the project site that would prohibit development. HoN ev er, the proposed project includes measures to protect the coastal environment and respect local cultural practices such as providing a permanent shoreline access pathway, ensuring that both natural and cultural resources are considered in the planning and development process. Possible adverse effects or impairment of valued resources: The proposed Kairnu Cove project is designed to minimize any potential adverse effects or impairments to -8- valued cultural or historical resources. Extensive archaeological surveys, including a significant inventory conducted in 1992 and a subsequent field inspection in 2024, have confirmed that there are no significant cultural or historical resources directly on the project site that would be affected by development. While the site does house some historical remnants of previous habitation and usage, these have been assessed and deemed not to require additional protective measures. Furthennore, the project incorporates specific strategies to safeguard against any potential impacts, such as establishing a 40-foot shoreline setback that ensures no construction occurs within sensitive coastal areas. Additionally, there is a commitment to halt construction activities should any undiscovered cultural features be encountered during development_ This proactive approach underscores the project's emphasis on respecting and protecting any cultural heritage that may be present. Overall, while there is always a risk when developing in areas with historical significance, the evidence gathered indicates that the Kaimu Cove project is unlikely to result in any substantial adverse effects or impairments to valued cultural or historical resources. Measures in place aim to ensure that any potential impact is minimized to the fullest extent. Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian rights: The proposed Kalmu Cove project incorporates principles derived from the Hawai`i State Supreme Court's landmark decisions in "PASH" (Public Access Shoreline Hawaii) and "Ka Pa`akai O Ka'aina," focusing on the protection of native Hawaiian rights to the extent feasible_ recognizing the importance of these rights, the project includes measures to ensure that any potential access and cultural practices associated with native Hawaiian traditions are respected. Specifically, the establishment of a 5-foot-wide public pedestrian access easement along the Northern boundary of the property enhances shoreline access, allowing the community and native Hawaiians to freely engage in traditional practices such as fishing, gathering, and cultural activities, Additionally, the project design accommodates ongoing assessments of the area to identify any cultural resources or rights that may exist, ensuring compliance with requirements to halt construction should any significant features or burials be discovered. By actively consulting with local stakeholders and -9- employing culturally sensitive practices, the Kaimrr Cove project aims to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights while facilitating the desired development, thus reflecting a balanced approach to land use that honors the heritage and rights of the Hawaiian community. Lastly, this approval is made with the understanding that the Applicant remains responsible for complying with all other applicable government requirements in connection with the approved use, prior to its commencement or establishment upon the subject property. Additional governmental requirements may include the issuance of building permits, the installation of approved wastewater disposal systems, compliance with Fire Code, installation of improvements required by the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), among many others. Compliance with all applicable governmental requirements is a condition of this approval; failure to comply with such requirements will be considered a violation that may result in enforcement action by the Planning Department and/or the affected agencies_ Based on the above findings, the proposed development will not have substantial adverse impacts on the environment, nor will its approval be contrary to the objectives and policies of Chapter 205A, HRS, relating to Coastal Zone Management and Rule No. 9 of the Plannmtr Commission relating to the Special Management Area. Approval of this request is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant(s), its successor(s), or assign(s) (Applicant) shall be responsible for complying with all stated conditions of approval. 2. The Applicant shall secure all necessary approvals and pen -nits from other affected Federal, State, and County agencies as necessary to comply with all applicable laws and regulation. 3. Development of the subdivision and related improvements shall be conducted in a manner that is substantially representative of plans and details as contained within the Special 'Management Area Use Permit Application dated July 5, 2024, and representations made to the Windward Planning Commission_ 4. Final Subdivision Approval shall be secured within five (5) years from the effective date of this permit. fflo S, The Applicant shall adhere to all recommendations by the Department of Water Supply regarding the establishment of water meters for each of the new subdivided lots, including, but not limited to the construction of new meters, payment of fees, and other required entitlements. 6. Access to the project site from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road shall meet with the approval of the State Department of Transportation. 7. Artificial light from exterior lighting fixtures, including, but not necessarily limited to floodlights, up -lights or spotlights used for decorative or aesthetic purposes shall be prohibited if the light directly illuminates, or is directed to project across property boundaries toward, the shoreline and ocean waters, except as may otherwise be permitted pursuant to Section 205A-71(b), Haw ai`i Revised Statutes. 8. All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on -site and shall not be directed. toward any adjacent properties. Any recommended drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to receipt of Final Subdivision Approval. 9. The applicant shall comply with Chapter 27 - Flood Control, of the Hawaii County Code. 10. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control of the Hawaii County Code. 11. The Applicant shall ensure that excessive siltation and turbidity are contained or otherwise minimized through the use of silt containment devices or barriers, or other approved Best Management Practices as approved by the Planning Director. 12. No land alteration, grubbing, landscaping or construction activities, including but not limited to, the stockpiling of debris, construction materials or equipment, shall occur in the shoreline setback area without securing a prior written determination of minor structure or activity pursuant to Rule 11-8 from the Planning Director or approval of a Shoreline Setback Variance from the Planning Commission, 13_ During construction, measures shall be taken to minimize the potential of both fugitive dust and runoff sedimentation. Such measures shall be in compliance with construction industry standards and practices utilized during construction projects of the State of -11- Hawaii. 14_ In the event that surface or subsurface historic resources, including human skeletal remains, structural remains (e.g., rock walls, terraces, platforms, etc.), cultural deposits, marine shell concentrations, sand deposits, or sink holes are identified during die demolition and/or construction work, the applicant shall cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find, protect the find from additional disturbance and contact the State Historic Preservation Division at (808) 933-7651. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from. DLNR.-SHAD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. 15. Construction of single-family or duplex ponies, includMu, �olmiia dwellings if allowed, by individual lot owners or a master developer are co%eyed bN this approval and do not need subsequent Special Management Area review or permit. 16. A Mauka-makai public pedestrian only access to the shoreline from Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road shall be provided along a 5-foot-wide portion of the 15-foot side yard setback area along the northern property line of the subject parcel. The Applicant shall clear and maintain the 5' pathway to ensure it is kept free of brush, trees, rubbish or other obstructions that would inhibit reasonably traversable pedestrian access. IT The Applicant shall purchase and install a Shoreline Public Access sign, meeting with Planning Department approval, at the entrance to the public access path at Kalapana- Kapoho Beach Road. The Shoreline Public Access Sign and post may be purchased from the Planning Department. 18. An initial extension of time for the perforniance of conditions within this permit may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstances: A. The non-perforrriance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant, successors or assigns, and that are not the result of their fault or negligence. B. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code, C. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of this permit. -12- D. The time extension granted shall be for a period not to exceed the period originally ,granted for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed within one year may be extended for up to one additional year). E. If the applicant should require an additional extension of time, the Planning Department shall submit the applicant's request to the Planning Commission for appropriate action. 19_ That in issuing this permit, the Department has relied on the information and data that the Applicant has provided in connection with this permit. If, subsequent to this permit, such information and data prove to be false, incomplete or inaccurate, this permit may be modified, suspended or revoked, in whole or in part, and/or the Department may, in addition, institute appropriate legal proceedings. 20. Should any of the foregoing conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Planning Director may initiate procedures to revoke the permit. -13- EXHIBIT A-23 Lisa Benham <Ibsbinc@_gmai .00my TMKA-2-018:001 SMA Permit 1 message Lisa Benham <Ibsbinc@gmail.ccm> To: planning@hawaiicounty.gov To the Hawaii planning Department, COO PLANNING DEPT JUN 12 2025 Pm3:07 RECT BY MAIL Sun, Jun 8. 2025 at 3:38 PM As an American citizen I want to follow all laws of the government. According to the 14 Amendment in the American Constitution, no state shall farce or make any law, shall abridge the privilege of the citizens of the United States. Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of the law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Please also look at the 5th Amendment which protects the right to private property. My name is Dr. Lisa A. Benham, I purchased property with two friends in the Puna District, Island of Hawaii, the TMK. 1-2- 018:001. The property address is 12-7789 Kapana Beach Road, Pahoa HI 96778. The state land use designation was zoned for urban and agricultural.. Our goal was to have a seven lot subdivision on a 3.6 acres lot which the county approved. We then changed that to a five lot subdivision due to the forty foot shore line setback for the public access pathway to the beach. After a meeting with the locals we went down to a two lot subdivision. We just want to build a home for each of us, Mark Wyatt and myself on a 3.6 acre Iot.There have been two scientific consultant surveys performed on the property. Both surveys stated there is no archeological, cultural significance or historic properties on the land. The first survey was performed by Dr. Robert L. Spear on Marcy 3, 1993, and the second one was in 2024 by ASM Affiliates_ Both surveys agree the property has no historic significance. There is no legal documentation that states this property was used for cultural rights. In October 2023 the ASM Senior Ethnographer Lokelani Brant asked several local residents in the area if they knew of relatives buried on the property or had any issues with past cultural rights practiced on the property. The responses were that none of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites on the projected site. There is absolutely no indication this property has served as an area of cultural rituals. Please look at the Kairnu Cove report and see the four areas identified by the archeological survey. I made this report two months ago and now we have agreed to be a 2 lot plan. The land has no endangered plants or wildlife. Please look at the land use planning according to the zoning rules. Please reach out if you have any questions. Be t regards, Lisa A. Benham c 951-203-1627rty EXHIBIT "A-23" c D ch 0 a= o �0 O m 0 0 A ■ Dm an 'z^ V/ � A C j T N M O xC �� m No w v O-4 MM oG m_ -n C mG rn C ♦? �C ni rG CD, G 0 zo -n m r m ...' D Z m =M �m z C r 0 m ill MOy 0 0 m 0 om 2-ON Oo<Z m0 D Op, 2CmOO m D V Mo l09 cn �� o a, -- D M 2: 1 < �=D o O N o N a O om�7J p i D Z m v � N m W b rn n w a 0PF J 3 N h N -I N z6 rO na m Z �� � m7-1 t o sj u n0 M r -- O REC'D BY COH PLANNING DEPT JUN 122025 PM3:07 Cry IW IN- l Au f + «� i rr'w V Nel KAIMU COVE zi:4901:11 May 25, 2025 Kalmu Cove Wif apprixiate v our time and efftart in ineell ng xith us today. We value each of your concerns. We retipect your commitment to public invokeln4nt in the development of this property. We understand that the intrinsic condition between the land and the native Hawaiian culture is riot just a legal obligation but a moral one. We respect and will preserve the natural habitat. We will adhere to all the regulations protecting the island's resources when constructing the live homes. We genuinely care for Hawaii`i`s land, environment, wildlife, and people. The property was purchased on June 2, 2022, The address is 12-7789 Kapapana Beach Road, Pahoa. t II 96778. When we purchased the property, the state land use &signation was Larbatal anal al 1_iLL&LII_ il. OUT goal was to hat e a �even-IoL tiubcli� isi011 011 a ?.6-:acre lot. We have ntnk chMI2i d that to a five -lot subdivision. Due to the forty -foot shoreline sethack and public access paLlm ays to the beach, we decided 011 .t ii�e-101 i-Si011. Th,• tiOUI I: 01` %tia11L l' anvil ela:ctrieii) 1� []I 11e pLlNIC LltllltleS, We will in Ldl tflicient water Iixtures �lrld inlplement xv iter-efficient practices. We will comply with all State Department of l leal 01 requirements to minimize the potential for ground or surface water degradation or eoniamination to protect L1'OLknL1N LIM ilnLIlity, Each lot is intended for a single-family dwelling. The property is not in the C°onscrvation District. As you know, the State of Hawaii Conservation District is a land managed by the 1)i patrtlnent of Land and Natural Resources. This district was established to protect Hawai` s naturatl Ne 0111_ccs, The 0)11.xervation District also includes submerged lands of the shoreline. We are not in the Conservation District, which is vital to protecting and preserving crucial natural resources. Although we aren't in this district, we will always respect and protect Hawai`i's natural resources and support conservation activities. We are Aloha `Aina, dedicated to protecting, preserving, and working to regenerate the ecosystem, which is the fundamental base of all thim4s living. Figure l eL I I I ll'Wt, ✓-" ' ,— R 34G@NCE P,Wlm f5 7d' irur.s..s &s.4-1 c-ar lrrgrp 6 B.*— . Fyy W, Cox A>•.a.Ww,p 4 l all V pa*W wul RaM A m 1 p NO, W awree p y��%1 WiptV 2W. r WM UWM 96. 9Pd" 5+rmrl Pin.'" — iY". ---�� 9115lkrtw+JnAs �r mU Fet .ma4 �pgwsa wn'i mamrn.:nry �ri�.y R Ell M Figure 2 - The development will have one home for Mark W4 aa i <<nd 1>n A. 1 iti;L IicIII):a[)7. 1.�sL 11 home will be a two —to three -bedroom family home. The fI00T plans we are WtViLIC"Ing are enclosed. The other three lots will probably have similar structures. On March 3, 1993. Dr. Robert L. Spear of Scientific Consultant Services. located at 47-269 Do Hui Twa Street, Kaneohe, HI 96744, inspected the property f'L7r anv archeological significance. Four areas of concern were identified within the property. Three regions identified were a ten pol as % shelter and possibly limited agricultural activities. The fourth is a C-shaped cc}r111 fi+und. C-shaped coral timris alSO f(Aind at the beach next to the property. The study concluded that it did not feel the coral was a religious offering, but wanted to add it to the survey. hear• 110 .YrWA 1 Iwwuwn aI Fww I aokklm.i rW 4 ;r.W (u,w ftl N. fM6 I 1: 4 I% R911 4 i ,: ri. _, Mild ':I. iii i, i, Ih+.'�, �.r.i i,.i.ip mu��.: xrrs• s. :L.. .. i..rrir_ii Figure 3 - Figure 4 - At Figure S This survey concluded that the property has no burial sites or historic properties. Ear. Spear recommended that no further archaeological work be required based on his property study. :r �mwn.. ei r r.0 �'r •u �n P. u�yu, f�aa�Lmr rr 7'r4k 11, . — nl Figure 6 - J.Uiµw4 2M14 .I,I: �rcnm,y Lxyx:d I Ic IJ I.H 1 MK i 1, 1; 0I9 W t .!p ,•. � +'� � Fed . ° •F h AKUn[ 7 ii,�la°:�,. ur� •��rgrL .fi ]14. 14 e1 P!L�! �.,n .ff4�,f14L+ tif'� ^l± �41 !,i Iht.4 ,, '. i.'h, � � u Halo Figure 7 - Figure b' - However. in 2024, we had another archeological field inspection and consultation by ASM Affiliates, whose address is 507 A. East Lanikaula St, Hilo, HI 96720, The study confirmed that there are no burial sites on the property, s ay ;fj N1. Aau.Mcwl.,r:..i 4.. 4_I Ir<eykxi+sen erwi y'al'trr.l !'�LL�nmm �P' 1 kt}: � i , . !, I r to, . 1-1- fidW It"1111l1,g WC •'utT—L I,l[,j—L ar—, tirc. to the wwh—i Figure 9 - h PU11 � 111111411 .01I.WN 1-k.LtCd ha 11W Wrih - 11 ul I$a +.arTenl pngec[ an•:i, m.,ua,+ of n� Rafsllsllu-I elxrh, R, +d..ItA t., th& —AII—I A cemetery is located northeast or the land on the opposite side of the Kalapana-Kapoha Road. The survey concluded that the property has no burial sites or historic properties. If human burials are found at this property when it is developed, we will ball the work and immediately notify the Historic reservation Division. This is a statement from the survey. They also consulted a plan to talk to the Natives, and they did not know of any burial sites in the area, According to the study, every individual stated that they know of no burial sites on our property. To address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proximity of the cemetery to the project area and to determine the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the project area, ASM"s Senior Ethnographer, Lokelani Brandt, M.A. conducted consultation with several Ion --time residents of the area including the descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho'omalu and Kealoha families. The consultation occurred between October 31, 2023, and December 13, 2023, when ASM staff contacted Ms. Ke`ala Keh'iho`omalu, Mrs. Leialoha llae-Kaleimamaliu, and Mrs. Ku'ulei Kealoha-Cooper by phone. Following the initial phone calls, each of the three consulted parties was provided with a consultation letter and snaps specifying ASM`s search for people who may know about any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. Each of the consulted parties contacted additional family members to seek such information. Ms. Keli`iho`omaliu spoke with elder relatives, Prince Keli`iho`omalu, Sam Keli`iho`omalu, Noenoe Dunn, Tiana Dunn, Jerry Dunn, Princess Keh`iho`omalu, Jr. Keli`iho`omalu, and Tiara Keli`iho`omalu. Ms. Keli`iho'ornalu indicated that her uncle yarn also attempted to reach out to Aku Hauani`o and Kamu Quihano and that her father attempted to reach out to Annie Ka`aukai and Leslie Enriques. Mrs, Ilae-Kaleimamahu also cord twtccl members of the 'ohanca Keli`iho'omalu and recommended that ASM stali'con(act Mrs. Kea loha-('oope:r, since she has heard that the cemetery belongs to the Kealoha famii-v. ASM contaclk!d %Ire. Kc:slohii-('o0lt Cr. aat.l L,he SJIO t, w%ith Wleral Ofht•r rtlatitieti, including her mother. None of the consulted parties knew of burial sites within the project area. Subsequent email correspondence with Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper clarified that the ceme(or_v did not belong to the Kealoha 'Dhana. However, her mother related that in the 1930s and 1 9411�_ the Kalapana Church was located near the cemetery and that her !liar I %Icr,. h,:tLI h,L (;<< h r gat--r a,_ti ,,.sth-r:. Emma Nai'a, was a pillar of that church. She added tl-.At there is a Kealoha cem ,.cry in 'Opihikao, but was not aware of any such Family cernetcrw in Kaimu. According to the 2024 report prepared by ASM Affiliates, a recently grabbed and graded driveway was on the property. A second roadway diverts From the upper road and is routed down through the middle of the area to the coast. The archaeological field inspection stated this road was probably already present when Spears surveyed the property in 1992. We Mll provide a five -foot -wide shoreline public pedestrian path along its not ! ho n h)01 J,•r ;,;IkLL'Vnt to the adjoining state-owned lands. The property is not <uhij v; i;, ;tr coi;,I.sl hazard :and is not anticipated to impact coastal resources adversely. The pr0p0s0d subch%i<ion and homesites will not adversely atTect cultural or historical resources in the area or endant,ci eel specks, of plants or animals.. Can March 29, 2023, we had a certified shoreline survey. A 40-foot-wide shoreline setback managed all structures and land urc .ictk itic;. Wiihin this setback was the need to ensure the protection of coastal processes and resources. In 2024, the County of Hawaii Planning Department was presented with our 5-lot subdivision. Figure 1.3 - Figure 14 - In October 2024, we proposed building li5 c liomL!5 on the property. The Windward Planning Commission deferred its approval beCaUSC of resid ntti' 4 oinplaints. One complaint was that we chain -sawed the largest Milo Forest in East I la\s ai'i. T1ie piewl- s abo%t r prw e this is a false statement. Some individuals were concerned about the milo trees (Thespesia populnea) and other plants on the property. The 2024 inspection stated in the undisturbed portions or the project area (see figure 10) that the overstory consists predominantly of moneytree trees, hala, hau, Milo, coconut palm, ri smpaka, `6hi'a lehua, noni, and one eucalyptus tree. The ground cover consists of nnnrnine No �. Boston fern, and various species of grasses. In the previously disturbed portions 111'11'L' pic�s)crty, the vegetation consists of grasses, purslane, gunpowder trees, Melochia, guava, ai)d olliL�r non-native plants. We will always respect Hawaiian culture, the environment. and all its resources. We care t11_00! 1 I,Lwai`i and promise to make our property a pleasing commUllity- EXHIBIT A-24 Daryn Arai L.ond Use Planning Consultant September 15, 2025 Mr. Jeffrey Darrow, Director County ofHawai`i Planning Departmet>t 10 1 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 1]'2411 1 ) �! I I or 1):1II(1" . 41,1'}.iCk-i: S\I-1 I tiL l'Lrllli[ ;1-.,�L:ssrnentApplication ,\ppliciml: K:Li,1:l, Wove LLC 1i��Ill�w!: 1 o ti74 m constrLMIOE 01 it tiinL,IL~-l lll'1IIv LI\t 1.1.11 pick1L'haII COW-1. alld ll� Ii1;I L'L! li!ll 10\ L'[l1L'lll� k1111111, 11 poi -•troll kfl 111L'-,ull!c t pr[)IDL'ltk Tml'w.; 1-2-01 N- W11: Pl11111. Aci:[ltt panViim—, this letter- 14 c present 1L7r VOL11- L ousld ration a regLlcwl h� K�11111L1 ('m l• LLC fOr : 11�'r`i.11 M 11tiL►iLnitllt :41"Lil .'•: 71'i1�1l1 lid:111km I't'r lilt~ L`t711�1r4.1L:tiOn Ofil. kill;.?1124I111111\- L'.' filing, 171� 1ti14 k1111f court {l id 11� ici1 lti't1 031 11!0! 1011 Of the 1'L` Pl'o lcl•ty locatcd al, l L.' lI1L cozlti;Ial 1l,l khC P111hi lhL�11ItI. I'lll' ll,l:ll ILti i'[,tll" 11f71 II�{llliil3 1-equirCt1wi.i.ti to hk Il L4l k'l;l ihl 1.11K' 4\ srk lm, pk1 z1sc find a. Original of the completed SMA Use Permit Assessment application farm and I I,L.' N-ickground and supporting information report that includes a location limp �Illd ,il. Mall: I.�. L �rlil�iL�L! ail,,+r�lin;` s111"�'L•.': slnal ti. 1"'ti,I1Llc}'tik']]L"I'w ,lLlllll�i"I14111�11t� '-dIO 11t1 \ 01: k1:L1 L' LIIIL"411'0114 L}tl 111I-� 111iLlIC1 , I''IC:L1,C IL'cl fnr to contact nlc. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Daryn Aral Enclosure: S A Use Permit Assessment Application & supporting information copy w}encl via email: Mark Myatt & Lisa Ann Benham, Kaimu Cove LLC P.O.BOX4111l 1111.[711El11'AR 4fi7-17 PHONE: EMAIL EXHIBIT "A-24" SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT ASSESSMENT APPLICATION Applicant: KAIMU COVE LLC Request: Proposed construction of a single-family dwelling, pickleball court and its related improvements on a portion of a 3.677-acre property situated within the Special Management Area Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018:001 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna District Hawaii Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant September 2025 Countv of 11awai'i Planning Department L r� 07_I'!,111:7111!.`4ImtColn �Sfdi1f11Ti�[G[CCi-hawa11-hI.US - i'A A I ILINVAN 011 itT 101 PRUahi Slreet, Suite :3 Hilo. Hawai'1. 96720 -8288 Fax (8Q8) 961-8742 tit i sl I Lnvai'i Office - 74-5044 Anc Keohokalole H% K. iltta-Kona. Hatvai`i 9674a 11honc (908) 3'_3-4770 F (8W) 327-3563 .S1T,(-.'1A1. N-1r\jNf�GJ-'N11:NT R]-' 1.1S1:1'1A~ti11111TASSI'.SSN11"'N'l,A11111.1L`1"T1()N APPI.,i[ .'4N INFORMATTON, (Ap-),':d77+ ;1' ?r;k ri •d•kr rld f);'k.WH 114 } d'rl ?r9.14,'{d�1i.14, 41.. ill all 'Jr' � 3er'crlr :.d '7the lcad;,,'�:',, IWI gar } :s d \-\\IhSd : Ka�n7u Cove LLC (c/o Mark Wyatt, Managing Member) AIA)R1-SS 12•55 Likoliko Long, Box 4866 CITY. Pt11)o l STATE: Hawaii GIP CODE, 96778 ENIA11 Wyattinhu ai9 grriail.com PII()N 11 N 1 1113E.i'�1 S ?. bus, SIGNATURE(S). (spe attached authorization letter) lull !cell: (808) 965-5404 DATE: September 2, 2025 LANIIrO11`NER I 1'01 1 L VFI0N ] 5XN IE _1S-111PJ,1('_1N'F w,r; ti r .11 This .wc'ri•)1d L.-ANP(AN",, Kaimu Cave LLC (Mark Wyatt & Lisa Ann Benham, Managing Members) ADDRESS: 12-55 Likoliko Loop, Box 4865 my., Pahoa STATE: Hawaii LIP CODE: 96778 ENTAIL: PHON I; NUMBER(S): bus: (see attached author!?anion le ter) hm /cell: I)A' 1' 1 '' . X f.1lrrdhpwiier ffg'ives to grwit repreveiawllw.w ?)/ the, U fineiry q1 iJdf ral 'l i'1dL'r` ght to elite i- the proper( ly at re as11a!l ale hi,r,srrat?,5'.4 %ipurY fry/' ,rh z piulwser raf xitt€ rrrxpu.'11.on. ALI MORIZi D AGENT/ CONTACT PERSON COl"NTT_1ur N�:LME(S): Darya Arai ADDRESS: PC] Box 4501 CI'I1': Hilo STATE: Hawaii LIP CODE: 96720 EMAIL: AIL: 1-11IONE NLIMBER(S)• bins: hm /cell: SIGNATURE(S): DATE: September 2., 2025 TAX MAP KEY(S): (3) 1-2-018:001 F1,0OD 70 E (Can be ohto mcc(tl-om the Department ofPubllc Woi*s- E'i ,mecring DiWsion): Zone X NATI'RI: O The Applicant wishes to construct a two-story, 2-bedroom single-family dwelling and related facilities, such as driveway and wastewater systems, a pickleball court and associated utilities within a portion of the 3.677-acre property. Most of the proposed improvements will be situated within an area previously disturbed by a prior landowner. No improvements will be situated within the 40-foot shoreline setback area. The Applicant resides nearby within the Kaimu area and will relocate to the subject property upon com- pletion of the proposed dwelling and maintain it as his primary residence. 1•U•I'.AL COST / FAIR MARKET VALUE OF DL\"LL0P.\ENT: $ 267,000 DATE OF APPLICATION September 2, 2025 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The .ailL.E m ned below are :hr r;Fanaging members of Kaimu Cove LLC, owner of that 3.677- aere property identl Tod r:s TMK: 1-2-018:001 located along the KKilapana-Kapoh[7 Beach Road within Lhe Kairnu-MIcrtir•:a Ho; ,,este.ads, District of Puma_ As aLithorized representatives of the ow,ernQ, of the SUbJP,.t 7rCi)er,_y, wvL� hereby authorize the filing of an SMA Use Permit Assessment application to allow Fo thC M!StCurtion of a singlo-family t�4,+�11 '�5, Pickluball court and its related improvements on die subject pro7)erty. By this letter, we ril5o authorize Oaryn Arai, Planning Consultant, to assist us with t"he filing and procps�rr)F of this �ipplication before the County of Hawaii. s Mark Wyat¢;'Mananirag- Iw amber Kalmu Cove LLC PO Boat 4866 Pahoa, HI ° 6Y/8 Usa Ann Penhaam, ('w anaginq 1'vlemhpr Kain'W Cove LLC PC Box 4866 Pahoa, HI 96778 ScIptcill ber 2, 2025 Dt3te Scptcmhor 2, 2025 Date BACKGROUND AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION REPORT REGARDING SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT ASSESSMENT APPLICATION Applicant: KAIMU COVE LLC Request: Proposed construction of a single-family dwelling, pickleball court and its related improvements on a portion of a 3.677-acre property situated within the Special Management Area Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018:001 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna District Hawaii Island Prepared by: Daryn Arai, Planning Consultant September 2025 Table of Contents A. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USE / DEVELOPMENT..............................................................................1 1. Applicant's Request..............................................................................................................................1 2. Location of Property.............................................................................................................................1 3. Statement of Objectives and reasons for the request......................................................................... 3 4. Proposed Project Details...................................................................................................................... 3 5. Timeframe and cost..............................................................................................................................3 C. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS..............................................................4 6. State Land Use Designation..................................................................................................................4 7. Current County Zoning..........................................................................................................................4 8. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: ......................................................... 6 9. Puna Community Development Plan: ................................................................................................... 6 10. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A..................................................................................9 11. Special Management Area (SMA).........................................................................................................9 12. Certified Shoreline Survey....................................................................................................................9 D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA............................................................11 13. Subject Property.................................................................................................................................11 14. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses...........................................................................................................11 15. ALISH: Other Important Agricultural Lands.......................................................................................11 16. Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification System..................................................................11 17. US Soil Survey.....................................................................................................................................11 18. FIRM....................................................................................................................................................12 19. Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report(2017)...............................................................13 20. Flora/Fauna Resources.......................................................................................................................14 21. Archaeological Resources...................................................................................................................14 22. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights....................................................................................................17 23. Public Access.......................................................................................................................................17 E. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES................................................................................................17 38. Access: ................................................................................................................................................ 17 39. Water..................................................................................................................................................17 40. Wastewater........................................................................................................................................17 42. Essential Utilities and Services............................................................................................................18 F. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SMA USE PERMIT REQUEST...........................................................18 33. Anticipated effects upon the Special Management Area...................................................................20 G. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF CHAPTER 205A AND SMA GUIDELINES.........................................21 H. CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................................... 24 BACKGROUND AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION REGARDING SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT ASSESSMENT APPLICATION FOR MARK WYATT Affecting Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018: 001; Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, Kaimu, Puna A. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USE / DEVELOPMENT Applicant's Request Mark Wyatt, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant", has filed this Special Management Area Use Permit Assessment application to allow for the construction of a two-story, two -bedroom single family dwelling, pickleball court and its related improvements within the northeast portion of the subject property consisting of approximately 3.677 acres of land situated along the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road within the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, District of Puna. 2. Location of Property The subject property is located at along the makai side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road (State Route 137), approximately 2,450 feet to the northeast from its intersection with the Pahoa-Kalapana Road (State Highway 130), and identified as TMK: 1-2-018: 001 (refer to Figure 1 - Location Map and Figure 2 -Tax Map below). POp,O S�pS CNP�N OF �pP 1IPage Figure 1 - Location Map SUBJECT PROPERTY Ln O O ct (D (D 0 G) • Figure 2 - Tax Map 2 1 P a g e 3. Statement of Objectives and reasons for the request The Applicant wishes to construct a two-story, 2-bedroom single-family dwelling and related facilities, such as driveway and wastewater systems, a pickleball court and associated utilities within the 3.677-acre property. The Applicant resides nearby within the Kaimu area and will relocate to the subject property upon completion of the proposed dwelling and maintain it as his primary residence. 4. Proposed Project Details (see Figure 3 — Proposed Site Plan & Exhibit A -Building Plans) a. Proposed Single-family dwelling: The proposed single-family dwelling will consist of the following: 1) 2-story dwelling, consisting of 2 bedrooms (one bedroom on each level); 2) 15t level having 384 square feet of living area (1 bedroom & 1 bath) and a 320 square foot porch with 2-car garage; 3) 2nd level having 768 square feet of living area (1 bedroom, 1 bath & living room with kitchen) and a 320 square foot lanai; 4) 60' X 35' pickleball court, slab on grade only, no fencing around perimeter, just a low perimeter landscaped hedge. b. Access: Access to the proposed dwelling will be directly from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road via a 15-foot wide compacted gravel driveway. A 5-foot tall rock wall and gate system is proposed at this entry point, having a total length of approximately 55 feet. c. Water: County water is available to support the proposed single-family dwelling via an existing water meter located along Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. d. Wastewater: A septic system will be installed in a manner meeting with the requirements of the State Department of Health. Site Improvements: The proposed dwelling site had been previously altered by a prior landowner. Therefore, site alteration is anticipated to be minimal, with the exception of grading or excavation associated with the installation of the building foundation, pickleball court and septic system. The construction of the single-family dwelling will also involve the installation of associated utility improvements, such as access driveway (compacted gravel), waterline installation and electrical utility poles. No use, land alteration or vertical construction will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback area as established by a shoreline survey of the subject property certified by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on March 29, 2023. 5. Timeframe and cost Upon issuance of an SMA Use Permit, the Applicant will promptly submit plans for the proposed dwelling with the Department of Public Works with construction commencing immediately upon issuance of a building permit, with completion within 2 years given it will be owner -builder. Associated known costs and estimates associated with the proposed project are as follows: • Construction of proposed single-family dwelling & utilities - $250,000 • Pickleball court - $5,000 • Rock wall and gate at entrance - $12,000 3 1 P a g e KALAPANA - KAPOHO ROAD ,, - 6 ,, -A Figure 3 - Proposed Site Plan C. LAND USE AND OTHER REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS 6. State Land Use Desienation: Urban. The subject property is situated within an area designated for Urban uses by the State Land Use Commission, as shown on Figure 4 — State Land Use 7. Current County Zoning: Residential and Agricultural-0.5 acre minimum lot size (RA-.5a) The Residential and Agricultural (RA) zoning district provides for activities or uses characterized by low density residential lots in rural areas where "city -like" concentrations of people, structures, streets, and urban level of services are absent, and where small farms are intermixed with low density residential lots. The RA district is intended to be only within areas designated as being in the State land use rural or urban districts. (see Figure 5 - Current Area Zoning) 4 1 F a g e AGRICULUTURAL CONSERVATION URBAN SUBJECT PROPERTY Figure 4 — State Land Use A-3a A-3a RA-.5a SUBJECT PROPERTY RA-.5a �r rm Figure 5 — Current Area Zoning 5 1 P a g e 8. General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: The County of Hawaii General Plan is the policy document for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawaii. The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map classifies the subject property and area directly inland (mauka) for Extensive Agricultural uses, which are lands not classified as Important Agricultural Land. Such lands are not capable of producing sustained, high agricultural yields without the intensive application of modern farming methods and technologies due to certain physical constraints such as soil composition, slope, machine tillability and climate. Other less intensive agricultural uses such as grazing and pasture may be included in the Extensive Agriculture category. Portion of the subject property along the shoreline prior to the certified shoreline is designated Open (see Figure 6- General Plan LUPAG Map) i/ V Y INTENSIVE EXTENSIVE AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTURAL LOW DENSITY URBAN SUBJECT PROPERTY Figure 6 — General Plan LUPAG Map 9. Puna Community Development Plan: The Puna CDP (PCDP) was developed and adopted by the Hawaii County Council on August 27, 2008. It became effective on September 10, 2008 as Ordinance No. 08 116. The PCDP does not define any specific land use pattern for the area in proximity to 6 1 F a g e the subject property. However, the PCDP established three (3) major themes that guided the development of the plan: Malama I Ka Aina which "establishes how the contextual natural, historic and cultural features of Puna should be preserved." (emphasis added) Growth Management which "addresses how the future pattern of human settlement and land use should be shaped to respect that context and support the desired quality of life for Puna's residents." (emphasis added) • Transportation which "focuses on sustainable approaches to transportation to support the goals of the two above themes." Relative to the Malama I Ka Aina theme, four (4) major elements were identified and assigned goals, objectives, and actions. These elements and their relationship to the proposed action follow: 1. Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources An archaeological inventory survey of the subject property in 1992 (see Exhibit B) did identify four (4) sites as significant for the information they contain, but because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. Nonetheless, should there be inadvertent discoveries during the construction of this project, work will stop and contacts with the County Planning Department and State Historic Preservation Division will be made. Furthermore, the project site is not known as hosting any cultural or scenic resources. A 2024 field inspection and cultural consultation (see Exhibit C) supports the findings of the 1992 survey, with the three relocated sites in similar condition to what was previously described and indicate that the subject property was used during the Precontact to early Historic periods for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. No potential burial features were identified within the subject property nor were any possible burial locations identified as a result of consultation by the archaeologist. This report also included consultation with several long-time residents of the area to determine who may have knowledge of any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. According to the report, none of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. Based on these findings, the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. 2. Native Forests and Geological Features An assessment of floral and faunal resources and its geology indicates that the goals and objectives of this element would not be compromised by the proposed construction of a dwelling within a previously graded portion of the subject property that is absent of any vegetation aside from typical grasses and weeds. 7 1 P a g e 3. Aquifers, Coastal Waters and Stormwaters The subject property is not proximate to potable wells in this area. Notwithstanding that factor, the proposed subdivision will utilize septic systems meeting with the approval of the State Department of Health. The subject property is also not subject to storm waters or coastal flooding nor the effects of sea level rise. Given the above, the goals and objectives of this element would be fulfilled. Testimony related to this property have spoken about the presence of tide pools within the area that could be affected by development. However, the tidepools mentioned are not situated within or along the shoreline frontage of the subject property. 4. Shoreline Area The Applicant has secured a certified shoreline survey of the subject property and has plotted the location of the 40-foot shoreline setback. The proposed single-family dwelling and related improvements will be situated approximately 140 to 150 feet mauka of the certified shoreline. The other theme is Managing Growth. For this, six (6) elements were identified. These elements and their relationship to the project follow. Land Use Pattern Evaluating this request against the articulated goals and objectives of the Managing Growth theme, the request would be consistent with the following Goals of the PCDP: • Puna retains a rural character while it protects its native natural and cultural resources. • Reduces the exposure to high risk from natural hazard situations. 2. Agriculture and Economic Development The PCDP identifies the following: Goals • Increase opportunities for diversified agriculture • Preserve lands for agricultural use • Increase local market share of Puna agricultural products Obiectives Discourage urban growth and further subdivision on lands that have been identified as having agricultural value. While the General Plan does identify the subject property for extensive agricultural activities, its small size and location between a public road and the ocean precludes its use for extensive agricultural activities. As such, the proposed subdivision should not have an adverse impact on the agriculture industry since the location, size and soil conditions do not present the subject property as having any significant agricultural value. 3. Social Services and Housing As this is not a social service or more affordable housing project, this section is not applicable. 8 1 P a g e 4. Public Safety and Sanitation Services Public safety services are available Pahoa. All solid waste generated by the project will be disposed of at either the transfer station in Pahoa or at the Hilo Transfer Station. No sewer system exists in the subject area, and the Applicant will comply with Department of Health requirements regarding proper wastewater disposal methods. 5. Parks and Recreation This section is not applicable, as the project would have no direct impacts on parks. 6. Energy Sustainability The subject property has access to the electrical grid and will be able to secure electrical service to the proposed dwelling. The third theme is Transportation. The proposed construction of a single-family dwelling is not subject to the goals and polices of this theme is not applicable to this project. However, the subject property is located within the established Kaimu-Makena Homestead community within a residential area having lot sizes ranging from 5,300 square feet to over 3 acres. The effectiveness of enhancing transportation facilities and options is dependent upon the density and distribution of users. In summary, the proposed construction of a single-family dwelling on the subject property will maintain the rural character of this area of Puna while remaining consistent with the themes outlined by the PCDP. 10. Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A The entire State of Hawai'i lies within the Coastal Zone Management area. The intent of the Coastal Zone Management Program is to guide and regulate public and private uses in the coastal zone management area with respect to recreational resources, historic resources, public access to the shoreline, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems, marine resources, economic uses, coastal hazards, managing development, public participation, and beach protection. 11. Special Management Area (SMA) The Special Management Area (SMA) is a part of the Coastal Zone Management Program that is regulated by the County, established to promote the State's policy to preserve, protect, and where possible, to restore the natural resources of the coastal zone of Hawaii. Therefore, special controls on development within the area along the shoreline are necessary to avoid permanent loss of valuable resources and the foreclosure of management options, and to ensure that adequate public access is provided to public -owned or used beaches, recreation areas, and natural reserves, by dedication or other means. The subject property is situated within the SMA due to its immediate proximity to the shoreline. 12. Certified Shoreline Survey A certified shoreline survey of the subject property was secured on March 29, 2023 from the Board of Land and Natural Resources. The certified shoreline migrated inland from the makai boundaries of the 3.677-acre subject property as defined by tax 9 1 P a g e maps, reducing the overall land area of the subject property to 3.677 acres, as shown on Figure 7 — Certified Shoreline Survey. �_— I r ooi - ,vi i :ems % �0 s°O b � � 4 . � L N 9 4 � i • 'O � � f y 01 x c ofrrc$� � u c 3�5 [ i pox c \ o" os� • • � <� o E g g a won [fit Y �1 �cv.do a �WC..GU_ o o ! \ a �Q Q mi O (Z.)o a 8 z 0 UCr�' �d I Q Er:Z)Y O d n \ W f a> d � f \ Iz a � O c �i'i ly��E� o• O Off® w VOI/'`F` w I N U O ..gp. °'pQp�ni�RE c L ; X 0 O 1 U U i- Figure 7 — Certified Shoreline Survey 101 Page D. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 13. Sublect Property The property is trapezoid in shape and 3.677-acres in size and situated between the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and the shoreline (see Figure 8 - Aerial Site Map). The Aerial Site Plan is based on March 7, 2023 imagery obtained via Google Earth. The subject property is currently vacant of any use or structure, aside from some limited clearing by the previous landowner for a proposed driveway and house pad circa 1992. However, the proposed home was never constructed and the previously cleared driveway and house pad is now overgrown with vegetation. More recently, the Applicant cleared and graded a portion of the subject property along its northern boundary, beginning at the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extending all the way down to the shoreline. Upon issuance of a Notice of Violation by the Planning Department, all work has ceased and the Aerial Site Map shows that vegetation has begun to reestablish itself. 14. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses The subject property is located within a portion of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, a collection of lots and subdivisions that span an area along the eastern side of the junction of Pahoa-Kalapana (Hwy 130) and Kalapana-Kapoho (Hwy 137) roads, and is predominately zoned for Residential and Agricultural (RA) uses with a minimum lot size of 1/2-acre. Adjacent to the east and makai of the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road are State lands zoned for Open (0) uses with agricultural -zoned lands (A-3a) along the mauka side of this road. The subject property basically defines the eastern- most extent of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. 15. ALISH: Other Important Agricultural Lands The subject property is not classified as by the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii. 16. Land Study Bureau's Detailed Land Classification System Soils within the subject property are classified as having very poor agricultural productivity rating (Class E soils). 17. US Soil Survey: Hakuma highly organic hydrous loam (666) These soils series consist of shallow, moderately well drained soils formed in basic volcanic ash over pahoehoe lava. Hakuma soils are on the low elevation, windward slopes of Mauna Loa and Kilauea volcanoes. Slopes range from 2 to 10 percent. Mean annual rainfall is about 154 inches. Hakuma soils are generally found in open canopied forest. A few areas are used for pasture. Natural vegetation is ohia lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha), treefern (Cibotium chamissoi or C. glauca), uluhe (Dicranopteris linearis) and guava (Psidium guajava). 111 Page 18. FIRM Zone "X" - determined to be outside the 500-year flood plain (see Figure 9 — Flood Hazard Map. There are no known existing drainageways that traverse through the subject property. Figure 8 — Aerial Site Map 121 Page lOO,R Flood Hazard Map Map generated Owl, TW.on 08/31/2023 Notes: Map Legend 0dc1— the Hawa✓, Deportment of land and NONrd &—,s (O[NR( assumes no responsRaLN aMinp from the use, accuracy, rompkteness, and I~hness of any information canrmned in this repair weviefc,/Usen are resp—lik for v"mg the Mcurosy of the it-rimon and ogrce to ndemNty the DINR, as officer; and emphryees from any AadAry which may arde from in usr of as data or rnformot— Figure 9 — Flood Hazard Map 19. Sea Level Rise Vulnerabilitv and Adaptation Resort (2017 The Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report ("report") provides the first state-wide assessment of Hawaii's vulnerability to sea level rise and offered recommendations to reduce the exposure and sensitivity to sea level rise and increase the State's capacity to adapt. The report assessed the best available science on climate change and sea level rise and provides recommendations based on emerging good practices. One such practice is that the magnitude and rate of sea level rise warrants planning for 3.2 feet of sea level rise by 2100. Towards that end, the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA) shows that the subject property and the location of the proposed single-family dwelling will not be vulnerable to 3.2 feet of sea level rise, as depicted in Figure 10 - SLR Viewer. 131 Page Sea Level Rise : State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer An Interactive Mapping Tool in Support of the State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report X view full -screen map } ', �e mh address or TMK_ Q 8 1 Zoom to — or rage 4 tttti dray lig AWM Sea Level Rise Exposure Area U 12 R scenario Figure 10 — SLR Viewer 20. Flora/Fauna Resources t BASfYAPS � f:rayscale O Satellite�� I .J Digital Elevation model (DEI .) EXPOSURE O Sea Level Rise Exposure Area 0 O.s ft tt it 3.2 it 0- pas;ie--inodinR E4 ] O.S ft I.l ft 2.0 ft expand 5p1iapse • clear • hide No professional flora or faunal surveys were conducted of the subject property. However, the Applicant has not identified any endangered species of plants or animals within the subject property and especially not within the northeastern portion of the property where the proposed homesite will be located. The on -site vegetation includes guava, lauae, ti, noni, hau, hala, milo, ohia, monkeypod, christmas berry, melochia, gunpowder trees, cane grass, java plum and verbina. Near the west property line there are some common mangos, avocado and banana from the neighbors. Naupaka occurs along the shoreline areas. As previously mentioned, the proposed single-family dwelling will be constructed within that portion of the subject property previously disturbed. While no endangered species of fauna was observed on the subject property, its location and shoreline proximity could see threatened or endangered species such as the Hawaiian Hoary Bat, Hawaiian (koloa) Duck, Hawaiian (Nene) Goose, Hawaiian Petrel, Hawaiian Coot, Band-rumped Storm -petrel, Hawaiian Stilt, Newell's Townsend's Shearwater and the Short -tailed Albatross. The Blackburn's Sphinx Moth is the only endangered species of insect that could inhabit the affected area. 21. Archaeological Resources 1992 Archaeological Inventory Surve The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 (Exhibit A). The report, titled "An Inventory Level Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawai `i (TMK: 1-2-18:1) November 1992", identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include: 141 Page • Site 18,525 — C-shaped structure built of stacked sub -angular to sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small boulders. No buried cultural features were found in this structure, which functioned as a temporary structure. • Site 18,526 —two surface features consisting of a C-shape and a rock mound, both consisting of sub -angular and sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small bounders. No cultural material was found in the C-shaped structure, which functioned as a temporary shelter. The small mound probably functioned as an agricultural feature. • Site 18,527 — a post -contact wall structure that extended along the base of the fill for the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extended beyond the subject property to the southwest until it was eventually covered by fill associated with the road construction. Most likely served as a boundary wall. • Site 18528 — small modified hole in a lava bubble. No cultural material was found in association with this feature and there proved to be no potential for excavation inside the opening. The feature function is unclear, but could have served as a storage area or small planting area. The presence of a nearby cemetery (locally known as Makena Cemetery) was a specific concern during the survey, so special attention was paid to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present within the subject property. No such features were identified., nor were there other features identified that were interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build-up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. January 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation (Exhibit B) The Applicant contracted with ASM Affiliates who conducted an archaeological field inspection of the subject property to confirm and update findings from the earlier archaeological inventory survey and a cultural consultation to confirm the presence or absence of burial sites. According to the report, "There has been some prior ground disturbance along the northeast, southwest, and mauka edges of the project area. On the `a `d flow in the northeastern portion of the parcel, a grubbed and graded driveway (Figure 8) meanders along the property line and accesses a graded house pad near the coast on a promontory that overlooks the rest of the parcel (this area was mostly recently cleared in 2022). There is a second roadway which diverts from the upper road and is routed down through the middle of the project area to the coast (Figure 9). This road may have been already present when previously surveyed in 199Z as something resembling it is mentioned by Spear (1992). Bulldozer push piles were also observed along the boundary with the adjacent residential property to the southwest near the middle of the project area. These push piles appear to be related to the clearing of that neighboring parcel. A 151 Page number of brush piles, seemingly from hand clearing activities, were also noted in the northeastern portion of the project area at the base of the `o `d flow. The pedestrian survey conducted located three of the four sites previously documented by Spear in 1992. The fourth site, a C-shaped feature [Site 15,525] located within the eastern portion of the project site at the base of an `a`a flow, could not be located as it was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbance after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) survey. The result of the current survey supports the findings of the Spear (1992) survey, with the three relocated sites in similar condition to what was previously described and indicate that the subject property was used during the Precontact to early Historic periods for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. No potential burial features were identified within the subject property nor were any possible burial locations identified as a result of consultation by the archaeologist. A consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted, that included descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families, namely Ms. Ke`ala Keli`iho`omalu, Mrs. Leialoha Ilae-Kaleimamahu, and Mrs. Ku`ulei Kealoha- Cooper by phone. According to the report, "Following the initial phone calls, each of the three consulted parties were provided with a consultation letter and maps specifying ASM's search for persons who may have knowledge of any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. Each of the consulted parties contacted additional family members to seek such information. Ms. Keli `iho `omalu spoke with elder relatives Prince Keli `iho `omalu, Sam Keli `iho `omalu, Noenoe Dunn, Tiana Dunn, Jerry Dunn, Princess Keli `iho bmalu, Jr. Keli `iho bmalu, and Tiara Keli `iho `omalu. Ms. Keli `iho `omalu indicated that her uncle Sam also attempted to reach out to Aku Houani `o and Kamu Quihono and that her father attempted to reach out to Annie Ko `oukoi and Leslie Enriques. Mrs. Ilae-Kalaimdmohu also contacted members of the `ohana Keli `iho `omalu and recommended that ASM staff contact Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper since she had heard that the cemetery belonged to the Kealoha family. Mrs. Kealoha- Cooper was contacted by ASM and she spoke with several of her relatives, including her mother." According to the report, none of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. Subsequent email correspondence with Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper clarified that the cemetery did not belong to the Kealoha `ohana, however, her mother related that in the 1930s and 1940s, the Kalapana Church was located near the cemetery and that her tutu (Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper's great-grandmother) Emma Nai`a was a pillar of that church. She added that there is a Kealoha cemetery in `Opihikao but was not aware of any such family cemetery in Kaimu. Based on these findings, the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" by the proposed subdivision development of the subject property, which has now been reduced in scope to a single-family dwelling. 161 Page 22. Cultural or Native Gathering Rights According to the Applicant, there are no known customary or Native Hawaiian cultural rights exercised within the subject property. The presence of Makena Cemetery nearby along the mauka side of the Kaimu-Kapoho Beach Road was of special concern by the archaeologist (Spear 1992) who paid special attention to look for features within the subject property that could be interpreted as burials, and none was found. As mentioned previously, recent consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted during the current study, that included descendants of the `ohano Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families, none of whom knew of any burial sites within the project area. If a burial is encountered during land disturbance activities, the Applicant will immediately cease all work and notify the Planning Department and the State Historic Preservation Division to await proper direction and clearance before any land alteration work can resume. 23. Public Access The nearest formal access to the shoreline is situated along Kalapana Beach Haven Road, situated approximately 640 feet to the southwest of the subject property along the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. Due to the location of the proposed single- family dwelling, no lateral access along the shoreline will be affected. E. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 38. Access: Access to the subject property is from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, a State - maintained roadway with a roughly 10-foot wide pavement and unimproved shoulders within an approximately 80-foot wide right-of-way. 39. Water County water is currently available to support the proposed single-family dwelling via an existing meter located along the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. 40. Wastewater There is no municipal sewer system servicing the subject area. The proposed single- family dwelling will be serviced by individual septic system meeting with the approval of the State Department of Health. 41. Solid Waste Solid waste will be handled through commercial haulers or disposal by the landowner into authorized landfill sites or transfer stations, the nearest of which is located approximately 1/2-mile to the northeast of the subject property. All waste generated by construction -related activities will have to be transported to the West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill in Pu`uanahulu, North Kona. 171 P a g r 42. Essential Utilities and Services Other utilities, such as electrical, cable and telephone services, will be made available to the subject property. F. STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SMA USE PERMIT REQUEST The approval of the Applicant's request to develop a proposed single-family dwelling within a portion of the 3.677-acre property will not be contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The subject property nor the proposed homesite is not subject to any coastal hazard nor anticipated to have any adverse impact upon coastal resources. The proposed single-family dwelling, due to its location and limited scope, will not have any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area or upon any endangered species of plants or animals. In view of the Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa`akai 0 Ka`Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. It is unlikely that there are any valued cultural, historic and natural resources to be found within the property. Two archaeological studies conducted on the subject property concludes that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. Consultation with several long-time residents of the area was also conducted and none of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. For these reasons, the Applicant could find no evidence of any possible adverse effects or impairments that will occur to any valued resources should the proposed construction of single-family dwellings be allowed. Should the Applicant inadvertently encounter any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials, the Applicant agree to cease any work in the immediate area and contact the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD), resuming activities only upon securing archaeological clearance from DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. Approval of the request to construct the proposed single-family dwelling will not be contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawai'i Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management nor the guidelines for approval of an SMA Use Permit as prescribed by Planning Commission Rule No. 9 regarding the Special Management Area. The subject property is situated within the Special Management Area with direct frontage along the shoreline. However, the subject property is not subject to any coastal hazard nor the effects of sea -level rise. Therefore, the construction of a single- family dwelling within a portion of the 3.677-acre subject property is not anticipated to have any adverse impact upon coastal resources such as coastal recreational and marine resources, coastal ecosystems or the public use and recreational use of any 181 Page beach. Based on a March 29, 2023 certified shoreline survey, a 40-foot wide shoreline setback is established that will manage all structures and land use activities within this shoreline setback area to ensure that coastal processes and resources are protected. The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 which identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include two C-shaped structures probably used as a temporary structure and an agricultural feature, a post -contact boundary wall, and a modified hole in a lava bubble probably used for storage or a small planting area. There were no features identified that could be interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build-up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. A January 2024 archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation confirmed these previous findings and found that the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the proposed request will have any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the area. The subject property, zoned RA-.5a, is similarly designated as the rest of the area referred to as the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. The subject property itself represents the eastern extent of this homestead area, with lands beyond retained by the State. While the General Plan suggests that the subject property be utilized for extensive agricultural purposes, it designates it as the only lot on the makai side of the Kalapana- Kapoho Beach Road, squeezed between Low Density Urban uses for the rest of the homestead area, and Open uses for the State lands immediately to the east. Extensive agricultural pursuits simply cannot happen on this 3.677-acre shoreline parcel, which is clearly best suited for residential uses as is the rest of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. For these reasons, the Applicant feels that allowing the construction of a single-family dwelling within a portion of the subject property is supportive of the County's efforts towards managing development through the General Plan that also encourages the County to: • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County. With a policy that: Vacant lands in urban areas and urban expansion areas should be made available for residential uses before additional agricultural lands are converted into residential uses. Finally, in terms of the public participation objective, this is generally a public agency function. This is achieved through the Marine and Coastal Zone Management 191 Page Advisory Group (MACZMAG). Planning Commission rule of practices and procedure determines what level of "development" warrants formal proceedings before the Windward Planning Commission and those actions that may be administratively approved by the Planning Director. In this particular instance, the construction of a single-family residential dwelling on a building site may not be considered as "development" under Commission rules and the Applicant finds that the proposed action, with the implementation of appropriate mitigating measures as described in this application, would justify its approval by the Planning Director without further SMA review. 33. Anticipated effects upon the Special Management Area a. Relationship of proposed action to land use plans, policies and control The subject property represents the eastern extent of that area designated Urban by the State Land Use Commission and recognized as a part of the Kaimu- Makena Homesteads. The Puna Community Development Plan does not offer any land use policies specific to the Kaimu area, but as stated above, the General Plan does focus more urban types of uses, such as the proposed single-family residential use, in existing Urban areas which is the case presented by the Applicant. b. Description of how proiect will affect area and surrounding lands The subject property lies within a long-established homestead area that has a number of single-family residences. This proposed construction of a single-family residential dwelling on the subject property will be no different. Lands beyond the subject property to the east and north (mauka) being owned by the State. All necessary utilities and services to support the proposed single-family residential use is or will be made available. Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road is a two- lane County -maintained roadway that can easily accommodate the traffic generated by this single-family residential use. c. Description of impacts that cannot be avoided and applied mitigation measures The development of the subject property as a single-family residential homestead will change the landscape in this particular section of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads. But as a part of this homestead area, the proposed development will not be contrary to the existing residential character within this section of Kaimu. Lands to the east beyond the subject property is owned by the State, providing adequate coastal open space opportunities along this scenic roadway. During construction of the proposed single-family dwelling, best management practices will be implemented to insure that excessive dust or runoff is controlled. If required by the Department of Public Works, a grubbing and grading permit will be secured prior to land alteration activities. No such land alteration activities will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback area, which will be clearly delineated with flags or temporary construction fencing, as deemed appropriate by the Planning Department. Wastewater generated by the proposed dwelling will be managed by a septic system approved by the Department of Health. 201 Page d. Alternatives to the proposed proiect The only reasonable alternative is to maintain the subject property in its current vacant and vegetated state. Attempts could be made to cultivate the land or place it into pasture, but at only 3.677 acres, the subject property provides little agricultural opportunity, especially given the poor soil conditions immediately adjacent to the ocean. The proposed project represents the construction of one single-family dwelling on the entire 3.677-acre property, which is reasonable given the land use and zoning pattern established as a part of the Kaimu-Makena Homestead. Adequate support facilities are or can be provided and impacts properly mitigated and managed especially given the limited overall scope of the proposed project. The purpose of the SMA is to ensure that development will not have a substantial adverse effect upon coastal resources, and the Applicant believes that he has accomplished this goal with the information provided within this application. e. Irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources Given the limited scope of the proposed construction of a single-family dwelling and its related improvements, the Applicant is not able to identify any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of cultural, historical, recreational or ecological resources as a result of the proposed subdivision development. Some may view the construction of a single-family dwelling on this property as an unwanted departure from its current vacant and largely undeveloped condition, but that view is also unreasonable and unfair given the existing zoning of the subject property and the mitigating actions presented by the Applicant that managed the property in a manner that is substantially less than that afforded by its zoning designation. G. OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF CHAPTER 205A AND SMA GUIDELINES a. Recreational resources While the subject property itself is not known to accommodate any coastal recreational opportunities, its shoreline proximity does provide access opportunities. The subject property has lost approximately 10,846 square feet of land area due to the encroachment of the shoreline. However, the proposed dwelling will be set back much further beyond the minimum 40-foot shoreline setback. Lateral shoreline access will not be impeded. b. Historic resources The subject property was subject to an inventory level archaeological survey conducted by Robert Spear, Ph.D. in 1992 (Exhibit A). The report, titled "An Inventory Level Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawai `i (TMK: 1-2-18:1) November 1992", identified four (4) archaeological sites within the subject property that include: • Site 18,525 — C-shaped structure built of stacked sub -angular to sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small boulders. No buried cultural features were found in this structure, which functioned as a temporary structure. 211 Page • Site 18,526 —two surface features consisting of a C-shape and a rock mound, both consisting of sub -angular and sub -rounded basalt cobbles and small bounders. No cultural material was found in the C-shaped structure, which functioned as a temporary shelter. The small mound probably functioned as an agricultural feature. • Site 18,527 — a post -contact wall structure that extended along the base of the fill for the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road and extended beyond the subject property to the southwest until it was eventually covered by fill associated with the road construction. Most likely served as a boundary wall. • Site 18528 — small modified hole in a lava bubble. No cultural material was found in association with this feature and there proved to be no potential for excavation inside the opening. The feature function is unclear, but could have served as a storage area or small planting area. The presence of a nearby cemetery was a specific concern during the survey, so special attention was paid to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present within the subject property. No such features were identified, nor were there other features identified that were interpreted as burials. The archaeological also concluded that the soil build-up within the subject property was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface burials. The report concluded that all four (4) sites are significant under Criterion D because of the information they contain. However, because sufficient data has been collected from each site, they can be evaluated as "no longer significant" and that no further archaeological work be required on the subject property. The State Historic Preservation Division will be notified and all work shall immediately cease should inadvertent discovery of any archaeological feature be encountered during development of the proposed subdivision. A January 2024 archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation conducted by ASM affiliates in January 2024 confirmed these previous findings and found that the current study, combined with the findings of the previous survey, supports a HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject property. c. Scenic and Open Space resources The subject property is not identified as an area of natural beauty by the General Plan. The subject property remains largely vegetated with restricted coastal viewplanes from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. Immediately to the north are State-owned lands situated upon a 1750 A`a lava flow that affords greater coastal viewplane opportunities than does the subject property. The proposed construction of a single-family dwelling on this 3.677-acre property will offer a very low density building site that should not have a significant adverse impact upon any viewplane. 221 Page d. Coastal ecosystems The subject property has direct shoreline frontage, along with a 40-foot shoreline setback that will be imposed and enforced by the County, ameliorating the effects of any development activities upon coastal resources. The small scale of the proposed single-family residential homesite will further manage the scale of improvements and uses upon these lands and its effects upon the coastal ecosystem. The Applicant will comply with all applicable government regulations to mitigate the effects of the project upon coastal resources, such as regulation related wastewater treatment and disposal, erosion and sedimentation control, grubbing and grading activities. e. Economic uses The subject property and this particular area of Kaimu has been designated for residential uses for over 50 years, providing such opportunities within an area long established as a homestead community. From an economic standpoint, jobs will be created on a temporary basis in order to support the construction of the single- family dwelling. The County will gain in real property tax revenues and fees associated with the construction and occupancy of the proposed single family residential dwelling within this subdivision. f. Coastal hazards The subject property is not subject to coastal flooding nor the effects of sea level rise, as discussed in Sections D(21) and D(22). In view of the Hawai'i State Supreme Court's " PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka'Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. The Applicant, nor past studies, have identified the proposed dwelling site as being host to any valued cultural, historical, and natural resources. Therefore, the Applicant could find no evidence of any possible significant adverse effects or impairments that will occur to any valued resources should this SMA Use Permit be approved. A cultural consultation with long- time residents of the area found that none of those consulted were aware of any burials within the subject property. However, should the Applicant inadvertently encounter any remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials, the Applicant agree to cease work in the immediate area and contact the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD), resuming activities only upon securing archaeological clearance from DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. The Applicant has not encountered any evidence of traditional or customary Native Hawaiian rights being practiced on the subject property, nor existence of any known valued cultural, historical or native resources in the area. Thus, it is believed that the project would have no adverse impact relative to the cultural and historical resources of the area. To the extent to which traditional and customary Native 231 Page Hawaiian rights are exercised, the proposed action will not affect traditional Hawaiian rights. Based on the above findings, the Applicant maintains that allowing the construction of a single-family dwelling and its related improvements on a portion of the 3.677-acre property will not have any substantial adverse impacts on the surrounding area, nor will its approval be contrary to the objectives and policies of Chapter 205A, HRS, relating to Coastal Zone Management and Rule No.9 of the Planning Commission relating to the Special Management Area. H. CONCLUSION Based on the discussion above, the Applicant finds that approval of an SMA Use Permit to allow for the construction of a single-family dwelling and its related improvements on the subject property will conform to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan; adheres to the general policies and objectives of the Puna Community Development Plan; will not have a significant adverse impact upon coastal resources; and would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. 241 Page r e, m � _ I E 8 6IH aas ,au,00 al aaH z �xy vua�xa `r 6uiweil N � _ W ; S � P V I m llem moyeN �d-S � `� 3 = n rl � W _ p ��= J 93 r-1 a m Q a � _ W LIWOM Z _ a O O LL 11 0 Z a yr a " �av .o-r - vmi� <3C Oro o�m m® .; LL E ana K a N w N rP �I� ¢ o ssy 55gwwa WO 070 m g aAA111A.AM^ o R s N 61 _solo Po =3 OO ' a® ❑ a aOH 9Lxb I.9l) Z 33333333333 O fif `m om A' a, v L4 E3v Vlo ea�oueu ne r m ` \ c \\\CnJ }" r cm m 8�m88 E3a rnarn W gEe - oY c 10 z O vEo a a Z •r.k .o,zr 7 O 5 LL r m_ w DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Auj-Zs-05 D4,41po FfovCLARK REALTY CORD WILD 1QUE162711 T-M P GOVD19 F°-022 IBM Ay 5/3/2022?+, EXHIBIT B DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA � UG-N-15 24:4 1 w, Fro---'LAR( REAL-Y CORP. HiLD 96896'6278 T-GTS OQVO!4 �-M Xr the reqP-Dst bf r- D"Oft *ObJMAQKI-, ica �nVQntOrY SurveY WCA OCrLductedby ,�Ln a par-ce-i oll &t. wt&��, 7-o 4ot-ermine or �Kbvjeacs. of jc'arj't culr-V-rtl r*malmw i-A tbA-� pswj'act is-rea. Tb* fI'Lw3'dVOrk V Gal: nut 013 D.C-tobez 23 a -ad JE44 13,w by kbb�rt T', spaijr, -7-ht by A'I. cm the by S�u ;Ucuan" O'n 'ZjIzV 'R.Out-th bY Otr-aPlecllxous& 10t, t-nd Qn tbn, -weAt by ��alfApjjric3-w poho K-a SO&ch pr.cij<Act area :LpgI-%jdzcj, -bat' Ic'z413 not -I.imit-Ad nqut'a-'y Pod, and � low qrpumcl Cuver. szall wvic'c j-dagit-iftAid, i-ft tho of 6611 CIA"if-i-cation. .0-f vrb ptojent Lx'l��Q ��Os lav�� *Xtremftly y pe4t (Soil stlrv-e 19 73:34, 4'a) -Y Ann.- AIRCHASOUHMAII -Oz tht LZIMA ion AunaT' 'olind 'ao O)T TI�L-ar tba-7 �?rpjje--'et Aecn;x.ded -itas F I 'eclau DS rDS 5/3/2022. DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA -res-C_A.&K PFAc T'r CDRP-. CLO i3Q9B6162i T-F2 i' ODAf7'9V. « - "' ` ! NI kle _ „� � , y �•+P� .r. ! B �.��+Sd y"J Jy � is d.5$y - _ jA �. � � �+<....✓''• : * I.a, .n ; .-� F—"r ..:..r .. �, „ `� � ��-.:, tCL'S4d'LFI� ,/�YiL' 1�' ...ai4lj rjTu RJ ,PA dirk' a A.. �".. RC47da"v 'Ra: it rr"'ss,' y7aw4P.te++"�r j} me c YIG"�4vstTs Y ..a W. , ' /-1 tg �-• ryri �- — - � }�y�i ��q y�^, .. i` r .c_ ��(5y� S r��sy .{�,ypr,+�c��•,p..,�, $ �Vi'i- �.: U�e: S.'.�'�-, � `��'.1'd'..!?tii{. .a��4 'w^i�J?kS.��•IV U.iI6+.a�.M°r,F+H�5 L7 fi a�. ,i DS DS �� �� 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Aug-ZHS 0 4; 42;ii Frc::-CL�S.K REALTY CORP. 81,0 8086& N"a T-M Y CC-5/01 "-83E 7. and a 7e kq 7 2 A a, Oz Ape a moppkns stone ZrF-o—), t-va, va3i-a 01,&-TA4Q� and, ljondacr t aad. a 4�er�i*4 of. Zr.011, * caotdAer Ism. Brxrdnehas sugqgu-t.ej. thrjr, arba raw general uz;-r.: thra%Aqhout rho rogi-or, wjtjj jz;veae pf,.kj-ip,�.jy c-reas mix.ed I.eM(-'ZIIL ;alit fgr the. MGdfkl WhiCIV -�rC�P;Isud f jvc ac�t-tj-eMOTLt ari.d 1"d: RA"O.- zif -a- cOa5tf4-1 gtr-uctu-las L�Rrf:SCR-I; rvj b3th .,C)1*�juAmurrt the enz i�e- c-paF,,c Y COul&- Occur i-r, rmma'kl,4 -Wiftl-V -SpAmced. 5.ruupY, or 44-04-nd Ot "Jzivati Oe majqr fat,--TPr& ISM, by AuVpDrted -kapa.anct o"Fil: mii�tt p�mitooz- Ellis A -�44L. Tind' -fc--rttl-� -Soil. Th c, DS rIDS �A 5/3/2022 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Aug-za-as CCUP- RFAL-Y COW HILO 808M We T-073 P 00019 F-486 % -caltlyatVA &)nd n CrI lided.: ez; Pf cc!couiAt., and �.Iijopn of ke�S. Fiji-& '-.Jr .1matist z�_-t hA4- * tipe sapdy. ln,,gacb. (,.&JLAO Ir. iz th* bea-ch ai Eta-, lAc7ludi ng of the fi projac.� arts, I-oc6t<id north&aat fxon the. be44cb up tb* _m& 4avc bcelj4 a JeFs por _Y .y d U 0 t'D t-hi-cl ane, the X..ac-k of a being -he cape, eVP4-_.Cze-0 tionc and R.0 The. psenco ;rjg ttvr.4:wVc! � . . CIMet,afY !r1kMe4Ai=1kLy AcZo-59 the z:,f?Lad. -frow thi-_ Fm)*ot"Ulee qlx'es rise. x-o. -r--h-e possjt5l.i_�y- of imman 1A tbf-M -all .4W 16, 4- 21M PU, 47 t_hj4p, jnV&Dttj-'y z W WAS .94. :de-ta:V4M t�y prpj.arod. In 2ynr-'PLKWt1c "0020 X&M T s P C) Vio ir e IU P, �5 �a T-'t_ i.'Ctc'P_ s ur waa f 16-a-Z to -goad., thi-Z. Z'PF'c i1r V7'A_ tk%kf Y.eyaz� -Awmigod eftquft" for zitc. d'i-j&t0v�_-ry' AI! jx1*h4'fjea war* t .and VLark-ed ij.rh rA- T QQ'06.r,�� uuz_0*4�-" T" 4UbV0TA_Z Cia tit Ail 1�tj' DS DS 41 5/3/Z.Q.22 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Aug-z. -J5 7•:47,p- c a,_C_?. ,. gRIL7 CO;;,. 4jL4 Boa 9618ITS T-073 �- 0071059 e-M • ands e�cpiore hAor- batrjc�d "Littural The- �Dil fr iz th'a era-c, vatiDn8 °uair: nm, rcentd, R6 rOrdt WeZ-e XOPZ t'brOLkoh ZhC U-%r O idnpt s� p it�z�aaie aural --I 98 01 sL"IeCtcd c�ii1 �1 r �� � x�t��e��, rr� � aa�e of a btai--.k and whitf, phttn rccoris. Al ] $,Oil COI-Q O VV-Ca bat od qn rb6� E R-U .nsell color Charts- M&Ppi rig. was do;ie by tape Aud All E our as` �tx�eb� 91.��a1 sites ��,ere 30,:p1:. ,Ij: ohm cvk:a5.0 wflr(� Fite }�1Q_5, J.B, ? to # ,5: t�s r j. 1yaI-Cb cad' 4 C-_�,hape ),�Q(.Ar-aO nadr the baa-�s cl t A-0. 1I.50 a'a- flcau and at thy: eAct jrif. -t 1Li ll.dca xPSVZ the depth cS oe C-Ahapq.- ITom its �j-,Z~tri.ot WL11 Lo _ 5h.ape was i .A.5 1�4 . TM% MaNd- urr. wa i tihs-c - so. va-s w.4nd hA;1 ht, w. .0.36 41. t_ -2h4p- 4X-rCK Qr J■a-31 of the st;zu.cz—urn had be�-n Ilslhi.-b' .ceV*rkj, grit ����r�;s, �"h� h;al f of tle feet-yrr.c W V ja(prt� d,j-r`.tuWb,cd.- 7aa gm •the .n t-her-n .bal f . DS DS �/ �� 5/3/2022 5 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA U;4?p;., Frc. v`_�R? REALTY CORP HIiG 8D$BBIfi2TA T-07-2 F L'.181Ci6 €-888 AN 'S • � y a 1� 4M ■ r ,t'1� ti _ AC 17f. .0 r DS DS DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Aur`Z3-U5 Cd:f4a F errCL•y,R Ohl-'�Y 1.4)PP, HILO V. 0 k�, 'D IDSI DS 5/3/2022 3 90&9616 iQ T-77 F C09/V0 F-8813 DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Aug -LE -a! [4:44p:: ru, FEALTY CORP. N1-0 I3 aS1CM 3 F CiQlai� r BBB z+ 4.. '�' 4.•PI i,'ti ,^Iy� •r 1`y��T�� J�. p �+�,�' aaa��] �.pp.Yay'�f �,{pq�$� iy���•.•�1�rAyv ��$� r�a SyA�� :. DS DS (�� �B 5/3/2022 -+ w ,^Iy� •r 1`y��T�� J�. p �+�,�' aaa��] �.pp.Yay'�f �,{pq�$� iy���•.•�1�rAyv ��$� r�a SyA�� :. DS DS (�� �B 5/3/2022 -+ w DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41CO-AO87-D524E75FE5EA JVu�'23'4R GS;+15G. F•ct:v--f—ARK R k` n: COP- HILL T-QT� ?.011/'19 F-189 r. t �°gc k a sc s 'IS' elk the grazod'-s-ur_ aide the cpnn-inj-,, of thp, C-:6h�ppe Lo tast fcra: buried c4altuml depos'i-tL. ? Ya oxU—t .aaa ur d 1,0-:0 13y C.,50 is and +ate: djj q tD, depth- of 4-0 cm —below vaxface, OnIT Ga. 04tsral layar yta vile I -a- er waa 7 . blagk (10 YR 211, 4) DiAt wi-th #�aed- p E,s of b4Zalit - 140Ut of t�-g. ea tang half of -tkvw uakx. :era rook b-claww- t x- -rgi5ce- P *.ee-ttro s fE tba wilt fit to s en 3-5: 4c l � :�� �, end 7�_ R�+�.t�a-aa,. � �t.�. � ������ ,��.•�,� i�,«�. ��p.t�.�c� errs-e�x�.�di tC tb� tau The trrn&rjm#--, c 1jidrh of the- ���•,�tx�� ��K� 1-U 0 and c ftp h vE tbe -§�-aP�-- f-40m lr5 tv iths +t1p oil -tI . T j- .maK1Mu:m wad cAr� QaL I AD m acrid �k�� .�i:r���r,x. iirLi.r rrm�,l �s..���•t wf� � o'�� �;. .. �.--. ii. *-I' toe . P4=)A 1p - WO-11, stacked, ard fime .- ll!ph.i.ly zQx &a t= 1 z t t key 7 150 n ae� � a :°° t�. -WU4 a s za�—Nw s sae- kat Of .. i3 ni. mom; to Pub— DS DS �� 5/3/2022 . • tea' DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA 0121619 "90 LI DS DS AA eds 009 " J FO J3 .9- ell 5/3/2022 Z a M-, DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Aug-23-05 04.I7;6 Fri ,LARD w-ALiY OAP HILT B3$nfi6G2T'8 T-073 F 0E4/01? i-898 no a nd d bAZ4a-k COUD • Anti f xkfnd 2TW� Q n ft dug. t* e r ul.i-mam depth. of 3.6 am ' :,dw Eijxlac&. Qn.iy 0r1 • a*tux�40- IAY . c ; �: i i • a gee s sj,?-e6 p4:e :+1 of. IF " The wall ex;t�cP4*4 -be � p vx�•rby rtim.mad '� t F*t its. so"h4g. ..04. Zbcl L'aD t-h 01 rbe mail tOljf-4 40P t.QP IDf tht. J�,aj-j, I DS DS • • 5/3/2022 �42 ClIt L4 - I 1hw 7, '4i IV! iA DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Aus-2"-105 G4: 4 8 P, Frc'a-_.ARK �-__ALTf C�jRP. HI'60 7-0 12 F cluvig P_ia� 4r, T h 0 P:rc 5 cm ce. of t hM :garb --F- y Jra _G @ S P-C ci f c c 0 n c Ourha,v- pro 1 r1 P�j Cd to the Qj_ t"Orl 01 tht Pr'Oie-ct 4-r.eBL. '!-0- dev-er=DQ ig LP VhOge. idaUtItil--d in L,hc, c-en, at-7,ry wbr48 aIFQ the pro-;C7 eL 4 a r,(I-a "h f"turO$ idarmified, nor WeXO Any uLher tea_ cures ldenrifLed that,wer� inzccprotccj aoil build-up in the proj-,,ct ark& WaE �40 z -110w dii• tb proctude the Prese-nct- ok vALbsujcl-ace. 4;2ria.1A w03;j�,_ cIN4. fQr thv teraA_Lji-t= c_Dt_,:10 early pctn-Coc.L E-eazAale, Tb u-s hm vi-tb r_N- C-,aha'po, 4= aka .e 14,61-5 p�j_O_Ce4�) QL uoTt'41 q 4 1 ma. prliAt cm 7�ha nvtmi�by beach. ye't Ozly b..OF� v4zaco '��z Ltc .. 641L.D. ccrr4, I ilk 10$te-L 'Lagc_4 A. re-Ligibuz "ferl;.�2 bN�-t it'.15 ZeaT."�riq ti" --d ter Faeture :2,,. a smz�j mo,"04 .5 6 CL n a nc, ab:t_ 'Olut I B c r c rfj maTmrialm- mere Qbx;aiArwd Iran t_,rYlz �j-t, ,_Siuo �,?;RSZ6 ij� ST- c d to ;be prD,C*=At*j' g _DS DS 5/3/2022 34 AA DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA N: as FfC-N- LARK REALTY CDRP HILD SBE9616278 1-013 F LiTIC"O F-BRO ot: V�' T4,F- 1-1 Pr.e-4at-'� thc. a w ch Iko" n4w. "Vtnq r-hc nozr_hzt end r)f the- �aFll coverd Ley the -road fill. the vall ,May hove svrved �;a a. boundfiry wall. 'Sit& I.f,,526 " a smadl, woCiili-n6 bole. in. a lava bubble. Na -cultural material bf dar-c7s obt_Li*cd fr.aM- bbis beaLt%kro. Thm fedtLtra fun-Otion is iinclear but it aou-d ri4sve sezvoC A� a ol-oragt, 6'rfi* or 4 Saall Plaa'.'Ing azpa21 thl-F SIC-P, is a-,jr-OcIated jt�.j'tj� Si.teg 18,,525 AVe 1.8,5.26 then ttc� sitii -Wcmad. 14ate, to -C to ear.ly of the IOU;c Rites rhE Pr6lzsz' area u"d fox I fits With Oiim'niodel �_-Erpased ea'rn'�i im vhla V-�rf' tame, 2_0z'b . C3BZfMIj_rY- JJ11 'PACt. J-*, at r by : ,h� pfem*n'C-L- 'fjj Ttir- WEIII r-;t .on mixcrz, xapn Rmcov-Piam 4i6c= All fOL3'r J),f t-he fj LC&p LInd Or cir" _10o V -Aona- aLm"45116g-te.0, ac -z4v prop�rty- Iw4AcP&Ip;m&d, work i-n immodim�c area bmrj,mj- most .fie batuid and, jr-ho 4tate Hasgcf IDn the of ��hkg It, 1A thaT_ S DS 5/3/202'2.: DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA 04=49 : P r Ls -CLAP ( RZALTY MPPK H 1-0 �0gOU I U?t T-OT3 P O l6Ji 19 F-8a8 Award Bt�03�r' 5 .ry q� ^F,r +i f.J3� A' ` � 071 b [1� fel4'V 1G'f 4. q u a.i R4Y d�.r, and • 72 ' g5 ypuha- xqip ,�A ziff a " 4+1 ' i'r ' r, ta.' �S SC w' ,�-' �a., :. 4�- c' AS•}.1'�w� +h.9r `�3 k� {� pp}y t ' — -x. S .1 i of F - 4�Lr ; C S C %. Croc ,r '� ��^S.Y S'-J � X+♦�"J.LJ.�.1.� .. `.—'Lf,' .d:Y��."g1�1-�'":1� .'S#4e�'�_411 � �f� Irtl .;��.t,�'.+r ;�y{�+++.�' �iFas+ 'r�1k:V:..��•�r�QY �-s V. .a . OT Dg 50/2022. TAt DocuSign Envelope ID: E445C575-8A87-41C0-A087-D524E75FE5EA Awjr2 3 -0 5 04:44pm Fm-,-,',LAFK qEAL-Y Mi RP VLC 806H I EM T-M P 0 i R/C'O F-HO jolin E DOCUSigned by: 5/4/2022 57486A681166452... DocuSigned by: 5/3/2022 EY-164A283A1373406... ' .11 I As Archaeology • History • Ethnography • Architectural History January 20, 2024 Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC 12-55 Likoliko Lp #4866, Pahoa, Hl, 96778 Email: wyattinhawaii@gmail.com Subject: Results of an archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation conducted in support of an SMA use permit application for the proposed subdivision of TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. Dear Mark: As requested, ASM Affiliates (ASM) conducted an archaeological field inspection and cultural consultation in support of an application for an SMA use permit, concerning the proposed subdivision of TMK: (3) 1- 2-018:001, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii (Figures 1, 2, and 3). The field inspection was conducted to help address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proposed 6-lot subdivision of the 3.551-acre subject parcel by confirming and updating the findings of an earlier archaeological inventory survey (AIS) prepared for the property by Spear (1992). Furthermore, consultation was undertaken seeking information from knowledgeable individuals regarding the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the subject property. Project Area Description The project area is the entirety of TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 located within Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii. The 3.551-acresubject parcel is bounded on the mauka side by the Kalapana-Kapoho Road (see Figure 3), on the makai side by a 40 foot exclusion zone along the coast (Figure 4), to the northeast by an undeveloped State-owned parcel consisting of `a `d lava, and to the southwest by a developed residential property. The project area situated at an elevation of 10 to 25 feet (3.05 to 7.62 meters) above mean sea level and is 40 feet inland from the coast. An Historic cemetery is located to the northeast of the project area on the opposite side of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road; Figure 5) Geologically, the project area is located on the lower flanks of Kilauea Volcano and is comprised of multiple lava flows (Sherrod et al. 2021), with a Puna basalt flow that erupted between 400 and 750 years before present (BP) forming much of the central and southern part of the parcel; a younger Puna basalt flow of `a `d lava dating to 200-400 years BP creating the northeastern edge; and a more recent pahoehoe flow that occurred between 1986 and 1992 present at the coast (Figure 6). Soil classifications within the project area (Figure 7) mimic the geologic substrates and are comprised primarily of dry Hakuma highly organic loam on 2 to 10 percent slopes, with dry Malama-Lava flows complex on 2 to 40 percent slopes on the `a `d flow along the northeastern edge, and pahoehoe lava flows on 2 to 20 percent slopes present at the coast (Soil Survey Staff 2022). There has been some prior ground disturbance along the northeast, southwest, and mauka edges of the project area. On the `a `d flow in the northeastern portion of the parcel, a grubbed and graded driveway (Figure 8) meanders along the property line and accesses a graded house pad near the coast on a promontory that overlooks the rest of the parcel (this area was mostly recently cleared in 2022). There is a second roadway which diverts from the upper road and is routed down through the middle of the project area to the coast (Figure 9). This road may have been already present when previously surveyed in 1992, as 820 Mililani Street, Suite 700, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 (808) 439-8089 Fax: (808) 439-8087 507A East Lanikaula Street, Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (808) 969-6066 Fax: (808) 443-0065 EXHIBIT C www.asmaffiliates.com January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 2 of 19 something resembling it is mentioned by Spear (1992). Bulldozer push piles were also observed along the boundary with the adjacent residential property to the southwest near the middle of the project area. These push piles appear to be related to the clearing of that neighboring parcel. A number of brush piles, seemingly from hand clearing activities, were also noted in the northeastern portion of the project area at the base of the `a `d flow. Vegetation cover within the project area is influenced by the extent of prior ground disturbance. In the undisturbed portions of the project area (Figure 10), the overstory consists predominately of monkeypod trees (Samanea saman), hala (Pandanus tectorius), hau (Hibiscus tiliacenus), indo (Thespesia copulnea), with coconut palm (Cocos nucifera), and naupaka (Scaevola sp.) along the makai section, `ohi `a lehua (Metrosideros polymorpha) along the northern boundary, a scattering of noni (Morinda citrifolia) throughout the property, and a single eucalyptus tree (Eucalyptus globidus). The ground cover consists of morning glory (Ipomoea indica), particularly in the makai portion of the project area, with Boston fern (Nephrolepis exaltata), and various species of grasses. In the previously disturbed portions, the vegetation is comprised of a mix of grasses, purslane (Portulaca sp.), gunpowder trees (Trema orientalis), Melochia (Melochia umbellata), guava (Psidium guajava), and other non-native weeds (Figure 11). A Brief Culture -Historical Background for the Subject Parcel The project area lies on the southern shores of the Puna District of the Island of Hawaii within the ahupua `a of Kaimu. Kaimu is bordered to the southwest by the ahupua `a of Kalapana and Kupahua, to the north by the ahupua `a of Waiakahiula and Ka`ohe, and to the west by the ahupua `a of K7kala 1-2 and Keokea. Traditionally, the primary village for this ahupua `a was (and still is) known as Kaimu, a name that has been translated to mean "gathering [at the] sea [to watch surfing]" (Pukui et al. 1974:69). The shoreline of this ahupua `a, according to Pukui et al. (1974:69), is "noted for its surf and its black sand beach" and was originally called H6`eu and Ka-poho. Pukui et al. (1974) note that this beach was likely formed after a 1750 lava flow, during which time steam explosions formed the characteristic black sand of the area (the beach at Kaimu was covered by lava flows that occurred during the 1980s and is no longer present). The English missionary William Ellis embarked on a circumnavigation of Hawaii Island in the 1820s in the hopes of identifying population centers that would be receptive of Christian missionary teachings. During his travels, he collected observations of the environments and people he encountered. After leaving the district of Ka`u, Ellis entered southern Puna along its coastline and described the string of villages he traveled through, including Kaimu, which he described as being: ...pleasantly situated near the sea shore, on the south-east side of the island, standing on a bed of lava considerably decomposed, and covered over with a light and fertile soil. It is adorned with plantations, groves of cocoa -nuts, and clumps of kou trees. It has a fine sandy beach, where canoes may land with safety; and, according to the houses numbered to -day, contains about 725 inhabitants. Including the villages in its immediate vicinity along the coast, the population would probably amount to 2,000.... The extent of cultivation in the neighbourhood, together with the decent and orderly appearance of the people, induce us to think they are more sober and industrious, than those of many villages through which we have passed (Ellis 1825:160). Indeed, the habitation and agricultural patterns of southern Puna were often dependent on the path of the lava flows from Kilauea Volcano. As Handy and Handy (1972:751) note, the lands of Makena and lower Kaimu were suitable for growing sweet potatoes but not taro, and the neighboring ahupua `a of "Keokea [Keokea] supported neither, being mostly pahoehoe lava." Additionally, Hawaiian traditions imply that Puna "was once Hawaii's richest agricultural region and that it is only in relatively recent time that volcanic eruption has destroyed much of its best land" (Handy and Handy 1972:752). By the mid-19t'' century, the traditional Hawaiian land tenure system was radically altered through a process of land division known as the Mdhele Aina. This change in land tenure was promoted by the missionaries and the growing foreign population and business interests in the island kingdom who were generally January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 3 of 19 hesitant to enter business deals on leasehold lands. The Mahele (division) defined the land interest of Kamehameha III (the King), the high-ranking chiefs and konohiki (headman of an ahupua `a). As a result of the Mahele, all lands in the Kingdom of Hawaii were placed into one of three categories: (1) Crown Lands (lands personally claimed by Kamehameha III); (2) Konohiki Lands (lands claimed by lesser ali `i and konohiki) and; (3) Government Lands (lands surrendered by the King or the konohiki in lieu of commutation) with the caveat that the rights of the hoa `dina (tenants) were to be reserved (Chinen 1958:vii; 1961:13). In the case of the lands of Kaimu, the ahupua `a was originally claimed by Mataio Kekuanao`a, who managed the estate of his daughter the ah `i Victoria Kamamalu. However, in January of 1848, Kekuanaa'a surrendered this land to the King, and Kaimu was placed into the inventory of Crown Lands (Buke Mahele 1848). As the King and his ah `i and konohiki made claims to large tracts of land via the Mahele, questions arose regarding the protection of rights for the hoa `aina. To resolve this matter, on August 6t11, 1850, the Kuleana Act (also known as the Enabling Act) was passed, clarifying the process by which native tenants could claim fee simple title to any portion of lands that they physically occupied, actively cultivated, or had improved (Garovoy 2005). Within Kaimu, no kuleana lands were awarded and within the entirety of the Puna District only two kuleana were awarded (Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018). A map of lands in the vicinity of Kalapana, Puna (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1614) prepared by E. D. Baldwin in 1892 shows the lands in the vicinity of the subject parcel and indicates the locations of nearby cultural features located to the southwest of the current project area, including a heiau, several houses and other named places located within Kaimu Village, and a trail extending inland from the village (Figure 12). The `a `a point located in the eastern corner of the subject parcel is labeled "Keoneana" on that map. A later tracing of the 1892 map showing the Crown Land Homesteads of Kaimu (Hawai`i Registered Map No. 1812) shows that the subject parcel was subdivided and sold to C.H. Will (Grant No. 8004) as Lot 28-C of the Kaimu-Makena Homesteads by late December 1921. Records from 1932 list the subject parcel as being owned by a Mrs. Chieko, who acted as a trustee for the minors Hanayo Will, Yoshio Will, and Isami Will, each of whom held a 1/3 interest in the lot. By the 1960's, ownership of the parcel had split between the previously mentioned members of the Will family, who would own the parcel until the late 1980s. Summary of Prior Archaeological Study within the Subject Parcel The current project area (TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001) was the subject of an intensive archaeological inventory survey prepared by Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. in 1992 (Spear 1992). As a result of that study, four archaeological sites were identified within the property (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18525, 50-10-63-18526, 50- 10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; Figure 13) that were interpreted as having been used for Precontact to early Historic Period for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. All four sites were described and mapped by Spear (1992), and two of the sites (Sites 18525 and 18526) were excavated to help refine their functional interpretations and test for the presence of buried cultural deposits. Spear (1992) assessed all four sites as significant under Criterion d for the information they had contributed to understanding past lifeways within the project area. He noted that sufficient data had been collected from the sites as a result of the AIS to warrant a treatment recommendation of ' no further work." The State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) agreed with the significance assessments and treatment recommendations for the sites, and accepted the Spear (1992) AIS, in a letter dated March 3, 1993 (LOG NO: 7604, DOC NO: 9302ks25). The descriptions of the sites recorded by Spear (1992) are summarized below. Site 18525 was recorded by Spear (1992) as a C-shape located near the base of the `a `d lava flow, at the end of a bulldozer push road, in the eastern corner of the parcel. According to Spear (1992), the opening to the C-shape was oriented to the west and measured 5.1 meters wide and 1.45 meters deep. The walls were 2.1 meters thick, and the maximum height was 0.36 meters. The feature was disturbed at the southern end, and hau growth affected the exterior wall (Spear 1992). One large piece of coral was found on the ground surface on the inside of the C-shape. A single stratigraphic trench was excavated outside of the opening of the C-shape to test for buried cultural deposits. Measuring 1.0 meter by 0.5 meter, the trench was dug to a January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 4 of 19 depth of 0.4 meters below the surface, but no cultural materials of any kind were encountered. Based on its formal attributes, this site was interpreted as a Precontact/Historic temporary habitation shelter. Site 18526 was recorded by Spear (1992) as consisting of two surface features (Features 1 and 2). Feature 1 was described as a C-shape with its opening oriented to the south, with a width of 3.7 meters and a depth of 1.2 meters. The maximum wall thickness and height were 1.09 meters and 0.75 meters respectively. The eastern third of the structure was collapsed and in poor condition. Feature 2 was situated slightly more than two meters to the south of Feature 1, and consisted of a rock mound which measured 1.85 meters N/S and 1.5 meters E/W. The maximum height of the mound was 0.6 meters, and a single stratigraphic trench measuring 0.5 by 0.5 meters was excavated between Features 1 and 2. Excavation extended to a maximum depth of 0.36 meters and no cultural materials were encountered. Spear (1992) interpreted Feature 1 as a temporary habitation shelter and Feature 2 as a small agricultural mound. Site 18527 was documented by Spear (1992) as a wall that extended along the base of the fill for the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. At the time of the 1992 study, the wall extended beyond the project area to the southwest and was covered with road fill at its northeast end. The length of the wall within the project area was recorded as 28 meters, with a maximum height and width 1.1 meters and 0.5 meters respectively. No excavation was undertaken at Site 18527 by Spear (1992), who interpreted the site as a boundary wall that predates the construction of the adjacent roadway. Site 18528 was documented by Spear (1992) as a modified lava bubble, with interior measurements of 0.82 meters (north/south) by 0.8 meters (east/west) and a depth of 0.92 meters. The opening was cleared of rock which had been used to build up the southwest portion of the feature. No cultural material was found in association with the feature and according to Spear (1992), who interpreted the site as a possible storage feature or small planting pit, there was no potential for excavation. The presence of the nearby cemetery (located to the northeast of the project area on the mauka edge of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road; see Figure 5) was a specific concern of the earlier study, and Spear (1992) noted that special attention was paid to the mauka portion of the project area to determine if structures similar to those identified in the cemetery were also present in the project area. No such features were identified in that area, or anywhere else within the project area. Additionally, as noted by Spear (1992), the soil buildup in the project area was so shallow as to preclude the presence of subsurface features or burials. Results of the Current Field Inspection On October 27, 2023, David King, M.A., Colsen Balai, B.A., and Jonas Leon, B.A., and Matthew R. Clark, M.A. (ASM Principal Investigator), conducted a thorough surface survey of the subject parcel, as well as a general inspection of the `a `d flow bordering the northeastern side of the project area. The survey included a surface inspection of the entire parcel utilizing north/south pedestrian transects with fieldworkers spaced at 10-meter intervals. As was previously done by Spear (1992), special care was taken in the mauka portion of the project area, especially on the surface of the adjacent 'a `d flow, to look for burial features similar to those contained within the Historic cemetery across the street. As a result of the pedestrian survey, three of the four sites previously documented by Spear (1992) within the subject parcel were found (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; Figure 14). The locations of these sites were documented using a GPS, and the current condition of each of these sites is briefly described below. Site 50-10-63-18525 (a C-shape) could not be relocated, and it is thought that this site, which was formerly located in the eastern portion of the subject parcel at the base of the `a `d flow (Figure 15), was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbing activities after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) AIS. The location and distribution of sites and features identified within the subject parcel, as well as the relative location of the cemetery to the project area, is depicted in Figure 14. Site 18526 Features 1 (a C-shape) and 2 (a mound) were both in similar condition to what was described by Spear (1992), but the features are currently obscured by heavy overgrowth and two large trees that have fallen across them (Figures 16 and 17). Site 18527 (a historic wall) is in the same condition as described by Spear and no changes to that site were noted (Figure 18). Site 18528 (a modified lava blister) has been January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 5 of 19 disturbed by land clearing activities since it was first documented in 1992. Small boulders from that push have fallen into blister and the site is currently obscured by thick brush covering its edges (Figure 19). No additional archaeological sites were identified within the project area as a result of the fieldwork conducted by ASM, but several recent rock constructions and modern landscape modifications were noted (see Figure 14). These more recent features, which include rock stacks, stone -lined paths (Figure 20), and rock cleared areas on the ground surface, are largely concentrated in the coastal -central portion of the subject parcel, in areas that appear to be used recurrently and recently for camping and fishing activities. The lack of mention of these features in the Spear (1992) AIS report, as well as the modern vegetation disturbance and debris associated with them, suggests that all of the additional rock constructions identified within project area were built during the last 30 years. None of these more recently constructed features appear to be burial monuments. Consultation To address the concerns of the County of Hawaii Planning Department regarding the proximity of the cemetery to the project area and to determine the presence (or absence) of burial sites within the project area, ASM's Senior Ethnographer, Lokelani Brandt, M.A. conducted consultation with several long-time residents of the area including descendants of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and Kealoha families. Consultation occurred during a period between October 31, 2023, and December 13, 2023, when ASM staff contacted Ms. Ke`ala Keli`iho`omalu, Mrs. Leialoha Ilae-Kaleimdmahu, and Mrs. Ku`ulei Kealoha-Cooper by phone. Following the initial phone calls, each of the three consulted parties were provided with a consultation letter and maps specifying ASM's search for persons who may have knowledge of any burials within the project area and information on the nearby cemetery. Each of the consulted parties contacted additional family members to seek such information. Ms. Keli`iho`omalu spoke with elder relatives Prince Keli`iho`omalu, Sam Keli`iho`omalu, Noenoe Dunn, Tiana Dunn, Jerry Dunn, Princess Keli`iho`omalu, Jr. Keli`iho`omalu, and Tiara Keli`iho`omalu. Ms. Keli`iho`omalu indicated that her uncle Sam also attempted to reach out to Aku Hauani`o and Kamu Quihano and that her father attempted to reach out to Annie Ka`aukai and Leslie Enriques. Mrs. Ilae-Kalaimamahu also contacted members of the `ohana Keli`iho`omalu and recommended that ASM staff contact Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper since she had heard that the cemetery belonged to the Kealoha family. Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper was contacted by ASM and she spoke with several of her relatives, including her mother. None of the consulted parties knew of any burial sites within the project area. Subsequent email correspondence with Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper clarified that the cemetery did not belong to the Kealoha `Ohana, however, her mother related that in the 1930s and 1940s, the Kalapana Church was located near the cemetery and that her tutu (Mrs. Kealoha-Cooper's great-grandmother) Emma Nai`a was a pillar of that church. She added that there is a Kealoha cemetery in `Opihikao but was not aware of any such family cemetery in Kaimu. Conclusion and Recommendations The results of the current study support the findings of the Spear (1992) AIS. Three of the four sites previously documented by Spear (1992) within the subject parcel were identified during the field inspection (SIHP Sites 50-10-63-18526, 50-10-63-18527, and 50-10-62-18528; see Figure 14). These sites are all in similar condition to what was previously described, and indicate that the parcel was used during the Precontact to early Historic Period for temporary habitation purposes, with associated storage and limited agricultural also occurring. All three of these sites were observed to be in similar condition to what was previously described by Spear (1992). The fourth site (Site 50-10-63-18525, a C-shape) could not be found, and is thought to have been destroyed by land clearing activities that have occurred within the subject parcel since the Spear (1992) AIS was accepted by SHPD. No potential burial features were identified within the subject parcel as a result of the current fieldwork, nor were any possible burial locations identified as a result of the consultation conducted by ASM. The only features identified within the property that were not reported on by Spear (1992) appear to be less than 50 years old and related to on -going camping and fishing activities that still occur within the project area. The findings of the current study, combined with the January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 6 of 19 SHPD's prior review of the Spear (1992) AIS (LOG NO: 7604, DOC NO: 9302ks25), support an HRS Chapter 6E-42 determination of "No historic properties affected" pursuant to HAR § 13-275-7(a)(1) for the proposed subdivision and development of the subject parcel. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly. Sincerely, Matthew R. Clark, M.A. Senior Archaeologist — ASM Hilo Director References Cited Buke Mahele 1848 Buke Kakau Paa no ka mahele aina i Hooholoia iwaena o Kamehameha III a me Na Lii a me Na Konohiki ana, Hale Alii, Honolulu. Chinen, J. J. 1958 The Great Mahele: Hawaii's Land Division of 1848. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawaii. Privately published. Ellis, W. 1825 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of a Tour of Hawaii, or Owhyee; with remarks on the History, Traditions, Manners, Customs and Language of the Inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands. Cocker and Brewster, Boston. Garovoy, J. 2005 "Ua koe ke kuleana o na kanaka" (Reserving the rights of Native Tenants): Integrating Kuleana Rights And Land Trust Priorities in Hawaii. Harvard Environmental Law 29:523- 571. Handy, E. S. C. and E. G. Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Office of Hawaiian Affairs 2018 Kipuka Database. Electronic document, http://lcipukadatabase.com/kpuka. Pukui, M. K., S. H. Elbert, and E. Mo`okini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii. Revised and Expanded ed. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Sherrod, D. R., J. M. Sinton, S. E. Watkins, and K. M. Brunt 2021 Geologic Map of'the State of Hawai `i. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. USGS Numbered Series. Scientific Investigations Map 3143. 1:100,000 and 1:250,000 scale. Electronic document, https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3l43, accessed February 18, 2022. Soil Survey Staff (United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service) 2022 Web Soil Survey. Electronic document, htip://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.�-to . Spear, R. 1992 An Inventory Survey of the Robinson Property, Puna District, Island of Hawaii, TMK 1- 2-18:1. Scientific Consultant Services, Inc. Prepared for Bruce Robinson. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 7 of 19 Figures - �•,..._ a t� f- Area of Detai ti QaO • 0 200 Km r r' r KKA a K umu - "'•AKEtifl\ 1 S f • n c RumEsmws riv KAIMU-MAKEN _ KaIrnu . ram•, .. park Portion of USGS 7.5' Quadrangle Kealakekua, 1996 0 190 380 0 Meters •' •*� [� Presj�ct ar a '�3tAit, I. 4, ", Figure 1. USGS map showing location of project area. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 8 of 19 p tl Y Z tl tl d � iLti �• i u W w E mix Ell 1 91 15 N3AYN Nf.3r .NW. ).. 1 t N,OI/IS N3MN NJY3i YMYIY )YN c d ( .+rN Yla • + � Rf 4 � ►e a � � O " 1 January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 9 of 19 Figure 3. Google EarthTM showing project area. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 10 of 19 Figure 4. Coastline fronting the current project area, view to the southwest. Figure 5. Historic cemetery located to the northeast of the current project area, mauka of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road, view to the northeast. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 11 of 19 Figure 6. Geology underlying the project area and surrounding vicinity. Figure 7. Soil composition in the project area and surrounding vicinity. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 12 of 19 Figure 8. Graded area along northeastern boundary of project area, view to the west. Figure 9. Road extending to the coast of the project area, view to the northwest. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 14 of 19 Pro P,,a i t KALn „iq!nn r. Figure 12. Portion of Hawaii Registered Map No. 1614 (prepared by E.D. Baldwin in 1892) showing the location of the current project area. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 15 of 19 4d, orA, r...,.• • tires iK ,� ' �� ��' •+r;. � yam.• _ A' Figure 13. Spear (1992:6) site location map. January 20, 2024 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Page 16 of 19 Figure 14. Location of sites and features identified during the current study. ml JO } y 'OM"- 0 � �r t i I ' `4p,4 T. •r�d 05.`�6• d-•+Ci� f r" � � � ; 12rFlz �Il % � ; w�� � %'� �,li i 7' Ji! , • �°p' f. s . }3 .{ ` , ,�' t +y •� "� 'cc 5 A• �� s, 5 QC ;z p tss�(• '„r - • !° q, . dam• r _ ti ,� �•'vvS�� ��� f � r, � �r� S� �' ��: • 1/ : 4M��'� � ,�" 1rr �s;" _ ( Y� •�'• ,� x .y(.� .a „i r . der c��� - a `C J ,e, r rz+T4 51' a, • EXHIBIT A-25 INDIVIDUAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM FOR KAIM I COVE LLC KAI U-MAKENA HOMESTEADS KAIMU, PUNA, HAWAI'I TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 b�ANO-- �' Licensed tvf Professional � `' Engineer lmmeI-dal THIS WORK HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE UNDER MY OBSERVATION D.g iai�y signer. ey Lennie Oka —KeMrck nu:c=us, LennieOkaaio-K2ndiick8=enn: maI.cwm, C3J-Lenne Oksno-KeMnck a.ie. 2025.10.02 20.02:-�&7 M DATE: 1012/2025 EXPIRALTION DATE OF LICENSE 04/30/2026 Lennie Okano-Kendrick, PE P.O. Pox 52 Pepeekeo, HI 96783 937-1036 f; EXHIBIT "A-25" TABLE OF CONTENTS Design Calculation f Floor Plan Vicinity Map I Location Map Site Plan Percolation Test data Sheet Absorption Bed Layout & Cross Section IWS Profile Septic Tank Detail & Notes 1 2 3 4 5 E 7 Distribution Box Detail 1 Operation & Maintenance 8 Septic Tank Inspection & Record 1 ,` DESIGN CALCULATION 1. Kaimu Cove LLC TNIK. (3) 1-2-018:001 (Future) 5-bedroom residential dwelling 2, Flow 5-bedroom x 200 galfbdr = 1,000 gpd 3. Septic Tank Selection. 5-bedroom - 1,250-gallon tank minimum 4. Absorption Field Design Percolation Rate - 1 min/in Use 70 sq ft per bedroom Required absorption area = 5-bdr x 70 sq fit = 350 sq ft Use 12' x 30' bed (360 sq ft) with 3' soil replacement. ML T 5 j. 1 IT Cb�Pf Y wf `r p ICII .� . I 3Ep�Cnni FLOOR PLAN 139 PROJECT Si TE �j FKIK. 1:3', VICINITY MAP 12-7789 KALAPANA KAPO— 0 �FAC;H ROAD we KAI[OU—k-IAKEtiA I— ONIEt TEADS LX r LE 'e Cl, :.Q—I'EN0R KAIMU, PUNA, HAA'Ail _._ •�4/ail, •.-. L1e/tw ' RO/: c PROJECT 517E �.�++...�...�-.,.- 1 2 1 8 TW (3) 1-2-018:IX11 LOCATION MAP 12-7789 KALAPANA KAPOHO BEACH ROAD KAiMU—MAKENA HOMESTEADS PREPARED PCRKAINIL, •::CL'E LI-:_ PREPARED R, LE'i-.iE PE KAIMU, PUNA, HAWAII 140 L ,DKANO. Uran sud @� f ralerianal fr.glneer NO,1 1 1 D5—C us THIS WORK HAS BEEN PREPARED By ME OR UWCS R MY9UKRVISIGN AF r CCHSTRUCTION OF THf5 PROIEC'i PALL BE UNDER WY OBSERVATION. 0' 39 SCALE. 1 `=30' 1,250-Gallon (Mitt. Septic Tanl \DWELLI 25' I i 25'-3 sI s s �12'x30' (NI in.) ' Absorption Bed with` 3' Sail Replacement FXPIRATION CATS OP LICEW$6: 4MZ" ` 1 5510 KALAPANA - KAPOHO ROAD Shoreline Setback INSET NOTE: Septic Tank and Absorption Bed are to be placed not less than 5' from any structure or property line not less than 10' from any tree which is approximately 4" minimum diameter. Septic system shall also be located not less than 1 000'from any potable water source. v PED2qsEo aWELLING DCCA: -" These contractors can install septic ■ I ; I systems - A general engineering, 1 I C-37 plumbing, C-37A sewer & drainline. C-43 sewer, sewage N I I disposal, drain & pipe laying. Install L — ^ _ J after building permit approval. SEEINSET NOTE; The depths to the pipe Inverts of the septic tanks. distribution box. TMK # (31 1-2-01B-001LOT � � * and absorption system are a ACRES controlled by topographic features F'sn:3- and the invert of the building r sewer which may impact the r r ray depths shown on the drawings. ,l Structure Allowed to be reviewed as Being in SOC D2 per R301.2.2.1.2 (Reg urarGonstructlon)l �w �•Yf •YNYK�''n-�mvOP run.xan -... . •AYu .1 fl YY tact YY lwYrY VI1[Ye YsnlluY fV a --.—.----- SITE PLAN TMK: (3) 1-2-a18:oa1 12-7789 KALAPANA KAPOHO BEACH ROAD KAIMU-MAKENA HOMESTEADS PREPARED FOR: KAIMU COVE LLC PREPARED BY: LENNIE OKANO-KENDRICK, PE KAIMU; PUNA, HAWAI'I 1Z#t DEPARTMENT OF HEALTR - WASTEWATER BRANCH INDIVIDUAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM (IWS) - SITE EVALUATION 1 PERCOLATION TEST Date I Tire: January 21, 2025_/ 8:00 am Test Performed by: Lennie Okano-Kendrick, P.E. Owner: Kaimu Cove LLC TMK: ( 3 ) 1 - 2 - 018 Elevation: 40 feet Depth to Groundwater Table: greater than 10 feet below grade Depth to Bedrock (if observed): - feet below grade Diameter of Hole: 28 inches Depth to Hole Bottom: _5_+/- feet belov et<tde Depth. inches below grade Soil PI.0111c (color- texture- 011ier� 601d hack lava PERCOLATION R_EADIN(,$; Time 12 inches of water to seep away: 1 minutes Time 12 inches of water to seep away; 1 urinates 001 Check one: X Percolation tests in sandy soils, recorded time intervals and water drops at least every 10 minutes for at least 1 hour. 11L'I'co atlon tesES IIl n0-5ttlii . �011ti. presuaI ."d 11 l'z'' 11 +1C for at least 4 hours. Recorded time intervals and Jinps at ]c;l,t every 11) mill tics for l ` (1-Iii of 'i.. c :1`1 the first 6 inches to seep away in greater than 30 1111".'Ilc� ,'LinT'C1 II`.:i� °I11CIl";I�� ;is11i t'.'.71C1` (�1�}'jl, :11 I�,; t'14C1" t111tii3litCS for4 l1011rs orttlttil ? SLlCCC551vC thin,, cfo llol ,.ar b' l oic lh;ui 1 16 inch, ..FI1Iti 1!L!. L''l ial 6 min. 6 min 6 ruin 6 niin. 6 rnn- 6 min. Drat) in hiclres Ti is llll,,nal Drop in Inches 6 6 min. 6 6 6 min. 6 6 6 min. 6 6 6 min. 6 6 6 Percolation Rate (tithe/final \~ aver level drop): 1 Ill:nutcsiinelies As 11w Quo; ncer respoiil 111C for L[[krill` „Ilia ':?1-0% ic:in" �Si, I11 U 1I11i1 Q11 e117U [} I C(i1:1:10l i I "I .Ik . 1 :iiicsi to the fact :1I:I .1.10%c +ile Illibrlll;H10I1 I :7l`CLl';11 Illil I11111 III 'III CL:I111m11C11 ',1';1ti C11;}Il'!citi' =il it CV1'It;;l'!iC'.l'll"_ I110 pl(111�ilSllti Ql ( 11;l}HCr I-f+_'_, sui?'J'Ic soil exist bet%, eci' I11C llil'.I1'lli o) 111" tic)!'t'4111"Lr':1';I'. '.' I;1'?it` o ,Iln ofilellllllilill 101212025 ............................................................................................................._ Engineer's Signatttre/Stamp Datc r„slr mac' 11108- 142 au)- 0a n o, Via¢ ozUwM NgLU LU g $ �ys�,�*w g E ��y 25 dz {*7md g J y W Si W t Ll] L a) -O N L3 F- ui `1 O Fes, 11, L �. 'u a of btu Q lz� a m 2:� m yQroc �m s d z y G C_ F ID z L�77 o y`, d N U �p x L aTi q 4 Iz TL LU .Cee� w � U � � .. ❑ C �� c c N i d .8Di ID q� � �?` � 4J ❑ V q❑� q�j Q E IN O 9] U1 17- �J 01 Qp' ca r t� N y •tl p 1�1 06 7n m i° 7 � � M. m f cr fti fl N O E J m L a fl. 41 N C C " �. Y Li Q mIL W 3 m ~ w O m o s`:i h a g o -1 u7 0 r sr g a fl u �a �m ar. o rx p a7 i T4±3 - 0 u.1 0 [3 :E g ? d LL Lli d ¢ m 0 z C 7 [] t F F- Wco ui Q — 4 J Y P4 �---------� h J r7 - LO i- o> LL 4� Off. G W W 4! � q f: LU r Cl) w ++ D Y % Ca d " J F-OD o _.1G "!+" _ yJ O C l/i� MF- W �� ? G V yC � 4 V W Q +B as ' m �z�w =m ' r< 2E Z LLJ o Ac �� �}zx W � m o � a` o CL TT 37 * $ 3 3 .Z m a. Q LJ 2i U co F W z LL ! CY TT Z 1 - L.1 LU 7 t�y LL h LL 0/� Z LLJ �m �_ �y P- 11r- L L.. , ' 1. C EL m u) in i..L L `l LLJ U C) k In a ECL {{ C35 to x N E O - U Q) 3 U 0 L> N LL LJ m ❑} c U Q < O� o o c cry w x W O a {3 L s� L..I Z F-- m c +� '0 N i 0. < = Wpm 0+ m y 7 C .� /Lys Z co ti_ U mW� ZM L �U ALR5 Crnrn C L Y E C v/ LU w W cn W 09 LUJ V V I I I 0 uJ � 1 1 J Y w � LL a LLJ �r � w a- or c�a LL. I= +f as ww o� a ID € 4-4 145 a 0a: m °°w c° 75 s v O S U) Z a le w as a Lu Ia. LU -Z cs m m c 3 ar � a� m Q� r W � y 7 Y Q N N Of O C J 7 07 X d N m L 0 LCDa)C U C ML 0. m Cc C g=ZU LU Q1 O O m a R C. ar m_{_LQ � J 0 v V a LQL 97 Uj.� r p Ct Q. W O L E LU d 13. cm Ll W p LU 00 N U} ,v tl7 L C p LLo Q Cif [ll 0 �` p d Q Q 0 6 _d [f4 U co 'a w N 'II OD f~ -,0 d}. O ¢ . O L C N r- a - © Z a E aE m a a sVQ m-L6o L L n CL NEL , C�b CL?Q a n E mo y o 0 O N Z7 rn O l0 N LG _ a u .J _ R a E C C CD W 0 !? �i. 'a � p C ' 0 C rj [ice or in C N 9 a E T L o 7 � C C N L C 3 .�. -O +ifn t[ V o ` wp 06 .2 s CA m p O LU ,�y ... L (V O d] [6 y C to C O p, 0 CD L 4E7 w [q?11 ..SC y�y 40 C C A G1 p � N p C ~p r� w AL fE 9iJ a L CL E -5 d a: [q cl 'a i^ C� L N tq O CLj L7 m VJ ti W Wu .- N (+i V LA C6 1_: �C a ¢ww 0 ar. o rx p O u � LLi � = (V0uj z LiJ z b Q W ii N 4 O d ZQ Z Y Z < rl (Tl d P �. C) W LU J Uj ULU 1=lril CV J J w IL U 21 H w d ru UJ - H L F _ u '. a O O z n t - z L111 acr- x qa aG ❑ W W q f: 0141 147 EXHIBIT A-26 Ro , Alex From: Sent: Monday, October 13, 2025 9:25 AM To: sears_p.naleirnaile@hawaii.gov Cc: Darrow, Jeff; Roy, Alex, Leslie Enriquez Rosehill; Leila Kealoha, Gina McGuire Subject: Kalr Ll Cove LLC (FL-SMA-2024-000063) JTMK: 1 .2-01B-001 SHAD Review Attachments: Puillrma CIA Ka Paakai praft_Qct11_2025.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status- Flagged Aloha kakahiaka Sean, It was good to talk with you last week Thursday after our meeting with Jeff and Alex at the County Planning Department regarding the above referenced SMA application submitted by Kaimu Cove LLCIMark Wyatt. It is our understanding that the Planning Department has submitted the developer's SMA Assessment to SHPD for review. The proposed project started as a subdivision for five (5) homes in the SMA zoned area of Kaimu which was heard at the Planning Commission last October 3, 2024, as an application for After -the - Fact Grading & Grubbing Permit. Below please find the link to the meeting where the proposed development was discussed at Z01.10, including public testimony- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwcv -cZ4vl&t=7218s The developer has been fined for illegal grubbing and grading, to include the DLNR property adjacent to the subject property, The destruction of a cultural site is documented in the initial SHPD report. Damage was also done to the century old milo grove, and coastal trail. Currently, after a tenuous meeting with our ohana in Kaimu, the application is reduced to one (1) house (although bath applications are still open in the Planning Department). It is our understanding that no permits have been issued, however, on Saturday a backhoe was on site and a rock wall is being constructed. I will forward pictures of the same via separate email. Below please find an introduction from Gina McGuire, along with her credentials, who has prepared a CIA and Kapa'akai Analysis for your kind consideration. I trust the information therein will provide objective new information not included in the Clark report of 2024, and also details the inconsistencies. I hope that this new information would Dead SHPD to order an AIS for the proposed development. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter, and please feel free to contact me if you should have any questions. Take good care, and I look forward to hearing from you. Aloha no, Ku'ulei Kealoha Cooper & ahana GINA MCGUIRE,PhD SUBMITTAL EXHIBIT "A-26" Aloha e Sean, Thank you so niuclI for considering a discussion about historic sites and cultural rights on TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 in Kaimu, Puna, Hawai'i Island. My name is Gina McGuire (PhD), I am a cultural ecologist who did my doctoral research on the Kalapana coast. I currently work as an ethnographer with Windy McElroy at Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting although this Cultural Impact Assessment and Ka Pa'akai Analysis for the parcel in KairU was completed independently. Below are the inconsistencies that I have with the findings of the archaeological inspection that was completed by Clark in 2024 and that led to a recommendation to SHPD that, ' 6'aseo, on these findings, the current ShOy, combined with the findings of the previous sarvey, supports a HR5 Chapter 6E-42 deterrnirration of "No Historic properties affected" for the proposed su&(Yiv&ion and deveiopn?ent of the subject property. „ The inconsistencies outlined below are documented in the attached CIA and Ka Pa'akai Analysis: The coastal trail that runs (ran) parallel along this parcel that connects Kikala/Keokea Ahuprra'a and KaimCj Ahupua'a (and is, as evidenced by the ethnographic history in this report at least 70 years old but is presumably much older) was not accounted for in Spear 1992 or Clark 2024 archaeological survey/inspection. The current property owners have destroyed the portion of this trail that ran through this property. (Photos of this trail and where it has been cut off are provided on page 38 of the report). I am happy to take any archaeologist to the site if necessary. Lineal descendants do not agree that the 4 (now 3 remaining) SHIP properties on this parcel are of no historic significance, as Clark 2024 suggests. There is great concern from lineal descendanw and community as SHIP 50-10-63-18525 has already been destroyed during un-permitted land Clearing. These sites are evidence of ancestral presence within one of the last remaining ancient portions of coastline in KaimD and Kalapana, immediately below a documented, extensive Hawaiian burial network (4IIIP 50-10-03-02547). The loss of these sites is not insignificant to the'ohana of the area. SHIP on the property include(d) SIHP 50-10-63-18525 (destroyed agricultural and habitation round), SHIP 50-10-63-18526 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SHIP SO- 10-62-18527 (historic boundary wall), STHP 50-10-62-18528 (a modified lava tube). The cultural consultation completed by Clark in 2024 (leading to the conclusion that there are no expected iwi present) was not with all of the relevant knowledge holden. Lineal descendants interviewed within this CIA talk about the potentials for cliff -interred burials and the burial of a specific ancestor within the parcel bounds. Given the presence of 8,000 burial mounds immediately upland of the area I don't think one can dismiss this potential. In addition to these archaeological and ethnohistoric inconsistencies that do not demonstrate the true historic value of the study area, the CIA and Ka Pa'akai Analysis attached also presents the tremendous depth to the cultural, spiritual, religious, and subsistence based practices that are entwined with this parcel (that have also not been acknowledged by the applicants in their current SMA application). humbly ask for your time and consideration of this document and for the aloha of the `ohana of this site who still 17ave trennendOLIS care and dedication to the historic sites of their ancestors. This area deserves to be protected on all accounts: archaeological, historical. natural, and cultural. and (in my eyes as a cultural researcher and wahine Kanaka '0iwi) should not be validated as of 'no longer of historic significance.' That this recommen e makes re very sad. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you might [lave at ar Mahalo nrri, Gina McGuire, PhD EXHIBIT A-27 RE: HICRIS Project No. 2025PR01081 possible trail From Bauer, Jackson M <jackson.m.bauer@hawaii.gov> Date Wed 10/15/2025 3:37 PM To Gastilo, Joshua T <joshua.gastilo@hawaii.gov> Cc Mello, Nicole A <nicole.mello@hawaii.gov>; Naleimaile, Sean P <sean.p.naleimaile@hawaii.gov> Hey Josh, Thanks for reaching out. I don't have anything else to add on this one. The main historic trail identified is what is today the highway. Public shoreline access would be my ask, but I realize that is not part of SHPD's scope. Jackson M. Bauer Hawaii Island Na Ala Hele Trails and Access Specialist. Division of Forestry and Wildlife, Deportment of Land and Natural Resources 19 East Kawili Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 808-657-8041 iackson.m.bauer(d0awaii.gov From: Gastilo, Joshua T <joshua.gastilo@hawaii.gov> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2025 3:32 PM To: Bauer, Jackson M <jackson.m.bauer@hawaii.gov> Cc: Mello, Nicole A <nicole.mello@hawaii.gov>; Naleimaile, Sean P <sean.p.naleimaile@hawaii.gov> Subject: HICRIS Project No. 2025PRO1081 possible trail Importance: High Aloha Jackson Please take a look at the subject project (I have added you as a contact); this is one of the projects SHPD had a meeting with the planning department (I believe you were present for that meeting as well). The proponents are reducing the original project scope (subdivision into 5 lots); the current scope involves the construction a residence, associated infrastructure and appurtenances. The current project area does not contain any of the previously identified historic properties and SHPD does not have any data regarding the identification of a coastal trail within the project parcel ( [3] 1-2-018:001; see CIA in HICRIS submittal materials). Do you folks have any information regarding the existence of this trail relative to the project area? Mahalo EXHIBIT "A-27" 1 of 2 10/16/2025, 9:43 AM Joshua T.M. Gastilo, M.A. Historic Preservation Archaeologist III 40 Po'okela St. Hilo HI 96720 State of Hawaii DLNR State Historic Preservation Division -Hawaii Island 2 of 2 10/16/2025, 9:43 AM EXHIBIT A-28 C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D. Mayor William V. Brilhante, Jr. Managing Director West Hawaii Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy Kaihia-Kona, Hawaii 96740 Phone (808) 323-4770 Fax (808) 327-3563 October 15, 2025 Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant P. O. Box 4501 Hilo, HI 96720 VIA EMAIL Dear Daryn Arai: County of Hawaii PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Applicant: Kaimu Cove, LLC Landowner: Kaimu Cove, LLC Request: Withdrawal of SMA Use Permit Application Tax Map Key: (3) 1-2-018:001, Kaimn, Puna, Hawaii Jeffrey W. Darrow Director Michelle S. Alm Deputv Director East Hawaii Office 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 This is in response to your email dated October 14, 2025, requesting to withdraw SMA Use Permit Application No. PL-SMA-2024-000063 to pursue a request for a single-family dwelling under a submitted Special Management Area Assessment Application. Special Management Area Use Permit Application No. PL-SMA-2024-000063 was originally submitted to this office on July 11, 2024, requesting to allow for the development of a 5-lot subdivision consisting of parcels at least one-half (1/2) acre in size in the Special Management Area. On September 15, 2025, the applicant submitted a Special Management Area Assessment Application (SAA) requesting to construct one (1) single-family residence on the subject parcel, with no included subdivision. That application, PL-SAA-2025-000312, is currently under review by the Planning Department. Based on the above, we are withdrawing SMA Use Permit Application No. PL-SMA-2024- 000063. As the application was brought before the Windward Planning Commission for a hearing, the application fee will not be refunded. www.planning.hawaiicoun[y.goy Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planningCdhawaiicounty.gov EXHIBIT "A-28" Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant October 15, 2025 Page 2 Please note that no work can occur on the subject parcel without first obtaining the appropriate permits or approvals from the Planning Department and other affected agencies. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Alex Roy of this department at (808) 961-8140 or via email at alexxoy(2.�hawaiicounty_gov Sincerely, (7e ffre 1 W. Dmow Jeff. Darrow (Oct 15, 2025 15:40:48 HST) JEFFREY W. DARROW Planning Director AJR:rms P:Awpwin60\ezm\letters\2025\pt-sma-2024-000063_retum app_sma to_saa.doex cc via email: Mark Wyatt Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant October 15, 2025 Page 3 bee via email: Leslie Rosehill Leila Kealoha EXHIBIT A-29 Project No. 2025PR01081 - Kaimu Cove land disturbances to be considered. Tmk 3120180001 IF Mark Wyatt <kaimu.cove@gmail.com> Nov 6, 2025, 8:45 AM (1 day ago) to joshua.gastilo, Susan.A.Lebo, LISA, Daryn, traven.apiki As per our discussion on 11/4/25 ; SHPD , Susan Lebo, and Joshua Gastilo, while you are considering requiring archeological oversight on our construction site, please consider these already occured ground disturbances. The property consists of upper and lower elevation roads that were already in place when we purchased the property. The upper road which had grown over with vegetation was re -cleared of vegetation in 2022. The blue dots on the 2022 aerial photo are smaller areas of clearing. The red circle on the aerial photo is the location of where the pickleball court will be. The construction of the house and pickleball court will be located on an area that once was cleared and bulldozed sometime after 1992 by a previous owner that had his SMA application approved. The 1992 Archeological Survey he had done on this property referenced a bulldozer push. So, there was also some ground disturbance prior to 1992. Also this upper area which is to be used for the home construction was also grubbed in 2022 as seen as the cleared area that runs the length of the property boundary line near the top of aerial photo. The most excavation that will need to be done is for a leach field for the septic tank. The septic tank will be located in a natural ravine to avoid excavation, and so only vegetation removal and backfilling will be needed. It is marked with a red x on aerial photo. The lower wooded area will not need to be disturbed , except for in the ravine to remove vegetation. Minor ground disturbances are needed for 2 holes for support polls for the front gate in an already trenched area. Also needed are post holes for fencing of Shore Line Access path that will parallel the upper road and land boundary that is already cleared. I tried to upload to HICRIS with no success. To blank drafts left there . If you would, please upload this. I have attached the 1993 SMA that was approved for your reference. I have attached a proposed construction plot plan for reference. I have attached a septic plan. Thank you, Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC 808-965-5404 808-965-5404 ■ Attached page 17 of SMA application reference prior ground disturbances 292 EXHIBIT "A-29" Proposes plot 3 Attachments • Scanned by Gmail IF Mark Wyatt <kaimu.cove@gmaH.com> to joshua.gastilo, Susan.A.Lebo, LISA, Daryn, traven.apiki Nov 6, 2025, 11:26 AM (1 day ago) This photo was missed on the attachments. It is main reference. 293 EXHIBIT A-30 From: Lebo, Susan A To: Plannino Internet Mail; Roy, Alex Cc: Daryn Arai; wyattinhawaii(@cimail.com; Bauer, Jackson M; ADiki, Traven K; Gastilo, Joshua T_ Subject: HICRIS 2025PR01081, PL-SAA-2025-000312 Date: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 1:55:29 PM Attachments: 3-1-2-018-001 2025PR01081 2511JG05 COMB 6E42 PRMT AMP REO.odf Hello, Attached is a pdf copy of our division's review of the following: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review County of Hawaii Special Management Area Use Permit Permit Number: PL-SAA-2025-000312 Applicant: Kaimu Cove LLC (Landowner's representative) Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Sincerely, Susan Susan A. Lebo, PhD SHPD Archaeology Branch Chief (808) 321-9000 cell Notes: SHPD provides determinations only in writing. Additionally, SHPD accepts submittals via HICRIS only. Do not submit your project materials via email or US mail. EXHIBIT "A-30" JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR I KE KIA'AINA SYLVIA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA �° Vand arb Nd� m� 'stets of Ha��"r�� November 21, 2024 Jeff Darrow, Director Planning Department County of Hawaii Hilo, HI 96720 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 plannin a,hawaiicounty og_v Dear Jeff Darrow: STATE OF HAWAN I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAN DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD, STE 555 KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 DAWN N.S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT RYAN K.P. KANAKA'OLE FIRST DEPUTY CIARA W.K. KAHAHANE DEPUTY DIRECTOR -WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOO LAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS IN REPLY REFER TO: Project No. 2025PRO1081 Doc. No. 251IJG05 Archaeology, History & Culture SUBJECT: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E42 Historic Preservation Review County of Hawaii Special Management Area Use Permit Permit Number: PL-SAA-2025-000312 Applicant: Kaimu Cove LLC (Landowner's representative) Kaimo Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii TMK:(3) 1-2-018:001 This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) review of the subject County of Hawaii Special Management Area (SMA) Assessment permit application received by our office on September 25, 2025. The submittal included an SMA Use Permit Assessment Application, construction plans, a previous field inspection letter report (Clark 2024), a draft cultural impact assessment report (CIA), project parcel related previous correspondence (see HICRIS submittal materials), and photos of the project area. Per the submitted correspondence, the current project and permit represent a reduction in scope of a previously reviewed project (HICRIS Project No. 2024PR00940- Doc. No. 2409JG07). SHPD received subsequent information on November 7, 2025 in support of the project (HICRIS Submission Nos. 2025PRO1081.003 and 2025PRO1081.004). The previously proposed project area was comprised of the entire 3.677-acre parcel; the project proponent proposed the development of a 5-lot subdivision consisting of parcels of at least 0.5 acre each for residential purposes and ground disturbing activities to facilitate the subdivision. The updated and current project area under the current permit application comprises a 0.46-acre portion of the project parcel; the proposed project consists of the construction of a residence and associated infrastructure and appurtenances. The proposed project will include the following: • Construction of a 2-story single-family dwelling (-704 sq. ft. first floor and —1088 sq. ft. second floor). • Construction of a 60 ft. long by 35 ft. wide pickleball court (slab on grade only, no fencing around perimeter). • Construction of an access road that will measure 55 ft. by 15 ft. with a rock wall and gate system at the entry point. Access to the proposed dwelling will be directly from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. • Installation of a septic system (see construction plans in HICRIS submittal materials). • Grading or excavation associated with the installation of the residence foundation, pickleball court and septic sy stem. • Installation of associated utility improvements, such as waterline installation and electrical utility poles. • A 10 -foot wide, cinder -surfaced public pedestrian access easement will also be provided along the entire northern boundary of the subject property, adjacent to the existing adjoining State lands once the subject permit approved. Jeff Darrow November 21, 2025 Page 2 Additionally, no use, land alteration or vertical construction will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback area as established by a shoreline survey of the subject property certified by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on March 29, 2023. The HICRIS submittal data and materials indicate that the proposed project area has been included as part of previous archaeological studies (Spear 1992, Doc. No. 9302ks25; and Clark 2024, Doc. No. 2409JG07) that resulted in the identification of historic properties. Per the submitted construction plans, none of the previously identified historic properties are located within the current permit area. SHPD received additional information subsequent to the initial submittal (Submission Nos. 2025PR01081.003 and 2025PR01081.004) that indicates that the proposed project area has been previously disturbed. SHPD previously reviewed an SMA permit (Permit # PL-SMA-2024-000063 [see above for previous project scope description]; HICRIS Project No. 2024PR00930; Doc. No. 2409JG07) in which SHPD reviewed a field inspection letter report (Clark 2024) and made a then -project effect determination of "No historic properties affected." The submitted CIA report (McGuire, October 2025) indicates that the coastline of Kaimu was a significant area to pre -contact and post -contact communities linked to traditional cultural practices. Moreover, interviews contained therein also indicate that a concern of the area is the potential for encountering subsurface deposits within the project area given the existing cemetery across the street from the subject parcel and the preservation of a coastal trail that that has not been identified by the previous studies (Spear 1992; and Clark 2024). Per correspondence (Joshua Gastilo [SHPD] to Jackson Bauer [DLNR DOFAW]; see HICRIS submittal materials), the trail alignment referred to in the CIA report (McGuire, October 2025) correlates with the existing highway corridor. While the proponent has previously indicated that the ground surface of the proposed project area is a result of a 1960s lava flow; available data and the submitted field inspection letter report (Clark 2024) specifically indicates the that the project parcel lies atop a "Puna basalt flow that erupted between 400 and 750 years before present (BP) forming much of the central and southern part of the parcel; a younger Puna basalt flow of `a`a lava dating to 200-400 years BP creating the northeastern edge; and a more recent pahoehoe flow that occurred between 1986 and 1992 present at the coast." The portion of the youngest flow (between 1986 and 1992) located in the project parcel is outside of the current project area. Moreover, the subject project area may lie within a previously disturbed area that that may have removed any surface features; however, any ground altering activity has the potential to impact subsurface features beneath the existing surface flow, including burials. Additionally, the portion of the lava flow on which the project is proposed is comprised of VA lava. Due to the nature of `a`a lava, potential exists for any unidentified historic properties, including human skeletal remains/burials to have fallen into the cracks and crevices and to have been deposited in subsurface contexts. Based on the information provided and the sensitivity of the area, SHPD has insufficient information to determine the potential for the project to adversely impact significant subsurface historic properties, including human skeletal remains/burials. Therefore, SHPD requests that archaeological monitoring be conducted for identification purposes during all ground disturbing activities to adequately identify any archaeological historic properties present and, if identified, to determine potential impacts to them, and to ensure that appropriate mitigation is implemented. SHPD looks forward to receiving for review and acceptance an archaeological monitoring plan (AMP) meeting the requirements of HAR §13-279-4 prior to permit issuance. Please submit the requested AMP and associated filing review fee to HICRIS Project No. 2025PR01081 in response to our HICRIS request. SHPD will notify the County of Hawaii Planning Department when the AMP has been reviewed and accepted, and the permit issuance process may continue. Please contact Traven Apiki at traven.apikiL&hawaii.gov for any questions regarding burials and Joshua Gastilo at Joshua. gastiloghawaii.lzov for any questions regarding archaeological resources or concerns regarding this letter. Aloha, Jessica L. Puff Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Jeff Darrow November 21, 2025 Page 3 cc: Alex Roy, alex.roy&hawaiicoun ov Daryn Arai, Kaimu Cove LLC, wyattinhawaii a gmail.com Gina McGuire, Jackson Bauer, jackson.m.baueE@hawaii.gov EXHIBIT A-31 This Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) is designed to meet the rigorous standards of Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-279-4 and provide a clear framework for the protection of historic properties during development in the Kaimu Ahupua`a. This plan focuses exclusively on the high -impact infrastructure while excluding the house foundation, the pickleball court, and the previously completed rock wall foundation trench. Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) Project: Single -Family Residence Infrastructure Location: 12-7789 Kalapana Kapoho Beach Road, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna, Hawaii TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 SHPD Project No: 2025PRO1081, Doc. No. 2511JG05 1.0 Introduction and Basis for Monitoring This plan is designed to comply with HAR §13-279 and addresses the potential for subsurface historic properties within the 3.8-acre parcel. Although surface inspections did not yield findings, the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR- SHPD) requires monitoring for activities involving significant ground disturbance in this region of Puna. 2.0 Focused Scope of Work To ensure efficient mitigation, monitoring will be conducted exclusively for the following infrastructure -related activities: Individual Wastewater System (IWS): Monitoring required of all subterranean trenching from the home leading to the septic tank and the associated leach field/absorption bed. No excavation is anticipated for the installation of the septic tank and leach field as it will be placed in existing ravine and back filled, should any excavation be needed for placement of septic tank and the associated leach field/absorption bed, monitoring will be required Utility Trenching: Monitoring of all subterranean trenching for water and electrical lines from the property boundary to the development area. 311 EXHIBIT "A-31" Driveway Alteration: Monitoring of excavation of portions of the existing 15-foot-wide gravel driveway corridor. 2.1 Explicit Exclusions The following components are exempt from archaeological monitoring under this plan: House Foundation: Excluded per applicant request (shallow/slab-on-grade). Pickleball Court: Excluded per applicant request (shallow/slab-on-grade). Rock Wall and Gate: Excluded because these features have been previously documented and/or completed, and no further ground disturbance is required in these areas. 3.0 Monitoring Methodology Archaeological monitoring will be conducted by ASM Affiliates, Inc. and follow these strict protocols: I. On -Site Presence: A qualified archaeologist will be present to observe all mechanized earth -moving activities within the IWS, utility, and driveway footprints. 2. Visual Inspection: The monitor will inspect all exposed soil and basalt profiles. 3. Lava Tube Protocol: In the event a lava tube or void is breached during IWS or utility trenching, all work must stop immediately to allow for a cultural and safety assessment. 4. Authority: The monitor has the authority to temporarily halt work in the immediate vicinity of a find to allow for identification and documentation. 4.0 Discovery Plan (Inadvertent Finds) Should any historic resources or human remains be identified: • Stop Work: All activity within 50 feet shall cease. • Protection: The find will be protected from further disturbance. • Notification: The monitor will immediately contact SHPD at (808) 933-7651. • Burial Protocol: If human remains are found, HAR §13-300 procedures will be initiated. 5.0 Reporting Upon completion of the monitored activities, an Archaeological Monitoring Report (AMR) will be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SHPD. This report will detail the findings and formally 312 document that the excluded areas (rock wall, etc.) were previously addressed or did not meet the criteria for monitoring. This report is necessary for final project clearance and County permit closeout. 313 EXHIBIT A-32 From: �el�. Susan A To- Planning Internet Mail; Roy, Alex; Bauer. Jackson M; Cc: Daryn Ara; wvattinhawa ffigrnail_com; ADW, Traven I:; Gastilo. Joshua T Subjects HICRIS 2025PR01081, PL-5AA-2025-OOD312 Date: Saturday, January 17, 2026 7;39:22 PM Attachments: 3.1.2-018-001 2425PROi081 26411GO1 COMB 6E42 AMP REV REO.ndf Hello, Attached is a pdf copy of our division's review of the following: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter § 5E-42 Historic Preservation review County of Hawaii Special Management Area Use Permit Permit Number: PL-SAA-2025-000312 Archaeological Monitoring Plan Applicant: Kaimu Cave LLC (Landowner's representative) Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii TM K: (3) 1-2-018: 001 Sincerely, Susan Susan A. Lebo, PhD SHPD Archaeology Branch Chief (808) 321-9000 cell (Notes: SHPD provides determinations only in writing. Additionally, SHPD accepts submittals via HICRIS only. Do not submit your project materials via email or US mail.. EXHIBIT "A-32" JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR; KE KIA AINA •Rp ,.,.xs 5 a ;Y,y SYLVA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA MOPE KA ANA 3 z ydr.% 4s .. 51 •Yd_ `-�— STATE OF HAWAI'I KA. MOKWAINA 'O HAWAH DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA 'OIHANA KIJMUWAIWAI `AIINA a 11: I IIS'FORIC` 1IRI ti1.R%'a I ION DIVISION KAKVIIIIII WA IM 111)[N 601 KAMOKIL A 131A 1). S 11. _c �, KAPOLI:I. HAWAII 96707 January 14, 2026 Jeff Darrow, Director Planning Department County of Hawaii Hilo, HI 96720 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 planningCo?hawaiicounty.ctov Dear Jeff Darrow - DAWN N.S. CHANG CHAT RPERS sN BOARD OF LAND AND NATu RAL RESOu RCES COM1.II$ZAQN ON WATER RcSQSRCE MANAGEMENT RYAN N.P. NANANAYILE FIRST DEPj7T C IARA W.K. KAFRANANE 7ERuiY CI REc.roR . YIATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN R ECREAT ION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMIS51ON ON WATER RESO' RCE I,IA,NAGEklm,' � CONSERVATION AND C6AS7AL LANDS CO§SERVATsDN AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESYRYAND VALDLIFE N15TQaIC PRE59RVATI0N KAHG6 LAVJE sSLAN D RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS IN REPLY REFER T0: Project No. 2025PRO1081 Doc. No. 2601 JG01 Archaeology History & Culture SUBJECT: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter § 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review County of Hawaii Special Management Area Use Permit Permit Number: PL-SAA-2025-000312 Archaeological Monitoring Plan Applicant: Kaimu Cove LLC (Landowner's representative) Kaimu Ahupua'a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) review of the subject archaeological monitoring plan (AMP) titled, Archaeological Monitoring Plan (no author, no date) received on December 17, 2025 (HICRIS Submission No. 2025PR01081.006) in support of the proposed project. SHPD previously reviewed the project and requested that archaeological monitoring be conducted for identification purposes during all ground disturbing activities (November 2.1, 2025: Doc. No. 2511JG05). The initial submittal Included an SMA Use Permit Assessment Application, construction plans, a previous field inspection letter report (Clark 2024). a draft cultural impact assessment report (CIA), project parcel related previous correspondence (see HICRIS submittal materials), and a set of photos of the project area. Per the submitted correspondence, the current project and permit represent a reduction in scope of a previously reviewed project (HICRIS Project No. 2024PR00930: Doc. No. 2409JG07). The project area under the current permit application comprises a 0,46-acre portion of the subject parcel. The project consists of the construction of a residence and associated infrastructure and appurtenances including the following: • Construction of the proposed 2-story single-family dwelling (- 704 sq. ft. first floor and '--1088 sq. ft. second floor). • Construction of a 60 ft. long by 35 ft. wide pickleball court (slab on grade only, no fencing around perimeter), • Construction of an access road that will measure 15. Ft. wide by 55 ft. long with a rock wall and gate system at the entry point. Access to the proposed dwelling will be directly from the Kalapana- Kapoho Beach Road. • Installation of a septic system (see construction plans in HICRIS submittal materials)_ • Grading or excavation associated with the installation of the residence foundation, pickleball court and septic system. • Installation of associated utility improvements, such as waterline installation and electrical utility pales. Jeff Darrow January 14, 2025 Page 2 No use, land alteration or vertical construction will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback area as established by a shoreline survey of the subject property certified by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on March 29, 2023. A 10-foot-wide. cinder -surfaced public pedestrian access easement will also be provided along the entire northern boundary of the subject property, adjacent to the existing adjoining State lands once the subject permit approved. The AMP (no name, no date) includes a scope of work and a list of archaeological monitoring provisions to be, followed fpr all ground disturbing work associated with the project - The Attachment identifies the issues and concerns that need to be addressed prior to the AMP being accepted as meeting the minimum requirements of HAR §13-279-4. To aid In rapid review, please provide a cover letter that specifies the changes made to the document with their page numbers in the revised plan and highlight the changes in the text. When completed, please submit the revised AMP, the submittal review fee, and any other project materials to SHPD HICRIS Project No- 2025PRO1081 in response to our request. Please contact Traven Apiki at traven.aoikiOhawaii.cgov for any questions regarding burials and contact Joshua Gastilo at Jos hua-gastiio{t-Dhawaii.gov for any questions regarding archaeological resources or this letter. u s t alu �_W� 11 , 21.4 Jessica L. Puff Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Alex Roy, alex.roy(&hawaiicountv.gov Daryn Arai, Kalmu Cove Wyatt await .gmnil.com Gina McGuire, Jackson Bauer, jackson.m.bauewaii.gov Attachment Concerns and Revisions: An Archaeological Monitoring Plan (No Author-, No date) Title page. Revise the title page to include the following; a. Project title (Ex- Archaeological Monitoring Plan for the Wyatt Single Family Residence Project)- b. Ahupua`a, district, and island information. c. Parcel TMK information. d. Author and date information (Ex: Wyatt, January 2026). General comment. The subject AMP does not contain the required components of an AMP as stipulated in HAR §13-279-4(1) through HAR §13-279-4(6), and HAR §13-279-4(8). Revise the document to include the following sections per HAR §13-279-4: a- What kinds of archaeological remains or historic properties are anticipated or require protection. Ensure that previous archaeological studies within the vicinity of the project area are included in this discussion with in -text cltations that are also included in a reference section, and a figure of a map that indicates where the previous study areas were in relation to the current project area. All references to any historic properties within the project area should include the site's full State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP) #, the study that frst identified them, their previous significance assessments, their recommended treatments, and whether or not they were assessed for eligibility for inclusion into the Hawaii Register of Historic Places (HRHP). A map of the locations of the historic properties in relation to the project area should also be included. Please also Jeff Darrow January 1.4, 2026 Page 3 include any previous LCAw or Land Grant history of the parcel as part of the project area background. b. Where in the project area these properties are known to be or anticipated to be located; include a map of the historic properties relative to the project area. Include a section on the potential for encountering human skeletal remains as has been established in correspondence between SHPD's History & Culture staff and the project proponent, as well as what was included in the submittal materials (CIA and community input). c. Needed fieldwork to protect or document known or anticipated historic properties, which may include, but not be limited to, profile documentation of stratigraphy, drawings, photographs, lithic sourcing, and excavation of exposed features. d. A provision that the archaeologist conducting the monitoring has been given the authority to halt ground disturbing activities in the immediate area of a find, in order to carry out the plan. Project activities can shift to other areas in such case. e. A coordination meeting with any construction team and the archaeologist, so the construction team Is aware of the plan. f, Any laboratory work expected to be done. g. Archiving of any collections. 3. Revise document to include a management summary section (page i) that includes the purpose of the monitoring plan. 4. Page 1. Revise document to include an introduction that includes the purpose of the archaeological monitoring plan, the location of the proposed project (including natural environment such as geology, topography, vegetation, etc.), the regulatory background of the project, and project review history with references to the HICR15 project no. and SHPD's previous determination (Doc. No. and determination). Following the Introduction section shall be a section describing the proposed project (in -text description of all ground -disturbing activities) which will also include the following a. A current USGS map of the project area. b. A current TMK map that includes project parcel with the project parcel highlighted. c. A figure containing the construction plans of the proposed project. 5. Revise document to include sections that discuss the cultural and historic contexts of the vicinity of the project area. 6_ Page 2, Explicit Exclusions. Revise this section to indicate whether SHPD agreed to these stipulations and reference the document in which the agreement is contained. If SHPD did not agree to these stipulations in writing, revise the section to indicate the logic supporting the exclusions. 7. Page 2, Monitoring Methodology. Revise this section to include the following stipulations or where appropriate per comment # 2; a. Listing of the archaeological firm conducting the monitoring and the associated archaeological permit that authorizes them to do so. b. On -site monitoring will be conducted for all ground disturbing activities within the project area; c. One archaeological monitor will be present per each piece of machinery conducting ground altering activities within the project area; d_ The archaeological monitor has the authority to temporarily }salt all activity in the area in the event of a potential historic property being identified, or to record archaeological information or cultural deposits or features; e. If non -burial historic properties are identified, documentation shall include, as appropriate, recording stratigraphy using USDA soil description terminology and attributes, GPS point collection with a receiver capable of sub -meter accuracy, recordation of feature contents through excavation or sampling of features, screening of features, representative scaled profile drawings, photo documentation using a scale and north arrow, and appropriate laboratory analysis of collected samples and artifacts. The areas for profile photography need to be clean enough for photo documentation. The scale in all field photographs shall be marked in 10 cm increments and the north arrow on all photos/maps shall point to magnetic north. If non -burial historic properties are identified, then they shall be assessed for integrity, condition, site significance, and recommended treatment in consultation with Jeff Darrow January 14, 2026 Page 4 SHPD pursuant to HAR §13-284-6 (HRS Chapter § 6E-42): if the sites are found to be significant„ then they shall also be assessed for its eligibility for inclusion into the HRHP. f. Representative stratigraphy will be recorded and photographed; a map of the location of all recorded profiles (site/feature associated and/or representative) shall be included. Deposits deemed significant by SHPD will be sampled. g. Isolated artifacts shall be recovered and their general provenience recorded, all traditional Precontact Hawaiian artifacts and diagnostic post -Contact artifacts will be recovered for laboratory analysis, their M-Vtu locations will be recorded, the artifacts will be photographed with a north arrow and scale in their identified provenience, the recovered artifacts will be photographed in a laboratory setting with a scale as well, and the surrounding soil of the finds will be fully described using standard USDA soil descriptions and Munsell colors- h. Collected materials not associated with burials will be temporarily stored at the archaeological firm's officellaboratory unit until an appropriate curation facility is selected, in consultation with the landowner and the SHPD. The monitoring archaeology firm shall consult with SHPD to establish/provide a repository/laboratory space for any expected and unexpected/ inadvertent materials. i. After any testing/data collection excavations that were conducted as a result of monitoring are complete, the archaeological monitor will conduct backfilling and will also conduct backfilling of the materials and sediments not collected. j. If non-compliance occurs (e_g_, working without a monitor present), this must be reported to the archaeological monitor, who will report non-compliance to SHPD. Work must cease until an action plan is agreed upon, allowing work to resume. k. Any changes in these provisions shall occur only with written approval from the SHPD. 8. Page 2, Discovery Plan (Inadvertent Finds). Revise this section to include the following: a. If human skeletal remains are identified, work will cease in the vicinity and the find shall be secured in their original find location, and provisions outlined within HRS Chapter §6E-43 and HAR §13-300-40, and any SHPD directives, shall be followed. b. A 10 ft. buffer will immediately be placed around the finding. c. No work shall be conducted within the 10 ft. buffer, nor any work within the project area without SHPD consultation and authorization. d. If the discovery of human skeletal remains occurs during the weekend or holidays, then SHPD and DOCARE will be immediately notified. e. If human skeletal remains are encountered during monitoring, SHPD may request the redesign of the project in order to safeguard the find(s). 9. Page 2, Reporting, Revise this section to indicate that a brief archaeological monitoring letter report of findings as specified in HAR §13-282-3(f)(1) shall be submitted within 30 days of completion of archaeological monitoring fieldwork, and that an archaeological monitoring report meeting the requirements of HAR §13-279-5 shall be submitted within 60 days of the completion of archaeological monitoring field work. EXHIBIT A-33 1 DRAFT— Cultural Impact Assessment and Ka Pa`akai 2 Analysis for Pu`ilima, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Pura District, 3 Hawai`i Island 4 TMK: (3)1-2-0IS. 001 w 6 7 8 9 Prepared For: 10 The `Ohana o Mokuhulu, Kairnu Makena, and Kalapana 11 October 2025 12 13 14 cMAPPIN :31 Gina McGuire, PhD EXHIBIT "A-33" 15 16 DRAFT— Cultural Impact Assessment and Ka Pa`akai 17 Analysis for Pu`ilima, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Is Hawai`i Island 19 "i"MK: (3) 1-2-0 18: 001 20 21 22 23 Prepared For: 24 The `Ghana o Mokuhulu, Kaimu Makcna, and Kalapana 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Prepared BY: Oiila I'Lialani MCGL61-^, I'�7U October 2025 Gina McGuire, PhD • MANAGEMENT SUMMARY Gina McGuire, PhD, prepared a Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) and Ka Pa`akai Analysis for study area TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 in Pu`ilima, Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District on Hawaii Island. This CIA and Ka Pa`akai Analysis was designed to identify any valued historical, natural, and cultural resources or practices that may occur in the area, detennine if the proposed project will affect the resources or practices, and offer mitigation recommendations for the project. The background research synthesizes traditional and historic accounts and land use history for the project area Kaimu Ahupua`a. The background study illustrated that this region is honored in `olelo no`eau, mo`olelo, and place names. As a result of this work, the cultural significance of the study site within Kaimu has been made clear. Kaimu has a long and sustained history of Kanaka `Oiwi (Native Hawaiian) subsistence, burials, and stewardship, with many of the same `ohana (families) persisting in ancestral homelands through present day. The area has seen many changes over the years, including dramatic geologic activity that filled in Kaimu Bay and displaced many long-term residents, increasing number of non -lineal descendant resident influx and subsequent development, and rapid coastal erosion and subsidence. Geologic activity has made remaining non -lava inundated, ancestral lands and coasts as highly valued kipuka, or refuges for cultural continuity for the Hawaiian people of the Kaimu and Kalapana areas. Following the Mahele land division and distribution act of 1848, no land commission awards (LCAs) were filed in Kaimu given its designation as crown lands. Hawaiian tenants continued to reside there through 1890. The Land Act of 1895 specified that government lands in rural areas be surveyed and granted (with cash payments) as homesteads to both Hawaiian and non -Hawaiian individuals to encourage rural farming. In Kaimu two areas were opened for homesteading, house lots at the shore of Kaimu Bay and agricultural lots in upland Ki`ula and Mokuhulu. Historic maps reveal the enduring rural character of Kaimu through the 1 Oth century, the presence of the Kaipu`uelelu Cemetery site immediately upland of the study area, and the land grant (Gr. 8004) made to C.H. Will. Previous archaeological surveys revealed four Sites of Historic and Indigenous Preservation (SHIP) within the current study area (Spear 1992). These sites include SIHP 50-10-63-18525 and SIHP 50-10-63-18526 (agricultural and habitation mounds), SIHP 50- 10-62-18527 (historic boundary wall), and SIHP 50-10-62-18528 (a modified lava tube). Three of these sites, SHIP 50-10-63--18526,-18527, and -18528 were confirmed during the archaeological field inspection completed of the study area by Clark 2024. SHIP 50-10-63-18525 could not be re- located (Clark 2024). Other documented archaeological sites located within 1 km of the study area include the Kumaka`ula Heiau to the west, the Star of the Sea Church (SHIP 50-10-63-07380) to the north, and the Kaipuuelelu Cemetery (SHIP 50-10-63-02547), a site of about 8,000 burial mounds immediately upland of the study area. Community consultations were performed to obtain information about the cultural significance of the subject property and the surrounding area, as well as to address possible concerns of community members regarding the effects of proposed development on places of traditional importance and cultural practices. Interviews with six individuals knowledgeable about the project lands produced information on its rich cultural history. The Hawaiian families of Kaimu were (and continue to be) sustained by susbsistence-based livelihoods of fishing, gathering, and growing. There are many place names that hold meaning for Kaimu. Closest to the study area is the place name, Kalaehiamoe, the promontory of sleep or rest, potentially inidcating the link of the resting place of the ancestors interred at Kaipu`uelelu to the shoreline. Hale`ili was identified as the name of the pebble beach to the east of Kaimu Bay that fronts the study area. Kumaka`ula Heiau, located within 1 kin of the study area is a spiritual site that remains following the lava flow that inundated Kaimu Bay. Mokuhulu, upland of the study area, is the home to the Hawaiian families who maintain kuleana, responsibility to the fishing and burial grounds of Pu`ilima, the name used by Hawaiian families for the study area. The interviewees described rich cultural practices, archaeological sites, and the vibrant landscape of mo`olelo in the surrounding area. They shared the rich connection between Mokuhulu and the Pu`ilima study area. Each of the interviewees recalls being taken by kupuna to engage in fishing and/or marine provisioning practices along the oceanfront of the project area and surrounding coastline. Traditional burial practices for iwi kupuna at Kaipu`uelelu remain within living memory and in continued practice today. Many treasured memories of this area and time spent there with their elders and ancestors were shared by the interviewees. The interviewees established a clear connection between the Kaipu`uelelu burial ground across the street and the study area, with a variety of relationships between the upland area and the coastline established. These include the feeding of the kupuna trees and fishing grounds of Pu`ilima from ancestors' bodies and spirits, leina for these ancestors, and kinolau-based communication from ancestors (e.g. `opihi ko`ele). The many kaona associated with the place names of Kalaehiamoe, Kaipu`uelelu, Pu`ilima, and Makena suggest a site of great mana, of healing practices, and as a place for ancestors to rest in slumber. Cultural practices within the project area include `aukai and pikai (cleansing and rinsing after burial practices) and gathering and fishing grounds for a variety of species including plants for medicinal uses (ko`oko`olau, `uhaloa, and `6hi`a) and weaving (lauhala), fish (ulua, aholehole, enenue, po`opa`a, moi, menpachi, aweoweo, kole, and pao`o), limu: limu (general) and limu kohu, and invertebrates (`opihi, lobsters, and `a`ama crab). This stretch of coastline is used for `6hi`a-pole based ulua fishing. Howard Konanui spoke of brackish pools where families from Mokuhulu would wash and dry clothes. The most archaeologically significant site near the project area includes the Kaipu`uelelu Cemetery, immediately upland of the project area. The interviewees recall many ancestors who are buried there, including family that they have laid to rest there. The proposed project may negatively affect cultural resources and practices including destruction of a storied gravesite, diminishing fishing and cultural access, and altering one of the few remaining ancestral stretches of coastline in Kaimu. Of immediate concern is the harm that has already been done to the historic coastal trail that connects the study area to the neighboring `a`a coast to the east and to upland Mokuhulu and to agricultural and habitation mound, SHIP 50-10-63-18525. Concerns include gating of the property (already discouraging public access), introduction of invasive species, destruction of the ancestral milo and noni grove that was on the property, and disrespect to the many Hawaiian ancestors buried in immediately surrounding lands. Concerns include the impact of increased human waste into the porous lava rock of the study area through the proposed septic system(s) into groundwater and marine gathering grounds that lineal descendants depend on. Historic sites that have and may be affected include SHIP 50-10-63-18525,-18526,-18527, and - 18528. Interviewee concerns include: • The study area is part of a cultural and burial complex that has ancestrally, is actively, and will continue to serve as a site of great significance for the Native Hawaiian communities of Pu`ilima, Kalaehiamoe, Kaipu`uelelu, and Makena. • Any building or construction that occurs within the project area will obstruct the leina (jumping off point for spirits). • The project area is known to be home to the burial site of ancestor Makap6 Kaho `okaulana. • Development will place waste into the ground which will affect the limu, intertidal zone, and fish that lineal descendants depend on to sustain subsistence -based livelihoods. • There are few stretches of coastline in Kalapana that have ancestral milo groves like the ones within the project area that have been harmed by recent land clearing. • There has already been damage done to the coastal trail and ancestral forest groves in the project area. • The project has already been negatively impacted by current owners who have shown disregard for gathering and religious practices and have proven not to be culturally respectful or mindful. • Development of the area facilitates gentrification of the humble and culturally -rich Native Hawaiian community of Kaimu. • Gating and blockage of access by current property owners has discouraged continuity of burial cleansing and gathering linked to ocean access from the project area. • Others may not recognize these sites as significant, but they continue to hold great kuleana and significance to lineal descendants. • Once the area is destroyed, it's gone and altered to all future generations to have the same experiences there as their kupuna. • The kupuna that have passed cannot speak for themselves, it is up to living lineal descendants to speak for them. • Burials may be encountered in the project area and may reside within the cliff face on the eastern side of the parcel. • The coastline has already shifted significantly with coastal subsidence; coastal erosion and subsidence are likely in the future. It was described by an interviewee as "treacherous." • There has been a lack of communication with lineal descendants regarding this area from the SMA planners and planning commission. Recommendations and mitigations suggested by the interviewees include the following: • The project area should not be developed due to the spiritual, religious, natural, and cultural sensitivities of the area. • Do not disturb this coastline, including the coastal forest groves on the project parcel, as there are few remnants of the ancestral coastline like this in Kalapana due to the lava histories. • Clear acknowledgement that this project area is home to a multitude of culturally significant gathering rights and religious practices. • Re -zoning / re-establishment of the area to conservation zoning to ensure protection of this coast. • Archaeological sites (e.g. historic residential) have already been disturbed by land clearing and there is the possibility for further destruction if development proceeds. These sites remain significant to Kalapana `ohana. • Identify the burial location of Makapo Kaho`okaulana. • Given the myriad of cultural practices tied to the project area, maintaining cultural access is of critical importance. Gates should be removed. • Engagement with the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, particularly in regards to harm caused to the coastal trail. • Have open and transparent conversations with community members and follow all recommendations that are shared. I CONTENTS 2 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY..................................................................................................................4 3 FIGURES............................................................................................................................................ ix 4 TABLES............................................................................................................................................. 1X 5 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1 6 Study Location, Cultural & Natural Environment..........................................................................1 7 BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................................6 8 Traditional History of Kaimu Ahupua`a.........................................................................................6 9 Place Names................................................................................................................................7 10 Traditional Land Use..................................................................................................................8 11 Mo`olelo......................................................................................................................................9 12 Oli and Mele.............................................................................................................................10 13 `Olelo No`eau................................................................................................................................12 14 Early Historic Kaimu, Puna..........................................................................................................13 15 The Mahele and Land Tenure...................................................................................................13 16 Historic Maps and Photos.........................................................................................................17 17 Previous Archaeological and Cultural Studies.............................................................................23 18 Background Summary..................................................................................................................28 19 ETHNOGRAPHIC, SURVEY..................................................................................................................30 20 Methods for the Ethnographic Survey..........................................................................................30 21 Interviewee Background...............................................................................................................30 22 Morreta Kanani Balai................................................................................................................31 23 Leslie Lihaunani Enriquez Rosehill..........................................................................................31 24 Samuel Kaho`okaulana.............................................................................................................32 25 Leila Kealoha............................................................................................................................32 26 Howard Konanui.......................................................................................................................33 27 Bernice Walker.........................................................................................................................33 28 Topical Breakouts.........................................................................................................................34 29 Connections to the Project Area...............................................................................................34 30 Archaeological Sites.................................................................................................................35 31 Gathering Practices and Mo`olelo............................................................................................38 32 Place Names and Mele..............................................................................................................40 33 Change Through Time..............................................................................................................42 34 Concerns and Recommendations..............................................................................................43 35 SUMMARY OF ETHNOGRAPHIC SURVEY...........................................................................................46 36 KA PA`AKAI ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................................49 37 History of Ka Pa`akai Analyses....................................................................................................49 38 Ka Pa`akai Analysis Topics..........................................................................................................50 39 Summary of Ka Pa`akai Analysis.................................................................................................52 40 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................................................53 41 Cultural Resources, Practices, and Beliefs Identified...................................................................54 vii 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 Potential Effects of the Proposed Project..................................................................................... 54 Confidential Information Withheld.............................................................................................. 54 ConflictingInformation............................................................................................................... 54 Recommendations/Mitigations.................................................................................................... 54 GLOSSARY........................................................................................................................................ 57 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................................... 62 APPENDIX A: AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE.................................................................................... 67 APPENDIX B: CONSENT FORM.......................................................................................................... 71 APPENDIX C: TRANSCRIPT RELEASE FORM..................................................................................... 74 APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW WITH MORETTA KANANI BALA1............................................................. 78 APPENDIX E: INTERVIEW WITH LESLIE LIHAUNANI ENRIQUEZ ROSEHILL...................................... 87 APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW WITH SAMUEL KAHO`OKAULANA........................................................... 93 APPENDIX G: INTERVIEW WITH LEILA KEALOHA............................................................................ 99 APPENDIX H: INTERVIEW WITH HOWARD KONANUI..................................................................... 108 APPENDIX I: INTERVIEW WITH BERNICE WALKER......................................................................... 114 viii 58 FIGURES 59 Figure I Study area overlayed on satellite imagery base map (Maxar 2022).....................................3 60 Figure 2 Study area on a TMK plat map (State of Hawaii 1963)......................................................4 61 Figure 3 Substrate map of the study area (USGS 2021).....................................................................5 62 Figure 4 Portion of a map of 'Hawaii Government Survey Kalapana and Vicinity', registered map 63 1623 (Baldwin 1892a)......................................................................................................................16 64 Figure 5 Portion of a map of 'Hawaii Government Survey Kalapana and Vicinity' (Baldwin 1892b) 65..........................................................................................................................................................18 66 Figure 6 Hawaii Territory Survey Homestead Map Kaimu Makena Section Puna, Hawaii (Wall 67 1901).................................................................................................................................................19 68 Figure 7 Hawaii Territory Survey, Kaimu-Makena House Lots, registered map no. 2700 (Wall 1922). 69..........................................................................................................................................................20 70 Figure 8 Topographic map of Kaimu and the study area (USGS 1924)...........................................21 71 Figure 9 Aerial imagery of study area (USDA 1965).......................................................................22 72 Figure 10 Google Terrain map showing the locations of previous archaeological studies and sites 73 within a 1 km radius of the project area............................................................................................25 74 Figure 11 Hand drawn sketch of SHIP 50-10-63-18525 (Spear 1992)............................................27 75 Figure 12 Hand drawn sketch of SHIP 50-10-63-18526 (Spear 1992)............................................27 76 Figure 13 Ancient coastal trail that connects the study area to the `a`a land to the east and Mokuhulu. 77 Left: coastal trail looking towards the study area where the trail has been damaged. Right: Uncle 78 Sam Kaho`okaulana walking along the historic coastal trail............................................................38 79 80 TABLES 81 Table 1. Previous Archaeological Studies Within 1 kin of the Project Area....................................26 82 Table 2. List of Individuals Contacted.............................................................................................31 83 84 ix f INTRODUCTION 87 At the request of lineal descendants of the Kaipu`uelelu Cemetery in Kaimu, Gina McGuire, PhD, 88 has prepared a CIA and Ka Pa`akai Analysis for TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 in Pu`ilima, Kaimu 89 Ahupua`a, Puna District, on Hawaii Island. This CIA and Ka Pa`akai Analysis was designed to 90 identify any valued historical, natural, and cultural resources or practices that may occur in the area, 91 detennine if the proposed project will affect the resources or practices, and offer mitigation 92 recommendations for the project. 93 The report begins with a description of the study area and a historical overview of land use and 94 archaeology in the area. The next section presents methods and results of the ethnographic survey. 95 Results of the CIA and Ka Pa`akai Analysis are summarized and recommendations are made in the 96 final sections. Hawaiian words, flora and fauna, and technical terms are defined in a glossary. Also 97 included are appendices with documents relevant to the ethnographic survey, including full 98 transcripts of the interviews. 99 Study Location, Cultural & Natural Environment 100 The study area consists of 1.48 ha. (3.677 ac.) on TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 in Kaim-a Ahupua`a, Puna 101 District, on Hawaii Island (Figures 1 and 2). This property is currently owned by Kaimu Cove LLC 102 and located within the Special Management Area. The property is on the makai side of the road 103 directly across from the Kaipu`uelelu burial ground. The parcel borders native -dominated coastal 104 shrublands on the Hawaii State conservation lands of Keokea/I-gala to the east, a single-family 105 residential home on 0.5 ha (1.2 ac.) on the western edge, 170 feet of the Kalapana-Kapoho Road on 106 the northern edge, and about 535 feet of coast. 107 Kaimu ahupua`a is situated within the Kalapana area within the Puna District. Kaimu borders the 108 ahupua`a of Kalapana on its western or Ka`u side and Kfkala/Keokea ahupua`a on the eastern or 109 Kapoho side of the study area. The study area lies towards the eastern edge of the ahupua`a, near the 110 boundary with Kuala/Keokea. The study area is on the ocean front, immediately inset from a boulder 111 beach with milo (Thespesia populnea) grove and neighboring an ` 5 pali (cliff) to the east that 112 provides the ancestral fishing grounds of the families of Mokuhulu (upland from study area). 113 Kaimu's unique geologic history and the Native Hawaiian lineal descendants who have persisted in 114 the lands of their ancestors makes this area a complex cultural kipuka (refuge). 115 The Puna district of Hawaii is situated in the southeastern corner of the island where some 116 of the greatest volcanic activity in Hawaii and the central Pacific takes place. It is the 117 youngest region in the entire Hawaiian archipelago and the center of a geologic hotspot 118 within the Ring of Fire... Its soil is rich and fertile, and its beaches are few and black. In 119 spite of its newness, Puna, meaning "spring," is home to many ancient sites.... Sites 120 destroyed by recent lava flows include... hundreds of archaeological features (not to 121 mention modern villages, homes, and roads). (James 1995:55) 122 Kainrd, and the wider Kalapana area, "is important as one of only a few Hawaiian communities that 123 survived on the land into the twentieth century.... Kalapana remained Hawaiian because it was lava 124 land, too poor for plantations. Up to 1960, the people who lived in Kalapana were almost all from 125 families that had long owned land there, many since the mid -nineteenth century" (Langlas & lcupuna 126 2016). 127 The study area is situated at the convergence point of three different lava flows: a 400-750-year-old 128 pahoehoe flow (western portion), a 200-400-year-old ` 5 flow on the eastern side, and the edge of 129 2007-2018 lava flow (see Figure 3). Soil is sparse in this area. The boulder beach fronting the 130 property area is a product of flows that inundated Kaimu Bay, 131 The study area is located at sea level and has a moderate slope down to the boulder beach on its 132 western portion and a much steeper cliff edge on the eastern oceanfront portion. The topography is 133 undulating, following volcanic terrain. Vegetation is dense on the pahoehoe, with some places 134 enveloped in ancestral milo and noni groves, sprawling koali vine, and newly introduced invasive 135 species (e.g. Albizia sp.). Located within a seasonal mesic climatic zone, mean annual rainfall ranges 136 from 1,500 mm to 2,000 mm per year (Price et al. 2012). There are no waterways (streams, rivers) 137 that travel through the study area; the area is well known for groundwater resources that historically 138 formed brackish ponds in surrounding areas. The area is terrestrially biodiverse with predominantly 139 native species. Documented native species in the study and surrounding area include endangered, 140 endemic species, Ischaeumum byrone (McGuire 2023). The milo and noni groves that are located 141 on the study site have ancestral and cultural meaning. The study area also fronts a biologically 142 diverse marine environment, including fishing grounds and pristine limu (seaweed) grounds that 143 have no alien limu species recorded, several rare endemic limu species documented, and diverse 144 native species consistently observed (Biegler et al. 2024). The most abundant limu observed near 145 the study area is limu kala (Sargassum spp.), culturally used within forgiveness and releasing 146 ceremonies (Aiona 2003). Kaimu is known for its historic presence of limu lipoa. Below are quotes 147 from two Hawaiian newspaper clippings that establish the prevalence of limu historically in Kaimu. 148 Eia mai kaki popolimu Lipoa aala o Kaimu ke panee is aku nei no kahi papaina o Hoku. 149 Here, is a fragrant ball of Lipoa of Kaimu being moved to the dinner table of ka Hoku (Ka 150 Hoku o Hawai`i 1940). 151 Ua mikomiko maika`i noho i a ke owili pu iho hoi me ka limu aala o Kaimu. 152 It was garnished well and rolled up with the fragrant limu of Kaimu (Ka Hoku o Hawai`i 153 1938). 154 In addition to the abundance and diversity of the biotic realm, Kaimu contains an abundance of 155 abiotic features including storied winds, rains, and geologic features. Collette Leimomi Akana's 156 work, Hanau ka Ua (Akana 2015), details the number of rains and winds that are known by the 157 residents of Kaimu and Kalapana, many of which hold unique volcanic and coastal associations and 158 movement patterns. These rains include: 159 `Awa rain... a bitter, acidic rain associated with K-ilauea (Akana 2015:11, 17, 19) 160 He`e koko`ula... a rain over the ocean (Akana 2015:35) 161 Kanilehua... rain associated with Kumukahi and `6hi`a (Akana 2015:48, 53) 162 Ko`iawe... rain of the cliffs (Akana 2015:107) 163 Kuakualau... a rain over the sea accompanied by wind and associated with `ohua fish 164 (Akana 2015:121, Kauhi 1996:59, 124) 165 Lihau... associated with Pahoa, and other parts of Puna (Akana 2015:152) 166 Lohukala... drenching of hala trees in Puna (Akana 2015:152) 167 Noenoe... misty or foggy rain associated with Puna (Akana 2015:211) 168 Polohinano... associated with white hinano blossom and Puna (Akana 2015:236-237) t �7 O M L M � 0 � M o x 0 N V1 O � e� N co N :I- 0 � N O LO O N H O � � 0 c0 40 o � � O N O y bn y 5 175 BACKGROUND 176 A historic review of Kaimu Ahupua`a is provided below, to offer a better holistic understanding of 177 the use and occupation of the project area. This section of the report presents background information 178 as a means to provide a context through which one can examine the cultural and historical 179 significance of the project lands. In order to record and preserve both the tangible (e.g., traditional 180 and archaeological sites) and intangible (e.g., mo`olelo, `61elo no`eau, oli, and mele) culture, this 181 research assists in the discussion of anticipated finds. Research was conducted at the Hawaii State 182 Library, the University of Hawaii at Hilo library, the SHPD library, and online on the Waihona 183 `Aina database and the State of Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services (RAGS) 184 website. Historical maps, archaeological reports, Mahele data, and historical reference books were 185 among the materials examined. 186 Traditional History of Kaimu Ahupua`a 187 Archaeologists have proposed that early Polynesian settlement voyages between Kahiki and Hawaii 188 began by AD 300 and continued regularly until about AD 1250 (Maly 1998). In these times, 189 residents, such as those in Kaimu, engaged in subsistence agriculture and fishing (Handy and Handy 190 1972:287) and hosted the renowned surf spot of Kaimu, to which many ali`i traveled to enjoy. 191 Kalapana is recorded to be one of the first sites of Polynesian settlement from Kahiki. Beckwith 192 (1970:432)records: 193 It is Aukele-nui-aiku and his brother (Kane-) Apua who bring the first coconut to Hawaii. 194 The first time Apua and his brother come from Kahiki they do not bring slips of food plants 195 because they expect to find them growing here. Being almost famished, they return to 196 Kahiki... the voyagers gather them into the canoes and carry them back to plant in Hawaii. 197 The first coconuts in Hawaii are planted at Kahaualea (where stand the heiau of Waha-ula) 198 and at Kalapana in Puna district, Hawaii. 199 The Island of Hawaii and the Puna district developed a sophisticated system of land management. 200 The boundaries of the Puna district extending from `Oki`okiaho on the Ka`u (southwest) side to 201 Mawae on the Hilo side (Pukui 1983:301). The six districts of Hawaii Island were ruled by 202 independent chiefs until the reign of Liloa (ca. 1475). During the reign of Liloa's son, `Umi-a-Liloa 203 (ca. 1525) subjugated remaining rebel chiefs (Maly 1998). Kamakau (1961:17-18) tells of a battle 204 in Kuolo in Kea`au, when Puna became subjugated to `Umi-a-Liloa. The district of Puna continued 205 to have rebellions. Towards the end of Kalaniopu`u's reign of Hawaii Island in 1782, his rule in 206 Puna and Ka`u was challenged by Puna chief, `I-maka-k6loa. Fornander (1996:201-202): 207 ...started with his chiefs and warrior for Hilo, in order to subdue the rebel chief of Puna. In 208 Hilo, Kalaniopuu consecrated the heiau called Kanowa, in Puueo, to the service of his war- 209 god; then took up his abode at Ohele, in Waiakea, and then the war with Imakakola 210 commenced. The rebel chieftain fought long and bravely, but was finally overpowered and 211 beaten. For upwards of a year he eluded capture, being secreted by the country -people of 212 Puna. In the meanwhile, Kalaniopuu moved from Hilo to the Kau district, stopping first at 213 Punaluu, then at Waiohinu, then at Kamaoa, where he built the heiau of Pakini in 214 expectation of the capture of Imakakoloa. Finally exasperated at the delay, and the refuge 215 given to the rebel chief by the Puna people, Kalaniopuu sent Puhili, one of his kahus, to 216 ravage the Puna district with fire, i.e. to burn every village and hamelt until Imakakoloa 217 should be fund or the people surrendeer him. Commencing with the land of Apua, it was 218 literally laid to ashes... 219 Place Names 220 One often overlooked source of history is the information embedded in the Hawaiian landscape. 221 Hawaiian place names "usually have understandable meanings, and the stories illustrating many of 222 the place names are well known and appreciated... The place names provide a living and largely 223 intelligible history" (Pukui et al. 1974:xii). 224 Place names associated with the study area are listed in Place Names o_ f Hawaii (Pukui et al. 1974) 225 and Hawai `i Place Names (Clark 2002), along with the meanings of the names and/or other 226 comments about the specific locales: 227 1-16`eu... Ancient surfing area, Kaimu, Hawaii (Finney and Houston 26), now called 228 Kaimu. Lit., mischief. (Pukui et al. 1974:47). 229 Kaimu... land section and village, Kalapana qd., Hawai`i, noted for its surf and its black 230 sand beach. The black sand was formed by steam explosions that occurred when a lava 231 flow entered the ocean (Macdonald & Abbott 44) in about 1750. The surfing site was 232 formerly called H6`eu and Ka-poho, but now is called Kaimu. Lit., gathering [at the] sea 233 [to watch surfing]. (Pukui et al. 1974:69) Beach Park, Kaimu, Hawaii. Once the site of 234 Hawai`i's most famous and most photographed black sand beach, the beach and park were 235 overrun by lava flows from Kilauea in 1990. The flows also filled the bay that fronted the 236 beach, destroying several surf sites. The park's shore is now rocky, with small pockets of 237 black sand. Lit., gathering [at the] sea [to watch surfing], or silent sea. (Clark 2002:144). 238 Kalapana... land sections, quadrangle, trail, village, and park, Puna district, Hawaii, 239 famous for its black sand (see Kainru). Pete was attacked near here by Kamapua`a, the pig 240 man (see Pua`a-kani; HM187). A priest of Pete may have been named for Kalapana. He 241 had vowed that only Pete might cut his hair. ON his way to the volcano he encountered a 242 storm and went back to the shore. People got him drunk on kava. When he fell asleep they 243 cut his hair. Later a woman appeared at the door and said that he would always remain 244 there. He was turned to a stone, said to still be there by a pool not far from a Catholic 245 church. (For. Set. 276) Se Ka-laoa. Probably lit., announce noted place. (Pukui et al. 246 1974:75) 247 Kikala... land sections and homesteads, Kala-pana qd., Hawai`i. Lit., hip. (Pukui et al. 248 1974:110) 249 Makena. Land section, Kala-pana qd., Hawai`i. Lit., abundance. (Pukui et al. 1974:142). 250 Returned by Keelikolam, retained by aupuni at the Mahele. Most of it is in the Kaimu- 251 Makena Homesteads, lexicology: abundance. (Ulukau Inoa `Aina Hawai`i). 252 Puna... Quadrangle and district, southeast Hawaii; land section and sugar mill, Kala-Papa 253 qd., forest reserves, Kala-pana and Puna qds., Poetic (Hawaii): paia 'ala i ka hala, bowers 254 fragrant with pandanus; ka 'aina i ka houpo o Kane, the land in the heart of Kane (Pukui 255 et al. 1974:142). 256 Puna Coast Trail... Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Hawai'i. Trail on the shore that 257 connected villages in Puna to the villages of Punalu`u in Ka`u, an important interisland 258 steamer landing until the 1940s. (Clark 2002:209). 259 There are several other place names associated with the study area and the Kaimu ahupua`a 260 as shared in interviews or documented within oral historical work by Charles Langlas in the 261 1980s and 1990s (Langlas & kupuna 2016) that are not listed in Place Names of Hawaii 262 (Pukui et al. 1974) or Hawai `i Place Names (Clark 2002). We have done our best to provide 263 the literal translation, associated locations, and meanings of these names here, as documented 264 within the Ulukau Hawaiian Place Names (Ulukau Inoa `Aina Hawaii) database and with the 265 Hawaiian Dictionary (Pukui & Elbert 1986): 7 266 Hale`ili... `pebble beach' located to the east of Kaimu Beach. (Langlas & kupuna 267 2016:223). Lit. Pebble house, place (Pukui & Elbert 1986). 268 Kalaehiamoe... A point near the Pu'ilnna study area. (Langlas & kupuna 2016:222). Lit. 269 Ka: the, lae: point, promonotoy, hiamoe: sleeping (Pukui & Elbert 1986). 270 Kiula... `ili `aina, located in Kaimu-Makena Homesteads, above 1,000 ft. Elevation 271 (Ulukau Inoa `Aina Hawaii) 272 Kumaka'ula Heiau... heiau (spiritual site) located in Kaimu, Hawaii (Ulukau Inoa `Aina 273 Hawaii and Langlas & "Puna 2016:222). This heiau was "nearly taken by the lava flow 274 that destroyed Kalapana village" (James 1995:55). Lit. Ku: to stand, to appear, name of 275 kane Hawaiian deity, maka`ula: red eyes or makaula: same as kaula (prophet). (Pukui & 276 Elbert 1986). 277 Mawae... pond located between Hale'ili and Kalaehiamoe in Kaimu (Langlas & kupuna 278 2016:222). Lit. cleft, fissure, crevice, crack as in rocks (Pukui & Elbert 1986). 279 Mokuhulu... Area upland linked to coastal study area, homestead area of Hawaiian families 280 with kuleana to study area fishing grounds. Lit. moku: island, section, forest, hulu: feather, 281 esteemed, precious (Pukui & Elbert 1986). 282 Pu'ilima... Name of study area as used by interviewees and Hawaiian families. Lit., pu`i: 283 plump, stocky, lima: arm or five, fifth (Pukui & Elbert 1986). 284 Upper Kaimu Homesteads... homestead located in Kaimu, elevation 1,000-1,4000 feet 285 (Ulukau Inoa `Aina Hawai`i). 286 Waipalama... name of a pond located centrally within the historic Kaimu Beach (Langlas 287 & kupuna 2016). Lit. wai: water, palama: sacred enclosure (Pukui & Elbert 1986). 288 Traditional Land Use 289 Most of our understanding of subsistence lifestyles within Kaimu come from the collected oral 290 histories of Hawaiian families from recollections of the 1920s and 1930s from historian, Charles 291 Langlas and kupuna (2016). Main dietary staples included taro and `ulu poi that was grown on upland 292 plots and coastal lands. `Uala, grown on the coast, were also important, secondary to poi. Fish, 293 marine invertebrates such as `opihi, and limu were paired with these staples. Langlas summarizes 294 the subsistence and land use patterns of Kaimu as related to these crops. 295 `Uala 296 Sweet potatoes were grown on the coast, because they like a dry climate, while taro had to 297 be forwn up in the hills where it was wetter... Most families lived cloase to the coast and 298 grew sweet potatoes in their house lots if there was enough soil there... There is not much 299 soil on the coast of southern Puna, but when you look carefully at the pahoehoe (smooth) 300 lava flows, you find pockets of soil in the depressions. The sweet potatoes were grown in 301 these soil -filled depressions, not in the `a`a (jumbled rock) lava flows... Trees were planted 302 only if the land was covered by an `a`a flow and not good for farming. Coconut palms were 303 therefore not very plentiful at the coast (Langlas & kupuna 2016:33). 304 Kalo 305 [E]very family had a taro patch up in the hills. Except for those who lived inland at 306 Mokuhulu, the taro patch was some distance from their main house on the coast, often three 307 miles or more... Taro planting was relatively simple. Small trees were cut down or barked 308 so that they would die and drop their leaves... Several varieties of taro were grown in the 309 Kalapana area, including `e`ele (or `ele`ele), lehua, ku`oho, lauloa, and mana. Of these, 3 t0 `e`ele was said to be the most common, because it grew best in the dry conditions. Lehua 311 was liked because it made a. reddish -colored poi, rather than the usual gray, but was harder 312 to grow. Ku`oho kept longer in the ground than the others. Mana. was usually just boiled 313 and eaten, being too rubbery to pound easily into poi (Langlas & kapuna 2016:33-34). 314 `Ulu 315 Breadfruit was more important at Kalapana than anywhere else in Hawaii, rivaling taro as 316 the basis for poi... Breadfruit usually bears twice a year in the Kalapana area, once around 317 January to March, and again in late summer... Breadfruit was planted both on the coast and 318 upland... families that lived farther west in Kaimu (directly in back of the black sand beach) 319 had pahoehoe with soil in the front for growing sweet potatoes, and `a`a in the back where 320 breadfruit was planted (Langlas & kdpuna 2016:34-35). 321 Canoe -Based Fishing 322 Many methods of fishing were used in the 1920s, but the most spectacular and highest- 323 yielding method was net fishing from canoes for `6pelu (macherel scad), which was dried 324 for later consumption or sold... There was a canoe landing for each of the three 325 communities [Kalapana, Kapa`ahu, and Kaimu]. For Kaimu, it was a spot at the middle of 326 the sand beach (in front of Kealoha's house and the old fishing heiau of Kumaka`ula). This 327 was by far the easiest landing, because the canoes could easily be pushed off or beached 328 onto the sand, which sloped up gradually and wouldn't damage the bottom. (Langlas & 329 kupuna 2016:37-39). 330 In -Shore Fishing 331 Periodically, a community fish -drive was carried out at Kaimu Bay, netting fish for the 332 whole Kaimu community and providing excitement for everyone. Sometimes schools of 333 kala or nenue would come into the bay, running parallel to the beach. Eight to ten men 334 strong men would swim out with the long net, and lay it in a semi -circle in front of the 335 school of fish... All the men helped patch the net afterward and the catch was shared with 336 the whole community.... Fishing methods used more frequently than the fish -drive include 337 pole fishing (with bamboo pole, hook, and line), throw -netting, and trapping with a scoop- 338 net or basket. Common fish caught from shore with the pole included po`opa`a, moi, and 339 ulua... Throw nets are generally used in shoreline pools frequented by fish (moi, aholehole, 340 nenue) (Langlas & kupuna 2016:37-39). 341 Gathering 342 Other prized shellfish, such as crabs and `ophi (a limpet), were gathered at the shore, 343 sprinkled with salt, and then eaten raw (Langlas & kupuna 2016:37-39). 344 Mo`olelo 345 As mentioned previously, Hawaiian place names were connected to traditional stories through which 346 the history of the places was preserved. These stories were referred to as mo`olelo: 347 [A] term embracing many kinds of recounted knowledge, including history, legend, and 348 myth. It included stories of every kind, whether factual or fabulous, lyrical or prosaic. 349 Mo`olelo were repositories of cultural insight and a foundation for understanding history 350 and origins, often presented as allegories to interpret or illuminate contemporary life... 351 Certainly many such [oral] accounts were lost in the sweep of time, especially with the 352 decline of the Hawaiian population and native language. (Nogelmeier 2006:429-430) 353 Mo`olelo are historic compositions and tell the story of the Puna district and of the Kaimu area. 354 There are many mo`olelo of Kaimu and Kalapana so there are just a few summarized here below. W 355 Mo`olelo Pele 356 The history of geologic phenomena in Puna is well documented in Native and scientific sources 357 (Maly 1998) and has been documeted within the stories of the arrival of Pele in Hawaii by Nathaniel 358 Emerson (1915) and by native writers within Hawaiian newspaper, Ka 1­16ku o Hawai`i (1916). W.D. 359 Westervelt's collection of 'Hawaiian Legends of Volcanoes' (1963) tells of Pele's journeys to the 360 shores of Puna, accounting for rift zone features on the landscape. Pele has been an active force 361 within the lives of Kalapana and Kaimu i families. 362 Mo`olelo o Ka-Miki and Maka`iole 363 One of the most detailed accounts of life on Hawaii Island (13th century Hawaii Island) is the 364 narrative, 'The Heart Stirring Story of Ka-Miki', published in Hawaiian Newspaper, Ka H61<u o 365 Hawaii (1914-1917). The narrative includes travel of two supernatural borthers, Ka-Miki andMaka- 366 `iole through the Puna district, and this summary is informed by the English translation completed 367 by Maly (1998). The two brothers competed against `61ohe experts through out the district. The epic 368 tells of many of the native plants encountered in the Puna district: `awa (several different varieties), 369 `6hi`a lehua, `6helo, `6helo papa, kupali`i, `ie`ie, hapu`u, `ama`uma`u and cultivars of sugar cane 370 (Mikioi-o-lehua), bananas (M5.nai-`ula-i-ka-wao), taro (Papakole-koa`e-o-lele-kea), and `awa 371 (Waimaka-a-ka-manu o Puna). Their account reveals the mysterious forests of Puna where travelers 372 are easily lost, a myriad of guardians and akua of these forests, the generosity of the peoples of Puna. 373 Mo`olelo 374 Perhaps the richest source of mo`olelo that we have of the Kalapana area is from the recollections 375 of Aunty Emma Kauhi who grew up in neighboring Kapa`ahu from 1916 to 1935 (Kauhi & Langlas 376 1996). Aunty Emma provides a rich tapestry of stories of Hawaiian life in the area. Her stories 377 include recollections of lauhala weaving with wahine family members at specific spots on the coast, 378 growing `uala within lava depressions, gathering limu, `opihi, moi, `6kole, pupu, ha`uke`ulce, 379 `a`ama, he`e, and pai`ea, growing kalo in upland plots, gathering honey, and use of canoe landings. 380 Her stories establish the strong subsistence based livelihoods of the people of Kalapana and Kaimu 381 well into the 20th century. The mo`olelo of Native Hawaiian residents of Kaimu can be further found 382 within the oral histories documented in Under the Volcano: The People of Kalapana, 1823-2010 383 (Langlas and kupuna 2016) and Hali `a Aloha no Kalapana: Fond Memories of Kalapana (Carr & 384 Kekaula 2013). 385 OR and Mele 386 The noteworthiness of specific locales in Hawaiian culture is further bolstered by their appearances 387 in traditional chants. An oli refers to a chant that is done without any accompaniment of dance, while 388 a mele refers to a chant that may or may not be accompanied by a dance. These expressions of 389 folklore have not lost their merit in society today. They continue to be referred to in contemporary 390 discussions of Hawaiian history, identity, and values. The mele below speak of the famous surf, 391 abundant, rain -laden forests and coasts of Mokuhulu and Kaimu, and hala groves of the area. 392 The following mele, Mokuhulu, was composed by Harry Keliihoomalu and Harry Nd'ope in the 393 early 20th century. This mele is a type of Hawaiian poetry known as hula ku`i. Mokuhulu was 394 composed to celebrate family ties to seven miles stretch of coastline bordered by Mokuhulu and 395 Kapa`ahu. There are four storied places highlighted in each verse, including Mokuhulu, Kaimu, 396 Kalapana, and Kapa`ahu. 397 Mokuhulu i ka malu o ka `ulu [niu] Mokuhulu in the `ulu shade 398 Ia home uluwehi This verdant home 10 399 Pua kani lehua [Pua ka lehua]. 400 401 Kaimu i ke `ala lYpoa 402 I ka hone a ke kai [Ia home o ke kai] 403 I kapu`e one. 404 405 Kalapana is pupa lu`u 406 Ia wai hu`ihu`i 407 Hu`i koni i ka `ili. 408 409 Ha`ina `ia ma ka puana 410 No Puna ke `ala 411 I lawe `ia mai nei 412 Of rain -rustled lehua blossoms. Kaimu in the fragrance of lipoa In the sweet song of the sea On the hilled-up sand. Kalapana, this pool for swimming This tingling -cold water So thrilling to the touch. Sing the summary From Puna comes the fragrance That has carried here to me (Silva 1997). 413 The mele, Aloha Kaimu, was composed and shared by G Girl Keliihoomalu in 2008. This 414 mele is speaks of the great love held for Kaimu by the families who call it home. It speaks of 415 the walls of Puna walls fragrant with pandanus blossoms, Lonowai— a brackish pond in 416 Kaimu, and the circles of aloha that surround Kaimu. 417 418 Aloha a`e au `o Kaimu 419 P6`ai keia `aina me ku`u aloha 420 (P6`ai keia `aina me ku`u aloha) 421 422 Maka`ika`i ka po`e malihini 423 `O ke one kaulana o Kaimu 424 (ke one kaulana o Kailnu) 425 Eia i Kaimu e ka la loa 426 `Ike `oe ka loko kaulana o Lonowai 427 (loko kaulana o Lonowai) 428 429 Hanohano o ka home o ka wa kahiko 430 `O Puna paia ala o ka hala 431 (Puna paia `a`ala o ka hala) 432 433 Ha`ina ku`u mole `o Kaimu 434 P6`ai keia `aina me ku`u aloha 435 (P6`ai keia `aina me ku`u aloha) (Keliihoomalu 2008). 436 437 The mele inoa, Auhea `O Ka Lani, was composed as a naming song for Hawaiian King 438 William Charles Lunalilo when his regal name was to be selected (Galuteria 1993). This mele 439 speaks of Ho`eu, the renowned wave of Kaim-d, the freshwater pond Wai`akolea of Kaimu, 440 and the Native home of Kaimu. This mele highlights the significance of Kaimu as a place for 441 recreational activities by ali`i. 442 443 `Auhea `o ka lam la 444 Aia i ka he`e nalu 445 He`e ana i ka lala la 446 Ho`i ana i ka muku 447 A ka nalu o Ho`eu la 448 Eu ho`i a`e kaua 449 A pae a` e Kaimu la 11 Where is the royal chief? There surfing Surfing on the long wave Returning on the short wave On the Ho`eu wave We both return And land at the sea of Kaimu 450 Ho`omunakanaka 451 `Au`au i ka wai la 452 A`o Wai`akolea 453 Lu`u aku a ea mai 15 454 Kanaenae o ka lani 455 Ha`ina mai ka puana la 456 No Lunalilo no he inoa 457 He Inoa no Lunalilo 458 `Olelo No`eau Where the natives gather We bathe in the fresh water The pond of Wai`akolea We dive and surface A prayerful chant for the chief Tell the refrain Lunalilo is the name In the name of Lunalilo (Galuteria 1991). 459 Like oli and mele, traditional proverbs and wise sayings, known as `olelo no`eau, have been another 460 means by which the history of Hawaiian places has been recorded. In 1983, Mary Kawena Pukui 461 published a volume of close to 3,000 `olelo no`eau that she collected throughout the islands. The 462 introductory chapter of that book reminds us that if we could understand these proverbs and wise 463 sayings well, then we would understand Hawaii well (Pukui 1983). 464 Approximately 500 places are listed in the `61elo no`eau book along with the proverbs and wise 465 sayings that refer to these specific places. Of these 500 or so locales, there are two `61elo no`eau 466 specific to Kaimu ahupua`a. The `61elo no`eau are as follows: 467 Ka i `a ka `a poepoe o Kalapana, zna `i `i `uala o Kaimfl. 468 The round, rollingfish of Kalapana, to be eaten with the sweetpotato ofKaimu. 469 This is from a ho`opapa riddling chant in the story of Kaipalaoa, a boy of Puna, Hawaii, 470 who went to Kauai to riddle with the experts there and won. (Pukui 1983:147, no.1347) 471 472 Ka male niu o Hu `ehu `ewai. 473 The coconut grove ofHu `ehu `ewai. 474 This grove was in Kaimu, Puna. (Pukui 1983:160, no.1475) 475 There are two other `61elo no`eau which refer to the neighboring Kalapana ahupua`a. Here are those 476 `61elo no`eau as they appear in Pukui's book: 477 Na niu moe o Kalapana. 478 The reclining coconut trees of Kalapana. 479 In ancient times it was a custom in Kalapana, Puna, to force a young coconut tree to grow 480 in a reclining position in the commemoration of a chiefly visit. The last two such trees were 481 made to bow to Chiefess Ululani and Queen Emma. On one side of Queen Emma's visits 482 to Puna, she was asked to participate in a commemoration. While mounted on a horse, she 483 held a single coconut leaf growing from a tree, while the people pulled and strained until 484 the tree was bent. Then the tree was fastened down so that it would grow in a reclining 485 position. These trees are mentioned in chants and songs of Puna. (Pukui 1983:249 no. 2280) 486 487 O `Awili ka nalu, he nalu kapu kai na ke akua. 488 Awili is the surf a surf reserved for the ceremonial bath of the goddess. 489 Refers to Pele. There were three noted surfs at Kalapana, Puna: Kalehua, for children and 490 those just learning to surf, Ho`eu, for experienced surfers; and `Awili, which none dared 491 to ride. When the surf of `Awili was rolling dangerously high, all surfing and canoeing 492 ceased, for that was the sign that the gods were riding. (Pukui 1983:257 no. 2356) 12 493 Early Historic Kaimu, Puna 494 When the first Westerners arrived in the Hawaiian archipelago in 1778, Hawaii Island was under 495 the rule of Kalaniopu`u. Kaimu was frequently traveled by missionaries and tourists traveling 496 through the Puna district and on treks to view Kilauea Volcano. Several of these visitors kept in- 497 depth accounts of their travels through the area. The first foreigner's account of Kaimu comes from 498 missionary William Ellis, who recorded memoirs of his 1823 trip through the area. Ellis described 499 the rich peoples, cultivation (fields of sweet potatoes, rich soil, and "industrious" nature of the 500 peoples), culture, abundance of fresh water, and coastal forests (niu and kou groves) of Kaimu. 501 ... About three p.m. we approached Kaimu. This was the biith-place of Mauae [Ellis' guide], 502 and the residence of most of his relations... The old people from the houses welcomed him 503 as he passed along, and numbers of the young men and women came out to meet him, 504 saluted him by touching noses, and wept for joy at his arrival. Some took off his hat, and 505 crowned him with a garland of flowers; others hung round his neck wreaths of a sweet- 506 scented plant resembling ivy [maile], or necklaces composed of the nut of the fragrant 507 pandanus odoratissime... (Ellis 1823:191) 508 Ellis estimated that 300-400 people gathered for the sermon given in Kaimu, with an estimated 509 number of 145 houses and 725 inhabitants (Ellis 1823:195-196). Ellis noted that at the time of Chief 510 Alapa`i (c. AD 1736-1754) Kaimu was overflowed with lava and that there had been a great 511 earthquake about two months before his visit (Ellis 1823:194). Ellis describes Kaimu: 512 Kaimu is pleasantly situated near the sea shore, on the S.E. side of the island, standing on 513 a bed of lava considerably decomposed, and covered, with a light and fertile soil. It is 514 adorned with plantations of cocoa -nuts and clumps of kou-trees. It has a fine sandy beach, 515 where canoes may land with safety; and, according to the houses numbered to -day, contains 516 about 725 inhabitants... Including the villages in its immediate vicinity, along the coast, the 517 population would probably be amount to 2000; and, if water could be procured near at 518 hand, it would form an eligible missionary station... The extent of cultivation in the 519 neighborhood, together with the deent and orderly appearance of the people, induced us to 520 think they are more sober and industrious than those of many villages through which we 521 have passed... (Ellis 1823:196-197). 522 Following William Ellis, Titus Coan, a Protestant minister, traveled through Puna in 1837 and 1840, 523 describing the coastal villages during his travels. Coan wrote that the inhabited regions along the 524 coasstline were 1-3 miles wide, with some settlements further inland (5-10 miles) (Coan 1882). Coan 525 wrote of the, "beautiful groves of the cocoa palm, also breadfruit, pandanus, and ohia" that flourished 526 on the Puna coast (Coan 1882:40). Lyman described holes made into lava areas to establish sweet 527 potato cultivars and the "plantains, pawpaws, taro, etc. were growing" in upland plots (Lyman 528 1927:19). 529 American geologist, Captain Clarence Dutton detailed observations of coastal forests and 530 agricultrual sites in a USGS report in 1882. Dutton recorded that, "the traditions of the natives 531 declare that no King ever reigned in Puna without seeing large parts of his dominion overflowed" 532 (Dutton, 1884: 1501). Dutton confirmed that the coastal forests observed by Ellis and Coan persisted: 533 "the sea -coast is margined in many places with abundant groves of cocoanut palms and dense 534 thickets of pandanus or screw pine" (Dutton, 1884: 147) 535 The Mahele and Land Tenure 536 The Mahele is rightfully considered one of the most significant chapters in the modern 537 history of Hawaii. Several legislative acts during the period 1845-1855 codified a 538 sweeping transformation from the centuries -old Hawaiian traditions of royal land tenure to 539 the western practice of private land ownership. (Moffat and Fitzpatrick 1995) 13 540 By the mid- 1800s, people from around the world had been living and working in the Hawaiian 541 Islands for more than 50 years and wanted to acquire and own their own land. Thus, the business 542 community and the missionaries began to pressure Kauikeaouli, Kamehameha III, to privatize 543 landownership. The change in the traditional land tenure system in Hawaii began with the 544 appointment of the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles by Kamehameha III, in 1845. The 545 Mahele took place during the first few months of 1848 when Kamehameha III and more than 240 of 546 his chiefs worked out their interests in the lands of the Kingdom. This division of land was recorded 547 in the Mahele Book. The King retained roughly a million acres as his own as Crown Lands, while 548 approximately a million and a half acres were designated as Government Lands. The Konohiki 549 Awards amounted to about a million and a half acres, however title was not awarded until the 550 konohiki presented the claim before the Land Commission. 551 In the fall of 1850 legislation was passed allowing citizens to present claims before the Land 552 Commission for property that they were utilizing within the Crown, Government, or Konohiki lands. 553 By 1855 the Land Commission had made visits to all of the islands and had received testimony for 554 about 12,000 land claims. Ultimately between 9,000 and 11,000 kuleana land claims were awarded 555 to kama`aina totaling only about 30,000 acres and recorded in ten large volumes. No commoners in 556 the Kalapana or Kaimu area received land commission awards after the Mahele. Just three kuleana 557 awards were made to commoners in the Puna district and 16 large awards went to prominent chiefs 558 (Langlas & kapuna 2016:23). An 1851 petition was made to legislature from several Puna residents 559 whose claims were submitted too late and was ultimately denied (Langlas & kupuna 2016:23). 560 Kalapana historian Charles Langlas details what happened next: 561 In the Kalapana area, most of the ahupua`a became govermnent lands, with the exception 562 of `Apua and Kaimu, which were crown lands, and three ahupua`a given to prominent 563 chiefs, Kahauale`a, Kamoamoa, and Panau Nui. After 1850, the government began to sell 564 government lands to individuals, Hawaiian or non -Hawaiian... The situation during the 565 latter half of the nineteenth century was different for those Hawaiians living on the crown 566 lands at Kaimu, on Chief (later King) Lunalilo's land at Kahauale`a, and on Queen Emma's 567 land at Kamoamoa. The Hawaians there apparently continued to live on the land as tenants 568 through 1890. They paid certain taxes to the government like other Kalapana residents 569 (poll tax, tax on their stock, houses and furnishings) but no taxes for the land they occupied. 570 Letters to the Interior Department of the Hawaiian Kingdom between 1862 and 1872 571 indicate the head of a group of Hawaiians who lived on the crown lands of Kaimu and 572 Wai`akolea. (Wai`akolea was an `ili kdpono, an independent `ili owned by the crown, 573 situated within Kalapana ahupua`a). In his letter, Lainaholo called himself the hope 574 konohiki o na `aina m6`i, "land stewardship for the king." Thus he described himself as a 575 retainer of a chief rather than an entrepreneur. He collected the rent due the king and sent 576 it to the governor (Ruta. Ke`elik6lani at that time), who sent it on to the crown land 577 supervisor (luna `aina moi) in Honolulu. The main interest of "Lainaholo and Company" 578 seems to have been the use of Wai`akoleapond to get `opae, used as the bait to net `6pelu- 579 the main fish caught to dry and exchange (Langlas & kupuna 2016:23). 580 The historic trajectory of land holdings in Kaimu shows that Native Hawaiian subsistence based 581 livelihoods continued in Kaimu long after the Mahele swept across large parts of Hawaii. After the 582 Mahele period Kaimu lands were tenancy based under the crown (1852-1890), transferred to the 583 government from 1890-1892, and homesteaded from 1893 to 1940. After 1893 when Queen 584 Lili`uokalani was overthrown, all crown land was transferred of the government. The Land Act of 585 1895 specified that government lands in rural areas be surveyed and granted (with cash payments) 586 as homesteads to both Hawaiian and non -Hawaiian individuals to encourage rural farming. In Kaimu 587 two areas were opened for homesteading, house lots at the shore of Kaimu Bay (such as the study 588 area) and agricultural lots in upland Ki`ula, which had long been used for growing taro. Mokuhulu 14 589 was also opened for homesteading due to its deeper soils. The house lots at Kaimu Bay often included 590 an upland parcel at Mokuhulu or KT'ula. 591 592 15 o F 0 s c X 0 3 Q °eh°�re ta�ol Oa t v, E Y LO 0 0 m 0 N O O \ zlr �1/ma�1/yy 5 (`7 O N n m 0 Lo 596 Historic Maps and Photos 597 Historic maps help to paint a picture of Kaimu in years past and illustrate the changes that have taken 598 place in the region. The earliest maps found for this region (Baldwin 1892; Figures 4 and 5) show 599 the place names that surround the study area including Keoneanai, Kaholo, Paliiki, and Kalaehiamoe. 600 These maps mark the Puu Elelu burial ground across from the Govermnent Road and the location of 601 the study area on the edge of the `a`a lava flow. 602 The third and fourth historic maps, the Hawaii Territory Surveys Homestead Map for the Kaimu 603 Makena Section in 1901 and 1922 (Wall 1901; Figure 6 and Wall 1922; Figure 7) displays land grant 604 Gr. 8004 on the parcel, with grantee name, C.H. Will. C.H. Will was also granted the two parcels 605 immediately west of the study area (Gr. 7123). There are no L.C.A.s documented for the study area. 606 Land Grant 8004 was made to Charles H. Will for $89.00 in 1921 (Waihona N.D.). Wall 1901 also 607 documents the executive ordinance that established the cemetery site of Puu Elelu immediately 608 mauka (upland) of the study area. 609 The USGS map of 1924 (see Figure 8) shows that the area had largely remained rural into the 1920s, 610 with a few homestead sites along the coastal portion of Kaimu Bay and on parcels near the western 611 side of the study area. The aerial image from 1965 (see Figure 9) shows no modern development on 612 the parcel, the rural, un-developed nature of the Kaimu coast, and Kaimu Bay prior to the geologic 613 flow that would extend that portion of coastline. The photo captures a boat and its wake fronting the 614 study area. 615 616 17 4. qua >.... Lo 2, Lil O io Y . •� N a ? : p p N U - s o a 0 }ol W i o J. i Q O 7 i c` r--oc :r. rn h At w CN { a h a ��• 'en c» O /ci ♦ Ci & � \ tea♦ / / a � /-. ,, N x moo` v� %� "ice` , ♦ "` R N CI ♦ 4 '! / cli iJ ` � ' ♦ `tom \ I�I coo g'V` 'y � `t'i� •,"\�� off" a \\\ � o� ♦ s . t1!• •7 � � it 'o �, �� �\�-'� l� 2S f) L.�'y :X � -tea I`:y - �• �'�� 's..:+l` O N 0 N N N N E Y LQ N N CZ W N ti T � 7 y, o w �C � W CN N N N N 630 Previous Archaeological and Cultural Studies 631 Previous archaeological surveys offer significant information regarding traditional and historic land 632 use. However, few studies have been conducted in the vicinity of the study area. The following 633 discussion provides brief summaries of the archaeological, historical, and cultural investigations that 634 have been carried out within a 1 kin radius of the project area, based on reports available within the 635 SHPD HICRIS database, University of Hawaii Hilo Mo`okini Library, and from personal 636 collections of the authors (Figures 10 and 11; Table 1). 637 The earliest archaeological work in Kaimu and the lower Puna coast was undertaken during Alfred 638 E. Hudson's Archaeology of EastHawai `i (1930-1932), documenting important archaeological sites 639 across the eastern portion of Hawaii Island. Hudson writes, "The southern part of Puna district 640 offers more favorable conditions for archaeological investigation than any of the other regions 641 examined... there is still a numerous Hawaiian population whose ancestors lived in the same locality 642 so that it is relatively easy to obtain information about particular sites" (Hudson 1932:337). Hudson 643 remarked on the histories of earthquakes and continuous coastal subsidence, noting the effects of 644 larger earthquake events (particularly the earthquake of 1868) (Hudson 1932:338). 645 Archaeological reconnaissance was completed for the proposed Kapoho-Kalapana Highway by 646 Robert F. Bevacqua and Thomas S. Dye in 1972. This report documents SIHP 50-10-63-02547, 647 Kaipuuelelu Cemetery, which is immediately adjacent (upland) to the study area). This site was the 648 most east -ward site in their survey. Kaipuuelelu Cemetery, on State of Hawaii lands, is on the mauka 649 (upland) side of Highway137 (Bevacqua & Dye 1972:23). 650 The Star of the Sea Painted Church (SIHP 50-10-63-07380), located about .85 km from the study 651 area was added to the U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of 652 Historic Places in 1977 (NPS 1977). 653 Paul H. Rosendahl completed a preliminary archaeological reconnaissance survey in 1983 for the 654 FIL-AM Papaya Cooperative on TMKs: (3) 1-2-006:007, :016, :018, :019, :020, :021, :033, and 655 :073. Cultural sites were observed on :033 and :019. Several sites were documented on parcel :033: 656 "A trail oriented N-S is located c. 50-70 m. east of the Pahoa-Kalapana Road. It is 657 approximately one meter wide and constructed of flat waterworn stones. Two small 658 platforms— possible burial features— were located near the west corner of the parcel, near 659 the property corner. Additional burial platforms were identified approximately features 660 may be within parcel 36 which is identified as a cemetery site on the tax map" (Rosendahl 661 1983). The southeast (makai) portion of parcel :019 contains a historic grave plot just north 662 of where recent bulldozing had occurred (Rosendahl 1983). 663 Robert L. Spear completed an archaeological inventory survey for the study area in 1992 at the 664 request of the property owner at the time, Mr. Bruce Robinson. Four archaeological sites were 665 located during the fieldwork (documented below) (Spear 1992). Matt Clark completed an 666 archaeological field inspection for the study area (2024) and relocated three of the four 667 archaeological sites documented by Spear 1992. 23 24 E ,C LO O 00 m 00 O Cl) M N O W O W OD O O N ll'1 00 ,n N N O O 00 M N T � N ep M CD C N T O •� �p y Y (0 m = U Y 0 CluC C OD I� QI Y N N m � � � C a a o z cn 0': a a c ` O T t6 O c U) CO 2 N Table 1. Previous Archaeological Studies Within 1 km of the Project Area Author(s) and Year Location Study Results Hudson 1932 East Hawaii Island Archaeological Documented Kumaka`ula Heiau Site Reconnaissance Survey in Kaimu. Bevacqua & Dye 1972 Immediately Mauka Archaeological Documented SIHP 50-10-63-02547, of Study Area Reconaissance Survey Kaipuuelelu Cemetery. NPS 1977 Upland of Study National Register of Identification of Star of the Sea Area Historic Places Church, Kalapana Painted Church, SIHP 50-10-63-07380. Rosendahl 1983 Kaimu-Makena Archaeological Cultural sites located on two of the Homesteads Reconnaissance Survey parcels surveyed. Spear 1992 Study Area Archaeological Inventory Archaeological sites documented Survey include SHIP 50-10-63-18525, - 18526,-18527, and-18528. Clark 2024 Study Area Archaeological Field Archaeological sites relocated (from Inspection Spear 1992) include SHIP 50-10-63- -18526,-18527, and-18528. SHIP 50-10-63-18525 could not be located. Four Sites of Historic and Indigenous Preservation (SHIP) were identified within the current study area (Spear 1992). These sites include SIHP 50-10-63-18525, SIHP 50-10-63-18526, SIHP 50-10- 62-18527, SIHP 50-10-62-18528. Three of these sites, SHIP 50-10-63--18526,-18527, and -18528 were relocated during the archaeological field inspection completed by Clark 2024. SHIP 50-10-63- 18525 could not be re -located, "as it was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbance after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) survey" (Clark 2024). SHIP 50-10-63-18525 This site consists of two features: a C-shape mound (3.7 x 1.2 x 0.75 meters) that functioned as a temporary habitation and agricultural feature. The drawing below was completed by Spear (1992). Clark 2024 could not locate this site in 2024, as it was destroyed during ground disturbance. 26 w. a I Cam' l O �1 0 00 C::D Il, X.N. 0Igo O. ® ROIRS o CiMAL FIGURE l: PIJNYIFL OF SITI 67-79, 5.1% FEAnVE 1. Figure 11 Hand drawn sketch of SHIP 50-10-63-18525 (Spear 1992). SHIP 50-10-63-18526 This site consists of two features: a C-shape mound (3.7 x 1.2 x 0.75 meters) that functioned as a temporary habitation and agricultural feature. The drawing below was completed by Spear (1992). M.R. 0 1 o l9Li FICArRE 5. PI x•. • Fk OF SITE *-10-43-18, 5?5, FEATLRFS I ARV 2. Figure 12 Hand drawn sketch of SHIP 50-10-63-18526 (Spear 1992). 27 SIHP 50-10-62-18527 This site is a free-standing wall 28 x 0.5 x 1.1 meters, located within the study area. The wall predates the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, as the northeast end of the wall was covered by the road fill. It is possibly a historic boundary wall. SHIP 50-10-62-18528 This site is a 0.82 x 0.8 x 0.92 meters deep lava tube, located within the study area. There is a small, modified hole in a lava bubble that may have served as a storage or planting area. Sites located within 1 km of the study area include: SHIP 50-10-63-02547 Used to inter ancestors for many generations in Kaimu, this site was recognized under Executive Ordinance 578 in 1933. "The cemetery, covering an area of 70,000 sq meters, contains 8,000 burial units, of which only 200 have been utilized... the state does not keep records of individual internments, though the cemetery is still officially open. The above information was extracted from the records of the Department of Health, State of Hawaii" (Bevacqua & Dye 1972:23). Most of the graves are `5'5 rock platforms, with many platforms large enough to fit more than one burial (Bevacqua & Dye 1072:23). Modem graves have concrete caps and headstones. SHIP 50-10-63-07380 The Star of the Sea Church, Kalapana Painted Church is a Catholic diocese church built in 193land contains paintings by the priests depicting biblical narratives. The church was located to avoid the lava flow in 1990. The church is significant for the folic art paintings, one of only two (the other is St. Theresa's in Mountain View) surviving painted churches of Father Evarist (NPS 1977). Kumka`ula Heiau A surface survey of Kalapana-Kaimu Beach Park was completed in 1974 by Francis K.W. Ching, Catherine Stauder, and Stephen L. Palama. This report noted Kumaka`ula Heiau and the "adjacent habitation complex" as the most significant sites of this land unit (Ching et al. 1974). Hudson documented "occasional elevations of the coast," referencing that the ocean used to come up to the base of Kumaka`ula Heiau (site 162) in Kaimu, a noted place for akule, but that at the time of the survey the base of the heiau was 100 yards from the beach." (Hudson 1932:338-339). This heiau is documented as having, "a, massive stone embankment, b, platform 40 feet wide and 100 feet plus in length; terrace 4 feet high; d, walled enclosure" (Hudson 1932:394). This is not a SHIP registered site. Background Summary Kaimu Ahupua`a is located within the Puna district on Hawaii Island. The Kalapana area was one of the first settled areas on Hawaii Island, as storied by the mo`olelo of Aukele-nui-aiku and his brother Kane-Apua who brought the first coconut trees to Kahauale`a, down the coast from Kaimu. The Hawaiian families of Kaimu were (and continue to be) sustained by susbsistence-based livelihoods of fishing, gathering, and growing. The Puna district rebelled against the unification of Hawaii Island in the 1500s and in 1782. There are many place names that hold meaning for Kaimu. Closest to the study area is the place name, Kalaehiamoe, the promontory, place of sleep or rest, potentially inidcating the link of the resting place of the ancestors interred at Kaipuuelelu to the shoreline. Hale`ili was identified as the name of the pebble beach to the east of Kaimu Bay that fronts the study area. Kumaka`ula Heiau, located within 1 km of the study area is a spiritual site that remains following the lava flow that inundated Kaimu Bay. There were brackish ponds that were located between Hale`ili and Kalaehiamoe near the study area. It is unclear if these remain today. Mokuhulu, upland of the study area, is the home to the Hawaiian families who maintain kuleana, responsibility to the fishing and burial grounds of Pu`ilima, the name used by Hawaiian families for the study area. Traditional land use in the area included `uala and `ulu cultivation in coastal areas, kalo in coastal and upland plots rich canoe -based and in -shore fishing of `apelu, nenue, po`opa`a, moi, and ulua. Gathering of limu and invertebrates such as `opihi and ha`uke`uke supplemented poi and fish -based diets. There are a multitude of mo`olelo related to Pele in the area and of the rich lives of Hawaiian families in Kaimu. There are several mele of note for Kaimu including Mokuhulu, Aloha Kaimu, and Auhea `O Ka Lani, which details the renowned wave of Kaimu, the wealth of aloha held by `ohana for their genealogical lands, and the connections of Kaimu to Mokuhulu, Kalapana, and Kapa`ahu. `Olelo No`eau indicate the abundance of natural and cultural resources in Kaimu including fish, `uala, coconut groves, and the surf. Following the Mahele land division and distribution act of 1848, no land commission awards (LCAs) were filed in Kaimu— given its designation as crown lands. Hawaiian tenants continued to reside there through 1890. The main industry within Kaimu, documented in letters to the Interior Department of the Hawaiian Kingdom between 1862 and 1872, was `6pae gathering for bait for `6pelu fishing. The historic trajectory of land holdings in Kaimu shows that Native Hawaiian subsistence based livelihoods continued in Kaimu long after the Mahele swept across large parts of Hawaii. The Crown Land of Kannu was transferred of the government in 1893. The Land Act of 1895 specified that government lands in rural areas be surveyed and granted (with cash payments) as homesteads to both Hawaiian and non -Hawaiian individuals to encourage rural farming. In Kaimu two areas were opened for homesteading, house lots at the shore of Kaimu Bay and agricultural lots in upland Ki`ula and Mokuhulu. Historic maps reveal the enduring rural character of Kaimu through the loth century, the presence of the Kaipuuelelu Cemetery site immediately upland of the study area, and the land grant (Gr. 8004) made to C.H. Will. Previous archaeological surveys revealed four Sites of Historic and Indigenous Preservation (SHIP) within the current study area (Spear 1992). These sites include SIHP 50-10-63- 18525 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SIHP 50-10-63-18526 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SIHP 50-10-62-18527 (historic boundary wall), SIHP 50-10-62-18528 (a modified lava tube). Three of these sites, SHIP 50-10-63--18526,-18527, and -18528 were confirmed during the archaeological field inspection completed of the study area by Clark 2024. SHIP 50-10-63-18525 could not be re -located, "as it was destroyed by mechanical ground disturbance after the acceptance of the Spear (1992) survey" (Clark 2024). Other archaeological sites located within 1 km of the study area include the Kumaka`ula Heiau to the west, the Star of the Sea Church (SHIP 50-10-63-07380) to the north, and the Kaipuuelelu Cemetery (SHIP 50-10-63-02547), a site of about 8,000 burial mounds immediately upland of the study area. 29 ETHNOGRAPHIC SURVEY Not all infonnation is found in the archives, in textbooks, or at the library. Rather, it is in the stories, knowledge and experiences of our kama`aina and kupuna, that important information is kept. Through ethnographic research we are able to better understand the past and plan for our future. With the goal to identify and understand the importance of, and potential impacts to, traditional Hawaiian and/or historic cultural resources and traditional cultural practices of the project area in Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, ethnographic interviews were conducted with community members who are knowledgeable about the area. Methods for the Ethnographic Survey This Cultural Impact Analysis was conducted through a multi -phase process from January through September 2025. Guiding documents for this work include The Hawaii Environmental Council's Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts, A Bill for Environmental Impact Statements, and Act 50 (State of Hawai`i). Personnel involved with this study include Gina McGuire, PhD, Ethnographer, and Windy Keala McElroy, PhD, Principal Investigator of Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, who mentored Dr. McGuire in ethnographic methods and reviewed a copy of this CIA. Interviewees were selected because they met one or more of the following criteria: 1) had/has ties to the project area or vicinity; 2) is a known Hawaiian cultural resource expert; 3) is a known Hawaiian cultural practitioner; or 4) was referred by other cultural resource professionals. Six individuals participated in the current study. Mana`o and `ike shared during these interviews are included in this report. Four interviews were conducted in person and taped using a digital MP3 recorder. Two of the individuals shared written responses to the questionnaire. During the interviews, each person was provided with a map or aerial photograph of the subject properties, the Agreement to Participate (Appendix A), and Consent Form (Appendix B), and briefed on the purpose of the Cultural Impact Assessment and Ka Pa`akai Analysis. Research categories were addressed in the form of open questions which allowed the interviewee to answer in the manner that he/she was most comfortable. Follow-up questions were asked based on the interviewee's responses or to clarify what was said. Transcription was completed by listening to recordings and typing what was said. A copy of the edited transcript was sent to each interviewee for review, along with the Transcript Release Form. The Transcript Release Form provided space for clarifications, corrections, additions, or deletions to the transcript, as well as an opportunity to address any objections to the release of the document (Appendix C). When the forms were returned, transcripts were corrected to reflect any changes made by the interviewee. Edited transcripts are presented in Appendices D—I. A total of seven individuals were contacted, resulting in six interviews (Table 2). The ethnographic analysis process consisted of examining each transcript and organizing infonnation into research themes, or categories. Research topics include connections to the project lands, history and mo`olelo of the area, archaeological sites and cultural practices, change through time, and concerns and recommendations for the project. Interviewee Background The following section includes background information for each interviewee, in their own words. This includes information on the interviewee's `ohana and where the interviewee was born and raised. The interviewees are Moretta Kanani Balai, Leslie Lihaunani Enriquez Rosehill, Samuel Kaho`okaulana, Leila Kealoha, Howard Konanui, and Bernice Walker. 30 Table 2. List of Individuals Contacted Name Connection Method of Contact Result of Contact Moretta Kanani Lineal Desendant, In Person Interviewed In Person Balai Genealogical Knowledge Holder Leslie Lihaunani Lineal Descendant, In Person Written Response Enriquez Rosehill Mokuhulu, Director, Wai Welawela Samuel Lineal Descendant, In Person Interviewed at Project Site Kaho`okaulana Mokuhulu, Kupuna Leila Kealoha Lineal Descendant, President In Person Written Response and Founder, Pohaku Pelemaka Howard Konanui Lineal Descendant, Kupuna Telephone Interviewed via Phone Mark Lindsey Kaimu Resident Telephone, In Unable to Schedule Franklin Person Bernice Walker Lineal Descendant, In Person Interviewed at Project Site Mokuhulu, Kupuna Morreta Kanani Balai My name is Moretta Balai. Middle name is Gokusana Kananioku`uhome. And I was born, and I was adopted. And uh, my mom is, her name, my grandmother, is Elsie Leimanu Kealoha Naungayan. So we get Filipino -Hawaiian but she more pure Hawaiian. Grandma was very instrumental in our family. She was the one that, she was the glue more like, keep us all together, take us... Actually she was a single mom. And, my grandfather, Lodigario Naungayan, he from, Ilocosaur, Philipines. And they used to live in Opihikao. And so did my grandma. In a Filipino plantation camp. You know, Opihikao used to be called Kaweleao Plantation Camp. You know, Opihikao. And, anyway, they were separate. He lived in Kona and she lived over her in Puna side. Born and raised Kalapana. And, by Kaimu, actually. The house was, was in the bay area. And not too far from Kaimu Bay, Kalapana. And, that was, the family, I guess that was, I guess you could call it the family inheritance. Leslie Lihaunani Enriquez Rosehill My name is Leslie Lihaunani Enriquez Rosehill. I was born 1980, Hilo Hospital. Grew up in Lava Tree State Park where my mama's `ohana owned a mac nut farm on 30 acres. In between the Walkers and the Chows. As well as Kapoho, where my father's mother was born and raised (Kumukahi Village) and relocated after the 1960 Pele. Spent every summer at Pohoiki with my father's godmother Bertha Veloria, who was married to my grandfather's oldest brother Sin Enriquez. And Kalapana where my godmother Aunty Sarah Hauanio lived. Kalapana, Kapa'ahu, Kaimu, Mokuhulu is where my grandfather is from. Enriquez/Kaho'okaulana from Kalua descent. We also had land in Kaohe Homesteads, Wao Kele O Puna, where I spent a lot of time in my high school years up into my 30s. I am hiapo of our generation of cousins. The oldest. I was given to my tutu wahine to raise and spend time with. Most of my knowledge is of experience and direct word of mouth from my kupuna. As well as constant practice after my fathers and my tutus passing. Carrying on their kuleana within space. 31 Samuel Kaho'okaulana My name is Samuel Kuhiwi Kaho'okaulana Junior. Son to Samuel Kuhiwi Kaho'okaulana and Pearl Keonaona Ka'awaloa Kaho'okaulana. I'm the number one out of twelve. My dad is from Mokuhulu. My mom is from Kapa`ahu. I grew up in Mokuhulu back in the late 1950s. Born September 30, 1956. Here I am with friends and relatives at Wills slash Pu`ilima talking about why I feel the way I feel about this place. I actually come from a farmer, hunter, fisherman, construction family. My dad was a construction worker, farmer, and everything. So we did everything. Farmer, gatherers, fisherman, hunters. We do everything that we need to do to survive. Leila Kealoha Aloha, my name is Leila Kealoha and I am Iwi kuamo`o o Puna (from the bones of my ancestors of Puna). I was born to John David Kaualalena Kealoha and Gail Bee (Holland) Kealoha on October 21, 1976 in Hilo, Hawaii. I am the second of four daughters born to them. I grew up in Puna makai, from Kamoamoa to Kapoho. I spent a lot of time in Kaimu, Kalapana, Opihikao, Pohoiki as a baby into adulthood. I attended Pahoa Elementary, Intermediate and High school where I graduated in 1994. I then attended school at Hawaii Community College in Hilo. I share about my fathers lineage as he was 100% Kanaka maoli from Puna where I grew up. He was the third of eight siblings. My grandfather was Gabriel Luka Kealoha III who was born on Kaimu beach next to Kumakaula heiau where their hale was. He was born to Gabriel Luka Kealoha Sr. from Kaimil and Cecelia "Sarah" Kaualalena from Keoneoio, Maui on January 28, 1932. He was one of six siblings. My grandmother was Mary Kawailani Makuakane who was born in Opihikao and resided at their hale across lae o`io in Opihikao. She was the fourth of seven siblings and she was born to Thomas Kaonohiokala Makuakane who was born in Kapoho and Kaulaokeahi "Hattie" Makua who was born in Opihikao, on June 26, 1934. My great- grandfather Thomas Makuakane was best known as a fisherman and lauhala gather amongst many other practices. He was known to fish the entire coastline as he was a respected person in the community. My grandfather Gabriel worked for him gathering lauhala and was taken to go holoholo along the coastline. He was taught about the `opae ula and feeding the opelu ko`a between Kapoho and Opihikao areas. My grandfather Gabriel and his older sister Elsie were also taught by their mother Sarah to pound `opihi, gather limu, and fish along the coastline from Kaueleau to Kaimu. He was also one of the old time fishermen from Pohoiki before there was a boat ramp. He was the main advocate of how we got our boat ramp. My father was taught by his dad, my grandpa Gabriel, how to fish along the coastline on land and in the ocean. He was also taught by his cousin Nohea Peleiholam along with his brother "Jr" Gabriel Luka Kealoha IV who would fish into Keauhou, Apua and Hilina pali. They always fished along the entire coast from Makena to Apua. As a child, I remember sending my dad off for days at a time to go holoholo with his brother and cousin(s). My grandfather was known as the `Opihi man, which is one thing my dad and his brother Jr. were a part of growing up. My grandpa Gabriel, being from Kaimu, had many ties to the `ohana of the area. Uncle Robert Keliiohoomalu was one of his close cousins because they lived right across the street from each other and they worked and fished together. He was also close with Uncle John Hale at Pohoiki where he spent a lot of time after moving to Opihikao with my grandma and fishing out of Pohoiki. Hence why my father was a fisherman on land and the boat. This is where I got my love and passion for fishing. My father was also the first one to start Kumakaula Canoe club with two of his cousins which started right in Kaimu. It later became known as "Kalapana Canoe Club" and is now 32 the Puna Canoe Club. My mother also paddled canoe. The men would paddle up from Kaimu to Pohoiki and then the woman would back from Pohoiki to Kaimu and we used to follow them up and down the coastline cheering them on. Howard Konanui My name is Howard Konanui. I`m of Joseph Kepa Konanui and Elizabeth Enriquez Konanui. I was born in Hilo Hospital. Raised in Opihikao and when we were about sixth grade, we moved up Pahoa. We had a house in the back of the elementary school. We lived there `til I graduated and then I got married. And I am also 70 years old. As far as for my dad, his father, my grandfather, David Kawika Konanui was born in Kapa`ahu, Kalapana. That's where he was raised. And when he got married to my grandmother, Lucy Silva, that was her name. So, actually, she came from Opihikao. So, that's where they moved, to Opihikao, and that's where they started their family. That's on my dad's side. On my mom's side, that's Rebecca Kaho`okaulana Enriquez. Now, if I go further back, to her mom, my grandma actually is Geonovefa Kailikapu. She was Kalua. She was born in 1874 and how she came, get some place in Kona, I kept asking people from there, where is it? Nobody heard of it. So anyway, she's from Kona. And then, we don't know how she met Makap6 Kaho`okaulana. So, then, my grandma Rebecca, don't share too much of genealogy. For some reason why, we don't know. Ok? So, anyway, they live in Puna. She got married to Makap6 Kaho`okaulana and they lived in Puna. So they had six kids and my Tutu Rebecca was the second oldest. And she was born December 15, 1896 in Kehena. [Howard Konanui] Bernice Walker My name is Bernice Kaho`okaulana Choy Walker. My mother is Abbie Kaho`ohaulana from Mokuhulu, Kalapana and my dad. is Henry Choy from Honolulu. I lived with my grandpa since I was two or three years old and I lived with him until I graduated from high school. We lived in Kalapana in Mokuhulu. My grandmother died when I was five years old so he basically raised me with my aunties. My parents lived in Pahoa. My dad actually lived in Oahu and my mother lived in Pahoa but I preferred to live with my grandfather, so I was able to live in Kalapana and I stayed there until I graduated from high school. In growing up in Kalapana, our days were, go to school, com home, do chores, and do household things like feeding the pig and making hot water to take a bath and cooking and cleaning and picking up the rubbish around the place and helping with fire wood and helping to clean fish and picking `opihi and helping with the meat they brought in when they went hunting. That was what I did. My uncles would come down and then they would go hunt and that's how they got the meat. Mokuhulu, way up behind, my grandfather would go and he would gather honey. I never went, he never took me, but there was some kind of a, I guess, little hamlet or something up there where he had fruit trees and honey and that's where they would go. We didn't have electricity down there so that's why we boiled hot water to take a bath. Everybody got a bucket of hot water. One of my chores was to clean the kerosene lanterns, clean the glass, the aniani, because burning at night it would get burnt with carbon and so I would have to go in with the newspaper and wipe all the carbon. That was one of my chores. And what we did for fun down there, what we did was climb trees and vines, mango and just go running around in the bushes. When my grandfather would say, "let's go fishing." He wouldn't say, "let's go fishing," he would say, "let's go holoholo." We would all pack up our stuff and go down the beach and spend the day, spend the night. We would fish and we would play on the rocks and watch what was going on. That was pretty much life. And of course, catching the bus at 6:30 in the morning. The bus would pick me up to go to school in Pahoa and drop me off, got me to my house at 3:00 in the afternoon. Yep, so that was my life when I was living in Kalapana. 33 Topical Breakouts The following sections are extended quotations from the interviews, organized by topic. Interviewees provided infonnation on connections to the project lands, place names and mele, archaeological sites, gathering practices, change through time, and concerns and recommendations for proposed development that may occur on the study area parcel. Connections to the Project Area So why we starting here? They never have cars like this to go to the beach. Kahakai. So from Mokuhulu house, Tutu Rebecca's house, that's Enriquez' estate. Over 30 something acres. Well the Enriquezes gave my Tutu Man, Herman Elia Kaho`okaulana three and a half acres and that's where my brother now lives. And so from over there, where they were growing up, they had to walk the trails, walk the road, to go and fish. And when they went, they went for a couple days. It's not like, they're gonna walk down there and catch a couple crabs, catch this, they catch that. They went down there, they stayed, sometimes for a whole week. And one of the places that I learned is, where we're going to end up down there, is Wills. We went and made ulua, I was about maybe, six years old, seven years old. And then get my brother, Keona, and my brother Elia, used to go with my mom and my dad. My dad's dad, Tutu Elia. Uncle Pika sometimes. My uncle, Uncle Sam, Ka`awaloa, he used to go, sometimes. But that's where I learned about this place, where we're going to go. I never used to think about this place, it's just a fishing ground, but now, as I grow up and get older, it becomes more of a spiritual thing. I never like nobody know where I'm at. So the trail, I wanted the trail just to be just the way it is. And this morning I went down and I had to look at the trail, follow the trail, and I was like, brah, you still get `em, over 20 years. So anyhow, it became, a really good feeling, that this trail, that, most of the time I would go by myself. I'd have someone drop me off in the middle of the night, take off down the trail do my thing. Early in the morning have someone pick me up. But today when I looked at `em this morning, I was like, "wow. You was like six, seven years old over there." That place is treacherous now. It's sunk. And development is coming up on the right side. So we'll see all of that. For me, that trail by itself, I believe, is another way that our kupunas and the Lord himself preserved me and our family... So across this main road, the trail would take you all the way down to the beach where we're going to go. I just wanted to let you guys know. Because Cousin Bernice and 1, this was our stomping grounds. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] I am a lineal descendant. My great grandfather Makapo Kaho `okaulana is laid to rest there. As well as my tutu wahine Rebecca. Tutu Man Enriquez, cousins and uncle. I have practiced in caretaking the area with my father who raised me since I was 10. Back then, we understood the area as an ahupua`a. From uplands to sea. It was never separated by western ideas of roads and ownerships. I was raised here, raised my children here and still reside. [Leslie Enriquez Rosehill] Why this spot is so special to me? Because it brings back happy and good memories. You know? We used to come down here and fish, hang ulua pole, spend the night, and watch the ocean, and listen to my grandfather and listen to him talk about the ocean and fish, and how you fish down here. Its not like one or two times. We used to come down here all the time. Because we just lived up the road where we came from. [Bernice Walker] My Uncle Ben's kids, read his letter of how he was raised and the lifestyle that he lived when they were raised in Kalapana. They were raised in Mokuhulu, Kalapana. For some reason, the sibling, my grandma, my Tutu Elia, which was her younger brother, and her other sister, Tutu Kamala, they all live close by, they were neighbors. Each one of them had their own house. And they had two to three acres next to each other. That's how they live in Mokuhulu and raise their families down there. So mom said when they were young they used to walk down, you know, the name is Pu`ilima, right? But mom said they called 34 that place Wills. That's what they named it. Wills. They used to walk down from Mokuhulu, walk down to Wills and they used to bring their clothes down there, wash their clothes with the old bar soap, you know the old brown kind from before. Military soap or what. They used to wash their clothes and there used to be a pond down. They used to put all their clothes in there and wash `em with the soap and wash `em, would go further out in the ocean and rinse `em out. After you pan rinse `em, you squeeze 'ern and then you place them on the stone to kaula`i. That's what they did. [Howard Konanui] Back then, it was from the mountain to the sea. That was the ahupua`a back then. And they lived, actually, not only in the bay, they lived further up, Mokuhulu. And if you go further up to, before Mokuhulu, just coming down, coming into Kalapana. Before you hit the hill. But you can see, yeah, the view, from the hill on the highway? Actually, it's from there. There was a, there is a place, actually two place, right and left, my grandma's, I think they are, the youngest brother or maybe the middle of her siblings passed away so back then, they bury their loved ones right in, right in their, right over there in the yard actually, their backyard. So, right in there, their residence. So, and I think, my grandma's brother's grave is still there even though it, that parcel was bought by her sister's in laws. The Hauanios. They live in Kalapana too. [Moretta Kanani Balai] Archaeological Sites For me, the number one significance is the trail. The trail existed ever since I was here, five, six, seven years old. Today I'm 68 years old. Even though the trail is ancient, it remains to be visible. Remains to be a sense that brings me back. It's almost like, once lost but now found. The trail is so, lasting memories, of those years, beginning with my grandparents, my dad, my mom, my brothers and sisters. And all the other people that we used to frequent the trail to go harvesting. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] As mentioned before, the beach is an extension of our family burial grounds, cemetery, and it is a part of the leina and a part of this complex. This has been a custom in our family for many generations. There are many other burials even behind my `ohana that are surrounding our `ohana who do not have headstones. We know these are old and are likely our predecessors, hence why my `ohana ended up being buried here. [Leila Kealoha] Also, you know, one thing about Big Island, the palis, it's not like Kona side, get sand. Iwis are found in the sand. Like Kalapana, like I told you about Drain Pipe? Had that mound that I was sitting on? The rock I was leaning on was a grave stone. I never know was a grave. Yeah? So, it's just like how Maui is going through now, the iwi in the sand. It's the same in Kalapana, Drain Pipes, had iwi. So I really think, I really understand now, when I hear of Uncle Desmond guys talking about the burials and stuff, there's certain, Hawaiians where they live in their location, they can be buried on their land or by their home or they were, because they were some kind of chief or something, they gotta go bury them in the caves and it's usually along the pali where it's not where people go maha'oi and go pick and stuff like that. There's a lot of caves that have, there are gravesites that are in the caves of the pali area. Because the Akuza family, further up as you go and pass our grave, continuously go where there's Kalanihonua area, if you can picture Kalanihonua, maybe about a half a mile, or maybe no even half a mile, not too far from there, the Naki family, the Nakiaunas, they used to live over there. But, over there, on their spot, get graves but there was also a landmark, crater. Something like Mackenzie, Mackenzie, get three craters over there. And the only way you go in is through Hauae. You know alongside our gravesite, further down, I think, not too far... Lava tube but it's round, yeah? I call `em crater `cause it's round, yeah? And we also have a tube alongside of the road. You know where the lava, where the residents of Kalapana got moved to the, those who were lava victims? On the left side, go further down the Red Road, on the side where they can go and build another site for their home? [Kilcala and Ke6kea.]... But I bet you, had, know what I mean? Had dakine inside there. It's just that they never, who would think? But when I would listen to Uncle Desmond, I tell you, I believe, I believe our Hawaiians, they go bury 35 their loved ones and that's where they go, they take them to the caves. [Morreta Kanam Balai] As far as the burials, I haven't seen any burial sites makai side of the road. And whether you get down to the beach, whether it's on the left side or the right side of us, I've never encountered any grave sites so I don't really know. Except the grave sites that we have mauka side of the road. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana]. The biggest thing, I see, is just the trail. The trail to me, after the first meeting and during the first meeting, there was something about that trail that I thought, I gotta go visit that place again. And here I am today. So significant. Here I was, five, six, seven years old, and now I'm 68 and the trail was, "I gotta go find `em." And I found `em. And it feels good. And why? It goes from here all the way back to the house. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] [S]o it's also a residential, a place where, back in the day, they never have roof, wood and stuff, was all pili grass, thatched... And rock formation where they can set their house in that area... residential. It could be pillars or stone walls but there is a road to go in. [Moretta Balai] Yeah, `cause she lived, Tutu Kauanoe, she lived to like, in her 90s. Tutu Kauanoe. She's buried in that cemetery further down where the development is trying to develop. Anyway, she's the only grave over there, are stacked up with stones... And my grandma remembered that when they, when the family get together, they had salt, lauhala mat, tapa ready for wrap her body. And that's how they buried her and then. So that was, Tutu Kauanoe. Was buried over there. But no plaque. Name, nothing. That was passed down to generations, to me, to know that that's Tutu Kauanoe that's buried over there... Yeah, so, my grandma used to tell us where she wanted to be buried because her, she had, six children. I'm the seventh, she adopted. But, between Aunty Pat and Uncle Clinton, her name was Catherine. And she was, her baby, was thrown up by the babysitters. And my grandma was a hard- working lady so she was working. Never, come home, that's when she found out that her baby was unresponsive and baby had, um, all she could see was bruise, my grandma said. Bruise on her head. So maybe was from a fall. All they told her, all we did was, all was going through her head was, she must have fall. So anyway, that was the reason why her baby Catherine buried there. She was only, grandma said she was only six months. [Moretta Kanani Balai] That trail we walked on today is one of two trails. There's one further in the middle. I think the one further in the middle is used more than that one. But I don't know, years have gone by, and maybe now people just that one that we were on today. [Bernice Walker] According to Howard (Konanui), his cousin said our grandfather is buried there... [GM: On this side of the road?] Yes. The family never talked about, when my great-grandfather died. My grandfather never said anything to us. Makap6 Kaho`okaulana. My grandfather, I lived with my grandfather. Back then, I had my grandfather and two aunties. And we would all come down here. We would go fish. Over here, used to have ponds with water but they're not there anymore. Maybe because the ground sank, and they all fell in the water? I think that point over there (pointing to east) went out further. But with erosion and stuff. Look the fish jumping. My grandfather would always tell us, "Stay low and Don't move around and stand up high," and you know. `Cause they can see you. So it was kind of like old teachings. [Bernice Walker] But those are those areas where... when you came in I talked to you about the, there's a grave in the back... on our cemetery there is probably maybe 8, 9 feet, the length, the width, but it's a big grave. I think this man was either an ali`i or a warrior, but the headstone is huge, the back of, in the back of, I think was Uncle Waiau's grave. There's our tutu's grave, Gabriel, Uncle Gabriel's dad, and next to, above his headstone is William Waiau. That is a relative, first generation relative to Gabriel Kealoha. They both, he considered... William 36 Waiau considered Gabrial as brothers. So the Waiau family also come and they're residents still in Kaimu. [Morreta Kanani Balai] But if you look at it they had the trail, they walk straight down, instead of you walking along the road. So it was much shorter. Although it was far. But it was a straight shot going down. You see? So. That was what my mom told us on that video and I knew she had said something about that so I had to go back and watch it and yes, that is what she spoke about. That area. And that area, right above is where her grave stay. [Howard Konanui] Pu'ilima is documented as our Kahookaulana `ohana ko`a. Fishing. My `ohana practiced traditional gathering rights within this area. There is a trail from Mokuhulu into Pu`ilima and Kalaehiamoe. [Leslie Enriquez Rosehill] So, wasn't only the spot, was a pretty big spot and so, only Tutu Kauanoe is buried there. Where I told you she's buried. And she's not the only one that's buried over there. At the other grave site there's Pe'as and Leongs and Kealohas too. Only because they're relative. They intermarried. The Pe'as. That's why. The side of, and in the back get graves and in the front, that's Leslie's `ohana over there if I'm not mistaken. Konanuis over there. The rest of the graves is in Opihikao. Another extension too is, there's graves across the street where they're planning on developing. Because it's untouched, there's plenty, I remember, I don't know about nowadays, if it still remains the same. [Morreta Kanani Balai] She (Rebecca Kaho`okaulana Enriquez) was the first one to be buried there. Then my grandfather, which is on the Kalapana side of her grave was put there. And my cousin on the right side of her, Kapoho side. Died in a car accident. My uncle put him there. And he was young, like say, in the early 20s. Yeah. So, that so far, is the only, oh, and then, my other cousin, her baby, I think was, still born. Is put in-between my grandma and my grandpa. Right there by the noni tree. [Howard Konanui] Does William Waiau and Gabriel Kealoha, they buried next together! My tutu, my great grand tutu, she said, you know why they close? That's her father buried in the back of Gabriel Kealoha. And I was like, "what?" She said, "yeah, that's my dad." How come, all our family buried behind the Keliihoomalu family? Oh, right over here, on the Waiau land? But I don't see my dad, come to find out, I had the paper, I write them down in case the rain and whatever, yeah? We always go put the sharpie for make `em more, readable, in case the family like come. So she said, "yeah, this is my dad. Buried in the back of your tutu." And I was like, "yeah, every time we go make sure whoever come visit that William Waiau can see the printing `cause the printing was fading every time rain. Well actually sweating, because it's really hot over there. So the printing would sometimes disappear. And yeah, that's what we would do. We would mark `em the same way with his name, the birth, the death, dates, in case the family come and visit. She said, "They are treated, my dad buried over there because he was very close to Kealoha." Like his brother. Because her tutu, William Waiau's mother, Elizabeth Kaapana Kaha.na, took care of Gabriel Kealoha. [Morreta Kanani Balai] 37 Figure 13 Ancient coastal trail that connects the study area to the `a`a land to the east and Mokuhulu. Left: coastal trail looking towards the study area where the trail has been damaged. Right: Uncle Sam Kaho`okaulana walking along the historic coastal trail. Gathering Practices and Mo`olelo And all the other people that we used to frequent the trail to go harvesting. And this is fishing ulua, fishing for shoreline fishing, enenue, aholehole, moi, popa`a, and maybe today, might have a lot of ta`ape and so forth. But I haven't been here for over 20 years, so I don't really know. The limu, the limu kohu, can be harvested. But it be used to more to the right from this point, along the papa, the reefs, that you can actually see today. There's a lot of limu. Then `opihi picking, a`ama, this is a good place. Especially when nobody comes here and harvest. This was a good place, always providing kaukau for our family. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] Get plenty medicinal plants growing in the front and on the left side of that property... `Uhaloa. `Uhaloa is mostly, is readily grown over there in that area that I know of. `Uhaloa. Plus get, further down where's there's vegetation, get kukui, a lot of kukui nut trees growing on the right side. Also, the `ohia trees also medicinal. [Morreta Kanani Balai] There has been much already said and stated by our kupuna that's already documented on this topic. I'd like to defer to my elders on this. One mo'olelo that was shared to me by my papa who is Rebecca's son was.... Kaipu`uelelu sits above our fishing grounds. All of our kupuna are laid to rest here and in stories, they make their way as water do downhill to our fishing grounds. So whatever we gather in our `ohana ko`a is a direct reflection of what our kupuna have provided for us. [Leslie Enriquez Rosehill] Uncle Ula Kuahiwinui had boat, Uncle Gabriel had boat, so you know, always, that spot and Hilina Pali spot, all along the coast, coming as they come from Pohoiki out, they all knew the spots for go holoholo. For even know what, the time of seasons and what they going get. Yeah, for our gravesite, is good ulua fishing spot over there. So people go, mostly men, though, they take their truck, park their truck and then they walk in. It's rough. But the path been there long time. Grandma knew. That that's good spot to go holoholo and also. [Morreta Kanani Balai] 38 It is always custom to go and visit our Upuna after they have been buried to honor them. When my grandmother died, this was not the first time I had been to the graves. She used to take us to visit our kupuna there growing up and so did my dad. My dad would always fish down there too. The beach at Pu`ilirna is an extension of our family burial grounds. Our kupuna who pass get buried and they eventually become the nutrients that feed the earth below them which extends to the sea. This is the, "Leina." [Leila Kealoha] We used to hai vest ko`oko`olau tea from the mauka side of the road from here. But today, I don't see any. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] You got to have four-wheel drive though to go in. All the fishermens, they know that. There's only one area over that's accessible for the fishermens to go in and do that. [Morreta Kanani Balai] You know, in the area there's also that papa down below. And there was limu kohu there. That's the gathering place for limu kohu. [Bernice Walker] There was something that was laying down on my, laying on my heart, to call you and let you know if it's ok that I can add to what we were talking about ... You know the, the, our family grave area. Yeah? The piece across, or the land across, of the cemetery, the road? ... It's a well-known spot over there. Also, it, it might have, you know the pali. It's a pali over there. But it's also, my grandma said, Elsie Leimanu Kealoha, married name Naungayan. She said that it was a good kahakai spot... Kahaka.i spot, meaning holoholo spot go pick `opihi, `a`ama crab, and fishing. Especially for certain kind of fish too like black ulua. Or the other kind, you know, the flying fish back in the day. All that kind. But over there is a highly, it's like a landmark to the lawai`a, the people who are fishermens. Especially like my grandma and my grandma's brother, Leila's grandpa, Uncle Gabriel Kealoha. Yeah. Yeah, they're all fishermen. And whether it's fishermen, fishing or kahakai, you know go pick `opihi, `a`ama crab, or even go pick limu. It is not only accessible to them, our family, but when Pohoiki was a ramp, was a fishing.... Pohoiki was a gathering place for fishermen to come with their boat and it was accessible because it had the ramp and everything. But the fishing spot was always Kaimu, Kalapana area. [Moretta Kanani Balai] I remember when we dug my grandpa's grave, my cousins and I walked the trail down to the beach and they were blocking it off... As we walked up to the beach, I came across a huge ko`ele shell polished white just sitting on the beach! I knew instantly that this was my grandfather saying hello to me. I placed that shell on his chest before we closed his casket. Every time I go down there I find the ko`ele shell and think of my grandpa. This is our kupuna talking to us. I even used one to make a sign for my aunty Emily who had me make a sign with her parents' names on top and I put two `opihi shells on each side of the sign from that beach. [Leila Kealoha] And after they finish wash all of their clothes, they used to go look for lauhala, they would pick opihi, ha`uke`uke, and limu and even the pa`o, the fish. That's what they call the jumping jacks, you know in the ponds? My uncle said they used to make `em raw. And that's what they used to eat, the pa`o. So they would spend the whole day down there. So in the afternoon, mom said the clothes was all dry already, so they'd pick up the clothes and walk back home Mokuhulu. Where Tutu Elia's house, that's where Boa stay now. And then right next to there, that's where Tutu Rebecca's house was. Little bit inside, but that's where the house was. And if you go little bit more, get the great big water tank, that area there is what we call Mokuhulu. [Howard Konanui] There's a reason why it's named Pu`ilima. And the fishing moons would go fishing over there, it's accessible. `Cause they go and camp for a couple days, especially for nowadays, ulua tournaments and you know all the stuff like that, yeah? That area is the highly, the fishermen who knows, that is a spot. Iconic to the fishermen but also it could also, for 39 people picking `a`ama, that is also an area that my grandma says, that is a good place to pick `opihi and `a`ama crab. [Morreta Kanani Balai] So, we didn't go to the fishing area down there because actually, since we lived Opihikao, our area is Opihikao and you don't go maha`oi somebody else's territory. [Howard Konanui] The only thing would be, I'm always looking in the back. You have this, scary feeling, and so every once in a while, you go fishing, "what was that?" Or you feel a breeze pass by and, "what was that?" But you just keep focused. "I came here to make kaukau, and that's what I came here to do. I can't let you," You meaning, whether it was a good spirit, bad spirit, all I know is, it was a time where I'm always on my toes. Very alert and aware of my surroundings even though it was dark. And then there's times it seems, I could see at night, without the light. It's like angels. Angels protecting me to do what I gotta do. And once its over, pick up the bag and it's full with what I came for. Menpachi at night, `aweoweo, aholehole, and early in the morning, catch some enenue, popa`a. And when the bucket was full it was time to go home. Kaukau, eat with the family. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] I was like, ok, now... my aunty, my great great aunty, she's Dolly. Her maiden name is Moke. She married Moke, lived in Keaukaha. But she's a Waiau. Aunty Dolly Waiau Moke. She told me the story that in Kalapana, in the bay, it was highly common for the ah'is to come, relax, and that's what they did, surf over there, in Kaimu Bay. And they would have to prepare kaukau, you know, for the ali`is to come eat and serve and stuff. Yeah. But that's the only thing I don't know is, who was the ali`i then, in Kalapana. That, I don't know. I would love to know. In the 17, 1800s. Or maybe way more back. [Morreta Kanani Balai] My father was related to everyone along our coastline and having a large family we spent a lot of time at family parties and `ohana homes. One thing that I want to share is about our family deaths. At first I was scared of dead bodies, then when I was 8-years old, my grandmother died. I remember vividly my cousins and I were just stuck by her casket, hugging and kissing her and crying because she was gone. We had a big funeral in honor of her and we buried her at Makena gravesite. This is where my grandfather's family is all buried. When we went to bury my grandmother, we dug a big hole in the ground and lined the walls with rocks so the sides don't cave in. Then they build a wooden box to put inside and that is what we put the casket in. There were so many people and flowers that day. My dad and his brothers were the ones to dig the hole and place her in her final resting place. The hole is dug days or a week before the burial. When that part is done, we always go across the street to the beach to get in the water and spend time together. This was so we could cleanse and be close to where my grandma would eventually go. We believe that our `ohana will eventually end up in the ocean. We call this the leina or the lele, the place where the spirits cross over. This is why we bury close to the beach or cliff; if not right next to the beach or the cliff. [Leila Kealoha] Place Names and Mete I consider this place, 'Wills'. I don't know but there's a long story about it. About Pu`ilima. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] So mom said when they were young they used to walk down, you know, the name is Pu`ilima, right? But mom said they called that place Wills. That's what they named it. Wills. [Howard Konanui] Some years later, my great-grandmother Sarah died and we buried her right next to my grandmother. Previous to my grandmother, my great grandfather and great -great grandmother and father were buried there and my great -granduncles as well. Over the years, my grandfather's sister Elsie and her daughter Geraldine were buried there as well. 40 In 2003, my grandfather died. It was a big funeral. We held his funeral at my aunty Dottie's house and then the next day we went down to Pohoiki and backed down the boat ramp one last time and then took him to our Makena gravesite which is when it was the first time that my cousins were the ones to place our kupuna into the ground. This is also when my cousin Kanani who was raised by our great-grandmother Sarah told us of the name Kaipueleu as the old name of the cemetery. [Leila Kealoha] I [Leila Kealoha] also share the following references in respect to place names: As noted, these names refer to specific things, yet the kaona (meaning) behind these names can be different. All of these names have reference to the practices used by the people of these areas such as fish, bones, canoes and people who traversed this area Kaipueleu: Ka ipu N. Hanger for ipu, calabashes. `Ele.`u N. A dark-skinned people to be descended from a chief of this name. (Not cap.) A hard stone, sometimes used as a fishing god. `eleu vs. Active, alert, energetic, lively, nimble, quick, dexterous, agile, spry, sprightly, prompt. Also `uleu. h6. `eleu Caus/sim.; to animate, stir into action, animated. Kalaehiamoe: ka.la`e 1. vs. Clear, calm, unclouded. ho`o.ka.la`e To cause to clear; to become clear. 2. n. Swelling, probably due to failing circulation. la`e Same as la`ela`e 1; pure in sentiment (Hal. 19.8). Cf. kala`e. ho`o.la`e To clear up, brighten. (PCP lake.) lae n. 1. Forehead, brow. Nalulu ka. lae, to have a headache. (PPN la`e.) 2. Cape, headland, point, promontory. (PEP la`e.) 3. Wisdom; mental or emotional qualities. Cf. lae o`o, lae pa`a, lae `ula, and idioms poha 1; po`ohu 1. ho`o.lae To pretend to be wise; to act smart; pretentious. 4. An insulting term, followed by qualifiers, referring to kaua, outcasts, who had dots tattooed on their foreheads (Maio 70-2). Cf lae kiko, lae mamo, lae puni. hia.moe nvi. Sleep; to sleep, fall asleep, asleep. Kona hiamoe `ana, his sleeping. Holoholona hiamoe, sloth. Hiamoe i ka make, to sleep in death, die. ho`o, hia.moe To put to sleep, lull to sleep, to pretend to sleep; soporific. L5'au ho`ohiamoe, sleeping tablet or drug. (PPN fiamohe.) Makena: 1. nvi. Mourning, wailing, lamentation; to wail, lament, weep for joy. Nona keia makena e uwe `ia mai nei (For. 4.47), this wailing that is being sobbed forth here is for him. (PPN matenga.) 2. n. Calm, of sea, atmosphere. Cf. make, dead. ma.kena vs. Many, numerous; often, much. Pu`ilima: Pu n. Head of octopus or squid. n. Canoe endpiece, both fore and aft. nvt. Coil of hair, topknot of hair; rope or line, as attached to sticks in an `6pelu net; rope attached to the front of an unfinished canoe to haul it to the shore; olona string used in the game pu kaula; snotter holding the end of the sprit of a sail; to coil; to gather in, as sails; to form a topknot. Pu i ka wa`a, ceremony during which a head craftsman prayed that the gods would protect the newly carved canoe hull as it was drawn from the forest to the sea; to attach a line to a canoe; such a line. Kaulapa pu (For. 6:483), drag or towline. Pu i ka lauoho, to form the hair in a topknot. part. Together, entirely, completely, also with, together with. Short for Puna_ `ilima 1. n. Small to large native shrubs (all species of Sida, especially S. fallax), bearing yellow, orange, greenish, or dull -red flowers; some kinds strung for leis. The flowers last only a day and are so delicate that about 500 are needed for one lei. Fruits of ma`o (Abutilon grandifolium), when green and soft, are used with `ilima leis, one fruit at each end of the lei; or the pale -green, cap -like calyx of the `ilima flower is used. A mild laxative for babies is made by squeezing out the juice of flowers; this is called kanakamaika`i. The `ilima was designated in 1923 by the Territorial Legislature as the flower of Oahu. It is related to the hibiscus. (Neal 552-3.) See songs, n6weo, pue 1; cf. `apiki. Ola no i ka pua o ka `ilima, healing in the `ilima flower (reference to its medicinal use). Kaimu: ka 1. nvt. To hit, strike, throw, smite, hack, thrust, toss, fling, hurl, dash, especially with a quick hard stroke; to bail water, as from a canoe; to clean, as weeds or mud from a pond; to fling the arms or swing them while walking; to make net meshes; to tie, as thatch 41 battens; to knit; to fish with a. pole; to turn the soil; nvt. Canoe bailer; to bail. (PPN taa.) n. Container, hanger. Incoming, of a current. Hip bone, pelvis. imu n. Underground oven; food cooked in an imu. Also umu. (PPN `umu.) Rock and coral fish trap; the fisherman might insert a branch into an opening at one side to frighten the fish into a surrounding net. Also ahu, umu. [Leila Kealoha] Change Through Time But what I recognize is development is happening. Again, it's, you know, sixty years went by and changes is going on. People have interests in the land. It's a beautiful spot. And if you go build on it, do something beautiful. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] Yes. When our last kupuna Milo grove was butchered down. It created a sadness in me that can't be explained in words. There are only a few areas left on our coastline that represent what our kupuna lived within. It should have never been destroyed by developers. [Leslie Enriquez Rosehill] Ulua spot is right there. And the big ulua stick would be sticking out from over there, leaning that way. And then our little tent with a rock wall would be right up that way. It's pretty much filled in. After all these years, the cliff is sinking. The waves came up, it looks like, took a lot of rocks out with them. That's our fishing spot, right there. I noticed, this morning, though, if you look back to the right, is the conventional `ohi`a pole stands. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] The erosion. The dropping of the land over here. When we had those big earthquakes. This land over here has dropped considerably. And this spot right over here is where we used to camp. Inside this little cove on the under. We used to put a taip over the top. Used to be a little bigger though. [Bernice Walker] We were grumbling because we were trying to figure out why they were blocking the trail to the beach, which we all grew up using and going down to fish and swim. [Leila Kealoha] I didn't see it, but from what I was told. When you came down from that highway, the road you come down and then the road used to fork, the left side you go Red Road, the left side you go down in the back in Kaimu. But in front had this bunch of coconut trees where people go picnic and used to have one old road. And that old road used to go right across the bay and hit the other side of Kaimu Road. That's how it used to be. I never did see it but I just saw that old road and just from what all our kupunas told us, that road used to go all the way across. And then, the lava flow came and took everything, and now it's all gone. That is what I remember about Kaimu and you know, the left side, that so called subdivision, back in those days, the local people used to go on the shoreline. Right around that subdivision that go all the way up to Pu'ilima to go throw net. Because my uncle folks used to go up there to go holoholo. The people before time, they didn't have an issue with the people going in front and throw net. It was all ok. But nowadays, oh my gosh, you cannot do that. I don't care where you go, times have changed. Well, because the kupunas is not around to go holoholo, I, I'm not the type to go around and maha'oi. So, I would rather stay in my own area. And, I don't have issue. [Howard Konanui] Gentrification is the only negative encounter. We have learned to live with the Pele and as she comes and goes, it's never been a loss but a blessing for more land being created. It's not the same perspective as foreigners have of destruction. [Leslie Enriquez Rosehill] The last I will share about is when my father passed away in 2022. This has been the hardest burial of them all. My father died on November 18, 2022. I had to help get everything ready for my dad to get buried down there on December 13. I met my cousin down there to check out where we were going to dig his hole and I saw signs across the street about a subdivision and they had bulldozed. My Uncle who was passing by had stopped and asked me if I knew what was going on, and I said, "no." In the midst of trying to get ready for my dad's funeral and burial I did not reach out to the planning department. On the day we went to bury my 42 dad, I pulled up and my dad's cousin, one of his diving partners, was standing in the driveway with papers in his hand. His eyes were bloodshot, which was what my dad's eyes looked like most of the time and he was pissed. He handed me the papers and it was about the property across that street and what they were doing. It was almost like my dad was speaking through him with his bloodshot eyes and his wild and bodinky hair. I hugged my uncle and told him thank you for reminding me and for sharing the paperwork. He spent a lot of time with my dad fishing all over. After burying my dad and having the pa`ina afterwards, plenty of my `ohana were talking about the property and if we knew what was going on and no one seemed to know. On December 23, 2022 I contacted the planning department to see what was going on and to share that I was totally against this development. I was contacted back and in the beginning of January, my cousin and I went in to meet with the SMA planners. We were told that we would be contacted if any more development was to move forward and over one and a half years my aunty called me the day before the hearing that they were having the planning commission meeting for this property. No one contacted us back and the developers stated that there was no opposition to this project. [Leila Kealoha] Kalapana area. When you drive and you come down to the end of the, see this (pointing at map). This is the inside of Kalapana, where there's the Catholic church. Used to have, if you can see the awa bar and took, I don't know how long, the lava acreage took behind Uncle Robert's place, is all covered with lava. But back then, it's how used to look like (showing photos). 1823, 1850s. And here you can see the Catholic Church, still remain. Back in the 80s used to be. Remains right there. Yeah. And then around here (points), that you cannot see, had big, huge ponds shallow enough for us kids swim in. Back in the 80s. And um, I wanted to show you that. [Moretta Kanam Balai] If you guys go, see if the trail, if the bulldozers push the stones and what not. If they did, can we get the Native Hawaiian Legal Core involved? Because they're destroying our cultural heritage. It's not good. Not good. [Howard Konanui] Concerns and Recommendations Continuing access could be a big concern because we know and we hear of other landowners who have beach front who close off the shoreline and say, "This is my property, you can't pass through here." And that is something that I personally do not want to see happening. People who come from the land, the ocean, down in that area, they know what's what and where, you know, they can go and gather and for you know, outsiders to come in and tell you, "you cannot do this, you cannot do that," that is just not right. [Bernice Walker] That place is treacherous now. It's sunk. And development is coming up on the right side. So we'll see all of that. [Samuel Kaho`okaulana] This area is very significant to our `ohana. The area has already been bulldozed of our Kupuna trees that my kupuna have fed from their decomposed bodies, gates put up, blocked access to the beach and total disregard to our gathering and religious practices of this area. Pu`ilima, Kalaehiamoe, Kaipueleu and Makena are part of a cultural and burial complex that has already been negatively impacted by Kaimu Cove, LLC and it will have an even more detrimental impact to our `ohana if anything is built/constructed on this property. It will obstruct the leina, place unwanted waste into the ground that will affect the tidepools, limu, and fish and the possibility of more destruction of other archeological sites that have already been disturbed. As I mentioned before, our kupuna bury either right next to the beach or cliffs and there is a good likelihood that there may be burials within this area as well. [Leila Kealoha] This parcel is a part of the cycle of our kupuna, whose remains rest here. Their journey is not static it continues, returning to the sea as part of a living process of ancestral flow. Documented in many resources, including Chiefs Of Hawaii by Kamakau. This land is not 43 just a location, it is a passage. Our kupuna are buried here, and their cycle continues. To disturb this place is to interrupt a rhythin that has long been in motion. While others may no longer recognize these documented sites as significant, they remain deeply important to us as lineal descendants. These are not just coordinates on a map, they are chapters of our history and anchors of our identity. Dismissing their importance erases lived memory and undermines the kuleana we carry to protect and honor them. [Leslie Enriquez Rosehill] Also it has caves. Along that pali get caves. So, never been touched. So all those areas right there cannot be developed. Seriously. Because number one, there's caves on the pali area over there, also there might be people back in the day, our `ohanas back in the day used to probably live there... [Morreta Kanani Balai] As the years have gone by we feel like they have kicked us out of our gathering place. Pu`ilima was not just a place to go holoholo which we all did, but it is a place where we aukai/pikai or go and cleanse and rinse when we are preparing for a family burial. Many of our family members have used this area for generations and now it feels like we are not allowed to. How come? I don't think anyone else would like it if we came to their homeland and put up a gate and blocked access to where their kupuna are buried or where they go to honor their kupuna? [Leila Kealoha] I would be really happy if they don't destroy the coastline. There's the section. When the lava came down, it took the shoreline, but that's the only piece of that older shoreline left. So I would rather that stay the way it is. And that's my hope anyway, if that can happen. If they can leave it pristine like it is, that'd be great. [Bernice Walker] Not building. This area should be represented as conservation lands as its surrounding areas are. It is a part of the Kaipu`ueleu Complex, in the 1970 red road survey, where it's documented that there are many burials and the road itself that was designed and put in did not exclude burials to be within the makai region of the complex. 8,000 burials units of note, supports that statement. [Leslie Enriquez Rosehill] Well if they don't touch this stretch of the coastline, I don't have a problem because that's private property. But from what my cousin Ilona said, our great grandfather is buried in there somewhere. Remember what she said? Don't know what the place looks like. We didn't know about it. So that would be something we would like to know about. We would like to be able to find that. That I would be interested in. [Bernice Walker] Why I feel that that area should be preserved is, that is our culture and our heritage. Because that's where my mom folks was taught that we live off the ocean and when you go down to the ocean you make your time worthwhile. You maximize whatever you have to do down there. So that you can accomplish a lot of things. And it taught them how to live off of the ocean. So now that's very, very important. If we don't have for our culture, we're going to lose a lot, our identity. So all of these things, once it's destroyed, then it's gone. We won't be able to show the future generations what it used to be like. You know, because I give you an example. You know for a poi pounder, for the pa`i ku`i `ai? And then the pohaku ku`i `ai. If you have that, you can pass that down to the future generations. And they can show the children, the grandchildren, what it means to ku`i kalo. Because they have something to hold. If you don't have your board and stone it's hard for the future generations to grasp what you are talking about. So it works in the same principle as the `aina. The place. If you don't have a place to show them what has been done. You know? Then they won't understand. Because, like, even for my dad when we go fishing like that, he showed me the areas where the moi stay, where the aholehole stay, and he even when he died, the areas where the lobster holes stay, where the certain fishes would stay, like say for the kole, you know? We don't have access to that area that, it's all gone. So, that's why for me, it's important and you know, it's for my mom, for my Tutus, all the kupunas that when passed. They cannot speak up for themselves. Now it's our time to speak for them because they taught us all of this. We should be the one that speaks for them because they 44 taught us and they taught us well. So that we can honor them for what they passed down to us. That's my mana`o. [Howard Konanui] Maybe not only me, my cousin Leila's side, you know, all passed down already. We all know. And that cemetery over there, my grandma said, "this is the family cemetery. Whoever pass away can bury over here." That's our family cemetery. Oh, and you know, when you little, ok, this is mine, this is mine, I'm gone be buried over there, I'm gonna be buried over here next to my grandma. [Moretta Kanani Balai] Gentrification. Kannu is of a space that is humble. We don't have much in regards to money or land. But many of our families that are descendants are still here and are a living culture, we are rich in practices and traditions. Because we are in a zone where land is cheaper than other places, but cash speaks volumes. It encourages those who have cash on hand to purchase and invest. The actions of these developers have already set the precedent that they are not culturally respectful or mindful. Therefore, leading the destruction and separation we have to embody our kupuna in our spaces that we are gated off from and locked out of. [Leslie Enriquez Rosehill] 45 SUMMARY OF ETHNOGRAPHIC SURVEY The six interviewees shared their extensive knowledge and experiences of Kaimu, particularly the connection between the study area with Native Hawaiian families from the linked upland area of Mokuhulu and with burial grounds for iwi kupuna. All of the interviewees have long-standing ties to the project area and each have ancestors that are buried at the linked Kaipu`uelelu Cemetery (Kaipuelu). Each of the interviewees recalls being taken by lcupuna to engage in fishing and/or marine provisioning practices along the oceanfront of the project area and surrounding coastline. Kupuna (elders) interviewed include Samuel Kaho`okaulana, Bernice Walker, Howard Konanui, and Morreta Kanani Balai. These kupuna each grew up with strong dependencies on Puna coastlines for subsistence -based survival. Bernice Walker and Samuel Kaho`okaulana recall ulua fishing and spending time with their families at the project area. Morreta Kanani Balai is the genealogist of her `ohana and holds knowledge of traditional burial practices (e.g. wrapping iwi in kapa before being interred) and participated in these practices as a child with her Tutu Kauanoe. Leslie Lihaunani Enriquez Rosehill and Leila Kealoha are part of the next generation of leaders within the Puna community. Leila Kealoha holds memories of her grandfather and father fishing via boat and her family paddling wa`a along the coastline fronting the project area. She actively practices burial ceremony that is dependent on access to the project area. Leslie Lihaunani Enriquez Rosehill continues to steward the resting place of these ancestors at Kaipu`uelelu Cemetery and actively engages in subsistence gathering and stewardship. The interviewees expressed a diversity of connections and memories of the Pu`ilima area, most of all the treasured memories of this area and time spent there with their elders and ancestors. The interviewees established a clear connection between the Kaipu`uelelu burial ground across the street and the study area, with a variety of relationships between the upland area and the coastline established. These include the feeding of the kupuna trees and fishing grounds of Pu`ilima from ancestors' bodies and spirits, leina for these ancestors, and kinolau-based communication from ancestors (e.g. `opihi ko`ele). These connected areas function within a cohesive ahupua`a system. The interviewees identified a rich myriad of natural resources, cultural practices, archaeological sites, and vibrant landscape of mo`olelo and place names. Cultural practices within the project area include `aukai and plcai (cleansing and rinsing after burial practices) and gathering and fishing grounds for a variety of species including plants for medicinal uses (ko`oko`olau, `uhaloa, and `ohi`a) and weaving (lauhala), fish (ulua, aholehole, enenue, po`opa`a, moi, menpachi, aweoweo, kole, and pao`o), limu: limu (general) and limu kohu, and invertebrates (`opihi, lobsters, and `a`ama crab). This stretch of coastline is used for `ohi`a-pole based ulua fishing. Howard Konanui spoke of brackish pools where families from Mokuhulu would wash and dry clothes. The most archaeologically significant site near the project area includes the Kaipu`uelelu Cemetery, immediately upland of the project area.. The interviewees recall many ancestors who are buried there, including family that they have laid to rest there. The many kaona associated with the place names of Kalaehiamoe, Kaipu`uelelu, Pu`ilima, and Makena suggest a site of great mana, of healing practices, and as a place for ancestors to rest in slumber. Kaipu`uelelu is an active burial ground where current lineal descendants plan to be interred and plan for their descendants to be interred. Archaeological sites linked to the project area include the ancient and significant coastal trail that had connected the project area (affected by recent land clearing) to the ulua fishing grounds immediately to the east and connects to Kaipu`uelelu and the Mokuhulu trail, fishing campsites, and historic residential sites. The continuity and presence of the trail has spiritual meaning to interviewees. The beach fronting the burial ground was described as a leina, or a jumping off point for the spirits buried upland to enter pa. Interviewees shared that ancestor, Makapo Kaho`okaulana is laid to rest on the makai side of the road on the project area and that there is a potential for burials within the pali neighboring the project area or the lava tube on the property. Given the stories of iwi being emplaced and hidden within caves along the pali (cliffs) of Puna, 46 including the neighboring lava tube of Hauae in Kikala, it is likely that there are iwi that have been deposited within the pali fronting the project area. Pu`ilima holds the ko`a of the Kaho`okaulana family. Interviewees have observed significant changes in the area including rapid coastal subsidence and cliff line sinking due to erosion and earthquake activity, increased development in the immediate Kaimu area that has diminished fishing practices on fronting coastal stretches, and the Pele geologic flow that inundated Kaimu Bay. Past development in that subdivision has discouraged interviewees and practitioners from continuing subsistence practices such a throw net and holoholo due to maha`oi attitudes of new residents. Recent land clearing by developers has harmed the ancestral noni and milo groves located within the project area, representations of kupuna stewardship that are lost. There have been rock blockades and gates put up that have blocked the trail to the beach and access for gathering and burial -related practices. Finally, during the ethnographic interviews, questions, concerns, and recommendations were shared pertaining to the proposed project. Interviewee concerns include: • The project area is part of a cultural and burial complex that has ancestrally, is actively, and will continue to serve as a site of great significance for the Native Hawaiian communities of Pu`ilima, Kalaehiamoe, Kaipu`uelelu, and Makena. • Any building or construction that occurs within the project area will obstruct the leina. • The project area is known to be home to the burial site of ancestor Makapo Kaho `okaulana. • Development will place waste into the ground which will affect the limu, intertidal zone, and fish that lineal descendants depend on to sustain subsistence -based livelihoods. • There are few stretches of coastline in Kalapana that have ancestral milo groves like the ones within the project area that have been harmed by recent land clearing. • There has already been damage done to the coastal trail and ancestral forest groves in the project area. • The project has already been negatively impacted by the Kaimu Cove LLC who has shown disregard for gathering and religious practices and have proven not to be culturally respectful or mindful. • Development of the area facilitates gentrification of the humble and culturally -rich Native Hawaiian community of Kaimu. • Gating and blockage of access by current property owners has discouraged continuity of burial cleansing and gathering linked to ocean access from the project area. • Others may not recognize these sites as significant, but they continue to hold great kuleana and significance to lineal descendants. • Once the area is destroyed, it's gone and altered to all future generations to have the same experiences there as their kupuna. • The kupuna that have passed cannot speak for themselves, it is up to living lineal descendants to spealc for them. 47 • It is likely that burials may be encountered in the project area and may reside within the cliff face. The coastline has already shifted significantly with coastal subsidence; coastal erosion and subsidence are likely in the future. It was described by an interviewee as "treacherous." • There has been a lack of communication with lineal descendants regarding this area from the SMA planners and planning commission in the past. The interviewees recommended the following: • The project area should not be developed due to the spiritual, religious, natural, and cultural sensitivities of the area. • Do not disturb this coastline, including the coastal forest groves on the project parcel, as there are few remnants of the ancestral coastline like this in Kalapana due to the lava histories. • Clear acknowledgement that this project area is home to a multitude of culturally significant gathering rights and religious practices. • Re -zoning / re-establislunent of the area to conservation zoning to ensure protection of this coast. • Archaeological sites (e.g. historic residential) have already been disturbed by land clearing and there is the possibility for further destruction if development proceeds. These sites are still sigificant to lineal descendants. • Identify the burial location of Makapo Kaho`okaulana. • Given the myriad of cultural practices tied to the project area, maintaining cultural access is of critical importance. Gates should be removed. • If the parcel is built upon it needs to be something beautiful. • Engagement with the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, particularly in regards to harm caused to the coastal trail. • Have open and transparent conversations with community members and follow all recommendations that are shared. KA PA`AKAI ANALYSIS The objectives of this Ka Pa`akai analysis are to identify any cultural resources or practices that may occur in the project area, deterinine if the proposed undertaking will affect the resources or practices or access to the resources or practices, and offer mitigation recommendations for the undertaking. This chapter begins with a brief history of Ka Pa`akai analyses in Hawaii, and then addresses these three topics: 1. The identity and scope of cultural, historical, and natural resources in which traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the project area 2. The extent to which those resources, including traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights, will be affected or impaired by the proposed action 3. What feasible action, if any, could be taken to reasonably protect Native Hawaiian rights History of Ka Pa`akai Analyses The Hawaii State Constitution (Art. XII §7) maintains that: The State reaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupua`a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778, subject to the right of the State to regulate such rights. Several fundamental court cases inform on the history of the Ka Pa`akai Analysis. The first of these occurred in 1982 with Kalipi v. Hawaiian Trust Company, Ltd. in which a Native Hawaiian landowner on Molokai (Kalipi) required access to undeveloped land for gathering rights. Kalipi claimed that because he owned land in the ahupua`a, he should be allowed access for gathering in that ahupua`a, as was customary in pre -contact Hawaii. The Court determined that "lawful occupants of an ahupua`a may, for the purposes of practicing native Hawaiian customs and traditions, enter undeveloped lands within the ahupua`a to gather those items." The Court recognized that allowing access to private property for gathering purposes might conflict with the modern concept of fee simple land ownership and recommended that this issue should be determined on a case -by -case basis (Jarman and Verchick 2003:208). A key term in Kalipi v. Hawaiian Trust Company, Ltd. is "undeveloped," as this prevents occupants from accessing developed property for gathering purposes. In a discussion of this and other relevant legal proceedings, Jarman and Verchick 2003:209 state that: In the case of "fully developed" land, the court suggested that the burden of providing cultural access might prove unreasonable. But where a project was still in the planning stage, that is, "less than fully developed," a planning cominission might be required to forge a compromise in which both native Hawaiians and resort guests could happily share the land. A decade after Kalipi v. Hawaiian Trust Company, Ltd., in 1992 Pele Defense Fund v. Paty was initiated for entry into the Wao Kele `O Puna Forest Reserve by tenants of the neighboring ahupua`a to "exercise traditional and customary rights" in the reserve. This tested the statement in Kalipi v. Hawaiian Trust Company, Ltd. that specifically limited access to "lawful occupants" of the ahupua`a. In Pele Defense Fund v. Paty, the Court rejected the idea that traditional gathering rights are limited to the ahupua`a by the lawful occupants of that ahupua`a and affirmed that these rights derive not solely from land ownership but also from the established customs observed by Native Hawaiians. 49 In 2000, Ka Pa `akai O Ka Aina v. Land Use Commission laid the framework for the Ka Pa`akai Analysis by determining "what analysis state and county agencies [must] undertake to ensure they adequately balance private property rights with native Hawaiian gathering rights" (Jarman and Verchick 2003:210). This case originated over the dispute of a Land Use Commission (LUC) determination to reclassify 1,000 acres on Hawaii Island from a Conservation District to an Urban District, in response to expansion of a resort. This expansion was in direct conflict with Native Hawaiian practices that were taking place on the land, and the LUC made a general statement that the developer should "preserve and protect any gathering and access rights of native Hawaiians." It was argued that these minimal initiatives were insufficient, resulting in the Ka Pa `akai O Ka Aina v. Land Use Commission case. The Court did find that the statement made by the LUC was insufficient, and they established a standard for the LUC to adhere to when cultural land -use rights were in question. The Court delineated three points that the LUC is required to consider when formulating their findings and conclusions: (1) the identity and scope of "valued cultural, historical, or natural resources" in the petition area, including the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the petition area; (2) the extent to which those resources— including traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights -- will be affected or impaired by the proposed action; and (3) the feasible action, if any, to be taken by the LUC to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist. In other words, the Ka Pa`akai Analysis was designed to identify any cultural resources or practices that may occur in the project area, determine if the proposed project will affect the resources or practices, and offer mitigation recommendations to protect Native Hawaiian rights if the project moves forward. Ka Pa`akai Analysis Topics As noted above, this Ka Pa`akai analysis aims to identify any cultural resources or practices that may occur in the project area, determine if the proposed undertaking will affect the resources or practices or access to the resources or practices, and offer mitigation recommendations for the undertaking. The three topics outlined at the beginning of this chapter are addressed below. The identity and scope of cultural, historical, and natural resources in which traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the project area Previous archaeological surveys revealed four Sites of Historic and Indigenous Preservation (SHIP) within the current study area (Spear 1992). These sites include SIHP 50-10-63-18525 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SHIP 50-10-63-18526 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SHIP 50-10- 62-18527 (historic boundary wall), SIHP 50-10-62-18528 (a modified lava tube). Three of these sites, SHIP 50-10-63--18526,-18527, and -18528 were confirmed during the archaeological field inspection completed of the study area by Clark 2024. SHIP 50-10-63-18525 could not be re -located (Clark 2024). Immediately upland of the study area is Kaipuuelelu Cemetery (SHIP 50-10-63- 02547), a site of about 8,000 burial mounds immediately upland of the study area. The interviewees established a clear connection between the Kaipu`uelelu burial ground across the street and the study area, with a variety of relationships between the upland area and the coastline established. These include the feeding of the kupuna trees and fishing grounds of Pu`ilima from ancestors' bodies and spirits, leina for these ancestors, and kinolau-based communication from ancestors (e.g. `opihi ko`ele). The many kaona associated with the place names of Kalaehiamoe, Kaipu`uelelu, Pu`ilima, and Makena suggest a site of great mana, of healing practices, and as a place for ancestors to rest in slumber. 50 Cultural practices within the project area include `aukai and pikai (cleansing and rinsing after burial practices) and gathering and fishing grounds for a variety of species including plants for medicinal uses (ko`oko`olau, `uhaloa, and `6hi`a) and weaving (lauhala), fish (ulua, aholehole, enenue, po`opa`a, moi, menpachi, aweoweo, kole, and pao`o), limu: limu (general) and limu kohu, and invertebrates (`opihi, lobsters, and `a`ama crab). This stretch of coastline is used for `6hi`a-pole based ulua fishing. Howard Konanui spoke of brackish pools where families from Mokuhulu would wash and dry clothes. 2. The extent to which those resources, including traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights, will be affected or impaired by the proposed action The proposed project may negatively affect cultural resources and practices including destruction of a storied gravesite, diminishing fishing and cultural access (and resource health), and altering one of the few remaining ancestral stretches of coastline in Kaimu. Of immediate concern is the harm that has already been done to: • the historic coastal trail that connects the study area to the neighboring `a`a coast to the east and to upland Mokuhulu, • to agricultural and habitation mound, SHIP 50-10-63-18525, and • the ancestral milo and noni grove that was on the property. Concerns include the impact of increased human waste into the porous lava rock of the study area through the proposed septic system(s) into groundwater and marine gathering grounds that lineal descendants depend on. 3. What feasible action, if any, could be taken to reasonably protect Native Hawaiian rights Interviewees recommended the following actions to protect Native Hawaiian rights: • The project area should not be developed due to the spiritual, religious, natural, and cultural sensitivities of the area. • Do not disturb this coastline, including the coastal forest groves on the project parcel, as there are few remnants of the ancestral coastline like this in Kalapana due to the lava histories. • Clear acknowledgement that this project area is home to a multitude of culturally significant gathering rights and religious practices. • Re -zoning / re-establishment of the area to conservation zoning to ensure protection of this coast. • Archaeological sites (e.g. historic residential) have already been disturbed by land clearing and there is the possibility for further destruction if development proceeds. • Identify the burial location of Makap6 Kaho`okaulana. • Given the myriad of cultural practices tied to the project area, maintaining cultural access is of critical importance. Gates should be removed. • Engagement with the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, particularly in regards to harm caused to the coastal trail. • Have open and transparent conversations with community members and follow all recommendations that are shared. 51 Summary of Ka Pa`akai Analysis There is a rich suite of cultural, historical, and natural resources in which traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the project area. These include: • four Sites of Historic and Indigenous Preservation (SHIP) within the current study area (Spear 1992). These sites include SHIP 50-10-63-18525 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SHIP 50-10-63-18526 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SHIP 50-10-62-18527 (historic boundary wall), SHIP 50-10-62-18528 (a modified lava tube). • the Kaipu`uelelu Cemetery (SHIP 50-10-63-02547), a site of about 8,000 burial mounds immediately upland of the study area • the connection between the Kaipu`uelelu burial ground across the street and the study area, including the feeding of the kupuna trees and fishing grounds of Pu`ilima from ancestors' bodies and spirits, leina for these ancestors, and kinolau- based communication from ancestors (e.g. `opihi ko`ele) • storied sites including Kalaehiamoe, Kaipu`uelelu, Pu`ilima, and Makena suggest a site of great mana, of healing practices, and as a place for ancestors to rest in slumber. • cultural practices including: o `aukai and p-i{ai (cleansing and rinsing after burial practices), o gathering and fishing grounds for a variety of species including plants for medicinal uses (ko`oko`olau, `uhaloa, and `ohi`a) and weaving (lauhala), fish (ulua, aholehole, enenue, po`opa`a, moi, menpachi, aweoweo, kole, and pao`o), limu: limu (general) and limu kohu, and invertebrates (`opihi, lobsters, and `a`ama crab, o `6hi`a-pole based ulua fishing. These resources, including traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights, will be affected or impaired by the proposed action in these ways: • potential for destruction of a storied gravesite, • diminishing fishing and cultural access (and resource health), • altering one of the few remaining ancestral stretches of coastline in Kaimu, • destruction of the historic coastal trail that connects the study area to the neighboring `a`a coast to the east and to upland Mokuhulu, • destruction of other SHIP sites on the parcel in addition to the already destroyed agricultural and habitation mound, SHIP 50-10-63-18525, • continued harm to the ancestral milo and noni grove on the property, • and increased human waste into porous lava rock of the study area through the proposed septic system(s) into groundwater and marine gathering grounds that lineal descendants depend on. Feasible actions that can be taken to reasonably protect Native Hawaiian gathering and spiritual rights include: this parcel should not be developed due to the spiritual, religious, natural, and cultural sensitivities of the area, the ancestral coastal forest groves should not be disturbed, the parcel should be re -zoned to conservation, SHIP -registered archaeological sites should not be harmed, the burial location of Makapo Kaho`okaulana should be identified, gates should be removed to re -affirm cultural access, the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation should be engaged, and transparent conversations should be held with lineal descendants. 52 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Hawaiian families of Kaimu were (and continue to be) sustained by susbsistence-based livelihoods of fishing, gathering, and growing. There are many place names that hold meaning for Kaimu. Closest to the study area is the place name, Kalaehiamoe, the promontory, place of sleep or rest, potentially inidcating the link of the resting place of the ancestors interred at Kaipuuelelu to the shoreline. Hale`ili was identified as the name of the pebble beach to the east of Kaimu Bay that fronts the study area. Kumaka`ula Heiau, located within 1 lrn of the study area is a spiritual site that remains following the lava flow that inundated Kaimu Bay. Mokuhulu, upland of the study area, is the home to the Hawaiian families who maintain kuleana, responsibility to the fishing and burial grounds of Pu`ilima, the name used by Hawaiian families for the study area. Traditional land use in the area included `uala and `ulu cultivation in coastal areas, kalo in coastal and upland plots rich canoe -based and in -shore fishing of `opelu, nenue, po`opa`a, moi, and ulua. Gathering of limu and invertebrates such as `opihi and ha`uke`ulce supplemented poi and fish -based diets. Following the Mahele land division and distribution act of 1848, no land commission awards (LCAs) were filed in Kaimu— given its designation as crown lands. Hawaiian tenants continued to reside there through 1890. The Land Act of 1895 specified that government lands in rural areas be surveyed and granted (with cash payments) as homesteads to both Hawaiian and non -Hawaiian individuals to encourage rural farming. In Kaimu two areas were opened for homesteading, house lots at the shore of Kaimu Bay and agricultural lots in upland Ki`ula and Mokuhulu. Historic maps reveal the enduring rural character of Kaimu through the loth century, the presence of the Kaipuuelelu Cemetery site immediately upland of the study area, and the land grant (Gr. 8004) made to C.H. Will. Previous archaeological surveys revealed four Sites of Historic and Indigenous Preservation (SHIP) within the current study area (Spear 1992). These sites include SHIP 50-10-63- 18525 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SHIP 50-10-63-18526 (an agricultural and habitation mound), SHIP 50-10-62-18527 (historic boundary wall), SHIP 50-10-62-18528 (a modified lava tube). Three of these sites, SHIP 50-10-63--18526,-18527, and -18528 were confirmed during the archaeological field inspection completed of the study area by Clark 2024. SHIP 50-10-63-18525 could not be re -located (Clark 2024). Other archaeological sites located within 1 kin of the study area include the Kumaka`ula Heiau to the west, the Star of the Sea Church (SHIP 50-10-63-07380) to the north, and the Kaipuuelelu Cemetery (SHIP 50-10-63-02547), a site of about 8,000 burial mounds immediately upland of the study area. The interviewees described rich cultural practices, archaeological sites, and the vibrant landscape of mo`olelo in the surrounding area. They shared the rich connection between Mokuhulu and the Pu`ilima study area. Each of the interviewees recalls being taken by kupuna to engage in fishing and/or marine provisioning practices along the oceanfront of the project area and surrounding coastline. Traditional burial practices for iwi kupuna at Kaipuuelelu remain within living memory and in continued practice today. Many treasured memories of this area and time spent there with their elders and ancestors were shared by the interviewees. The interviewees established a clear connection between the Kaipuuelelu burial ground across the street and the study area, with a variety of relationships between the upland area and the coastline established. These include the feeding of the kupuna trees and fishing grounds of Pu`ilima from ancestors' bodies and spirits, leina for these ancestors, and kinolau-based communication from ancestors (e.g. `opihi ko`ele). The many kaona associated with the place names of Kalaehiamoe, Kaipuuelelu, Pu`ilima, and Makena suggest a site of great mana, of healing practices, and as a place for ancestors to rest in slumber. 53 Cultural Resources, Practices, and Beliefs Identified The interviewees identified a rich myriad of natural resources, cultural practices, archaeological sites, and vibrant landscape of mo`olelo and place names. Cultural practices within the project area include `aukai and pikai (cleansing and rinsing after burial practices) and gathering and fishing grounds for a variety of species including plants for medicinal uses (ko`oko`olau, `uhaloa, and `6hi`a) and weaving (lauhala), fish (ulua, aholehole, enenue, po`opa`a, moi, menpachi, aweoweo, kole, and pao`o), limu: limu (general) and limu kohu, and invertebrates (`opihi, lobsters, and `a`ama crab). This stretch of coastline is used for `6hi`a-pole based ulua fishing. Howard Konanui spoke of brackish pools where families from Mokuhulu would wash and dry clothes. The most archaeologically significant site near the project area includes the Kaipu`uelelu Cemetery, immediately upland of the proj ect area. The interviewees recall many ancestors who are buried there, including family that they have laid to rest there. Potential Effects of the Proposed Project The proposed project may negatively affect cultural resources and practices including destruction of a storied gravesite, diminishing fishing and cultural access, and altering one of the few remaining ancestral stretches of coastline in Kaimu. Of immediate concern is the harm that has already been done to the historic coastal trail that connects the study area to the neighboring `a`a coast to the east and to upland Mokuhulu and to agricultural and habitation mound, SHIP 50-10-63-18525. Concerns include gating of the property (already discouraging public access), introduction of invasive species, destruction of the ancestral milo and noni grove that was on the property, and disrespect to the many Hawaiian ancestors buried in immediately surrounding lands. Concerns include the impact of increased human waste into the porous lava rock of the study area through the proposed septic system(s) into groundwater and marine gathering grounds that lineal descendants depend on. Historic sites that have and may be affected include SHIP 50-10-63-18525,-18526,-18527, and - 18528. Confidential Information Withheld During the course of researching the present report and conducting the ethnographic survey program, no information was withheld in confidentiality. Conflicting Information No conflicting information was obvious in analyzing the ethnographic interviews. On the contrary, a number of themes were repeated and information was generally confirmed by independent sources. Recommendations/Mitigations Recommendations and mitigations suggested by the interviewees include the following: • The project area should not be developed due to the spiritual, religious, natural, and cultural sensitivities of the area. • Do not disturb this coastline, including the coastal forest groves on the project parcel, as there are few remnants of the ancestral coastline like this in Kalapana due to the lava histories. • Clear acknowledgement that this project area is home to a multitude of culturally significant gathering rights and religious practices. 54 • Re -zoning / re-establishment of the area to conservation zoning to ensure protection of this coast. • Archaeological sites (e.g. historic residential) have already been disturbed by land clearing and there is the possibility for further destruction if development proceeds. These sites are still significant to lineal descendants. • Identify the burial location of Makapo Kaho`okaulana. • Given the myriad of cultural practices tied to the project area, maintaining cultural access is of critical importance. Gates should be removed. • If the parcel is built upon it needs to be something beautiful. • Engagement with the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, particularly in regards to harm caused to the coastal trail. • Have open and transparent conversations with community members and follow all recommendations that are shared. 55 56 2 GLOSSARY 3 `a`a Rough, stony lava. Surface appearance is sharp and broken. 4 `a`ama The edible crab Grapsus grapsus tenuierustatus. `A`ama also refers to relaxing or 5 spreading, as in the fingers, as `a`ama crabs were sacrificed so the gods would relax 6 and accede to a request. 7 `aholehole Young stage of the Hawaiian flagtail fish. 8 ahupua`a Traditional Hawaiian land division usually extending from the uplands to the sea. 9 `Nna Land. 10 akua God, goddess, spirit, ghost, devil, image. 11 ON Chief, chiefess, monarch. 12 aloha Love, affection, compassion, sympathy, kindness, greeting. 13 `ama`uma`u The young `ama`u fern, or many `ama`u ferns. 14 aniani Mirror, glass. 15 `aukai To travel or swim in the sea. 16 `awa The shrub Piper methysticum, or kava, the root of which was used as a ceremonial 17 drink throughout the Pacific. 18 `aweoweo Various Hawaiian species of fish Priacanthus; a sugar cane named after the fish; a 19 type of seaweed. 20 enenue The chub, rudder, or pilot fish (Kyphosus bigibbus, K. migiensis). 21 halau Meeting house for hula instruction or long house for canoes. 22 hapu`u Cibotium splendens, a fern endemic to Hawaii; a forest fern to 5 in high. 23 ha`uke`uke The sea urchin Colobocentrotus atratus, or helmet urchin, whose teeth were used 24 in Hawaiian medicine. 25 We Octopus. 26 heiau Place of worship and ritual in traditional Hawaii. 27 hiapo First born child, eldest. 28 holoholo To go out or go for a walk or ride. 29 hula The hula (traditional Hawaiian dance), a hula dancer; to dance the hula. 30 hula ku`i Any interpretive hula, so called since the days of Kalakaua. 31 `ie`ie The vine Freycinetia arborea, an endemic, woody branching climber hat grows at 32 altitudes of 300-600 in. In ancient Hawaii, vines were considered sacred and used in 33 basketry and for ceremonial purposes. 34 `ike To see, know, feel; knowledge, awareness, understanding. 35 ipu General name for a vessel or container. Also the bottle gourd Lagenaria siceraria 36 or L. m1garis, which was used traditionally for containers, hula instruments, and 37 for medicine. 38 iwi Bone. 57 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 iwi kupuna Ancestral remains; iwi kupuna is plural. kahakai Beach, seashore, coast. kahu Honored attendant, guardian, nurse, keeper, administrator, pastor. kala The surgeonfish or unicorn fish, Teuthidae. kalo The Polynesian -introduced Colocasia esculenta, or taro, the staple of the traditional Hawaiian diet. kama`aina Native-born. kanaka Human, person, man, Hawaiian. kanaka maoli A person of pure Hawaiian blood. Kanaka `Oiwi Native Hawaiian. kaona Hidden meaning in poetry, or concealed reference to a person, place, or thing. kapa, tapa Tapa cloth. kaukau Relatively recent tenn for food. kaula`i To hang up, dry in the sun. kinolau Physical forms or manifestations. 54 Mpuka A change in form, such as an area of vegetation in a lava bed. 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 ko`a Fishing shrine. koali, kowali Vines of the morning glory Ipomoea spp., used traditionally to make swings and nets. ko`ele Limpet: C. talcosa (`opihi ko`ele). kole The Ctenochaetus strigosus, or surgeonfish. konohiki The overseer of an ahupua`a ranked below a chief, land or fishing rights under control of the konohiki; such rights are sometimes called konohiki rights. ko`oko`olau Bidens spp., refers to all species. Certain varieties used medicinally. kopekope To till, rake the earth. kou The flowering tree, Cordia subcordata, either native to Hawaii or introduced by Polynesians. ku`i To pound or beat, as in taro. kuleana Right, title, property, portion, responsibility, jurisdiction, authority, interest, claim, ownership. kukui The candlenut tree, or Aleurites moluccana, the nuts of which were eaten as a relish and used for lamp fuel in traditional times. kumu Teacher. kumu hula Hula teacher/master. kupali`i Native plant, Peperomia tetraphylla. kupuna Grandparent, ancestor; kupuna is the plural form. WJ 75 lae 76 lauhala 77 78 lawai`a 79 leina 80 81 lele 82 83 limu 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 limu kala limu kohu maha`oi Mahele maile makai maka`ainana Mato mana`o mete menpachi Milo Moe moi MWI moku mokupuni mo`olelo mete niu noho noni Headland. Leaf of the hala, or pandanus tree (Pandanus odoratissimus), used for matting and basketry. Fisherman; to catch fish. To leap or spring. Leina ka `uhane or leina a ke akua were places where spirits leapt into the nether world. A detached part or lot of land belonging to one `ili, but located in another `ili; sacrificial altar or stand. Refers to all sea plants, such as algae and edible seaweed. The long, brown seaweed Sargassum echinocarpum, edible but not often eaten raw because of toughness. Limu kala was used traditionally in ceremonies for forgiveness or to heal sickness. The prized edible seaweed Asparagopsis taxiformis. Bold, rude, forward, nosy. The 1848 division of land. Alyxia olivaeformis, a fragrant native shrub used for twining. Toward the sea. Common people, or populace; translates to "people that attend the land." Male's loincloth. Thoughts, opinions, ideas. Song, chant, or poem. The squirrelfish Holocentridae. The tree Thespesia populnea, used traditionally for dye, medicine, oil, gum and for making calabashes. To sleep, lie down, to prostrate oneself. The threadfish Polydach4us sexfilis, a highly prized food item. King. District, island. Island. A story, myth, history, tradition, legend, or record. Curious, inquisitive; to keep asking questions. The Polynesian -introduced tree Cocos nucifera, or coconut. To live, reside; seat, chair, bench. Morinda citrifolia, the Indian mulberry, a tree or shrub known for its medicinal value in traditional Hawaii. `ohana Family. `6helo Vaccinium reticulatum, a native shrub with small edible berries. Found in higher altitudes. f.UE 113 `6helo papa Fragaria chiloensis ssp. sandwicensis, a native white strawberry plant. 114 `6hi`a lehua The native tree Metrosideros polyinorpha, the wood of which was utilized for 115 carving images, as temple posts and palisades, for canoe spreaders and gunwales, 116 and in musical instruments. 117 `61eto Speech, language, word; to speak, to tell. 118 `61eto no`eau Proverb, wise saying, traditional saying. 119 oli Chant. 120 `61ohe Spilled fighter, competitor of cultural shills. 121 `6pae`ula Red shrimp. 122 `6pelu Mackerel scarf (Decapterus pinnulatus and D. maruadsi). 123 `opihi Limpets, four types of which are endemic to Hawaii: Cellana exarata (`opihi 124 makaiauli), C. sandwicensis (`opihi alinalina), C. talcosa (`opihi ko`ele), and C. 125 melanostorna (no Hawaiian name). `Opihi are a prized food in Hawaii and 126 considered a rare treat today. 127 pahoehoe Smooth lava; surface unbroken. 128 pai`ea An edible crab, found where the `a`ama is found. 129 pa`ina A party or small celebration and dinner. 130 pa`iku`i`ai The pounding of taro for poi. 131 pali Cliff, steep hill. 132 pikai To sprinkle with salt water for purification or to remove kapu. 133 pili A native grass, Heteropogon contortus. 134 p6 Night, darkness, the realm of gods. 135 p6haku Rock, stone. 136 p6haku ku`Pai Stone tool used to pound poi. 137 poi A staple of traditional Hawaii, made of cooked and pounded taro mixed with water 138 to form a paste. 139 po`opa`a Hawkfish (Cirrhites pinnulatus) 140 pnpn General name for marine and land shells. 141 pu`u Hill, peak, mound, protuberance. 142 `uhaloa The weed Waltheria indica mr. americana, used medicinally. 143 `ulu The Polynesian -introduced tree Artocarpus altilis, or breadfruit. 144 ulua An adult of various Carangid fishes. 145 ta`ape The bluestripe snapper Lu Janus kasn ira that lives in waters 40-300 feet deep or 146 more. 147 tutu Grandmother or grandfather. 148 wa`a Canoe, paddlers. 149 wahi Place, location. 60 150 wahine Woman, wife; femininity. Wahine is the plural. 151 152 61 153 REFERENCES 154 Aiona, K. 155 2003 Ike Kuuna Limu: Learning About Hawaii's Limu. University of Hawaii Manoa. Thesis. 156 Akana, C.L. 157 2015 Hinau ka Ua. Kamehameha Press, Honolulu. 158 Baldwin 159 1892a Hawaiian Governement Survey, Kalapana and Vicinity. Map and Survey. Accessed via 160 DAGS database. 161 Baldwin 162 1892b Hawaiian Governement Survey, Kalapana and Vicinity (version 2). Map and Survey. 163 Accessed via DAGS database. 164 Beckwith, M. 165 1970 Hawaiian Mythology. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. 166 Bevacqua, R.F. and T.S. Dye 167 1972 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Proposed Kapoho-Kalapana Highway, District of 168 Puna, Island ofHawaii. Dept. of Anthropology, Bishop Museum, Honolulu, HI. 169 Biegler, M. and McGuire, G. 170 2024 Limu ofPu `ilima. Unpublished Data. Pacific Internship Programs for Exploring Science. 171 Carr, M.W. and N. Kekaula 172 2013 Hali `a Aloha no Kalapana: Fond Memories of Kalapana. CreateSpace Independent 173 Publishing Platform. 174 Clark, J.R.K. 175 2024 Kaimu Cove LLC Special Management Area Use Permit Application January 2024 176 Archaeological Field Inspection and Cultural Consultation. County of Hawaii Planning 177 Department, Hilo, HI. 178 Clark, M. 179 2002 Hawai `i Place Names Shores Beaches, and Surf Sites. University of Hawaii Press, 180 Honolulu. 181 Coan, T. 182 1882 Life in Hawaii: An Autobiographic Sketch of Mission Li_ fe and Labors, 1835-1881. ADF, 183 Randolph. 184 DeSilva, K. 185 1997 He Aloha Moku o Keawe: A Collection of Songs, far Hawaii Island, Island o_ f Keawe. 186 Kailua, HI. 187 Dutton, C.E. 188 1884 Hawaiian Volcanoes. USGS. 189 Emerson, N.B. 190 1915 Pele and Hiiaka; A Myth From Hawaii. Honolulu Star -Bulletin Limited. 191 Ellis, W. 192 1823 A Narrative of a Tour Through Hawaii. Hawaiian Gazette Co., Ltd., Honolulu, HI. 193 Fornander, A. 62 194 1996 Ancient History of the Hawaiian People to the Times of Kamehameha L Mutual 195 Publishing, Co. 196 Galuteria, P. 197 1993 Auhea `O Ka Lani in Lunalilo. Kamehameha Publishing, Honolulu, Hawaii. 198 Handy, E.S., E.G. Handy, and M.K. Pukui 199 1991 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Revised Edition. 200 Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 23, Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. 201 Hudson, A.E. 202 1932 Archaeology of East Hawaii. ms in Bishop Museum Archives. Honolulu. 203 James, V. 204 1995 Ancient Sites of Hawai `i: A Guide to Hawaiian Archaeological Places on the Big Island. 205 Mutual Publishing, Honolulu. 206 Jarman, M.C. and R.R. Verchick 207 2003 "Beyond the `Courts of the Conqueror': Balancing Private and Cultural Property Rights 208 under Hawaii Law." The Scholar 5(2) pp. 201-216. 209 https://commons.stmarytx.edu/thescholar/vol5/iss2/5 210 Ka Hoku o Hawaii 211 1914-1916 The Heart Stirring Story ofKa-Miki. Papakilo Database, Honolulu. 212 Ka Hoku o Hawaii 213 1938, 1940 Limu in Kalapana Search Articles. Papakilo Database, Honolulu. 214 Kamakau, S.M. 215 1961 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. Kamehameha Publishing, Honolulu. 216 Keliihoomalu, G. 217 2008 Aloha Kaimu. Kaimu Records, Kalapana. 218 Keliihoomalu, H. and H. Nd'ope. 219 N.D. Wokuhulu. Kaimu Records, Kalapana. 220 Langlas, C. and kupuna 221 2016 Under the Volcano: The People of Kalapana, 1823 to 2020. Pili Productinos, Hilo, 222 Hawaii. 223 Lyman, C.S. 224 1927 Around the Horn to the Sandwich Islands and California, 1845-1850: Being a Personal 225 Record Kept by Chester S. Lyman. Ayer Company Pub. 226 MacDonald, G.A., A.T. Abbott, and F.L. Peterson 227 1983 Volcanoes in the Sea the Geology of Hawai `i. Second Edition. University of Hawaii Press, 228 Honolulu. 229 Maly, K. 230 1998 Puna, Ka Aina i ka Hikina a ka Ld A Cultural Assessment Study —Archival and 231 Historical Documentary Research and Oral History Interviews. Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo. 232 Maxar 233 2022 Satellite Imagery Basemap. Accessed via QGIS. 234 McGuire, G. 235 2023 Indigenous Ecology of Kalapana. University of Hawaii Manoa. Dissertation. 236 Moffat, R. M. and G. L. Fitzpatrick 63 237 1995 Palapala `uina: Surveying the MAHELE. Editions Limited. Honolulu. 238 National Park Service (NPS) 239 1977 National Register of Historic Places, NPS Form 10-900, Star of the Sea Painted Church, 240 Hawaii County. United States Department of the Interior. 241 Nogelmeier, M.P. 242 2006 "Commentary." The Epic Tale o_ f Hi `iakaikapoliopele. Awaiaulu: Hawaiian Literature 243 Project, Honolulu. 244 Price, J.P., Jacobi, J.D., Gon, S.M., Matsuwaki, D., Merhoff, L., Wagner, W., Lucas, M., and 245 Rowe, B. 246 2012 Mapping plant species ranges in the Hawaiian Isalnds developing a methodology and 247 associated GIS layers. USGS. https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1192/of20l2-1192_text.pdf 248 Pukui, M.K. 249 1983 `Olelo No `eau: Hawaiian Proverbs and Poetical Sayings. Bishop Museum Press, 250 Honolulu. 251 Pukui, M.K. and S.H. Elbert 252 1986 Hawaiian Dictionary. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. 253 Pukui, M.K., S.H. Elbert, and E.T. Mookini. 254 1974 Place Names of Hawaii. University Press of Hawaii, Honolulu. 255 Rosendahl, P.H. 256 1983 Preliininary Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey FIL-AMPapaya Cooperative, 257 Kaimu-MakenaHomesteads, Puna, Hawaii(TMK.•3-1-2-06.•7,16,18,19,20,21,33,73). Paul 258 Rosendahl, PhD, Inc. Hilo, HI. 259 Spear, R.L. 260 1992 An Inventory Level Survey of the Robinson Property Puna District, Island of Hawai `i 261 (TMK.•I-2-18:1). Scientific Consultant Services. Kaneohe, HI. 262 State of Hawaii 263 1963 TMK Map, Zone 1 Sec 2 Plat 004. Por. Kaimu Village, Puna, Hawaii. 264 Department of Finance, Property Assessment Division, State of Hawaii. 265 Ulukau Inoa `Aina Hawaii 266 n.d. Kaimu Place Names. Accessed January 2025. 267 United States Department of Agriculture 268 1965 Aerial image of Kaimu. 269 United States Geological Survey 270 1924 USGS Topographic Map. 271 United States Geological Survey 272 2021 USGS substrate map (study area) Shapefile. 273 Waihona `Aina 274 n.d. https://www.waihona.com/previewDoc.asp?type=RP&docId=72066. Accessed September 275 2025. 276 Wall, W.A. 277 1901 Hawaii Territory Survey Homestead Map Kaimu Makena Section Puna, Hawaii. Map 278 Accessed through DAGS database. 279 Wall, W.A. 64 280 1922 Hawaii Territory Survey Homestead Map Kaimu Makena Section Puna, Hawaii. Map 281 Accessed through DAGS database. 282 Westervelt, W.D. 283 1963 Hawaiian Legends of Volcanoes. Mint Editions. 284 285 65 286 66 287 288 289 290 291 292 APPENDIX A: AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE 67 293 294 Agreement to Participate in the Cultural Impact Assessment and Ka Pa`akai Analysis for 295 Pu`ilima, Kaimu 296 Gina McGuire, PhD, Ethnographer 297 You are invited to participate in a Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) and Ka Pa`akai Analysis on 298 behalf of Pu`ilima, Kaimu, Puna Moku, Hawaii Island (herein referred to as "the Project"). The 299 Assessment is being conducted by Gina McGuire, PhD, on behalf of the `ohana of Mokuhulu and 300 Kalapana. The ethnographer will explain the purpose of the Assessment, the procedures that will be 301 followed, and the potential benefits and risks of participating. A brief description of the Assessment 302 is written below. Feel free to ask the ethnographer questions if the procedures need further 303 clarification. If you decide to participate, please sign the attached Consent Form. A copy of this form 304 will be provided for you to keep. 305 Description of the Project 306 This CIA and Ka Pa`akai Analysis is being conducted to collect information about the project area 307 in Kaimu Ahupua`a, through interviews with individuals who are knowledgeable about this area, 308 and/or about information including (but not limited to) cultural practices and beliefs, mo`olelo, mele, 309 or oli associated with this area. The goal of this Assessment is to identify and understand the 310 importance of any traditional Hawaiian and/or historic cultural resources, or traditional cultural 311 practices within the project area. This Assessment will also attempt to identify any effects that the 312 proposed development may have on cultural resources present, or once present within the project 313 area. 314 Procedures 315 After agreeing to participate in the Assessment and signing the Consent Form, the ethnographer will 316 digitally record your interview and it may be transcribed in part or in full. The transcript may be sent 317 to you for editing and final approval. Data from the interview will be used as part of the ethno- 318 historical report for this Undertaking and transcripts may be included in part or in full as an appendix 319 to the report. The ethnographer may take notes and photographs and ask you to spell out names or 320 unfamiliar words. 321 Discomforts and Risks 322 Possible risks and/or discomforts resulting from participation in this Assessment may include, but 323 are not limited to the following: being interviewed and recorded; having to speak loudly for the 324 recorder; providing information for reports which may be used in the future as a public reference; 325 your uncompensated dedication of time; possible misunderstanding in the transcribing of 326 information; loss of privacy; and worry that your comments may not be understood in the same way 327 you understand them. It is not possible to identify all potential risks, although reasonable safeguards 328 have been taken to minimize them. 329 Benefits 330 This Assessment will give you the opportunity to express your thoughts and opinions and share your 331 knowledge, which will be considered, shared, and documented for future generations. Your sharing 332 of knowledge may be instrumental in the preservation of cultural resources, practices, and 333 information. 334 69 335 Confidentiality 336 Your rights of privacy, confidentiality and/or anonymity will be protected upon request. You may 337 request, for example, that your name and/or sex not be mentioned in the Assessment material, such 338 as in written notes, on tape, and in reports; or you may request that some of the information you 339 provide remain off-the-record and not be recorded in any way. To ensure protection of your privacy, 340 confidentiality and/or anonymity, you should immediately inform the ethnographer of your requests. 341 The ethnographer will ask you to specify the method of protection and note it on the attached Consent 342 Form. 343 Refusal/Withdrawal 344 At any time during the interview process, you may choose to not participate any further and ask 345 ethnographer for the tape and/or notes. If the transcription of your interview is to be included in the 346 report, you will be given an opportunity to review your transcript, and to revise or delete any part of 347 the interview. 348 349 350 351 352 70 353 354 355 356 357 358 APPENDIX B: CONSENT FORM 71 359 72 360 Consent Form 361 I, , am a participant in the Cultural Impact Assessment (Assessment) 362 and Ka Pa`akai Analysis on behalf of Pu`ilima, Kaimu (herein referred to as "the project"). I 363 understand that the purpose of the Assessment is to conduct oral history interviews with individuals 364 knowledgeable about the project area and the surrounding ahupua`a in an effort to identify and 365 protect traditional cultural practices and cultural resources. 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 I understand that Gina McGuire and `ohana o Kanmu will retain the product of my participation (digital recording, transcripts of interviews, etc.) as part of their permanent collection and that these materials will only be used for scholarly, educational, and/or land management purposes. I hereby grant Gina McGuire the right to use the property that is the product of my participation (e.g., my interview, written materials, and any other materials I provide) for the Assessment as stated above. By giving permission, I understand that I do not give up any copyright or performance rights that I may hold. I also grant to Gina McGuire my consent for any photographs provided by me or taken of me in the course of my participation in the Assessment to be used, published, and copied by Gina McGuire and its assignees in any medium for purposes of the Assessment. I agree that Gina McGuire may use my name, photographic image, biographical information, statements, and voice reproduction for this Assessment without further approval on my part. If transcriptions are to be included in the report, I understand that I will have the opportunity to review and edit my transcripts to ensure that they accurately depict what I meant to convey. I understand I have the power to delete any information I deem too sensitive and/or too personal for publication from the transcript. I also understand that if I do not return the revised transcripts after two weeks from the date of receipt, my signature below will indicate my release of information for the draft Assessment, although I will still have the opportunity to make revisions during the draft review process. I further understand that not giving my consent to any portion of the above listed items will not prevent my mana`o being included in the Assessment. For example, I may decline Gina McGuire or their client permission to use my photographic image or biographical information but by signing this Consent Form, still grant my permission for my mana`o to be included in the text of the Assessment. By signing this consent form, I am acknowledging that I have been informed about the purpose of this Assessment, the procedure, how the data will be gathered, and how the data will be used. I understand that my participation is strictly voluntary, and that I may withdraw from participation at any time without consequence. Interviewee Signature Print Name Phone Address Date Thank you for participating in this valuable study. 73 404 405 406 407 408 409 APPENDIX C: TRANSCRIPT RELEASE FORM 74 410 75 411 Transcript Release 412 I, , am a participant in the Cultural Impact Assessment and Ka Pa`akai 413 Analysis on behalf of Pu`ilima, Kaimu (herein referred to as "the project") and was interviewed for the 414 Assessment. I have reviewed the transcripts of the interview and agree that the transcript is complete and 415 accurate except for those matters delineated below under the heading "CLARIFICATION, 416 CORRECTIONS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS." 417 1 agree that Gina McGuire, may use and release my identity, biographical information, and other interview 418 information, for the purpose of including such information in a report to be made public, subject to my 419 specific objections, to release as set forth below under the heading "OBJECTIONS TO RELEASE OF 420 INTERVIEW MATERIALS." 421 422 423 CLARIFICATION, CORRECTIONS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS: 424 425 426 427 428 OBJECTIONS TO RELEASE OF INTERVIEW MATERIALS: 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 Interviewee Signature Print Name Phone 442 443 Address Date 444 Thank you for participating in this valuable study. 445 446 76 447 448 77 449 450 451 452 453 454 APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW WITH MORETTA KANANI BALAI 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 wi 472 79 473 TALKING STORY WITH 474 MORETTA KANANI BALAI (MB) 475 Oral History for Pu`ilima, Kaimu by Gina McGuire (GM) 476 January 17, 2025 477 478 GM: If you can start with your name and `ohana background. 479 MB: My name is Moretta Balai. Middle name is Gokusana Kananioku`uhome. And I was born, and 480 I was adopted. And uh, my mom is, her name, my grandmother, is Elsie Leimanu Kealoha 481 Naungayan. So we get Filipino -Hawaiian but she more pure Hawaiian. Grandma was very 482 instrumental in our family. She was the one that, she was the glue more like, keep us all together, 483 take us... Actually she was a single mom. And, my grandfather, Lodigario Naungayan, he from, 484 Ilocosaur, Philipines. And they used to live in Opihikao. And so did my grandma. In a Filipino 485 plantation camp. You know, Opihikao used to be called Kaweleao Plantation Camp. You know, 486 Opihikao. And, anyway, they were separate. He lived in Kona and she lived over her in Puna side. 487 Born and raised Kalapana. And, by Kaimu, actually. The house was, was in the bay area. And not 488 too far from Kaimu Bay, Kalapana. And, that was, the family, I guess that was, I guess you could 489 call it the family inheritance. Back then, it was from the mountain to the sea. That was the ahupua`a 490 back then. And they lived, actually, not only in the bay, they lived further up, Mokuhulu. And if you 491 go further up to, before Mokuhulu, just coming down, coming into Kalapana. Before you hit the hill. 492 But you can see, yeah, the view, from the hill on the highway? Actually, it's from there. There was 493 a, there is a place, actually two place, right and left, my grandma's, I think they are, the youngest 494 brother or maybe the middle of her siblings passed away so back then, they bury their loved ones 495 right in, right in their, right over there in the yard actually, their backyard. So, right in there, their 496 residence. So, and I think, my grandma's brother's grave is still there even though it, that parcel was 497 bought by her sister's in laws. The Hauanios. They live in Kalapana too. But they have children too. 498 So. 499 GM: Did that lot get covered by lava? 500 MB: Still there. Yeah. Even the, the area where they live is still there but they use it as a, I think, 501 was orchid, the family pay lease over there. So they made that area, they just bulldoze around my 502 great great grand uncle's grave. So they never push the tree and they never push his grave. So it's 503 still there. 504 GM: That's good. 505 MB: So, Kalapana area. When you drive and you come down to the end of the, see this (pointing at 506 map). This is the inside of Kalapana, where there's the Catholic church. Used to have, if you can see 507 the awa bar and took, I don't know how long, the lava acreage took behind Uncle Robert's place, is 508 all covered with lava. But back then, it's how used to look like (showing photos). 1823, 1850s. And 509 here you can see the Catholic Church, still remain. Back in the 80s used to be. Remains right there. 510 Yeah. And then around here (points), that you cannot see, had big, huge ponds shallow enough for 511 us kids swim in. Back in the 80s. And um, I wanted to show you that. But my, my grandma, come 512 from Kalapana. Born and raised Kalapana. I no like get off the subject but. Think she was 10 years 513 old, because her dad, the Kealoha, Gabriel Luka Kealoha, that was her daddy, and her grandmother, 5t4 Tutu Kauanoe, is actually, she's, her last name was hard to figure out because the spelling and 5t5 everything on the death certificate, people those days, the way they write and stuff, or even the 5t6 informant that tell them, you know? And then they write `em down. It's so different. But when I 5 t 7 look back on the marriage certificates and stuff, we find out that it's actually Aiona. But going back 5 t 8 to my grandma's dad living in Kalapana. They used to live in, after the tidal wave in Kalapana, Tutu 519 still remained over there but they moved to Ola`a in Mountain View. MB: Especially Saint Theresa 520 Church, they hold a lot of.. like I said, a tidal wave back then. Kalapana Church. This church 521 (points). Had a lot of records, baptismal records, things like that. So whatever they when salvage, 522 when move to Saint Theresa. 523 [Kanani and Gina talk about the family that moved to Ola`a.] 524 MB: My grandma's father's brother, Bonaventura, he lived on the upside where I told you. 525 GM: Mokuhulu? 526 MB: Above Mokuhulu but on the opposite side. And the Kamanus live over there on that side too. 527 And, ok, so he live on that side, on the right side when you coming down in a two story house over 528 there. My Uncle Bonaventura. And I remember, for some reason, I don't know why, as young as I 529 was, I remember the funeral. I was telling my grandma the story. And she says, yeah, we had couple 530 funerals inside that house. And now, maybe I was two or three, she said, "how the hell can you 531 remember that far back? You're too young!" I said, "grandma, I remember, I telling you." 1 532 remember how the person looked like. Because Uncle Bonaventura used to wear cowboy shirt, jeans, 533 and hat. She said, "yeah?" I said, that's what I remember." And who, whose funeral you folks went 534 to? She said, "I don't know, I forget." So, my grandma's tripping out. And she's trying to remember, 535 maybe was her tutu. Yeah, `cause she lived, Tutu Kauanoe, she lived to like, in her 90s. Tutu 536 Kauanoe. She's buried in that cemetery further down where the development is trying to develop. 537 Anyway, she's the only grave over there, are stacked up with stones. And my grandma remembered 538 that when they, when the family get together, they had salt, lauhala mat, tapa ready for wrap her 539 body. And that's how they buried her and then. So that was, Tutu Kauanoe. Was buried over there. 540 But no plaque. Name, nothing. That was passed down to generations, to me, to know that that's Tutu 541 Kauanoe that's buried over there. Maybe not only me, my cousin Leila's side, you know, all passed 542 down already. We all know. And that cemetery over there, my grandma said, "this is the family 543 cemetery. Whoever pass away can bury over here." That's our family cemetery. Oh, and you know, 544 when you little, ok, this is mine, this is mine, I'm gone be buried over there, I'm gonna be buried 545 over here next to my grandma. Used to do that already. 546 Yeah, so, my grandma used to tell us where she wanted to be buried because her, she had, six 547 children. I'm the seventh, she adopted. But, between Aunty Pat and Uncle Clinton, her name was 548 Catherine. And she was, her baby, was thrown up by the babysitters. And my grandma was a hard- 549 working lady so she was working. Never, come home, that's when she found out that her baby was 550 unresponsive and baby had, um, all she could see was bruise, my grandma said. Bruise on her head. 551 So maybe was from a fall. All they told her, all we did was, all was going through her head was, she 552 must have fall. So anyway, that was the reason why her baby Catherine buried there. She was only, 553 grandma said she was only six months. 554 [Conversation continued, Pu`ilima was returned to in follow up conversation]. 555 This portion of the interview with Aunty Kanani took place over the phone as a follow up to the 556 previous conversation on March 3, 2025. 557 558 MB: There was something that was laying down on my, laying on my heart, to call you and let you 559 know if it's ok that I can add to what we were talking about. 560 GM: Yeah, for sure. 81 561 MB: You know the, the, our family grave area. Yeah? The piece across, or the land across, of the 562 cemetery, the road? 563 GM: Yeah 564 MB: It's a well-known spot over there. Also, it, it might have, you know the pali. It's a pali over 565 there. But it's also, my grandma said, Elsie Leimanu Kealoha, married name Naungayan. She said 566 that it was a good kahakai spot. 567 GM: Wait, can you repeat that one more time? I had a truck driving by. 568 MB: Kahakai spot, meaning holoholo spot go pick `opihi, `a`ama crab, and fishing. Especially for 569 certain kind of fish too like black ulua. Or the other kind, you know, the flying fish back in the day. 570 All that kind. But over there is a highly, it's like a landmark to the lawai`a, the people who are 571 fishermens. Especially like my grandma and my grandma's brother, Leila's grandpa, Uncle Gabriel 572 Kealoha. Yeah. Yeah, they're all fishermen. And whether it's fishermen, fishing or kahakai, you 573 know go pick `opihi, `a`ama crab, or even go pick limu. It is not only accessible to them, our family, 574 but when Pohoiki was a ramp, was a fishing.... Pohoiki was a gathering place for fishermen to come 575 with their boat and it was accessible because it had the ramp and everything. But the fishing spot 576 was always Kaimu, Kalapana area. But all along the coast, what was the name that Leila used? 577 GM: Pu`ilima. 578 MB: Yeah. There's a reason why it's named Pu`ilima. And the fishing moons would go fishing over 579 there, it's accessible. `Cause they go and camp for a couple days, especially for nowadays, ulua 580 tournaments and you know all the stuff like that, yeah? That area is the highly, the fishermen who 581 knows, that is a spot. Iconic to the fishermen but also it could also, for people picking `a`ama, that 582 is also an area that my grandma says, that is a good place to pick `opihi and `a`ama crab. Also it has 583 caves. Along that pali get caves. So, never been touched. So all those areas right there cannot be 584 developed. Seriously. Because number one, there's caves on the pali area over there, also there might 585 be people back in the day, our `ohanas back in the day used to probably live there so it's also a 586 residential, a place where, back in the day, they never have roof, wood and stuff, was all pili grass, 587 thatched. Yeah? And rock formation where they can set their house in that area. But those are those 588 areas where... when you came in I talked to you about the, there's a grave in the back... on our 589 cemetery there is probably maybe 8, 9 feet, the length, the width, but it's a big grave. I think this 590 man was either an ali`i or a warrior, but the headstone is huge, the back of, in the back of, I think 591 was Uncle Waiau's grave. There's our tutu's grave, Gabriel, Uncle Gabriel's dad, and next to, above 592 his headstone is William Waiau. That is a relative, first generation relative to Gabriel Kealoha. They 593 both, he considered... William Waiau considered Gabriel as brothers. So the Waiau family also come 594 and they're residents still in Kaimu. 595 But Aunty Paulette, her dad, my goodness, he was the real Hawaiian you know? Walk around, malo. 596 Yeah. And the mom, Aunty Paulette's mom, a kumu, she was a hula teacher. Yeah. But her students 597 are from, they have a home in Pahoa. Yeah. So, uh, also, Aunty Paulette married Uncle Lawrence 598 Wright. His mother was also a kumu hula teacher. So that residence where Uncle Lawrence live, 599 back in the day, dakine had a hula halau back then because my Aunty Tina, Aunty Florence was one 600 student. It was Kumu Hula Wright in Pahoa. And across the street, Makuakanes live there. But Uncle 601 Gabriel married one of the Makuakane girls. Aunty Lani. So, anyway, we all closely related to the 602 Waiaus. Being that, the family, or `ohana road was across from the road from Aunty Paulette guys' 603 house. So, wasn't only the spot, was a pretty big spot and so, only Tutu Kauanoe is buried there. 604 Where I told you she's buried. And she's not the only one that's buried over there. At the other grave 605 site there's Pe'as and Leongs and Kealohas too. Only because they're relative. They intermarried. 606 The Pe'as. That's why. The side of, and in the back get graves and in the front, that's Leslie's `ohana 607 over there if I'm not mistaken. Konanuis over there. The rest of the graves is in Opihikao. Another 608 extension too is, there's graves across the street where they're planning on developing. Because it's 609 untouched, there's plenty, I remember, I don't know about nowadays, if it still remains the same. 610 Get plenty medicinal plants growing in the front and on the left side of that property. Yeah. 611 GM: Can you share which kind? 612 MB: `Uhaloa. `Uhaloa is mostly, is readily grown over there in that area that I know of. `Uhaloa. 613 Plus get, further down where's there's vegetation, get kukui, a lot of kukui nut trees growing on the 614 right side. Also, the `ohia trees also medicinal. 615 GM: Did you say there was a grave on the ocean side of the road? 616 MB: Oh, residential. It could be pillars or stone walls but there is a road to go in. You got to have 617 four-wheel drive though to go in. All the fishermens, they know that. There's only one area over 618 that's accessible for the fishermens to go in and do that. 619 GM: Would you want to go down with me one day? 620 MB: Yeah, one day I can show you what and what. 621 GM: That'd be great. 622 MB: Because I would even like to show you the grave behind our grave. That grave, that was like, 623 to me, I mentioned it to grandma. But there must have been a reason why Tutu Kauanoe, because 624 she's the only one out of the Kealoha family. She's from Ka`u, she's born and raised Ka`u. She's a 625 Keamo, she comes from a descendant from the Keamo family from over there in Ka`u. But the, 626 Keamo and the Aiona family. Ka`u side. Like I said, I was trying to get more info, mostly on my 627 grandma's dad, Gabriel Kealoha before he took sick of tuberculosis. Housed in Hilo in King's Land 628 where Pumaile used to stand. Pumaile Homes, in King's Landing. Used to be the tuberculosis 629 patients in that hospital. For tuberculosis patients. The foundation still there.... 630 I was born at the new hospital in Hilo. My Aunty Tina, Aunty Florence, born in the old hospital. 631 That's what grandma said. All my other aunties and uncles, they were born at home. Delivered at 632 home. So my tutu, my great grandmother was the midwife and a couple of my aunties and uncles 633 were born at home. Then my grandma became a midwife also, along with her mom. Aunties and 634 uncles used to. That's at home and it's a far ride from Opihikao all the way to Hilo. So a number of 635 cousins were born at home, aunties and uncles, great grand aunties and uncles born at home. 636 Opihikao side. And Kalapana too. But my grandma said, only a couple times she went and go kahakai 637 down that side, where Leila speaks of And also several times, my grandma also tagged along with 638 her brother, Uncle Gabriel, on the boat. They go all the way to Hilina Pali, jump off the boat, swim 639 the beach, and they start kahakai already. But they said, gotta learn how to swim because the current 640 is really rough. 641 GM: I really want to do that one day. 642 MB: [Laughter]. Yeah. So, Uncle Ula Kuahiwinui had boat, Uncle Gabriel had boat, so you know, 643 always, that spot and Hilina Pali spot, all along the coast, coming as they come from Pohoiki out, 644 they all knew the spots for go holoholo. For even know what, the time of seasons and what they 645 going get. Yeah, for our gravesite, is good ulua fishing spot over there. So people go, mostly men, 83 646 though, they take their truck, park their truck and then they walk in. It's rough. But the path been 647 there long time. Grandma knew. That that's good spot to go holoholo and also. 648 Also, you know, one thing about Big Island, the palis, it's not like Kona side, get sand. Iwis are 649 found in the sand. Like Kalapana, like I told you about Drain Pipe? Had that mound that I was sitting 650 on? The rock I was leaning on was a grave stone. I never know was a grave. Yeah? So, it's just like 651 how Maui is going through now, the iwi in the sand. It's the same in Kalapana, Drain Pipes, had iwi. 652 So I really think, I really understand now, when I hear of Uncle Desmond guys talking about the 653 burials and stuff, there's certain, Hawaiians where they live in their location, they can be buried on 654 their land or by their home or they were, because they were some kind of chief or something, they 655 gotta go bury them in the caves and it's usually along the pali where it's not where people go maha'oi 656 and go pick and stuff like that. There's a lot of caves that have, there are gravesites that are in the 657 caves of the pali area. Because the Akuza family, further up as you go and pass our grave, 658 continuously go where there's Kalanihonua area, if you can picture Kalanihonua, maybe about a half 659 a mile, or maybe no even half a mile, not too far from there, the Naki family, the Nakiaunas, they 660 used to live over there. But, over there, on their spot, get graves but there was also a landmark, crater. 661 Something like Mackenzie, Mackenzie, get three craters over there. And the only way you go in is 662 through Hauae. You know alongside our gravesite, further down, I think, not too far... 663 GM: Lava tube? 664 MB: Yeah! Lava tube but it's round, yeah? I call 'ern crater `cause it's round, yeah? And we also 665 have a tube alongside of the road. You know where the lava, where the residents of Kalapana got 666 moved to the, those who were lava victims? On the left side, go further down the Red Road, on the 667 side where they can go and build another site for their home? 668 GM: Kikala and Ke6kea? 669 MB: Yeah. Over there, used to have, along the road, but people used to dump rubbish inside. Used 670 to have craters on the side of the road. But, you know these people who drive along and dump 671 rubbish, no more the `trine, no more caution, or you know, sign that say, `no dumping.' 672 GM: Right. 673 MB: But I bet you, had, know what I mean? Had dakine inside there. It's just that they never, who 674 would think? But when I would listen to Uncle Desmond, I tell you, I believe, I believe our 675 Hawaiians, they go bury their loved ones and that's where they go, they take them to the caves. 676 GM: I'm really glad you brought that up because I hadn't thought about that pali that way but that 677 makes a lot of sense. 678 MB: Yeah, if you can recall. I do, remember the story of King Kamehameha. He's not in the tundra, 679 you know, in Oahu. His iwi is in one of the caves in Kohala. In the pali. Yeah. That is, it's not his 680 birthplace but he was took, he had to be took there because King Kahakili, the mW! back then had 681 said, all the first-born boys, to the warriors, go and kill them. Yeah. So Kuamo`o had to talce the 682 baby, King Kamehameha, take the baby to his sister in Kohala. It was treacherous though, from 683 where he was, because he wasn't born and raised Kohala. He was in some place. It's slipping my 684 mind. Anyway, Kuamo`o had his, King Kameha's mom. Kuamo`o was the only one that was very 685 smart, not only smart, but he was the once that can withstand any hit, any force as a warrior. He was 686 a good, good warrior. But Kamehameha's mom, told him, go take my baby, take him to my sister in 687 Kohala. 688 I was like, ok, now... my aunty, my great great aunty, she's Dolly. Her maiden name is Moke. She 689 married Moke, lived in Keaukaha. But she's a Waiau. Aunty Dolly Waiau Moke. She told me the 690 story that in Kalapana, in the bay, it was highly common for the ali`is to come, relax, and that's what 691 they did, surf over there, in Kaimu Bay. And they would have to prepare kaukau, you know, for the 692 ali`is to come eat and serve and stuff. Yeah. But that's the only thing I don't know is, who was the 693 ali`i then, in Kalapana. That, I don't know. I would love to know. In the 17, 1800s. Or maybe way 694 more back. Because she, when I met her, she was in her `80s and she was strong, and she was short 695 lady, you know. Aunty Dolly Waiau, live on Todd Street in Keaukaha. The Moke ohana. Yeah. Two 696 story, her house. But the pictures, I'm telling you, when I met her, she showed me pictures I never 697 knew. Our Hawaiian ancestry. They were prestigious, I tell you. Her dad, her uncle, the Waiau 698 family, They all wear suits, how you like that? Suits. And they had, you know those tops, those hat 699 tops, I said, "wow, Aunty, why they look like that?" Yeah. She just said, "yeah." I looked at her, I 700 said, "Are they doctors, attorneys or something?" She said "No. They dress like that." I say, "why, 701 Aunty?" They don't dress nothing like nowadays. [Laughter]. 702 GM: Right? 703 MB: So I said, does my tutu? Does William Waiau and Gabriel Kealoha, they buried next together! 704 My tutu, my great grand tutu, she said, you know why they close? That's her father buried in the 705 back of Gabriel Kealoha. And I was like, "what?" She said, "yeah, that's my dad." How come, all 706 our family buried behind the Keliihoomalu family? Oh, right over here, on the Waiau land? But I 707 don't see my dad, come to find out, I had the paper, I write them down in case the rain and whatever, 708 yeah? We always go put the sharpie for make `em more, readable, in case the family like come. So 709 she said, "yeah, this is my dad. Buried in the back of your tutu." And I was like, "yeah, every time 710 we go make sure whoever come visit that William Waiau can see the printing `cause the printing 711 was fading every time rain. Well actually sweating, because it's really hot over there. So the printing 712 would sometimes disappear. And yeah, that's what we would do. We would mark `em the same way 713 with his name, the birth, the death, dates, in case the family come and visit. She said, "They are 714 treated, my dad buried over there because he was very close to Kealoha." Like his brother. Because 715 her tutu, William Waiau's mother, Elizabeth Kaapana Kahana, tools care of Gabriel Kealoha. "You 716 have picture? Does my tutu wearing suits too?" She said, "I sorry baby, no." But `cause I was trying 717 to find, yeah, pictures for my grandmother before she passed, yeah? I said, I'll try my best. So I was 718 fortunate to talk to her before she passed away, Aunty Dolly Moke. I know her oldest son was into 719 genealogy and he knows too. I hope he's still alive, not sure though. But anyway, yeah she had 720 awesome stories. Her uncle that live there, Uncle Chad, Aunty, they were intermarried too with the 721 Pe'a family. Yeah. 722 [Conversation continues.] 723 85 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 86 770 771 772 773 774 775 APPENDIN E: INTERVIEW WITH LESLIE LIHAUNANI ENRIQUEZ ROSEHILL 776 87 777 778 TALKING STORY WITH 779 LESLIE ENRIQUEZ ROSEHILL (LE) 780 Oral History for Pu`ilima, Kaimu by Gina McGuire (GM) 781 September 12, 2025 782 LE: Aloha e Gina, Here is my mana'o. Mahalo. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. 783 Uhau. 784 GM: To start please tell us about yourself... Name? Where/When you were born? Where you grew 785 up? Where you went to school? 786 LE: My name is Leslie Uhaunani Enriquez Rosehill. I was born 1980, Hilo Hospital. Grew up in 787 Lava Tree State Park where my mama's `ohana owned a mac nut farm on 30 acres. In between the 788 Walkers and the Chows. As well as Kapoho, where my father's mother was born and raised 789 (Kumukahi Village) and relocated after the 1960 Pele. Spent every summer at Pohoiki with 790 my father's godmother Bertha Veloria, who was married to my grandfather's oldest brother Sim 791 Enriquez. And Kalapana where my godmother Aunty Sarah Hauanio lived. Kalapana, Kapa'ahu, 792 Kaimu, Mokuhulu is where my grandfather is from. Enriquez/Kaho'okaulana from Kalua descent. 793 We also had land in Kaohe Homesteads, Wao Kele O Puna, where I spent a lot of time in my high 794 school years up into my 30s. 795 GM: Could you tell us about your `ohana/family background? 796 LE: My tutu man Hilarion Enriquez was Luna of Pahoa. During the plantation era. He married, 797 Rebecca Kahookaulana. We are farmers and fishers. From Kumukahi to Kalapana. Rebecca's 798 father is of Kalapana/Kaimu. Her mother is from Napo'opo'o. They had their children in the area 799 of Kehena and lived their lifetime between that space and Kalapana, Mokuhulu and Kalapana. 800 GM: What is your association to the subject property (family land, work place, etc.)? 801 LE: I am a lineal descendant. My great grandfather Makapo Kaho`okaulana is laid to rest there. As 802 well as my tutu wahine Rebecca. Tutu Man Enriquez, cousins and uncle. I have practiced in 803 caretaking the area with my father who raised me since I was 10. Back then, we understood the 804 area as an ahupua`a. From uplands to sea. It was never separated by western ideas of roads and 805 ownerships. I was raised here, raised my children here and still reside. 806 GM: What are the ways you have acquired special knowledge of this area (from your `ohana, 807 personal research, specific sources)? 808 LE: I am hiapo of our generation of cousins. The oldest. I was given to my tutu wahine to raise and 809 spend time with. Most of my knowledge is of experience and direct word of mouth from my 810 kupuna. As well as constant practice after my fathers and my tutus passing. Carrying on their 811 kuleana within space. 812 GM: Could you share your mana`o relevant to the Pu`ilima, Kaimu area and the surrounding 813 region (personal anecdotes, mo`olelo, mele, oli, place names, etc.)? 814 LE: There has been much already said and stated by our kupuna that's already documented on this 815 topic. I'd like to defer to my elders on this. One mo'olelo that was shared to me by my papa who is 816 Rebecca's son was.... Kaipu`uelelu sits above our fishing grounds. All of our kupuna are laid to 817 rest here and in stories, they make their way as water do downhill to our fishing grounds. So 818 whatever we gather in our `ohana ko`a is a direct reflection of what our kupuna have provided for 819 us. 820 GM: As far as you remember and your experiences, how has the area changed? Could you share 821 how it was when you were young and how it's different now? 822 LE: Gentrification is the only negative encounter. We have learned to live with the Pele and as she 823 comes and goes, it's never been a loss but a blessing for more land being created. It's not the same 824 perspective as foreigners have of destruction. 825 GM: Do you know of any traditional sites or historically significant buildings which are or were 826 located on the Property site --for example: cultural sites, archaeological sites, historic structures 827 and/or burials? Please elaborate. 828 829 LE: This parcel is a part of the cycle of our kupuna, whose remains rest here. Their j ourney is not 830 static it continues, returning to the sea as part of a living process of ancestral flow. Documented in 831 many resources, including Chiefs of Hawaii by Kamakau. This land is not just a location, it is a 832 passage. Our kupuna are buried here, and their cycle continues. To disturb this place is to interrupt 833 a rhythm that has long been in motion. While others may no longer recognize these documented 834 sites as significant, they remain deeply important to us as lineal descendants. These are not just 835 coordinates on a map, they are chapters of our history and anchors of our identity. Dismissing their 836 importance erases lived memory and undermines the kuleana we carry to protect and honor them. 837 GM: Do you think the proposed development would affect any place of cultural significance or 838 access to a place of cultural significance? Please elaborate. 839 LE: Yes. When our last kupuna Milo grove was butchered down. It created a sadness in me that 840 can't be explained in words. There are only a few areas left on our coastline that represent what 841 our kupuna lived within. It should have never been destroyed by developers. 842 GM: Are you aware of any traditional gathering practices at the Property area and/or within the 843 surrounding areas both past and ongoing? 844 LE: Pu'ilima is documented as our Kahookaulana `ohana ko`a. Fishing. My `ohana practiced 845 traditional gathering rights within this area. There is a trail from Mokuhulu into Pu`ilima and 846 Kalaehiamoe. 847 848 GM: Within this proposed development, what could be done to lessen the adverse effects on any 849 current cultural practices in the area? 850 LE: Not building. This area should be represented as conservation lands as its surrounding areas 851 are. It is a part of the Kaipu`ueleu Complex, in the 1970 red road survey, where it's documented 852 that there are many burials and the road itself that was designed and put in did not exclude burials 853 to be within the makai region of the complex. 8,000 burials units of note, supports that statement. 854 855 GM: Are you aware of any other cultural concerns the community might have related to cultural 856 practices within or in the vicinity of the Property site and its surrounding areas? 857 LE: Gentrification. Kaimu is of a space that is humble. We don't have much in regards to money 858 or land. But many of our families that are descendants are still here and are a living culture, we are 859 rich in practices and traditions. Because we are in a zone where land is cheaper than other places, 860 but cash speaks volumes. It encourages those who have cash on hand to purchase and invest. The all 861 actions of these developers have already set the precedent that they are not culturally respectful or 862 mindful. Therefore, leading the destruction and separation we have to embody our kupuna in our 863 spaces that we are gated off from and locked out of. 864 GM: Do you know of any other kupuna, kama`aina, cultural/lineal descendants, or other 865 knowledgeable people who might be willing to share their mana`o of the Pu`ilima, Kaimu area? 866 LE: I've shared all names of people that may. Mahalo. If interested, Nainoa Rosehill, my son 867 would be my only other suggestion. 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 011 92 882 883 884 885 886 887 APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW WITH SAMUEL KAHO`OKAULANA 888 l� 889 890 94 891 TALKING STORY WITH 892 SAMUEL KAHO`OKAULANA (SK) 893 Oral History for Pu`ilima, Kaimu by Gina McGuire (GM) 894 January 3, 2025 895 The interview with Aunty Bernice Walker & Uncle Sam Kaho`okaulana included a travelling 896 huaka`i (journey) from Aunty Bernice's home in Pahoa, to Mokuhulu, to the study area in 897 Kaimu. 898 Location: Mokuhulu, Hawaii Island 899 SK: So why we starting here? They never have cars like this to go to the beach. Kahakai. So 900 from Mokuhulu house, Tutu Rebecca's house, that's Enriquez' estate. Over 30 something acres. 901 Well the Enriquezes gave my Tutu Man, Herman Elia Kaho`okaulana three and a half acres and 902 that's where my brother now lives. And so from over there, where they were growing up, they 903 had to walk the trails, walk the road, to go and fish. And when they went, they went for a couple 904 days. It's not like, they're gonna walk down there and catch a couple crabs, catch this, they 905 catch that. They went down there, they stayed, sometimes for a whole week. And one of the 906 places that 1 learned is, where we're going to end up down there, is Wills. We went and made 907 ulua, I was about maybe, six years old, seven years old. And then get my brother, Keona, and 908 my brother Elia, used to go with my mom and my dad. My dad's dad, Tutu Elia. Uncle Pika 909 sometimes. My uncle, Uncle Sam, Ka`awaloa, he used to go, sometimes. But that's where 1 910 learned about this place, where we're going to go.1 never used to think about this place, it's just 911 a fishing ground, but now, as 1 grow up and get older, it becomes more of a spiritual thing. 1 912 never like nobody know where I'm at. So the trail, I wanted the trail just to be just the way it is. 913 And this morning I went down and I had to look at the trail, follow the trail, and 1 was like, brah, 914 you still get `em, over 20 years. So anyhow, it became, a really good feeling, that this trail, that, 915 most of the time I would go by myself. I'd have someone drop me off in the middle of the night, 916 take off down the trail do my thing. Early in the morning have someone pick me up. But today 917 when I looked at 'ern this morning, I was like, "wow. You was like six, seven years old over 918 there."... For me, that trail by itself, I believe, is another way that our kupunas and the Lord 919 himself preserved me and our family. So now I can go, share it with you. 920 SK: So across this main road, the trail would take you all the way down to the beach where 921 we're going to go. I just wanted to let you guys know. Because Cousin Bernice and 1, this was 922 our stomping grounds. The road used to be all gravel here. 60s was paved. Mango tree right 923 there. Never had telephone. No water yet. One story 1 have, Tutu Elia,1 was about six or seven 924 years old and we were going to go fishing at Apua. We started from here. Tutu Man had this 925 old Model T. Was just him and 1. He would wake me up. "Okay boy, get up." Talking in 926 Hawaiian. Fluent Hawaiian. 1 never really picked up the language and as 1 learned about Elvis 927 Presley and I eat Korean BBQ and rice 1 forgot about my Hawaiian. But this one morning we 928 was gonna go fishing Apua and 1 don't know why he wanted me to go with him to Apua. This 929 old Model A, Model T. `Cause after that he's going to upgrade, get the green Chevy. We drove 930 to Tutu Pondei's house. A lot of you people may know him, may not. He lived in Kapa`ahu, 931 more towards National Park. Kupahu`a. We get there, they start talking Hawaiian, he gets the 932 donkey, tie `em up to his truck and we drive all the way to Inaba subdivision or Royal Gardens. 933 Like the old Queen's Bath. I'm hanging in there. I said, "let's go!" I'm a trooper. So, we get the 934 mule all loaded up and then we start on this tour from there all the way to Apua. From here to 935 there, it take us, maybe about 12 hours. From here to there! Before we get to Apua, there's 936 Keena, Kealakomo, goat corral, Kahue, after Kahue then Apua. There's all this stuff along the 937 way. Each of those places had distinct things. Like the water hole. For the horses. Brackish 938 water. But eventually you made it to Apua and our lunch was, he bust out canned corn beef and 939 he had his poi. And I'm like, "what 1 going eat." And he get one loaf of bread. Purity brand. And 940 can orange soda. Made my day. I said, "T55u,1 ready to fish!" The pole was about from me to 941 you. Was really easy, he goes over there, he hits the rock and this worm like thing comes out, 942 there's a word for `em, and he hooks `em on and he flicks like that. Thunk. Guess what was the 943 first fish I found? 944 GM: Nenue? 945 SK: Close. Was po`opa`a. Buggah was huge. The po`opa`a was pulling me. Was like, "Tutu, 1 946 got the fish, I got the fish!" Ever since then, when we came back, I wanted to come home. 947 `Cause I caught thatpo`opa`a. I went, with Tutu Man, with Cousin Bernice, went down to Kaena 948 Point. We caught some fish! Hanapa. We still alive, we still prospering. We got all these 949 different tricks. So Kaena Point is gone, covered by lava. That was during the 1969 to `74 lava 950 flow. But Apua Point is still there. Hopefully I get to see it again. Just gotta get in shape. So 1 951 just wanted to give you guys and overview of where our family started and how it evolved. Next 952 stop is Pu`ilima. 953 Location: walking along Pu`ilima trail, Kaimu, Hawaii Island 954 SK: For me right now, I'm using the word impression. Blueprint, in my life. For whatever the 955 reason, it may be back then, I always thought that 1 would come back. And 1 was right, I came 956 back. 957 GM: It's a good spot. 958 SK: It used to be. The world growing up, is magic, right? When we were five, six, seven, it was 959 good. It wasn't guaranteed, if the fish was hungry, if they were gonna bite the bait. 960 GM: Was it a limu spot at all? 961 SK: Limu? Not here. It was mostly to the right, was all of the papa. That reef. The limu was 962 more towards the Catholic Church. 963 GM: Drain Pipe? 964 SK: Yeah. 965 SK: Ulua spot is right there. And the big ulna stick would be sticking out from over there, 966 leaning that way. And then our little tent with a rock wall would be right up that way. It's pretty 967 much filled in. After all these years, the cliff is sinking. The waves came up, it looks like, took 968 a lot of rocks out with them. That's our fishing spot, right there. I noticed, this morning, though, 969 if you look back to the right, is the conventional `6hi`a pole stands. 970 GM: Pole stands. Is this whole area Pu`ilima or is it a smaller section of this area? 971 SK: I consider this place, Wills. The biggest thing, I see, is just the trail. The trail to me, after 972 the first meeting and during the first meeting, there was something about that trail that I thought, 973 1 gotta go visit that place again. And here I am today. So significant. Here I was, five, six, seven 96 974 years old, and now I'm 68 and the trail was, "1 gotta go find `em." And I found `em. And it feels 975 good. And why? It goes from here all the way back to the house. 976 GM: Do you know why it was called Wills? 977 SK: 1 don't know but there's a long story about it. About Pu`ilima. 978 Location: Pu`ilima shoreline, Kaimu, Hawaii Island 979 (Standing on `a`a flow (state land) directly to the east of the study area.) 980 GM: Can you share a little bit about your background, where you grew up, family history. 981 SK: My name is Samuel Kuhiwi Kaho'okaulana Junior. Son to Samuel Kuhiwi 982 Kaho'okaulana and Pearl Keonaona Ka'awaloa Kaho'okaulana. I'm the number one out of 983 twelve. My dad is from Mokuhulu. My mom is from Kapa`ahu. I grew up in Mokuhulu back 984 in the late 1950s. Born September 30, 1956. Here I am with friends and relatives at Wills slash 985 Pu`ilima talking about why I feel the way I feel about this place. I actually come from a 986 farmer, hunter, fisherman, construction family. My dad was a construction worker, farmer, 987 and everything. So we did everything. Farmer, gatherers, fisherman, hunters. We do 988 everything that we need to do to survive. And I'm grateful that 1 could share what 1 could 989 share about how this place started at Mokuhulu and we've ended here at Pu`ilima. Do you 990 have any questions for me? 991 GM: Thinking about this spot and the surrounding area with the burial grounds, fishing 992 grounds. I don't know if you want to share anything about this coastline and why it's special? 993 SK: Yes. For me, the number one significance is the trail. The trail existed ever since I was 994 here, five, six, seven years old. Today I'm 68 years old. Even though the trail is ancient, it 995 remains to be visible. Remains to be a sense that brings me back. It's almost like, once lost but 996 now found. The trail is so, lasting memories, of those years, beginning with my grandparents, 997 my dad, my mom, my brothers and sisters. And all the other people that we used to frequent 998 the trail to go harvesting. And this is fishing ulua, fishing for shoreline fishing, enenue, 999 aholehole, moi, popa`a, and maybe today, might have a lot of ta`ape and so forth. But I 1000 haven't been here for over 20 years, so 1 don't really know. The limu, the limu kohu, can be 1001 harvested. But it be used to more to the right from this point, along the papa, the reefs, that 1002 you can actually see today. There's a lot of limu. Then `opihi picking, Varna, this is a good 1003 place. Especially when nobody comes here and harvest. This was a good place, always 1004 providing kaukau for our family. As far as the burials, I haven't seen any burial sites makki 1005 side of the road. And whether you get down to the beach, whether it's on the left side or the 1006 right side of us, I've never encountered any grave sites so I don't really know. Except the 1007 grave sites that we have mauka side of the road. We used to harvest ko`oko`olau tea from the 1008 mauka side of the road from here. But today, I don't see any. But what I recognize is 1009 development is happening. Again, it's, you know, sixty years went by and changes is going on. 1010 People have interests in the land. It's a beautiful spot. And if you go build on it, do something 1011 beautiful. So again, I'm grateful for being here. a 1012 GM: is there anybody else you recommend talking story with? 1013 SK: Oh yeah, there's so many good people that you can ask. One would be my Uncle Sam 1014 Ka`awaloa. He was really close to my dad. And my dad pretty much taught him how to hunt, 1015 how to fish, everything. So, he has vast knowledge. 1016 GM: 1 know I already asked you about mele and oli but are there any mo`olelo that we should 1017 know about? 1018 SK: There probably is. The Hawaiians always had mo`olelo. They always spend time, you 1019 know, that's one way they can remember and experience, whether was good, bad, ugly, 1020 suffering, pain. The Hawaiians did have something, but I don't have any, really, that I could 1021 share. None was passed down to me. 1022 GM: Ok. When you came out here at night by yourself, did you have any mo`olelo or stories? 1023 SK: The only thing would be, I'm always looking in the back. You have this, scary feeling, 1024 and so every once in a while, you go fishing, "what was that?" Or you feel a breeze pass by 1025 and, "what was that?" But you just keep focused. "I came here to make kaukau, and that's 1026 what 1 came here to do. 1 can't let you," You meaning, whether it was a good spirit, bad spirit, 1027 all 1 know is, it was a time where I'm always on my toes. Very alert and aware of my 1028 surroundings even though it was dark. And then there's times it seems, I could see at night, 1029 without the light. It's like angels. Angels protecting me to do what 1 gotta do. And once its 1030 over, pick up the bag and it's full with what I came for. Menpachi at night, `aweoweo, 1031 aholehole, and early in the morning, catch some enenue, po`opa`a. And when the bucket was 1032 full it was time to go home. Kaukau, eat with the family. 1033 GM: Is there anything you want to add? 1034 SK: I think the last thing I want to add; is I just want to thank Gina for this opportunity. And 1035 I'm so grateful that I could come back and see the place, touch the ground, be able to see 1036 family and friends join me in this interview. Thank you. 1037 M. 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 APPENDIX G: 1NTERVIEW WITH LEILA KEALOHA 1044 1045 M 1046 1047 100 1048 TALKING STORY WITH 1049 LEILA KEALOHA (LK) 1050 Oral History for Pu`ilima, Kaimu by Gina McGuire (GM) 1051 September 14, 2025 1052 Aloha, my name is Leila Kealoha and I am Iwi kuamo`o o Puna (from the bones of my ancestors of 1053 Puna). I was born to John David Kaualalena Kealoha and Gail Bee (Holland) Kealoha on October 1054 21, 1976 in Hilo, Hawaii. I am the second of four daughters born to them. I grew up in Puna makai, 1055 from Kamoamoa to Kapoho. I spent a lot of time in Kaimu, Kalapana, Opihikao, Pohoiki as a baby 1056 into adulthood. I attended Pahoa Elementary, Intermediate and High school where I graduated in 1057 1994. I then attended school at Hawaii Community College in Hilo. 1058 I share about my fathers lineage as he was 100% Kanaka maoli from Puna where I grew up. He was 1059 the third of eight siblings. My grandfather was Gabriel Luka Kealoha III who was born on Kaimu 1060 beach next to Kumakaula heiau where their hale was. He was born to Gabriel Luka Kealoha Sr. from 1061 Kaimu and Cecelia "Sarah" Kaualalena from Keoneoio, Maui on January 28, 1932. He was one of 1062 six siblings. My grandmother was Mary Kawailani Makuakane who was born in Opihikao and 1063 resided at their hale across lae o`io in Opihikao. She was the fourth of seven siblings and she was 1064 born to Thomas Kaonohiokala Makuakane who was born in Kapoho and Kaulaokeahi "Hattie" 1065 Makua who was born in Opihikao, on June 26, 1934. 1066 My great- grandfather Thomas Makuakane was best known as a frsherinan and lauhala gather 1067 amongst many other practices. He was known to fish the entire coastline as he was a respected person 1068 in the community. My grandfather Gabriel worked for him gathering lauhala and was taken to go 1069 holoholo along the coastline. He was taught about the `6pae ula and feeding the `6pelu ko`abetween 1070 Kapoho and Opihikao areas. My grandfather Gabriel and his older sister Elsie were also taught by 1071 their mother Sarah to pound `opihi, gather limu, and fish along the coastline from Kaueleau to 1072 Kaimu. He was also one of the old time fishermen from Pohoiki before there was a boat ramp. He 1073 was the main advocate of how we got our boat ramp. 1074 My father was taught by his dad, my grandpa Gabriel, how to fish along the coastline on land and in 1075 the ocean. He was also taught by his cousin Nohea Peleiholani along with his brother "Jr" Gabriel 1076 Luka Kealoha IV who would fish into Keauhou, Apua and Hilina pali. They always fished along the 1077 entire coast from Makena to Apua. As a child, I remember sending my dad off for days at a time to 1078 go holoholo with his brother and cousin(s). My grandfather was known as the Opihi man, which is 1079 one thing my dad and his brother Jr. were a part of growing up. 1080 My grandpa Gabriel, being from Kaimu, had many ties to the `ohana. of the area. Uncle Robert 1081 Keli`oho`omalu was one of his close cousins because they lived right across the street from each 1082 other and they worked and fished together. He was also close with Uncle John Hale at Pohoiki where 1083 he spent a lot of time after moving to Opihikao with my grandma and fishing out of Pohoiki. Hence 1084 why my father was a fishennan on land and the boat. This is where I got my love and passion for 1085 fishing. 1086 My father was also the first one to start Kumakaula Canoe club with two of his cousins which started 1087 right in Kaimu. It later became known as "Kalapana Canoe Club" and is now the Puna Canoe Club. 1088 My mother also paddled canoe. The men would paddle up from Kaimu to Pohoiki and then the 1089 woman would back from Pohoiki to Kaimu and we used to follow them up and down the coastline 1090 cheering them on. 1091 My father was related to everyone along our coastline and having a large family we spent a lot of 1092 time at family parties and `ohana homes. One thing that I want to share is about our family deaths. 101 1093 At first I was scared of dead bodies, then when I was 8-years old, my grandmother died. I remember 1094 vividly my cousins and I were just stuck by her casket, hugging and kissing her and crying because 1095 she was gone. We had a big funeral in honor of her and we buried her at Makena gravesite. This is 1096 where my grandfather's family is all buried. 1097 When we went to bury my grandmother, we dug a big hole in the ground and lined the walls with 1098 rocks so the sides don't cave in. Then they build a wooden box to put inside and that is what we put 1099 the casket in. There were so many people and flowers that day. My dad and his brothers were the 1100 ones to dig the hole and place her in her final resting place. The hole is dug days or a week before 1101 the burial. When that part is done, we always go across the street to the beach to get in the water and 1102 spend time together. This was so we could cleanse and be close to where my grandma would 1103 eventually go. We believe that our `ohana will eventually end up in the ocean. We call this the leina 1104 or the lele, the place where the spirits cross over. This is why we bury close to the beach or cliff, if 1105 not right next to the beach or the cliff. 1106 It is always custom to go and visit our kupuna after they have been buried to honor them. When my 1107 grandmother died, this was not the first time I had been to the graves. She used to take us to visit our 1108 kupuna there growing up and so did my dad. My dad would always fish down there too. The beach 1109 at Pu`ilima is an extension of our family burial grounds. Our kupuna. who pass get buried and they 1110 eventually become the nutrients that feed the earth below them which extends to the sea. This is the, 1111 "Leina." 1112 Some years later, my great-grandmother Sarah died and we buried her right next to my grandmother. 1113 Previous to my grandmother, my great grandfather and great -great grandmother and father were 1114 buried there and my great -granduncles as well. Over the years, my grandfather's sister Elsie and her 1115 daughter Geraldine were buried there as well. In 2003, my grandfather died. It was a big funeral. We 1116 held his funeral at my aunty Dottie's house and then the next day we went down to Pohoiki and 1117 backed down the boat ramp one last time and then took him to our Makena gravesite which is when 1118 it was the first time that my cousins were the ones to place our kupuna into the ground. This is also 1119 when my cousin Kanani who was raised by our great-grandmother Sarah told us of the name 1120 Kaipueleu as the old name of the cemetery. 1121 I remember when we dug my grandpa's grave, my cousins and I walked the trail down to the beach 1122 and they were blocking it off. We were grumbling because we were trying to figure out why they 1123 were blocking the trail to the beach, which we all grew up using and going down to fish and swim. 1124 As we walked up to the beach, I came across a huge ko`ele shell polished white just sitting on the 1125 beach! I knew instantly that this was my grandfather saying hello to me. I placed that shell on his 1126 chest before we closed his casket. Every time I go down there I find the ko`ele shell and think of my 1127 grandpa. This is our kupuna talking to us. I even used one to make a sign for my aunty Emily who 1128 had me make a sign with her parents' names on top and I put two `opihi shells on each side of the 1129 sign from that beach. 1130 As the years have gone by we feel like they have kicked us out of our gathering place. Pu`ilima was 1131 not just a place to go holoholo which we all did, but it is a place where we aukai/pikai or go and 1132 cleanse and rinse when we are preparing for a family burial. Many of our family members have used 1133 this area for generations and now it feels like we are not allowed to. How come? I don't think anyone 1134 else would like it if we came to their homeland and put up a gate and blocked access to where their 1135 kupuna are buried or where they go to honor their kupuna? 1136 As mentioned before, the beach is an extension of our family burial grounds, cemetery, and it is a 1137 part of the leina and a part of this complex. This has been a custom in our family for many 1138 generations. There are many other burials even behind my `ohana that are surrounding our `ohana 102 1139 who do not have headstones. We know these are old and are likely our predecessors, hence why my 1140 `ohana ended up being buried here. 1141 The last I will share about is when my father passed away in 2022. This has been the hardest burial 1142 of them all. My father died on November 18, 2022. I had to help get everything ready for my dad to 1143 get buried down there on December 13. 1 met my cousin down there to check out where we were 1144 going to dig his hole and I saw signs across the street about a subdivision and they had bulldozed. 1145 My Uncle who was passing by had stopped and asked me if I knew what was going on, and I said, 1146 "no." In the midst of trying to get ready for my dad's funeral and burial I did not reach out to the 1147 planning department. On the day we went to bury my dad, I pulled up and my dad's cousin, one of 1148 his diving partners, was standing in the driveway with papers in his hand. His eyes were bloodshot, 1149 which was what my dad's eyes looked like most of the time and he was pissed. He handed me the 1150 papers and it was about the property across that street and what they were doing. It was almost like 1151 my dad was speaking through him with his bloodshot eyes and his wild and bodinky hair. I hugged 1152 my uncle and told him thank you for reminding me and for sharing the paperwork. He spent a lot of 1153 time with my dad fishing all over. After burying my dad and having the pa`ina afterwards, plenty of 1154 my `ohana were talking about the property and if we knew what was going on and no one seemed 1155 to know. On December 23, 20221 contacted the planning department to see what was going on and 1156 to share that I was totally against this development. I was contacted back and in the beginning of 1157 January, my cousin and I went in to meet with the SMA planners. We were told that we would be 1158 contacted if any more development was to move forward and over one and a half years my aunty 1159 called me the day before the hearing that they were having the planning commission meeting for this 1160 property. No one contacted us back and the developers stated that there was no opposition to this 1161 proj ect. 1162 This area is very significant to our `ohana. The area has already been bulldozed of our Kupuna trees 1163 that my kupuna have fed from their decomposed bodies, gates put up, blocked access to the beach 1164 and total disregard to our gathering and religious practices of this area. Pu`ilima, Kalaehiamoe, 1165 Kaipueleu and Makena are part of a cultural and burial complex that has already been negatively 1166 impacted by Kaimu Cove, LLC and it will have an even more detrimental impact to our `ohana if 1167 anything is built/constructed on this property. It will obstruct the leina, place unwanted waste into 1168 the ground that will affect the tidepools, limu, and fish and the possibility of more destruction of 1169 other archeological sites that have already been disturbed. As I mentioned before, our kupuna bury 1170 either right next to the beach or cliffs and there is a good likelihood that there may be burials within 1171 this area as well. 1172 I also share the following references in respect to place names: 1173 As noted, these names refer to specific things, yet the kaona (meaning) behind these names can be 1174 different. All of these names have reference to the practices used by the people of these areas such 1175 as fish, bones, canoes and people who traversed this area 1176 Kaipueleu: refers to the ipu, fishing god and the active energy of what lies within the area 1177 Kalaehiamoe: refers to the forehead or the point of sleep- hence when I mention that one day when 1178 the kupuna will return to the ocean through the "leina" the point where they cross over. 1179 Makena: the many that are wailing of those that are found within this area 1180 Kaimu: this name references the canoes and the type of fishing that was done in the area 103 1181 The area is significant to fishing, gathering and those who lay down to their final resting place. 1182 Kalaehiamoe and Pu`ilima is/was used as a canoe launching site and is a place for gathering ocean 1183 resources. Traditionally, there was a Ku`ula or fishing shrine placed on land to give honor to the 1184 fishing akua "Ku". I have been told there is/was a Ku`ula residing here. Puna always refers to fresh 1185 water springs and the ponds that are found on the inside areas of the beach were likely used for 1186 brackish drinking water which would have been gathered with calabashes or ipu. 1187 In conclusion, this entire ahupua`a of Makena is very significant to our family. My `ohana is still 1188 very large and many more of our `ohana will be buried at our `ohana Makena gravesite, or Kaipueleu 1189 and we need to have unobstructed access to the kai directly across the street to continue our practice 1190 of cleansing, gathering and honoring our kupuna. What type of reciprocity will be done for the 1191 execution of our kupuna trees and the blocked access of our gathering places and religious use? 1192 `Ohana I know that Gilbert Hauanio Sr., Emily Hauanio (Konanui), Tootsie Peleiholani, Hayward 1193 "Braddah" Peleiholani, Emily Naeole (Kealoha), and Daniela Kealoha. 1194 Kaipueleu 1195 Ka ipu 1196 N. Hanger for ipu, calabashes. 1197 `Ele.`n 1198 1. N. A dark -shinned people to be descended from a chief of this name. 1199 2. (Not cap.) A hard stone, sometimes used as a fishing god. 1200 1201 `eleu 1202 vs. Active, alert, energetic, lively, nimble, quick, dexterous, agile, spry, sprightly, prompt. Also 1203 `uleu. h6.`eleu Caus/sim.; to animate, stir into action, animated. 1204 Kalaehiamoe 1205 ka.la`e 1206 1. vs. Clear, calm, unclouded. ho`o.ka.la`e To cause to clear; to become clear. 1207 2. n. Swelling, probably due to failing circulation. 1208 We 1209 Same as la`ela`e 1; pure in sentiment (Hal. 19.8). Cf. kdla `e. ho`o.la`e To clear up, brighten. (PCP 1210 lake.) 1211 lae 1212 n. 1213 1. Forehead, brow. Nalulu ka lae, to have a headache. (PPN la`e.) 104 1214 2. Cape, headland, point, promontory. (PEP la`e.) 1215 3. Wisdom; mental or emotional qualities. Cf. lae o `o, lae pa `a, lae `ula, and idioms poha 1; po `ohu 1216 1. ho`o.lae To pretend to be wise; to act smart; pretentious. 1217 4. An insulting term, followed by qualifiers, referring to kaua, outcasts, who had dots tattooed on 1218 their foreheads (Malo 70-2). Cf, lae kiko, lae mamo, lae puni. 1219 hia.moe 1220 nvi. Sleep; to sleep, fall asleep, asleep. Kona hiamoe `ana, his sleeping. Holoholona hiamoe, sloth. 1221 Hiamoe i ka make, to sleep in death, die. ho`o, hia.moe To put to sleep, lull to sleep, to pretend to 1222 sleep; soporific. La`au ho`ohiamoe, sleeping tablet or drug. (PPN fiamohe.) 1223 makena 1224 1. nvi. Mourning, wailing, lamentation; to wail, lament, weep for joy. Nona keia makena e uwe `ia 1225 mai nei (For. 4.47), this wailing that is being sobbed forth here is for him. (PPN matenga.) 1226 2. n. Calm, of sea, atmosphere. Cf make, dead. 1227 ma.kena 1228 vs. Many, numerous; often, much. 1229 Pu`ilima 1230 Pn 1231 n. Head of octopus or squid. 1232 n. Canoe endpiece, both fore and aft. 1233 nvt. Coil of hair, topknot of hair; rope or line, as attached to sticks in an `6pelu net; rope attached to 1234 the front of an unfinished canoe to haul it to the shore; olona string used in the game pu kaula; snotter 1235 holding the end of the sprit of a sail; to coil; to gather in, as sails; to form a topknot. Pu i ka wa`a, 1236 ceremony during which a head craftsman prayed that the gods would protect the newly carved canoe 1237 hull as it was drawn from the forest to the sea; to attach a line to a canoe; such a line. Kaulapa pu 1238 (For. 6:483), drag or towline. Pu i ka lauoho, to form the hair in a topknot. 1239 part. Together, entirely, completely, also with, together with. 1240 Short for puna. 1241 `ilima 1242 1. n. Small to large native shrubs (all species of Sida, especially S. fallax), bearing yellow, orange, 1243 greenish, or dull -red flowers; some kinds strung for leis. The flowers last only a day and are so 1244 delicate that about 500 are needed for one lei. Fruits of ma`o (Abutilon grandifolium), when green 1245 and soft, are used with `ilima leis, one fruit at each end of the lei; or the pale -green, cap -like calyx 1246 of the `ilima flower is used. A mild laxative for babies is made by squeezing out the juice of flowers; 1247 this is called kanakamaika`i. The `ilima was designated in 1923 by the Territorial Legislature as the 105 1248 flower of Oahu. It is related to the hibiscus. (Neal 552-3.) See songs, nowco, puc 1; cf. `apiki. Ola 1249 n6 i ka pua o ka `ilima, healing in the `iliima flower [reference to its medicinal use]. 1250 Kaimn 1251 ka 1252 1. nvt. To hit, strike, throw, smite, hack, thrust, toss, fling, hurl, dash, especially with a quick hard 1253 stroke; to bail water, as from a canoe; to clean, as weeds or mud from a pond; to fling the arms or 1254 swing them while walking; to make net meshes; to tie, as thatch battens; to knit; to fish with a pole; 1255 to turn the soil; 1256 nvt. Canoe bailer; to bail. (PPN taa.) 1257 n. Container, hanger. 1258 Incoming, of a current 1259 Hip bone, pelvis. 1260 imu 1261 n. Underground oven; food cooked in an imu. Also umu. (PPN `umu.) 1262 Rock and coral fish trap; the fisherman might insert a branch into an opening at one side to frighten 1263 the fish into a surrounding net. Also ahu, umu. 1264 1265 1266 106 1267 107 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 APPENDIX H: INTERVIEW WITH HOWARD KONANUI 1275 108 1276 TALKING STORY WITH 1277 HOWARD KONANUI (HK) 1278 Oral History for Pu`ilima, Kaimu by Gina McGuire (GM) 1279 January 2, 2025 1280 1281 The interview with Uncle Howard Konanui was completed over the phone. 1282 GM: Could you start by sharing about yourself and your family background? 1283 HK: My name is Howard Konanui. I'm of Joseph Kepa Konanui and Elizabeth Enriquez 1284 Konanui. I was born in Hilo Hospital. Raised in Opihikao and when we were about sixth grade, 1285 we moved up Pahoa. We had a house in the back of the elementary school. We lived there `til I 1286 graduated and then I got married. And I am also 70 years old. 1287 GM: Do you want to share a little more about your family background? 1288 HK: Do you want for my dad's side or my mom's side? 1289 GM: Whatever you want to share. 1290 HK: As far as for my dad, his father, my grandfather, David Kawika Konanui was born in 1291 Kapa`ahu, Kalapana. That's where he was raised. And when he got married to my grandmother, 1292 Lucy Silva, that was her name. So, actually, she came from Opihikao. So, that's where they 1293 moved, to Opihikao, and that's where they started their family. That's on my dad's side. is that 1294 enough or you need more? 1295 GM : I think that's ok. 1296 HK: Ok. On my mom's side, that's Rebecca Kaho`okaulana Enriquez. Now, if I go further back, 1297 to her mom, my grandma actually is Geonovefa Kailikapu. She was Kalua. She was born in 1298 1874 and how she came, get some place in Kona, I kept asking people from there, where is it? 1299 Nobody heard of it. So anyway, she's from Kona. And then, we don't know how she met Makapo t300 Kaho`okaulana. So, then, my grandma Rebecca, don't share too much of genealogy. For some 1301 reason why, we don't know. Ok? So, anyway, they live in Puna. She got married to Makapo t302 Kaho`okaulana and they lived in Puna. So they had six kids and my Tutu Rebecca was the t303 second oldest. And she was born December 15, 1896 in Kehena. Ok? And anytime, if you need 1304 to ask me something, you just gotta stop me. 1305 GM: Ok. 1306 HK: With that said, I don't know when my grandma Rebecca married... we don't have the 1307 date when they got married but Rebecca married Hilarion Enriquez. And he actually was from 1308 plantation, Filipino immigrant, from the Philippines. We don't know how he met my grandma. 1309 Anyway, that's how they started for the family. And between Rebecca and Hilarion, they have 1310 ten children. And majority of them was boys. The only girl was my mom, Elizabeth Enriquez. 1311 And my mom was right about the middle. That's where she sits among the family tree. And 1312 then, she got married to dad. So that's how I came. So, now, my mom used to tell us that, 1313 when she used to ask, Tutu Rebecca questions, my Tutu used to always call her niele. That's 1314 what she always said, "niele." That's also my mom, tried how many times, and she would 1315 always get the same response. And why she didn't want to share, she doesn't know. My Tutu 1316 was kind of fed up with always being asked the same thing. My Tutu told her, you no 109 1317 kopekope the dirt, `cause if you kopekope the dirt, all the grass is going to come out. Meaning 1318 you don't dig up the past. You just let it go. That's why, what I mean is, now all of the 1319 cousins, our age, we don't know a real solid of history of our Tutu. But anyway, June 28, we 1320 did a video sit down, this was in 2008, we did a video sit down with my mom and one of her 1321 brothers. The youngest one. Tony. My other Uncle Benny was up on the mainland and he 1322 actually couldn't come home so what he did was, he wrote a letter, and when we had our 1323 Enriquez sit down, get together, we video-ed it. So his children, My Uncle Ben's kids, read his 1324 letter of how he was raised and the lifestyle that he lived when they were raised in Kalapana. 1325 They were raised in Mokuhulu, Kalapana. For some reason, the sibling, my grandma, my Tutu 1326 Elia, which was her younger brother, and her other sister, Tutu Kamala, they all live close by, 1327 they were neighbors. Each one of them had their own house. And they had two to three acres 1328 next to each other. That's how they live in Mokuhulu and raise their families down there. So 1329 mom said when they were young they used to walk down, you know, the name is Pu`ilima, 1330 right? But mom said they called that place Wills. That's what they named it. Wills. They used 1331 to walk down from Mokuhulu, walk down to Wills and they used to bring their clothes down 1332 there, wash their clothes with the old bar soap, you know the old brown kind from before. 1333 Military soap or what. They used to wash their clothes and there used to be a pond down. 1334 They used to put all their clothes in there and wash `em with the soap and wash `em, would go 1335 further out in the ocean and rinse `em out. After you pau rinse `em, you squeeze `em and then 1336 you place them on the stone to kaula`i. That's what they did. And after they finish wash all of 1337 their clothes, they used to go look for lauhala, they would pick `opihi, h5'uke`uke, and limu 1338 and even the pao`o, the fish. That's what they call the jumping jacks, you know in the ponds? 1339 My uncle said they used to make 'ern raw. And that's what they used to eat, the pao`o. So they 1340 would spend the whole day down there. So in the afternoon, mom said the clothes was all dry 1341 already, so they'd pick up the clothes and walk back home Mokuhulu. Where Tutu Elia's 1342 house, that's where Boa stay now. And then right next to there, that's where Tutu Rebecca's 1343 house was. Little bit inside, but that's where the house was. And if you go little bit more, get 1344 the great big water tank, that area there is what we call Mokuhulu. 1345 GM: That's a walk! 1346 HK: Yeah. But if you look at it they had the trail, they walk straight down, instead of you 1347 walking along the road. So it was much shorter. Although it was far. But it was a straight shot 1348 going down. You see? So. That was what my mom told us on that video and I knew she had 1349 said something about that so I had to go back and watch it and yes, that is what she spoke 1350 about. That area. And that area, right above is where her grave stay. Have you been up there 1351 by that grave? 1352 GM: Yeah. 1353 HK: Ok. So for what reason why she wanted to be buried there, we don't know. But it's only 1354 her is buried there. Her sister Kamala and Elia is buried behind Pahoa Catholic Church. 1355 Although, this was back in 1953. That's when she died and then she was buried there. So, that 1356 is all what I know about that place. Because after my mom married my father, they moved to 1357 Opihikao. So, we didn't go to the fishing area down there because actually, since we lived 1358 Opihikao, our area is Opihikao and you don't go maha`oi somebody else's territory. That is all 1359 what I can share with you about Pu`ilima. 110 1360 1361 GM: That's plenty! 1 didn't know had lauhala down there before. 1362 HK: Because my Tutu Rebecca was a weaver and that's how she made money. By making 1363 lauhala mats like that. That's what she used to do. 1364 GM: Wow. 1365 HK: Yeah. 1366 GM: Get plenty Enriquez buried over there though, right? 1367 HK: Oh, ok. She was the first one to be buried there. Then my grandfather, which is on the 1368 Kalapana side of her grave was put there. And my cousin on the right side of her, Kapoho 1369 side. Died in a car accident. My uncle put him there. And he was young, like say, in the early 1370 20s. Yeah. So, that so far, is the only, oh, and then, my other cousin, her baby, I think was, 1371 still born. Is put in-between my grandma and my grandpa. Right there by the noni tree. 1372 GM: Oh wow. 1373 HK: Yeah. So do you have any other questions. 1374 GM: I would ask you, in your own words, why the spot is special or relates to the burial 1375 grounds? 1376 HK: Why 1 feel that that area should be preserved is, that is our culture and our heritage. 1377 Because that's where my mom folks was taught that we live off the ocean and when you go 1378 down to the ocean you make your time worthwhile. You maximize whatever you have to do 1379 down there. So that you can accomplish a lot of things. And it taught them how to live off of 1380 the ocean. So now that's very, very important. If we don't have for our culture, we're going to 1381 lose a lot, our identity. So all of these things, once it's destroyed, then it's gone. We won't be 1382 able to show the future generations what it used to be like. You know, because I give you an 1383 example. You know for a poi pounder, for the pa`i ku`i `ai? And then the pohaku ku`i `ai. If 1384 you have that, you can pass that down to the future generations. And they can show the 1385 children, the grandchildren, what it means to ku`i kalo. Because they have something to hold. 1386 If you don't have your board and stone it's hard for the future generations to grasp what you 1387 are talking about. So it works in the same principle as the `aina. The place. If you don't have a 1388 place to show them what has been done. You know? Then they won't understand. Because, 1389 like, even for my dad when we go fishing like that, he showed me the areas where the moi 1390 stay, where the `aholehole stay, and he even when he died, the areas where the lobster holes 1391 stay, where the certain fishes would stay, like say for the kole, you know? We don't have 1392 access to that area that, it's all gone. So, that's why for me, it's important and you know, it's 1393 for my mom, for my Tutus, all the kupunas that when passed. They cannot speak up for 1394 themselves. Now it's our time to speak for them because they taught us all of this. We should 1395 be the one that speaks for them because they taught us and they taught us well. So that we can 1396 honor them for what they passed down to us. That's my mana`o. 1397 GM: That's really beautifully said. My other question is how you've seen Kaimu change in 1398 your lifetime, the community or the coastline. 1399 HK: You know, you didn't have the opportunity to see the original Kaimu, right? 111 1400 GM: The bay? 1401 HK: The only thing you saw was pictures, yeah? 1402 GM: Yeah. 1403 HK: Ok.1 didn't see it, but from what 1 was told. When you came down from that highway, 1404 the road you come down and then the road used to fork, the left side you go Red Road, the left 1405 side you go down in the back in Kaimu. But in front had this bunch of coconut trees where 1406 people go picnic and used to have one old road. And that old road used to go right across the 1407 bay and hit the other side of Kaimu Road. That's how it used to be.1 never did see it but I just 1408 saw that old road and just from what all our kupunas told us, that road used to go all the way 1409 across. And then, the lava flow came and took everything, and now it's all gone. That is what 1 1410 remember about Kaimu and you know, the left side, that so called subdivision, back in those 1411 days, the local people used to go on the shoreline. Right around that subdivision that go all the 1412 way up to Pu'ilima to go throw net. Because my uncle folks used to go up there to go 1413 holoholo. The people before time, they didn't have an issue with the people going in front and 1414 throw net. It was all ok. But nowadays, oh my gosh, you cannot do that. 1 don't care where 1415 you go, times have changed. Well, because the kupunas is not around to go holoholo,1, I'm 1416 not the type to go around and maha`oi. So, 1 would rather stay in my own area. And, 1 don't 1417 have issue. 1418 GM: 1 think you answered all of the questions I have. if the project were to go through, is 1419 there anything they can do to lessen their impact? 1420 HK: Well, I don't know if you guys are gonna go tomorrow for a walk? 1421 GM: Yeah. 1422 HK: Ok. If you guys go, see if the trail, if the bulldozers push the stones and what not. If they 1423 did, can we get the Native Hawaiian Legal Core involved? Because they're destroying our 1424 cultural heritage. It's not good. Not good. 1425 GM: I'll go look tomorrow. 1426 HK:Ok. 1427 GM: Thank you so much for your time, Uncle Howard. Appreciate it. 1428 112 1429 1430 113 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 APPENDIX 1: INTERVIEW WITH BERNICE WALKER 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 TALKING STORY WITH 114 1458 BERNICE WALKER (BW) 1459 Oral History for Pu`ilima, Kaimu by Gina McGuire (GM) 1460 January 3, 2025 1461 1462 The interview with Aunty Bernice Walker & Uncle Sam Kaho`okaulana included a travelling 1463 huaka`i (journey) from Aunty Bernice's home in Pahoa, to Mokuhulu, to the study area in 1464 Kaimu. 1465 Location: Pu`ilima shoreline, Kaimu, Hawaii Island 1466 (Standing on `a`a flow (state land) directly to the east of the study area.) 1467 BW: So this is where they want to put five homes? 1468 GM: No, you see where it's clear there (pointing to cleared area where study area is). 1469 BW: According to Howard (Konanui), his cousin said our grandfather is buried there. 1470 GM: On this side of the road? 1471 BW: Yes. The family never talked about, when my great-grandfather died. My grandfather 1472 never said anything to us. Makapo Kaho`okaulana. My grandfather, I lived with my grandfather. 1473 Back then, I had my grandfather and two aunties. And we would all come down here. We would 1474 go fish. Over here, used to have ponds with water but they're not there anymore. Maybe because 1475 the ground sank, and they all fell in the water? I think that point over there (pointing to east) 1476 went out further. But with erosion and stuff. Look the fish jumping. My grandfather would 1477 always tell us, "Stay low and Don't move around and stand up high," and you know. `Cause 1478 they can see you. So it was kind of like old teachings. 1479 GM: Can you share why this spot is so special for you? 1480 BW: Why this spot is so special to me? Because it brings back happy and good memories. You 1481 know? We used to come down here and fish, hang ulua pole, spend the night, and watch the 1482 ocean, and listen to my grandfather and listen to him talk about the ocean and fish, and how you 1483 fish down here. It's not like one or two times. We used to come down here all the time. Because 1484 we just lived up the road where we came from. 1485 GM: So this is state land, but that parcel is the one being considered. How do you think that 1486 would affect the coastline? 1487 BW: Well if they don't touch this stretch of the coastline, I don't have a problem because that's 1488 private property. But from what my cousin Ilona said, our great grandfather is buried in there 1489 somewhere. Remember what she said? Don't know what the place looks like. We didn't know 1490 about it. So that would be something we would like to know about. We would like to be able to 1491 find that. That I would be interested in. 1492 GM: Do you know of any mele or oli for this area? 1493 BW: No. I know, I read your handout. 115 1494 GM: Just making sure I go through everything. What are the primary changes you've seen in 1495 this area? 1496 BW: The erosion. The dropping of the land over here. When we had those big earthquakes. 1497 This land over here has dropped considerably. And this spot right over here is where we used 1498 to camp. Inside this little cove on the under. We used to put a tarp over the top. Used to be a 1499 little bigger though. 1500 Location: Aunty Bernice Walker's home in Pahoa, Hawaii Island 1501 GM: Could you start by telling me about yourself and your family background? 1502 BW: My name is Bernice Kaho`okaulana Choy Walker. My mother is Abbie Kaho`ohaulana 1503 from Mokuhulu, Kalapana and my dad is Henry Choy from Honolulu. I lived with my grandpa 1504 since I was two or three years old and I lived with him until I graduated from high school. We 1505 lived in Kalapana in Mokuhulu. My grandmother died when I was five years old so he basically 1506 raised me with my aunties. My parents lived in Pahoa. My dad actually lived in Oahu and my 1507 mother lived in Pahoa but 1 preferred to live with my grandfather, so I was able to live in 1508 Kalapana and I stayed there until 1 graduated from high school. In growing up in Kalapana, our 1509 days were, go to school, com home, do chores, and do household things like feeding the pig and 1510 making hot water to take a bath and cooking and cleaning and picking up the rubbish around 1511 the place and helping with fire wood and helping to clean fish and picking `opihi and helping 1512 with the meat they brought in when they went hunting. That was what I did. My uncles would 1513 come down and then they would go hunt and that's how they got the meat. Mokuhulu, way up 1514 behind, my grandfather would go and he would gather honey. I never went, he never took me, 1515 but there was some kind of a, I guess, little hamlet or something up there where he had fruit 1516 trees and honey and that's where they would go. We didn't have electricity down there so that's 1517 why we boiled hot water to take a bath. Everybody got a bucket of hot water. One of my chores 1518 was to clean the kerosene lanterns, clean the glass, the aniani, because burning at night it would 1519 get burnt with carbon and so I would have to go in with the newspaper and wipe all the carbon. 1520 That was one of my chores. And what we did for fun down there, what we did was climb trees 1521 and vines, mango and just go running around in the bushes. When my grandfather would say, 1522 "let's go fishing." He wouldn't say, "let's go fishing," he would say, "let's go holoholo." We 1523 would all pack up our stuff and go down the beach and spend the day, spend the night. We 1524 would fish and we would play on the rocks and watch what was going on. That was pretty much 1525 life. And of course, catching the bus at 6:30 in the morning. The bus would pick me up to go to 1526 school in Pahoa and drop me off, got me to my house at 3:00 in the afternoon. Yep, so that was 1527 my life when 1 was living in Kalapana. 1528 GM: Do you have any mo`olelo that you'd like to share about the study area? 1529 BW: No, not really. 1530 GM: You shared that the biggest change has been the erosion and the change of the coastline, 1531 you mentioned the potential burial site of Makap6 Kaho`okaulana, are there any other cultural 1532 sites that we should know of in the study site? 1533 BW: Not that I know of. I didn't even know my great-grandfather was buried there and that 1534 remains to be found if he's there. 116 1535 GM: I know we talked about ulua fishing. Are there any other traditional gathering practices 1536 that you want to share? 1537 BW: You know, in the area there's also that papa down below. And there was limu kohu there. 1538 That's the gathering place for limu kohu. 1539 GM: That's good to know. is there anything that developers could do to lessen their impact on 1540 cultural practices in the area? 1541 BW: Continuing access could be a big concern because we know and we hear of other 1542 landowners who have beach front who close off the shoreline and say, "This is my property, 1543 you can't pass through here." And that is something that I personally do not want to see 1544 happening. People who come from the land, the ocean, down in that area, they know what's 1545 what and where, you know, they can go and gather and for you know, outsiders to come in and 1546 tell you, "you cannot do this, you cannot do that," that is just not right. 1547 GM: Do you want to say anything about that trail that we walked on today? 1548 BW: That trail we walked on today is one of two trails. There's one further in the middle. I think 1549 the one further in the middle is used more than that one. But 1 don't know, years have gone by, 1550 and maybe now people just that one that we were on today. 1551 GM: 1 don't know, but my last question, is there anyone else that you recommend we talk story 1552 to? 1553 BW: See, my cousin Boa, we grew up down there. Everyone else down there, they didn't come 1554 down until they were older. They grew up in Honolulu or somewhere else. We are the original 1555 ones down there. And even when we were down there, the Ka`awaloas. But everybody of our 1556 generation are gone already. A lot of these folks they're a lot younger than we are. 1557 GM: So maybe Uncle Boa. 1558 BW: Yeah, for sure, if he'll talk to you. And I don't know about, even Mindy guys, they're 1559 down there, but they're newcomers. Of the old, I don't know anybody else. 1560 GM: Is there anything else you want to add about the place? 1561 BW: I would be really happy if they don't destroy the coastline. There's the section. When the 1562 lava came down, it took the shoreline, but that's the only piece of that older shoreline left. So I 1563 would rather that stay the way it is. And that's my hope anyway, if that can happen. if they 1564 can leave it pristine like it is, that'd be great. 1565 GM: Ok, thank you so touch, Aunty, for sharing your time. 117 oc EXHIBIT A-34 Fwd: SMA permit application review #PL-SMA-2024-000063 From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Date: Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 3:19 PM Subject: Fwd: SMA permit application review #PL-SMA-2024-000063 To: Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov>, Steen, Raimee<Raimee.Steen@hawaiicounty.gov>, <Micah.Alameda@hawaiicounty.gov>,<kimo.alameda@hawaiicounty.gov>, <Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov> Aloha Hawaii County Planning Department and all included to whom this may concern, As native Hawaiian descendants of the affected area in which Kaimu Cove LLC has been applying for a Special Management Area permit. TMK 1-2-018: 00, we at present formally oppose the proposed gated subdivision of 5 homes, as we believe it will and already has had a significant impact on the surrounding area. Including the irreversible and illegal destruction of our Milo grove, already erasing a vital part of our heritage and ecosystem. The background report that states there is no opposition from the public, is incorrect. Please notify us of all related hearings forthcoming, as our perspectives carry significant weight. This area is a historical, valuable and culturally sensitive resource to the lineal and cultural descendants of Kaimu, where we practice and exercise our customary and cultural rights. We are the families directly connected to the Kaipu'uelelu (Makena) Cemetery. Due to insufficient prior notice in the past we request timely information to ensure our attendance at these hearings. Mahalo for your time as well as considering our stance and request. Sincerely, Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Chair - Wai Welawela Hilo, HI. 96720 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakupelemaka.org> Date: Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 12:59 PM Subject: SMA permit application review #PL-SMA-2024-000063 To: Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Aloha Alex, My name is Leila Kealoha from Puna. I am inquiring about the application for the SMA permit for the Kaimu Cove, LLC, TMK 1-2-018: 001 which proposes building a 5-lot subdivision. I am a lineal descendant of the Kaipueleu "Makena" gravesite across the street and I provided testimony at the October meeting in opposition of this project. Director Kern at the time asked for the landowners to provide either an AIS or a CIA for the project. EXHIBIT "A-34" I am still perturbed about the situation because I called and reached out in December of 2022 in opposition to this project representing many other family members. We met with the SMA planners at that time, Tracie Lee and another person (male). They said they would contact us when this application came up for review and we were never contacted by them. I literally found out the day before this meeting occurred it was happening. I would like to formally be notified if and when this application will be placed on the agenda if possible two weeks in advance to the meeting occurring. I also have a cousin who is a lineal descendant to this gravesite, Leslie Rosehill attached to this email and she needs to be informed as well. This is so we can inform our family members in a timely manner. I appreciate your cooperation in our request and I look forward to hearing back from you Happy Aloha Friday! Leila Kealoha Executive Director Pohaku Pelemaka Pahoa, HI 96778 He ali'i ka 'aina, he kauwa ke kanaka "The land is chief, and man is its servant." It is our kuleana as kanaka to care for the lands that feed us EXHIBIT A-35 From: Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicountv_.gov> Date: Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 12:17PM Subject: RE: Kaimu Cove LLC (PL-SMA-2024-000063) To: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Cc: Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakunelemaka.org>, Darrow, Jeff <Jeff.Darrow @hawaiicounty.gov>, Ku`ulei Kealoha-Cooper Gina McGuire Daryn Arai Leslie, We do not have the experience to review a CIA, that would be sent to SHPD for review and acceptance/recommendations. If you do not want to share it with SHPD that is up to you, but we rely on SHPD for all cultural reviews. Thank you, Alex J. Roy, MSc County of Hawaii Planning Department —Hilo Office SMA Section — Planner VI From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Sent: Wednesday, September p.,"Rq:::R"� To: Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty_gov> Cc: Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakupelemaka.org>; Darrow, Jeff <Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicount . ov>; Ku`ulei Kealoha-Cooper Gina McGuire 1of13 EXHIBIT "A-35" Subject: Re: Kaimu Cove LLC (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Mahalo e Roy, I appreciate your kokua in responding to my questions. I also appreciate Director Darrow in opening up his schedule to meet with us directly. Mahalo nui for your time and consideration. Also in attachment is the recent article in Ka Wai Ola pertaining to this issue. As well as the petition collecting support in opposition of development. As mentioned by Leila in previous email, we have prepared an independent Cultural Impact Assessment through a reputable source, and we intend to hand -deliver it to you in person at the upcoming meeting. Given the sensitivity of its contents and the context in which it was prepared, we respectfully request that it not be shared or circulated beyond your office without consent. We offer these documents in the spirit of kuleana and transparency, to support your discernment in decision -making. The materials previously submitted do not encompass the full scope of cultural, procedural, and lineal descendant concerns that deserve consideration. October 9th at 10 am will work for me to meet in person as suggested by Aunty Ku'ulei and Leila Kealoha. Article : https://kawaiola.news/aina/resisting-erasure-and-gentrification-at-kaimu/ Petition: httpLL//c.org/LCCwnn grM I have yet been able to review Lokelani Brandts work done, with ASM if you could please share that with us, in preparation of our meeting. Or direct me in how I can obtain a copy of it. Mahalo nui. 2of13 Me ka ha'aha'a, Leslie Enriquez Rosehill. On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 9:06 AM Roy, Alex <Alex.Rov@hawaiicounty_.gov> wrote: See my responses in RED. Alex J. Roy, MSc County of Hawaii Planning Department — Hilo Office SMA Section — Planner VI From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Sent: Monday, September 22, P" To: Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakupelemaka.org>; Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy 9hawaiicounty_gov>; Darrow, Jeff <Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty_gov>; Ku`ulei Kealoha-Cooper c: Gina McGuire Subject: Re: Kaimu ove - - 4-000063) Aloha Planning Department, I'm writing to follow up on the parcel associated with Kaimu Cove LLC and the recent SMA permit application submitted by Mark Wyatt on September 15, 2025. After reviewing EPIC and related communications, I'd like clarification on several points: 1. Conflicting Development Descriptions • On June 12, 2025, Lisa Benham contacted the Planning Department stating the intent to build two single-family homes. - However, the September 15 SMA application submitted by Mark Wyatt describes plans for one single-family home and a pickleball court with a 5 foot rock wall surrounding the parcel. - Can you confirm whether the current SMA application reflects the full scope of intended development? If not, will an updated application be required? 3of13 The current request is for one (1) single-family residence. We have no other requests for development at this time. I cannot comment on what may or may not happen in the future. 2. Site Activity and Permitting • Community members have reported that water lines have been laid, septic preparation is underway, and a rock wall is being planned. • I was unable to locate any approved permits in EPIC to support these claims. • Can you confirm whether any permits have been issued for water, septic, grading, or construction on this parcel? No SMA permits have been approved for work on the parcel; however, we have not received any official complaint that specifically calls out the above -mentioned alleged development. 3. Pending Archaeological and Cultural Assessments • An Archaeological Resource Survey is still listed as pending in EPIC. Has this survey been completed or approved? • A Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) or Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) was previously requested by Planning Director Zendo Kern. Has either been submitted or reviewed? SHPD has reviewed the project site and has stated that there are no historic properties that will be impacted by the original proposed development. We have also met with SHPD to ensure review of any new proposed development as required by law. 4. Follow -Up with SHPD I will also be contacting SHPD again to follow up on the status of these assessments and to inquire about potential damage already done to the site. Ground disturbance has occurred without clearance. OK. 5. Lack of Communication with Descendants 4of13 As descendants with ancestral ties to this land, we have not been contacted or consulted yet on this new application. The lack of communication is deeply concerning, especially given the cultural and historical significance of the area. We ask that future steps include meaningful outreach. OK. 6. Fines and Enforcement We are aware that fines have already been issued in connection with this parcel. Can you please confirm: • The nature of these fines (e.g., unauthorized activity, procedural violations)? • Whether any enforcement actions have been taken or are pending? • Whether these fines have been paid, contested, or escalated? No fines have been paid to date. Resolution of these types of enforcement cases usually comes via the approval of a permit. I cannot comment on current enforcement procedures as I am not privy to that information. Mahalo for your time and consideration. Akua pu Leslie Enriquez Rosehill On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 9:30 AM Leslie Enriquez Rosehill wrote: Aloha kakou My name is Leslie Rosehill, and I am writing to you as a descendant of Kaimu, Hawaii. I am part of the Kaho'okaulana 'ohana, whose ancestral ties to this land is deeply rooted and well documented. Our family lineage traces back before the 1800s, with our kupuna buried in Kaipu'uelelu. We continue to reside here, maintaining our cultural practices, honoring our ancestors, and stewarding the'aina that has sustained our people for generations. 5of13 I am writing to formally express my strong opposition once again to the proposed development by Kaimy Cove LLC in the sacred area of Pu'ilima and Kalaehiamoe. I fully support and echo the sentiments shared in previous correspondence by Aunty Ku'ulei and Leila, whose voices represent the broader concerns of our community and'ohana. As requested, I have attached a list of names and signatures from individuals who were available to sign in person and stand in solidarity with this opposition. Additionally, I am providing the link to an online petition that has garnered 150 signatures from community members and supporters who share our concerns: https:Hchng.it/w48GKsF8m5 This petition reflects a growing collective voice calling for the protection of Pu'ilima and Kaipu'uelelu Complex from development. the proposed project threatens cultural integrity, historical significance, and spiritual sanctity of this wahi pana. Our community is deeply concerned about the lack of meaningful consultation with lineal descendants and the desecration of ancestral burial grounds. We respectfully urge you to: - Immediately halt any current or future development plans in the Pu'ilima area. -Recognize Pu'ilima and Kaipu'ueleu as culturally protected sites. -Engage in direct dialogue with Native Hawaiian families who have generational ties to this 'aina. I look forward to your response to both Aunty Ku'uleis and Leilas email, and I ask that you give this matter the serious attention it deserves. Mahalo for your time and consideration, and respect for our community's voice. Me ka'oia'i'o, Leslie Enriquez Rosehill 6of13 Descendant of Kaimu Enriquez - Kaho'okaulana'Ohana On Friday, August 1, 2025, Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakupelemaka.org> wrote: Aloha e Alex and Director Darrow, This is a follow up response to Aunty Ku`ulei`s email, as well as to my January 24th email that we requested a two week notice of the next agendized meeting for the Kaimu Cove, LLC SMA Permit application. My Puna `ohana who I can speak for (which is over 100) and my father, grandparents, great-grandparents, great-grandparents and their siblings, their children, aunties and uncles who are buried at the cemetery across the street and and I are in TOTAL OPPOSITION to this proposed project! We respectfully request that the Windward planing commission withdraw the Kaimu Cove, LLC SMA permit application at this time. Leslie, could you please share the sign in sheet from our June 13th meeting as well as the sheets that are in opposition to this project please. This list will become much larger when we organize to oppose this project. Alex, the sheet that was used to ask who is in opposition was not circulated until after half of the ohana had left, which I believe is about 35 people. We can share that our meeting, which was not a consultation with our `ohana, but rather a request for the developers to share what their plans were lasted over 3-hours which we abruptly shut down because Mark Wyatt was very rude and blatantly disregarded anything and everything we shared with them. 7of13 Leslie also has the zoom recording of the meeting which can show you folks that this was not a consultation meeting, rather an informational meeting for the `ohana. Also, we have been working on our own CIA to share that is being compiled by a reputable person and this will be shared when we are ready. I have been in opposition of this development since I had to bury my dad across the street in December of 2022 and I felt completely disrespected and disregarded when the developers stated at the October 2024 commision meeting that there was no opposition. I can forward emails between Tracie-Lee who was the planner working on this project at the time and Director Kern if you need. I greatly appreciate the follow up by Aunty Ku`ulei and her diligence in ensuring that this does not "Fall through the Cracks" once again. I humbly ask that you folks the Planning department and the Windward planning commission withdraw the Kaimu Cove, LLC`s SMA permit application at this time. I also want to say thank you for your ability to communicate with us in a timely manner. Me ke aloha pumehana, Leila Kealoha On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 10:32 AM wrote: Alex: First, I appreciate your response to my inquiry (which was first requested via phone messages and emails, over a month ago) with regard to the Kaimu Cove LLC SMA permit application referenced above. For your information, on May 25, 2025, a meeting was held with the original 8of13 families of the Kaimu area to discuss the proposed development. The meeting was coordinated by several lineal descendants, and the Applicant(s) were invited. There were approximately 70 people present, all of whom are originally from the Kaimu and Kalapana area. The Applicant did not make any overture to meet with the community, which they blamed the Planning Department for not advising them to do so. In my view, the onus is upon the Applicant to inform the community of the proposed development, not the responsibility of the Planning Department nor the lineal descendants. The information shared by the Applicant, and the subsequent discussion at the meeting was tenuous. Therefore, to your statement regarding 'lack of any cooperation from the community" was self inflicted. Our community is not beholden to "cooperate" with any developer, especially when developers are not forthcoming. In fact, we found out that this proposed project was on the Windward Planning Commission agenda for October 3, 2024, the day before the meeting. Several requests made to the Planning Department to be kept informed about this proposed project, and when it would be heard at the Commission were ignored. Zendo Kern, Planning Director at the time, took full responsibility for the oversight at the Windward Planning Commission meeting. He "fell on his sword" to protect his staff who was responsible for the oversight, which shows his integrity. I am thankful for his response to the testimony provided, and his suggestions that followed (ie. adding the CIA condition, potentially rescinding his "favorable recommendation", etc.) As to your statement "no work is permitted to occur on the parcel until the SMA permit has been issued", perhaps "no further work" is more appropriate. Grading and grubbing has already been done evidenced by the September 29, 2022 notice from the Planning Department to cease and desist grubbing that began in July, 2022 and continued through mid -August, 2022. Additionally, the Applicant graded and grubbed into the State land adjacent to the subject parcel. The damage done to the milo grove, and potentially one (1) significant cultural site, is most concerning. The Applicant is oblivious to the history and cultural significance of the area, shown by the blatant disregard of laws in place to protect cultural sites. The past actions of the Applicant have raised concerns within our community, which have not been addressed by the Applicant to date. 9of13 In reading the SHPD comments dated September 6, 2024 regarding this proposed project, it addresses the cultural sites, of which one was assumed to have been destroyed: (*SHPD Report - Page 2 /Paragraph 2) Site 50- 10- 63- 18525 was not relocated and was assumed to have been destroyed as the area exhibited evidence of ground -disturbing activities. Site 50- 10- 63-18526 and Site 50- 10- 63- 18527 were observed to be in a similar condition as originally recorded by Spear (1992); Site # 50- 10- 63- 18528 was observed as having been impacted by land - clearing ( push) activities. We will continue to vehemently oppose this proposed development, given the cultural significance of the area, and the family graveyard in the immediate area. Of note, not all gravesites are marked, nor are they recorded, as it was historically common practice not to share information as to the placement of remains. Prior to the Kalapana-Kapoho Road being developed, the immediate area was historically known as a cultural "complex", which was described in detail during testimony at the Windward Planning Commission meeting. We are also aware of the history regarding the previous SMA application that was submitted by the previous owner, and the challenges faced at that time. It is apparent that this property is not conducive to development, and frankly was zoned Conservation prior to the change to Urban zoning which raises additional concerns. Please pardon my ignorance as to the process, as I have several questions. What is the current time frame allocated to this SMA "After the Fact" application, and does the Applicant have deadlines to adhere to? As to the fines levied for the illegal grubbing and grading, to include the August 4, 2023 notification of Commencement of Daily Fines commenced as of October 11, 2022 for failure to comply with corrective actions by June 15, 2023, which was extended to June 26, 2024 to comply. What is the status? 10 of 13 Have all corrective actions been completed as required by the Planning Department? What is the amount of fines levied due to the illegal grading and grubbing? Will the fines be forgiven if the SMA "After the Fact" permit is awarded? I have copied two (2) of the lineal descendants of Kaimu, Leila Kealoha, and Leslie Enriquez Rosehill, who represent the majority of the lineal descendants of Kaimu who still reside in the area. For your information, both have sent several inquiries regarding this proposed development with no response. I trust all future communication will include them both. I am formally requesting that we be advised should the Applicant file a formal request to amend the current application, and all pertinent information (including the submittal of the CIA) regarding this proposed development. Should the proposed project be agendized again at the Windward Planning Commission, I am formally requesting we be notified in advance. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to your response. Respectfully submitted, Ku'ulei Kealoha Cooper Phone Contact: 11 of 13 On Monday, July 28, 2025 at 02:54:41 PM HST, Roy, Alex <alex.roy@hawaiicounty_.gov> wrote: Kuulei, I received a request you submitted regarding the subject application. The Director and I had a meeting with the applicant a few weeks ago to discuss how they are moving forward as the project has stalled out due to lack of any cooperation from the community. It appears that they are no longer pursuing the subdivision, however, we have not received a formal request to amend the current application, so I am not sure until they submit something. Note that no work is permitted to occur on the parcel until the SMA permit has been issued. As for the AIS or CIA, we have not seen anything final. Please note that only SHPD can request the AIS, the Planning Commission does not have that authority. From what I have been told, a CIA was being worked on, but we have not seen a final copy or draft yet. To date the project is on hold and not scheduled for any hearing or determination. I have no other information about the project until they submit something formal to the Planning Dept. Thank you, Alex J. Roy, MSc 12 of 13 County of Hawaii Planning Department —Hilo Office SMA Section — Planner VI Executive Director Pohaku Pelemaka 13-3749 Old Kalapana Road Pahoa, HI 96778 (808) 937-7991 He ali`i ka `i ina, he kauwa ke kanaka "The land is chief, and man is its servant." It is our kuleana as kanaka to care for the lands that feed us 13 of 13 EXHIBIT A-36 Roy, Alex From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2025 7:24 AM To: Darrow, Jeff Cc: Leila Kealoha; Roy, Alex; Gina McGuire Subject: Re: Meeting Re: Kaimu Cove LLC (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Aloha mai kakou Director Darrow, respectfully request an immediate Stop Work Order for all activity on this parcel by your office if it has not been issued yet. The State Historic Preservation Division has received the Cultural Impact Assessment. Proceeding with development before SHPD completes its review violates HRS §6E and SMA permitting conditions, especially those requiring consultation with lineal and cultural descendants. I'm in the understanding that even if this project holds a Minor SMA Permit (which neither have been issued yet), it remains subject to HRS §205A and HRS §6E. All development in the SMA, including small single-family dwellings, requires proper review. Please add my information to HICRIS. I will also be submitting to your office the summary of our ohana meeting, within the next few days. Ingratitude and aloha, again mahalo for your time and consideration. Mahalo for your quick response on my request for site inspection. Looking forward to hearing the outcome. Mahalo, uez Rosehill Chair Wai Welawela On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 6:10 AM Darrow, Jeff<ieff.darrow(Ebhawaiicountv.aov> wrote: Aloha Leila, EXHIBIT "A-36" Thank you, along with Klr`Lrlel, Leslie and Gina for meeting with us to discuss this sensitive matter. We did receive your photos and video. Alex and Mark did a site inspection yesterday and I will speak with them when they get in this morning. Alex, please upload the submittal(s) from Leila to HICRIS. It is our understanding that the applicant is in the process of withdrawing the request for a 5-lot subdivision and is seeking to build a smaller single-family dwelling on the parcel. As mentioned in the meeting, it is very difficult to deny this type of request, which was previously an exempt action. We are waiting for the comments from SHPD and will follow their recommendations regarding cultural, historical, and archaeological sites and resources. Additionally, we are going to be adding a condition for public access to the ocean. We will keep you informed to any decision that will be made. Thanx, Jeff From: Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakupelemaka.org_ Sent: Monday, October 13, 2025 6:11 PM To: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Cc: Darrow, Jeff <'eff.darro Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.Mov Gina McGuire Subject: Re: Meeting Re: Kaimu Cove LLC (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Aloha Kakou, E First of all I want to mahalo Director Darrow and Alex for meeting with us and a big mahalo to Aunty Ku'ulei, Leslie and Gina for your folks dedication, work and support. This has been a very sensitive subject and a challenging process to be blatantly disregarding the laws. Lineal descendants should not be ignored as well. My `ohana had a family reunion this weekend and we were all at our `ohana gravesite. I saw the work being done across the street and I was shocked to say the least. Whatwill be the outcome of this? I don't think fines are serious enough. This person will disregard anything being thrown at him and will do whatever he feels suits his needs. My only recommendation for this project is to shut it down and not allow anything to occur on the property. I also redo that a full EIS be done for this property and the surrounding area. Please use this email to communicate and add it to the HICRIS access. Again, I truly appreciate all of your kokua and efforts on this matter. Me ke aloha pumehana, Leila Executive Director Pohaku Pelemaka 13-3749 Old Kalapana Road Pahoa,H196778 (808) 937-7991 He a[Vi ka `aina, he kauwa ke kanaka "The land is chief, and man is its servant." It is our kuleana as kanaka to care for the lands that feed us On Sun, Oct 12, 2025 at 7:08 PM Leslie Enriquez Rosehill wrote: E Kalamai, photos were not attatched in the last email with video documentation . So I am sending them here. Mahalo Leslie On Sun, Oct 12, 2025 at 7:05 PM Leslie Enriquez Rosehill wrote: Aloha Director Darrow and Alex, Thank you for meeting with us last week. I am writing to report and request follow-up regarding recent activity observed on property over the weekend of 10-1 1-2025. This appears to have occurred outside of permitted work. Specifically, the following actions were documented: • Use of a backhoe on site • Construction of anchors to front double gate and trench dug. Building of a rock wall. • Movement of material and visible alteration of terrain. Requesting confirmation of whether any permits authorize weekend work or the use of heavy machinery on this site. Clarification whether the construction of the rock wall was reviewed or approved. Would a site inspection or follow-up to assess potential violations or discrepancies be possible? Advise on next steps for formal documentation and enforcement, if applicable. It's deeply troublingto me that Mark Wyatt, Kaimu Cove LLC, continues to disregard compliance. I appreciate your time and mahalo for all that you do. Included in attachments are video and photos taken 10-11-2025. look forward to your response. Me ka ha'aha'a Leslie Uhau Enriquez Rosehill On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 1:14 PM Darrow, Jeff <ieff.darrow(E0hawaiicount . ov> wrote: Aloha Kti'ulei, We really appreciate each of you taking the time to meet with us regarding this development. We appreciate your insight and look forward to receiving the information requested. We will keep you informed of any action that we contemplate with these applications (the SMA Major for the subdivision or the SMA Minor for the proposed dwelling). Thanx, Jeff From: Sent: To: Darrow, Jeff <Loseh�ill� ount ov>- Ro Alex <alex.rov@hawaiicounty.eov> Cc: Leslie EnriqueLeila Kealoha <leila@Pohakupelemaka.org>; Gina McGuire Subject: Meeting Re: Kaimu Cove LLC (PL-SMA-2024-000063) Aloha Jeff and Alex: Thank you kindly for spending your valuable time with us this morning to discuss the proposed development in Kaimu. We appreciate your transparency, and for providing clarity as to the process and procedures to ensure any development along our shorelines adhere to laws in place. As we discussed, Leslie and Leila will provide via separate email their contact information to be added to the HICRIS file for the proposed development. Thank you in advance for adding them to the file in order to be kept advised of all information pertaining to this application. I have spoken to Sean Naleimaile and discussed there are inaccuracies in the previous report submitted to SHPD for this proposed development, and that we are requesting the case be reopened. He asked for the additional information, and stated that he will review it upon receipt. told Sean that we firmly believe an AIS needs be ordered by SHPD in order to ensure no further cultural sites are destroyed or disturbed in the project area. I will copy you both on my email to Sean. Alex, it was lovely to meet you and I have great respect for your experience in working with these types of projects. I appreciate your candor, and willingness to work with us moving forward. In closing, thank you again for your valuable time this morning. I look forward to when our paths cross again, and please take good care. Aloha no, (Aunty) Ku'ulei EXHIBIT A-37 EXHIBIT A-38 C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D. .'Mayor William V. Brilhante, Jr. Nfanaging Director West Hawai' i Office 74-5044 Ane Keohok5lole Hwy Kailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740 Phone (808) 323-4770 Fax (808) 327-3563 October 14, 2025 County of Hawaii PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mr. Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cov Via email: wwwww Dear Mr. Wyatt, Jeffrey W. Darrow Director Michelle S. Alin Deputy Director East Hawai'i Office 101 Pauahi Street, Suilc 3 Hilo, Hawaii 967,U Phone 961 Fax fSOS) 96 1 -8742 SUBJECT: Stop Work Order Reference: Work Occurring Onsite on October 11, 2025 TZIK: 1-2-018:00 112-7789 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, Pahoa, Hawai'i STOP WORK ORDER This Stop Work Order is sent to you to inform you to stop any unpermitted work that may be conducted on the above -mentioned property. Immediately cease and desist any and all work occurring at TMK 1-2-018:001, 12-7789 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, until the submitted application for work in the Special Management Area (SMA) has been acted upon. The property is owned by Kaimu Cove LLC, which consists of approximately 3.8 acres and is located within the State Land Use (U) Urban and within the County of Hawai'i RA-.5a Zoning District. SITE INSPECTION REPORT A site inspection of the property was conducted on October 13, 2025, at approximately 10:15am which revealed the following: 1. The Planning staff observed two (2) small trenches that had been dug which flank the interior gate, along with two steel supports attached to the gate. The trenches were estimated 10-12 feet long, 2-ft wide, approximately 1-ft deep within the natural ground, and a large mound of gravel material. There were no people or equipment located onsite. w%-w.t3lannina.hawaiicounty.aov Haiaai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer EXHIBIT "A-38" platuiina dhawaiicounty.aov Mr. Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC October 14, 2025 Page 2 The Planning Department received additional information and photographs on October 12, 2025, which described work was being done on October 11, 2025, to the front double gate including a trench, the building of a rock wall, and visible movement of material occurring with a use of a backhoe. Based on the above information, the Planning Director issues this order to cease and desist with any and all work on the subject property. If work continues without proper SMA permits, a Notice of Violation will be issued with additional fines. For any questions regarding this order, please contact Planning Inspector Annalyn Seguban or Mark Iwamoto preferably by e-mail at planning(ir),hawaiicounty_izov. For questions regarding HRS 205A Coastal Zone Management, please contact Planner Mr. Alex Roy at our Hilo Office at (808) 961-8140. Sincerely, JeiLe IV. bwow Jeffie,'A'. Darror;Od:15, 2025 0&49:43 H57`i Jeffrey W. Darrow Planning Director As/MI/AR:ta V:\PL\PL\planning\public\Enforcement\TMKFilesVONE 1 Sec. 1-1 to 1-4\1-2-019-001\CeaseDesistKaitnuCoveLLCPL-PCV-2022-00015 (jwd).doc Cc: Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC Via email: kaimu.cove(a�gmail.com and kehena(ckmail.com Administrative Permits Division Planning Inspectors Via email: Annalyn.Seguban a,hawaiicounty_.izov Mark. Iwamoto(k)hawaiicounty_gov Planning Division Via email: Alex.Roy_ra�hawaiicounty.goy Mai ja.Jackson(Nhawaiicounty_goy EXHIBIT A-39 C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D. An ur- %Villian) VIitilliatlic, Jr. V1,r?!a,-le! ^ f)n','a'r,.r l4'r.�s Efa�.ai-i i}ITia'r '.1-�u l l Anc Kti !o :ok rioILr I hN k;riI,!o-k.,nj. IIm% i i )n"ors CERTIFICD MAIL 7020 1290 0001 4429 4441 October 29, 2025 County of Hawa1`x PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mr. Mark Wyatt Kairnu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC P.O. Box 4501 I-lilo, III 96720 Via email: Dear Mr. Wyatt, Jaffrey W. Darrow Dir•ec•far Michelle S. Ahn Deepvty Director Fist Hawaii office 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 i'ltcttu (208)961-8288 Fax (808) 9151-8742 SUBJECT: 21d Notice of Violation and Order (NOVO) Reference: Stop Work Order dated October 14, 2025 `1'MK: 1-2-018:001, 12-7789 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, Pahoa, Hav►�ai`i F INDINGS: Our initial investigation, based on a complaint, has revealed the following: The property is located at TMK (3) 1-2-018:001, 12-7789 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, and is hereinafter referred to as the "property". The property is owned by Kaimu Cove LLC and consisting of approximately 3.8 acres is located within the State Land Use Urban (U) and within the County of Hawaii, Zoning District Agricultural (RA-.5a). On October 28, 2025, our Planning Department staff observed additional unpermitted work being conducted on the subject property with a yellow excavator and its operator. In addition, there were several areas of additional ground disturbances which may be for the purpose of your proposed pickle ball court. In addition, our staff observed a yellow septic tank and several piles of base course material. NOTICE OF VIOLATION The Planning Department issued you a Stop Work Order dated October 14, 2025, informing you to stop any unpermitted work that may be occurring on the subject property. You have failed to www.planniiig.hawaiicoun!y.gov Hawai'i County is art Eguar Oppornuritr Provide)- and Employer p1anin&Ld4hawaiicoun . gov EXHIBIT "A-39" Mr. Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC October 29, 2025 Page 2 comply with the stop work orclLr- th, 3iQI'Orc you are being issued a 2"d NOVO with an additional tine in the sum of'$10,000, which wi I l b` added to the previous NOVO fine. Based on the foreooin2, you are in violation as follows: 9-8 (a) No developmemt shall be allowed within the Special Management Area without obtaining a permit in accordance with this rule. Therefore, the Department is issuing you a Notice of Violation and Order, with an additional administrative fine in the sum of ten thousand ($1I0,000) for the development of property (Additional Unperrnitted Development) without a Special Management Area (SMA) permit. The violation must be corrected as stated in the Order below on or before the stated deadline date to avoid the accrual of daily fines. ORDER You are hereby ordered to take the following corrective action(s) at your own expense: 1) Immediately cease and desist all work occurring on the subject property until your SMA permit is secured. 2) Immediately remove the excavator and septic tank from the subject property. 3) Pay the l" SMA NOVO fine in the sum of S10,000 and the 2n4 NOVO SMA fine in the sutra of $10,000, equaling to the total of $20,000. 4) Pay all fines due to this office by or before thirty (30) days from the elate of the Postmaster Stamped date on the certified letter. Payment may be made by cash, cashier's check, or money order. Personal checks are not accepted. Make cashier's check or money order payable to the County Director of Finance. 5) Contact the Planning Inspector listed to arrange a site inspection to verify removal of the excavator and septic tank. RULE 9. SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA 9-4 Definitions: a) "Assessment" means an evaluation by the Department of a proposed use, activity, or operation to determine whether a Special Management Area Use permit is required. e) "Development" means any of the following uses, activities, or operations on land or in or under water within the Special Management Area: (1) "Development" includes the following: Mr. Marls Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC October 29, 2025 Page 3 (A) Placement or erection of any solid material or any gaseous, liquid, solid, or thermal waste. (B) Grading, removing, dredging, mining, or extraction of any materials. (3) Any proposed use, activity, or operation listed in Section 9-4(e) (2) shall be deemed to be "Development" until the Director has dctcrmined it to be exempted from the definition of"development." (4) Whenever the Director finds that any excluded use, activity, or operation may have a cumulative impact, or a significant adverse environmental or ecological effect on the Special Management Area, that use, activity, or operation shall be defined as "development" for the purpose of this rule. 9-8 Permits required for development: a) No development shall be allowed within the Special Management Area without obtaining a permit in accordance with this rule. b) No State or County Agency authorized to issue permits within the Special Management Area shall authorize any development unless approval is first received in accordance with this rule. GENERAL INFORMATION 9-17 Penalties (a) Any person who violates any provision or this rule shall be liable for (1) a civil fine not to exceed $100,000; or (2) for the cost of returning the affected environment or ecology within the Special Management Area to the condition existing before the violation. (b) In addition to any other penalties, any person who is violating any provision of this rule shall be liable for a civil fine not to exceed $10,000 a day for each day in which such violation persists. (c) Any civil fine or other penalty provided under this rule may be imposed by the circuit court or by the Planning Department after an opportunity for a hearing under Chapter 91, HISS. 9-19 Administrative Fines The Department is authorized to impose administrative fines in accordance with established rules. Mr. Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC October 29, 2025 Page 4 What happens if you do not correct the violation? A violation that is not corrected by the deadline date may be assessed daily fines. Can you appeal this Notice of Violation`' Yes. In accordance with Section 6-9.2 (a) of the Hawaii County Charter, the Board of Appeals is authorized to hear and determine any appeal from the final decisions of the Planning Director. I. An appeal shall be electronically submitted in the format prescribed by the Board of Appeals and shall specify the person's interest in the subject matter of the appeal and the grounds of the appeal. Unless otherwise specifically provided by the Board of Appeals rules, an electronic copy of each document shall be filed. A filing fee of $250 shall accompany any such appeal. (Application must be submitted electronically) 2. The appellant, landowner(s) if not the appellant, and the director shall be parties to an appeal. Other persons may be admitted as parties to an appeal, as permitted by the Board of Appeals. For your convenience, we have provided the website address for Hawaii County's new EPIC System (Electronic Processing and Information Center) for applications. Appeal must be submitted electronically, WEBSITE: httus:llhawaiicountvhi-energovpul).tvierhost.net/AppslSe[fServiee#/home Due Date for Appeal: The appeal must be received within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt of this Notice of Violation and Order. An appeal to the Board of Appeals shall not stay the provisions of the Director's "Order" pending the final decision of the Board of Appeals. The appeal must be made in accordance with the Board of Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedures, or it may result in the dismissal of the appeal. What happens if I lose my appeal? The assessment and accumulation of fines does not stop when you file for an appeal. If the Board of Appeals denies your appeal, then you will be required to pay your fines from the day the fines began to the date the violation(s) has been corrected, which must be verified by the Planning Department. You can also take corrective action as described in this letter and stop the daily fines while appealing. If you do not take corrective action, daily fines will continue to accrue incrementally. Should you acquire the services of an attorney/counsel representation., then you are required to also submit a letter of consent with your response letter authorizing the County to correspond and respond to the attorney/counsel representation. Mr. Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC October 29, 2025 Page 5 Can 1 get a tine extension to have more time to correct the violation? 'NO, this is they 2"a NOVO and Order with fines against you therefore you will not be allowed to request for a time extension. Daily lines may begin accruing from the date of this letter until the violation E5 corrected. For any questions re-arding this order, please contact Planning Inspector Annalyn Seguban or Mark Iwamoto preferably by e-mail at planning@ hawaiicounty.gov.. For questions regarding IIRS 205A Coastal Zone Management, please contact Planner Mr. Alex Roy at our Hilo Office at (SOS) 961-8140. Sincerely, ��'' �y a�� IV al Je4rey . d1ir,: ct 29. 2�i_,5 i. , -k�5 HST; JEFFREY W. DARROW Planning Director MVJD:ad V:%Pl:1PLI,planiiitig{subkic�Enforrement1TMK FilegO:4NF I Sec. I•I to 1-4%1-24U18-001�2025-1Q-29 Pl.-PCV-2022-00015 2ndnovc.Kn1muCoveL1.C.doc cc: Mark Wyatt Kairnu Cove LLC Via email: kaimu.coveC&ugmail.com and kehena(a),gmail.eom Alex Roy, SMA Planner VI. Via entail: alex.rU hawaiicounty.gov Jean Campbell, Deputy Corporation Counsel Via email: iean.carnnbellQhawaiicounty.g_ov Hans Santiago, Administrative Permits Planner Via email: hans.saiitia�o@hawaiicounty.gav Mayor Kimo Alameda Via email: kimo.alameda�7a hawaiicounty.gov EXHIBIT A-40 From: Leslie Enriouez Rosehill To: Darrow. Jeffrey W. Cc: Roy. Alex; Steen, Raimee; Ku'ulei Kealoha-Cooper; Leila Kealoha; Gina McGuire Subject: Re: Continued SMA Violations at Kaimu Cove Property — Enforcement Still Pending Date: Wednesday, October 29, 2025 11:39:02 AM Attachments: imaae001.12no Aloha e Director Darrow I appreciate your communication. I was advised that the Windward Planning Committee can indeed initiate an easement to "restore" and or protect an already destroyed trail, especially if it holds cultural, recreational significance over a certain time period. It is to my understanding that it has to be one or the other and the two requests can not co -exist, a new easement vs an old historical trail which is called an "easement by prescription." Easement by prescription is recognized in Hawaii Courts. The use of this trail has been documented, testimony has been created and there are cultural records of it, which meets the criteria. The illegal land work and the destruction/negligence of our traditional fishing trail has already been documented with reference to a police report, which allows agencies grounds to intervene, the request of re- establishing what was destroyed is not far fetched. As we discussed in our in person meeting, this has been done before. A new easement is not feasible. Please clarify, as this is extremely weighing to watch the desecration continue. -How are these new fines being tracked and enforced? Will they be? -What steps are being taken to hold the negligent landowners accountable? -What timeline can we expect for escalation if noncompliance continues as expected? Mahalo for your time and consideration. I appreciate your understanding. Me ka ha'aha'a Leslie Enriquez Rosehill On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 7:44 AM Darrow, Jeffrey W. <Jeff.Darrow(4�hawaiicounty.gov> wrote: Aloha Ms. Rosehill, Thank you for the information that you have provided. Our staff did conduct a site visit and reiterated the stop work order to those onsite. They are drafting a notice that will be sent out once completed. The Planning Department cannot create an easement on private property without being part of a planning permitting process. In this case, the public access easement would be established as part of the SMA permitting process, which is still in progress. EXHIBIT "A-40" Thanx, Jeff Jeffrey W. Darrow Planning Director Cozmty of'Hawcrii Plaiming Department 101 Pauahi Street, Sitite 3 Hilo, H196720 808-961-8158 County of Hawai'i U Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any review, use, disclosure, or distribution by unintended recipients is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2025 1:16 PM To: Darrow, Jeffrey W. <Jeff.DarrowCcDhawaiicounty.gov>; Roy, Alex <Alex.RoyCDhawaiicounty.gov>; Steen, Raimee <Raimee.Steen(@hawaiicountygov> Cc: Ku`ulei Kealoha-Cooper Leila Kealoha <leila ftohakupelemaka.org>; Gina McGuire Subject: Continued SMA Violations at Kaimu Cove Property — Enforcement Still Pending Aloha, I am following up on my previous report regarding the illegal use of a backhoe on the Kaimu Cove property in the Puna District. Despite the County's issuance of a stop -work order, the desecration has continued, most recently on October 12th and again on October 27th with no visible enforcement or consequence. The backhoe, owned by Mark Wyatt, has been used repeatedly by hired operators to disturb the land. The current construction of a pickleball court is being carried out with no regard for the SMA permitting process, environmental protections, or cultural sensitivity. These actions are not only unlawful, they are deliberate. The developers, Mark Wyatt and Kaimu Cove LLC, have submitted incomplete and biased documentation throughout the SMA application process. Their actions reflect a pattern of disregard for the law and for the community's efforts to engage in good faith. The descendants of Kaimu have worked diligently with your department and others to protect our home, yet our documented concerns have gone unanswered. I am respectfully demanding that the Windward Planning Department fulfill its kuleana by: • Enforcing the stop work order already issued • Issuing appropriate fines and penalties for noncompliance • Requiring restoration for any damage done in violation of SMA regulations I am also following up on our request of restoration to access to our fishing trail, during our in person meeting. This trail has been used by descendants of Kaimu for well over 40 years as access to our ko`a. Its erasure is not only a cultural violation, it is a severing of our relationship to place and practice. We are formally requesting that this trail be reinstated and recognized as an easement for continued access to our ko`a, by law. The developers' actions have disrupted a living tradition and endangered our ability to fulfill our kuleana. The County has a responsibility to protect cultural access and uphold the rights of lineal descendants. We ask that this request be reviewed with urgency and honored in alignment with the law and the County's commitments to cultural preservation. I look forward to your response and to seeing the County uphold the protections it has put in place. Me ka `oia`i`o, Leslie Enriquez Rosehill EXHIBIT A-41 SMA Assessment Application No. PL-SAA-2025-000312 & SMA Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2025-000079 for Kaimu Cove LLC on TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 From: Steen, Raimee <Raimee.Steen@hawaiicounty.gov> Date: Thursday, December 4, 2025 To: Cc: "Roy, Alex" <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: SMA Assessment Application No. PL-SAA-2025-000312 & SMA Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2025-000079 for Kaimu Cove LLC on TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Attachments: 2025-12-04 Letter to Daryn Arai (PL-SAA-2025-000312 & PL-SMM-2025-000079).pdf Good afternoon, Please find attached your copy (via bcc) of the Planning Department's determination regarding Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit Assessment Application No. PL-SAA-2025-000312 along with the issuance of SMA Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2025-000079 for Kaimu Cove, LLC on TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001. There will be no hard copy of this letter to follow. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Alex Roy (cc'd herein) at (808) 961-8140. Thank you. Raimee Steen Clerk II 1 Planning Division County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 1 Hilo, HI 96720 Main: (808)-961-8288 raimee.steen@hawaiicounty.gov EXHIBIT "A-41" C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D. Mayor William V. Brilhante, Jr. Managing Director West Hawaii Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy Kaihia-Kona, Hawaii 96740 Phone (808) 323-4770 Fax (808) 327-3563 December 04, 2025 Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant P. O. 4501 Hilo, HI 96720 VIA EMAIL Dear Daryn Arai: County of Hawaii PLANNING DEPARTMENT Jeffrey W. Darrow Director Michelle S. Alm Deputv Director East Hawaii Office 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 SUBJECT: Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2025-000312) Special Management Area (SMA) Minor Permit (PL-SMM-2025-000079) Applicant(s): Kaimn Cove LLC Landowner(s): Kaimn Cove LLC Project: Construction of New Single -Family Residence and Related Improvements Tax Mau Kev: (31 1-2-018:001. Kaimn. Puna. Island of Hawaii We have reviewed your completed Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit Assessment Application (PL-SAA-2025-000312), received by this office on September 15, 2025, with additional information provided by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) on December 2, 2025, for a proposed single-family residence (SFR) and related improvements on the subject parcel. The 3.8-acre parcel is zoned Residential -Agricultural 0.5-acre (RA-.5a) by the County and designated Urban by the State Land Use Commission (LUC). The subject parcel is designated as Extensive Agriculture (ea) by the Hawaii County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map. The subject parcel is a shoreline parcel and situated entirely within the SMA, and the proposed single-family residence is defined as "development" pursuant to §205A-22, Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS). Staff notes that the applicant did obtain a certified shoreline survey, which was approved by the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) on March 29, 2023. ww v.plannin.hawaiicounty.ov Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning(a) _haNvancounty.go Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 2 Proposed Proiect: The Applicant is proposing to construct a 2-story dwelling, consisting of 2 bedrooms (one bedroom on each level), with the 1st level having 384 square feet of living area (1 bedroom & 1 bath) and a 320-square-foot porch with 2-car garage and the 2nd level having 768 square feet of living area (1 bedroom, 1 bath & living room with kitchen) and a 320-square-foot lanai. Additional work includes the construction of a 60' X 35' pickleball court, slab on grade only, no fencing around perimeter, just a low perimeter landscaped hedge. A 10-foot-wide public access easement will be located along the property boundary with the State parcel to the north-east. Access to the proposed dwelling will be directly from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road via a 15-foot-wide compacted gravel driveway. A 5-foot-tall rock wall and gate system is proposed at this entry point, having a total length of approximately 55 feet. County water is available to support the proposed single-family dwelling via an existing water meter located along Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. Wastewater will be accommodated by an Individual Wastewater System (IWS) to be designed in accordance with State Department of Health rules and regulations. No staging of material will occur within the shoreline setback area, and no other work is proposed at this time. Special Management Area Determination: According to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 205A-44 and Planning Commission (PC) Rule No. 9-4(i)(1)(A)&(E), "development" includes "Placement or erection of any solid material or any gaseous, liquid, solid, or thermal waste "; and "Construction, reconstrcution, or alteration of the size of any structure. " Therefore, the proposed construction of a new single-family residence and related improvements is considered to be development and will require a review against the Special Management Area rules and regulations. We find that the proposed project is not exempt from the definition of "development"; however, the project will not have a cumulative impact or a significant adverse environmental or ecological effect on the SMA. Therefore, pursuant to PC Rule Section 9-10(e), Special Management Area Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2025-000079 is hereby issued for the project as described above. It is the applicant's responsibility to read and comply with the conditions listed in the enclosed permit. While further review of the proposed project against the SMA rules and regulations will not be required, all other applicable Zoning Code and Building Code requirements must be satisfied. Additionally, any future development or activities not included in this approval will require further review and approval as provided under Chapter 205A, HRS and Rule 9, Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure. Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 3 If you have questions regarding this document, please contact Alex J. Roy of this office at (808) 961-8140 or via email at alex.roykhawaiicounty.oovv. Sincerely, c7e ffye w Daftow Jeff�W. Darrow (Dec 4, 2025 13:57:15 HST) JEFFREY W. DARROW Planning Director AJR:rms P:Awpwin60\czm\smm\2025\pt-smm-2025-0000791_wyatt sfr.docx Enclosure: SMA Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2025-000079 Exhibit 1 — Site Plan Exhibit 2 — SHPD Ch. 6E-42 Review Letter cc via email w/enclosure: Shichao Li, State-OPSD Lisa E. Webster, State-OPSD GIS Section Lisa Benham C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D. Mayor William V. Brilhante, Jr. Managing Director Jeffrey W. Darrow Director Michelle S. Alm Deputv Director West Hawaii Office East Hawaii Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy • • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Kaihia-Kona, Hawaii 96740 County Hawal 1 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone (808) 323-4770 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Phone (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 327-3563 Fax (808) 961-8742 Special Management Area Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2025-000079 Project: Construct Single -Family Residence and Related Improvements Applicant(s): Kaimn Cove LLC Landowner(s): Kaimn Cove LLC TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Location: Kaimn, Puna, Island of Hawaii Land Area: 3.8 acres Applicant's Request 1. Project Description: The Applicant is proposing to construct a 2-story dwelling, consisting of 2 bedrooms (one bedroom on each level), with the 1 st level having 384 square feet of living area (1 bedroom & 1 bath) and a 320-square-foot porch with 2-car garage and the 2nd level having 768 square feet of living area (1 bedroom, 1 bath & living room with kitchen) and a 320-square-foot lanai. Additional work includes the construction of a 60' X 35' pickleball court, slab on grade only, no fencing around perimeter, just a low perimeter landscaped hedge. A 10-foot-wide public access easement will be located along the property boundary with the State parcel to the north-east. Access to the proposed dwelling will be directly from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road via a 15-foot-wide compacted gravel driveway. A 5-foot-tall rock wall and gate system is proposed at this entry point, having a total length of approximately 55 feet. County water is available to support the proposed single-family dwelling via an existing water meter located along Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. Wastewater will be accommodated by an Individual Wastewater System (IWS) to be designed in accordance with State Department of Health rules and regulations. No staging of material will occur within the shoreline setback area, and no other work is proposed at this time. 2. Project Valuation: $267,000. 3. Determination: According to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 205A-44 and Planning Commission (PC) Rule No. 94(i)(1)(A)&(E), "development" includes "Placement or erection of any solid material or any gaseous, liquid, solid, or thermal ww v.plannin.hawaiicounty.ov Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning(a) _haNvancounty.go Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 2 waste"; and "Construction, reconstruction, or alteration of the size of any structure." Therefore, the proposed construction of a single-family residence and related improvements is considered to be development and will require a review against the Special Management Area (SMA) rules and regulations. Our review has resulted in the issuance of a SMA Minor Permit. State and County Plans 4. State Land Use District: The project area is within the State Land Use URBAN District. 5. General Plan: The parcel is designated as Extensive Agriculture (ea) by the Hawaii County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map. 6. County Zoning: The parcel is currently zoned as Residential -Agricultural 0.5-acre (RA- 0.5a) 7. Special Management Area: The project parcel is located within the SMA, as well as within the "shoreline area" as defined by section 205A-41, Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS). A Certified Shoreline Survey was approved by the BLNR on March 29, 2023. 8. Flood Zone: The subject parcel is designated as Flood Zone X, which are areas above the 500-year flood plain. A small portion of the makai side of the parcel is within Flood Zone V, however, no work will occur within that area. Compliance with Objectives and Policies of Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS), Regarding the Special Management Area Check all objectives and policies found to be consistent with proposed development. Issuance of SMA Minor Permit requires that activity be consistent with all objectives & policies. The proposed development is consistent with the following objectives and policies: ❑x Development will not have any significant adverse environmental or ecological effect, except as any adverse effect is minimized to the extent practicable and clearly outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling public interest. Those adverse effects shall include but not be limited to the potential cumulative impact of individual developments, each of which taken by itself might not have a significant adverse effect and the elimination of planning options. ❑x The proposed development is consistent with the Hawaii County General Plan, community plan, and zoning; provided that a finding of consistency shall not preclude concurrent processing where a general plan, community plan, or zoning amendment may also be required. Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 3 ❑x The proposed development does not conflict with the following objectives of Chapter 205A, HRS (as amended), to: 0 Provide coastal recreational opportunities accessible to the public. 0 Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore those natural and man-made historic and pre -historic resources in the coastal zone management area that are significant in Hawaiian and American history and culture. 0 Protect, preserve, and where desirable, restore or improve the quality of coastal scenic and open space resources. 0 Protect valuable coastal ecosystems, including reefs, beaches, and coastal dunes, from disruption and minimize adverse impacts on all coastal ecosystems. 0 Provide public or private facilities and improvements important to the State's economy in suitable locations. 0 Reduce hazard to life and property from coastal hazards. 0 Improve the development review process, communication, and public participation in the management of coastal resources and hazards. 0 Stimulate public awareness, education, and participation in coastal management. 0 Protect beaches and coastal dunes for: Public use and recreation; The benefit of coastal ecosystems; Use as natural buffers against coastal hazards; and Coordinate and fund beach management and protection. 0 Promote the protection, use, and development of marine and coastal resources to assure their sustainability. ❑x The proposed development is consistent with the following policies of Chapter 205A, HRS, relating to: 0 Recreational Resources 0 Historic Resources 0 Scenic and Open Space Resources 191 Coastal Ecosystems Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 4 ❑x Economic Uses ❑x Coastal Hazards ❑x Managing Development ❑x Public Participation ❑x Beach and Coastal Dune Protection ❑x Marine and Coastal Resources ❑x The proposed development conforms to the requirements of Chapter 343, HRS, regarding Environmental Impact Statements. Findings 1. As discussed above, the proposed activities will not have any significant adverse environmental or ecological effect, except as such adverse effects are minimized to the extent practicable and clearly outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling public interest. 2 The proposed development is consistent with the objectives, policies, and SMA guidelines of Chapter 205A, HRS. 3. The estimated project cost of $267,000 is not in excess of $500,000. Approved Uses, Activities and Operations Pursuant to Planning Commission Rule Section 9-10(e), Special Management Area Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2025-000079 is hereby approved for the proposed project as described above, subject to the applicants' compliance with the conditions of approval as specified below. Conditions of Approval The Planning Director has approved SMA Minor Permit No. PL-SMM-2025-000079, subject to the following conditions: The applicant(s), its successor(s), or assign(s) (Applicant) shall be responsible for complying with all stated conditions of approval. 2. The Applicant shall secure all necessary approvals and permits from other affected federal, state, and county agencies as necessary to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 5 3. Construction of the proposed development shall be completed within five (5) years from the effective date of this permit. 4. No land alteration, grubbing, landscaping or construction activities, including but not limited to, the stockpiling of debris, construction materials or equipment, shall occur in the shoreline setback area without securing a prior written determination of minor structure or activity pursuant to Rule 11-8 from the Planning Director or approval of a Shoreline Setback Variance from the Planning Commission. 5. Artificial light from exterior lighting fixtures, including, but not necessarily limited to floodlights, up -lights or spotlights used for decorative or aesthetic purposes shall be prohibited if the light directly illuminates, or is directed to project across property boundaries or toward the shoreline and ocean waters, except as may otherwise be permitted pursuant to Section 205A-71(b), Hawaii Revised Statutes. 6. In order to preserve the coastal access for fishing and gathering purposes the public currently uses, the Applicant shall establish a 10-foot-wide pedestrian public shoreline access easement on the subject parcel along the north-east property boundary adjacent to the State parcel that extends from Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road to the shoreline fronting the subject parcel. The metes and bounds of the shoreline access trail shall be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances as a deed instrument against the affected lot. The Applicant shall not, at any time, impede or otherwise restrict lateral public access along the shoreline and within the public pedestrian access easement. The Applicant shall purchase and install a Shoreline Public Access sign meeting with Planning Department approval at the entrance to the public access path at Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. The Shoreline Public Access Sign description may be obtained from the Planning Department. 7. All earthwork and grading activity shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control of the Hawaii County Code. 8. All construction and maintenance activities on the subject parcel shall comply with Chapter 27, Floodplain Management, of the Hawaii County Code. 9. Due to insufficient information regarding potential impacts to subsurface historic properties, the Applicant is required to prepare an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) meeting the requirements of Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) Ch. 13-279-4 for review and approval by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) prior to the issuance of Building Permits for the proposed development. The Applicant shall provide a copy of the approved AMP to the Planning Department once approved by SHPD. The Applicant shall comply with the approved AMP including, but not limited to, having an archaeologist onsite to conduct archaeological monitoring for identification purposes during all ground disturbing activities to adequately identify any archaeological historic properties present Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 6 and, if identified, to determine potential impacts to them, and to ensure that appropriate mitigation is implemented. 10. In the event that surface or subsurface historic resources, including human skeletal remains, structural remains (e.g., rock walls, terraces, platforms, etc.), cultural deposits, marine shell concentrations, sand deposits, or sink holes are identified during the demolition and/or construction work, the Applicant shall cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find, protect the find from additional disturbance and contact the State Historic Preservation Division at (808) 933-7651. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from DLNR-SHPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. 11. Any further development, including but not limited to, the construction of structures or improvements not included in this determination shall require further review and approval as provided under Chapter 205A, HRS, and Rule 9, Planning Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure. 12. That in issuing this permit, the Department has relied on the information and data that the applicant has provided in connection with this permit. If, subsequent to issuance of this permit, such information and data prove to be false, incomplete or inaccurate, this permit may be modified, suspended, or revoked, in whole or in part, and/or the Department may, in addition, institute appropriate legal proceedings. 13. An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the permit may be granted by the Director upon the following circumstances: A. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant, successors or assigns, and that are not the result of their fault or negligence. B. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code. C. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of the permit. D. The time extension shall be for a period not to exceed the period originally granted for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed within one year may be extended for up to one additional year). E. If the applicant should require an additional extension of time, the Applicant will be required to submit for review and processing a new Special Management Area Asessment Application to to the Planning Department for appropriate action. Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 7 14. The Planning Director shall initiate procedures to revoke this permit should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Alex Roy at (808) 961-8140 or via email at alex.roy_(r)c ,hawaiicounty. gov. APPROVED: /e ffYe� W. b�Yow December 04, 2025 Jeffrey Darrow (Dec 4, 2025 13:57:15 HST) JEFFREY W. DARROW Date Planning Director /1 / / I / Q O E �/ © t"' O c/ O B N U O U /2 . ... .,... V LU co •G N Ca C a c C � � tYif C •� N Uw�y LU 0 O o U V) Z tea' ` l O J 3 � d UJ g ► 0 o N N H Y m O s o O r 3 ,.Wt ,toZ L � c a 0 L a � t£8 O O _ Cl. -$ \O Y , �I • \ w v V U N< p \j F- O co L - � Z� ---- -0i — SZ'�S4 W JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNORI KE KIA'AINA SYLVIA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA-AINA tVand �d Ndt AdIPm m c 0 's�dre of NaWa� November 21, 2024 Jeff Darrow, Director Planning Department County of Hawaii Hilo, HI 96720 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 plannin hawaiicounty.gov Dear Jeff Darrow: STATE OF HAWAH I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION KAKUHIHEWA BUTLDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD, STE 555 KAPOLET, HAWAII 96707 DAWN N.S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT RYAN K.P. KANAKA`OLE FIRST DEPUTY CIARA W.K. KAHAHANE DEPUTY DIRECTOR -WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS IN REPLY REFER TO: Project No. 2025PRO1081 Doc. No. 2511JG05 Archaeology, History & Culture SUBJECT: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review County of Hawaii Special Management Area Use Permit Permit Number: PL-SAA-2025-000312 Applicant: Kaimu Cove LLC (Landowner's representative) Kaimu Ahupua`a, Puna District, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) review of the subject County of Hawaii Special Management Area (SMA) Assessment permit application received by our office on September 25, 2025. The submittal included an SMA Use Permit Assessment Application, construction plans, a previous field inspection letter report (Clark 2024), a draft cultural impact assessment report (CIA), project parcel related previous correspondence (see HTCRTS submittal materials), and photos of the project area. Per the submitted correspondence, the current project and permit represent a reduction in scope of a previously reviewed project (HICRIS Project No. 2024PR00940; Doc. No. 2409JG07). SHPD received subsequent information on November 7, 2025 in support of the project (HTCRTS Submission Nos. 2025PR01081.003 and 2025PR01081.004). The previously proposed project area was comprised of the entire 3.677-acre parcel; the project proponent proposed the development of a 5-lot subdivision consisting of parcels of at least 0.5 acre each for residential purposes and ground disturbing activities to facilitate the subdivision. The updated and current project area under the current permit application comprises a 0.46-acre portion of the project parcel; the proposed project consists of the construction of a residence and associated infrastructure and appurtenances. The proposed project will include the following: • Construction of a 2-story single-family dwelling (-704 sq. ft. first floor and —1088 sq. ft. second floor). • Construction of a 60 ft. long by 35 ft. wide pickleball court (slab on grade only, no fencing around perimeter). • Construction of an access road that will measure 55 ft. by 15 ft. with a rock wall and gate system at the entry point. Access to the proposed dwelling will be directly from the Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road. • Installation of a septic system (see construction plans in HICRIS submittal materials). • Grading or excavation associated with the installation of the residence foundation, pickleball court and septic system. • Installation of associated utility improvements, such as waterline installation and electrical utility poles. • A 10 -foot wide, cinder -surfaced public pedestrian access easement will also be provided along the entire northern boundary of the subject property, adjacent to the existing adjoining State lands once the subject permit approved. Planning Depi. -Exhibit 2 Jeff Darrow November 21, 2025 Page 2 Additionally, no use, land alteration or vertical construction will be permitted within the 40-foot shoreline setback area as established by a shoreline survey of the subject property certified by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on March 29, 2023. The H1CR1S submittal data and materials indicate that the proposed project area has been included as part of previous archaeological studies (Spear 1992, Doc. No. 9302ks25; and Clark 2024, Doc. No. 2409JG07) that resulted in the identification of historic properties. Per the submitted construction plans, none of the previously identified historic properties are located within the current permit area. SHPD received additional information subsequent to the initial submittal (Submission Nos. 2025PR01081.003 and 2025PR01081.004) that indicates that the proposed project area has been previously disturbed. SHPD previously reviewed an SMA permit (Permit # PL-SMA-2024-000063 [see above for previous project scope description]; HTCRTS Project No. 2024PR00930; Doc. No. 2409JG07) in which SHPD reviewed a field inspection letter report (Clark 2024) and made a then -project effect determination of "No historic properties affected." The submitted CIA report (McGuire, October 2025) indicates that the coastline of Kaimu was a significant area to pre -contact and post -contact communities linked to traditional cultural practices. Moreover, interviews contained therein also indicate that a concern of the area is the potential for encountering subsurface deposits within the project area given the existing cemetery across the street from the subject parcel and the preservation of a coastal trail that that has not been identified by the previous studies (Spear 1992; and Clark 2024). Per correspondence (Joshua Gastilo [SHPD] to Jackson Bauer [DLNR DOFAW]; see HICRIS submittal materials), the trail alignment referred to in the CIA report (McGuire, October 2025) correlates with the existing highway corridor. While the proponent has previously indicated that the ground surface of the proposed project area is a result of a 1960s lava flow; available data and the submitted field inspection letter report (Clark 2024) specifically indicates the that the project parcel lies atop a "Puna basalt flow that erupted between 400 and 750 years before present (BP) forming much of the central and southern part of the parcel; a younger Puna basalt flow of `a`a lava dating to 200-400 years BP creating the northeastern edge; and a more recent pahoehoe flow that occurred between 1986 and 1992 present at the coast." The portion of the youngest flow (between 1986 and 1992) located in the project parcel is outside of the current project area. Moreover, the subject project area may lie within a previously disturbed area that that may have removed any surface features; however, any ground altering activity has the potential to impact subsurface features beneath the existing surface flow, including burials. Additionally, the portion of the lava flow on which the project is proposed is comprised of `a`a lava. Due to the nature of `a`a lava, potential exists for any unidentified historic properties, including human skeletal remains/burials to have fallen into the cracks and crevices and to have been deposited in subsurface contexts. Based on the information provided and the sensitivity of the area, SHPD has insufficient information to determine the potential for the project to adversely impact significant subsurface historic properties, including human skeletal remains/burials. Therefore, SHPD requests that archaeological monitoring be conducted for identification purposes during all ground disturbing activities to adequately identify any archaeological historic properties present and, if identified, to determine potential impacts to them, and to ensure that appropriate mitigation is implemented. SHPD looks forward to receiving for review and acceptance an archaeological monitoring plan (AMP) meeting the requirements of HAR § 13-279-4 prior to pen -nit issuance. Please submit the requested AMP and associated filing review fee to H1CR1S Project No. 2025PR01081 in response to our H1CR1S request. SHPD will notify the County of Hawaii Planning Department when the AMP has been reviewed and accepted, and the permit issuance process may continue. Please contact Traven Apiki at traven.MikiLhawaii.gov for any questions regarding burials and Joshua Gastilo at Joshua.gastilo(a hawaii.gov for any questions regarding archaeological resources or concerns regarding this letter. Aloha, Jessica L. Puff Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Jeff Darrow November 21, 2025 Page 3 cc: Alex Roy, alex.roy(&hawaiicounty.gov Daryn Arai, Kaimu Cove LLC, Gina McGuire, Jackson Bauer, jackson.m.bauer(a)hawaii.gov Daryn Arai Land Use Planning Consultant December 04, 2025 Page 4 bcc via email w/ enclosure: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Gina McGuire Leila Kealoha Ku'ulei Kealoha Cooper & Ohana EXHIBIT A-42 Kaimu Cove LLC/Mark Wyatt - Arch Monitoring Plan; Pu'ilima From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Date: Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 12:37 PM Subject: Kaimu Cove LLC/Mark Wyatt - Arch Monitoring Plan; Pu'ilima To: Naleimaile, Sean P <Sean.p.naleimaile@hawaii.gov>, Gastilo, Joshua T <joshua.gastilo@hawaii.gov>, Darrow, Jeff <Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov>, Gina McGuire Ku'ulei Kealoha-Cooper Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakupelemaka.org> Aloha kakou I'm reaching out to request a follow up. I am aware that the planning department has not received any formally approved Arch Monitoring Plan; Mr. Wyatt of Kaimu Cove LLC is not to be digging in the ground until that happens. I've witnessed ground disturbance by developers since the single family dwelling was approved on December 4th 2025, but I am in the understanding that no ground disturbance can occur until the SHPD approved AMP is submitted to planning dept. Mahalo nui for your time and consideration in this matter. Wishing you all the best during this holiday season and grateful for your continued attention to this time sensitive project in our home. Me ka ha'aha'a Leslie Enriquez Rosehill From: Gastilo, Joshua T <joshua.gastilo@hawaii.gov> Date: Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 4:20 PM Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Kaimu Cove LLC/Mark Wyatt - Arch Monitoring Plan; Pu'ilima To: Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Cc: Mello, Nicole A <nicole.mello@hawaii.gov>, Naleimaile, Sean P <sean.p.naleimaile@hawaii.gov>, Lebo, Susan A <susan.a.lebo@hawaii.gov>, Apiki, Traven K <traven.apiki@hawaii.gov>, Darrow, Jeff <Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov>, Roy, Alex <alex.roy@hawaiicounty.gov>, Gina McGuire Ku'ulei Kealoha-Cooper Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakupelemaka.org> Greetings, An AMP has been submitted and is currently being reviewed. I have cc'd Alex Roy whom you may follow up with regarding the ground -disturbing activities you have witnessed since SHPD's determination letter. Sincerely, Joshua T.M. Gastilo, M.A. Historic Preservation Archaeologist III 40 Po'okela St. Hilo HI 96720 State of Hawaii DLNR State Historic Preservation Division -Hawaii Island From: Darrow, Jeffrey W. <Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov> Date: Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 3:54 AM Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Kaimu Cove LLC/Mark Wyatt - Arch Monitoring Plan; Pu'ilima To: Gastilo, Joshua T <joshua.gastilo@hawaii.gov>, Leslie Enriquez Rosehill Cc: Mello, Nicole A <nicole.mello@hawaii.gov>, Naleimaile, Sean P <sean.p.naleimaile@hawaii.gov>, Lebo, Susan A <susan.a.lebo@hawaii.gov>, Apiki, Traven K <traven.apiki@hawaii.gov>, Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov>, EXHIBIT "A-42" Gina McGuire Ku'ulei Kealoha-Cooper Leila Kealoha <leila@pohakupelemaka.org> Aloha Joshua, Thanx for the information. Please keep us updated regarding the submitted AMP. Alex, when you return to work please set up a site inspection. Thanx, Jeff EXHIBIT A-43 C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D. Mayor William V. Brilhante, Jr. Managing Director West Hawaii Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 Phone (808) 323-4770 Fax (808) 327-3563 January 14, 2026 County of Hawaii PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mr. Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC Via email: Dear Mr. Wyatt, Jeffrey W. Darrow Director Michelle S. Alm Deputy Director East Hawaii Office 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 SUBJECT: Stop Work Order - Reference: Work Occurring Onsite on January 13, 2026 TMK: 1-2-018:001,12-7789 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, Pahoa, Hawai'i STOP WORK ORDER This Stop Work Order is sent to you to inform you to stop any land clearing and/or construction work that may be occurring on the above -mentioned property. An appeal to SMA Minor Permit No. 2025-000079 (PL-SMM-2025-000079) has been submitted to the Planning Department. Immediately cease any work occurring at TMK 1-2-018:001, 12-7789 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, until the appeal process for SMA Minor Permit No. 2025-000079 (PL-SMM-2025- 000079) has been resolved. As this permit has been appealed, you are directed to immediately cease and desist from all ground disturbing activities including, but not limited to, land clearing, grading, grubbing, construction work, rock wall construction, and similar work. Additionally, Condition No. 9 of SMA Minor Permit No. 2025-000079 (PL-SMM-2025-000079) required that the applicant submit and receive approval of an Archeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD), and a copy of the approved AMP be submitted to the Planning Department prior to all ground disturbing activities. Although the AMP has been submitted, it has not been approved and ground disturbing activities have occurred. The property is owned by Kaimu Cove LLC, which consists of approximately 3.8 acres and is located within the State Land Use (U) Urban and within the County of Hawai'i RA-.5a Zoning District. www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer EXHIBIT "A-43" planning@hawaiicounty.gov Mr. Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC January 14, 2026 Page 2 SITE INSPECTION REPORT A site inspection of the property was conducted on January 13, 2026, at approximately 11:15am which revealed the following: The Planning staff observed significant clearing of the lower Milo forest as well as a large graded and grubbed area (ground disturbance). Additionally, there is construction of a rock wall and waterlines in the vicinity of the public shoreline access path. Staff notes that there were materials and equipment staged on site, however, only the rock wall at the gate was being worked on by a contractor. No other work was occurring on site. Based on the above information, the Planning Director is issuing this stop work order to cease and desist any and all work on the subject property until the submitted appeal is resolved. If work continues prior to the resolution of the submitted appeal and without obtaining an approved AMP, a Notice of Violation will be issued with additional fines. Please contact Inspector Mark Iwamoto to schedule a follow up site inspection. For any questions regarding this order, please contact Planning Inspector Mark Iwamoto at (808)-961-8151. For questions regarding HRS 205A Coastal Zone Management, please contact Planner Mr. Alex Roy at our Hilo Office at (808) 961-8140. Sincerely, J C W. ban -ow Jeffre�w Jan 14, 202612:53:15 HST) JEFFREY W. DARROW Planning Director c: Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC Via email: kaimu.coveggmail.com and kehena(a.gmail.com Lisa Behman Via email: lbsbinckgmail.com Administrative Permits Division Planning Inspectors Via email: Mark. Iwamoto cr,hawaiicounty. og_v Planning Division Via email: Alex.RoyAhawaiicounty_gov Maij a.Jacksonkhawaiicounty_gov Mr. Mark Wyatt Kaimu Cove LLC c/o Daryn Arai LLC January 14, 2026 Page 3 State Historic Preservation Division — Hawai'i Island State of Hawaii DLNR Via email: Joshua. ast�ilokhawaii.gov Via email: sean.p.nalelmalle@hawaii.gov hawaii.gov EXHIBIT A-44 Kaimu Cove LLC - 1/21/2026 Violation of a Stop Work Order From Darrow, Jeffrey W. <Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov> Date Fri 1/23/2026 11:35 AM To Oda, Michelle <Michelle.Oda@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov>; Kato, Norren <Norren.Kato@hawaiicounty.gov>; Iwamoto, Mark <Mark.lwamoto@hawaiicounty.gov> 0 2 attachments (686 KB) IMG_3114.jpeg; IMG_3112jpeg; Aloha Michelle, Please intake and assign to Norren for Mark to follow up on. T will be sending you several other emails to add as well. Thanx, Jeff From: Leslie Enriquez Rosehil) Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2026 6:51 PM To: Darrow, Jeffrey W. <Jeff. Darrow@ hawai icou nty.gov>; Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Kaimu Cove LLC - 1/21/2026 Violation of a Stop Work Order Aloha kakou I am currently cleaning our ohana graves at Kaipu'ueleelu and witnesss continued work today on the parcel makai, by Kaimu Cove LLC. Rock wall has been completed on one end of the entrance gate, by contractor and footing pins in place for another concrete slab. Mahalo for your k6kua in addressing these issues. Developers have no intentions from what I have continued to witness, of respecting the Stop Work Order. Mahalo Leslie Enriquez Rosehill EXHIBIT "A-44" �41 µ W � M � 4bm u ua �w �qry OF a. O V EXHIBIT A-45 C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D, Mayor William V. Brilhante, Jr. Managing Director West Hawaii Office 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy Kailua-Kona, Hawaii 96740 Phone (808) 323-4770 Fax (808) 327-3563 CERTIFIED MAIL 9589 0710 5270 3378 1987 41 January 28, 2026 Mr. Mark Wyatt Lisa Benhen Kaimu Cove LLC 12-55 Likoliko LP Pahoa, HI 96778 6810 County of Hawaii PLANNING DEPARTMENT Dear Mr. Wyatt and Ms. Benham: Jeffrey W. Darrow Director Michelle S. Ahn Deputy Director East Hawaii Office 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 Phone (808) 961-8288 Fax (808) 961-8742 SUBJECT: 3rd Notice of Violation and Order (NOVO) PL-PCV-2022-00015 Reference: Stop Work Order dated January 14, 2026 TMK: 1-2-018:001,12-7789 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, Pahoa, Hawaii FINDINGS The Planning Department continues to receive complaints regarding continued ground disturbing activities, including the pouring of a large concrete slab, continued rock wall building and land clearing. Our investigation based on complaints received has revealed the following: The property is located at TMK (3) 1-2-018:001, 12-7789 Kalapana-Kapoho Beach Road, and is hereinafter referred to as the "property". The property is owned by Kaimu Cove LLC (Mark Wyatt & Ms. Lisa Benham), consisting of approximately 3.8 acres is located within the State Land Use (U) Urban and within the County of Hawaii, Zoning District Agricultural (RA-.5a). INSPECTION The Department received a complaint on January 6, 2026, stating that Kaimu Cove LLC conducted ground disturbance by constructing a concrete slab without an approved Archeologist Monitoring Plan (AMP). On January 13, 2026, our staff conducted a roadside inspection of the subject property and observed additional grubbing has occurred. The Planning Department issued you a Stop Work Order dated January 14, 2026, informing you to stop all land clearing and/ or construction work on the subject property. On January 26, 2026, staff conducted an on- www.plannin¢.hawaiicoun ov Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planninghawaiicoun ov EXHIBIT "A-45" Mark Wyatt Lisa Benhen Kaimu Cove LLC PL-PC-2022-00015 January 28, 2026 Page 2 site inspection and observed a concrete slab approximately 60' long and other ground disturbance toward the south-east portion of the property. HISTORY 1) On October 10, 2022, the Department issued the 1st NOVO to Kaimu Cove LLC with a SMA fine in sum of $10,000 for unpermitted development (the grubbing & grading of a road without a SMA Permit on a shoreline lot). 2) On December 15, 2022, the Department granted a time extension to comply with the NOVO. 3) On August 4, 2023, the Department issued a daily fines letter with information that fines began to accrue on October 11, 2022, and the accrued fines totaled $206,000. 4) On December 26, 2023, the Department granted a 2nd time extension to comply with the NOVO. 5) On July 22, 2024, the Department granted a 3`d time extension to comply with the NOVO. 6) On October 14, 2025, the Department issued a Stop Work Order for activity occurring on the subject property. 7) On October 29, 2025, the Department issued the 2nd NOVO to Kaimu Cove LLC with an additional SMA fine in the sum of $10,000. 8) On November 19, 2025, the Department received payment of $20,000 for the initial fine for the 1st NOVO and the fine for the 2nd NOVO. This did not include the accrued daily fines for the 1st NOVO. 9) On December 4, 2025, the Department issued Kaimu Cove LLC a Special Management Area Minor Permit (PL-SMM-2025-000079) with conditions for a single-family dwelling and related improvements. Condition No. 9 required that the applicant receive an approved Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) from the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD), which would require having an archaeologist onsite to conduct archaeological monitoring for identification purposes during all ground disturbing activities. The applicant submitted an AMP to SHPD but this was not approved. 10) On January 14, 2026, the department issued Kaimu Cove LLC a 2nd Stop Work Order after receiving additional complaints of ground disturbing activities occurring on -site Mark Wyatt Lisa Benhen Kaimu Cove LLC PL-PC-2022-00015 January 28, 2026 Page 2 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Based on the foregoing, you are in violation as follows: You have failed to comply with Condition No. 9 of the Special Management Area Permit (PL- SMM-2025-000079) requiring that an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP), which meets the requirements of the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) be provided to the Planning Department prior to any development or ground disturbance. Therefore, you are being issued a 3rd NOVO with an additional SMA fine in the sum of $10,000. You are hereby ordered to take the following corrective action(s) at your own expense: 1) Immediately cease and desist all work on the subject property until you provide the Department with an approved AMP by SHPD and secure an archaeologist to conduct archaeological monitoring for identification purposes onsite during all ground disturbing activities. 2) Pay the 3rd NOVO fine in the sum of $10,000 and the remaining daily fine in the sum $196,000 ($206,000 - $10,000 for the I" NOVO). 3) Pay all fines due this office by or before 30 days from the date of the Postmaster Stamped date on the certified letter. Payment may be made by cash, cashier's check, or money order. Personal checks are not accepted. Make cashier's check or money order payable to the County Director of Finance. Upon satisfactory compliance with all conditions of the above order, we may close the complaint with no further action. RULE 9. SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA 9-4 Definitions: a) "Assessment" means an evaluation by the Department of a proposed use, activity, or operation to determine whether a Special Management Area Use permit is required. e) "Development" means any of the following uses, activities, or operations on land or in or under water within the Special Management Area: Mark Wyatt Lisa Benhen Kaimu Cove LLC PL-PC-2022-00015 January 28, 2026 Page 2 (1) "Development" includes the following: (A) Placement or erection of any solid material or any gaseous, liquid, solid, or thermal waste. (B) Grading, removing, dredging, mining, or extraction of any materials. (3) Any proposed use, activity, or operation listed in Section 9-4(e) (2) shall be deemed to be "Development" until the Director has determined it to be exempted from the definition of "development." (4) Whenever the Director finds that any excluded use, activity, or operation may have a cumulative impact, or a significant adverse environmental or ecological effect on the Special Management Area, that use, activity, or operation shall be defined as "development" for the purpose of this rule. GENERAL INFORMATION 9-17 Penalties (a) Any person who violates any provision or this rule shall be liable for (1) a civil fine not to exceed $100,000; or (2) for the cost of returning the affected environment or ecology within the Special Management Area to the condition existing before the violation. (b) In addition to any other penalties, any person who is violating any provision of this rule shall be liable for a civil fine not to exceed $10,000 a day for each day in which such violation persists. (c) Any civil fine or other penalty provided under this rule may be imposed by the circuit court or by the Planning Department after an opportunity for a hearing under Chapter 91, HRS. 9-19 Administrative Fines The Department is authorized to impose administrative fines in accordance with established rules. What happens if you do not correct the violation? A violation that is not corrected by the deadline date may be assessed daily fines. Can you appeal this Notice of Violation? Yes. In accordance with Section 6-9.2 (a) of the Hawaii County Charter, the Board of Appeals is authorized to hear and determine any appeal from the final decisions of the Planning Director. Mark Wyatt Lisa Benhen Kaimu Cove LLC PL-PC-2022-00015 January 28, 2026 Page 2 1. An appeal shall be electronically submitted in the format prescribed by the Board of Appeals and shall specify the person's interest in the subject matter of the appeal and the grounds of the appeal. Unless otherwise specifically provided by the Board of Appeals rules, an electronic copy of each document shall be filed. A filing fee of $250 shall accompany any such appeal. (Application must be submitted electronically) 2. The appellant, landowner(s) if not the appellant, and the director shall be parties to an appeal. Other persons may be admitted as parties to an appeal, as permitted by the Board of Appeals. For your convenience, we have provided the website address for Hawaii County's new EPIC System (Electronic Processing and Information Center) for applications. Appeal must be submitted electronically, WEBSITE: https://hawaiicountvhi-enert!ovpub.tylerhost.net/Apps/SelfService#/home Due Date for Appeal: The appeal must be received within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt of this Notice of Violation and Order. An appeal to the Board of Appeals shall not stay the provisions of the Director's "Order" pending the final decision of the Board of Appeals. The appeal must be made in accordance with the Board of Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedures, or it may result in the dismissal of the appeal. What happens if I lose my appeal? The assessment and accumulation of fines does not stop when you file for an appeal. If the Board of Appeals denies your appeal, then you will be required to pay your fines from the day the fines began to the date the violation(s) has been corrected, which must be verified by the Planning Department. You can also take corrective action as described in this letter and stop the daily fines while appealing. If you do not take corrective action, daily fines will continue to accrue incrementally. Should you acquire the services of an attorney/counsel representation, then you are required to also submit a letter of consent with your response letter authorizing the County to correspond and respond to the attorney/counsel representation. Can I get a time extension to have more time to correct the violation? NO, this is the 3rd NOVO and Order with fines against you therefore you will not be allowed to request for a time extension. Mark Wyatt Lisa Benhen Kaimu Cove LLC PL-PC-2022-00015 January 28, 2026 Page 2 For any questions regarding this order, please contact Planning Inspector Mark Iwamoto preferably by e-mail at 808-961-8151. For questions regarding HRS 205A Coastal Zone Management, please contact Planner Mr. Alex Roy at our Hilo Office at (808) 961-8140. Sincerely, t7e^/% 11ve W DwwW Jeffrey . Darrow (Jan 28, 202611:51:09 HST) Jeffrey W. Darrow Planning Director MI/JD: sklo V:\PL\PL\planning\public\Enforcement\TMKFiles\ZONE 1 Sec. 1-1 to 1-4\1-2-018-001\novo3ndKaimuCoveLLC PL-PCV-2022-00015 .doc Cc: Planning Division SMA Planner VI Via email: alex.roy�a�hawaiicounty_gov Cc: Jean Campbell Corporation Counsel Via email: jean.campbell(i�hawaiicounty.gov Cc; Hans Santiago Via email: hans.santiagokhawaiicounty.gov Cc: Mayor Kimo Alameda Via email: kimo.alamedaLa,,,hawaiicounty.gov EXHIBIT A-46 KAi.APANA - KAPOHO ROAD _ Proposed rock wall and gate at entry PROPOSED SEPTIC SYSTEM (Sw Ava~ Cr1 Enpn✓. Can.lnrca ,. fl b—) EXHIBIT "A-46" EXHIBIT A-47 --2;�ir -f� y 4,z f 4,/' zit �5��,-� l lvi.� V� �yFS , X441 z r any' r / 4VS� p4of� o flay/mil e . G i� AO 41 ji, e- �� LlVas�in� 4 44,e - e �� 6u�� plod �ru r C�c r2 -4 //t G 1l Gf el c.b/f.. �` lll'�'. Q !!/G ,llt%�t'J K/�. /�/S�rl �/�J h/�•C�h TGl 14 EXHIBIT A-47 /�/fTC? 7�i'd/l %1 ti�/tl B•� //! �7l G Gu/h� � -fit . �on�%s! � r���t Jft /%'cfr %mot 7�►-.�7'�l / r/�/!1l S �/1 /�j �Jo/7o 7 ��ke-,- GUQ Q &U-1, In 1ppanf,� b �¢ /! d -t� r- �= 4. T> Qt i^ e Q �✓ - �7l l��t S cL is 4 R �� `tG-�J', l "rilrz T� � �✓r /'�eJ�'l e.�tl,b e �-� �v�Io ��e S�i�/ 7F�iJn ,/a 771Jd/t �ll�f?-O �4�+�Q4 O!I Q d l ( n r re- /Jo -1 A17 4e OA UCzt' �lO jyj CoK4� -�YOGLS //1o.� LLJft�►"� pat/, r ) �'d-t/¢ �" C'� G Cj, Q �%G P'VI D i17 y f itc h %a (.ice � %Ncx-45 � C�.�. tcb �� IJ -t4 Ta �iQ,��7�Q loe� i7� / �ev'v 4/ 4/-t- 4e- /ova 141 cAwl jo, A 09C w -r4#,,f 41L 41 ff. to A -Or A*# PON C.4,#4 if 40 *00 /POA I"*,* ovo 4*'Alf to Y41- '400'*.ek e.0 4L 400 40 0 •mL g"T .40. JI lo 40 ellw" to"Co.- ive caffe5'o7a*j 40 "r*rs #a ok 'o" fop ire 4PAPIN 'Ae 4ff 46 -flo .0 df o'o 4,4 4e- C "4� �1011,7,6evl A;�- lz2,le- P621 fl&rA z,2, AgW? 4e) .7 p � f t �1Q /'e �"C--T� roc E'- c 4us -Aex-�- e -�/ Cry fs ��5ir`G EXHIBIT A-48 a CD crQQ m EXHIBIT "A-48" 't, EXHIBIT A-49 Gina Pualani McGuire, PhD Telephone: E-mail: — Academic Background • PhD, Geography & Environment (2019-2023), University of Hawaii at Manoa • MS, Tropical Conservation Biology & Environmental Science (2017-2019), University of Hawaii at Hilo • MA, Creative Writing (2018-2020), Lancaster University • BA, International Relations (2013-2017), Stanford University Recent Speaking Engagements • Guest Lecturer, Indigenous Crops & Food Systems, University of Hawaii Manoa, biocultural coastal forests • Guest Speaker, NEON (National Ecological Observatory Network) Imaging Science Graduate Course, best practices in Indigenous science & co -production • Guest Workshop, place -based research & community ethics, University of Hawaii Hilo Tropical Conservation Biology & Environmental Science Relevant Training & Participation in Indigenous Collaboration • 2024-2027 NCA6 Tribes & Indigenous Peoples chapter co-author • 2024 Speaker, National Tribal & Indigenous Climate Conference • 2023 Keynote Speaker, Global Research Alliance Indigenous Research Network workshop • 2023 Kulana Noi`i Research Ethics & Co -production workshop participant & speaker • 2022 Indigenous Data Sovereignty workshop participant, Native BioData Consortium member • 2022 planned & held a workshop on community co -production with emphasis on collaboration with Native peoples • 2022 Intertribal Agriculture Council annual conference youth mentor • 2021 Australia National University Pacific Research Methodologies micro -credential Commendations • 2025 tiniv ersity of Hawaii Hilo Affiliate Faculty • 2024 Nativ c Climate Research Fellow • 2022-2023 Tribal Agriculture Fellow • 2022 Stanford Changcmakcrs Scry ant Leadership Award recipient • 2021 Imagining Indigenous Futurisms Award recipient • 2017-2019 Hau`oli Mau Loa Fellow Co -Author, Technical Reports (selected reports listed —co-authored more than 30) 2026 Cultural Impact Assessment & Ka Pa`akai Analysis for the Na Hale Manai Project, La`ie Malo`o Ahupua`a, Ko`olauloa District, Island of Oahu, Hawaii. `Aiea: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. 2026 Ka Pa`akai Analysis for the Koko Villas Phase 2 Project, Maunalua Ahupua`a, Kona District, Island of Oahu. `Aiea: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. 2026 Cultural Impact Assessment for the Proposed Relocation of Schofield Barracks Military Reservation East Range Deep Wells, Wai`anae Uka Ahupua`a, Wai`anae Moku, Island of Oahu, Hawaii. `Aiea: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. 2025 Cultural Impact Assessment for Mililani High School Teacher Workforce Housing Project, Waipi`o Ahupua`a, `Ewa District, Island of Oahu, Hawaii. `Aiea: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. EXHIBIT "A-49" 2025 Ka Pa`akai Analysis for the Proposed Two -Story Commercial Building Project at 87-1818 Farrington Highway, Lualualei Ahupua`a, Wai`anae District, Island of Oahu. `Aiea: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. 2024 Cultural Impact Assessment for 4767B, 4767D, 4769, and 4775 Kohala Ave. in Waikiki Ahupua`a, Honolulu District, Island of Oahu, Hawaii. `Aiea: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. 2021 Ethno-Historic Study for the Radio Bay Yard Extension Project, Waiakea Ahupua`a, Hilo District, Island of Hawaii. `Aiea: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. 2020 Cultural Impact Assessment for the Pu`u `Opae Special Area Master Plan, Waimea Ahupua`a, Kona District, Island of Kauai, Hawaii. Kaneohe: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. 2020 Cultural Impact Assessment for the Proposed DTS Bus Transit Station, Waimalu Ahupua`a, `Ewa District, Island of Oahu, Hawaii. Kaneohe: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. 2019 Cultural Impact Assessment for TMK: (1) 4-7-006:010 (por.) and :018 in Waihe`e Ahupua`a, Ko`olaupoko District, Island of Oahu, Hawaii. Kaneohe: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting, LLC. Academic Publications In Press McGuire, G. More than medicine, Hawaiian healing as lens for place -based well-being. H2rlili Multidisciplinary Research on Hawaiian Well-being. In Press McGuire, G. Stain your hands red with hau— the cultural, ecological, and spiritual dimensions of caring for Hawaiian sailing forests in Ancestors of Tomorrow. University of Hawaii Press. In Press Grandinetti, J., Yee, C., McGuire, G., McMillen, H., Dacks, R., Parsons, E., Giardina, C. Fire risk, urbanization, & stewardship mapping in North Kona & South Kohala, Hawaii. Earth Stewardship. 2026 McGuire, G. The KFpuka Keepers in Experiencinglslandness. University of Hawaii Press. 2025 McGuire, G., Mawyer, A., Akau, J., and Puniwai, N. Seaweeds and Sovereignty: governance gaps, coastal wellbeing, and self-determination within limu stewardship in Hawaii. Marine Policy. 2025 Delevaux, J., Stamoulis, K.A., Kurashima, N., Trauernicht, C., Ticktin, T., DeMaagd, N., Teneva, L., McGuire, G., Silao, Z.H., Bremer, L. Scaling biocultural initiatives can support nature, food, and culture from summit to sea. NPJ Ocean Sustainability. 2025 Bremer, L., McGuire, G., Hastings, Z.S., Kurashima, N., Ticktin, T., Crow, S.E., Giardina, C.P., Winter, K.B., DeMaagd, N., Trauernicht, C. Carbon benefits through fallow agricultural land transitions: the case of multi -strata agroforestry in Hawaii. Scientific Reports. 2024 McGuire, G., Keliihoomalu-Holz, M., Lee, T., & Lincoln, N. Constellating cultivation: texturing agro- ecological legacies with a mixed methods approach in Hawaii. Ecology & Society. 2023 McGuire, G. Indigenous Ecology of Kalapana, Hawaii. Diss., University of Hawaii Department of Geography and Environment. 2023 McGuire, G. & Mawyer, A. Cultivating the Unseen: Pa`akai and the Role of Practice in Coastal Care. Ethnobiology Letters. DOI: 10.14.2.2023.1825. 2022 McGuire, G. Nurturing coasts, hala and legacies of mutual care in coastal forests. Parks Stewardship Forum. DOI: 105070/P538257519. Teaching Experience Curriculum Development 2023: Native American Agriculture Fund (NAAF)- created curriculum material focused on agroforestry practices across diverse Indigenous and Tribal settings including Native Hawaiian, Menominee, and Pacific Northwest Tribal communities to be included in national high school curriculum on Native agriculture. Lecturer 2021-2022: University of Hawaii Hilo Geography 201(Interpreting Geographic Data) Lecturer in Fall 2021 and Fall 2022. Class sizes ranged from 12-20 students. Course structure included two exams, weekly assignments, in -course group work, and a final project focused on applying the skills and concepts to a mock proposal relevant to student interests. Teaching Assistant 2019- 2020: University of Hawaii Manoa Geography 101 (Introduction to Geography, Fall 2019) and Geography 368 (Geography of Hawaii, Spring 2020) teaching assistant. Each of these courses had class sizes of just over 100 students. Duties included holding office hours, prepping online course materials when switching over to online modalities during COVID outbreak, providing support to students during a different time, and guest lecturing. Research & Related Work Experience Ethnographer & Geospatial Analyst 2019 2022, 2025-present: Keala Pono Archaeological Consulting- actively worked to document, write, and map sites of cultural and eco- cultural significance within ethnohistoric reports, cultural impact assessments, and Ka Pa`akai Analyses as required under Chapter 43 of the Hawaii State Constitution during proposed development or disturbance. I report findings back to cultural practitioners and Native elders, as well as to developers and policy makers of diverse science understandings. Post -doctoral Researcher 2022- 2025: Biocultural Researcher- This position involved initial and ongoing evaluation of the inclusion of Indigenous methods & equitable audiences and outcomes to the creation of a ridge to reef Decision Support Tool (DST) being led by the U.S. Forest Service Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry. This tool considers hydrological, climatic, and invasive species shifts on the island of Hawaii. Identification of gaps led to team leadership and coordination in the inclusion of Indigenous methods (particularly `Oiwi methods) and consultation of diverse subject knowledge experts including Native practitioners and knowledge holders and rural communities to support groundwater contaminant, fire, and invasive species modeling. This position also supported the continuation of doctoral research (detailed below). Sponsoring organizations have included the Oak Ridge Institute for Science & Education (ORISE) (2022-2023), Akaka Foundation (2023-2024), and U.S. Forest Service (April 2024- Present). Doctoral Research 2019-2023: Cultural Ecologist, principal investigator- assessment of vegetation community ecology and biocultural meanings alongside and in conversation with the wellbeing of rural Native Hawaiian lineal descendants in Kalapana. This research considers the Kalapana coastline from several Native Hawaiian perspectives: Hawaiian healing practice, the plurality of practices and understood entities associated with seasalt, biocultural vegetation communities, and stories of rural subsiders of the coastal geography. This work introduces the concept of coastal care: the reciprocal relationship pf care between communities and coasts and the biocultural linkages and diversity of cultural dimensions that contribute to care. Secured funding, supervised and mentored undergraduate students, and maintained community co - productive research relationships. Climate Reporter 2023 / Native Climate Research Fellow 2024: Native Climate Project with the Desert Research Institute- write climate -grounded stories that speak to challenges, effects, and resilience of Native communities in changing climates within the USDA Southwest Climate Hub. These stories are produced for the Native Climate website to reach a diversity of audiences and Indigenous peoples. In addition to Native Hawaiian communities, my engagement has included collaboration with Hopi, Gila River, and Yavapai Tribal communities. Geospatial Analyst 2020-2022: Pacific Island Climate Adaptation Science Center Fellow- describe the soil carbon and above ground carbon benefits of agroforestry system restoration across the State of Hawaii within a collaborative research team. Hau`oli Mau Loa Fellow / Principal Investigator 2018-2020: Midway Atoll Visitation Program, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service- led the inclusion of Native Hawaiian method, makawalu (eight ways of seeing) within assessment of the return of a visitor program to Midway Atoll National Wildlife Refuge (known as Kuaihelani, the backbone of heaven in Hawaiian language). Geospatial Analyst 2017-2018: Hawaii Coral Reef Initiative Research Assistant 2016: Humpbacks & High -Rises, Griffith University Center for Coastal Management, Queensland, Australia Administrative Assistant 2014-2016: Stanford Native American Cultural Center (NACC) Lead Researcher 2015: Stanford Bing Overseas Program- Co -produce research on traditional and modern management of dugongs with the Noonuccal Nation, Minjerribah (Stradbroke Island), Queensland, Australia. Community • Student & Practitioner 2020-present, La`au Lapa`au (Hawaiian Medicine) Community- Participate in lessons, gathering, and medicinal preparation and administration of herbal remedies under the tenants of Hawaiian medicinal practice with Kumu Keoki Kikaha Pai Baclayon. • Traditional lauhala sail weaver 2023-present • Mentor, Pacific Internship Programs for Exploring Science (2021, 2024, 2025) • Stanford Powwow Booth Committee Co -Chair 2015-2016 • O`ahu Inter -tribal Council Powwow volunteer • Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council Youth Seat (2010-2012) • Pacific Remote Islands National Marine Monument Community Group Youth Representative (2019- 2024) C! EXHIBIT A-50 From: Gina McGuire To: W PCtesti mono Subject: Written Testimony for Windward Planning commission, PL-SMA-2024-000063 Date: Wednesday, October 2, 2024 12:54:12 PM Aloha nui, I am submitting (attached) written testimony in regards to the Windward Planning Commission agenda item for October 3, 2024: Kaimu Cove LLC (PL-SMA-2024-000063). I am writing as an individual and not on behalf of an organization. I know that it's past the deadline to submit written testimony and also plan to share my perspective tomorrow but I hope that this can be added to the record and if possible shared with the Windward Planning Commission. My contact information is: Dr. Gina McGuire Mahalo for your consideration of my testimony and please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions. Me ka 'oiaTo, Gina PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: In accordance with NRS Chapter 239, this email and responses, unless otherwise made confidential by law, may be subject to the Nevada Public Records laws and may be disclosed to the public upon request. EXHIBIT "A-50" Dr. Gina McGuire Aloha nui, I would like to provide testimony in regard to the proposed Special Management Area permit (PL-SMA-2024-000063) for development of the Kaimu Cove LLC 5-lot subdivision. I am providing expertise in my capacity as specialist in the intersections of coastal and community health in Hawai `i (focus of my PhD focused on the Kalapana and Kaimu coasts specifically) from both ecological and cultural lens. I provide this expertise as an individual, un- connected to an organization. I have worked as an ethnographer and GIS analyst for cultural assessments and as a research ecologist here in Hawaii for the last five years and am a lifelong resident of Puna, Hawaii Island. This proposal is not in alignment with several county and state policies and is not in the best interest of community and ecological heatlh. Proximity to Critical Coastal Nursery Over the last four years my research team has conducted limu and marine invertebrate surveys within the Pu`ilima tidepool site, immediately adjacent to the proposed development (see map below). This site is documented within ancestral knowledge and our collected oral histories as a critical site for cultural practices and lifeways as well as a biodiversity hotspot for many marine organisms cherished by the Kalapana communities. I cannot understate the importance of this site: as the only low-lying coastal access point for both the Hawaiian communities of Kalapana (Kaimu, Kikala, and Keokea) and marine species due to its unique geologic features. This tidepool system is unique in that it currently only has native limu (seaweed) species documented (current documented number is 44 known native species) including several extremely rare endemic limu species (ex. Boodleopsis hawaiiensis). It is a nursery location for many native fish, both ecologically and culturally valued including moi (Polydactylus sc.rfilis) and aholehole (Kuhlia spp.). Tidepool systems in Hawaii have been repeatedly proven to have adverse effects due to development -based contaminants. This refugia of native species is currently protected from wastewater and storm water runoff effects that come from development due to the un-developed areas that currently buffer it. This proposed development would significantly increase the stressors to this system in the forms of runoff (unavoidable when impervious surfaces are created) and wastewater inputs from five single family homes are added (more detailed below). Figure 1: proximity of development to high value limu (seaweed), marine invertebrate, and juvenile fish nursery grounds. This is the only site of this type currently on the Kalapana coast due to recent geologic activity. Incompatibility of SMA with Existing Puna CDP The current Puna Community Development Plan' states: "Important coastal resources biological, historical, and access trails —are at risk of degradation or loss due to development and erosion. Traditionally, coastal trail alignments moved inland as the shoreline retreated, but contemporary legal practice often leads to the loss of trail segments. Similarly, coastal vegetation naturally tracks inland with shoreline erosion, unless the vegetation line is artificially maintained. Present Special Management Area (SMA) rules and review practices do no adequately take these change factors into account" (pg. 26). The Puna CDP directly asks for "bold planning initiatives to re -shape the pattern of future growth and development in a manner that is more in harmony with the natural setting," and directly cites the impacts of development on increasing the spread of invasive, non-native species, the decline of native organisms, fragmentation, alteration of drainage patterns, and collapse of geologic structures (pg.12). Clear goals of the CDP include protection of cultural sites and value, maintenance of the character of older communities such as Kaimu, and protection of native forests (pg. 19-20). This development is not in alignment with the character of the Kaimu community and will directly impact critical cultural and coastal sites (further detailed below). ' Puna Community Development Plan. 2011. Ordinance No. 08-116..Q...(hawaiicotarv(1.,�,ov) This property is not just another coastal lot. This land is the connecting piece in the Puna coastal trail system between Kikala Ahupua`a and Kaimu Ahupua`a. Since purchasing the property the applicant has harmed coastal trail access (see photo below) along this key bridge between the two ahupua`a and has already cleared portions of ancestral coastal forest groves. My research team has conducted vegetation surveys along this coastline from 2021 forward and this land owner has harmed these coastal forests and pre-existing coastal trails already in the clearing of their property. The vision to emplace 5 homes upon this lot, further harming coastal access for Native Hawaiian along a key coastal trail segment IS NOT in aligment with documented community goals, vision; or needs. coastal access. Historic coastal trail route that connects Kaimu and Kalapana to Kikala and Keokea. damage to historic trail system through land clearing efforts done by the developer. Coastal Impact The proposed SMA states that the development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect and that any effects will be minimized to the extent possible. However, without an environmental impact assessment and without having in-depth knowledge of this coastline, this statement cannot be true. The SMA cites the shoreline setback and septic -system wastewater management as mitigations for many of the perceived ecological impacts on the nearshore and coastal ecosystem. However, demonstrated ridge -to -reef and immediately -adjacent -coastal -devel opment-I inked impacts are well documented and backed with scientific evidence, especially here in HawaiY. Septic tanks are increasingly being documented as failing to provide effective waste water treatement, particularly in the highly porous areas in such close proximity to the coast34 Potential for Increased Stormwater Runoff The Ilaw�.l `, ,,,,,,Clean,,,,;W lle�,,,,,,�;�r �n,�1h,,,,,pl;.�ajfhj� R, shows recurring brown water advisories for the Kaimu coastline, linked to heavy rain events that result in stormwater runoff. This runoff incudes potentially overflowing cesspools, sewer, manholes, pesticides, animal fecal matter, dead animals, pathogens, chemicals, and associated flood debris (Hawai`i CWB). These events pose threats to human health and to the nearshore ecosystems of Kaimu. Under projected climatic change these high intensity rain events are expected to increases. Increasing the number of anthropogenic, low -permeable surfaces through development and increasing the amount of human -generated waste alongside anticipated high -frequency and high -intensity rain events poses great risk to the linked human community and nearshore environment health. Incompatability with Cultural Rights & Site Disturbance Historically, privatized coastal management has led to the forced removal and long-term separation of Native peoples from their traditional gathering grounds (both here in Hawaii and across Indigenous worlds)'. This is an ongoing issue on island even with "friendly" organizations which have restricted through their policies, Native Hawaiian access and use. It is insulting and unacceptable to vision this level of development on Native coasts without a cultural assessment and without consideration for the fishing and gathering rights of Native Hawaiian communities that will be impacted by this development. The areas surrounding this property are actively used by Native Hawaiian Kalapana community members for fishing ang gathering purposes. z Carlson, R.R., Foo, S.A., and Asner, G.P. 2019. Land use impacts on coral health: a ridge -to -reef perspective. Frontiers in Marine Science 6. DOI: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00562. Foo, S.A. and Asner, G. 2020. Impacts of remotely sensed environmental drivers on coral outplant survival. Restoration Ecology. DOI: 10.1111/rec.13309 3 Wiegner, T.N., Colbert, S.L., Abaya, L.M., Panelo, J., Remple, K., and Nelson, C.E. (2021). Identifying locations of sewage pollution within a Hawaiian watershed for coastal water quality management actions. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 38. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrh.2021.100947 'Babcock, R.W., Lamichhane, K.M., Cummings, M.J., Cheong, G.H. (2014). Condition assessment survey of onsite sewage disposal systems (OSDSs) in Hawaii. Water Science and Technology 70(6). DOI: 10.2166/wst.2014.336 s Fandrich, K.M., Elison Timm, O., Zhang, C., and Giambelluca, T.W. 2021. Dynamical downscaling of near -term (2026-2035) climate variability and change for the Main Hawaiian Islands. JGR Atmospheres. DOI: 10.1029/2021 JD035684 6 McGuire, G. 2023. Indigenous Ecology on an `Oiwi Coast. Dissertation. University of Hawaii Manoa. There are significant cultural sites that cannot be relocated and will undeniably (and already have been) impacted by the development (either directly or in close proximity to the development). These include primarily the coastal trail system that connects Kikala and Kaimu Ahupua`a. "The elevated trails of lower Puna appear to be unique in that... they do not occur elsewhere in the Hawaiian Islands."'. This trail has already been severed by the developer in the process of clearing the property, showing clear disregard and disrespect for Native Hawaiian cultural sites and access. The SMA willfully ignores the cultural significance of this property's location on this coastline. County acceptance of this proposal would represent willful acceptance of the loss and detriment to Hawaiian cultural sites in one of the last ecological and cultural kipuka (refuges) within the state and on -island. Kalapana is a very special place with enormous ancestral and cultural significance. Safety In addition to the expected ecological, cultural, and community -level effects of this proposed development, there are profound implications for human safety that have not been addressed. Coastal Inundation I am attaching below a:....a aQ� chi t ic...���_Jve..flood....zoti .4..���cg�.,N.....111�.� t Ie coastal flood zotie (. .... �.. 211 seat level rise. (Please access the interactive map at the link here). This area encompasses a significant portion of the proposed development area. Projected coastal flooding has multiple impacts for human safety including exacerbation of previously mentioned stormwater runoff, groundwater and cesspool/sewer infiltration, and property loss. These effects would be detrimental to the tidepool systems immediately adjacent to this proposed development. N-111,, Fl— d 7.i SIR, 2 Illlllm Co M.1 F1a J Z.­, . SLR32 ' Orr, J.B. 1980. Elevated Hawaiian Trails of the Puna District Island of Hawaii. Proceedings for the Third Conference in Natural Sceinces Hawaii Volcanoes National Park. L,q—,, k*ass'uvH Fl. d 7,,, s5LR3,2 h C..-33 .l P-..od Z.iinee.� 3102 e Layer citations: Coastal Flood Zones with 3.2 feet of sea level rise — Tetra Tech, Inc. for The State of Hawaii 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency Sea Level Rise Under Passive Flooding with 3.2 feet of sea level rise — University of Hawaii Coastal Geology Group Closing Thoughts The Environmental Precautionary Principle (EPP) establishes a need to act in favor of environmental protection when there is uncertainty' (Akins et al. 2019). Akins et al. described the need to expand beyond the EPP to a universal precautionary principle (UPP) "which recognizes people's connection to the land, and elevates community, cultural, and economic wellbeing as equally important values alongside environmental concerns" (2019, 1). This SMA does not provide substantial entrepreneurial, residential, environmental, or cultural benefit to the people of Kalapana. If a universal precautionary principle were applied in this situation, I know that this development would not be approved. Who benefits from this development? It is not the environment, the people of Puna, or the ancestral and cultural sites. The SMA states that adverse ecological effects are "clearly outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling public interest." How could this possibly be true? Who benefits from this development outside of the monetary gain of this developer? There are no public health, safety, or compelling public interest benefits from this development but many for the protection of this culturally and ecologically valued site. Both an environmental impact and cultural assessment need to be done before any further harm is caused on this property. I humbly ask that the County take into account their own and associated state policies and objectives currently in place to protect and support these communities when making a decision on this SMA. 'Akins, A., Lyver, P.O.B., Alroe, H.F., and Moller, H. 2019. The Universal Precautionary Principle: New Pillars and Pathways for Environmental, Sociocultural, and Economic Reslience. Sustainability 11. DOI: 10.3390/sul 1082357. Mahalo nui, �� rvl/lr Dr. Gina McGuire EXHIBIT A-51 TMK# 120180010000 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads From: Leila Kealoha <pohakupelemaka@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 9:23 AM Subject: Re: TMK# 120180010000 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads To: Camero, Tracie-Lee <Tracie- Lee. Came ro@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Jackson, Maija <Maija.Jackson@hawaiicounty.gov>, Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov>, Aloha Tracey I hope this finds you well, healthy and in good spirits. I wanted to follow up with about this property. What is the plan for these landowners? I go down that way a few times a month to visit my dad and just want to ensure we are kept in the loop. Mahalo Leila Kealoha On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 3:32 PM Camero, Tracie-Lee <Tracie-Lee.Came ro@hawaiicounty.gov> wrote: Good Afternoon, I am the Planner that is currently in review of the subject parcels TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 Special Management Area Assessment Application. Thank you for your email. The subject property has applied for a Special Management Area Assessment (SAA) application and a subsequent subdivision application was submitted. The subdivision application was later returned as an SMA determination will need to be completed prior to the review of a subdivision application. Based on your email I sent a follow-up email to the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) for their consultation in regards to your statement that there is burials located within TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 and I will be waiting to hear back from SHPD on next steps. In your recent email to the Planning Department, you have requested to have a meeting with Planning Department. Would you like to have a meeting that included the Director or just the SMA section of the Planning Department? Please feel free to email me back so that I can coordinate your request with others as well as what you wish to discuss in the meeting. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Tracie-Lee Camero Planner IV Planning Division Planning Department Phone: (808) 961-8166 1 Main Line: (808) 961-8288 Email: tracie-lee.camero@hawaiicounty.gov Website: www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov County of Hawai'i Zoning & Subdivision Code Update Project Website: COHcodeupdate.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any review, use, disclosure, or EXHIBIT "A-51" distribution by unintended recipients is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. From: Leila Kealoha <pohakupelemaka@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2023 1:03 PM To: Kern, Zendo <Zendo.Kern@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Ley, Rachelle<Rachelle. Ley@hawaiicounty.gov>; Roy, Alex <Alex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov>; Camero, Tracie-Lee <Tracie-Lee.Camero@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Re: TMK# 120180010000 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads Aloha Zendo, I appreciate you getting back to me and yes I miss the shakas too :( Alex and Tracie-lee please reach out to me. I would prefer an in -person meeting if possible. My phone number is Please respond to this email to confirm. Mahalo piha, Leila On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 4:44 PM Kern, Zendo <Zendo.Kern@hawaiicounty.gov> wrote: Aloha Leila, My sincerest condolences to you and your Ohana on your father passing. I will always have fond memories of throwing shakas back and forth with him over many years. Thank you for reaching regarding the above refenced property, there are a few things going on, subdivision and SMA applications as well as a Notice of Violation. I have included our SMA Planners Alex Roy and Tracie-Lee Camero in this response. They can give you additional information as well get your insight on the trail as well as burials. Alex or Tracie can you please update Leila on this property, thanks. I look forward to seeing you soon Leila. Mahalo! Zendo From: Leila Kealoha <pohakupelemaka@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 10:27 AM To: Kern, Zendo <Zendo.Kern@hawaiicounty.gov>; Ley, Rachelle <Rachelle.Ley@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: TMK# 120180010000 Kaimu-Makena Homesteads Aloha e Zendo a me Rachelle, I am contacting you in regards to TMK# 120180010000. I'm sure you are both aware, my dad passed away and we just buried him last week at the Kaipueleu cemetery in Makena (Kalapana area near Kaimu) also known as Kalapana Cemetery. Directly across the street from the cemetery is a newly developed parcel. I have been speaking with `ohana and no one has seen signs of this new development. The big white signs with black lettering stating that this parcel is requesting it to be subdivided. We have heard they are subdividing and putting in a small subdivision. This is also the trail we use to go holoholo to the beach and now there is a huge gate placed in the front. Our `ohana is against this development being placed directly across our `ohana burials. I spoke to another family member who says there may be burials on that side of the street as well. Was there an EA with consultation done for this property? The few times I had to go to the cemetery in the last few weeks to dig the hole for my dad and prepare for his burial I have come across people parked inside next to our graves. I have had to ask them to leave and shared that they are being disrespectful by parking inside of there. We already know how many people have moved in along our coastline and it is only getting worse. I completely understand that this is the holidays and that all of your folks' time is valuable and quite busy, yet we cannot allow this to continue without consultation with our 'ohana. Please advise us as to how we can circumvent this issue. My deepest appreciation to you both for all that you do and Wish you both a Happy Holiday with your `ohana! Me ke aloha pumehana, Leila Kaimu Cove, LLC https://qpublic.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=1048&LayerID=23618&PageT ypeI D=4&Pagel D=9878&KeyValue=120180010000 Kaipueleu Cemetery https:Hgpubiic.schneidercorp.com/Appiication.aspx?AppID=1048&LayerID=23618&Pag eTypel D=1 &Pagel D=9875&Q=1508850978&KeyValue=120180010000 EXHIBIT A-52 Follow-up Email to Meeting From: Camero, Tracie-Lee <Tracie-Lee. Came ro @ hawai icou nty. gov> Date: Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 3:48 PM Subject: Follow-up Email to Meeting To: Leila Kealoha <pohakupelemaka@gmail. com> Attachments: Inventory of TMK 1-2-18-1.pdf; Complaint Form Fillable PDF.pdf Good Afternoon Leila, My apologies for taking so long to follow-up with you on your request for additional information from our meeting yesterday. Attached to this email is the `Inventory Level Survey'that was submitted for the subject property TMK: (3) 1-2-018:001 and Planning Department Complaint Form. Should you have any questions please feel free to contact me at (808) 961-8166. Thank you and have a great day! Sincerely, Tracie-Lee Camero Planner IV Planning Division Planning Department Phone: (808) 961-8166 I Main Line: (808) 961-8288 Email: tracie-Iee.camero@hawaiicounty.gov Website: www.planning.hawaiicounty.gov County of Hawai'i Zoning & Subdivision Code Update Project Website: COHcodeupdate.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any review, use, disclosure, or distribution by unintended recipients is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. EXHIBIT "A-52"